Aggregator
Cara Delevingne finally breaks silence on rumored Amber Heard romance
Hakeem Jeffries handed himself over to the DSA on a plate, and the comrades will gladly eat him for breakfast
Venezuelan Housing Projects Collapsed "Like Sandcastles" As Twin Quakes Expose Socialist Rot
Spanish daily newspaper ABC.es reports that some of the worst quake damage in Venezuela is concentrated in Caraballeda and Catia La Mar, where high-rise towers built under the Great Housing Mission Venezuela, or Gran Misión Vivienda Venezuela (GMVV), were reduced to rubble.
The Chávez-era socialist housing program is now facing scrutiny after the outlet noted, "The explanation given by engineers and construction specialists is that low-quality materials were used in the Chavista Housing Mission, without supervision and without applying anti-seismic standards."
GMVV was later expanded by the socialist Maduro regime without regard for the quality of building materials or anti-seismic standards, leaving only a handful of the 193 buildings in one housing complex in quake-ravaged Catia La Mar standing.
The devastating earthquakes in Venezuela exposed exactly how the socialist government built housing for their people. Look at this video from La Guaira.
The buildings in the Misión Vivienda program were constructed using expanded polystyrene (EPS) panels coated with a thin layer… pic.twitter.com/N4qLX7W3Xa
"None of the official buildings would withstand an engineering inspection, much less an earthquake of magnitude 7.5, like the one last Wednesday," the outlet stated.
Según múltiples reportes independientes y testimonios de las zonas afectadas confirman que #HechoEnSucialismo es: muerte, destrucción y dolor
Las propiedades de la #MisionVivienda son las que mayormente se han caído o sufrido daños sustanciales (si no se han derrumbado)
Una… pic.twitter.com/DT0AMEuNUi
Transparency Venezuela has previously alleged widespread corruption in the socialist housing program, including unfinished or failed projects linked to foreign contractors from Chavismo-aligned countries.
The outlet said many of these social housing projects "collapsed like sandcastles," and the head of the Chilean rescue teams on the ground told AFP News last Friday that there is "little chance of finding people alive."
A satellite image reveals the collapse of five residential buildings of the Housing Mission in Venezuela 🇻🇪 pic.twitter.com/mBQRQEThPA
— BowTiedMara (@BowTiedMara) June 27, 2026The collapse of Venezuela's GMVV is becoming another case study in how socialist corruption fails at delivering even the most basic needs for the people. What was sold by the left-wing government as housing for all now appears to have produced high-rise death traps, built with low-quality materials, weak oversight and inadequate seismic standards.
The result is grim: 1,500 dead, 50,000 missing...
Yet another example of socialist governance has instead become a symbol of state failure and corruption.
Tyler Durden Mon, 06/29/2026 - 18:50Americans name our greatest contribution over last 250 years — and list a surprising food as ‘most ‘American’
Dodgers star Tyler Glasnow’s bikini-clad wife Meghan flaunts pregnant belly during beach day
Supreme Court decision on late ballots underlines need for voter ID
‘The Office’ star opens Honey Baked Ham store in SoCal: ‘Did I stutter?’
Too much screentime for young kids will harm their ability to properly learn later, study reveals
3 injured in Monaco after makeshift bomb explodes in street, police hunting for suspect
Inspiring student graduates high school while using telepresence robot
Knicks sign Landry Shamet to a four-year deal
Warriors master offseason plan includes LeBron James and Anthony Davis
Guy takes a drink for every place that went out of business at Third Street Promenade: ‘RIP Santa Monica’
Builders Vs. Gatekeepers
Authored by Monty Donohew via American Thinker,
A viral X post by @r0ck3t23 featuring Marc Andreessen hopes to ignite fresh debate in tech and political circles. In the clip, Andreessen articulates a blunt frustration familiar to anyone who has tried to build anything substantial in modern America: "Right now, in many cases in many places, no you can't." The target is regulatory gridlock preventing factories, data centers, and, specifically the colocated nuclear microreactors many believe are needed to power the AI boom.
