Thursday • April 3 • 2025
Vol.XVII • No.XIV
Manchester, N.H.
In the fast-paced and competitive landscape of modern commerce, efficiency is paramount. Every minute saved, every resource optimized can make a significant difference in achieving success. Recognizing this need, an increasing number of businesses are turning to personalized assistance to streamline operations, enhance productivity, and provide unparalleled support to their teams.
Understanding Business Concierge ServicesCorporate personalized assistance are specialized solutions designed to address the diverse needs of companies across various industries. Unlike traditional customer assistance that caters primarily to personal needs, business personal assistants focus on assisting organizations with tasks ranging from administrative support to strategic initiatives.
These services are often provided by dedicated professionals or agencies with expertise in corporate management, administration, and customer service.
The Role of Business Concierge ServicesIn summary, corporate concierge services play a vital role in enhancing efficiency, productivity, and effectiveness within organizations.
By outsourcing administrative tasks, leveraging specialized expertise, and accessing professional support, businesses can optimize their operations, streamline processes, and focus on driving success.
As the demand for flexible, scalable, and cost-effective solutions continues to rise, corporate concierge support is poised to become indispensable partners in the journey towards business excellence.
The post The Role of Business Concierge Services appeared first on Granite Grok.
Someone told me that if I came here, I’d see more memes than I can shake a stick at (pardon the sentence ending preposition).
It depends on the stick, I suppose.
In any case, I’m back pulling temp duty as the mid-week memester and doing what I can to uphold the position with honor and dignity. Who am I kidding? These are memes. Yes, memes. You’d do well to remember that. Almost anything could climb the scroll.
Here we go!
Click Play
pic.twitter.com/H6VTnaVt65
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 26, 2024
And finally, some Libertarian Party Jokes.
The post Midweek Memes – Once More Unto the Breach! appeared first on Granite Grok.
It would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous and destructive. Woke-Communists (a/k/a Democrats) portray themselves as “intellectuals,” in contrast to Republicans, whom they consider backward rubes. Yet it is the Woke-Communist … especially the ones portraying their garbage degrees and credentials on their social media … who are the actual dummies.
A quintessential example is Debby Altschiller.
Debby believes that “gender” is a “social construct.” So just ignore that women, and only women and never men, produce eggs. And just ignore that men, and only men and never women, produce sperm. And just ignore that you need an egg (a woman) fertilized by a sperm (a man) to have a baby. Debby apparently believes in immaculate conception or that storks bring babies:
Debby, if she really believes the nonsense she regularly spews, is a really, really, really DUMB person. Indeed, the featured image for this post … Debby wearing a CLOTH mask OUTDOORS … suggests that she really does believe all the Woke-Communist nonsense.
The post Debby Altschiller Thinks Eggs And Sperm Are “Social Constructs” appeared first on Granite Grok.
Unrelated site business: A rise in recurring site downtime issues has prompted me to consider changing hosting companies, so the update is in a holding pattern until all the options are reviewed and a decision is made (sorry). We are not, however, waiting to find out who last week’s comment of the week winner is.
Ian Underwood.
Congrats to Ian (Again), whom I will now have to not pick for reasons we all understand. His comments always tend to be well thought out and excellent. Readers tend to vote for him if I give them the option.
We want to spread the love around, but we do love Ian’s input.
Here’s the comment!
New Hampshire’s “Red Flag” Camels Nose is Back! Ian Underwood First, note how concerned youare about ‘infringing on the rights of innocent, law-abiding citizens’. Second, go back and check Part 1, Article 2-a of the state constitution. It protects the right to keep and bear arms… for what group of people? Innocent, law-abiding citizens? Or all persons? The other day, I saw someone who should know better make the blanket statement that ‘criminals forfeit their constitutionally protected rights after they have committed a crime and been convicted by a jury’. Really? Do they forfeit the right to freedom of speech? Freedom of religion? Freedom from warrantless searches? Freedom to enter into contracts, or have children? Freedom to travel? No, they don’t. Why not? Why do they lose somerights, but not others? Because we just let judges make things up on the fly, and call whatever they say ‘the Constitution’. Conservatives who have spent decades beggingfor things like HB1711 are now acting surprised and outraged because they’re getting what they asked for: https://granitegrok.com/blo… https://granitegrok.com/blo… All of this comes back to what I said the first time I testified at a bill hearing: If the legislature is going to just ignore the state constitution, why shouldn’t the people just ignore the legislature? https://granitegrok.com/blo..The post The Comment of the Week Winner …. appeared first on Granite Grok.
Electric Vehicle owners continue to find themselves the victims of a massive global bait-and-switch. They bought the car thinking it would save the planet (jokes on you, fool) only to discover hidden costs, from insurance to longer and more expensive repair times, for a car that’s not really green, that isn’t running on green energy, and now this.
Tires.
EVs are extremely heavy, causing significantly more wear on roads and bridges and, naturally, on the tires rolling across them.
