Tag Archives: Sleep Manpnea

May 15 2023

Scalia & the Right to Secede


Armstrong Economics Blog/Rule of Law Re-Posted May 15, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION: Marty; There are those who say Scalia was wrong for he claimed the civil war was correct and he changed the meaning of the Second Amendment. You are the real constitutional scholar on these issues. Is there a right to secede by a state? Did Scalia really change the Second Amendment?

Thank you so much for your diverse background.

Kirk

ANSWER: As far as the question of the Civil War, Scalia answered a question for a movie and it was simply a letter and not a court decision that he rendered. Saying that question was decided by the Civil War and that the precedent was that there is no right to secede was not his opinion, but the established law of the Court. Scalia could not respond otherwise for that was in fact the law, right or wrong. The decision of the Court was not Scalia’s. The argument for secession is not nearly as clear-cut as people think. The Supreme Court in 1869 ruled that secession is illegal.

Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869 where Texas sought to recoup its bond losses. The case involved a claim by the Reconstruction government of Texas that United States bonds owned by Texas since 1850 had been illegally sold by the Confederate state legislature during the American Civil War. Texas filed suit directly with the United States Supreme Court under the Constitutional provision giving the Court original jurisdiction.

The court ruled that Texas had remained a state of the United States ever since it first joined the Union. The fact that it joined the Confederate States and was at the time under military rule. Therefore, they decided on the merits of the bond issue. That is where the Court held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States. Consequently, that meant that all the acts of the legislatures within the Confederate states were “absolutely null” and void. Hence, that decision was mandatory or the US would have to also honor the bonds of the Confederate States. That is why the 14th Amendment was passed stating that the Confederate states would not question the debt of the North, but there would be no compensation for the debt of the South.

Therefore, those who ridicule Scalia are just typical soap-box lawyers who pretend to know things they do not. Scalia’s response was correct for that was the precedent and we see that the same position is taken in Europe. Once you join, there is no divorce. We see the war in Ukraine is also over the secession of the Donbas. This was the difference between Lenin and Stalin. Lenin believed that the states could secede from the federation and Stalin said no way.

Scalia is correct. The power of the federal government will NEVER acknowledge any right of any state to secede. Scalia said that the Civil War decided that issue which is correct because any secession today would also have to be by force of arms – not in some court.

What people seem to wrongly think is that Justice Antonin Scalia made some ruling on this subject. Scalia was responding to a letter from a screenwriter working on a comedy dealing with secession in 2006. Scalia wrote he could not imagine such a case ever reaching the Supreme Court. Scalia wrote in 2006:

“I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be.  Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment?

But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.”

Scalia said that the last attempt at secession also established a clear precedent.

“If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede.” 

Scalia is correct insofar as Texas v White established that there is no right to secede. However, there is no strict construction of the Constitution to support that. Many historians and legal experts also say the Civil War clearly established there is “no right” to secede. However, that was by force of arms – not law! Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution lists acts that states cannot undertake, and secession is not on that list. That was a decision that was biased and necessary at the time to prevent having to pay the debts of the South. The real question is when the United States breaks up, I seriously doubt that it will be a legal case asking permission. I personally believe that the Constitution does NOT prohibit secession. That is simply the self-interest of Washington and thus the only real right will be by force of arms. Anyone who claims otherwise is a toss-up between an idiot and a fool.

As far as Scalia’s decision in DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA et al. v. HELLER back in 2008, his strict construction came shining through. Many people who want to eliminate gun ownership argue that bearing arms was only for a militia that has been supplanted by a standing army and therefore the Second Amendment is no longer valid.

It was Scalia who shot that argument down. He held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Second Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

(c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the 2nd Amendment. Pp. 28–30.

