Category Archives: The Coronavirus Apocalypse

This is your chance to prepare for another lockdown.

From Witneb.com (not a sponsored post)

You’d better be listening, because after this, I get to say I told you so.

An adviser for Biden stated his intention for a 4 to 6 week nationwide lockdown. He has since walked back on this statement, but we know that these guys are at their most trustworthy when they accidentally say the quiet part out loud.

This is our chance to be prepared for it. Here’s some recommended actions:

  • Stock up on shelf-stable food items,
  • Secure your home, preferably 2A style,
  • Procure various sundry items, it’s difficult to tell what there may be a shortage of,
  • Make sure bills are paid, and some money is saved, if this can be reasonably done.
  • Be prepared to hit the road on a moment’s notice. Consider assembling a bug-out bag.

You might ask, “What if the lockdown doesn’t happen?” Generally, it’s better to have and not need than to need and not have. People should be prepared for disasters, in any case.

But consider this: we’ve already seen lockdowns, and no one asked us whether we thought they were a good idea. What’s more, much of Europe has already enacted a second round of lockdowns, with little notice, leading to rioting in Italy and France.

Some of you might think Trump might help you. His ability to do so might be limited, especially if your state has a Democrat as a governor. Besides, they didn’t try cheating him out of an election because they wanted him to have a chance, and they’re not censoring him and his followers on social media and corporate news outlets because they want him to do anything about it.

The left has previously stated their intention to listen to the advice of the World Health Organization (WHO). Since then, the WHO has voiced their opposition to lockdowns, saying that they should only be used as a last resort. The left isn’t listening, because their own control over us is more important to them than anything doctors have to say about it, and “science” is only useful to them as far as they can use it to their own ends.

You might feel secure because your job was on the arbitrary list compiled by your state governor that he deemed “life-sustaining”. But be warned, Biden’s list may be different from that of your state governor.

The initial lockdowns exasperated the problems of poverty and child starvation. It is advised that you act for your family’s benefit, as the left has proven that they don’t care about you or your children.

There it a lot more to say about how to prep for another lockdown, so it’s suggested that you check out some guides on how to do so, such as this one by Preparedness.news.

This is our opportunity to prepare, and it may slip away from us more quickly than we realize.

You’ve been warned.

Europeans Rioting, Fleeing in Response to New Lockdowns

Going against the advice of the WHO, leaders across Europe are calling for second round of lockdowns in an effort to contain the coronavirus.

The novel coronavirus, also known as SARS-CoV2, causes a disease known as COVID-19. Symptoms include a mild, persistent cough that lasts about two days. The survival rate is almost absolutely guaranteed for most people, but there is a fatality rate of about 6% for the elderly. In most respects, it’s like the flu.

Traffic is backed up for “hundreds of miles” outside Paris, France as people desperately flee the city in an effort to escape more draconian measures of the lockdown, which involves confinement to one’s home, save only by those with paperwork. This measure is to be enforced by police.

A similar lockdown in Spain has provoked similar riots, Germany faces a lockdown for the month of November, and Belgium faces the possibility of another lockdown as early as this weekend.

Previously, the World Health Organization (WHO) has advised against lockdowns, stating the damage that such lockdowns have done to the economy, causing poverty that’s likely to double, and exacerbating the problem of child starvation.

Of course, the leaders of the EU countries threatening their people with lockdowns don’t care about you or your children. To them, the lockdowns are trivial because they are rich and you are not. They are insulated from the consequences of their policies, and care little beyond that. They have the means to eat well for the duration of a lockdown, but did not consider you.

Europeans, stop voting for people who don’t care about you.

Americans, the ball will be in our court in just a few days.

“We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself.” -President Donald Trump

Work-At-Home Falling Out of Favor With Employers

The reasons keep piling up to move on from the Coronavirus Apocalypse. This time, it’s becoming apparent to employers that working from home isn’t such a great long-term idea.

