The latest commentary from German substacker eugyppius on the Magdeburg Christmas Market murderer:

The dishonesty about al-Abdulmohsen and his motives has been staggering. While those on the German left are sparing no effort to portray the attacker as a right-wing terrorist and “AfD sympathiser,” loud voices on the right have spent days insisting that he was some kind of sleeper jihadist agent.

Neither is remotely true. All the evidence shows that al-Abdulmohsen was a paranoid, mentally unstable and professionally incompetent doctor with a long history of making terroristic threats to satisfy petty personal grievances. Anti-Islam statements from the AfD appealed to him, but beyond that al-Abdulmohsen had no developed political vision, and his self-styled refugee advocacy put him at odds with core elements of the AfD party platform. His entire internet presence is moreover uniformly anti-Islamic; all the tweets cited to support the argument that he was a crypto-Muslim are invariably misinterpreted or taken out of context.

The real story here is the failure of German police and immigration bureaucrats to do anything about this obviously unbalanced and dangerous man. In Germany, pensioners who call Green politicians “morons” get their houses raided by the police, while insane migrants who promise over and over to commit terrorist acts attract no attention. Authorities neglected to deport al-Abdulmohsen even after he overstayed his original visa, then granted and extended new residence permits despite his increasingly erratic behaviour. Al-Abdulmohsen received political asylum in 2016, two years after a court fined him for making terroristic threats. In 2023, as al-Abdulmohsen’s mental state deteriorated and his continuing threats brought him to the notice of the police again and again, he was granted permanent residence in Germany. As late as May of this year, he was even tweeting veiled threats directly at Interior Minister Nancy Faeser.

…

[Here eugyppius recounts al-Abdulmohsen’s “interesting” history in Germany, which is a history of the failure of authorities to deal with a fellow who engaged in vexatious litigation against his perceived enemies and made several threats against German institutions for their failure to address the needs of ex-Muslim refugees. Somehow in the midst of all this he managed to be granted a medical degree and accreditation as a psychiatrist]

Since 2020, al-Abdulmohsen has lived in Bernburg (Sachsen-Anhalt), where he worked as a doctor at the Bernburg Regional Hospital for Forensic Psychiatry. He treated involuntarily admitted drug addicts and headed three therapy wards. His colleagues report that he did his rounds alone and avoided social contact as much as possible. He soon earned the nickname “Dr. Google,” because he “had to look up every diagnosis on the internet.” Rumours circulated that he was not a real doctor; his German was so terrible that many patients could hardly understand him and his privileges to practice at a neighbouring clinic were suspended because he “repeatedly prescribed medication that could have put patients’ lives at risk.” In October, as his appeal in Cologne was turning sour, al-Abdulmohsen embarked upon an extended absence from his job [I suspected this would be the case; another warning sign ignored – Roger.] via a combination of paid holiday leave and sick leave. His latest sick leave was schedule to expire on 20 December, the very day he carried out the attack in Magdeburg.

Ten years after Martin Place, are Western security agencies capable of leaning anything from such incidents and their perpetrators?

That’s the SFL “moderate” faction speaking — the same white ants who staged the 2015 SFL party room coup in Canberra that assassinated Tony Abbott and installed Malcolm Turnbull as PM. The same corrupt renewable energy subsidy miners who run the SFL machine in NSW.

They’re the unelectable rabble who got a loser like Giuseppe Proscuitto (h/t Rabz) elected to lead the Victorian SFLs in the first place.

Everything in three sentences.

Angela Mollard is upset in the Courier Mail:

My friend, typically a genial sort, has steam coming out her ears.

Her parents, she tells me, are celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary.

“Oh, that’s lovely …” I enthuse.

“Yes, it is lovely,” she grimaces, “but they’re going all out. Four months in Europe, first class flights, a cruise down the Rhine and they’ve booked to stay in a castle in France. My dad keeps calling it his SKI holiday …”

My friend drops her voice to a whisper. “He’s telling anyone who will listen that he’s ‘Spending the Kids’ Inheritance’. My brother is apoplectic and together we’ve calculated they’re dropping about $200K on the trip.”

It does not seem the moment to point out that presumably her parents worked very hard for their money and, having notched up 50 years of marriage, have every right to celebrate the occasion. Instead, I promise to send her an article expressing similar sentiments.

“My inheritance is being drunk through a straw in a coconut in the Caribbean,” fumes the writer.

“Yes!” my friend texts back. “Is it really that distasteful to resent my parents for frittering money that should be mine? After all, they inherited money from their parents.”

Oh dear. The great wealth transfer which will see Australia’s over-60s bequeath around $3.5 trillion of their money to younger generations in the next 20 years has been heralded as a financial lifeline for many.

But what few are talking about is the growing conflict and potential implosion within families as generations with different attitudes and expectations wrangle over who is entitled to what. As lawyer and estate planner Brian Herd tells me, throw in blended families, “compactos”, “martyr children” and “FOFO” and the inheritance business is rapidly becoming fraught to the point of toxic.

