Friend of mine said 3M was thinking of leaving Minnesot and the US.
I didn't want to post it on account it was heresay.
Guess it wasn't.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Do Something .Org
Because;
1. Studying
2. Playing sports
3. Working a part time job
4. Going to college
5. Supporting yourself
6. Spending time with friends
7. Playing video games
8. Or just plain being a normal high school kid
Isn't enough.
You need to "Do Something!"
Found this at a local high school. It's nothing more than leftist brainwashing. But what is so despicable is how the left purposely targets the young as they are too stupid to know any better.
What scares me is how many companies obviously just donated money to them despite, in the long run, participants in "Do Something" will simply vote for higher corporate taxes.
1. Studying
2. Playing sports
3. Working a part time job
4. Going to college
5. Supporting yourself
6. Spending time with friends
7. Playing video games
8. Or just plain being a normal high school kid
Isn't enough.
You need to "Do Something!"
Found this at a local high school. It's nothing more than leftist brainwashing. But what is so despicable is how the left purposely targets the young as they are too stupid to know any better.
What scares me is how many companies obviously just donated money to them despite, in the long run, participants in "Do Something" will simply vote for higher corporate taxes.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Chimney Sweeper > Communications Major
Chimney maker makes $240 an hour.
Starbucks "Barrrrrrrrristas" make considerably less.
This concludes your lesson in basic economics.
Starbucks "Barrrrrrrrristas" make considerably less.
This concludes your lesson in basic economics.
Breaking the Social Contract, Gone Fishin', Teacher Union Math and More
Linkfest!
A rather succinct summary of enjoying the decline. (though the Captain does NOT endorse the Bon Jovi lameness at the end)
Haley goes to a hell that makes Normandy on a rainy June day in 1944 look good.
Progression of Egyptian graduates from 1959 to Present (Just four photos to look at and a very quick post).
How teachers unions do math.
We're still not at 5 months supply, so expect housing prices to continue down.
Can we just "turn down the rhetoric?" Thank god Althouse is on the ground.
And Grerp! You're supposed to ENJOY the decline, not fear it! Embrace the decline. The decline is your friend.
Retro Captain!
A rather succinct summary of enjoying the decline. (though the Captain does NOT endorse the Bon Jovi lameness at the end)
Haley goes to a hell that makes Normandy on a rainy June day in 1944 look good.
Progression of Egyptian graduates from 1959 to Present (Just four photos to look at and a very quick post).
How teachers unions do math.
We're still not at 5 months supply, so expect housing prices to continue down.
Can we just "turn down the rhetoric?" Thank god Althouse is on the ground.
And Grerp! You're supposed to ENJOY the decline, not fear it! Embrace the decline. The decline is your friend.
Retro Captain!
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Aren't You Glad You "Stuck it to the Man?"
Hope protesting in the 60's was worth it.
Because in the end what drives your 401k's is corporate profits.
Not going green.
Not overburdensome regulations.
Not higher corporate tax rates.
Filed under, "Jim Morrison died on a toilet bowl"
Because in the end what drives your 401k's is corporate profits.
Not going green.
Not overburdensome regulations.
Not higher corporate tax rates.
Filed under, "Jim Morrison died on a toilet bowl"
Monday, February 21, 2011
Glad I Had a Vasectomy
If for any other reason my would-be-child does not have to suffer the mental-carpet-bag this poor kid is going to become when he gets older. Read the whole article and you will see why I'm happy I'm out of the genetic propagation race.
hat tip.
hat tip.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Liars, Cheats and Teacher's Unions
I shall be short and sweet with this because it is that simple.
In the many articles you can find about the Madison protests, of all that is insulting and angers me the most is when I hear the various unions, protesters and teachers say, "We're fighting for democracy."
No you aren't.
Democracy is where the majority rules.
You are by default tyrants and oppressors.
The majority of the population in Wisconsin has voted in Republicans and, among other things, they are going to reel back what is frankly huge overpayment to a corrupt union. Fighting against it, to the point cowards flee from their responsibility to "hide" is the DEFINITION of TYRANNY. Of course these corrupt officials and the idiot protesters who support them, frankly do not have the maturity or intellectual honesty to adhere to democracy.