Earlier this year, companies adopted working from home as an approach to keep their employees safe from a virus that causes a mild cough for a few days. Obviously, it wasn’t an option for every employer, as many jobs require a physical presence to get them done, such as those in the service industry, or production jobs.

Initially, it the work-at-home deal seemed great, as well-motivated workers that didn’t need to commute could perform their jobs in spite of the distractions of home. But in time, productivity seemed to decline, and it’s becoming apparent why.

Much of the motivation behind the initial high productivity was fear. People were afraid that they might quickly lose their jobs, and the world was changing in a hurry. However, that fear has largely disappeared, as the world is slowly returning to normal due to a combination of factors (the virus being discovered to be far less deadly than first anticipated, the WHO being against lockdowns, various measures against the virus being found illegal in certain countries, etc.).

Also, the same efficiency that can be achieved with teams on collaborative projects is difficult to replicate when each member of the team is working remotely. According to the Wall Street Journal article, what could take an hour for a team could take all day for a group working remotely.

Another problem that I’ve seen from doing work remotely has to do with school attendance. The Coronavirus Apocalypse is a really bad experience for those attending college, as much of the experience that one would get from lab work cannot be effectively recreated by attending school from home.

One of the reasons one wants to attend a more prestigious school isn’t because the coursework is more challenging, it’s because those schools offer more tools to help students to succeed. Prestigious schools such as MIT and Harvard have huge libraries and laboratories in which professors can hold workshops and students can collaborate on projects. What’s more, it’s at these prestigious schools that students can network with their peers and future employers in job fairs to help build their careers.

Without these valuable tools, the main reason to attend an Ivy League school is just to say you did!

These are some of the unsung tragedies of the lockdowns that were a gross over-reaction to a virus that actually wasn’t very bad. Sadly, any honest assessment of the situation is likely to be buried, while the content more likely to be promoted is drivel along the lines of “THE LOCKDOWNS ARE GREAT, THANK YOU, MORE LOCKDOWNS PLEASE,” or “KILLER CORONAVIRUS OF EVIL DEATH MURDERS PEOPLE“, because for some reason, coronavirus alarmism has become a left-wing viewpoint, to be promoted by Dark State media to the detriment of sense.

Was the WordPress block editor made by staffers working at home?

The World Health Organization is Now Opposing Lockdowns

As the novel coronavirus (SARS CoV-2) spread early in 2020, the prevailing wisdom was “14 days to slow the spread”. We’re now over 200 days into the lockdowns, and there’s no signs that (mostly-left) leaders have any plans for life to return to normal, in spite of the extremely-low fatality rate of a virus that turned out to be mostly harmless.

Now, the World Health Organization (WHO) is advising against shutdowns as a means to control the coronavirus, saying that it was only intended to be considered as a last resort for when things looked especially dire.

The WHO furthermore explained that it does not advise shutdowns due to the widespread economic damage that such shutdowns would cause.

“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” said WHO envoy Dr. David Nabarro. “The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

Nabarro pointed to what’s happening to poverty levels as one of the reasons why the WHO is advising against lockdowns:

“We really do appeal to all world leaders: stop using lockdown as your primary control method,” said Nabarro. “Look what’s happening to poverty levels – it seems that we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition because children are not getting meals at school… This is a terrible ghastly global catastrophe, actually.” (emphasis mine)

Those advocating the lockdowns are obviously not considering the doubling poverty rates or the child starvation that their irresponsible policies are causing. But considering that they have no idea how to run a society, how can you blame them for making such a mistake?

Jane Orient M.D. is one of over 200,000 people, as well as doctors, scientists, and professors, who have signed the Great Barrington Declaration, which has decried the damage done by the coronavirus shutdowns. She is among the many who has pointed to the successes of Sweden in battling the coronavirus, where coronavirus restrictions were minimal, and yet the country has had lower-than-expected coronavirus rates.

