Friday, September 27, 2024

How Are Democrats Going To Charge Their Electric Vehicles?

Earlier this year the Biden/Harris administration's EPA proposed new pollution control rules that would require that as many as two-thirds of all new vehicles sold in the United States by the 2032 model year (lseven years away) be electric or hybrids.

That would require a nearly a ten-fold increase over current electric vehicle sales.

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/20/bidens-regulators-poised-to-issue-rule-meant-to-drive-electric-car-sales-00148019

Electric vehicles made up less than 8% of new vehicle sales last year and more than 80% of those were Teslas.


Source: https://www.statista.com/outlook/mmo/electric-vehicles/united-states#unit-sales


The Biden/Harris Administration claims that this is not an electric vehicle mandate on auto consumers. However, if the auto makers are prohibited from exceeding 30% in gas-powered vehicles in their output isn't that argument just a little bit disingenuous?

Of course, I have a hard time understanding how a rule like this that would have such far reaching consequences for the American people could be instituted without legislation passed by their elected representatives in Congress.

It is hard to believe that our Founders would not be shocked at this overreach by the executive branch made up of unelected bureaucrats.

However, consumers do not seem to be buying what the government is attempting to mandate and the auto companies are producing.

Electric vehicles are piling up at dealerships in increasing numbers.


Credit: https://x.com/MattTopley/status/1816526327605850615/photo/1


This is despite the fact the federal government is providing a $7,500 subsidy on the purchase of many electric vehicles.

It has also provided billions of dollars to automakers to subsidize the production of electric vehicles.




In the meantime, each of the EV units that Ford sold this year incurred an average loss of $44,000 each.



It is insane.

The sad reality is that this is how Kamala Harris believes the U.S. economy should work.

However, let's look at this from a more practical perspective---where will the power come from to charge these electric vehicles?

Bear in mind that at the same time that the climate change lobby wants to ban gasoline powered vehicles they also want to ban coal, natural gas and oil to generate electricity. They are also averse to using nuclear power.

They also want to ban gas stoves in favor of electric stoves and gas furnaces in favor of electric heat pumps.

All of these are at the top of this list that Kamala Harris believes are absolutely essential to address climate change.

How do you increase the number of things plugged into the electric gird while decreasing the energy sources that can be used to power the grid?

How does that work?

It doesn't.

However, that apparently is a minor detail in the minds of Democrats.

A recent poll indicates that the only energy sources that a majority of Democrat voters favor expanding are solar panel and wind turbine farms.

On the other hand, a majority of Republicans are in favor of "all of the above".

If the Democrats have their way we seem headed back to the 19th century when water and wind were about all we had to power anything.

How are we going to charge all those electric vehicles, electric stoves and future AI needs not to mention your iPhone?

It is estimated that data center power consumption will jump by a factor of six to ten over the next decade.

Over the last 15 years electricity demand has been relatively stable in the United States. However, we are beginning to see an increase that will undoubtedly grow due to electric vehicles, data centers, AI and even crypto mining.

Increasing needs for power due to data centers and AI is the sole reason that Microsoft just announced that they have reached an agreement to reopen the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania for their exclusive use.

Notice the noticeable uptick in electricity demand since 2020.



The latest projections are that electricity demand over the next decade is going to grow at 3 times the rate at which it grew over the last decade.

The math simply does not add up.

None of it makes any sense but you can be sure from looking at the poll above that plenty of people will be voting for it.

I just wonder how many of those voters are prepared to live like this in order to power their household needs?


Credit: https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/watermill--410812797244116795/


Source: https://www.ydr.com/picture-gallery/news/2019/06/25/photos-early-wind-power-machines-dots-farm-near-new-park/1555852001/

That appears to be what they are voting for.


Friday, September 20, 2024

Polling Potpourri---September 20, 2024 Edition

It has been just over a week since the Trump/Harris debate.

This should be enough time to evaluate any effects that the debate may have had on the arc of the 2024 Presidential race.

It is difficult to detect any major shifts in the race toward either candidate.

Most polls show a small shift toward Harris. A few others show that Trump continues to enjoy a small advantage.

Harris was +1.1 over Trump right before the debate in the RealClear Politics poll national average.  She is currently +1.9 points.

However, Trump and Harris are tied in the battleground state average. 

The candidates are generally separated by a point or less in all of these state polls.


Source: https://www.realclearpolling.com/elections/president/2024/battleground-states


There are only two things I know for sure in looking at the recent polling.

1. Kamala Harris has infused the Democrats with new energy and life in the campaign that they did not have with Biden on the ticket.