Tyre manufacturer Michelin has previously said that conventional tyres wear out around 20pc faster in an electric vehicle, while Goodyear said they can degrade as much as 50pc faster.
Last year, research by technology firm Epyx found that, on average, tyres fitted to EVs lasted 6,350 fewer miles than those on petrol or diesel cars. The first tyre change for electric cars takes place after an average of 17,985 miles, compared to 24,335 miles for petrol and diesel cars.
Tires are not a green commodity (not that many, if any, of the self-proclaimed green ones are), which means your EV purchase, whose environmental bill of materials continues to carbonize the earth (if you still believe that’ seven a problem), can add some redder to its ledger.
Every time you need new tires, you are degrading the planet (your worldview, not mine). From manufacture to delivery to installation to the increase in particulates in the air that results from the more rapid wear (every time you drive it), you are a driving contradiction.
It reminds me of the Tyre Extinguishers. “Green’ Activists that puncture SUV tires as punishment for driving a larger Internal combustion engine. It is supposed to be pro-green, but doing so comes with a litany of dirty side effects.
How many unnecessary calls (cellular networks emit carbon) were made for tow trucks or auto club services to come and reinflate them, or calls to the police who had to drive out to file a report? And how often was it two of these things and not just one? Call the police. Call the European equivalent of AAA. Emissions, emissions, emissions.
Depending on the miles driven, round trip by police or services, plus the emissions from the compressors to reinflate the tires or generators to run the compressors, you’ve likely added a pile of unnecessary crap into the biosphere … in the name of reducing it.
And did you walk to wherever it is you went to deflate all the tires, or did you catch a ride there and there and there and back?
Depending on the type of damage (you can’t repair sidewall breaches) and the carbon footprint for the manufacture, delivery, and replacement of the old tires with new ones (we should add calls to insurance companies and all the carbon generated on that end as well), and let’s not forget the disposal of the damaged tires.
Stupid.
The post EVs Worse for the Environment Episode Number (…I’ve Lost Count) appeared first on Granite Grok.
Although the federal administrative state probably existed before the Franklin Roosevelt administrations, those administrations ushered in a large expansion of federal agencies and more and more have arisen almost continuously thereafter.
The federal administrative state is populated and effectively controlled by unelected bureaucrats who seemingly ignore the policy will of voters expressed in presidential and congressional elections. Thus, changes in administrations in Washington frequently do not result in meaningful changes in the administrative bureaucracy and its rules and regulations.
Efforts to Drain the Swamp are usually hampered in large measure by the existing federal administrative bureaucracy.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court of the United States effectively expanded the powers of the administrative state in 1984 in its so-called Chevron decision.
The research department of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, an integral part of the Federal Reserve system, regularly publishes a variety of research papers, including a magazine named “Econ Focus.” The latest issue contains the following article, reprinted with permission, by contributor Sam Louis Taylor, on the so-called Chevron Doctrine, which appears to be a very cogent explanation of the Chevron Doctrine and what might be coming in the future for us regarding it.
[Please note that the views expressed in Econ Focus are those of the contributors and not necessarily those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond or the Federal Reserve System.]
“Following the will of Congress is often a complicated endeavor for regulators, especially when lawmakers leave aspects of a regulatory law unclear. That uncertainty often leads to litigation.
But how should courts determine if an administrative agency has gone outside the bounds of the law when designing regulations? This is an important question for regulators, like the Fed, that have been charged with implementing laws passed by Congress.
In the 1984 landmark case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. the court established a process to determine whether an agency has acted properly in creating a regulation in the face of legislative uncertainty. This concept, commonly referred to as Chevron deference, has been a critical legal concept that has governed how courts oversee the regulatory process for the past 40 years.
In January, the Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases that could overturn Chevron and set out new expectations for how agencies should implement laws passed by Congress.
In Chevron, the Supreme Court established a two-part test to determine the lawfulness of a regulation. First, when a regulation is being challenged, a court will determine if Congress has spoken clearly on the matter. “If the intent of Congress is clear, that is the end of the matter.” But if Congress does not clearly state how it wants a statute to be implemented, then courts should defer to an agency’s interpretation of the statue that is within its administration so long as it is a “permissible construction” of the law. The court based this deference on three reasons: ambiguity in a statute amounts to an implicit delegation of authority by Congress to an agency to resolve outstanding questions of implementation; an agency has greater subject matter expertise than courts to resolve this ambiguity; and an executive branch agency is a better venue for reconciling “competing political interests” than the courts because the president has greater political accountability.
The Supreme Court has combined two cases in its current term, Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which two herring fishing companies have challenged a rule from the National Marine Fisheries Service that requires the industry to pay for on-board observers to monitor federal conservation efforts. Lower courts cited Chevron in rejecting the companies’ challenges. The petitioners have asked the Supreme Court to overrule Chevron or at least significantly curtail the deference given to agency determinations.
