I'm About to Hit the Popeye Curve

Posted by Abaco 4 months, 1 week ago to Culture
31 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I've seen so much turmoil and bad stuff both in people close to me and in our community here in California lately that I'm feeling a real need to go Galt. So much dysfunctional behavior. Saw a guy chasing a lady down the street the other afternoon in rush hour traffic, trying to mug her. Al kinds of lived-in vehicles on the side of the road on my way in to work every morning. Tent cities along the river where we used to walk and fish by our place. I'm seeing people I've known a long time start to spin out of control too. It's as though, as I decided to start to withdraw from society a bit (go a little Galt - so far) that I'm seeing other get sucked up and spun around in a tornado of malarkey. Have any of you ever felt or noticed this? While playing golf with a buddy one night last week I explained it, "I feel as though I'm calming down, slowing down, and getting more focused while others all around me are doing the opposite." My most concise remarks seem to come without thought...haha.

Oh, and the term "hit the Popeye curve" is an old expression a friend of mine used to say - to imply that one has been dealt enough BS and is about to "get busy". Anyway, I think it's funny.

Another example: A couple weeks ago my mother-in-law crashed her car into a tree. My kid was in the back seat. Luckily, no injuries. A lady driving buy decided to file a claim against my mother-in-law. No reason. Just wants money. Hint: the lady probably just sees an old infidel and thinks it's ok to do this. Then, the fire department sends a bill to my house for $400 - for the kid who was riding in the back seat and wasn't hurt. I called and asked who called them to show up. They don't know. Well...why would they? Then, I threatened my golf buddy that I was going to send the fire department to his house...


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  Stormi 4 months, 1 week ago
    I knew Calif. was nto a place I wanted to be, after visiting my grandparents there several summers. Crazy people. My ex-boyfriend from high school lives in Washington, they are crazy liberal too. We cn't even e-mail and stay civil. Love N.M., and Texas as well a Wyo., Ohio is a bit yuppied corporate types, and all the welfare from south of here, as Ohio ha good welfafre! Until UN Agenda 21 crams us all in inner city apts. We have escaped to a rural subdivision where all the lots are 1-5 acres, and we are mostly conservatives. If they aren't. we have 200 trees to block the view. Our own little Gulch. We have a senior group of 20+ rational seniors who meet for coffee and talk of cars and politics at McDs -we will educate, but not tolerate BS.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  dukem 4 months, 1 week ago
    Well, I figured nothing could be as bad as Oregon, so I moved to New Mexico on some semi-remote acreage.
    There is some place far worse than Oregon, I found out. I am surrounded by non-thinking idiots.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by H2ungar123 4 months ago
      Oregon bad? NY right behind. Why is it that nearly every murder, rape, stabbing, is mostly committed by blacks to blacks, Whatever happened to their
      cry of "Black Lives Matter"????
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 4 months, 1 week ago
    That Kalifornia "tornado of malarkey" does not strike me dino as conducive toward sustaining one's mental health.
    Go Galt, young man, go Galt.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 4 months, 1 week ago
    Yeah, I have epilepsy and when I have a seizure, somtimes I'm lucky enough to have it at home. But when it's in the street, some uninformed person (I'd like to say "idiot" but perhaps that wouldn't be fair) calls the ambulance,and then I get stuck with an ambulance bill and a hospital bill. But I haven't had one in public since I went on Social Security (which I didn't and don't want to be on; I'm trying to get a job), so maybe Medicare would take care of it. I do have a piece of paper around my medicine bottle on which I have written "EPILEPSY IF SEIZURE NO AMBULANCE NO DR NO $". But an ambulance person who was at the house for one of my neighbors said it was not a legal document, and therefore probably would not work.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 months, 1 week ago
    I put up with the insanity of Washington, DC for over 20 years after retiring from the military. I had originally planned to return to Los Angeles, but years ago abandoned that silly idea. I moved to Oklahoma, and found a civilized, hospitable, enjoyable society.

    I've had a peaceful existence here the last decade, but I get nervous when the voters decided to pursue "medical" marijuana. The law passed by referendum is so loose it begs the cartels to set up shop. The governor needs to call a special session to tighten things up, but doesn't want to out of fear the session will also override her veto of a constitutional carry law. Things are not perfect in paradise.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 4 months, 1 week ago
      If all drugs were legal, there would not be cartels. U could buy the stuff at walmart
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 months, 1 week ago
        Legal drugs have to meet safety standards, as do the dealers. That state oversight cost means the cartels can always undercut the price of legal drugs, as California is discovering.. They were expecting tax revenues of nearly $200M annually, and even though there are a lot more users, only about half of them are buying the legal stuff, so the revenue stream looks like it will only be about half of expected.