The post's thesis is provocative. The old left-right divide is "obsolete." The real conflict pits "builders" and "accelerators," those engineering abundance through atoms and computing power, against "gatekeepers" who would freeze progress. The gatekeepers are comprised of environmentalists on one side, armed with environmental regulation that has strangled nuclear power for decades. On the other are the populist skeptics of rapid AI rollout exemplified by Bernie Sanders and Tucker Carlson. They meet, the argument goes, in a horseshoe of fear opposing the physical infrastructure the future demands.
This framing deserves consideration. America's permitting regime is a national liability. Decades of NEPA reviews, endless environmental litigation, and bureaucratic risk aversion have delayed or killed projects that should be straightforward. Nuclear power offers a stark case study. France derives most of its electricity from nuclear, with a far cleaner grid and lower costs in key metrics. America, despite superior resources and early ambition (recall Nixon-era Project Independence targeting a thousand reactors), effectively built zero new plants for forty years after creating the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Recent executive actions under President Trump aim to reform NRC licensing with deadlines and streamlined processes, reform that is both welcome and overdue.
Andreessen is right that colocated microreactors could elegantly solve the power demands of AI data centers, bypassing strained grids and delivering reliable, high-density energy. Tech leaders' interest in advanced nuclear aligns with broader national security goals: reducing dependence on adversarial supply chains, bolstering baseload power, and maintaining a technological edge against China. Regulatory gridlock has real costs in lost opportunity, higher energy prices, and strategic vulnerability.
Yet the post's sweeping narrative, that skeptics of unchecked acceleration are primarily "fighting physics" or the future, itself invites scrutiny. It risks collapsing into a Solvency Trap: a dynamic where solvable governance challenges are recast as permanent existential blockades, sustaining urgency and aligned interests while sidelining trade-offs, evidence of costs, and pragmatic safeguards. Real problems with hyperscale AI data centers exist beyond knee-jerk Luddism. They include grid reliability, massive water consumption (billions of gallons annually), localized electricity price spikes for residents and small businesses, community impacts, and job displacement in traditional sectors. These are not imaginary.
Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act proposes abandoning reason, planning, and problem-solving in favor of a potentially perpetual and unyielding pause on all new construction until broader safeguards address worker effects, privacy, civil rights, and environmental strain. One can reject the hysterical blanket moratorium as overreach while acknowledging that underlying concerns nonetheless merit consideration and debate. Sanders' equity-focused critique of Big Tech concentration, nonetheless, differs in motivation from Carlson's populist emphasis on taxpayer subsidies, rural community burdens, and skepticism of elite-driven disruption benefiting hyperscalers at ordinary Americans' expense. Their convergence on caution is emergent, not a secret "alliance." Presenting it as such adds conspiratorial flair but flattens distinct worldviews. It also unnecessarily sows division and invites dismissal of valid concerns by improperly linking them to those with invalid or meritless ideological axes to grind.
Populist wariness of taxpayer-backed incentives for private data centers, projects that can span tens of thousands of acres and consume city-scale power while delivering limited direct local jobs, echoes longstanding conservative skepticism of corporate welfare. Carlson's clashes with advocates like Kevin O'Leary highlight legitimate questions: Why should working families subsidize infrastructure primarily enriching coastal tech giants? Accelerationists rightly decry regulatory capture by legacy environmental interests. But dismissing all distributional and prudential concerns as mere "fear" risks its own form of capture by venture incentives and hype cycles.
Civilization is indeed atoms arranged by those who show up. But prudent stewardship demands more than velocity. The history of nuclear energy proves regulation can become abolition in disguise, yet safety, waste management, proliferation risks, and public confidence cannot simply be waved away with rhetoric about "deleting limits." Successful deployment requires reformed but serious oversight that is evidence-based, time-bound, and focused on outcomes rather than process theater. Trump's return to regulatory realism is the right step. The same applies to AI governance: rapid progress toward abundance is desirable, but experiments with alignment, security, and societal integration benefit from evidence- based and targeted guardrails rather than pure velocity.
The builders' energy is vital. America must reclaim its capacity to execute at scale, permitting reform, nuclear revival, and domestic manufacturing resurgence. Trump administration moves on NRC and energy dominance point the way. Yet the path forward is not a binary purge of gatekeepers but disciplined solvency: measurable progress on energy abundance, worker transitions, community buy-in, and risk mitigation that delivers broad-based flourishing, not concentrated gains amid diffuse costs.
Tyler Durden Mon, 06/29/2026 - 18:25