Recently, posting anything to social media challenging the WHO’s advice in regards to the coronavirus has been considered grounds on those outlets for censoring the same content, or perhaps even banning the poster. Now that the WHO is adopting a stance that challenges the thinking of these predominantly-left social media outlets, how these outlets respond to this new information remains to be seen.

As I’ve pointed out before, the economy isn’t just some abstract concept that only stockholders and smart people talk about, it’s something that matters to anyone who cares whether a box of pasta costs $1 or $5. Even if you’re one of those morons who believe that wealth should be redistributed while only a few people should actually work, it should make sense to you that a society doesn’t have a reason to eat unless they actually produce something. For something to be produced, businesses have to be allowed to actually conduct business.

If you do not understand this, you are in no position to tell society how to operate.

Empty heads, empty plates.

The Coronavirus Stimulus and Its Appeal to the Monumentally Stupid

Talks have reached an impasse on the stimulus package that was designed to provide relief in light of the coronavirus shutdowns, and if legacy media is to be trusted, millions of Americans are upset because they aren’t getting a few hundred extra dollars in their bank accounts.

Let’s do something educational today. The following is a mathematical sign:

This symbol means less-than. It is used instead of an equals sign in mathematical expressions where the left side of the expression is of lesser value than the right. When the opposite is true, and the right side of the equation is of lesser value, the symbol is flipped horizontally and is galled a greater-than symbol.

This symbol is called much less-than. The theory behind it is the same as the less-than symbol, but with a bit of a subjective element; it can be used when the difference in quantity is vast, to the point that it’s obvious that the two sides of the expression are nowhere close to equal.

Knowing that, let’s make a comparison. The next coronavirus relief package being considered would deposit $1200 into the bank accounts of Americans. If you, like myself, are accustomed to living marginally, you’re imagining all the macaroni and cheese you can buy with all that money.

You might even splurge on the Kraft logo, the bling of boxed pasta and yellow powder.

Otherwise, that 72 inch TV that you’ve been eyeing has come into your crosshairs.

It would seems like $1200 is a lot of money, but there’s a reason I brought the less-than sign into this; we’re going to make a comparison. The poverty level for the 48 contiguous states in the United States is $12,760 (source). Living on that kind of money is not easy, but it’s certainly a lot more reasonable than attempting to live off of the stimulus checks alone. In this case, the less-than symbol is merited, because it’s obvious that the former quantity is lesser than the latter.

Let’s do another comparison. Let’s compare the $1200 number to what a person would make in a year employed at minimum wage, full-time. It varies state-to-state, but assuming the Pennsylvania minimum wage of $7.25 / hour, that comes to about $15,080 dollars per year. Another less-than case where the stimulus package is only of marginal realistic help.

Next, let’s compare the $1200 number to the median household income in the United States for the year 2019. That would be $68,703 (source). In this case, the much less-than sign is merited.

And for anyone curious, the average yearly income for an Electronic Technician is much less than that median household income. Are STEM majors FTW, after all?

It should be obvious at this point that the correct way to deal with the economic damage caused by the coronavirus shutdowns would be to allow businesses to conduct business, so that the people they employ can be compensated for their contributions. Compared to the yearly income of nearly all people gainfully employed in the United States, the coronavirus relief packages are a mere drop in the bucket.

One of the reasons why I tend not to vote Democrat is because I have an understanding of what the economy is, and know how to do simple math, including the direct comparison of quantities. It’s obvious that the left is attempting to court the short-sighted who overestimate their own abilities.

As vexing as it may be, it’s an approach that works, because there are enough dimwits out there to make a difference.

Let’s Get Real: The Economy Matters

Found on ThrillBlender.com, edited for language.

Above is a picture of a dinosaur panicking about the economy when seeing a meteor coming overhead. The joke is that, during a potential extinction-level crisis, the dinosaur is expressing concern for the economy, which is conveyed as though its priorities are misplaced. The joke circulated during the coronavirus epidemic as a jab towards those expressing concern about the state of the economy during an epidemic where people are getting sick, as though their priorities are similarly misplaced.