This is clearly shown in this graph of the RCP national poll averages over the last six months.


Source: https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/president/general/2024/trump-vs-harris


2. Trump is polling better right now with almost all demographic groups than he did in either 2016 or 2020.

This chart comparing 2016 and 2020 polls in various states compared to 2024 in the RealClear politics average shows that.


Credit: https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1836096233598787683


If you put both of these together it points to an extraordinarily tight race that could go either way depending on the votes in a couple of states.

In fact, the most likely outcome in my mind is that the final result will be determined by a factor that is not even in play in the race right now. An external event? A major faux pax by one of the candidates? A new revelation involving one of them?

The two most recent national popular votes favorable to Trump are the Atlas Intel poll showing Trump +3 and Rasmussen +2.

Atlas Intel was rated the most accurate pollster in 2020. Trafalgar was second and Rasmussen was third.


Credit: https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1835148869849448885


Trafalgar appears to only be polling the battleground states in 2024 thus far.

It has Trump up by about 2 points in both Pennsylvania and Georgia in polls released this week.



Trafalgar show similar leads for Harris in Nevada and Wisconsin.

The two best national polls for Kamala Harris have her +6 with Morning Consult and +4 with ABC News/Ipsos.

However, it also has to be kept in mind that Joe Biden won the popular vote by 4.5 points nationally but barely won the electoral college. He won several critical swing states by the slightest of margins. It should also be remembered that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2.1 points over Trump in 2016.

In 2020, Biden won Arizona by 11,000 votes, Georgia by 12,000 votes and Wisconsin by 21,000 votes. Less than 50,000 votes in those states decided the election in 2020 despite the national popular vote margin of over 4 points. If Biden's margin of 1.2% in Pennsylvania, on top of turning those three other states, had gone the other way, Trump would have had a comfortable victory.

This suggests that Harris needs to be polling at +4 points or better nationally to be considered the favorite in this election. If Trump can keep her margin below +2 points he will be favored.

A Fox News Poll released on Wednesday shows that dynamic in action. Harris is up +2 nationally but trails Trump in the critical battleground states by 2. That scenario favors Trump in the electoral college vote. However. Trump led by +1 overall in that poll in August.

A New York Times/Siena poll released yesterday has the race tied. 

Any way you look at it, this race promises to be as close as 2016 and 2020 were.

What does Trump have going for him?

The Atlas Intel poll shows that Trump is the voter's choice when asked who they trusted more on various issues.

Most of the big issues has Trump with double digit leads in trust.

Surprisingly, based on the media narrative on abortion, Harris only has a 2 point advantage on reproductive rights in the Atlas Intel poll.


Credit: https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1835078306464776609

Based on these results, why isn't Trump running away with the election?

It clearly comes down to Trump's personality, demeanor and likeability.

However, I was surprised that the Atlas Intel poll showed that there was not much difference in favorability issues between the two.

Kamala Harris has a net favorability of -2.

Donald Trump is at -5.

However, Joe Biden is at -14 

Tim Walz is -15 and J.D. Vance -13.


Favorability Ratings (Green positive, Red negative)
Source: https://www.atlasintel.org/poll/usa-national-2024-09-14

The Fox News poll also has Harris at -2 in net favorability. Trump is -8 in that poll.

The New York Times/Siena poll has Harris at -1 and Trump at -4 in net favorability.

What does Kamala have going for her?

The less people know about her the better it seems to be,

Her age is also helping her against Trump whereas this was a huge negative for Biden.

There is a reason that her campaign is doing all they can to avoid interviews and press conferences. 

I would do the same if I was running her campaign.

The problem for Harris is that there are a lot of video and other evidence about her past positions and how extreme her California values have been.

The challenge for the Trump campaign is to expose who Kamala Harris really is without the benefit of the media who are doing all they can to help her win.

A recent Gallup poll seems to suggest that the more voters find out about Kamala Harris the more they do not like her.

Harris got a lot of favorable media attention right after she replaced Biden which gave her an immediate boost in her favorability rating compared to what it had been as Vice President.

However, a Gallup poll just released this week shows that Trump is being looked at more favorably over the last month and Harris is being look at more unfavorably.

Gallup has Trump's net favorability at -7. However, that is a 7 point improvement compared to August.

Kamala Harris is actually viewed less favorably than Trump right now in the Gallup poll. She is at -10 but has lost 8 points in a month.



What really stands out to me in the Gallup data is that Kamala Harris has a -25 net favorability rating with Independents! Trump is -9 with that group.