But first he tells me about “Ken and Barbie syndrome”. As he explains, he’ll have a long-established couple sitting in front of him and they may not have considered what the other might do after they die.

“The survivor could last a long time,” he says. “For instance, the woman might go to a line dancing class at the local RSL where she’ll meet a Ken. She becomes so enamoured of Ken that she races off and changes her will. Or the opposite could happen. He goes to the class and meets a Barbie.”

Brian, who works for Brisbane’s HopgoodGanim Lawyers, didn’t use to raise the issue but times have changed. Couples, he says, generally have two responses.

“Their first reaction is to look at each other simultaneously and say: ‘You wouldn’t do that’. Or the other reaction is the woman looks straight at me and says: ‘Who would want him’?”

And that’s just the couple. Never mind what their kids think when mum or dad refuses to resign themselves to a lonely old age and instead partners up with a potentially younger model.

In the past, an inheritance was often a delightful surprise. It wasn’t something you talked about, far less demanded. But in the age of entitlement everyone has their eyes on, if not their fingers in, the prize. And Millennials, burdened by hefty mortgages and raising children, are the most grasping. Research this year by Vanguard showed 45 per cent of Millennials believed retirees should leave money to their children while 40 per cent said they should prioritise enjoying their own money.

As for those holding the purse strings, for every proud globetrotting, Grange-sipping “SKIer”, there’s another retiree crippled with FOFO – or “fear of falling out” with their loved ones. In the tension over inheritances, they worry about being denied access to grandchildren, gifting money to one more needy child over another, or skipping their children and bequeathing money directly to their grandchildren.

As Brian points out, they might be frustrated by a child on their third marriage and might want to bypass them altogether out of concern about where their inheritance might end up. There’s also potential conflict around what the industry calls “martyr” children – those who step in to care or house an elderly parent to save money on aged care expenses. As he says, it sounds straightforward in practice until the child living in Equatorial Guinea arcs up when the elderly parent changes their will to give more to the child who looks after them.

Oh, and Brian has also dealt with offspring infuriated that a sibling nominated to have enduring power of attorney (EPA) over their parents has used the privilege to plunder the inheritance.

What’s clear is that on focusing on their financial legacy, few are considering their relationship legacy – or what sort of emotional state they’ll leave their family in.

As for my friend fretting about her parents gallivanting around Europe and buying up large in the vineyards around their chateau in Bordeaux, I did offer one consoling comment: “They might bring you back a bottle.”

I mean really? This was published in the paper last year but reheated.
The entitlement these young people feel is extraordinary.
I don’t expect my parents to leave me anything, they have to make sure their last year’s are enjoyable.
Needs to be because the old man has prostate cancer, which is under control now but can become aggressive.
As for the author of the above bilge, FMD

American workers are the most productive in the world. Compare to China.

As of 2022, the GDP per hour worked for American and Chinese workers is as follows:

United States: $95.1

China: $20.5

This indicates that American workers are approximately 4.6 times more productive per hour than their Chinese counterparts.

Wikipedia

In 2024, China’s labor productivity per hour is estimated at $16.1, measured in 2017 constant U.S. dollars adjusted for purchasing power parity (PPP).

Statista

These figures highlight the significant disparity in labor productivity between the two countries.

It’s not the hours worked, but what happens during working hours and the capital investment standing behind these workers. The difference is staggering actually.

It is.

I wonder why companies offshored whole industries to China if Americans are almost five times as productive as Chinese?

especially as they already had those industries operating at home, without the extra cost of sea transport, without building new factories and without the geopolitical risk?

Is productivity the wrong measure for that which attracts capital, or is it something else going on with the numbers? Are some sectors offsetting poor manufacturing productivity or is there something wrong with the way the number is calculated?

Return on capital. In a peaceful world with well intention-ed players, you focus on where and how you can achieve the highest return on capital. We don’t have a well intention-ed world now, or it doesn’t appear to be the case any longer. The US did what economics dictates in that world, which is why the S&P has the highest return on capital deployed. Focus on what you;re really good at and palm off the low return production elsewhere.

Hard to get one’s head around these sorts of numbers.

Apple Stock Hasn’t Had a Streak Like This Since 2010. Value Nears $4 Trillion.

H B Bear

 December 27, 2024 6:06 pm

 Reply to  Sancho Panzer

Let’s not worry too much about Boomer bashing. Always well deserved.

Or proven to get Generations X through to Z clicking to read the full article (which may contain traces of truthiness).

@RealJamesWoods

This creature “won” third place as AP’ FEMALE ATHLETE OF THE YEAR.

Knowing this, would you ever believe anything the Associated Press has to offer going forward?

I’m going out for Shabbat dinner and I’m going……drum roll…..braless…….

I was going to say “photos or it didn’t happen”, but thought I shouldn’t be so crass.
It’s not that sort of blog.