College Republican Economics

Alex Boone, in the article College Republicans Are Tired Of [sic] Hearing These 8 Things, argues, “Basic economics tells you that tuition free public education means the utter extinction of private schools. Do not expect a Bernie voter to understand basic economics, though.”

That’s nice.

This is coming from a young, private school member of a party that still believes that a billion dollars in the hands of one person is better for the economy than ten thousand people with one hundred thousand dollars each.

The statement also assumes that the progressive political platform deems the protection of private universities more important than the education of our youth.

Alex Boone, go back to class. Maybe somewhere other than Roanoke College, eh?

Trump on Japan

“I would rather see Japan having some form of defense and maybe even offense against North Korea.”

-Donald Trump, 3/29/2016

Here you go, bud:
Ministry of Defense (Budget Report)

Per Wikipedia:
Budget $41 billion (2016)
Active personnel 247,150 personnel (2015)
Reserve personnel 56,100 personnel (2015)

Big Numbers

5/3/1940 – 3/28/2016 = 27,723

43,300,000,000 / 27,723 ≈ 1,561,880

5,000,000 / 1,561,880 ≈ 3.2

3.2 x 24 = 76.8

Now, obviously it doesn’t include terrible acts. Killing is not part of the deal. Rape and torture are out. I’m not serving a life sentence, because that would defeat the purpose.

My number is five million. If you were to give me $5,000,000, I would do anything you want me to. You own me for five.

I’m not getting killed and I’m not ruining my life, but a finger or something? Shit, you can have a hand. If there are five million bucks waiting for me on the other side, I’m open for business*.

Now for some perspective.

5/3/1940 – 3/28/2016 = 27,723

This is David Koch‘s life span as of this writing. He was born on May 3, 1940, and is 75 years old. He’s lived for 27,723 days.


This is David Koch’s reported net worth.

43,300,000,000 / 27,723 ≈ 1,561,880

This is how many dollars David Koch is worth divided by the number of days he’s lived. This obviously is not the amount of money he has made each day of his life, but an even distribution of his money over his time. This actually skews my final figure to make it LESS impressive/disgusting (whichever you prefer). It includes inheritance, assets, and all that jazz. Regardless, it’s his money over his days. He has it.

Each day of David Koch’s life (under even distribution) has earned him 1.56 million dollars. Remember my price?

5,000,000 / 1,561,880 ≈ 3.2

It takes David Koch (over the course of his life, on average) 3.2 days to earn enough money to buy my soul.

David Koch earns two Steve Corbetts a week.

43,300,000,000 / 5,000,000 = 8660

Actually, let’s call it 43,200,000,000 so he still has a little nest egg of 15 to 20 times what I’ll earn in my entire life to live out his last two years or so. 8640. He loses 20 Steves.

This rat could buy a couple good-sized brigades of guys just like me to do whatever he wanted. You know what’s funny? He’s got a brother who’s worth just as much. So…

Why is it that when someone who makes less in two hours of work than David Koch’s dollars per second lived** wants to make a little less than that amount in one hour, we call that person a slob and tell them they get what they’re worth? Does David Koch work 8,660 times as hard as me? Why do we punch down at the people who make in a day of work less than a Koch brother has for every 7 seconds of his life?

Why don’t we punch up?

*in theory
**1,561,880 (dollars of worth over days lived) / 24 (hours) ≈ 65,078 (dollars per hour) / 60 ≈ 1,084 (dollars per minute) / 60 ≈ 18.07 (dollars in his coffers over seconds he has lived)


Who Said It? Part II

Who said it?

On Trump supporters:
“You’re the guy who goes, ‘Yeah, I didn’t think about that. Maybe we should win again. Ha, yeah, you know what? Let’s make America great again, yeah, I like that.’

“If you like that, I’ve got to be honest with you, you’re a simpleton. Yeah, we all want to make America great. Some of us think it’s pretty great already in some ways. And we’re going to show you policy positions on how to make it better. If you don’t like that, and you think that’s too cerebral, there’s some chance you’re not cerebral enough.