What is also interesting about the overall favorability scores of Trump with the Atlas Intel (-5) Gallup (-7) Fox (-8) and NYT?Siena (-4) polls is comparing those scores to when he was on this score in 2016 and 2020,

In 2016, Trump's favorability rating was -21 in polls (RCP average) right before the election when he defeated Hillary Clinton.

In 2020, Trump was -13 (RCP average) when he lost to Joe Biden.

It may be hard for some to believe but Trump actually has higher net favorability scores now than at almost any time since he first entered the political arena in 2016.

Yes, Trump is still in negative territory, but so is almost every other national political figure in the United States. 

In the end, polls are just polls.

However, the real polls have already opened in Pennsylvania for early mail-in voting.

Many other states will soon follow with either mail-in or early in person voting over the next month.

An important metric this year will be to compare early voting trends based on party affiliation.

Will Democrats be able to attain the same number of mail-in ballots it did in 2020?

To what extent will Republicans be able to close the early voting gap now that the GOP is advising its supporters to vote early? Can they also do that without cannibalizing their election day vote advantage?

The next 46 days promise to be very interesting.



Thursday, September 19, 2024

Buried Under A Mountain of Debt

The amount of federal debt of the U.S. government continues to grow.

It is now over $35 trillion. It is up over $12 trillion since 2020.


Source: https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/1818050246242365893


Federal debt as a % of GDP is now higher than what it was right after we borrowed heavily to fight and win World War II.

At the end of 2023, U.S. debt was 121% of GDP. 

It peaked at 119% in 1946.


Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDGDPA188S


The debt taken on for World War II became manageable over time because the economies of most countries around the world were devastated by the war.  This allowed the United States to dominate the world economy with large annual increases in GDP.

We are in a much different position today.

Interest expense on the federal debt is now over $1.1 trillion per year.



To put that number in context, it is estimated that the United States will only collect $1.7 trillion in individual income taxes in 2024!

In August, the federal government spent twice as much as what came in from revenues.

$307 billion in receipts. $687 billion in outlays.




Interest expense is now consuming almost 65% of every dollar of individual income taxes coming in.

Net interest (Interest expense minus interest income) is now the second largest outlay in the federal budget.



As the debt continues to increase and interest payments get larger, more and more pressure will be exerted on the federal budget.

The interest paid to service the debt will begin to squeeze out all other spending. Do you see a problem?

The recent 50 basis point cut in interest rates had little to do with the economy. It was not justified in any way by economic data. The stock market is at all-time highs. Inflation has trended down but is still not at the 2% Fed target. The unemployment rate is 4.2%. 

The Fed move is all about making it cheaper for the federal government to finance its debt most of which is now being issued in short-term maturities which the Fed rate influences a lot more than longer debt terms.

In 2023, the Treasury  issued $23 trillion in Treasury bills (less than 12 months maturity). This was to cover $2 trillion in deficit spending and refinance debt that was maturing and had to be financed.  It was done because not many are willing to buy longer-term notes and the Treasury was betting (hoping?) that short term rates would come down in the future when these bills came due.




The can is being kicked down the road and it is critical for the Treasury to have lower interest rates.

Jerome Powell is making sure that hope comes true.

We are on track to have a $2 trillion budget deficit for the 2024 fiscal year and there is no sign that this will get better in the near future.

In fact, a full fledged recession would result in the deficit exploding much higher.

We are being buried under a mountain of debt.

There is a common misconception that I often hear from people about who owns all of the debt of the U.S. federal government.

Many think that China and other foreign entities hold a lot of it.

The fact is that almost 75% of the U.S. debt is held domestically.

The largest holder of the U.S. debt is, in fact, the federal government itself. This is debt held in intragovernment accounts such as the Social Security or Medicare trust fund accounts. $7 trillion of the debt is held in these accounts of which Social Security ($2.6 trillion) and the Federal Employees Retirement Fund are the largest ($1.1 trillion).

This debt has accrued as the federal government collected taxes previously for things like Social Security benefits. As FICA taxes were paid while baby boomers were working, this money was first used to pay the benefits of their parents. However, the amounts collected in taxes were much larger than necessary to pay the benefits of the older generation.

The excess was not locked away but spent on current needs (defense, welfare, etc) and an IOU was given by the federal government to Social Security. That debt is now coming due and it can only be satisfied by new taxes coming in or issuing new debt. 

Do you see a problem? 

In 2024, Social Security benefits will exceed payroll tax contributions by $152 billion. These benefits are effectively being paid through the issuance of new external debt. By 2035, the "trust fund" reserves will be completely depleted. At that point revenues are projected to only cover 83% of benefits payments. In future years it will be reduced to 73%,

The second largest holder of treasury debt is the Federal Reserve System. It holds over $5 trillion of debt. This is a result of effectively printing the money and then "loaning" it to the federal government.

