Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

Higgenbotham wrote: Thu Jun 11, 2026 3:50 pm Second, Trump wants to tell you that because he is getting rid of a few illegals that he is tackling the immigration problem. The real immigration problem is the subject of the videos this youtuber is putting out. That's why this particular one has 3 million views and over 40,000 comments. As Europe burns as was noted yesterday. The comments are spot on and truthful.

Third, the reason people voted for Trump is because he promised to solve the immigration problem. Since he has taken office, the problem has grown by leaps and bounds. This was entirely predictable.

Fourth, since Trump has failed to solve the immigration problem, as was entirely predictable, people will now start to look for alternative solutions. Without doing a full blown analysis of the population in that area, I would venture to say that choosing Frisco as a location for replacement of the native population is problematic because it can easily be a target for a domestic insurgency, as it is on the far north edge of the Dallas Metroplex and butts up against rural areas full of ex military, hunters, preppers, etc.

viewtopic.php?p=94397#p94397

‘END IT NOW’: MAGA Demands Trump End Visa Program That Takes Jobs From Americans

Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell
June 14, 2026

The MAGA movement is demanding that the Trump administration finally end a visa program that incentivizes employers to hire foreign students.

The Optional Practical Training program, created in 1992, allows foreign students to remain in the United States to work for nearly four years after graduation. Employers receive a tax break for hiring foreign graduates under the program, which some say gives foreign nationals an advantage over U.S. citizens.

“F” student visa holders, including OPT graduates, are considered nonresident aliens for their first five calendar years in America. For those years, their wages are exempt from Social Security and Medicare taxes—for both the employee and the employer.

While the Department of Homeland Security has the authority to end the program by issuing a new rule, President Donald Trump’s administration has not publicly begun the rulemaking process, leading some conservative members of Congress to propose their own bills to end the program. Immigration hawks have supported the administration’s tough border policies but believe the OPT program should be a major priority as well.

Higgenbotham wrote: Wed Jun 17, 2026 4:52 pm Vis-a-vis the Presidents of the past 50 years, this was stated in language that is almost unrecognizable. An old friend born in 1915 used to say the Presidents of this century were not, in his words, "Presidential timber".

Higgenbotham wrote: Thu May 24, 2012 10:13 pm But I also think we have a larger problem here. In my opinion, Barack Obama is no George Washington, he is no Abraham Lincoln, and he is no Franklin Delano Roosevelt. An old man from the hero generation told me, "This man is not presidential timber."

Inventor and entrepreneur George Eastman founded the Eastman Kodak Company in Rochester, New York, in 1888. Over the next century, the word Kodak — which George Eastman made up — essentially became synonymous with the act of taking pictures. It democratized photography with the affordable Brownie camera in 1900, then revolutionized it again in 1935 with Kodachrome, one of the first commercially successful color films. In 1975, a Kodak engineer invented the first digital camera — and by the end of that decade, the company was making billions of dollars per year.

But throughout much of the 20th century, Kodak was also, for all intents and purposes, a U.S. military contractor. Alongside its subsidiary Eastman Chemical, Kodak produced warplane lacquer, gas mask parts, and refined uranium for the Manhattan Project.

“A company like Kodak, which we think of as this company that pioneered the snapshot that lives in this cultural realm, is deeply embedded in changing the substance of our world,” Lovejoy told Grist. That has had a profound impact on the environment and on frontline communities. But to most of the world, it’s still just the company that makes cameras. In her book, Lovejoy recounts the story of a Kodak representative telling people impacted by a methylene chloride spill, “We’ve never been thought of as a chemical company … we just made the yellow boxes.”

That, Lovejoy said, might be the company’s public image, but it was never the truth. “Internally, they identified themselves as a chemical company,” she said. And for Lovejoy, “the environment and the military can’t be separated.”

“The history of this material comes through poison gas, and it comes through the atomic bomb, and it comes through all of these materials that are really part of the history of the 20th and now 21st century.”

Household names like DuPont, General Electric, and Exxon are among those that have similarly left the land, the water, and the air in the communities around them polluted — often while also serving as contractors for entities such as the Department of Defense. All have kept their environmental and social harms (and military ties) largely out of public view until decades after the fact, when they’re sometimes forced to pay for remediation.

aedens wrote: Wed Jun 17, 2026 2:48 pm "The paper system being founded on public confidence and having of itself no intrinsic value, it is liable to great and sudden fluctuations, thereby rendering property insecure and the wages of labor unsteady and uncertain.