The fact of the matter that seems lost on many people is that the economy actually is something a person can have a valid concern for in the face of an epidemic. Or any other disaster, for that matter.

This is because “the economy” isn’t just some abstract concept that only smart people and investors in the stock market talk about. In fact, it’s relevant to anyone who manages finances. If you care whether a box of pasta costs $1 or $5, then the concept of an economy is something that’s relevant to you.

The etymology of the word “economy” has its origin in the Greek word “oikonomia”, which refers to the management of wealth and resources in a household. It wasn’t until the 1650s that it referred to the wealth and resources of society as a whole. The word used by English-speaking countries to refer to the concept came to be “economy”.

While it might seem like the concepts of wealth for households and societies are independent of one-another, the fact is, the two are connected. This is because the condition of income for a household is dependent on the state of society, especially considering that in the present-day world, very few people hunt, gather, or cultivate their own food. For that matter, they don’t build their own homes, or manufacture their own automobiles or electronics. Everyone’s prosperity is largely dependent on the rest of society functioning well. That seems truer today than it’s ever been.

When one considers this, they come to the realization that the economy is a valid thing to be concerned about during the outbreak of a contagious disease. Or in the aftermath of a meteor strike, for that matter. Natural disasters or any event that has a significant impact on society has the potential to influence the income of resources for any household that that society hosts. If supply lines are disrupted, homes are likely to notice when there are shortages for certain items deemed “essentials”. Even items not related to the disaster can be quickly cleared from the shelves due to a widespread consensus to value them, as was the case for toilet paper during the initial coronavirus outbreak.

A mere concern about a virus was enough to significantly impact the economy, and households (that went without toilet tissues) felt the impact.

After the initial outbreak, governors decided to enact widespread shutdowns, during which some businesses were closed, and many people lost their jobs. Those who were unable to provide for their families and those who became dependent on government assistance are in a great position to understand the consequences a damaged monetary ecosystem can have on their household!

Ironically, the shutdowns had a more devastating impact on the typical American household than the virus that they were intended to respond to. And because the prosperity of a civilization on one continent affects the prosperity of households on different continents in a way unprecedented in history, the stubborn irresponsibility of governors in the United States can have far-reaching impacts on families thousands of miles away.

Don’t believe me? The UN estimated that more than a quarter-of-a-Billion people face starvation as a consequence of the coronavirus lockdowns. Which is terrible news, unless you’re one of those population-control monsters.

One can easily find a video of a professional athlete having dinner in their large mansion, engaging in platitudes like “we’re in this together”. But in reality, for most people, the situation is far different. Most people don’t have millions of dollars saved up, sprawling estates, and enough food on hand to last for months. The general population has largely given up on saving up for retirement just to get by, only have enough food and money to last a week, and live in small apartments. People at large are dependent on a thriving economy to continue to survive, including those who receive Social Security payments, and missing one week’s pay is usually a disaster.

The dinosaur beholding the meteor would actually be right to be concerned for the state of its economy. After all, the meteor might damage the ecosystem’s capacity for sustaining it.

But if the dinosaur were a leftist, it might instead exclaim:

To have a better understanding of the conditions that sustain your life is to be more in-touch with reality.

Federal Judge Finds PA Coronavirus Restrictions Unconstitutional

Image source: The Free Telegraph

In a huge win for Pennsylvanians, a federal court has found that coronavirus restrictions put into place by PA governor Tom Wolf (D) are unconstitutional. Specifically, the ruling was against Wolf’s ban on large gatherings and his arbitrary list of businesses that he deemed “life-sustaining” and therefore worthy of remaining open during the pandemic.

Look, if someone is going to hold elected office in the United States, they should be required to read the Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights, at least once. It’s not a long document, so it’s not much to ask.

While late victories are still victories, the major issue that remains is that the bulk of the damage has already been done. The PA coronavirus restrictions have been in place for months. In that time, hundreds of thousands of Pennsylvanians have been unemployed, the unemployment rate has shot up as high as 13.7 percent, and many businesses have shuttered, some of which will not open again.

