Quick Jots: March 2021
Cuomo #MeToo'd
Andrew Cuomo, who back in 2018 blasted Kavanaugh over his sexual assault allegations, has sexual assault allegations of his own, now so far with eight women coming forward with accusations. He apparently is now a fan of due process and is refusing to resign. Unfortunately, all of these accusations have taken the spotlight, front and center, diverting attention from his gross mishandling of the pandemic, leading to the deaths of thousands of seniors, and attempting to mislead the public about it. Cuomo needs to answer for all of it.
More Cuomo COVID malfeasance
The governor of New York is still in the headlines. This time, it's been revealed that Andrew Cuomo had secured access to COVID testing for his family members and VIPs over the general public early during the pandemic. How does Cuomo still have his job as governor? Why are we hearing about this now? How does his brother Chris still have a job at CNN? Will Andrew get to keep his Emmy?
Hong Kong dropped from Index of Economic Freedom
The end of an era. Hong Kong had dominated Heritage's Index of Economic Freedom, one of the top countries for economic freedom for years. Heritage said that much of the economic policies are directed from Beijing and Hong Kong is no longer sufficiently autonomous. It remains to be seen whether Cato and Fraser will drop Hong Kong from their Economic Freedom of the World list.
Portland's cancer
Nancy Rommelmann wrote a brilliant piece for Reason Magazine on the insanity that is Portland. She infiltrated the ranks of Antifa / Black Bloc and observed the utter insanity and chaos the Portland fascist anti-fascists have wreaked on the city. She pondered the naive hope that many moved to Portland for in the 90s in search of a leftist utopia. When they instead received mounting costs of living without the advances in their dream or even their careers, they lashed out and something, anything, other than turning to introspection. Her interactions with such people illustrated the lack of desire to seek out why things turned out the way it did, or even be honest with themselves. Armed with non-sequiturs and a furious opposition to any suggestion they might be wrong, the only reasonable response, it would seem to them, would be to turn to violence.
James Randi died???
How the hell did I miss this? James Randi died last October. He was the hero of my heroes. Without Penn Jillette, I may still not know of the word libertarian, and I may not know what skepticism is without him. I would not be who I am today without Penn, and he has said that without James Randi, there would be no Penn and Teller. Rewatching his documentary, An Honest Liar, he appeared to also have had a major influence on Michael Shermer and Adam Savage, two other people I immensely admire.
DoorDash needs to make money? Who knew?
NBC News reported that they found 68 jurisdictions that imposed limits on delivery service fees and DoorDash imposed consumer end fees on 57 of them. To anyone that understands business and economics, this headline was a major "duh". But not to politicians, it appears. Politicians are mad that DoorDash dared to impose customer side fees in regions that they passed laws limiting the fees they can charge to restaurants. I know DoorDash charges high service fees to restaurants. I also know that DoorDash was not even profitable until 2020 where it made a paltry $23 million, considering how much investment has been poured into it. It also doesn't seem like its first profitable quarter is a trend but rather, a COVID exception. Politicians can stomp and pout all they want, but they still can't legislate away the laws of economics. Price controls have never, and will never work.
Colorado shooting and assault weapons bans
There was another tragic shooting in Colorado, following the Georgia shooting. Immediately, as predicted, conversations turned to gun control, ignoring that the shooting took place in a "gun-free" zone, as is usually the case. In this case, it looks like the media also focused on overturning an "assault weapon" ban in Boulder just 10 days before the shooting. As usual, there is no evidence that this court ruling against the ban would have done anything to curb it. Even though one of the guns used was covered by the ban, the ban only existed in the city of Boulder. The shooter did not even live in that town, and even if he did, he just had to drive one town over to buy one (this weapon was a handgun, by the way, not a rifle). But even if the ban was statewide or even nationwide, there are hundreds of other weapons that aren't banned that he could have used to the same lethality. Predictably, the same news outlets don't cover how even the threat of concealed carry could deter the shooting, let alone an actual good samaritan on site that could use a gun defensively.
