Verily, the mind doth boggle - sports edition

I participated in sports as a youngster, and enjoyed watching it as a young adult, but I've never been fanatical about it.  I've also enjoyed classical music and ballet, and used to go to performances in my country of origin on a regular basis.

However, I've never before encountered a combination of sports and ballet in quite this fashion.

This fall, your favorite childhood game is back—with a twist! Dust off those gym shorts and grab your tutu for this outrageous mashup of ballet and dodgeball at the Westminster Sports Center on Saturday, Nov. 4.

In keeping with the City of Westminster’s slew of unconventional events like Zombie Golf and the Adult Easter Egg Hunt hosted by the deranged Easter bunny, the City will hold an adults-only dodgeball tournament on Saturday, Nov. 4, from 2-5 p.m. at the Westminster Sports Center, 6051 W. 95th Ave.

This is not your average gym class dodgeball game; designed for adults age 21 and over, the event incorporates fun costumes, hilarious rules, and adult beverages. Players begin each match with one hand on a ballerina bar at the back wall, and then dance to the midfield line to retrieve their balls. After retreating back to the ballerina bar and completing a plié, it’s on! Players hit by a special metallic ball must break out their best ballet dance moves until the music stops to rejoin the game. At the end of the night, prizes will be awarded to the winning team.

There's more at the link.

Er . . . OK, if you say so!  Now, we need team names.  How about the New York Jetés, or the Refugee Arabesques?

(Hey - I never promised to be politically correct!)




Peter

Looks like Seattle is going the same crappy way as other loony-left cities

Readers will be aware of the problems in San Diego, where an explosion in the transient homeless population has led to an outbreak of Hepatitis A.  It appears to be spreading to Los Angeles.  It's been called "the largest and deadliest hepatitis A outbreak to hit the US in decades".

Aesop doesn't pull his punches in describing the root of the problem.

A wise historian once said that the story of western civilization's progress boils down to the rise of sanitation, refuse removal, and achievement of running water and indoor plumbing.

And that the most frequent reason for near-area migration was literally a village/town/city moving far enough away to escape the smell and pest problems from their burgeoning trash heaps and dung hills.

Herein, living proof of concept.

San Diego (indeed, all of CA, esp. the coastal regions) is overrun by homeless waste-of-skin douchebags. Frisco's been dealing with the problem for decades, and they even publish poop-avoidance maps in S***istan By The Bay for the feces-averse.

Then, there's the perennial problem of drug addicts carelessly leaving their discards where anyone can get punctured by them. (So, where are all the "Legalize everything!" folks now...anyone? Beuller? Ferris Beuller...?) This helpfully adds lifelong incurable Hep B and C to the treatable Hepatitis A problem. Any large-"L" Libertarians in the audience? Tell me how you deal with near-zero government solutions to this problem. Or does this sort of thing fall inside the lines of Things It's Okay-to-beat-folks-into-submission-to? Just curious.

Rather than run them in for lawlessness, or run them out of town, city governments full of jackholes (San Diego city council, call your office...) let them shoot up, p***, and s*** everywhere, which has real-world public health consequences.

. . .

Hepatitis A (invariably with a fecal-oral vector, meaning someone else's chocolate gets in your peanut butter) ensues.

There's more at the link.  It's a profane, but accurate description of the problem.  I know it's accurate, because I've seen precisely the same thing, magnified greatly, in several Third World countries where effective sanitation is still a pipe-dream.

Seattle, WA is another city with a left-wing, liberal/progressive government.  It, too, has ignored its homeless/transient problem for a long time;  and the results have been similar to those encountered in California.  Crime, too, has become a burgeoning problem there, as transients steal anything they can get their hands on, allegedly to fund drug abuse.

One company has now had enough.

“I’m moving my business out of Seattle city limits, not only because of the homeless situation, but because of a variety of factors; definitely the tone and tenor of the city hasn’t helped the situation,” Benezra told the Dori Monson Show.

. . .

“I haven’t seen the area look as bad as it looks currently, the homeless problem has become an issue,” he said. “Not just for us, but for all the surrounding businesses. We also own some other properties, as well, down here and it’s a constant problem.”

At Buffalo Industries, people often sneak into the loading dock area where heavy machinery is operating, Benezra said. They go through the trash and he says they frequently kick people out. They also find discarded syringes on the ground.

“We periodically have people defecating in our parking lot; that’s always not a good look,” he said.

Erin Goodman with the SoDo Business Improvement Area says it’s not just Buffalo Industries.

“We have heard in the last month … that while crime in the south precinct overall is down about 5 percent, crime in the SoDo District itself is up about 20 percent,” Goodman said. “This tracks with what we are hearing from businesses as well.”

When it comes to the city, Benezra says, they don’t get much of a response. What businesses do get, he says, are more taxes.