Additionally, I will post two charts that should be in every state capitol and in the hands of every state legislator and every governor, so please feel free to send them. They are for Minnesota, but I'm quite sure the statistics would hold for any state;
Do not tell me you need more money or that it's horrible you have to pay for your own damn pensions.
In the many articles you can find about the Madison protests, of all that is insulting and angers me the most is when I hear the various unions, protesters and teachers say, "We're fighting for democracy."
No you aren't.
Democracy is where the majority rules.
You are by default tyrants and oppressors.
The majority of the population in Wisconsin has voted in Republicans and, among other things, they are going to reel back what is frankly huge overpayment to a corrupt union. Fighting against it, to the point cowards flee from their responsibility to "hide" is the DEFINITION of TYRANNY. Of course these corrupt officials and the idiot protesters who support them, frankly do not have the maturity or intellectual honesty to adhere to democracy.
Additionally, I will post two charts that should be in every state capitol and in the hands of every state legislator and every governor, so please feel free to send them. They are for Minnesota, but I'm quite sure the statistics would hold for any state;
Do not tell me you need more money or that it's horrible you have to pay for your own damn pensions.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Mandating Charts by Law in All Reuters Articles
Reuters reports "Housing Starts SURGE in January!"
Does this look like a $#$ing surge to you people at Reuters?
You shameless political shills.
I swear, when I am king there will be a law passed that forces all media reporting on the economy to provide the corresponding chart or link to a chart that shows the data.
File under "The Cancer is Spreading Less Slowly"
Does this look like a $#$ing surge to you people at Reuters?
You shameless political shills.
I swear, when I am king there will be a law passed that forces all media reporting on the economy to provide the corresponding chart or link to a chart that shows the data.
File under "The Cancer is Spreading Less Slowly"
The End of Political Correctness
I believe as the economy continues to collapse and people's futures continue to look bleak, people will have no economic incentive any longer to be politically correct and will instead just start speaking the truth.
For example.
Hat tip.
For example.
Hat tip.
The Death of an Entrepreneur
Let me tell you about Bill and then I have to bolt.
Bill is my buddy and my realtor. I've known him a long time as I've been in real estate a long time. And ever since I've known him he's been an entrepreneur. He's been in real estate, works hard and has always been on the look out for what we call "Cunning Plans" as a reference to the Black Adder Comedy Troupe.
His "cunning plans" included grandiose things like boosting some of the poorer communities by bulldozing the worst neighborhoods and putting a golf course right in the middle while building around the periphery of the course condos to house those displaced.
Another was to analyze and identify key houses in the richest of neighborhoods, purchasing them and housing ex-cons and loud youth in them to drive prices in the neighborhood down, only to repurchase the land, kick the criminals out and resell the properties at a markup.
Whatever the case, he was always thinking, planning and scheming coming up with new ideas.
No longer.
Now he's gone into complete defense mode. His purchases and "investments" are not really investments at all, but food supplies, survival gear and potentially finding a safe house. Admittedly he's gone a little further down the "society collapsing" route than I have, but be it him, me or any other young entrepreneur, there is a HUGE ramification that just dawned on me.
The entrepreneurs are no longer entrepreneuring. They've stopped.
Now, if you study economics enough, you will realize that what REALLY advances economies and societies is NOT working harder and more efficient. It is revolutionary ideas, largely led by entrepreneurs and youth, that revolutionize society and produce massive amounts of wealth (ergo why I support STEM degrees and advocate the elimination of liberal arts and other such worthless degree and programs).
Regardless, the juxtaposition of talking to Bill the other day and what the clueless leaders in Washington say is hilarious, though sad. Obama wants a "sputnik moment." He also wants to "win the future" and his rosy budget forecasts rely on 5% RGDP growth in the future. Our governor, Mark Dayton in his speech hailed a "generation of greatness."
Not without the likes of Bill.
For idiots such as Mark Dayton and Barack Obama who never work a real job in their lives and have never produced an ounce of genuine economic production (both trust fund babies), think they can simply "order" "greatness" and "sputnik moments." They don't realize they need to get out of the way, shut up, lower taxes and make the country hospitable to future entrepreneurs. They also don't realize that the single biggest fear driving away investment and future entrepreneurs is that damn deficit and the forever increasing likelihood of economic collapse.
