Uncategorized
Almost a Year Later, There’s Still No Evidence Showing Governments Can Control the Spread of Covid-19
Despite the scary warnings and grim predictions of Superbowl gatherings, we find, yet again, a gaping hole in the mainstream covid-19 narrative.
As we approach the one-year anniversary of fifteen days to flatten the curve, we have yet to acquire any data suggesting that the past year of life-destroying lockdowns and politicized behavioral mandates has done anything to keep us safe from covid-19. While discussions surrounding the reintroduction of nationwide lockdowns seem to have ceased—it’s impossible to ignore the lockdowns’ disproportionately deadly effects and the numerous studies demonstrating their futility—the media still retain their grip on the narrative that nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as mask mandates, curfews, capacity restrictions, gathering restrictions, and others remain necessary to prevail in our fight against covid-19.
Government officials, in lockstep with big tech and nearly all major news outlets, have controlled the NPI narrative to such an extent that its proponents have simply sidestepped the burden of proof naturally arising from the introduction and continued support of novel virus mitigation strategies, happily pointing to the fact that their ideas enjoy unanimous support from the corporate media and government officials all over the world. This seemingly impenetrable narrative rests, of course, on the critical assumption that NPIs, or behavioral mandates, have protected us from covid-19.
The One Chart That Covid Doomsdayers Can’t Explain
If there is one visualization the reader should become familiar with to highlight the ineffectiveness of a nearly a year’s worth of NPIs, it would be the following chart comparing hospitalizations and deaths per million in Florida with those in New York and California, however we will be focusing solely on the comparison between Florida and California.
In light of everything our officials have taught us about how this virus spreads, it defies reality that Florida, a fully open and popular travel destination with one of the oldest populations in the country, currently has lower hospitalizations and deaths per million than California, a state with much heavier restrictions and one of the youngest populations in the country. While it is true that, overall, California does slightly better than Florida in deaths per million, simply accounting for California’s much younger population tips the scales in Florida’s favor.
Florida has zero restrictions on bars, breweries, indoor dining, gyms, places of worship, gathering sizes, and almost all schools are offering in-person instruction. California, on the other hand, retains heavy restrictions in each of these areas. At the very least, Florida’s hospitalizations and deaths per million should be substantially worse than California’s. Those who predicted death and destruction as a consequence of Florida’s September reopening simply cannot see these results as anything other than utterly remarkable. Even White House covid advisor Andy Slavitt, much to the establishment’s embarrassment, had no explanation for Florida’s success relative to California. Slavitt was reduced to parroting establishment talking points after admitting that Florida’s surprisingly great numbers were “just a little beyond our explanation.”
Does Compliance Explain the Discrepancy?
Invariably, the above graph will invoke responses pointing to Californians’ supposed lack of compliance relative to Floridians as justification for their poor numbers. On its face, this claim is patently absurd given that Florida has been fully open since September. But if we dig into the data a bit more, we find some relevant metrics that shed light on how frequently Floridians and Californians are engaging in behaviors that allegedly fuel covid-19 transmission. The following survey data—California is shown in blue, Florida in gray—is taken from Carnegie Mellon University’s Delphi Research Group. Beyond the red vertical line, Florida has had consistently lower hospitalizations and deaths per million than California.
We can see that, relative to Floridians, Californians have consistently been doing a better job of avoiding social behaviors that allegedly fuel the spread of covid-19. Moreover, at no point was there a drastic change in behavioral patterns after December 17 indicating that Floridians had suddenly begun avoiding activities purportedly linked to covid transmission.
A quick glance at each state’s “social distancing score” also indicates, yet again, that Californians have been doing a better job avoiding activities meant to facilitate the spread of covid-19. Additionally, Google’s covid mobility reports, as of February 16, 2021, show that Californians partake in fewer retail and recreational visits—restaurants, cafes, shopping centers, theme parks, museums, libraries, and movie theaters—as well as fewer grocery store and pharmacy visits, which include farmers markets, food warehouses, and speciality food shops. Evidently, the whole “noncompliance” schtick is nothing more than a fraudulent excuse for explaining away undesirable trends.