“What is the percentage of Trump supporters who understood what I just said?”

Rock the Vote

…and I’m going to keep this one very simple.

Every time I bash Hillary, my uncle Henry astutely reminds me that the elections are for more than one thing. It’s not just about who we want to be President. I do plan to vote for a non-Republican, no matter who it is, but some people are going Bernie or bust. I may end up writing in Bernie, but that is not the point.

The point is that there are other seats up for election.

I know 16 people will read this, two will vote Trump, and five will vote Hillary. One for either Rubio or Kasich, too. Of the other half, I may be able to convince three.

We still need to keep the psychos out of congress!

Every seat (435) in the House and one class of 34 Senators are up for election. Take care of it.

Power! Ha! (Election Hacking)

There is an agreement by which the eleven most populous states, in theory, could use the Electoral College to decide a Presidential election by national popular vote without the others having a say, sort of.

In April of 2001, Northwestern University professor Robert Bennett published an article entitled Popular Election of the President Without a Constitutional Amendment. His idea has gained traction, but it hasn’t yet broken through and changed the game.

The relevant language of Article II Section 1 Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution is as follows: “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”

This establishes each state’s power to choose how they assign electoral votes. Since they get to do it however they want, one option is to award all of their electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most individual votes nationwide. The “magic number” of electoral votes needed to win the election is 270. If so many states agree to award their electoral votes to the candidate who gets the most votes (each state’s prerogative) that the total number of electoral votes from those states gets to 270, then the compact activates.

What I mean by “activates” is the states in the compact do not assign their votes that way now, but when their membership hits 270 votes, they will switch to that method.

The idea is that support for a popular vote election system is so strong in the United States that certain states would theoretically ignore their own election results in favor of the collective voice of America.

It’s my pleasure to introduce the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, a coalition of states that have pledged to honor the popular vote, and are close to acquiring the power to do so.

Professor Bennett’s article pointed out a potential back door to the selection of a President of the United States. As of now, ten states have signed an agreement, and they make up a little less than one third of the electoral vote count (thank you, California). There are six other states that have legislation for joining the compact pending. If those six go through with it, either Texas or Florida could finalize it; the compact would need 22 more electoral votes, which either of those two states could provide. This does not apply to primaries, only the general election, and here’s how it works:

The states that have already joined have agreed that if all of the compact member states’ votes become enough to decide the election (270), they are all bound to assign their votes to the popular vote winner.

So if the six states with pending legislation ratify it, and then Florida, Texas, or any other states with a combined 22 electoral votes join the compact, the popular vote is in effect.

What does this mean? It means that considering current members, 17 states, in theory, could all agree to honor the national popular vote, and with their majority of electors, elect a President while ignoring the rest of the election process.

Even more simply, every state is in charge of assigning electoral votes. 270 wins. If states with 270 or more votes combined decide that whichever candidate gets the most individual votes nationally gets their electoral votes, that candidate immediately has 270 or more votes, and immediately wins the election. There would be no point in counting electoral votes or monitoring state races, you would only have to look at the total national vote count.

The funny thing is that the electoral votes of states not in the compact would be an afterthought in the election, but the individual votes of the people in those states would be more important, especially those in non-swing states. Each American’s vote would be a point for their candidate in a most-points-wins patch of the American election system, thanks to a collection of states taking matters into their own hands.

Here are the states that have passed legislation to join the compact:

District of Columbia
New Jersey
New York
Rhode Island

A Little Help Out Here?

America has a leaky roof.

Hillary Clinton has a can of Scotchguard for the carpet and is bragging about how much water her friend’s buckets are catching.

The idiot Republicans are meeting with a contractor about installing bars on the windows, but they’re eating up the pitch for a moat and drawbridge.

Bernie Sanders is outside with some cement and some new shingles, yelling for the people inside to come out and hold the ladder.