What would be the impact of ruling against the government in these cases?
Legal scholars have predicted that agencies could become more constrained in their interpretations of statutes and more hesitant to create regulations in response to new and emerging issues without going to Congress for more authority. Experts have also observed that Congress would need to clearly state its intent when drafting laws or be willing to come back and tackle new issues as they arise. There are also predictions that regulations would more often be challenged in court because agencies could not count on judicial deference to their interpretations of statutes.
There are many in the political and legal sphere who see these potential changes as a feature, not a drawback, of overturning Chevron. In an amicus brief led by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Republican members of Congress have argued that Chevron has inappropriately expanded the role of agencies into policymaking, a power reserved for Congress. “Over time, it’s proven to be a harmful precedent because it shifts decision making away from democratically elected members of Congress to the permanent members of the bureaucracy,” the Republican members of Congress argued.
Others have argued that Congress purposefully provided agencies with leeway to respond to new threats that it could not have anticipated. A brief filed by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., on behalf of a group of Senate Democrats stated, “As industries grew more complex, Congress delegated some regulatory authority to administrative agencies. Chevron deference has been an important element in this endeavor, allowing Congress to rely on agency capacity and subject matter expertise to help carry out Congress’s broad policy objectives.”
Regulators and other interested parties will be following the ruling closely to better understand the limits courts are likely to impose on the way agencies operate in the future.”
The post Draining The Swamp? appeared first on Granite Grok.
Marketing, as a modern digital technology, regularly changes, evolves, and modernizes. What worked before may not work next year, and vice versa. This is why it is important to always stay up-to-date and be aware of the latest online marketing strategies. A well-thought-out, structured, organized, and personalized action plan for each small business can serve as a real guide that leads to clear results. Moreover, it is essential to remember that the strategy needs to be regularly updated, expanded, and improved in accordance with the tools that appear online.
To create and develop a personalized strategy, it is better to turn to a qualified Roseville SEO company where professionals work. They will help achieve all goals and complete all tasks at a high level. Additionally, the specialists will be interested in managing the business project and will be able to implement current digital marketing technologies without problems and difficulties. The coordinated actions of the team will help expand reach, increase recognition and conversion, gather the target audience together, and find new clients, etc.
What is the Importance of an Online Marketing Strategy?Digital marketing, as an essential approach, helps brands achieve success through the effective organization of media advertising, online campaigns, search engine optimization, and other tools. It encompasses a wide range of strategies—from content creation to email marketing, web design, and video production. Before drafting a plan for a business project to promote and optimize it, it is crucial to understand its importance. The answer is quite simple, as a marketing plan:
Having a strategy in a business plan can be compared to a breath of fresh air, essential for every person to live fully. However, in this case, everything operates in the digital world, where only electronic types of advertising and online channels are utilized.
What effective strategies deserve the attention of modern small businesses?To establish their presence and showcase their current products or services, small businesses need a clear marketing strategy. This strategy must be not only unique and aligned with the brand’s theme but also comprehensive, skilled, objective, and step-by-step. Various strategies can be used individually or in combination during the optimization and promotion process. The most effective include:
Additionally, don’t forget about remarketing, which can also be an excellent internet marketing strategy, allowing businesses to target people who previously visited the website or social networks for purchases. Small businesses should also ensure a smooth customer journey (attracting consumers to the process of purchasing goods and services can be achieved through e-commerce SEO and other relevant promotion channels). It is worth noting that any of the aforementioned strategies is an excellent opportunity to ensure the prosperity of your brand.
The post Effective Digital Marketing Strategies for Small Businesses appeared first on Granite Grok.
So here is a tweet (X) from Rep Lori Selig in which she accuses Republicans of not wanting “to feed hungry kids” and claims that there are “many kids across New Hampshire” who are going hungry. Both the accusation and the claim are lies. BIG LIES. But that’s what Woke-Communists like Selig do. LIE.
The bill that was defeated would have extended eligibility for free and reduced school meals from the current 185 percent of the federal poverty level to 350 percent. If my arithmetic is correct, the 350 percent amounts to roughly $100,000 for a family of four.
So, in order for Selig’s accusation that Republicans want hungry kids to go unfed during the school day to be true, her claim that “many kids across New Hampshire” in families making up to $100,000 “suffer an empty belly” has to be true. Please review the comments to Selig’s tweet (link above). She is repeatedly asked to provide some documentation to substantiate her claim that “many kids across New Hampshire” in families with incomes between 185 percent and 350 percent of the federal poverty level “suffer an empty belly.” She provides NOTHING.
A serious person would not make such a bold claim without having the facts and data to back it up. Selig, at a minimum, is NOT a serious person. She was, at a minimum acting with reckless indifference to the truth. However, I think it is safe to say that if there were any facts and data showing widespread hunger in families making up to $100,000 the Woke-Communists in the House and their allies at NHPR, etc. would have presented it. I think it is fair to conclude that there is no such data and, therefore, Selig was telling the BIG LIE.
Moreover, if Selig really cared about helping children she would NOT be supporting Joe Biden because the Biden-Regime’s INFLATION is destroying the standard of living of working and middle-class families.
What Selig and her Woke-Communist comrades want is power. Spreading the LIE that Republicans refuse to feed “hungry kids” helps elect Woke-Communists (“Woke-Communists”). This is what Woke-Communists do … they LIE. It is part of their DNA. Open your eyes, bitter-clingers, to what you are dealing with.
The post Night Cap: Rep Lori Selig Does Not Give A Damn About Feeding Hungry Children appeared first on Granite Grok.
Gayle E. Pitman, the author of the book “My Maddy,” published by the American Psychological Association, promotes to boys and girls that some people can be neither male nor female. The book is about a parent that the child calls “Maddy”, a combination of Mommy and Daddy.
The first page of the book:
Most mommies are girls. Most daddies are boys. But lots of parents are neither a boy nor a girl.
No mention is made of the child’s other parent or who gave birth to him. However, Maddy has a masculine face and the book says that Maddy’s face feels like sandpaper against the child’s face, so the reader can assume he wasn’t the one who gave birth to the child and we never find out what happened to the child’s mother. The reader can only assume that the mother is not around because this mentally unbalanced parent has destroyed their relationship in pursuit of his gender obsession.
This book promotes to children the idea that if they aren’t comfortable with their sex they could be non-binary. It sows gender confusion in children.
The mission of the American Psychological Association should be to help alleviate mental health problems. With this book, they are working to create mental health problems in children. They should rename themselves to the American Psycho Association.
The post American Psychological Association Promotes Gender Confusion to Kids appeared first on Granite Grok.
I was working on a long-form Substack post for Memorial Day, and as I was revisiting the history, something interesting occurred to me. The Civil War’s Decoration Day became Memorial Day, and one of the South’s pre-Civil War Concerns is similar to modern Americans’ current problems.
It is the overwhelming political influence of densely populated urban or industrialized areas (in the North) over most of the rural population, its character, and its culture. In the 1800s, the North was growing in population, which resulted in majority representation in Congress. This would then influence national policy that threatened the pre-Civil War South—not just slavery but nearly everything from commerce to culture. It was a legitimate concern elucidated by political thinkers like John Calhoun. It worried them enough to start a war.
One hundred and seventy years later (more or less), our mostly rural landscapes have been overrun (politically) by densely populated cities. Large cities like New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago dominate statewide elections as they would a national one (National Popular Vote). Portland and Seattle drive the politics in Washington and Oregon. Maine has recently fallen to the political left thanks to progressive heat islands like Portland, Lewiston, and Bangor.
Most of America’s rural landscape is increasingly tilted politically by a handful of growing progressive population centers that have nothing in common with the rest of most states (or the nation).
Is it an odd twist of history that rural interests are in a political fight to prevent the urban progressives from turning all of us (effectively) into slaves of the state? A state looking to suppress speech, the right to defend ourselves, our mobility, privacy, sovereignty, and even our food choices.
I suppose the unanswered question is if the Left is genuinely willing to do anything to protect the Statist Uniparty Cabal’s hold on power, will it lead to another civil war – and one without so clearly drawn lines?
I’m not advocating it (that’s for our friends in the NSA and the FBI). But the Dems have been acting like they intend to do things that would incite one (broad language banning so-called ‘militias,’ for example, attacking a popular president, jailing his supporters, and the escalation of surveillance along with its war on so-called misinformation campaigns).
I’ve long said the Blob would love a gunfight. It’s an excuse to institute Marshall law – to conscript local law enforcement under national control and institute oppressive emergency orders. It is a progressive Command and control infrastructure wet dream.
I’m not saying it would work or not inflame any resistance, but I think they’ve wanted it since at least Obama.
If Trump wins and they can’t steal it back, and they don’t assassinate him (and I think they would do that to start the war they want), their coordinated post-election street violence will do its best to get someone to shoot back and escalate the national conflict.
You have to remember that to a proper Marxist, you have to wreck everything before you can rebuild the alleged paradise, and it is of little concern to them the cost to the nation or anyone in it.
There’s nothing civil about civil war, but there are unknown numbers of foreign agitators among us as well, who are very likely here to instigate and then take advantage of any internal conflict if it starts.
I know. Happy Tuesday!
The post The Uncivil War The Left So Desperately Wants appeared first on Granite Grok.
Wow! WOW! WOW, WOW, WOW! A Woke-Communist … oh, I’m sorry, I am sure he would prefer “Democrat” … from that bastion of white privilege called Bedford has stood up for children. More specifically, see the tweet (X) below, where he says that Democrats should not be allowed near children:
I am confident that Strand has no idea that National Socialism was a socialism based on race and other identity factors AND that of all the historic ‘isms, the ideology of the NH-Democrats (which I call Woke-Communism) most resembles National Socialism. Stated more succinctly, it is Strand and she/her Selig and their ilk who are the Neo-Nazis.