        California law enforcement agencies are asking for a tripling of their budget for drug enforcement since they're swamped, and the environmentalists are screaming about illegal grows in state parks. Marijuana is an energy hungry and very thirsty crop, and some of the big wildfires are thought to have been accidentally started by cartel farms.

        Legalizing other drugs also means increased opportunity for the cartels, and increased deaths from impure or corrupted drugs. Licensing doesn't do squat, because the user can flash his license at a curious cop, but there's no sure way short of confiscating and testing to prove the drugs are legal.

        The real world is a bitch, as Colorado and California have discovered with their recreational marijuana experiment. Market forces still apply, even when part of the providers are criminals. I predicted this would happen, as it's simple logic.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jdg 4 months, 1 week ago
          Drug regulation, at least as applied to non-controversial drugs, does not raise the price so much that buying on the black market is cheaper. But several of the states that recently legalized weed have taxed it that much, probably on purpose so that they can come back in a few years and say legalization didn't work. I see this as a temporary problem -- both Washington and Colorado did this but have since lowered the taxes to the point that it makes sense to buy the legal product. In a few years both states will so depend on that revenue that repeal won't even be considered.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 4 months, 1 week ago
          I was thinking about legalizing drugs like weed, cocaine, and the like. Why do we need government regulation of those anyway. Competition will always be a better regulator than government anyway.

          Take the illegality of it away, and the cartels go away as its no longer profitable in a competitive environment.

          Think of it this way, illegal drugs arent government regulated as to quality now, and I really dont hear a lot of complaints from users. competition among drug dealers is operative now.

          I just dont think government does even a reasonable job of "protecting" us. It protects
          them" and their retirements more than us.

          Watch "kitchen nightmares" to see just how well the health departments inspect and control restaurants. If they did a bang up job, that show wouldnt exist.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 months, 1 week ago
            If we were in an objective, every man for himself environment, and regarded those who pick the bad dealer and die as Darwin at work, then the idea of legalizing all drugs could be regarded as effective eugenics. Unfortunately, we aren't in that environment, and most likely never will be. Families do care for relatives that make bad choices, and want government to at least try to reduce the possibility that the next time they see the miscreant will be in the morgue.

            Cartels are big business, and when they see how big an American market will be if drugs are legalized, they will be all in. Just like some former Mafia organizations are alive and kicking, transitioning to legal offshoots of their formerly illegal (bootlegging) rackets. The cartels are already expert at efficient growing, shipping, and direct distribution of drugs, so why shouldn't they dominate the market?

            Wherever there's widespread use of legal drugs, there's a bad environment of dirty needles, homelessness, and dangerous streets. Unless you also make drugs free, set up "shooting galleries" and recovery centers to keep druggies from laying around on the streets, you get a very bad situation. People mug and kill for the money for the next fix, and making it legal doesn't avoid that for really addictive drugs.

            If you make drugs legal, then you better make constitutional open carry legal too. No "illegal" means of self defense either, and law enforcement stays out of what happens on the streets. Sounds like my kind of world - NOT.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 4 months, 1 week ago
              I would argue that a free market in so called "illegal drugs" would cut the prices and profits WAY down. Cartels, unless they want to act like normal competitive businesses, would find their way of operating impractical to say the least. They would have to stop killing for example and would have to be much more efficient (like a walmart). Cartels are 'efficient' as you say, but primarily because they operate on fear and violence. If they had to compete and were subject to the normal laws outlawing practices like killing off workers who were not behaving, they would not survive.

              With lower prices, wouldnt crime be reduced too? If your fix is $10 vs $100, you dont need to steal as much. Also, and this is politically incorrect, interest in drugs would go down as more people were just dying of drug addiction. Its really not a great way to live, and this would become more obvious if they were de crimminalized.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 months, 1 week ago
                I don't know how many drug users you've come in contact with, but they don't think or act rationally. For a real market to function as it should, the consumer has to be capable of rational decision-making, which is what you assume if a dealer gets a bad reputation that cuts him out of the market. There are "off the books" pot dealers in Los Angeles, and when law enforcement catches up to them, they just change names and locations. When the new dealer opens up in an unregulated environment, the eager buyers have no way of knowing about past bad deals.