(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts, and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47. That shows what I am talking about with strict construction. The liberal view would have said the right was tied to a militia exclusively. He wrote:

” We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the many amici who believe that prohibition of handgun ownership is a solution. The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns, see supra, at 54–55, and n. 26. But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. “

So I do not see where anyone can say that Scalia somehow rewrote the Second Amendment to deny gun rights. All things, including speech, have limits and regulations. It is not free speech to yell fire in a movie theater. Judge Amy Coney Barrett has vowed to follow Scalia. It was Apprendi v New Jersey, the decision championed by Justice Scalia was based upon strict construction. Before then, it was Judges deciding facts – not juries. The denial of a right to a jury trial was common practice in the United States. It was Scalia who change the Judiciary and defended the people. No other judge would protect citizens and finally, Scalia was able to convince others that this was a violation of the Sixth Amendment. Anyone who disparages Scalia must be a leftist who loves government power. Scalia had no problem ruling against the government.

When I got to the Supreme Court, they ordered the government to explain how they were keeping me in prison on civil contempt without a trial indefinitely when the law, 28 USC 1826, said the maximum sentence was 18 months. They were rolling it every 18 months. Only when the Supreme Court ordered the government to respond, then I was released and they told the court the case was “moot” for I was suddenly released. Without Scalia, I would probably have died in prison. He at least stood up for the law and 18 months was one-term, not indefinitely, where the NY judges protect the bankers. Trump will NEVER get a fair trial in NYC. From what I saw with others, nobody gets a fair trial in the Second Circuit or State court. When my case began, my lawyer, Richard Altman, said NYC practices law differently. Boy was that an understatement. Nobody should do business with any bank domiciled in NYC.

May 15 2023

Protect The Kids – Powerful Testimony by Democrat Shawn Thierry Texas Bill to Restrict Gender Modification in Children


May 14, 2023 | Sundance 

Texas State House Representative Shawn Thierry, D-Houston, joined with Republicans to support Senate Bill 14 which would restrict gender modification in children. As a Democrat from the Houston area, Mrs. Thierry came under blistering assault from organized alphabet activists in her decision to support the House version of the Texas bill.

Facing threats, ostracization, ridicule and direct personal attacks against her, Ms. Thierry stood against the rage of the mob and voted to support the bill. Explaining her position, Representative Thierry delivered eloquent and powerful remarks on the issue to the House chamber. WATCH:

.

At times it feels like we are living in a dystopian era well beyond the prescient writing of George Orwell.  Indeed, I think we can all feel the shift that has taken place as the battle between commonly accepted right and wrong has morphed into a spiritual battle between good and evil.

Joe Biden was installed as a one-term disposable Cloward-Piven opportunity for the most destructive elements of political activism.  Every left-wing fantasy operation is now enveloping the United States and tearing at the fabric of the nation.  In this era, any Democrat who stands up for moral values with an intent to protect the children becomes a mortal enemy to the tribe of wicked enterprise.  Shawn Thierry should be appreciated for taking a stand against the raging mob.

TEXAS – Texas is one step closer to banning gender-affirming care for transgender minors who live in the state.

On Friday, the Texas House of Representatives voted to preliminarily advance Senate Bill 14, a measure that would prohibit the administration of puberty blockers and hormone therapy to people under 18 years old who are transitioning.

Rep. Tom Oliverson, R-Cypress, told lawmakers from the House floor that he believes gender dysphoria should be treated with counseling rather than gender-affirming care.

“In contrast to experimental medicine and surgery, professional counseling and psychotherapy is a proven alternative that helps children overcome gender dysphoria,” he told lawmakers.

The legislation is one of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s priorities and has already passed the Senate.

Under the Senate version, minors currently on transition-related medical care would have to stop their treatment after the bill goes into effect in September.

The version passed Friday in the Texas House, however, would give transgender minors a period of time to wean off treatment.

Still, trangender-rights advocates say the legislation is hateful and will have a negative effect on the lives of transgender minors.

Sofia Sepulveda, the community engagement and advocacy manager with the LGBTQ advocacy group Equality Texas, said SB 14 is just one of many measures targeting people in the LGBTQ community.