I discussed the similarity between NH-Democrats and Nazis in Heil Diversity … Heil Equity … Heil Inclusion. Read it … National Socialism was NOT a “right-wing” ideology. It was a manifestation of socialism. This is a FACT. It may be an inconvenient fact for people like Strand. But it is still a fact.
The post Michael Strand Says NH-Democrats Should NOT Be Allowed Near Children! appeared first on Granite Grok.
Who will stand up for the people and the oceans? Who will show up for us? There is not enough data on what will become of our fragile Gulf of Maine if this is allowed. From the lobsters to the endangered Right Whales, it must be addressed, and it is not. All reps and senate members should be attending or send a rep for them. Our gulf is too important.
The only thing green about offshore wind is the subsidies/money being handed to foreign companies.
Don’t Saudi Arabia the Gulf of Maine, which is what Sen. Watters wants to do.
We only have limited time to fight this, as the subsidies are running out. Our fragile Gulf of Maine will not survive offshore wind industrialization. It is right in the path of right whale migration and feeding grounds. Our shores will look like NJ shores with a dead mammal a day. Show up to these meetings, say DON’T!
BOEM – Follow the link.
If you can’t make a meeting there are instructions here (below the meeting schedule) to submit comments online.
Detailed information video…
Share and show up, if you care… over 80 Cetacean deaths since January on the east coast where offshore wind is running or surveyed!
The post Time is Running Out for the Gulf of Maine!Urgent! appeared first on Granite Grok.
The Guardian reported,
A new report claims “resounding evidence” shows that high corporate profits are a main driver of ongoing inflation, and companies continue to keep prices high even as their inflationary costs drop.
The report, compiled by the progressive Groundwork Collaborative think tank, found corporate profits accounted for about 53% of inflation during last year’s second and third quarters. Profits drove just 11% of price growth in the 40 years prior to the pandemic, according to the report.
Is this true? Unraveling this mysterious relationship between corporate profit and inflation is easy once we clearly define what profit and inflation are. This allegation that corporate profits accounted for 53 percent of inflation is a result of using wrong definitions and reasoning by mainstream economics researchers.
First, let us see what inflation is. As Henry Hazlitt explained in his article “Inflation in One Page,” inflation is “an increase in the quantity of money and credit. Its chief consequence is soaring prices. Therefore inflation—if we misuse the term to mean the rising prices themselves—is caused solely by printing more money. For this the government’s monetary policies are entirely responsible.”
Faulty reasoning by mainstream economists occurs because of their faulty way of mistaking the price rise effect of inflation as inflation itself. They are putting the cart before the horse. Rising prices is only one of the chief effects of inflation, not inflation itself.
Another mistake that mainstream economists make is that they use the long disproved Marxist “production cost/labor theory of value” to explain the rise in the prices of consumer goods, as is the case with this research done by the Groundwork Collaborative think tank. Production cost (corporate profit) doesn’t determine the prices of consumer goods. The subjective value of the consumer determines those prices. In this article I do not have the space to discuss this very important subjective value theory. I advise my readers to study the literature of the Austrian School of economics.
They also mistake individual commodity price fluctuation for inflation. In a market economy, prices of various commodities are always changing. Such price fluctuation doesn’t reflect the mythical general price level that mainstream economists use to measure inflation.
Also, if corporate profits explain the rise in prices of consumer goods—what mainstream economists call inflation—then what explains the rise in the prices of producer goods? The same corporate profits? We need to remember here that inflation not only increases the prices of consumer goods but also producer goods. When the supply of money rises due to the Fed’s easy money policies of creating dollars out of thin air, it dilutes the purchasing power (value) of all existing dollars in the economy. And because dollars are legal tender money (a common medium of exchange), they will buy less of both consumer and producer goods (i.e., looking from the goods side it will look as if their prices have gone up). Actually, the dollar is losing its value and so buying less of everything against which it is being used in market exchange.
We next look at profit. Here is Ludwig von Mises explaining profit:
In the capitalist system of society’s economic organization the entrepreneurs determine the course of production. In the performance of this function they are unconditionally and totally subject to the sovereignty of the buying public, the consumers. If they fail to produce in the cheapest and best possible way those commodities which the consumers are asking for most urgently, they suffer losses and are finally eliminated from their entrepreneurial position. Other men who know better how to serve the consumers replace them.
If all people were to anticipate correctly the future state of the market, the entrepreneurs would neither earn any profits nor suffer any losses. They would have to buy the complementary factors of production at prices which would, already at the instant of the purchase, fully reflect the future prices of the products. No room would be left either for profit or for loss. What makes profit emerge is the fact that the entrepreneur who judges the future prices of the products more correctly than other people do buys some or all of the factors of production at prices which, seen from the point of view of the future state of the market, are too low. Thus the total costs of production—including interest on the capital invested—lag behind the prices which the entrepreneur receives for the product. This difference is entrepreneurial profit.