Other domestic owners (mutual funds, banks, pension funds, insurance companies, individuals) hold $14 trillion of the debt.

The largest country for foreign ownership of U.S. debt is Japan with $1.1 trillion.

China is second with $800 billion and the U.K. third at $700 million.

China has also reduced its ownership of Treasury debt by over a third in the last decade.

This is the distribution of the holders of U.S. Treasury debt as of the end of 2023.


Credit: https://san.com/cc/the-us-breached-34-trillion-in-national-debt-heres-who-owns-every-dime/


Here is a breakdown of the foreign holders of U.S. debt.


Credit: Credit: https://san.com/cc/the-us-breached-34-trillion-in-national-debt-heres-who-owns-every-dime/


The reality is that the United States actually has relied less on foreigners to buy our debt than most other developed countries.

As shown in the chart below, only Japan, Sweden and Switzerland have less government debt held by foreign entities.


Credit: https://x.com/ISABELNET_SA/status/1824391739789963541

All of this says that the United States is being buried under a mountain of debt.

That mountain of debt is just going to get bigger and bigger with each succeeding year due to the  compounding of interest on the debt

Even with an average interest rate on the debt of 3% the federal debt will be $47.5 trillion in 10 years if the federal government started running a balanced budget next year.

Sustained $2 trillion annual deficits on top of that debt will mean the United States will be looking at $70 trillion in debt by 2034.

It does not matter if Kamala Harris or Donald Trump is elected President.

A day of reckoning is approaching.

The reality is that no matter how much Kamala wants to raise taxes on the rich there is not enough money to make a small dent in the numbers. We also know that any money Kamala might receive from new taxes will immediately be spent on new handouts.

Likewise, as far as Trump is concerned, not taxing tips, overtime pay or Social Security benefits is not likely to result in enough economic growth to pay for those cuts and have enough left over to solve the debt problem.

We are going to see a debt crisis sooner or later.

The numbers don't lie.

It is another reason that I believe that Donald Trump is the only realistic vote for President.

Trump has been a problem solver in business his whole life.

He also has a lot of experience in dealing with highly leveraged debt situations.

Kamala Harris does not have a clue. She has never done anything in business or the private sector. She has no problem solving experience.

She is also beholden to Wall Street for a lot of her campaign donations.

Source: https://fortune.com/2024/07/24/wall-street-kamala-harris-campaign-fundraising-presidential-election/

Does anyone remember what happened in the 2008/2009 financial crisis?

Wall Street got bailed out. Main Street paid the price for it.

Donald Trump gives Main Street a fighting chance if that day of financial reckoning comes during the next four years.

Trump knows that the only real choice we have to get out from under the mountain of debt, without doing great financial damage to most Americans, is economic growth similar to what the United States was able to do after World War II.

Barring that, the debt will only become manageable through default (unlikely but not impossible, especially if the U.S. dollar loses its reserve currency status) or massive inflation that will allow the debt to ultimately be paid off with cents on the dollar.  Either of these will result in financial ruin for most Americans.

The numbers are sobering.

However, the math does not lie.

Who is the most capable and has the past business experience to being sitting in the desk in the White House managing that mountain of debt?

Another reason to choose wisely in 2024.


Wednesday, September 18, 2024

The SAVE Act

The SAVE Act ( "Safeguard American Eligibility Act") has been getting a lot of attention in Washington, D.C. lately.

The House passed the SAVE Act in July by a vote of 216-198 in July with only 5 Democrats supporting the measure.

It was not even presented for a vote in the Senate because Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and almost all Democrats in that chamber oppose it. Joe Biden stated he would veto the measure if it passed.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has stated he wants to attach it to the continuing resolution spending bill (CR) that will be necessary to fund the government for the new fiscal year beginning October 1.

Congress needs to pass that CR or another government shutdown would be necessary due to lack of funds.


Source: https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024345


Although all Republicans in the House are in favor of the SAVE Act a handful of conservative members are opposed to funding the government through a CR in that it does not allow for a critical look at spending levels. Therefore, they might vote against the Johnson proposal on that basis.

Johnson and Donald Trump would both like to force Democrats to explain why they are willing to shutdown the government because they do not want to make it clear that non-citizens are not eligible to vote.

Are Democrats really so far gone that they would rather shut down the government than pass a law making it clear that only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections?