“It feels like every other day there is legislation or there’s a hearing targeting the trans community,” Sepulveda told reporters Friday morning. “We are literally fighting for our lives.”  (read more)

The ideological leftists have gone totally nuts on this issue.

Their activism on the mutilation of children is evil.  These are not issues that can be debated in nuance and soft pastels.

Protect the children.

The mentally ill alphabet people are filled with psychosis.

Where is the Nashville mass murderer’s “Manifesto”?

May 13 2023

Disney Shareholder Dumpster Fire, Bud Light Disaster Spreads | MEitM #403


By Midnight’s Edge Posted ordinally on Rumble on May 12, 2023

May 12 2023

Biden Administration: “Birthing Persons” or “Unpaid Caregivers” are Bad for the Economy


Armstrong Econo9mics Blog/WOKE Re-Posted May 12, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Happy early Mother’s Day to the women in charge with shaping our society. The vital role of a mother, arguably the most important responsibility one can take on, has been dismissed in recent years as society changes drastically. The woke agenda feels that the word “mother” is offensive and wants to replace the term with “birthing persons.” I have not heard anyone refer to fathers as “inseminating persons,” as part of the woke agenda is to eliminate the importance of women in society. Economic conditions have made it nearly impossible for the average family to survive on one income. Yet, those who can and do choose to stay home deserve appreciation for the role they play in our society.

The Biden Administration recently took a jab at stay-at-home mothers, claiming they are hurting our economy. His administration supports sending “free” money to “hard-working families” as long as they are receiving some income tax revenue. The schools can raise our children according to their way of thinking.

“[M]any Americans — particularly women — stay out of the workforce to care for their families, making it hard for businesses to attract and retain a skilled workforce and for the economy to grow. A BCG brief forecasts losses of $290 billion each year in gross domestic product in 2030 and beyond if the U.S. fails to address the lack of affordable child care.”

The cited report from the BCG refers to parenting as “unpaid caregiving” as it lowers the number of taxable workers. Instead of staying home with your children or elderly relative, the government believes you should move into “paid caregiving.” “About 1.8 million critical-care jobs, including nursing assistants, home health aides and childcare workers, are open, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics,” the report noted. The report also noted that these jobs often have terrible pay and poor benefits. Furthermore, the study noted that 40% of caregivers have missed “more than five days of work over the last year simply because their paid-care support has fallen through.” Other countries will laugh at the US for that one. They also talk about implementing a “government-run childcare system that begins at birth.” That is sad prospect. Even dogs have an 8 to 10 week grace period before their puppies can be adopted, a luxury not provided to women living in the financial capital of the world.

Caretaking roles are only seen as essential is they benefit the government. It is almost impossible for one 40-hour salary to support a family comfortably. Preschools and childcare centers often cost more than the salary a parent would bring home. And they wonder why there is a steep decline in the birth rate. The nuclear family has no place in woke America. Whether you stay home or choose a career, a mother’s role is essential.

Ca

May 12 2023

Elon Musk Hires Ultra Woke Linda Yaccarino as CEO of Twitter – Former Head of NBCUniversal Advertising – WEF Board Member – Pioneer of DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) Wokeism


Posted originally on the CTH on May 11, 2023 | Sundance 

Elon Musk has reportedly hired Linda Yaccarino as the CEO of Twitter.  Unfortunately, this decision is the exact opposite of what everyone hoped about Musk’s intentions with the platform.

Ms. Yaccarino is the head of NBCUniversal Advertising and Partnerships [Example Here], and she is the tip of the spear in the creation of DEI (Diversity Equity and Inclusion) indexing and corporate scoring.  You might be familiar with ‘DEI’ as a result of the Bud Light woke advertising campaign to promote beer for transgenders.  Well, that’s DEI in action, and Ms. Yaccarino is one of the pioneers in the advertising industry.

Additionally, Linda Yaccarino is the Chairwoman of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Taskforce on Future of Work.  As she noted in her position, “every CEO and executive needs to look inward, and build workplaces that ensure our employees, current and future, can always succeed amid rapid transformation.” Overlaying the Diversity Equity and Inclusion mindset, you will note Yaccarino says, “long-term benefits for the unemployed, women, and communities of color.”