The corporations which create the paper money can not be relied upon to keep the circulating medium uniform in amount. In times of prosperity, when confidence is high, they are tempted by the prospect of gain or by the influence of those who hope to profit by it to extend their issues of paper beyond the bounds of discretion and the reasonable demands of business; and when these issues have been pushed on from day to day, until public confidence is at length shaken, then a reaction takes place, and they immediately withdraw the credits they have given, suddenly curtail their issues, and produce an unexpected and ruinous contraction of the circulating medium, which is felt by the whole community.

The banks by this means save themselves, and the mischievous consequences of their imprudence or cupidity are visited upon the public. Nor does the evil stop here. These ebbs and flows in the currency and these indiscreet extensions of credit naturally engender a spirit of speculation injurious to the habits and character of the people. We have already seen its effects in the wild spirit of speculation in the public lands and various kinds of stock which within the last year or two seized upon such a multitude of our citizens and threatened to pervade all classes of society and to withdraw their attention from the sober pursuits of honest industry.

It is not by encouraging this spirit that we shall best preserve public virtue and promote the true interests of our country; but if your currency continues as exclusively paper as it now is, it will foster this eager desire to amass wealth without labor; it will multiply the number of dependents on bank accommodations and bank favors; the temptation to obtain money at any sacrifice will become stronger and stronger, and inevitably lead to corruption, which will find its way into your public councils and destroy at no distant day the purity of your Government."

Andrew Jackson, Farewell Address, 1837

There is, perhaps, no one of the powers conferred on the Federal Government so liable to abuse as the taxing power. The most productive and convenient sources of revenue were necessarily given to it, that it might be able to perform the important duties imposed upon it; and the taxes which it lays upon commerce being concealed from the real payer in the price of the article, they do not so readily attract the attention of the people as smaller sums demanded from them directly by the taxgatherer. But the tax imposed on goods enhances by so much the price of the commodity to the consumer, and as many of these duties are imposed on articles of necessity which are daily used by the great body of the people, the money raised by these imposts is drawn from their pockets. Congress has no right under the Constitution to take money from the people unless it is required to execute some one of the specific powers intrusted to the Government; and if they raise more than is necessary for such purposes, it is an abuse of the power of taxation, and unjust and oppressive. It may indeed happen that the revenue will sometimes exceed the amount anticipated when the taxes were laid. When, however, this is ascertained, it is easy to reduce them, and in such a case it is unquestionably the duty of the Government to reduce them, for no circumstances can justify it in assuming a power not given to it by the Constitution nor in taking away the money of the people when it is not needed for the legitimate wants of the Government.

Plain as these principles appear to be, you will yet find there is a constant effort to induce the General Government to go beyond the limits of its taxing power and to impose unnecessary burdens upon the people. Many powerful interests are continually at work to procure heavy duties on commerce and to swell the revenue beyond the real necessities of the public service, and the country has already felt the injurious effects of their combined influence. They succeeded in obtaining a tariff of duties bearing most oppressively on the agricultural and laboring classes of society and producing a revenue that could not be usefully employed within the range of the powers conferred upon Congress, and in order to fasten upon the people this unjust and unequal system of taxation extravagant schemes of internal improvement were got up in various quarters to squander the money and to purchase support. Thus one unconstitutional measure was intended to be upheld by another, and the abuse of the power of taxation was to be maintained by usurping the power of expending the money in internal improvements. You can not have forgotten the severe and doubtful struggle through which we passed when the executive department of the Government by its veto endeavored to arrest this prodigal scheme of injustice and to bring back the legislation of Congress to the boundaries prescribed by the Constitution. The good sense and practical judgment of the people when the subject was brought before them sustained the course of the Executive, and this plan of unconstitutional expenditures for the purposes of corrupt influence is, I trust, finally overthrown.

The result of this decision has been felt in the rapid extinguishment of the public debt and the large accumulation of a surplus in the Treasury, notwithstanding the tariff was reduced and is now very far below the amount originally contemplated by its advocates. But, rely upon it, the design to collect an extravagant revenue and to burden you with taxes beyond the economical wants of the Government is not yet abandoned. The various interests which have combined together to impose a heavy tariff and to produce an overflowing Treasury are too strong and have too much at stake to surrender the contest. The corporations and wealthy individuals who are engaged in large manufacturing establishments desire a high tariff to increase their gains. Designing politicians will support it to conciliate their favor and to obtain the means of profuse expenditure for the purpose of purchasing influence in other quarters; and since the people have decided that the Federal Government can not be permitted to employ its income in internal improvements, efforts will be made to seduce and mislead the citizens of the several States by holding out to them the deceitful prospect of benefits to be derived from a surplus revenue collected by the General Government and annually divided among the States; and if, encouraged by these fallacious hopes, the States should disregard the principles of economy which ought to characterize every republican government, and should indulge in lavish expenditures exceeding their resources, they will before long find themselves oppressed with debts which they are unable to pay, and the temptation will become irresistible to support a high tariff in order to obtain a surplus for distribution. Do not allow yourselves, my fellow-citizens, to be misled on this subject. The Federal Government can not collect a surplus for such purposes without violating the principles of the Constitution and assuming powers which have not been granted. It is, moreover, a system of injustice, and if persisted in will inevitably lead to corruption, and must end in ruin. The surplus revenue will be drawn from the pockets of the people--from the farmer, the mechanic, and the laboring classes of society; but who will receive it when distributed among the States, where it is to be disposed of by leading State politicians, who have friends to favor and political partisans to gratify? It will certainly not be returned to those who paid it and who have most need of it and are honestly entitled to it. There is but one safe rule, and that is to confine the General Government rigidly within the sphere of its appropriate duties. It has no power to raise a revenue or impose taxes except for the purposes enumerated in the Constitution, and if its income is found to exceed these wants it should be forthwith reduced and the burden of the people so far lightened.