More Metrics Rebutting the Mainstream Covid-19 Narrative
Moving on from the Florida-California comparison, national metrics also highlight the lack of correlation between the intensity of states’ NPIs—methodology for determining this can be found here—and deaths per million.
In fact, if we visualize case trends across all fifty diverse states, each state having varying levels of restrictions, you’ll quickly notice a pattern that presents itself quite similarly across all fifty states: a bump in cases early to midway through the year followed by a much bigger surge in cases during winter months. The following data was retrieved from Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.
Similar case patterns across fifty states is hardly an indicator of a government capable of influencing the course of the virus. Instead, research published in Evolutionary Bioinformatics shows that case counts and mortality rates are strongly correlated with temperature and latitude, a concept known as “seasonality,” which, once recognized, largely explains the failure of the past year’s NPIs.
Meanwhile, we can look at seasonally congruent regions to see whether or not varying degrees of behavioral mandates have had any noticeable impact on cases. What we find, thanks to seasonality, is that regardless of the timing or existence of mask mandates and other behavioral mandates, similar regions follow similar case growth patterns.
For the firm believer in NPIs, these simultaneous and nearly identical fluctuations between cities within the same state and states having similar climates are inexplicable. After accepting seasonality as one of the driving factors behind case fluctuations, we can start speaking of “covid season” as pragmatically as we speak of “flu season.” A helpful visual of what covid season might look like, based on the Hope-Simpson seasonality model for influenza, can be found here.
Update on the Holiday Surge and Recent “Superspreaders”
Some of you may be wondering about the “holiday surges” that were supposed to have ravaged our hospitals following Thanksgiving and Christmas. Well, they never happened. Not only did the rate of covid-19 hospitalization growth decline after Thanksgiving, hospitalizations peaked less than two weeks after Christmas and have been sharply plummeting since! At the very least we should have seen a rapid increase in the hospitalization growth rate in the few weeks following Christmas.
As a bonus for those who like to keep up to date with the latest installments of The Media Who Cried Superspreader, Alabama recently came under heavy fire after thousands of maskless football fans took to the streets to celebrate their team winning the national college football title. FanSided, among others, was quick to label the large celebration as a superspreader event, and health officials were worried that the Alabama superspreader was going to result in a huge case spike. Here’s what really happened.
Miraculously, cases immediately plummeted after Alabama’s “superspreader” event and continue to plummet to this day. If that wasn’t enough, Mississippi, Alabama’s next-door neighbor, followed a nearly identical case pattern despite hosting no superspreader events.
Finally, in our most recent installment of The Media Who Cried Superspreader, we see that two weeks—two weeks being the establishment’s baseline lag time between superspreaders and their consequences—after millions of people gathered with friends and family to watch Superbowl LV, cases, hospitalizations, and deaths continue to plummet.
Despite the scary warnings and grim predictions of Superbowl gatherings, we find, yet again, a gaping hole in the mainstream covid-19 narrative. It would appear safe to conclude that the worst of covid season is behind us.
Data show that from the few weeks prior to February 4, cases have fallen 45 percent in the United States—cases are still declining at a rapid pace despite mid-January warnings that the new variant would create a surge in cases—30 percent globally, and hospitalizations have dropped 26 percent since their mid-January peak. Yet there appears to be a general confusion as to how we’ve achieved these numbers. Did populations around the world unanimously begin complying with covid regulations? Did governments finally get serious about enforcing their mandates? These are some explanations we might hear, but only so long as cases and hospitalizations continue to trend downward.
It is very unlikely, however, that health officials will start pointing to seasonality as an alternative explanation for our continually improving numbers. To do so would be a tacit admission that nearly a year’s worth of heavily politicized behavioral mandates, life-destroying lockdowns, and devastating business closures were all for naught. But the data have spoken, and it is abundantly clear that attempting to socially engineer a respiratory virus out of existence is nothing short of a fool’s errand.