And until that happens, you can expect Bill to store nuts for a horrible economic winter instead of start up another company and employing people.
Enjoy the decline!
Bill is my buddy and my realtor. I've known him a long time as I've been in real estate a long time. And ever since I've known him he's been an entrepreneur. He's been in real estate, works hard and has always been on the look out for what we call "Cunning Plans" as a reference to the Black Adder Comedy Troupe.
His "cunning plans" included grandiose things like boosting some of the poorer communities by bulldozing the worst neighborhoods and putting a golf course right in the middle while building around the periphery of the course condos to house those displaced.
Another was to analyze and identify key houses in the richest of neighborhoods, purchasing them and housing ex-cons and loud youth in them to drive prices in the neighborhood down, only to repurchase the land, kick the criminals out and resell the properties at a markup.
Whatever the case, he was always thinking, planning and scheming coming up with new ideas.
No longer.
Now he's gone into complete defense mode. His purchases and "investments" are not really investments at all, but food supplies, survival gear and potentially finding a safe house. Admittedly he's gone a little further down the "society collapsing" route than I have, but be it him, me or any other young entrepreneur, there is a HUGE ramification that just dawned on me.
The entrepreneurs are no longer entrepreneuring. They've stopped.
Now, if you study economics enough, you will realize that what REALLY advances economies and societies is NOT working harder and more efficient. It is revolutionary ideas, largely led by entrepreneurs and youth, that revolutionize society and produce massive amounts of wealth (ergo why I support STEM degrees and advocate the elimination of liberal arts and other such worthless degree and programs).
Regardless, the juxtaposition of talking to Bill the other day and what the clueless leaders in Washington say is hilarious, though sad. Obama wants a "sputnik moment." He also wants to "win the future" and his rosy budget forecasts rely on 5% RGDP growth in the future. Our governor, Mark Dayton in his speech hailed a "generation of greatness."
Not without the likes of Bill.
For idiots such as Mark Dayton and Barack Obama who never work a real job in their lives and have never produced an ounce of genuine economic production (both trust fund babies), think they can simply "order" "greatness" and "sputnik moments." They don't realize they need to get out of the way, shut up, lower taxes and make the country hospitable to future entrepreneurs. They also don't realize that the single biggest fear driving away investment and future entrepreneurs is that damn deficit and the forever increasing likelihood of economic collapse.
And until that happens, you can expect Bill to store nuts for a horrible economic winter instead of start up another company and employing people.
Enjoy the decline!
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
I Support the Teachers
A teacher who has the courage to speak her mind about public education and then is lambasted by the school administration?
Damn right I'll link to her.
Filed under, "Institutions trying to violate your freedom of speech if they don't agree with it and threaten to fire you for having an opinion."
Damn right I'll link to her.
Filed under, "Institutions trying to violate your freedom of speech if they don't agree with it and threaten to fire you for having an opinion."
Monday, February 14, 2011
Good Journalism
In preparation for a speech I will be holding at the U of Minnesota, I spent a fair amount of time looking up University salaries as a means to gauge education inflation.
I came across this piece put together by the Minnesota Daily (the student newspaper) that was heartening in that it was;
1. Well written
2. Relevant
3. An actual example of good journalism
Sadly there are no comments on the site which leads me to believe such work largely falls on deaf ears in the university world.
I came across this piece put together by the Minnesota Daily (the student newspaper) that was heartening in that it was;
1. Well written
2. Relevant
3. An actual example of good journalism
Sadly there are no comments on the site which leads me to believe such work largely falls on deaf ears in the university world.
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Why You Should Be Against "Male Studies"
I didn't think it would exist because of inherent male psychology, but it does. Found it on one of the manosphere blogs and I can't remember which, but it's come to this;
Male Studies.
So let me explain this as short and succinctly as I can.
Male studies should not exist.
Not because men aren't important.
Not because aspects of society aren't assailing and assaulting men.
And because not that we shouldn't be calling attention to the plight men have.
Male studies should not exist because the concept of having a "male studies" degree or program is antithetical to being male.
Men solve problems. Men are direct and to the point. Men are practical.