. . .

“They are picking on the wrong people,” Benezra said. “… I just wonder about what people who are coming here to go on cruises think; when they come in town and see all the encampments off to the side of the freeway? Are they going to want to continue to travel here when they have to go through a lot of waste, and aggressive panhandling all over the city? People can make choices about where they want to travel as well. We are spending a lot of money on a new convention center … how likely are we to continue to have those conventions when our city, frankly, looks like a garbage dump?”

Again, more at the link.

The simple answer, of course, is that to the liberal/progressive mindset, the needs of business and those who pay their own way simply don't matter as much as those of the "helpless" or "downtrodden" or "oppressed" (insert whichever politically correct description du jour is appropriate).  If the homeless "can't help being homeless", surely it would be wrong to make them clean up their act - and the streets?  That would be blaming them for something they can't help.

(That's a very common thread in left-wing discussions of the problem;  they blame the lack of public toilets for the feces in the street, rather than the lack of self-control of those leaving them there.  Isn't it odd how, in generations past when there were no public facilities for the whole of society, public urination and defecation weren't that much of a problem?  It's called common decency - or, at least, it used to be common.  Not so much today, it seems.)

I predict that more and more liberal/progressive city administrations are going to be confronted with this dilemma.  Be "sensitive" towards the politically correct cause du jour, and have to deal with the health and public safety consequences;  or come down on the side of the latter, and be pilloried for being "insensitive" or having politically incorrect attitudes.  Unfortunately, I suspect most of them will choose the former option, because they simply can't bear to be considered politically incorrect.  Meanwhile, their citizens, many of whom have been brainwashed into the same politically correct mentality, will suffer the consequences.

I remember witnessing how one medium-sized African city dealt with the problem.  It was facing serious health and hygiene problems, as the result of an influx of outsiders who had nowhere to stay.  It hired groups of men to go around, armed with stout sticks and sjamboks.  Whenever they found someone urinating or defecating in public, or a member of the public pointed out someone who'd just done that, they'd whale the tar out of them, without hesitation and without mercy.  It took only a couple of weeks for the problem to be almost completely eliminated.  Somehow, I don't think that approach would go down well in these United States . . . but I'm here to tell you, it worked.

Peter

Here's what you owe to make up your state's pension and debt shortfall

CNBC has a very interesting (and, depending on where you live, a potentially devastating) article showing the liability of residents of each state to pay off the current shortfall in that state's unfunded debts, pension shortfalls, and so on.  Here's a helpful chart to show where you stand.

There's much more information at the link.  It's important and highly recommended reading - and remember, the figures above exclude federal government debt and privately held debt, which together amount to far more.  Frankly, if you live in one of the worst-performing states on that list, it may be time to do anything and everything you can to get out of there before things get worse!

Peter

Interesting . . . did Trump beat Hillary through better data analysis?

Dave Karpf says that "digital inexperience paid off" for the Trump campaign, in a big way.

The 2016 Trump campaign’s digital director, Brad Parscale, was featured on 60 Minutes last week. Much of the interview focused on the central role of Facebook in Trump’s digital strategy. Parscale shared that he “understood early that Facebook was how Donald Trump was going to win. Twitter is how he talked to the people. Facebook was going to be how he won. …We did [ads] on Twitter, Google search, other platforms. Facebook was the 500-pound gorilla, 80 percent of the budget kind of thing.” He also revealed that the Trump campaign had been closely advised by Facebook staffers who were literally “embedded” within their offices. While this little fact led the news, the truth is that top tech platforms have been offering such services to political campaigns for years. What was news, however, was the revelation that the Clinton campaign had turned Facebook down.

. . .

Back before Trump was being treated as a serious candidate, the 2016 election was supposed to be the one when Republicans finally started to catch up with Democrats in their use of social science experiments in elections. Then Trump happened, and everything got, well, weird. Many Republican digital campaign professionals were active #NeverTrumpers, further isolating the Trump digital team from any established base of digital campaign knowledge.

As a result, the experienced digital politics professionals weren’t in the room for Trump when Facebook arrived with its marketing pitch. The Clinton digital team had seen the experimental results. They had been around for past cycles, and had heard all these bold social media promises before. Facebook was touting its new-and-improved lookalike advertising product and asking for a giant slice of the digital advertising pie. The data from past elections said otherwise. Parscale, meanwhile, effectively responded by saying, “Magic beans?!? Take all of my money!”

Google and Twitter sent embedded staff to the Trump campaign as well. And the Clinton campaign accepted some staff embeds from big tech firms, even if Facebook was not among them. The digital technology firms didn’t just have a seat at the table with Trump’s digital program; they were often the most knowledgeable and experienced voices in the room. That’s generally a terrible way to run a campaign. You’ll get sold a bill of goods more often than not.