If you’ve been reading a lot of my posts (thank you, by the way), you may have noticed that I tend to side against Democrats when it comes to most major issues. One of the reasons for this is because I’ve noticed that Democrats have a tendency towards authoritarianism, which is expressed in how they wield their authority on those over whom they have power, and their adversarial relationship with a constitution which stands to limit their power.

In Tom Wolf’s case, he used the authority he was granted to overstep the U.S. Constitution. In fact, it was the very first tenet of the Bill of Rights that he overlooked, which is generally regarded as the most important of the lot (it’s first for a reason).

But it gets worse: Tom Wolf’s initial list of “life-sustaining” businesses that he deemed acceptable to remain open was both inconsistent and arbitrary. For example, he initially disallowed automobile sales. If your your car was totaled in an accident at that point, you’d have been in quite a predicament.

But hold on, his list permitted automobile rentals. So, a person wasn’t allowed to buy a car for themselves by reason of an infectious disease, but they were permitted to rent a vehicle that frequently changes hands? What kind of sense does that make?

But mass transit remained open. Excuse me? So a person was restricted from getting a car for themselves, including out-of-state car purchases, but crowding into a filthy bus is somehow just peachy-keen?

On the surface, it seems senseless. But when you consider that some Democrats want to get people out of cars and get more people using mass-transit, it suddenly becomes evidence of the authoritarianism that the left is increasingly tending toward.

When you look at Democrats in terms of their agenda, their eagerness to wield power over those they have authority over, and their tendency towards authoritarianism, it’s far easier to see the reasoning behind some of their apparently-senseless decisions.

So it turns out, Tom Wolf’s ban on large gatherings and closure of certain businesses was illegal. How the government of Pennsylvania proceeds in light of this is to be seen.

What’s it take to find some smiles during a pandemic?

0616A6DD-A392-4E11-B467-06B6CF3F836B
Have you found yourself wondering what it takes to find some smiles during a pandemic? Notice how the guy in the middle is the only one smiling? Maybe he has the answer.

”Paid for with Pennsylvania taxpayer dollars.”

If this is the kind of thing that Pennsylvania is doing with taxpayer dollars, they can make Pennsylvanians smile by giving them their money back.

Newspapers Remove Pro-BLM Strip For Being “Offensive”

EeB3VFiXYAAYd8q.png

In an unusual change of pace, left-wingers are on the victim’s end of a free-speech issue. This one is over a supposedly-offensive panel (pictured above) in a pro-BLM, pro-mask comic.

Running in it’s place was an apology over the offending strip:

EeNGWHbXYAEdQwg

Oh wow, they didn’t just censor the panel, they dropped the entire comic. That’s a strong reaction.

So, what was offensive about the panel? Having seen it for myself, it doesn’t seem terribly offensive. There’s multiple layers of humor to be had. For one thing, a woman is pointing out the irony behind a woman wearing a face mask also wearing a shirt that reads, “I can’t breathe”. What’s more, the poor woman wearing the shirt seems taken aback by the ignorance of the woman who didn’t seem to understand the significance of the phrase to the black community.

Of course, it’s apparent that what’s being focused on is the potential for interpretation against the ironic combination of face masks and the “I can’t breathe” slogan. Lately, those on the left have demonstrated themselves as having far thinner skin regarding anything that even has a slight potential for being interpreted as against them, to the point that they’ve called for the censorship of anything that they could determine to be upsetting to them. This has given rise to “cancel culture”, wherein people start digging into the past of content creators to find a pretext for getting them censored, perhaps even costing them their jobs. An early victim was James Gunn, the director of Guardians of the Galaxy.