Ergo, the idea of having a "male studies" program in college is inane. It doesn't solve the problem, but instead is simply a side-show that distracts from the main issues. It's a means to profit off of the naive feelings and emotions of kids who lack the intellectual rigor to study a real discipline in college, but enough of their parents money they can afford not to (just like women's studies, or any hyphenated American studies). It does nothing to help its participants.
To champion "male causes" or fight against "the war on boys" the tools already exist in the form of the public forum. The internet, the media, your legislators, the judicial system and (above all) your personal decisions are all one needs to help the cause of men.
The idea of making it a "science" or a "discipline," where no doubt taxpayer money would be used, is frankly insulting and beneath all real men and their standards everywhere. Besides, in creating a "male studies" program, how are we now any different than those who participate in a "womens studies" program?
Male Studies.
So let me explain this as short and succinctly as I can.
Male studies should not exist.
Not because men aren't important.
Not because aspects of society aren't assailing and assaulting men.
And because not that we shouldn't be calling attention to the plight men have.
Male studies should not exist because the concept of having a "male studies" degree or program is antithetical to being male.
Men solve problems. Men are direct and to the point. Men are practical.
Ergo, the idea of having a "male studies" program in college is inane. It doesn't solve the problem, but instead is simply a side-show that distracts from the main issues. It's a means to profit off of the naive feelings and emotions of kids who lack the intellectual rigor to study a real discipline in college, but enough of their parents money they can afford not to (just like women's studies, or any hyphenated American studies). It does nothing to help its participants.
To champion "male causes" or fight against "the war on boys" the tools already exist in the form of the public forum. The internet, the media, your legislators, the judicial system and (above all) your personal decisions are all one needs to help the cause of men.
The idea of making it a "science" or a "discipline," where no doubt taxpayer money would be used, is frankly insulting and beneath all real men and their standards everywhere. Besides, in creating a "male studies" program, how are we now any different than those who participate in a "womens studies" program?
Saturday, February 12, 2011
It's Tough to Pay Taxes Without a Job
Which is why I refuse to make more than $30,000 per year and instead take 2 month vacations out West on my motorcycle because, well, even if I wanted to work more;
1. Nobody's hiring and
2. Why would I do such a thing when i'd only get to keep half the extra money.
1. Nobody's hiring and
2. Why would I do such a thing when i'd only get to keep half the extra money.
More Courting Advice from the Captain
Recessions are great things in that they force reality upon people.
Oh sure, little Suzie, you can major in communications with a minor in Ethiopian-Czech-American-History. But if a recession comes, you'll be living with mommy and daddy once again (whilst no doubt spouting how independent you are).
But for men (and those women of a certain mechanical nature) recessions do two things that do actually provide an upshot;
1. They cut your income
2. They increase the amount of free time
These two factors forces you to consider a long lost art from the Manly Men of Yore;
Fixing and repairing things.
With less income, you can't afford to fix your motorcycle.
With more time, you CAN learn how to fix it yourself.
And if you combine all these factors, you may actually come out financially ahead on account you are at a lower income tax bracket, but still have the same disposable income because you're fixing things on your own.
For example the Captain is rapidly become an excellent motorcycle mechanic. Advantages?
1. Saving tons of money.
2. Learning a new skill.
3. Increased sexual attraction from the ladies (and no, I'm not making that up, you just see what happens when you walk back inside the house all mucked up in grease and sweat and see what happens)
Or another example, I installed my own wood burning stove. Advantages?
1. Saving money on heat bills (TONS of money on account I live in Minnesota).
2. Learning new carpentry skills.
3. Increased sexual attraction from the ladies (not just because you are being manly constructing new things, but the ladies do seem to like nice warm fires on cold, blustery winter nights)
It is here men, that regardless of your occupation or profession, you must learn some blue collar skills. Not just to save money or prepare for an inevitable decline of the country where a Mad Max world would be upon us. And not just for the psychological benefit that comes with actually producing something (of which Barry O knows nothing about). But because it is a huge advantage in the dating world.
Go to any university and there's little Suzie (once again majoring in 13th Century Feminist Interpretive Dance). She's a cutie and her car breaks down. Oh no! Who will save Cutsie Suzie?