Except this time, the beans turned out to actually be magic.

There's more at the link.

That's a fascinating thought.  Were the "experts" on the Clinton campaign so over-exposed to "hype" about technology that they automatically distrusted it, or at least some aspects of it?  And were Trump's "experts" less expert, and therefore less jaded and more willing to listen to technologically savvy advice?  Did that make the difference between victory and defeat?

I'm looking forward to learning more about this as the post-election analysis continues.  It may hold interesting implications for future campaigns.

Peter

So tell me . . . why are US taxpayers sending aid to Puerto Rico when it's treated like this?

I wonder which Puerto Rican officials are responsible for this?  (A tip o' the hat to reader Jason L. for sending me the link to the video.)

Probably some of the same officials responsible for this.

FBI agents in Puerto Rico have been receiving calls from "across the island" with residents complaining local officials are "withholding" or "mishandling" critical FEMA supplies -- with one island official even accused of stuffing his own car full of goods meant for the suffering populace.

The accusations come in the aftermath of deadly Hurricane Maria, which devastated the U.S. territory last month.

“The complaints we’re hearing is that mayors of local municipalities, or people associated with their offices, are giving their political supporters special treatment, goods they’re not giving to other people who need them,” FBI Special Agent Carlos Osorio told Fox News.

. . .

Some of the claims have come by phone and others have poured in over social media, but the allegations stretch across the island.

Osorio told of one allegation where a party official is accused of pulling his own car around the back of a government building and driving off after loading it full of FEMA supplies.

“We’re going out and investigating these claims,” Osorio said. “We don’t know yet if they’re accurate or not...but yes we have received many similar allegations from people in many different parts of the island.”

The allegations of misconduct come amid a pitched back-and-forth between island officials and President Trump over the federal response to Maria.

San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulin Cruz, a frequent Trump foil, reportedly accused Trump on Thursday of “genocide” for not doing more to aid in the relief efforts.

There's more at the link.

Perhaps the best disaster relief for Puerto Rico might be to remove from office every state and local government official, and replace them with qualified, competent, honest people from the mainland - perhaps retired businessmen and administrators, who can teach and/or show them how it's done.  Many of them need the jobs, and Puerto Rico needs better government, making it a win-win situation.  What say you, readers?




Peter

A lot of exciting medical "discoveries" may be false

Courtesy of a link at Vox's place, I came across this very troubling article.

Researchers warn that large parts of biomedical science could be invalid due to a cascading history of flawed data in a systemic failure going back decades.

A new investigation reveals more than 30,000 published scientific studies could be compromised by their use of misidentified cell lines, owing to so-called immortal cells contaminating other research cultures in the lab.

The problem is as serious as it is simple: researchers studying lung cancer publish a new paper, only it turns out the tissue they were actually using in the lab were liver cells. Or what they thought were human cells were mice cells, or vice versa, or something else entirely.

If you think that sounds bad, you're right, as it means the findings of each piece of affected research may be flawed, and could even be completely unreliable.

. . .

Serge Horbach from Radboud University in the Netherlands ... and fellow researcher Willem Halffman wanted to know how extensive the phenomenon of misidentified cell lines really was, so they searched for evidence of what they call "contaminated" scientific literature.

Using the research database Web of Science, they looked for scientific articles based on any of the known misidentified cell lines as listed by the International Cell Line Authentication Committee's (ICLAC) Register of Misidentified Cell Lines.

There are currently 451 cell lines on this list, and they're not what you think they are – having been contaminated by other kinds of cells at some point in scientific history. Worse still, they've been unwittingly used in published laboratory research going as far back as the 1950s.

"After an extensive literary study, we believe this involves some 33,000 publications," Halffman explains.

"That means there are more than 30,000 scientific articles online that are reporting on the wrong cells."

There's more at the link.

This has enormous implications for medical research.  For example, if the FDA approves a new drug to treat a certain illness, and it turns out that the drug was tested on the wrong cells, its usefulness may be overstated at best - perhaps even overturned entirely.  Furthermore, our understanding of certain diseases, like some types of cancer or tumors, might be completely wrong.  Doctors and scientists may have to revisit some issues from the ground up, repeating all the flawed research using cell lines that are proven to be correct - a massive, perhaps unsupportable expense.

The potential lawsuits stemming from this might be mind-boggling in their complexity.  I suspect medical malpractice lawyers are, right now, setting up urgent conference calls and preparing advertisements.  As far as they're concerned, this might just be bonanza time.

Peter

New favorite lower-cost wood grips for handguns

I recently tried a pair of Pachmayr Renegade wood laminate grips on one of my snubnose revolvers.  I liked them so much, I've just ordered another pair, and I daresay I'll be "re-gripping" a number of my revolvers with them.