On the surface, it would seem that cancel culture is driven by the desire to fight injustice. In reality, cancel culture is driven by the desire to destroy. When people are young, they have a lot of restless energy, but usually no direction or outlet for their energy. Therefore, many of them will seek to bring about a change, just to have seen it come about knowing that they were the ones who made it happen. The man who destroyed the temple of Diana did so for no other reason than to be remembered for doing so. Somewhere out there, there’s someone who knows that he was the one who got James Gunn fired, and all he had to do was find an old social media post that could be used to make him look bad.

That’s the kind of cheap sense of empowerment that cancel culture hungers for, as they enable under-employed content consumers to think to themselves, “I can ruin the life of someone more accomplished than myself, and I don’t even have to drag my distended paunch from beneath my Chromebook.”

Intersectional causes are a powerful weapon in the hands of cancel culture, as they take on left-wing causes to try to get content creators canceled, and media companies don’t seem to have the nerve to resist. Seeing that it’s playing into their hands, leftists aren’t doing very much to address cancel culture for the threat that it is, but instead feed into it, believing they stand to benefit from the efforts of armchair activists.

Now that cancel culture is turning on leftists themselves, it’s interesting to see the leftists that previously fed into it complaining on free speech issues. As sad as it may be, they manufactured the conditions of their own plight.

What goes around, comes around.

It’s Actually Happening: Social Media is Now Censoring Medical Professionals

book burning.png

If you’ve been a proponent of free speech, you’ll agree that dark times are currently underway. Social media giants Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter have deleted a livestreamed video wherein real doctors tout their successes when treating coronavirus, with one of them boldly proclaiming invariable success in treating patients who were sick with COVID-19. In addition, posts linking to the original video were deleted. According to the social media giants, these claims were classified as misinformation, and were subsequently censored.

Did you guess what medication was discussed? If you guessed hydroxycloroquine, go ahead and treat yourself to an imaginary cookie of satisfaction. The very same medicine that isn’t being given a fair shake just because it’s already been touted by Trump is now getting the doctors that prescribe it censored because their medical advice is not in line with the official stance of the World Health Organization (WHO).

Excuse me? The WHO is not even an American organization, so why are a bunch of American social media companies deferring to it when determining what constitutes sound medical advice, and what position are these same social media companies in to decide that a foreign agency’s official position overrides the advice of a trained and educated medical professional?

And, for that matter, why are they allowing a foreign organization with a suspiciously close relationship with China to determine what constitutes misinformation to be censored?

More important still: why the failure to conduct themselves in a manner consistent with a civilized western society that protects free expression in a free and open marketplace of ideas? The excuse that they are a corporate entity, exempting them from the superordinate governing principles of the progressive societies that surround them on all sides, is a rotten crutch getting ready to splinter.

I get that leftist propaganda media dislikes Trump with a burning passion, but to stem the dissemination of information about a possible treatment that could potentially save the lives of thousands just out of spite is taking it way, way too far. If hydroxycloroquine is actually saving lives and is touted by real doctors, why take any action that might prevent it from getting into the hands of people whose lives may very well depend on it?

If Twitter has any intention of being consistent in their censorship, then they can start censoring CNN:

cnn did an oopsie.png

After all, if doctors can be censored for prescribing a drug that works against the coronavirus, why exempt CNN, who aren’t even doctors, for sharing a story that suggests that the very same drug might actually be effective?

And while we’re at it, CNN also did a story about how masks don’t have any benefit when it comes to the coronavirus. What about that story? Oh, hold on… It was actually the WHO that called masks ineffective, and CNN merely passed the information on. Oops.

But it gets worse. As Anthony Fauci admits, the reason Americans were discouraged from wearing masks in early 2020 was because there was a shortage of masks, and they wanted to be sure healthcare workers had enough. So then, is misinformation on the part of the medical community okay if someone benefits from the misinformation, that is, the medical community? And how does the medical community benefit from censoring its own? And how does the public benefit when what’s censored indicates a treatment that might save perhaps millions of lives?

Considering the WHO’s close relationship with a regime that is actively committing genocide, I doubt they can be trusted with the health of billions around the world.