Will it be Tanner Jones-Feelingsman, a fellow 13th Century Feminist Interpretive Dance major, and sensitive 90's man extraordinaire?
Will it be Gaylan McHippie-Goatee, a poetry major whose parents couldn't teach him the difference between a phillips or a flat head screw driver, but he uses a reusable bag when he goes to Whole Foods?
Or will it be Mike Jones, regular ole American guy whose dad, instead of giving him a free ride through college, bought him a Stanely Tool set and taught him how to fix cars?
You young men figure that one out.
Oh sure, little Suzie, you can major in communications with a minor in Ethiopian-Czech-American-History. But if a recession comes, you'll be living with mommy and daddy once again (whilst no doubt spouting how independent you are).
But for men (and those women of a certain mechanical nature) recessions do two things that do actually provide an upshot;
1. They cut your income
2. They increase the amount of free time
These two factors forces you to consider a long lost art from the Manly Men of Yore;
Fixing and repairing things.
With less income, you can't afford to fix your motorcycle.
With more time, you CAN learn how to fix it yourself.
And if you combine all these factors, you may actually come out financially ahead on account you are at a lower income tax bracket, but still have the same disposable income because you're fixing things on your own.
For example the Captain is rapidly become an excellent motorcycle mechanic. Advantages?
1. Saving tons of money.
2. Learning a new skill.
3. Increased sexual attraction from the ladies (and no, I'm not making that up, you just see what happens when you walk back inside the house all mucked up in grease and sweat and see what happens)
Or another example, I installed my own wood burning stove. Advantages?
1. Saving money on heat bills (TONS of money on account I live in Minnesota).
2. Learning new carpentry skills.
3. Increased sexual attraction from the ladies (not just because you are being manly constructing new things, but the ladies do seem to like nice warm fires on cold, blustery winter nights)
It is here men, that regardless of your occupation or profession, you must learn some blue collar skills. Not just to save money or prepare for an inevitable decline of the country where a Mad Max world would be upon us. And not just for the psychological benefit that comes with actually producing something (of which Barry O knows nothing about). But because it is a huge advantage in the dating world.
Go to any university and there's little Suzie (once again majoring in 13th Century Feminist Interpretive Dance). She's a cutie and her car breaks down. Oh no! Who will save Cutsie Suzie?
Will it be Tanner Jones-Feelingsman, a fellow 13th Century Feminist Interpretive Dance major, and sensitive 90's man extraordinaire?
Will it be Gaylan McHippie-Goatee, a poetry major whose parents couldn't teach him the difference between a phillips or a flat head screw driver, but he uses a reusable bag when he goes to Whole Foods?
Or will it be Mike Jones, regular ole American guy whose dad, instead of giving him a free ride through college, bought him a Stanely Tool set and taught him how to fix cars?
You young men figure that one out.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Link Fest!
He's tired, he should enjoy the decline!
"like getting banned by a store you don’t visit"
Why the colonel (a real economist) should replace Paul Krugman (a fake one)
Drink before watching.
"like getting banned by a store you don’t visit"
Why the colonel (a real economist) should replace Paul Krugman (a fake one)
Drink before watching.
Wednesday, February 09, 2011
5th Grade Economics
I have maintained that economics is above all else, simple.
It's common sense.
It's easy.
And if you're just willing to spend the 3 minutes or so to check something out on the internet to see if something is true or not, it becomes very apparent how pretty much all of the world's problems can be solved.
And so, now an economics lesson your average 5th grader can understand.
The Republicans have proposed $74 billion in budget cuts from the Federal Budget. They will catch hell for this and be called racist and evil and so forth.
I ask you, is this anywhere near solving the problem?
It's common sense.
It's easy.
And if you're just willing to spend the 3 minutes or so to check something out on the internet to see if something is true or not, it becomes very apparent how pretty much all of the world's problems can be solved.
And so, now an economics lesson your average 5th grader can understand.
The Republicans have proposed $74 billion in budget cuts from the Federal Budget. They will catch hell for this and be called racist and evil and so forth.
I ask you, is this anywhere near solving the problem?
I > Society
"Me and my beliefs are more important than adhering to any modicum of unspoken and generally accepted societal decorum because ultimately I am more important and better than the rest of society."
