To become a Swiss citizen refugees must first repay all of the welfare money they received

Self-reliance is an old idea from well before the creation of capitalist economies and democratic states. So here’s a thought that others might think about: Switzerland Rejects Citizenship Bids Of Residents Who Were Once On Welfare.

Switzerland doesn’t mess around.

The idyllic nation — where the average annual GDP per capita is nearly $80,000 — doesn’t like deadbeats. The nation recently enacted a new civil rights act that prevents residents who received welfare benefits from becoming citizens until they pay back the money they took.

The new regulations took effect January 1. Asylum seekers and refugees who received handouts in the previous three years can’t become permanent residents without paying back the government.

What’s more, refugees must prove they are making efforts to integrate into society in order to win citizenship. They must show that have “cultivated contacts” with a number of Swiss people, according to Kronen Zeitung. There are also new language requirements, which vary depending on the canton they are living in, the Daily Mail reports.

Via Zylocast on an open thread.

Maybe people should get serious about nuclear weapons in the hands of North Korea and Iran

Nuclear War will come to us when someone starts a war on the West. They will attack us. And this is a taste of what it would be like, as we have just seen for ourselves.

 

Wouldn’t you want something done to make sure it doesn’t happen? Any thoughts on what that something might be? Any suggestions about who should do what can be done? Who, in fact, is the only person who is actually trying to do something? Weakening the only government Americans have by Americans themselves does not seem like a good strategy in dealing with America’s enemies.

The books you do [and don’t] see in bookshops

It is the first time in years I have seen a book of mine on a bookstore shelf, and a mere $39.95 as well. Has only happened twice before but incredible to see. I imagine it may have been because the title is so ambiguous – Art of the Impossible – so that it might have been anti-Trump as was every other political tract sharing the shelf. You can also buy the book from The Book Depository for A$29.21 and with worldwide free delivery. In my view, the farther we move from the election, the better the book becomes. It puts everything in context and helps you remember the might have beens, every one of which is a horror story we are not being made to endure. No book a decade from now will be able to make you understand the 2016 election the way this book does.

What has also amazed me is that even with all the interest in PDT across the world, I have never ever seen one of his own books anywhere for sale, other than in op-shops, where I am the only one to buy them at $3 a copy. In particular, why does no one sell or buy his Art of the Deal which has always been plain sailing to get through and would teach you something about the man who is president you cannot otherwise find out.

FROM THE COMMENTS: And quite unpleasant as well.

It is good to see the author is modest enough to try and wrap some sort of narrative around his ham fisted attempt to create interest in his book

So let me introduce another concept that may be foreign to some people, that it is almost a certainty that most people who write books do so in the hope that others will read them. And I will add this as well – for the author who goes to the trouble of writing these books, it is usually not to make money but just to be part of a conversation. One of the lessons, let me also add, that comes from frequenting secondhand bookshops is that you get a true understanding of how all is vanity. Every book you see – unsaleable at 50 cents – would have taken its author at least a year, and often much much more, from conception to publication. And there they now are, mouldering away, as are most of their authors. That said, every book was also something someone had once wished to do and had taken genuine effort to bring to completion. You should therefore not be resentful if an author suggests that you might read his book. In this one instance, and there are few others in life, you may be sure they are really trying to do you a good turn whatever you may think yourself.

Expletive undeleted

The short version, from the comments thread at Instapundit as is the photo:

So let me get this straight:

* The NYT alleges that Pres. Trump said the word “shithole” in private meeting
* CNN repeats the word “shithole” on the air about six dozen times

Did I just get that right?

The longer version from Drudge:

.
Meantime, what’s the issue, the word he used or is it something else?

And for you too young to remember, this is the source for the phrase “expletive deleted”. Makes me feel old to have to do this, but you would have to go back forty years to be able to get the point.

Why don’t you Google it?

What comes up first if you google Google’s New Fact-Check Feature Almost Exclusively Targets Conservative Sites. You might even pair this with this: James Damore sues Google, alleging intolerance of white male conservatives.