As Mises explained, an entrepreneur will earn (corporate) profit only if he successfully anticipates this mismatch between the present prices of producer goods versus the future prices of the consumer goods that these producer goods will help produce. The difference between the prices of producer goods and consumer goods is profit.
Once we define profits clearly, we can see corporate profits are not responsible for causing inflation. It is, in fact, inflation that affects the profit calculation of an entrepreneur by raising the prices of both consumer and producer goods. Prices of consumer goods are rising because some of the consumers—let’s say from the state of California—are receiving freshly printed dollars, which they are using to bid the prices of consumer goods higher. Those who are at the end of this market process are facing higher prices and seeing their dollars’ purchasing power diluted. Those same dollars are also chasing producer goods, raising their prices. Some entrepreneurs can judge this gap between producer and consumer goods in a better way than others, and so they are making profits. The mainstream researchers are forgetting that many unsuccessful entrepreneurs aren’t properly judging this gap, and so they are making losses and going out of business. Are these corporate losses also causing inflation/deflation?
All in all, the present study by the Groundwork Collaborative think tank represents the classic case of spurious correlation. Spurious correlation is when on the face of it there seems to be a causal relationship between two variables, but the theory says there isn’t any. Mainstream researchers in the present study forgot the basic statistical caveat that “correlation doesn’t mean causation.” If they used the right definitions of both inflation and (corporate) profits, then they would’ve seen that it is the US Federal Reserve that is creating inflation, which in turn is affecting corporate profits.
Madhusudan Raj | Mises Wire We heartily encourage reprints and shares of Mises Wire articles. If you wish to reproduce an article in your blog, magazine, radio show, newspaper column, classroom material, textbook, discussion group, website, or any other venue, please do so. The original publication source must be included in an appropriate place.The post No, Corporate Profits Don’t Cause Inflation appeared first on Granite Grok.
That Joe Biden does not live in the day is not my original thought. I heard it somewhere in the last couple of weeks and wish I could give proper credit as it is a fitting explanation for his perpetual string of bad policies and decisions. He cannot grasp the pulse of today’s America and sees the other side as a collection of MAGA Republicans, Racists, and White Supremacists. This labeling from the president who urged unity and civility, His name calling is about as unifying as Hillary Clinton in last season’s pantsuit after she packed on an extra fifteen. Joe Biden has a dark, ominous view of America, which may be why he wants to destroy her.
Biden gave the commencement address at Morehouse College, and I am sure the hierarchy at Morehouse regrets their choice. A commencement speech should congratulate and enable the graduates to identify future opportunities and feel proud of their accomplishments. Biden did anything but. His speech was dark and painted a dismal picture of the future. He told these Black graduates that the world was stacked against them and they needed to be ten times better than White graduates to achieve the same results. He harped about the systemic racism that plagues his world and the greatest threat to our country being the White Supremacy of the MAGA Republicans on the Right. These baseless claims are where Joe loses touch with reality and the America we live in.
There is no systemic racism in America except in the minds of people like Joe Biden, who use the concept as a subliminal weapon against their opponents. In Biden’s mind, America is still in the 60s, 1960, or 1860, when the White population looked down upon people of color and opportunities were few for people of color. We have come so far from those eras, and for most Americans, we have no color wheel for people. We judge people on their merits and potential, regardless of pigment. For people like Al Sharpton and Joe Biden, they have no purpose unless they can convince people of color that they are still oppressed and inferior. It is time for these folks to come into today’s world and start living on their merits and accomplishments and leave the rhetoric in the past.
Biden set the same tone when addressing the NAACP at their 69th Annual Fight for Freedom Fun held in Detroit. Joe needs to court the Black community, especially in key battleground states like Michigan, where he sees his lead over Trump shrinking or gone. The president introduced himself as a lifetime member of the NAACP. There is no proof of this, like there is none that he grew up in a Black Church or is part Puerto Rican. This opening line set the pace for a speech the White House would need to issue nine corrections to Biden’s flawed delivery. This speech was read off a teleprompter, and the president could not read it accurately. How will he ever navigate a 90-minute debate with Trump? I do not see that happening.
These are just a couple of examples of how out of touch Biden is and the difficulty he has in delivering a prepared speech. The White House and DNC must limit this man’s time behind a mic or in front of the public. The choice seems clear for the Democrats. They either need to bury Joe in his Delaware basement ala 2020 or replace him before the convention, but no viable options are waiting in the bullpen. The Dems are going to ride this one horse pony until November. You might want to place your bet for Old Joe to Place!
The post Joe Biden Does Not Live In The Day appeared first on Granite Grok.
From the take the wins when you get them file, the World Health Organization has gone into its yearly meeting with health ministers absent any agreement on a global Pandemic Treaty.