Why would Elon Musk bring the most woke NBC advertising executive to become the CEO of Twitter?  Obviously, he is focused on generating revenue, and Yaccarino can bring woke credentials to the platform luring corporate advertisers.  Unfortunately, in order to achieve that objective, the platform content will have to be modified.

That means the public square of Twitter needs to become a platform of non-controversial NPCs (Non Player Characters) which generally are identified in memes [SEE HERE].  The content on Twitter must fit an approved standard for advertising. Leading this effort to control platform content through the control of the monetization, is literally what Yaccarino has done in her work at NBCUniversal.  Thus, her efforts to promote DEI take on a new level of importance.

Ms. Yaccarino also supports Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and follows him and his fellow influencers through her Twitter account.  Politically this puts her in alignment with Elon Musk and the acceptable Republican group that promotes the Florida Governor.

Keep in mind, for DeSantis, the “woke issues” are political tools to achieve an objective; nothing more.  Ms. Yaccarino supporting Ron DeSantis is not a misnomer, it’s just politics.

Similarly, for Elon Musk, it appears Ms. Yaccarino brings a greater financial value to the table offsetting any contradictions in his belief system about wokeism as a danger to speech and culture.   Obviously, this hire says Musk is more concerned about revenue generation than actual free speech.

Regarding opposition or alignment with what is colloquially called “wokeism”, Ms. Yaccarino is somewhat of a touchstone.  Her bona fides on DEI make her a subject matter expert on the weaponization of advertising to advance a cultural objective.

Just accept things as they are and not as you might wish them to be.  That way you are not disappointed later.

Accept the Musk selection of Ms. Yaccarino as exactly what it says for the Twitter platform.  First, money is the most important issue right now; revenue generation for Musk is the #1 priority.  Second, the content of the platform will modify accordingly.

[ Yaccarino on Twitter ]

Jun 2 2022

The Rise in Violence – Who to Blame?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Civil Unrest Re-Posted Jun 2, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

While the Texas school shooting is a politician’s dream, for they suddenly can pretend to care and look authoritative, the real culprit here, I fear, has been the COVID-19 lockdowns. What government will not talk about is the statistics. Homicides increased by nearly 30 percent in 2020. Overall, violence and aggravated assaults have increased.

The homicide rates normally increase in the summer months. The real culprit may be the additional social interaction that happens when people spend more time outdoors during the summer months, NewsNation reports. There’s simply a greater number of interactions happening, which means there are also more opportunities for them to go awry.

Everywhere we look, homicides are up. In Chicago, 228 people have been killed this year alone. In Philadelphia, over 200 homicides have already taken place in 2022. Houston exceeded 100 homicides so far in 2022.

The National Library of Medicine reported a drastic increase in homicides post-lockdowns in Peru. Even CNN reported that a series of homicides took place during the first six months of  2021. In 22 cities, the number of murders increased by 16% or greater compared to the same period in 2020 and by 42% compared to the first six months of 2019.

So while the elites are listening to Klaus Schwab, who will probably become an evil villain for a future movie, there is ZERO understanding of human nature. The sharp rise in homicides is NOT because of guns; lockdowns have driven many to extreme behavior and stress. There was a man killed over an argument involving a parking spot. I have a friend who worked in an office in Philadelphia. The violence is so great and random that the staff no longer need to go into the office.

Monkeypox is less deadly than smallpox, with a mortality rate below 4 percent. Nevertheless, there are those in governments actually talking about lockdown 2.0. Johns Hopkins University reported, “Lockdowns in the U.S. and Europe had little or no impact in reducing deaths from COVID-19, according to a new analysis. The lockdowns during the early phase of the pandemic in 2020 reduced COVID-19 mortality by about 0.2%, said a broad review of multiple scientific studies. We find no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures, and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality,” the researchers wrote.