They look very attractive, and are usually available in plain or checkered form.  Here's a composite image, showing one of each style sized to fit a snubnose revolver.

The smooth finish is very smooth, and seems to be finished in polyurethane.  The combination can be slippery if your hand is wet;  but that's not been a problem for me, since I make sure to use a firm grip.  The smooth finish lets the gun slide easily into a pocket (which is where I usually carry a snubnose revolver).  They don't "grab" the pocket material at all, which is a big help.  The checkered version offers more traction, which will be useful to control more powerful rounds, but still isn't overly "grabby" on pocket material (unlike soft rubber grips).  I think my .357 Magnum snubbies will carry the checkered grips, while my .38 Special snubbies will sport the smooth versions.

The Renegades are a little larger than standard snubby grips, so that the gun fits my hand better (giving a full 3-finger grip) and points very naturally.  I find, as I bring it up into line with my target, the front sight nestles almost instinctively into the dovetail of the rear sight.  That's handy.  However, they're slightly less concealable because of the larger grips;  something to keep in mind, and compensate for if necessary in the way one dresses.  The gun still conceals well in an ankle holster, too.  People with smaller hands may not find the Renegade grips a good fit.

I haven't tried the Renegade grips on larger-frame revolvers yet, but I plan to do so soon.  They're available for several models of semi-auto pistols as well.  Best of all, they're priced very reasonably, much more so than some other "fancy" wood grips.  The rosewood grips look good on either blued or stainless firearms.  There's also a charcoal finish that I find too dark for my taste, but I'm sure there are those who'll prefer it.

No, Pachmayr isn't paying me to advertise their products, and I've received no compensation in cash or in kind for mentioning them.  I simply like to tell my readers when I find a product I really like, that does its job well.  These Renegade grips are worth a closer look, if you're a shooter.

Peter

"Why Crypto-Currencies are the Next Dotcom Bubble"

That's the title of a very interesting article by Aaron Clarey, a.k.a. Captain Capitalism.  If you've been wondering about Bitcoin (the original "cryptocurrency"), "Initial Coin Offerings" and the like, he provides a great deal of information of which I hadn't been aware.  In particular, he highlights the risks involved in dealing in such pseudo-commodities.

... unlike say, a bond, a stock, or a rental property, currencies (crypto or not) do not produce income.  They are a tool of economic exchange, a store of value, and naturally forming and evolving economic phenomenon since humans existed.  Silver bars do not poop out little silver coins and gold coins do breed to make little gold coins.  And since all currencies produce nothing, there is no means by which to value them.  The value of currencies are therefore determined by their rarity relative to one another, whether they have intrinsic value (precious metals), utilitarian/commodity value (silver is used in electronics), purchasing power (the Big Mac Index) and the amorphous, whimsical, and impossible-to-measure trust and faith of the entire world's people.

. . .

I'm no economist, but as far as my logic takes me, the world should only need ONE cryptocurrency.  Maybe three or four in order to account for the fact people would want to diversify out of being reliant upon just ONE cryptocurrency.  But when I did the research for my client...now approaching 4 months ago...there were....(drum roll please)

967 cryptocurrencies!

But wait, it gets better!  In those four short months the number of cryptocurrencies has increased by 200!

Do not tell me this isn't Dotcom II all over again.

. . .

Very simply "The We Accept Index" reconnects and measures the only thing that matters with a currency - whether it is accepted as such.  Whether you can use that currency to purchase ACTUAL TANGIBLE PHYSICAL THINGS IN THE REAL WORLD.  Whether other people deem it to have value.  And it is here we find out just how few cryptocurrencies have value.

In all honesty, only two, MAYBE four have value:
    Bitcoin
    Litecoin
    Ethereum, and
    Dogecoin (and this was started on a lark!)

The remaining 99.7% of cryptocurrencies, in literal economic terms, have no value.

There's much more at the link.

This is a very informative and useful guide to the area of cryptocurrencies, and the explosively expanding market for them.  I'm forced to agree with Mr. Clarey;  this looks like yet another bubble, one that may take the fortunes of many investors with it when it (inevitably) implodes.  There is no real, tangible value underlying it at all.

Peter

Yet more effects of our national debt: increased taxes and a poorer retirement

I've written frequently about debt and its effects on our economy.  John Mauldin draws the inescapable conclusion about federal government debt, and how it may - almost certainly will - impact our retirement.

The projected total US debt will be $30 trillion within 10 years, using the CBO’s own numbers. But the CBO also makes the rosy assumptions that there will be no recessions and that GDP will grow at a 4% nominal rate ... If you asked me to bet the “over/under” on the debt in 2027, I would bet the over at $35 trillion.

. . .

