Broken LA

In his WSJ piece about the mayoral race in Los Angeles between a hard core Progressive-Democratic Party incumbent and a dual member of the Democratic Socialists of America and the Progressive-Democratic Party upstart, Karen Bass and Nithya Raman, respectively, the news writer wrote about the broken condition of the city and each candidate’s hopes and dreams (my characterization) for fixing it.

It took an average of seven days to fix a pothole in the fiscal year that ended June 30, up from 0.9 days in 2021-22. Also, the average response time to repair a streetlight outage rose to 224 working days from 31 over the same period, amid a spate of copper-wire theft.

A week to fix a pothole and nearly a year for a streetlight. It’s ridiculous even for those repairs to take the earlier 21 hours and an entire month. If the pothole takes more than a couple of hours to fill with asphalt for a sound repair, it’s only because the city had let the hole fester for so long that a far more extensive repair became necessary. It’s even worse for the streetlight. A month!?

Big government regulation, at the core of those delays and which has so severely damaged the city over the last 25 years of Progressive-Democratic rule, is unlikely to be reduced—indeed, quite the opposite—whether the city is ruled by another Progressive-Democrat or by a socialist running as a Progressive-Democrat.

Regarding the potholes and streetlights in particular, it should be as simple as, channeling Major John “Mac” McGillis, see the hole, fix the hole; see the light, fix the light.

Fat chance under LA’s new old regime.

Naïveté and Arrogance

Holman Jenkins had this bit in his Friday WSJ op-ed:

Until he [President Donald Trump (R)] threw down a regime-survival gauntlet before Iran’s leadership personnel, under no other circumstance did it make sense for them to close the Strait of Hormuz.

Jenkins is breathtakingly, dangerously naive, and a little bit arrogant in this claim.

The rest of his piece is just more of the same. In no way does the IRGC’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz have to make sense to his august news commentator self. The closure needs only make sense to the IRGC leadership. In this regard, earlier Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani’s remarks regarding the utility and outcome of a nuclear exchange with Israel applies just as dispositively here in this less nuclear confrontation.

Letitia James, the Cornell Seven, and Rule of Law

New York’s Progressive-Democrat governor Kathy Hochul has appointed fellow Progressive-Democrat State Attorney General Letitia James to oversee the reopened criminal investigation of a Cornell University seven then-student frat boys and their…encounter…with a then-student young woman. The frat boys’ behavior was utterly despicable, whether or not it was criminal. The case already has been opened and closed once, though, and there are obvious problems with James’ appointment apart from the problems of the reopening.

One such is James’ commentary on social media in the days just prior to her appointment.

What this young woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I’m holding her in my heart and in my prayers. To her, and to all survivors: you’re not alone. We stand with you.

As lawyers for two of the potential defendants noted,

Her own words indisputably establish that Attorney General James is not and cannot remain neutral in investigating this matter and determining whether to prosecute[.]

This commentary comes in the aftermath of the young woman’s own statement to the police that her participation was voluntary, conscious, and consensual. Her use of the term “rape” also in her statement raises questions, but it’s hard to take the usage dispositively in light of her voluntary, conscious, and consensual participation. The idea of a woman getting off on being ravished is the stuff of 18th century fiction. The decision of the local prosecutor to not prosecute on the basis of those two items has been widely bruited, but his assessment that there was no conviction possible based on the totality of her statement is legitimate.

But James wasn’t done, and this is the other obvious problem, although not so much bruited. She said in response to the hooraw over her post,

Those comments demonstrate empathy, and what we need now more than ever in our body politic is more empathy[.]

In the body politic, certainly. But in enforcement of our laws and in court, no. What is needed there, for the for both the defendant’s and accuser’s safety’s sake, is hard objectivity and adherence to the cold facts of the matter. James is justifying her decision to bring emoting into the courtroom at least on par with facts.

Letitia James is unfit to oversee this case.

Assumptions

In their article centered on the domestic woes of the People’s Republic of China’s automobile industry, the news writers had this claim:

Beijing shows little sign of doing anything about its car mess, partly because it doesn’t enjoy full control. Local government officials who promoted car manufacturing are reluctant to pull the plug, said Tu Le, managing director of consultant Sino Auto Insights.

That’s partly true, but it’s erroneous to assume it’s the only factor. PRC Electric Vehicle exports are hammering the European auto industry, and it’s getting into Canadian auto industry. The US auto industry is getting hammered, albeit not as extremely, by the tariffs imposed in an effort to protect it from PRC auto imports.

This hammering is part of a sub rosa two-pronged assault on the West. One prong is holding Western industry hostage to PRC control over rare earths—both of the ores and of the capacity to process them into finished items. The other prong is to deindustrialize the West by pushing hard goods—not just battery cars—into Western markets at prices and in volumes that Western nations cannot match, inducing those populations to buy PRC goods in preference. The domestic auto industry kerfuffle is a price the PRC is willing to pay in order to achieve its aim of dominance over the US and over the West in general.

This is a long-term threat to Western security, but there’s a near-term security threat, also. As WWII demonstrated, a viable automobile manufacturing facility is at the core of the ability of a nation to produce its military establishment’s combat vehicles and related weapons systems.

There is a solution to this, which itself involves addressing both prongs. One facet is to take advantage of the PRC’s domestic industrial strait and either impose very high tariffs on all imports originating from the PRC, regardless of the path those imports take between the PRC and the final destination, or outright boycott all PRC products. Either would limit PRC sales to its already paltry and declining domestic market.

The other prong is to get off the dime and move to develop Western rare earth mining—there are a plethora of rare earth ore regions throughout North America, for instance, and on the accessible sea bottoms of the eastern Pacific Ocean and the South China Sea—and processing facilities, thereby eliminating the PRC-controlled bottleneck and associated fist on the throat of Western industry. In parallel, or at least in tight sequence, that rare earth supply chain adjustment should be extended to supply chains for all Western manufacturing and assembly facilities, removing all dependence on PRC supply.

Of course, this solution will be extremely expensive to bring about, especially were the PRC to cut off access to its rare earth output—as seems likely, along with restrictions on other supply chain materials—in response to moves to develop non-PRC accesses. That effects of that cutoff would last, though, only until Western accesses come on line. The relatively shorter-term cost, too, must be compared with the longer-term cost of PRC dominance over the US and the West and our remnant industrial output.

Nice Facility Ya’s Got There

The Pacific Maritime Association is planning to strike the two largest West Coast ports, Los Angeles and Long Beach. Talks haven’t gone as favorably toward the union as it wishes, so….

The union laid bare its attitude toward port management and toward us average Americans generally.

A timely agreement matters not only to the parties at the table, but to the entire Southern California supply chain and to the local, state, and national economies that depend on it.

That’s just naked extortion, and it’s putting those not anywhere close to the negotiations under union threat, using them as hostages. Not only is this union threatening the ports’ ability to function and earn the income needed to pay up, it’s also threatening all of the hostages it’s taken, us average Americans who make up those local, state, and national economies.

Yet another union is demonstrating why it should be decertified.

Further, in any other milieu than union “negotiations,” contracts signed under duress would be held invalid. If unions aren’t going to be decertified, then at the least, contracts signed while a strike, or a lockout, is in progress or within some serious time period after the end of a strike or lockout should be held invalid, having been signed under duress.