I can say that I was tested for COVID-19 five times, and all were negative. I was still thrown into a COVID wing in the hospital, and when I explained I knew nobody with COVID, I was told that it did not matter. The nurses said it could travel in the air or I could have contracted it from pumping gas into my car. So I asked, “Do masks do not work?” They said, “Pretty much.” I asked why I needed TWO negative tests to be released. “Does one test not work?” They admitted that the tests were invalid. So after FIVE negative tests, they said, “OK, but we still think you had it.”

Another friend said his son in his early 20s is lost. Since the lockdowns, he stayed in his room, glued to social media. He will no longer have a conversation with his father. These lockdowns not only FAILED to work, but they appear to have caused significant damage psychologically to many, and the stress appears to have manifested in violence. It is time we face the fact that guns do not kill — people do. We need to respect what is taking place and stop the experiments for political power. Our computer’s forecast of a rise in civil unrest is manifesting before our very eyes.

May 8 2022

CNN Claims Pro-Life Supporters Will Turn Violent with SCOTUS Victory, Amish Extremists now Threatening ANTIFA Peacekeepers


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 7, 2022 | Sundance

No, it’s not opposite day.  This example is just another example of how the Ministry of Truth operates.  Political violence is speech, unless actual speech is heard from their opposition; then, it becomes violence.  War is peace. Water is dry, etc. George Orwell sighs. {Direct Rumble Link}

Knowing there is an increased likelihood of violence incited by far-left democrat activists and the White House, CNN moves their advance narrative engineering team into place to lay the blame for violence at the feet of their political opposition.  With Roe -v- Wade potentially being overturned, Amish extremists are now going to lay siege to the peaceful assembly of ANTIFA in DC, or something equally stupid.  WATCH:

.

If the issues were not serious, this nonsense from CNN would be funny.  Far left activists have been threatening the Supreme Court justices and the White House has been provoking their political allies to keep up the anger against the court.  As a result, every sub-chapter of leftist political activism has been triggered to a state of rage and grievance.  The rhetoric and hatred expressed toward the justices on the court has been extreme.

However, CNN redefines the mob by calling them “right-wing”, the exact opposite of who is making the threats.

Keep in mind, none of the previous ANTIFA or Black Lives Matter violence could take place without the expressed support from the FBI.  If the FBI wanted to stop riots, political violence or the unlawful intimidation of federal judges, they could.

It would be very easy for the FBI to intercept the people making threats and arrest them for intimidation of federal judges.  18 U.S.C. § 1503 – Whoever . . . corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be (guilty of an offense).”   The reason the FBI and DOJ are staying silent, is because the FBI and DOJ support the targeting of the Supreme Court.  It really is that simple.

It should be alarming how the Executive Branch of the United States Government is openly targeting the Judicial Branch of the United States Government, but that point seems to be completely missed by everyone.   U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland standing aside while extremists in the democrat party attack supreme court justices only highlights how political the DOJ and FBI have become.

Last night, Fox News host Tucker Carlson drew attention to the media portrayal and the violent targeting now condoned by DHS, DOJ, FBI and the White House. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:

.

Mar 11 2022

Jussie Smollett Goes Bananas in Courtroom After Sentence of 150 Days in Cook County Jail, Effective Immediately


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on March 10, 2022 | Sundance

Hate crime hoaxer Jussie Smollett was fined $25,000, ordered to pay $120,106 in restitution, given 30 months of felony probation and sentenced to spend the next 150 days in the Cook County jail – to begin immediately.

Smollett went bananas after he was asked by Cook County Judge James Linn if he had any questions, shouting “Your honor, I respect you, and I respect the jury, but I did not do this. And I am not suicidal. And if anything happens to me when I go in there, I did not do it to myself. And you must all know that.”  As deputies led him from the courtroom, Smollett shouted out again.  “I am innocent,” he yelled, raising his first. “I could have said I am guilty a long time ago.” [AP Report HERE]  WATCH:

Nov 25 2021

Guilty Verdicts Delivered Against All Three Men in the Murder of Ahmaud Arbery


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 24, 2021 | Sundance | 276 Comments

A Georgia jury has found all three suspects in the shooting of Ahmaud Arbery guilty of murder. Travis McMichael, Gregory McMichael and William Bryan were all found guilty of murder.  Arbery was a black male victim and all three suspects -who claimed to be attempting to make a citizens arrest were white males.