Note: That ... does not take into account the off-budget deficit that still ends up having to be borrowed. Last year the deficit was well over $1 trillion—but we were told it was in the neighborhood of $600 billion.

If any normal company tried to use accounting like the US Congress does, the SEC would rightly declare it fraudulent and shut it down immediately.

. . .

... looking at the demographic reality of longer lifespans and lower birthrates, it’s hard to believe Social Security can survive over the long run in anything like its present form.

But any major change will mean that the government is breaking its promise to workers and retirees.

And now we come to the really uncomfortable part.

Larry Kotlikoff wrote in an article on Forbes that we would need an immediate approximately 50% increase in taxes to fund our future deficits. That’s what we would need to create a true entitlements “lockbox” with the funds actually in it.

But surely everybody knows by now that there is no lockbox with Social Security funds in it. That money was spent on other government programs and debts. And so when the CBO doesn’t count the trust funds as part of the national debt, they are not only being disingenuous, I think they are committing financial fraud.

The money that will actually pay for Social Security and Medicare down the road is going to have to come out of future taxes, just as for any other debt of the US.

So at some point – even though Republicans are jawboning hard about cutting taxes now – we are going to have to raise taxes in order to fund Social Security and Medicare. I personally think it will have to be done with a value-added tax (VAT), because the necessary increase in income taxes would totally destroy the economy and potential growth.

. . .

But the simple fact of the matter is that no Congress is going to fund Social Security and Medicare through tax hikes. Before they ever go there, they will means-test Social Security and increase the retirement age – which they should.

There's more at the link.

So, if you're expecting to rely on Social Security for any part of your retirement income (let alone a significant proportion of it), keep in mind:

1. SS is very likely to become a means-tested program, meaning that only those who lack other means of financial survival will get it (or part of it).  No matter how much you, personally, have paid in Social security "contributions" (for which read "taxes"), you are no longer guaranteed a return on that money.  It'll depend on your net worth and other financial factors.
2. Your tax burden is almost certain to increase, whether by direct or indirect means.  Therefore, you may get less than you expected from SS, and you may have to pay out more in taxes - a double financial whammy.

I think the odds of both happening are pretty darn good, as Mr. Mauldin points out.  Mathematics is a hard science, not a feeling or an opinion.  If the money isn't there, it can't be spent;  and if Congress wants to spend it, it has to find more money somewhere.  Either way, we're the victims.




Peter

Making Number 2 a little easier when off the beaten track

I was intrigued to find this video review at The Vulgar Curmudgeon's place.

He's also done an earlier review, on the original, smaller toilet paper "tablets".  Those may be found here, if you're interested, while the larger ones may be found here.  There are similar products from other manufacturers, too;  see some of them here.

I'd never heard of these things, but I have several friends and acquaintances who regularly hike in back-country areas, or go on hunting trips where they travel as light as possible.  I asked them whether they'd ever used such products.  Three said they had, and recommended them from personal experience.  They said they weren't as comfortable as toilet paper, but got the job done, and the saving in weight and space in their backpacks were so impressive as to make the choice a no-brainer.

A fourth friend, however, added a cautionary note.  He's from Minnesota, and hunts there in winter;  and he's traveled to Alaska to hunt there, too.  He reminded me that one has to dampen these things to get them to expand, and pointed out that in sub-zero temperatures, applying a damp piece of cellulose fiber to one's nether regions would be both exceedingly uncomfortable, and a potential health hazard if the damp material should freeze to . . . shall we say, delicate portions of one's anatomy.  He reckoned the defrosting process could also be hazardous to one's health, given that the only heat available would be from a fire or camp stove.  "What happens if the darned thing freezes to your tush, then catches fire when you try to warm it up to get it off?" he wondered.  Once he'd pointed that out, I wondered the same thing!

If you've used these or similar products, please let us know how you found them in Comments.  I might have to add some of these to my emergency kit.  At least, living in Texas, the freezing hazard is likely to be minimized!




Peter

The Las Vegas shootings: lots of smoke, but where's the real fire?

There are still many unanswered questions about the Las Vegas shootings a fortnight ago.  Law enforcement seems to be changing the timeline and other details to suit their own narrative, and they've done it so often as to call their professionalism and expertise into serious question.

Two articles summarize the current state of play:

Vegas Weekend Roundup: Insanity

Las Vegas Still Makes No Sense

Go read them for a very good summary of the issues that remain unsolved (at least, as far as the public is concerned).

I'm particularly concerned that little or no internal security footage from the hotel has been released.  I'm sure such video would be date- and/or time-stamped, and reveal the truth about who responded to the situation, at what time, where and how.  The fact that it has not been released speaks volumes about a potential police cover-up of a flawed, delayed response that may - I emphasize, may - have doomed dozens or scores of people to death or injury.  Unfortunately, in the absence of the release of this sort of information, we can only speculate;  and many are doing precisely that.  Law enforcement agencies are doing themselves no favors at all by their reluctance to provide details.