You would think The Save Act would receive bipartisan support if you were interested in fair elections in which only U.S. citizens cast votes

The SAVE Act simply requires:

• Proof of citizenship for voting in federal elections

• States to verify citizenship

• Removal of non-citizens from voter rolls

• Legal action against officials who register non-citizens

However, as stated above, almost every Democrat in the House and Senate oppose this simple measure.

Why?

The only answer seems to be the obvious one.

Democrats want non-citizens to vote.

And every non-citizen that is allowed to vote effectively cancels out the votes of lawful citizens of the United States.

For example, consider the Poll Site Language Assistance program in New York City,

It provides language assistance to voters with limited English proficiency in casting their ballot.

This is an excerpt from the NYC Civic Engagement website on Voter Language Access.

Notice that you don't see Spanish on that list of languages.

That is because the Voting Rights law already requires various cities and counties to provide voting ballots, registration forms and other election forms based on a Census Bureau formula that takes account of English proficiency and educational attainment in various areas.

This law generally covers those persons who are American Indian, Asian American, Alaskan Natives or of Spanish heritage. 

However, how does any of this language assistance make sense when U.S. law also requires that in order to become a naturalized U.S. citizen it is required that an applicant must meet an English language proficiency requirement?

These are the requirements as listed in the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Policy Manual.


There is an exemption to the language requirement but it is generally only available to those age 50 or over who have resided in the United States for many years.

For example, someone 50 years or older must have resided in the United States for at least 20 years to qualify for this exemption.

If you have to prove the ability to read, write, speak and understand English to become a citizen why would you need any language assistance to vote in the first place?




It makes little sense.

The main argument that Democrats make against The Save Act is that non-citizens are already prohibited by law from voting in federal elections. Therefore, the bill is extraneous. 

However, why then is it necessary to have foreign language assistance to cast a ballot under the Voting Rights law if it is also the law that an individual must have proficiency in English to become a citizen?

What also does not make any sense is that English has never been made the official language of the United States.

What sense is it that you need to be able to speak English to be become a naturalized citizen but it is not the official language of the United States?

What is the logic for the requirement to be proficient in English to gain citizenship but have a law to require cities and counties to provide foreign language voting materials?

Isn't this an invitation for non-citizens to vote in the first place?

Of course, if you were to argue that English should be designated as the official language of the United States you would likely be termed xenophoic or racist.

However, look at this map of the world that shows that the United States is one of a very few countries that do not have an official language.



Canada actually has two official languages---English and French.

The United States is in a very distinct minority in having no official language for the nation.

Is the rest of world xenophobic and racist?

Although it would make all the sense in the world to make English the official language of the United States we are undoubtedly too far gone with uncontrolled immigration to make that a reality.

If we can't get a law passed to prohibit non-citizens from voting how would a law making English the official language of the United States ever pass?

It is much more likely that the English proficiency requirement will be removed from the citizenship standards by Democrats than English becoming the official language of the United States.

In my view that it unfortunate because non-English speakers are at a distinct economic disadvantage in the United States. The best jobs and incomes will likely be beyond their reach 

Those without English proficiency end up being in an economically dependent underclass.

This was clearly the reason that English proficiency was made a part of the citizenship requirements along with making it more likely that immigrants would assimilate better into the United States.

Of course, all the evidence suggests that Democrats believe that they need an economically dependent underclass to retain their relevancy and power as a political party.

What other reason explains their support for open borders?

The SAVE Act might be the last thing that can save us.

Watch the vote on that measure closely to see who is really interested in protecting YOUR vote.


Monday, September 16, 2024

Does The Road To The White House Run Through Springfield, Ohio?

I doubt that many people in the United States had ever heard of Springfield, Ohio until Donald Trump brought up the city in his debate with Kamala Harris last week.

Of course, if you are a regular BeeLine reader you already knew about "The Sad Story of Springfield, Ohio". Six weeks ago I wrote about the plight of this small town of 58,000 trying to deal with the influx of 20,000 Haitian migrants into the city over the last several years.

This is what I wrote in that blog post six weeks ago.


In the last five years an estimated 15,000-20,000 Haitian migrants have settled in Springfield, Ohio.

Over 15,000 Haitians move into a city of 58,000 within a few years time?

I was shocked recently when I heard this fact about what has happened to Springfield.

I don't know how any city could absorb the influx of an increase in its population by almost one-third within five years without causing major disruptions to the quality of life of its citizens. 

It is even worse when the influx involves people with no shared language, culture or values.

How is any city supposed to deal with this?


What made the Springfield story stand out in the debate was Trump referencing various reports of migrants stealing and eating dogs, cats, geese and ducks which apparently is part of the culture in Haiti.

