Vin Suprynowicz

I always enjoy perusing the concise summaries of the increasingly ludicrous nonsense being peddled by our government lackeys when I open the monthly newsletters of the Tucson-based Doctors for Disaster Preparedness.

From the March newsletter:

“ ‘Stimulus’ packages always fail. A 2004 UCLA economic study revealed that FDR’s New Deal prolonged the depression by seven years. Ten Japanese stimulus bills between the 1992 real estate crash and 2000 poured billions into infrastructure; unemployment is still twice that in 1992 (Bamford, TWTW 2/14/09.) Japan accumulated the largest public debt in the developed world, totaling 180 percent of its $5.5 trillion economy. Its future generations will have paved-over rural areas, and an enormous tax burden.” (Downsizer Dispatch 2/10/09.)

“Infrastructure does not generate goods to sell abroad. And when the project is done, so are the jobs,” writes Paul Craig Roberts (Rense.com 2/9/09.)

“If $20 trillion in private capital cannot be enticed to enter the market, and the government tries to ‘replace’ it, Karl Denninger predicts a bond market collapse. Unable to sell U.S. Treasury debt, the federal government would have to contract to one-third its current size overnight. This would mean cutting all Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid spending, reducing military spending by 75 percent and all other discretionary spending by 50 percent — with a very high probability of complete destabilization of our political system.

“Private capital is withdrawn because the market sees government ‘rescues’ as a cover-up of raw fraud and abuse. … (Market Ticker 3/2/09.)”

Almost like what those “tea party” people — common salt-of-the-earth Americans so widely ridiculed and reviled by the sold-out Left — were warning us about?

Just by coincidence, I halted my 401(k) contributions last week. After trying several sensible mixes of the (very limited) stock and bond funds available — and still seeing losses of varying size for four successive quarters — I decided we only encourage them by continuing to give the Wall Street charlatans more of our money to play with. I believe I can do better putting that extra $600 per month into gold, guns, ammo (massive markups in ammo, just now, if you have or know where to get any), silver, and first editions.

Acquaintances with more sizable portfolios — including investors long criticized for not being sufficiently “diversified” because they did their best to prepare for precisely the current world economic stall by sticking with the stocks of silver mining firms and the like — are similarly talking quite seriously about “firing their brokers,” pulling their wealth out of dollar-denominated paper, and buying hard assets you can bury in the desert.

After viewing the “South Park” episode where Kyle takes his grandma’s hundred-dollar check to the bank, whereupon the nice banker sticks it in a currency-trading mutual fund & promptly declares “and … it’s gone,” I’m having trouble imagining where they’re going to find enough remaining fools to hand Bernanke and Geithner that additional $20 trillion in loose change they’re now looking for.

(Yes, I know “South Park” is “just a cartoon.” Point is, Wall Street and the U.S. Treasury weren’t supposed to be. Were they?)

Doctors for Disaster Preparedness, by the by, will hold their 27th annual meeting July 31-Aug. 2 at the Doubletree Hotel Denver. Marc Morano, now with ClimateDepot.com and formerly communications director for the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, will speak on “Global Warming: Consensus in Freefall, and the Morality of Energy Rationing.”

Paul Driessen, author of “Eco-Imperialism: Green Power, Black Death” will speak on green biotechnology in a talk titled “Crusading for Poverty, Disease, and Death.” The address of banquet speaker William Gray, Ph.D., of Colorado State University is listed as “Climate Change Is Driven by the Oceans — Not Humans.”

See www.ddponline.org for details.

# # #

Brian writes in from an Earthlink address:

“Vin, thanks for the refreshing article ‘Greenland and the polar ice cap are melting.’ I am often irritated by articles claiming that we need to reduce man-made CO2 gases to save the planet from global warming. It is amazing that there are so many people (including government leaders) that believe we can alter global temperatures by using renewable energy sources.

“After readying your article, I am sure that you are aware that man-made CO2 emissions comprise only 0.117 percent of the total greenhouse gases that trap solar radiation and heat the earth’s atmosphere. Water vapor comprises the majority of the greenhouse gases. Eliminating human activity altogether would have little impact on the climate change.

“I am a retired aerospace engineer who spent over 40 years in southern California designing satellites. Much of that time was devoted to the thermal design of satellites wherein we relied on various techniques to control the amount of incident solar energy absorbed and rejected by the satellite exterior surfaces.

“We were able to control the temperature of the satellites to within 2 to 3 degrees F of the predicted control temperature. To accomplish this achievement we had to account for energy radiated from the sun as well as the earth. I am quite familiar with how the earth’s atmosphere traps a portion of the sun’s energy spectrum and re-emits a portion of that energy in the infrared energy spectrum.

“The scientists can make all the statistical quotations they want but they cannot refute my basic assertion — man-made CO2 emissions comprise only 0.117 percent of the total greenhouse gases. The laws of physics will not allow 0.117 percent of the atmosphere to control the climate temperature. …”

# # #

John writes in from Bonne Terre, Missouri:

“Enjoyed your article (https://vinsuprynowicz.com/?p=191) as I usually do. We only differ on government-funded (not government-run) health care. I’ve written you before. I’m the retired critical-care nurse who considers myself a little left of center.

“I prefer smaller government with greater local and state control, minimal gun control, and I do not oppose first-term abortion on demand or later term under certain conditions. I have no opposition to gay marriage either.

“Since I’m a resident of Missouri, the MIAC directive caused much concern. I seem to fall into the category of both right wing and extremist. I really don’t care about the labels, however. I realize that taxes must increase in the future with the bailouts of the financial community and the auto industry started by Bush and continued by Obama.

“I would much rather see significant cuts in the “defense” budget and other government programs, but beyond cuts for show, I don’t expect much. Much too strong a lobby. As a nation, we’d rather fund wars and killing than health care. That’s the choice we make. You seem a reasonable person and there is far more we agree upon than not.

“Continue the good fight.”

I replied: Hi, John — Thanks for writing.

Unfortunately, what government funds, government will run.

See Mr. Obama’s new initiative to take “Title IX” college sports funding policies (requiring colleges whose students accept federal college loans or loan guarantees — which is to say, 99 percent of all colleges) to drop men’s sports programs which generated some fan support and paid for themselves, in order to subsidize equal numbers of female athletes in sports no one bothers to watch — and adapt those “Title IX” policies to the SCIENCES.

In other words (we can only presume), throwing out on their ears numbers of qualified and motivated MALE science students to make room for an equivalent number of less-well-qualified women … until everything “comes out even.”

It’s not hard to imagine where such “leveling” doctrines will lead in, say … medicine.