I'll let Karl Denninger sum it up.

As for the LVMPD quit covering **** up, especially whatever you know about that "guard's" legal status vis-a-vis being in the United States and why he doesn't show up on the Nevada License site as holding the license he would almost-certainly need to be a security guard.

Oh, and quit playing with the timeline too.

Finally, you and the Fibbies obviously can't find your ass with both hands.  How else does a (dead) suspect's house, which you breached violently and then searched, get broken into by burglars while you have it under surveillance?  Either cops broke into it (with your explicit permission so they could literally loot it) or you lack the basic ability to do your damn job and your entire department needs to be defunded since you are all a sufficiently-bad waste of oxygen that you deserve to get lost in the desert and expire. The rank incompetence during and immediately following the event is bad enough but this tops the list when it comes to getting paid to do literally nothing and nobody in your state should sit for one second more of that crap.

I'm not buying what you're selling -- I don't know why or what you're covering up but that you are is evident from the ever-changing timeline and your failure to address the inconsistencies, including said "Security Guard" who is a ghost according to the requirements of Nevada law to hold that position.  You knew damn well what was going on there within hours of the event and have intentionally blackballed all discussion of same.

There's more at the link.

Frankly, I think Mr. Denninger is right in almost every respect.  Why is the LVMPD still evading the issues in this case, two weeks after the fact?  This stinks of a cover-up at every level.

Peter

True dat

Courtesy of Donald Sensing:

Word.

Peter

Is Amazon.com becoming complacent, and resting on its laurels?

I was intrigued to read this article by Karl Denninger.

Walmart has said they expect a 40% e-commerce increase (in dollar terms) over the next 12 months.

Here's my view on them vis-a-vis Out-Amazoning Amazon: Amazon is in trouble.  Serious trouble.

WalMart has done a lot with their online presence of late.  Further, and far more importantly, they do not charge a "subscription fee" for some "premium" tier such as Amazon does with Prime.

Why is this important?  Several reasons:

• Walmart now handily beats Amazon for a lot of products when it comes to price.  In fact if you don't check Walmart's online listing before ordering from Amazon you are a fool and almost-certain to overpay.  It's that blatant now, and has been getting more-so over the last few months.

• You need buy no special plan to get free delivery.  You can, as with Amazon, get free delivery to your house if you have a modest amount spent in one transaction.  However, you can also get free delivery to any of WalMart's stores irrespective of the amount of the transaction and typically the product is there in 2-3 days -- in other words, just as fast as PRIME.  WalMart will hold it at their customer service desk for about a week and you can come get it at your leisure.

. . .

Next up Walmart has announced that they intend to make returns of their internet purchases zero hassle (requiring just seconds) at any of their stores.  That's a huge win over returning something via Amazon where you typically have to go to a UPS retail outlet or similar to drop it off and deal with printing their return label.  In this case just take it with you the next time you go to Walmart, check it back in at the store and it's done.

There's more at the link.

On Sunday morning, I was researching the purchase of some home gym equipment to supplement the strength training that Miss D. and I are currently doing.  After reading Mr. Denninger's article, I decided to do a direct, like-for-like price comparison between Walmart and Amazon (same equipment, same manufacturer, same model, just a different vendor).  To my astonishment, Walmart had the cheapest price every time - and it wasn't a small difference, either.  Across six different products that I wanted, Amazon and/or its third-party vendors averaged 258% - i.e. two and a half times - more than the prices at Walmart.  That's astonishing!  Admittedly, this was for relatively expensive specialty items, not "normal" shopping like groceries or clothing;  but even so, that sort of difference in price is mind-boggling.  What's more, Walmart offered the same free shipping I'd receive from Amazon.  In addition, it was far cheaper than every other online retailer I could find selling the same make and model of equipment - many of whom would have charged shipping and handling fees on top of their retail prices.

Needless to say, I dug out my credit card and ordered what I needed from Walmart without further delay, for about $450 less than Amazon would have charged me for the same goods.  I'll be able to pick up my order at my local Walmart on Thursday.  It's nice to know it'll be held securely for me;  I don't have to worry about someone stealing it from my front porch (which has happened in the past, in other towns).  That's a definite plus.

After that experiment, you can bet I'm going to be much more diligent about price comparisons between online vendors in future.  Amazon has done a wonderful job of making online transactions as easy and painless as possible.  Where the difference in price is very small, I'll probably opt for the convenience of using their tried and trusted services, rather than open accounts at more vendors.  However, when buying more expensive items, the kind of savings I've just enjoyed have been a real eye-opener.  I suspect Amazon has been "coasting", resting on their (well-earned) laurels for customer service, trusting that clients will value that so highly that they won't bother to check prices elsewhere.  For me, that's just come to a grinding halt!  I only have so many dollars to spend.  If I can stretch them further by taking a bit more time and trouble, so much the better.  I'll use Amazon to check user reviews of products I'm considering (it's still by far the best online resource for that), but I'll check prices elsewhere, too, and "follow the money" in terms of savings.