Roland Driece, co-chair of W.H.O.’s negotiating board for the agreement, acknowledged countries were unable to deliver an agreed proposal. W.H.O. had hoped a final draft treaty could be agreed on at its yearly meeting of health ministers starting Monday in Geneva.
“We are not where we hoped we would be when we started this process,” he said, adding that finalizing an international agreement on how to respond to a pandemic was critical “for the sake of humanity” even as a host of countries disagreed with the basic principle that unelected, unaccountable, health bureaucrats could somehow decide major global decisions on government policies.
That’s a huge win, but they are not giving up.
Addressing a sullen final day of negotiations, the W.H.O. chief insisted, “This is not a failure.”
“We will try everything — believing that anything is possible — and make this happen because the world still needs a pandemic treaty,” Tedros said. “Because many of the challenges that caused a serious impact during COVID-19 still exist.”
Challenges like lying about the threat, lying about mortality, lying about nonpharmaceutical interventions, and lying about the safety and efficacy of existing drugs. Lying about the safety and efficacy of the (mandated/preferred) inoculation. It is the shortlist, I know, but you also know that the pandemic treaty didn’t address any of these “challenges.” It did, however, try very hard to make it illegal to question all the lying. What, exactly, that has to do with health remains a mystery.
We have several ‘States’ (like the UK) to thank for the treaty’s current state of interoperability, but none of them are the United States. Biden was in favor, as are his media allies, who insist there is no conspiracy to enact global health governance. Of course, these are the same entities responsible not just for the dissemination of the lies listed in the previous paragraph but also for working to discredit and silence anyone who dared to contradict them.
In other words, don’t put this win to bed. The Left never gives up on anything, and yes, pushing back is exhausting, but “Tyranny Never Rests – So Neither Shall We.”
The post The WHO Pandemic Treaty Is Dead – For Now appeared first on Granite Grok.
Isn’t that a lovely picture of Angie Brennan and the imposter-figurehead-President Joe Biden. But does Little Miss Angie know she is standing with a White-Supremacist? For example, Biden believes that White people like him should get to decide who is a “real Black” and who is not. Remember this from 2020:
And this was NOT a “one-off.” Just recently, Biden told graduates at Morehouse College essentially that they had just wasted four years because America is pervasively and incurably racist … the clear implication being that these graduates will amount to nothing without Great White Father Biden in the White House. A variation on 2020’s “you ain’t Black.”
Little Miss Angie badly needs to recalibrate her #decency meter.
The post If You Stand With Joe Biden … You Are Standing With An Actual White-Supremacist appeared first on Granite Grok.
The parent company that owns the Oreo empire, Mondelez, is being warned by the National Legal and Policy Center that its involvement with partisan political groups, specifically the LGBTQ pressure group PFLAG, is putting shareholder value at significant risk.
The cookie company’s Chicago-headquartered parent organization, Mondelēz International, will be confronted at its annual shareholder meeting on Wednesday over how its LGBTQ marketing could tank business and irreparably tarnish the brand.
As a shareholder in Mondelēz, formerly Kraft Foods, the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), a non-profit corporate watchdog, is warning the owner of Oreo (and other American household favorites): “Don’t make yourself the next Bud Light.”
According to a two-page proposal, which NLPC will present to shareholders this week, Mondelēz “irresponsibly” involves itself in politically divisive issues and is deeply embroiled in left-wing activism, consequently creating “reputational and financial risk.”
In the proposal they note that, “Potentially controversial relationships, especially tethered to social and cultural issues, can damage brands with customers, employees, suppliers, and investors, and present material risks to companies’ reputation and sustainability.” It includes a handful of examples, including Bud Light, Target, and Walt Disney. The proposal goes on to point out that,
Boycotts, silent or boisterous, can arise without warning. Once they gain momentum, the damage can be difficult to contain. InBev, Target and Disney are learning the hard way. Thus, it is critical the Board of Mondelez International (“Company”) focus on its own vulnerabilities before they become a liability.
The proposal suggests “Shareholders request the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors create a study subcommittee to examine the risks and consequences of the Company’s associations with external organizations.” It is a fair and equitable resolution. Conservatives are not the most proficient of boycotters, but the Bud Light thing created a new baseline for their ability to punish a brand.
Neutrality, it seems, is what these shareholders are after. Stay out of politics, make a decent cookie, and we’ll all share in the ongoing success of a well-established brand.
I don’t think the people running Oreo are going to listen, so feel free to start your boycott now. Or don’t.
The post Night Cap: Stockholders Send Warning to Oreo – Don’t Budlight This Brand appeared first on Granite Grok.
Readers should already be familiar with Paula Johnson, who has worn many hats in Nashua over the years, including alderman, state rep, school board, plaintiff, and ardent critic of the mayor and Jeb. She sent me this 7-minute video about RTK warfare happening in NJ, and I decided to share it with the Senate Republicans, who have been an abject disappointment in this matter.