Google’s New Fact-Check Feature Almost Exclusively Targets …

dailycaller.com/…/googles-new-fact-check-feature-almost-exclusively-targets-conserv…

 

Google’s New Fact-Check Feature Almost Exclusively Targets Conservative Sites. Photo of Eric Lieberman. Eric Lieberman · Tech and Law Reporter. 12:04 PM 01/09/2018. Pinterest. Reddit. LinkedIn. WhatsApp. Share. TOP …

TO WHICH MAY NOW BE ADDED THIS:

 

The left will not tolerate dissent even in private

You think the left is open to debate? Then read this. A fascinating story: Coming Out As A Republican To My Democrat Family Went Worse Than Coming Out Gay. Lots to read and you should read it all, but let me select this to give you some idea of what you will find.

When, in my adulthood, the liberal policy agenda became problematic for me, I found myself at a loss. I began to raise questions with my family and friends, and met resistance. It was not because my concerns were particularly inappropriate; I was just not supposed to be questioning at all.

One could disagree with nuances, but not the judgment of the (then) president, or the party. Period. The irony of this apparent intolerance for diversity of thought by the party claiming to champion the rights of groups underserved by the status quo was not lost on me.

For the first time in my progressive life, standing up for the values that I most strongly espouse—truth, morality, self-reliance, boundaries, tolerance, and a healthy dose of Jewish skepticism—was damaging my reputation and character. When I publicly opposed my dad’s support of the Iran deal, I was admonished. I had few friends with whom I could have a civil political conversation: one stopped all communication with me for two weeks because Trump won the presidency.

The left expects everyone to behave like a dumb terminal, with the views of the main processor the only views permitted. But it is possible to escape so we must keep attacking their views before we find ourselves overrun and submerged.

Keynesian economics is the greatest racket ever invented

This is how they steal from you while pretending they are doing you good. Here then is something you should therefore know before you listen to another word from anyone in government: Except during recessions, an economy always creates as many jobs as there are people who are able to fill them. Government spending never creates a net increase in employment. Government spending only creates jobs in one place at the expense of jobs somewhere else, and does it by giving money to the government’s best friends to run projects no firm, based on profit and loss, would ever undertake. And if the project is loss making, which government projects almost invariably are, it has taken the economy backwards – that is, people in general invariably become less well off as a result – even if those to whom the government has paid money are better off, which they are almost invariably are. Government spending, unless there is a genuine and calculated benefit above the cost, is a ripoff, and it is you who are being ripped off. They pick your pockets and pretend they are doing you good.

How do you deal with people who know all the answers before they hear the questions?

This is the most significant political problem of our time. The left are on the left because of a will to believe, but have virtually never had a political success other than by taking the reins of power which they quite often do, and not always peacefully either. They have imposed their will time and again because they often temporarily have the numbers, but are removed as soon as possible – which is often not very soon at all – since their beliefs create neither wealth nor freedom.

The outcome has been that no one on the left is any longer willing to debate since they have run out of arguments because virtually everything they say and do has a proven history of failure. And so the question has become, is it worth trying to convince people on the left who never listen to what anyone else says? Is it worth trying to show how markets work better than government direction, for example, or that there is no evidence of the existence of global warming? How do you deal with people who think that Barack Obama was worth electing president, or now even Oprah for heaven’s sake? It is the greatest problem of our day, and may yet lead to the collapse of our Western way of life. Anyway, I came across the brief schematic that I think sums up quite a bit.

Conservative, AKA Normal People = facts, analysis ——-> conclusion.

Liberals AKA Walking Nerve Endings = feelings, conclusion ——> rationalization

They are not “stupid” in the normal sense, political idiots though they are. They cannot learn from history because they do not want to, because history continuously demonstrates the dangers and vacuity of their ideas. If anyone ever works out how to get past the barricades they put up to protect their political prejudices from examination, they will save the world from a good deal of grief. In the meantime, we have to find ways to barricade ourselves from the destruction they cause whenever they achieve political control. There is always another Venezuela just around the corner if these people cannot be made to see how things really are, and that next Venezuela might be right where you happen to live right now.