ABC News moderator David Muir quickly pushed back on Trump's statements on the pets stating they had checked with the city manager of Springfield who said that they have no reports of that taking place.

I don't know whether those claims are true or not but I have seen the same videos that Trump must have seen of Springfield, Ohio residents talking about the situation there.

You also have to wonder what would be the motivation of a Springfield resident to lie about something like this? On the other hand, the city manager might have plenty of reasons to avoid confirming the story,

I do know the following.

Trump's line about Springfield and the fact check by Muir was probably the most memorable exchange during the entire debate.

My guess is that more people remember that about the debate than anything else that was said.

Does anyone remember much of anything that Kamala Harris said during the debate?

Yes, she was polished and prepared. However, was there anything of substance Kamala said that voters will remember in two weeks?

I also know that it is difficult to evaluate the impact of a debate until a week or so after the event. You need that amount of time to see how the narratives from the debate settle in.

Let's put aside the claims about eating dogs, cats, ducks and geese.

The important point here is that the sad story of Springfield, Ohio was introduced to most voters for the first time at the Trump/Harris debate.

The sensational reports may be proven false. The Democrats and the media who claim that Trump's claim is "baseless" may be right. The claim might be unconfirmed but it is hardly "baseless" in that it came from reports of residents. There is also plenty of evidence that this is consistent with the culture in Haiti.

However, bear in mind that it would only take one concrete example of the Haitians eating pets and Trump will be proven right on this issue and the perception of who won the debate will turn against Kamala.

Time will tell.

You don't have to have pets, ducks and geese disappearing in Springfield to know that something is seriously wrong about the situation in that city due to the policies of Biden/Harris the last four years.

What is not in dispute is what has happened in Springfield as a result of the influx of Haitian migrants.

There are hard facts to back that up.

Housing costs have skyrocketed with the influx. Rents have outpaced the national averages over the last two years by a considerable margin.



This is despite the fact that many houses or apartments may be housing 20 Haitians sleeping on cots.

Crime is up.


As one example, there were 14 reported rapes in Springfield in 2019. In 2022, there were 58.

The 2022 crime rate (the most recent year available) is higher than 97.9% of U.S. cities.

What will the 2023/2024 numbers look like?


Source: https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Springfield-Ohio.html


The Springfield, Ohio school district has about 7,000 students.

1,600 are non-English speaking according to this report by WHIO-TV in Dayton, Ohio.

That number was 250 in 2017.


Credit: https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1833187536560177650


As educators must devote time and money to support these non-English speaking students it inevitably takes away from the other students in the district.

The Springfield school district was already financially challenged to begin with. 

Over half of the students are minorities and 76% are Medicaid eligible.

These students need all the help they can get in the classroom and this invasion of migrants in their schools is going to create even more disadvantages for them.


Credit: https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1833187536560177650

In 2020 (the first year of Covid)  the local hospital and health care clinic treated 71 immigrant patients during the year.

Between 2022-2004 that number grew to 7,334.

This data is from the City of Springfield.

Source: https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1835047184049532988/photo/1

There are reports that the streets in Springfield have become like a war zone due to the number of Haitian migrants driving vehicles with no training and no knowledge of the motor vehicle laws.


Source: https://nypost.com/2024/09/12/us-news/influx-of-wild-driving-haitian-migrants-turning-streets-of-springfield-ohio-into-combat-zone/

Longtime residents say the immigrants are getting temporary driving permits without having to learn how to drive safely in the US — or even knowing how to drive at all.

“There must be eight to 10 accidents a day here,” one resident who asked not to be named told The Post.

“I’ve seen cars drive up into buildings and onto sidewalks. I believe everyone deserves help, but we shouldn’t be providing cars and licenses until people know how to drive here safely.”

Longtime residents say the immigrants are getting temporary driving permits without having to learn how to drive safely in the US — or even knowing how to drive at all.

On social media, residents have posted alarming footage showing cars in ditches, smashed up at intersections, flying across the road into oncoming traffic, and even crashed through homes and businesses.


Why was the Springfield, Ohio story the one thing that was "sticky" after the debate?

I think it is because it is easy for everyone to say to themselves, "That could be my town."

How would it feel if it was your rent exploding because of these migrants or your schools and health care services were being overwhelmed?

The reality is that these forces are in play all over the nation but it is not as blatant as what we see in the microcosm that is Springfield, Ohio.

It is happening around everyone but many don't make the connection between illegal immigration and rising housing prices, inflation, strained medical services and schools and increased pressure on our environment and infrastructure.