                As regards theft, as I said before, the druggies are not rational thinkers. If they steal enough for the next round of fixes, they will steal enough to buy more and distribute. San Francisco tried literally subsidizing druggies and supplying them with clean needles and a place to safely shoot up. The street death rate didn't budge, and the theft and mugging rate climbed

                The current opioid crisis is proof of the flaw in your thinking about deaths causing a reduction in users. The death rate has been highly publicized and still climbs in spite of the public being well informed. Your ideas reflect the well meaning wishes of a non-user. Like I said earlier, reality is a bitch.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by term2 4 months, 1 week ago
                  What I would say is that the war on drugs is a total failure. Drug use isnt down. But prices are higher because of it, as well as crime, costs of the whole enforcement mess, costs of the encarceration and the difficulties it creates when they get out.

                  Not to mention the whole cartel thing.

                  I would also say that the war on drugs is immoral at its core and violates so many individual rights its indefensible.

                  We coddle the druggies so they dont experience the problems with their addictions. We give them free medial care, shelter when they are homeless, and much more if they are in SF.

                  I am sorry to say it, but if they die, they die. We cant force people to stay alive no matter what they do.

                  Maybe they dont care if they die, and the fix is just too good to pass up. Let them do it and reap or suffer the consequences.

                  I just know that what we are doing now just isnt right, and doesnt work.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 months, 1 week ago
                Keep dreaming ace, cuz it just won't turn out the way you think.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by term2 4 months, 1 week ago
                  they will never legalize the currently illegal drugs. Its like a low speed limit that can never be raised. lest someone die and its blamed on raising the speed limit.
                  So, we will continue to spend huge dollars and loss of substantial freedoms in the quest to control the use of "illegal" drugs, and never win that battle (cause it isnt something that can be won in principle). In addition, the crime will result in many deaths and the formation and continuation of cartels.

                  The acceptance of the evils caused by the war on drugs reminds me of the acceptance of the evils of caused by socialism. No matter how many evils are uncovered, it never seems to be accepted by the die hards.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by DrZarkov99 4 months, 1 week ago
                    Too many resources are wasted on aggressively going after users. Dropping charges for small amounts and drug courts rather than jail can actually help users quit. Dry up the market with kind treatment, and use the resources to go after the big dealers.

                    Legalizing all drugs isn't a good solution, because some like meth and crack are quickly addictive. I've known functioning users of alcohol and pot, but none who use more serious drugs, at least not for long.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by term2 4 months, 1 week ago
                      i would suggest that crimminalizing possessing, making, distributing them is a solution that shouldnt have ever been pursued. . It goes against all the tenets of individual rights, and leads to a gross reduction in individual freedom for the rest of the population.

                      If in fact certain drugs keep the users from functioning for very long, then the problem is self correcting.

                      I mean if people start jumping off buildings, is it right to ban the existence of all buildings high enough to hurt a nutcase that wants to jump off?

                      Thats what we have done with this war on drugs.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 4 months, 1 week ago
    California has turned into Bizarro's world...haven't seen much craziness here in CT except from our governor and two senators...a few idiots in the streets on TV and wondered if it was a set up because there are no signs of this nuttiness anywhere else in the state.

    Don't know where all the psychopaths are hiding. We are second only to DC in psychopathic concentrations but it sounds like your state takes the cake.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 4 months, 1 week ago
    I love the $400 for a publicly-supported service. Perfect! Mooch, mooch, mooch.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jdg 4 months, 1 week ago
      I have no problem with governments charging for emergency services if you voluntarily called them, and if insurance will cover them. But if a busybody calls them needlessly, make the busybody pay the bill.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 4 months, 1 week ago
        Totally agree...except for the $7M budget for emergency services in the county budget. If both charges to the public are present, a clear divide and assertion of value/cost made.

        When you pay for emergency services, why are they publicly funded? Private services will kill them. Perhaps that is your point.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jdg 4 months, 1 week ago
          Maybe I'm naive, but I was assuming that the fee would avoid the need for the charges to go up.

          I like the idea of truly privatizing emergency services if we can avoid abusive situations. I'm thinking of two kinds: (1) charging the victim for needless third-party interventions such as LibertyBelle describes, and (2) price gouging enabled by the near-monopoly on these services (and the fact that their use is often not voluntary). Of course, both problems are possible even with the government monopoly in place.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 4 months ago
            Maybe I’m too jaundiced, but it seems like an excuse for just more unbridled government waste. Your approach is good if it isn’t abused by the police/fire unions.

            Here in MA these guys can retire after 20, like the old military rules. They work until 45 and coast on taxpayer pensions. In my little rural town of 10k they had two firehouses, one on each side of town. They had to have better facilities, and built a $12M giant firehouse with six engine bays. The police have a nice little newer office near it, but when the firehouse was built, the police needed a new building too. Fortunately the town said “no”.

            I assume CA is similarly wasteful.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo