Jews in the attic example

Via email Bob Reynolds points out:

Here’s one for the “Jews in the attic” category:

From the article:

“This is not King County going and grabbing this data, you know, big brother watching what you buy at the grocery store,” said Satterfield.

Instead, the county said they pay the company who pays stores such as Safeway and QFC for access to customer data contained in every one of those reward card swipes.

Satterfield seems to think that paying someone to do it for you means you are “not doing it”.

From my Jews in the Attic Test web page we have an example which predicts the result Bob points out:

Elimination or severe restriction of anonymous financial transactions.  The purchase of food and other supplies for your “Jews in the attic” would show up in the records as being excessive compared to what your needs were.


11 thoughts on “Jews in the attic example

  1. From my close friend who works for KC animal control: “So the agency has bought mailing lists from a company that sells these lists based on certain criteria like buying pet food, toys, etc. in order to boost levels of license sales. The King County Council ordered my director to boost revenue and this particular approach has resulted in 11% new license sales.”

    It’s a fishing expedition to put pressure on people to “voluntarily” pay.

      • I’ve been using “Otto Frank” with a phone number from a nearby city’s Coroner’s Office, with address to match, but I’ve been reluctant to give up my credit card points. I’m going to have to rethink that.

        But I think the “Jews in the Attic Test” is the real reason the Soviets had rationing even before “The Great Patriotic War” gave it to the USSR right in the breadbasket. “The Forsaken” has a paragraph in which some US official was being driven somewhere during a winter, with “badly stacked wood” on the sides of the road. His driver said that wasn’t wood, but people who had had enough and wanted to go somewhere they didn’t need ration points, only money, to go to a restaurant. They didn’t make it; the Russian winter got them.

        • “Otto Frank” — that’s a good test of people’s awareness of history.
          Re badly stacked wood, that illustrates Trotsky’s observation of what the real goal is for all these schemes: “In a country where the sole employer is the State, opposition means death by slow starvation: The old principle: who does not work shall not eat, has been replaced by a new one: who does not obey shall not eat.” — Leon Trotsky, 1937

  2. You seem to mention these sorts of things as though informing an armed robber that, a) he’s breaking the law, b) his pointing a gun at you is rude and dangerous, and c) that what he’s doing is immoral and unfair.

    That the growing surveillance network can be, is, and will be used to nudge, control, rob, harass or otherwise fuck with people, is a feature, not a bug. It’s the whole idea. That some people have been bamboozled into believing otherwise is also a feature, and a rather necessary one. So what’s your point?

    My point is that I wonder if you’ve grasped the fact that we’re in an all-out war, being fought in ways that make us sit down and never fight back – the Progressive way. You point to some predictable and obvious enemy action and say, “Heyyyy! That’s not fair! Don’t you know someone could get hurt?!!”

    Well….yeah. That’s the whole point of waging war. You think the anti-Americans are going to just haul off around the year 1900 or 1910 and start shooting? Here? The little fancy boy sissy turd helpless know-nothing weakling pissed off jealous envious communists of the world? They’d have have been slaughtered and hung out to dry as examples to the rest of the world, and they knew that.

    • I mention it to motivate people to take action. I do it by giving false information or avoiding those stores. By properly motivating others other alternatives and perhaps long term solutions may become available.

  3. Some of the comments to that article were telling in their compliance. I don’t remember the verbiage exactly, but one woman said something to the effect of, “Oh, well, nothing is really private anymore, so I guess it doesn’t really bother me.”

    Completely oblivious to what she really is experiencing with this stupidness.

Comments are closed.