I shall file this under, "Girls who make it painfully obvious I don't want to date them."
Post Post
This is a comment (rarely do I post them) and I want you to view it as if we were studying something scientifically in a cage. The reason why is it exemplifies precisely the psychology I'm talking about and reiterates my point;
I see absolutely nothing wrong with breast feeding in public. What's the big friggin deal? Somebody's "sensibilities" might get offended? Because god forbid somebody get offended, we should have laws against that shit so nobody will ever have to feel bad again. Ever.
I shall point out just these few points and leave the rest to you guys;
1. The absurdity about making laws so that nobody feels bad anymore. I feel bad this person has the right to vote. I feel bad I can't drive 100 MPH on the interstate. I feel bad a democrat is president. I feel bad Green Bay won the super bowl. So let's outlaw these things? It's so childish and inane the point needn't be hounded.
2. Notice I've made no demands or requests to outlaw breast feeding in public. I merely am pointing out many people find it inappropriate and will continue to find it inappropriate, whether it's legal or not, and when confronted with the fact that this might deter potential suitors, the cage is severely rattled.
Enjoy the decline!
I shall file this under, "Girls who make it painfully obvious I don't want to date them."
Post Post
This is a comment (rarely do I post them) and I want you to view it as if we were studying something scientifically in a cage. The reason why is it exemplifies precisely the psychology I'm talking about and reiterates my point;
I see absolutely nothing wrong with breast feeding in public. What's the big friggin deal? Somebody's "sensibilities" might get offended? Because god forbid somebody get offended, we should have laws against that shit so nobody will ever have to feel bad again. Ever.
I shall point out just these few points and leave the rest to you guys;
1. The absurdity about making laws so that nobody feels bad anymore. I feel bad this person has the right to vote. I feel bad I can't drive 100 MPH on the interstate. I feel bad a democrat is president. I feel bad Green Bay won the super bowl. So let's outlaw these things? It's so childish and inane the point needn't be hounded.
2. Notice I've made no demands or requests to outlaw breast feeding in public. I merely am pointing out many people find it inappropriate and will continue to find it inappropriate, whether it's legal or not, and when confronted with the fact that this might deter potential suitors, the cage is severely rattled.
Enjoy the decline!
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Friday, February 04, 2011
Working to Pay for Somebody Else to Take Care of Your Children
I shall summarize these lengthy economic studies quickly and succinctly so you needn't bother with reading them in their entirety.
When both parents work, there is nobody there to take care of the children.
Ergo, the feeding, raising, rearing and general "bringing up" of the child is foisted upon the government.
This necessitates a higher government spending as a percent of GDP which correlates with more labor force participation by women.
HOWEVER,
Because more and more women are working, this increases GDP per capita (which is a good thing)
HOWEVER,
Think about the two statements above.
Think about it....
THIIIIIINK ABOUT IT!!!!
KEEP THINKING!!!!
What do your economic spidey senses tell you!????!!!
And you will probably realize that in essence (and with an admittedly VERY broad stroke of a brush I am painting here) women have essentially given up being stay at home moms so they may work up the tax dollars to pay government paid strangers to bring up their own children.
READ THAT AGAIN
women have essentially given up being stay at home moms so they may work up the tax dollars to pay government paid strangers to bring up their own children.
Matter of fact, if you think about the plurality of jobs women pursue, it is simply to take care of other women's children (teachers, social workers, day care, nannies, etc.). But hey, at least they're not bothered bringing up their own icky yuck gross children. I mean, at least they don't have to spend time with them. I mean who wants to do THAT? They are too busy working up the money to pay taxes to pay some government worker to take care of their children. Thank god for outsourcing! I mean, otherwise you might have sit down dinners and conversation and a healthy nuclear family void of divorce.
Now imagine,
JUST IMAGINE (and I know this is going to be a revolutionary thought)
if ONE PARENT STAYED AT HOME TO BRING UP THEIR OWN CHILDREN
AND
ANOTHER PARENT WORKED TO SUPPORT THE FAMILY!
Then you wouldn't need to have two parents working because the government wouldn't need the taxes to bring up other people's children, because (drum roll please)....
YOU'D BE BLEEPING TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN BLEEPING CHILDREN!!!!