Senators:
I want you to take 7 minutes to watch this video and know what’s happening in the state that HB 1002’s cosponsor, Tim Lang, hails from. I’m guessing that most of you won’t, but let it be known that NH does not have a monopoly on RTK warfare and what a disappointing bunch you are.
With any luck, the Damn Emperor will veto HB 1002, and all of you will be primaried. Enjoy your holiday weekend.
Julie Smith
Nashua
(the RTK hellhole)
I should point out that most people already know that Jeb is retiring and, therefore, doesn’t need to be primaried, but there is definitely some talk about the suitability of his aspiring replacement, Rep McConkey.
And I will add that Rep Tim McGough is definitely not suitable to occupy the seat once belonging to Gary Daniels, who declines coming out of retirement. Talk to Melissa Blasek and Ginger if you want to learn more about Tim or have a recruiting prospect to suggest.
Many people are angry at the Senate because it has lived up to Mr Sylvia’s comment that “it’s a place where good House bills go to die.” My personal anger is that they’ve become “the body that rubber stamps bad House bills” instead of being a firewall against them.
Efforts are underway to recruit candidates for primaries. I am thrilled to share the good news in District 23 because freshman Rep Emily Phillips is stepping up to primary legal lad and Judiciary Sheeple of Sharon, Senator Gannon.
Please show Emily some love. And back to Paula Johnson, she’s not only no ordinary Nashua resident, but she lives in District 12. (hint, hint)
The post An Open Letter to All 14 Senate Rs. appeared first on Granite Grok.
From the Democrats Actually Hate Women Files, Donovan Brown (dba: Veronica Garcia) won the Washington state championship in the girl’s 400m dash. He beat his second-place competitor by 3.25 Seconds.
It might not sound like much, but it’s huge and embarrassing. Watch.
Would you look at that…the thing that never happens happened again.
Veronica Garcia (Donovan Brown) just won the Washington State Championship in the girls’ 400m in total domination.
In Washington & Oregon this past week, the fastest “girl” in the each state has been a boy. pic.twitter.com/jbAEhdyTDl
— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) May 25, 2024
Another victory for Demcorats hating women.
Donovan/Victoria’s time was 55.59. How does that compare with the “boys”? I couldn’t get them all, but Eddie Bruner Jr. won the 400m for the guys with a time of 48.39 seconds (7.2 seconds faster than Donovan Brown).
The 25th fastest time was 49.73 (5.86 seconds faster than Brown). If I had to guess, Donovan would have never even gone to the state championships, but look, #woke, fools; the C-Team track “star” denied some hardworking young lady her chance at a state championship. And the best part for Democrats is she has to accept second place to a man with a smile and no complaints. Equality!
Here are the Boy’s results
The post Celebrate or Else: Washington State High School Girls Track Champion is a Guy (Who Couldn’t Compete Otherwise) appeared first on Granite Grok.
Memorial Day is a federal holiday, but unlike all of the others that are celebrations of an event, this day is a somber day to remember the brave men and women who left the safety of their homes, often just as kids, and went off to some foreign land to battle for the freedoms we enjoy, and did not return. It is a day to pause and thank the more than one million who made the ultimate sacrifice for us.
On this day, many of us will also remember our ancestors and family who have passed, but we should do that every day. Today, the last Monday in May, Memorial Day, is a special day for those who died while wearing the uniform. What they unselfishly did for us deserves their own day of remembrance.
While researching the holiday’s origin, I came across an interesting list of things you should not do on Memorial Day.
The article explained why these five were taboo, but the gist is not to allow the day to be cheapened or lose its significance. The last item on the list got me thinking. These folks we remember today may not have understood the purpose of the war they would be a part of, and we should not judge the battles either. On this day, we remember the lost souls. There are plenty of other days to debate the whys and how these conflicts existed and why we entered the fray. Today is for the dead.
I am going to get political for a moment because that is what I do. I think that this holiday should be apolitical, but I have a problem with Liberals celebrating this day. I find it incredibly hypocritical to take the time to remember the fallen on this day and thank them for what they have preserved for us while, at the same time, doing whatever they can to bring down and destroy this great country.
These bravest died for the Red, White, and Blue, which many came back home covered with. That flag represents the vision our forefathers had for America. To degrade America or continue to push to transform Her into a Socialist country is to concede these souls died in vain. To destroy our sovereignty and allow millions of unvetted individuals from around the world to cross our border, many from countries that hate our nation, is to strip the very thing these fallen fought and died for. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot salute the fallen and say you support the living troops while aligning yourself with these people who want to end the American experiment and replace it with a system that has failed every place it has been tried.
Let’s mark this Memorial Day and truly honor those for whom we pause by pledging from this day onward that we will do everything in our power to assure that anyone elected to serve us is as American as the ones whose grave is marked by the American Flag.
God Bless you, and may He keep you in his arms, our fallen brothers and sisters.
The post Some Thoughts On Memorial Day appeared first on Granite Grok.