The Rape Gang Inquiry Report

At least 250,000 girls raped.

This is a survivor-led Rape Gang Inquiry report chaired by Rupert Lowe MP. It argues that Britain’s grooming-gang scandal was not a set of isolated local failures, but a national pattern of organised child sexual exploitation, overwhelmingly involving vulnerable white British girls and predominantly Pakistani Muslim male networks.

The report’s central claim is brutal: the state knew, recorded the signs, and still failed to act. It says police, social services, schools, the NHS, taxi licensing authorities, councils, and politicians repeatedly ignored reports, blamed or criminalised victims, protected “community cohesion,” feared racism accusations, and allowed known offenders to continue.

It relies heavily on survivor testimony, whistleblower accounts, previous inquiries, court records, press reports, and political evidence. The report says girls as young as 11 were groomed with gifts, alcohol, drugs, taxis, attention, and fake relationships, then raped, trafficked, filmed, blackmailed, impregnated, forced into abortions, or abandoned by authorities.

Its biggest numerical claim is that at least 250,000 young white girls may have been victims, using an extrapolation from Rotherham, Telford, Oxford and other cases. The report also says gangs operated or had operated in at least 149 local authority districts, with a map showing confirmed and suspected areas.

Higgenbotham wrote: Sat Jun 13, 2026 3:24 pm

Higgenbotham wrote: Fri Jun 12, 2026 4:14 pm In the new dark age, it will likely not be possible to achieve the scale of a standard insurgency but a large number of independent insurrections can mimic that without any coherent endpoint, as would be expected in a dark age environment.

Military analyst Michael Clarke has said he would be "surprised" to see Iran sign an agreement with the US on Sunday.

"It's not a peace deal," he explained, adding "it's a series of modalities to arrive at a peace deal".

"It would be unusual to me if the Iranians signed it tomorrow, because why would they play to Donald Trump's agenda?

"They want to humiliate him, and it would suit them to embarrass him and sign it next week when they're really happy with it."

Although everything is "unpredictable" with the US president, Clarke said he believes Iran will wait longer before signing any agreement.

"I think we're not going to see a neat end to this, it will just drift on for a long time," he said.

"The Strait of Hormuz will open again, but it will never go back to the way it was because the Iranians now know how easy it is for them to close it."

https://news.sky.com/story/iran-war-lat ... z-13509565

Similarly, this is a good encapsulation of what war will look like in the new dark age.

Sure, it would be to the Iranian's advantage at this time (in the current new dark age environment) to go ahead and open the Strait of Hormuz, then close it again when the US is unprepared and least expects it. Generally, it would be to their advantage to say, yeah, yeah, we'll go ahead with an agreement, then drag their feet over minor negotiating points, maybe sign an agreement, then renege on it when it's convenient for them to do so...as the new dark age tightens its grip.

Higgenbotham wrote: Fri Jun 12, 2026 4:14 pm In the new dark age, it will likely not be possible to achieve the scale of a standard insurgency but a large number of independent insurrections can mimic that without any coherent endpoint, as would be expected in a dark age environment.

Military analyst Michael Clarke has said he would be "surprised" to see Iran sign an agreement with the US on Sunday.

"It's not a peace deal," he explained, adding "it's a series of modalities to arrive at a peace deal".

"It would be unusual to me if the Iranians signed it tomorrow, because why would they play to Donald Trump's agenda?

"They want to humiliate him, and it would suit them to embarrass him and sign it next week when they're really happy with it."

Although everything is "unpredictable" with the US president, Clarke said he believes Iran will wait longer before signing any agreement.

"I think we're not going to see a neat end to this, it will just drift on for a long time," he said.

"The Strait of Hormuz will open again, but it will never go back to the way it was because the Iranians now know how easy it is for them to close it."