It is popular to talk about the need for sustainability today. However, there is nothing that is worse for sustainability in the United States than the the addition of 10+ million illegal immigrants entering the United States in several years that no one planned on being here.

For example, consider this chart comparing the number of births in the United States with the illegal aliens who entered the country but were not expelled over the last four years.

In total, we have seen as many illegals enter the country as the number of US births over the last two years.

For a good part of last year, more illegals were entering the country than the number of births in the United States.

The contrast to when Trump was President is striking.


Source: https://x.com/fentasyl/status/1835120548398891505/photo/1


As population increases through births we have years or even decades to make the necessary additions to medical and education services, housing and infrastructure due to the population increase.

That is not the case with illegal immigration.

Over time, more and more of the United States will increasingly feel the effects of illegal immigration and the orchestrated migrant invasion that Biden, Harris and the Democrats have unleashed on the nation over the last four years.

There are "Compounding Effects of Illegal Immigration" as I wrote in June.

The immigration laws were established to provide order for our society. The laws were considered necessary to provide for the entrance of an established number of immigrants annually that could be assimilated without disrupting and degrading the experience of U.S. citizens and others who are rightfully here.

The compounding effects of uncontrolled immigration is the reason that the immigration laws were put on the books in the first place.

When the law is ignored or not enforced, chaos is sure to follow due to the compounding effects of large numbers of people the society is not prepared for.

Adding too many immigrants, too quickly,  puts added pressure on the social order if those immigrant numbers outpace the ability to integrate and assimilate them into the general population.

Too many immigrants puts too much strain on our resources. It puts unnecessary strain on everything in our society---our water, our sewer systems, our roads, the electric grid, our infrastructure and our environment. It contributes to congestion and urban sprawl.

Add to this what it does to increase the financial strain on our schools and our health system and cost pressure on rents and housing costs, not to mention our law enforcement and justice system.

What happens when AI and technology displaces many of the jobs that low-skilled immigrants are likely to hold? Are we importing a gigantic permanent underclass that will have to be supported by welfare and tax dollars for years and years to come?

Is this the underlying reason that Democrats have embraced open borders? Importing large number of people who will be dependent on the government for support provides future votes to support the Democrat party agenda.

If you want to dismiss that last suggestion just consider where the federal government has settled the over 400,000 Haitian migrants that have entered the country the last few years.

81% went to states that voted for Trump.

Source: https://x.com/fentasyl/status/1834995793540903329


Is that just a coincidence?

It is not just Haiti either.  The chart looks similar (just a lot more migrants) when you add in those coming from Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela.

We are talking 1 million illegals from these four countries in just the last 12 months.

For context, the annual legal limit for immigration into the United States from the entire world is 675,000 Exceptions for spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, and some other exceptions, has historically meant that 1-1.2 million immigrants in total receive permanent legal status in a typical year..

We have seen that much from these four countries alone in the last 12 months.

And almost all of them are being settled in states that voted for Trump?


Source: https://x.com/fentasyl/status/1835061741883212208


My suggestion is for Trump/Vance to have a town hall meeting in Springfield (It is not an original idea of mine. Others have also suggested this.) and primarily use it to listen to what long term residents of the city have to say about what is happening around them.

Let the rest of the country hear it as well. 

Trump and Vance can support what the residents are concerned about in Springfield by preparing real facts and data in charts similar to what I have shown above. In that way the "fact checking" is already done for the media.

Most importantly, make sure that the voters know who is responsible for what has happened to Springfield, Ohio---Kamala Harris, Joe Biden and the Democrat party. 

It is hard to blame the Haitians wanting to get out of the hell-hole they live in.

However, how does it makes sense to create a similar situation in Springfield, Ohio, or in any other city or town in the United States, while our own citizens struggle?

The road to The White House in this election may run through Springfield, Ohio if Trump and Vance can use its sad story so that voters can understand how unsustainable all of this illegal immigration is and the compounding effects that it will inevitably have on every voting citizen in the United States.
`

Friday, September 13, 2024

Sport Shorts---September 13, 2024 Edition

 I am a big sports fan.

A few interesting factoids in the world of sports that I have seen recently..

Fairways, Greens and Real Green 

Ted Scott is the caddie for the current #1 golfer in the world Scottie Scheffler.

Scheffler had a tremendous year in 2024.

He won The Masters. The Olympics gold medal in golf. He also won the season long FedEx Cup on the PGA Tour.

Scheffler won a lot of money this year---$62 million.

Ted Scott earned a lot of money carrying Scheffler's bag.