Uncategorized
Mayor de Blasio Tells NYPD to Pay People Home Visits For “Hurtful” Comments
What could possibly go wrong?
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio says NYPD officers should pay people home visits if they engage in “hurtful” behavior to others even if the action isn’t criminal.
What could possibly go wrong?
“Even if something is not a criminal case, a perpetrator being confronted by the city, whether it’s NYPD or another agency, and being told that what they’ve done was very hurtful to another person — and could, if ever repeated, lead to criminal charges — that’s another important piece of the puzzle,” de Blasio told reporters.
The Mayor failed to define precisely what he meant by “hurtful,” but since he framed it in the context of non-criminal behavior, he can only be referring to mean words.
De Blasio urged officers to “confront” people to tell them their behavior is “not appropriate,” urging alleged victims to make more reports to authorities.
He then even suggested that cops, instead of responding to actual crimes, should visit New Yorker’s homes to police their speech.
“I assure you, if an NYPD officer calls you or shows up at your door to ask you about something you did, it makes people think twice,” he said. “We need that.”
De Blasio made the comments in light of yet another contrived moral panic, this time over an alleged rise in “hate crime” towards Asians.
The narrative was bolstered after a gunman slaughtered eight people — including six Asian women — at massage parlors across Atlanta, Georgia.
The media has either glossed over or outright ignored the fact that two white victims also lost their lives and that the attack was motivated by the killer’s sex obsession and had nothing whatsoever to do with race.
Uncategorized
Government Stimulus Is Blowing Up a Massive Economic Bubble
How can millions of Americans be out of work while simultaneously on a spending binge?
We’re told we’re on the road to economic recovery. The $1.9 trillion stimulus is all we need to get us over the hump. But the truth is, Americans started spending like they were over the hump months ago. In fact, American consumers high on stimulus have been on a spending spree since last summer. The Federal Reserve printed money. Uncle Sam handed it out. American consumers spent it on imported goods.
This isn’t the formula for a genuine economy. It’s the formula for a giant bubble.
During the Great Recession, consumers cut spending. This is what you generally expect during an economic downturn. The economy contracts, people lose jobs, money gets tight and consumers spend less. You can see this in the numbers. Spending on durable goods plunged by 19% from the peak in October 2007 to the trough in April 2009. Meanwhile, spending on nondurable goods (food and gasoline) dropped by 10% during the Financial Crisis, from the peak in July 2008 to the trough in March 2009.
This spending cutback during an economic downturn creates what economists call “pent-up demand.” This helps drive spending upward during an economic recovery. You can see how the pent-up demand drove spending on durable goods post-recession in this graph produced by WolfStreet.

You can also see that consumer spending during the pandemic downturn took an entirely different trajectory. After a sharp but brief drop in the first months of the pandemic, spending surged.
In January alone, spending on durable goods spiked by 18.6% from a year ago, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. You might think this was the result of the mythical economic recovery as states loosen lockdown restrictions, but this spending spree has been going on since last June.
How can this be? How can millions of Americans be out of work while simultaneously on a spending binge?
The government has been handing out money, that’s how.
And Americans have dutifully spent it. WolfStreet sums it up this way:
Give Americans some free money, and tell them it’s their duty to buy some stuff with it, preferable stuff imported from other countries, and they’ll buy some stuff with it, big and expensive stuff too, and they did buy a lot of stuff with it, more than they’d ever bought before, and their homes are full of stuff they bought in this eight-month-long record rollicking free-money spending spree.”
Even with millions out of work, incomes in the US have risen during the pandemic – and a lot of that income came from Uncle Sam’s handouts. Income from wages and salaries in January came in at $9.7 trillion, a modest 1.1% year-on-year increase. But income from unemployment benefits, stimulus checks, and other government support payments exploded to $2.9 trillion. According to WolfStreet, “along with income from interest, dividends, rental properties, farm income, income from Social Security and other transfer payments, total income in January, all together, jumped by 13% from a year ago to a record $21.5 trillion (seasonally adjusted annual rate).”