Kudos to Walmart for putting so much effort into improving its online ordering process, which is noticeably easier to use than it was in the past.  They've definitely upped their game.  If their handling of my order is equally good, they're going to become an e-commerce force to be reckoned with.  I think Amazon is going to have to work very hard to maintain its current leadership position.

(For another perspective on the e-commerce rivalry between the two behemoths, see "The Amazon-Walmart Showdown That Explains the Modern Economy".  It's a good article, and worth reading.)

Peter

Sunday Morning Music

It's Sunday morning, but by some minor miracle my back let me sleep later than usual (I normally wake up in the small hours of the morning).  I'm not fully awake yet;  so what better time to give you a song or two about waking up?

Let's start with possibly the most famous Goon Show dialog of all time.  Eccles and Bluebottle are in "the ground floor attic of a nearby clock repairers", and have this conversation.

When you've stopped laughing, here's an Irish song about waking up.

I reckon that'll do it for this morning!

Peter

Dietary supplements: an interesting piece of history

I'm sure most of my readers are aware of the ongoing controversy surrounding dietary supplements:  vitamins, minerals, weight gain, weight loss, "energy drinks", the whole schmear.  I regard all of them with suspicion, given the number of studies that have shown them to have little, if any, positive effect.

Many people aren't aware that the dietary supplement "fad" began in weightlifting and bodybuilding circles in the 1960's.  It was unscientific, but promoted by the suppliers of equipment to the sport, as they realized they could make a lot more money out of bodybuilding supplements than they could out of one-off sales of equipment (because barbells, etc. don't wear out and never need replacement).  A very interesting six-part article by Dr. Ken Leistner recalls the period, and how supplements grew into a multi-million-dollar industry.

If you trained with weights during this era, you also had an interest and a financial investment in any number of nutritional supplements. One of the oft-quoted summaries regarding this came from famed collegiate and NFL strength coach Dan Riley, who in one lecture remarked, “For those of you familiar with the statue on top of the York Barbell Company building, I want you to know that I paid for half of that with all of their supplements that I bought.” I immediately piped up from the audience, “Dan, I believe you because I paid for the other half!”

My own odyssey that wound through the nutritional supplement field was no doubt as typical for the era as it is possible to be. It began with the awareness that my training efforts needed a boost, some sort of push forward that training alone could not and would not provide. At least the muscle magazines told me this. Of course this wasn’t true, as weight training was in the process of taking me from an undersized 120-pound youngster to a 232-pound collegiate athlete. The training was doing its job, but like so many, I read the ads that were aimed at fourteen and fifteen-year-old trainees and fell prey to the purveyors of protein powder, vitamins, minerals, wheat germ oil, and brewer’s yeast. In the early 1960s these were the “standard fare” for anyone involved in weight training who deemed themselves to be “serious about things.” No one was more serious about their training than I was, and I believed the advertising copy, much of which passed for legitimate articles in the various muscle magazines.

Please allow for another reminder, especially for those young readers of the Internet Age: the dissemination of information was extremely limited – often limited to what was printed in the magazines, if one could not actually get themselves to a storefront gym, garage, basement, or warehouse where serious lifters or bodybuilders trained. The “information” in the York publications clearly boosted “the fact” that the featured lifters and bodybuilders used York Hi-Proteen powders, tablets, Energol germ oil, and their other supplements. The Weider magazines, published under an almost dizzying array of titles, focused primarily on bodybuilders, but again the key feature was the intake of the Weider brand of nutritional supplements, many of which mimicked what York was selling.

. . .

A true observation about training with a barbell ... was made in 1970 by Arthur Jones in his Nautilus Training Bulletin. He noted that once a trainee purchases a barbell set, he is effectively removed from the marketplace as a consumer unless the barbell itself is defective. Any failure in performance of the barbell set becomes evident and a replacement will be sought. He clearly stated that it is much more difficult to judge the efficacy of a can of protein powder, and once established as a customer, the purveyor of nutritional supplements will have the user as a monthly customer, perhaps for a very lengthy period of time as he replenishes his depleted supplement supply.

This was also the realization of Hoffman, Weider, and a few smaller manufacturers or distributors who jumped onto the supplement bandwagon.

There's much more at the link, which takes you to the first article in the series.  Links to the other parts are at the foot of the article.