In fact, the estimated $6.2 million that Ted Scott earned caddying for Scottie would mean that he made more money traversing those fairways and greens on the PGA Tour this year than all but 14 Tour players.



To put that in additional perspective, that $6.2 million is more than the LIFETIME earnings of Jack Nicklaus playing golf on the PGA Tour ($5.7 million) that included winning 18 majors.



Yes, inflation is part of it.

However, even if you inflate the winnings of Jack, he still earned only $31 million over his entire career in today's dollars.

That is only half of what Scheffler earned in one year.

Ted Scott still earned 1/5 of the career earnings of Nicklaus caddying this year.

That is some real GREEN.

It also makes you wonder that with all this money in play, why is it that the PGA Tour and LIV golf still cannot figure a way forward in their merger talks?


Caitlin Clark

Caitlin Clark was a generational talent who vastly expanded the popularity of college women's basketball while she played for Iowa.

There were veteran women's players who were of the opinion that Clark would have a difficult time transitioning from the college game to playing as a professional in the WNBA.

Diana Taurasi was one of the most vocal about Clark.

Those assessments seem to have been proven wrong.

Compare Caitlin's rookie stats to other WNBA stars in their first season, including Taurasi.


Thru games of 9/11/24
Source: https://stats.wnba.com/player/1642286/
















Caitlin Clark is also responsible for putting fans in the seats at her games.

Total attendance at Indiana Fever home games is up 264% compared to last year.

Caitlin has put more eyeballs on the WNBA than any other player before.

All 14 of the most-watched televised WNBA games ( and 17 of the top 20) this year were games in which Caitlin Clark's Indiana Fever team played.


Source: https://sportsnaut.com/wnba-tv-ratings/


Caitlin Clark is MONEY to the WNBA.

However, why is it that almost 1/5 of all of the flagrant fouls in the WNBA this year have been committed against Caitlin?


And how does the WNBA allow that to occur without taking major actions such as ejecting and suspending the offenders?

Did we see anything like this on the PGA Tour when Tiger Woods arrived on the scene?

Or when Larry Bird came to the NBA?

Is it jealousy? Is there something different in the makeup of men and women on this subject?

Is it reverse racism? Only 19% of WNBA players are White. 

A combination of both and the fact she is also a rookie who has not "paid her dues"?

What is it?

How does it makes any sense to do this to the one player that is putting all that money in your pocket?


What Would Brock Purdy Get Paid In The SEC?

Brock Purdy is the starting quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers. He led his team to the Super Bowl in  his second year in the league last year. He was fourth in the NFL MVP vote.

Brock Purdy is earning a base salary of $985,000 this year in the third year of a four year contract that he signed after he was the last player drafted in the 2022 NFL draft.

What is really wild is that Brock Purdy is making less money than the average starting college quarterback is in the SEC this year---that dollar figure is $1,040,000.


Source: https://x.com/ClayTravis/status/1832892721759187449


Just a small example of how absurd the entire NIL scheme has become in college football.

Student athletes?

If you doubt the power of the SEC to dominate college football, take a look at the pay scales across the various positions compared to the other Power 4 conferences.

As far as Brock Purdy is concerned, he should soon find himself in a better financial position soon if he does not get hurt.

The going rate for a top NFL quarterback appears to have settled in at $50+ million per year and trending to $60 million.

Source: https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfls-top-10-highest-paid-qbs-of-2024-where-dak-prescotts-new-cowboys-deal-stacks-up/

That is a nice chunk of change. 

However, it is not as much as Scheffler earned on the golf course.

Of course, those quarterbacks don't have to pay a caddie!


The Worst Team in the History of Major League Baseball?

The 1962 New York Mets are generally considered to be the worst teaim in the history of the modern era (since 1900) of major league baseball.

The Mets were an expansion team that year that were comprised of cast off players from other major league teams. Most would probably have been playing in the AAA level of the minor leagues but for expansion.

The New York Mets finished 40-122 in 1962. 

Through 147 of their 162 game season the Chicago White Sox are 33-114.

The Los Angeles Angles have the second worst record in the American League. They have won 27 more games than the White Sox.

Source: https://www.mlb.com/whitesox/standings/


The Chicago White Sox are not an expansion team. They were a charter member of the American League when it was founded in 1901.

To avoid becoming known as the worst team ever in Major League Baseball the Sox have to win at least 7 of their remaining 15 games.

Can they do it?

It is going to take a .500 record in the last couple weeks of the season when they have only been winning at a .224 clip so far. The odds do not look good.

The hapless Mets of 1962 may soon be replaced in the record books.