On top of that, a lot of Americans had money freed up because they didn’t have to pay rent or mortgages, or make student loan payments. According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, 4.3 million mortgages were in forbearance at the height of the pandemic. Currently, 2.6 million mortgages remain in forbearance.
Give people lots of free money and they’ll spend it. As WolfStreet put it, demand wasn’t pent up during the pandemic, it was let out.
This time around, households didn’t go through two years of cutting back on goods purchases, as they’d done during the Financial Crisis.
This time around, there is a shortage of supply, including the now infamous semiconductor shortage, due to the surge in spending on goods, and inventories are tight, amid production snags and supply-chain problems. And given this demand, and the supply issues, prices of goods are rising.
Consumers have been awash with this money they didn’t need to work for. And they paid down credit card debts with it. And they spent part of it on goods.
Now another stimulus package with more free money is being prepared in Congress. If it passes, more free money will rain on consumers over the next two or three months.
This raises another question: if millions of Americans were not working but kept spending, who made all of the stuff that they bought?
That’s pretty clear from the numbers too. And it doesn’t exactly scream “booming US economy.”
The merchandise trade deficit is at a record level. In a nutshell, Americans are spending their printed money on imported goods. Peter Schiff summed up the US economy in a recent podcast.
We’re making so little that we’re importing a record amount of stuff. The world is basically, single-handedly supporting our economy by providing us with all of this stuff. How is it that we’re getting all this stuff? Are we making a lot of stuff and trading it for that stuff? No! We’re not making any stuff. The merchandise trade deficit is skyrocketing. We’re printing all this money and the Federal Reserve gives it out to Americans who aren’t productive, many of them who don’t even have jobs, but many Americans who do have jobs are in the service sector, so they’re not producing anything that they can trade, but they’re still using that money to buy the stuff other people that are living in actual viable economies, stronger economies that are saving and producing, and we’re buying all of that stuff with all the money that we’re printing. Meanwhile, we’re deluding ourselves into thinking that what we have here is a genuine economy. What we actually have is a genuine bubble.”
The problem with bubbles is they always pop.
Uncategorized
Xi Alerts Military “Be Prepared To Respond” In Current “Unstable & Uncertain” Situation
“We are facing mounting tasks in national defense… and we must comprehensively improve military training and preparedness …”
During the major annual legislative session in Beijing on Tuesday President Xi Jinping addressed top leaders of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), telling the military it must be “prepared to respond” in increasingly difficult and complex security challenges facing the nation.
“The current security situation of our country is largely unstable and uncertain,” Xi said in the address which comes two days after Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi gave his own fiery warning to the same assembly saying the US is “crossing lines” and “playing with fire” on Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan.
President Xi continued: “The entire military must coordinate the relationship between capacity building and combat readiness, be prepared to respond to a variety of complex and difficult situations at any time, resolutely safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests, and provide strong support for the comprehensive construction of a modern socialist state,” according to the South China Morning Post.
Xi, who also serves as head of the Central Military Commission further affirmed the need for “high-level strategic deterrence and a joint combat system” and rapid defense tech innovation
His words were in agreement with the assessment of Defense Minister General Wei Fenghe who on Saturday once again urged a boost in combat readiness across the armed forces, saying that national security had “entered a high-risk phase”.
“We are facing mounting tasks in national defense… and we must comprehensively improve military training and preparedness for battle so as to increase our strategic capabilities to prevail over our strong enemies,” the nation’s top general said.
A particular example that’s been front and center at the ongoing meetings are recent US and Western allied naval maneuvers in an near China-claimed waters. In the China FM’s comments, Wang pointed out, “The US and other Western countries frequently stir up troubles in the region, trying to drive a wedge using the South China Sea issue. They have only one purpose: to sabotage peace and disturb regional stability,” Wang said.
His remarks in particular emphasized a warlike tone of battling “hegemony, high-handedness and bullying” from the United Sates and its allies, and “outright interference in China’s domestic affairs” in places like Hong Kong and Taiwan.