Accusations of racism have propagated the framework of the case and the jury heard evidence that racism was a factor.  As with the Rittenhouse verdict, this verdict in Georgia was accurate to the details of the case.

GEORGIA – […] The jury found Travis McMichael, who fatally shot Arbery on Feb. 23, 2020, in a Brunswick, Ga., neighborhood, guilty of all nine counts brought against him, including malice murder.

His father Gregory McMichael, who was with him at the time of the shooting, was found guilty of four counts of felony murder, two counts of aggravated assault, one count of false imprisonment and one count of criminal attempt to commit a felony. 

William “Roddie” Bryan, who recorded the incident, was found guilty of three counts of felony murder, one count of aggravated assault, one count of false imprisonment and one count of criminal attempt to commit a felony. (read more)

Unfortunately, this case is again being exploited by a culturally Marxist media and those who promote race as a divisive business model.   The verdict against the three men was justified and accurate to the horrific events that culminated in the death of Arbery.  However, the exploitation of Arbery’s death to advance the divisive issue of race is destructive and damaging.

In the recent Waukesha, Wisconsin, mass killing and slaughter of people at the Christmas parade, the media went out of their way to deny the motive of race, because the accused driver of the vehicle, Darrell Edward Brooks Jr, was a black male targeting white people.  The racial motive was/is intentionally downplayed.

Contrast that purposeful media framework against the media narrative against Kyle Rittenhouse, a situation that had nothing whatsoever to do with race, and then overlay the events around the Arbery case, and it is clear the media has an agenda to promote racism in one direction only.

The New York Post provides one of multiple examples of the double standard that creates toxic division and conflict:

(story link)

Racism was likely a large part of the motive in the Georgia killing of Ahmaud Arbery, and The New York Post leads with that aspect.  However, racism was also likely the motive for Darrell Brooks in Waukesha Wisconsin, and yet the media avoids that entirely.

Race is only used as a promotional hook for the media story when the attacker is white and the victim is black.   When the races are reversed, the attacker is black and the victim white, suddenly political correctness dictates the racial dynamic is not safe for public discussion.  This type of cultural Marxism only makes racial animosity worse.

It is a very sad state of affairs when social division is beneficial for political and electoral manipulation.  Much of this intentional manipulation is what you find when you look into the conduct of the DOJ Community Relations Service (CRS), an agency within the DOJ civil rights division.

When the perpetrator is black and the victim(s) are white – the CRS activates quickly to instruct media and the judiciary system how to handle the racial component; the CRS goal is to downplay race as a motive.   However, when the perpetrator is white and the victim(s) black – the CRS activates to support the professional grievance activists who thrive on racism as a business model.  By approaching things this way, the DOJ-CRS actually flames racial animosity, the exact opposite of their presumed mission.

All of this is very unsettling… and THAT division is the tool of Marxists, in politics and media.

Sep 28 2021

Friends – Who Needs Them?


Armstrong Economics Blog/New Norm Re-Posted Sep 28, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

QUESTION:  Marty, computers in schools started to appear in the ’90’s. Do you see any relationship between societal shifts and classroom learning? Bill Gates influence?

LP

ANSWER: I don’t think so. I outfitted the grade school I went to with computers in the early 90s. I think it improved their skills to be able to function in the 21st century. However, the introduction of smartphones has changed the game. Now a 7-year-old is teaching their mother, who was in those classes in the 90s, how to forward and take pictures. There are a lot of studies now showing that young adults have fewer friends. Then there are studies saying that the average American has not made a new friend in 5 years.

I live on the beach. I see people walking the beach alone while on the phone. It is rather strange.