Reading Dr. Leistner's recollections of supplements in the weightlifting and bodybuilding "industries", one can see many similarities to how supplements are promoted for general use in TV advertisements and other media today.  The comparison is interesting, and thought-provoking.  Recommended reading if you're interested in fitness and/or strength training, which is the discipline Miss D. and myself are following.  We're very happy with the results so far - and no supplements are needed!

Peter

Simplifying life . . .

. . . according to Stephan Pastis and his "Pearls Before Swine" comic strip.

Click the image to be taken to a larger version on the cartoon's Web page.




Peter

Doofus Of The Day #980

Today's award goes to a French "intelligence agent".

A French intelligence agent sent a text message by mistake to the mobile phone of a jihadist, inadvertently warning him that he was under surveillance and undermining an investigation, it emerged on Friday.

The target of the probe, described as an “Islamist preacher” based in the Paris area, immediately understood that his phone was being tapped and his movements monitored.

He called the agent to complain and warned his contacts that they were under surveillance. As a result, separate investigations by two different intelligence services came to nothing, M6 television reported.

“It was undoubtedly the worst mistake the agent ever made,” M6 commented. Interior ministry sources confirmed the report.

There's more at the link.

Sounds like a peculiarly unintelligent intelligence agent, if you ask me!

Peter

Worst Halloween costume EVAR?

Would you believe this?

Verily, the mind doth boggle . . .  That's not scary - that's sick!




Peter

Uh... yeah. About that gym thing...

Given Miss D.'s and my recent gym activities, I had to laugh at this cartoon from The Devil's Panties.  Click the image to be taken to a larger version at its Web page.

Peter

The Second Amendment, mangled beyond recognition

I daresay many of my readers have seen Michael Moore's suggested changes to the Second Amendment to the United States constitution.

PROPOSED 28th AMENDMENT TO THE US CONSTITUTION

“A well regulated State National Guard, being helpful to the safety and security of a State in times of need, along with the strictly regulated right of the people to keep and bear a limited number of non-automatic Arms for sport and hunting, with respect to the primary right of all people to be free from gun violence, this shall not be infringed.”

. . .

• As over 90% of gun violence is committed by men, in order for a man to purchase a gun, he must first get a waiver from his current wife, plus his most recent ex-wife, or any woman with whom he is currently in a relationship (if he’s gay, he must get the waiver from his male spouse/partner). This law has greatly reduced most spousal/domestic gun murders in Canada.

• All automatic and semi-automatic guns are banned.

• No gun or clip can hold more than 6 bullets.

• To activate a gun for it to be used, the trigger must recognize the fingerprint of its registered owner. This will eliminate most crimes committed with a gun as 80% of these crimes are done with a stolen gun.

• One’s guns must be stored at a licensed gun club or government-regulated gun storage facility. Believing that having a gun in your home provides you with protection is an American myth. People who die from a home invasion make up a sad but minuscule .04% of all gun murders in the US. And over a third of them are killed by their own gun that the criminal has either stolen or wrestled from them.

• To own and operate a gun one must obtain a license (like one does to operate a car). To get a license you have to complete a gun training and safety course and pass a thorough background check.

• As nearly half of all gun deaths are suicides, mental health care must become a top national health priority and must be properly funded. And by making it more difficult to purchase a gun - and requiring its storage outside the home - easy access during a suicidal moment is denied.

There's (unfortunately) more at the link.

Needless to say, such an "amendment" would be no amendment at all, but rather a complete negation of the Second Amendment and all it stands for.

Daniel Greenberg summarizes why people like Mr. Moore want to accomplish that.

The left will lecture on the failure of drug prohibition, but is sure that gun prohibition would work. Why? Because they usually have some personal experience buying drugs, but little experience buying guns. And so they’re sure that a ban that they would ridicule in any other area will somehow work with guns.

. . .

Gun control isn’t a policy. It’s a moral panic. Like prohibition, it’s a xenophobic reaction to a different culture that shares the same country with them. Guns have come to embody a rural conservative culture in the minds of urban leftists the way that alcohol once embodied foreign immigrants to prohibition activists and the way that drugs represented urban decadence to rural America.

It’s why the “common sense solution” talk quickly gives way to broad denunciations of a “national gun culture”, of “white privilege”, of rural folk “clinging to their bibles and guns”, of American militarism and toxic masculinity, and of all the things for which guns are merely a symbol to the leftists who hate them.

A cultural critique is very different than a common sense solution. It isn’t guns that the left wants to ban. It’s people. It was never really about banning guns. It was always about the culture war.

Again, more at the link.

We'll just have to make sure that Mr. Moore, and others of his ilk, don't succeed - whether or not they manage to get legislation, or even a constitutional amendment, through Congress.  There are words on paper, and then there's the reality on the ground.  Mr. Moore is most unlikely to change that.

Peter