I know! CRAZY STUFF! huh!? I mean, society should try that sometime! Oh, it would be experimental and we don't know what the results would be. But, pha, I don't have my "doctoroate in sociology" or "family psychology" so what do I know? I'm just an economist.
In the meantime I will continue to enjoy watching parents forced to slave away to pay other parents to take care of their children through forever increasing taxation so they can afford the outsourcing fee to pay governmental strangers to bring up those yucky icky gross children of theirs.
BIG Hat tip
When both parents work, there is nobody there to take care of the children.
Ergo, the feeding, raising, rearing and general "bringing up" of the child is foisted upon the government.
This necessitates a higher government spending as a percent of GDP which correlates with more labor force participation by women.
HOWEVER,
Because more and more women are working, this increases GDP per capita (which is a good thing)
HOWEVER,
Think about the two statements above.
Think about it....
THIIIIIINK ABOUT IT!!!!
KEEP THINKING!!!!
What do your economic spidey senses tell you!????!!!
And you will probably realize that in essence (and with an admittedly VERY broad stroke of a brush I am painting here) women have essentially given up being stay at home moms so they may work up the tax dollars to pay government paid strangers to bring up their own children.
READ THAT AGAIN
women have essentially given up being stay at home moms so they may work up the tax dollars to pay government paid strangers to bring up their own children.
Matter of fact, if you think about the plurality of jobs women pursue, it is simply to take care of other women's children (teachers, social workers, day care, nannies, etc.). But hey, at least they're not bothered bringing up their own icky yuck gross children. I mean, at least they don't have to spend time with them. I mean who wants to do THAT? They are too busy working up the money to pay taxes to pay some government worker to take care of their children. Thank god for outsourcing! I mean, otherwise you might have sit down dinners and conversation and a healthy nuclear family void of divorce.
Now imagine,
JUST IMAGINE (and I know this is going to be a revolutionary thought)
if ONE PARENT STAYED AT HOME TO BRING UP THEIR OWN CHILDREN
AND
ANOTHER PARENT WORKED TO SUPPORT THE FAMILY!
Then you wouldn't need to have two parents working because the government wouldn't need the taxes to bring up other people's children, because (drum roll please)....
YOU'D BE BLEEPING TAKING CARE OF YOUR OWN BLEEPING CHILDREN!!!!
I know! CRAZY STUFF! huh!? I mean, society should try that sometime! Oh, it would be experimental and we don't know what the results would be. But, pha, I don't have my "doctoroate in sociology" or "family psychology" so what do I know? I'm just an economist.
In the meantime I will continue to enjoy watching parents forced to slave away to pay other parents to take care of their children through forever increasing taxation so they can afford the outsourcing fee to pay governmental strangers to bring up those yucky icky gross children of theirs.
BIG Hat tip
Thursday, February 03, 2011
It's Called "Capital Flight"
This one, with such a small mention in the Pioneer Press, almost slipped past the radar.
Of course, this is good that BP is shutting down it's refining capacity here (good luck finding a buyer). Because BP is an evil oil company and we don't want any of those jobs here in the US.
Of course, this is good that BP is shutting down it's refining capacity here (good luck finding a buyer). Because BP is an evil oil company and we don't want any of those jobs here in the US.
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
"Well My Husband is a Republican, So So Am I!"
This is a really big pet peeve of mine.
And let me explain why.
Politics, tainted as it may be as a "hobby," is one of the more noble ones in that it shows you actually care about the country. THis is why this blog is here and arguably why you are here. You care about the future of the country and so you opine, theorize, and if you're particularly intellectually honest, study and research the facts and then form an opinion.
But Bruni, all of the sudden, deciding she is "not so left wing anymore" is just another example of a another typical leftist-turned-conservative because "her husband is conservative." It's akin to the "Sean Hannity Trophy Wives" I spoke about before where a "typical" 20 something girl with the politically correct liberal arts degree, swallows the leftist BS whole and skips along in la la liberal land during her 20's with no serious or rigorous thought given to her supporting a leftist ideology and what the ramifications are for her country and future in voting so.
Then comes along the first REAL challenge and responsibility she ever has face - a husband and children.
This heavy dose of reality does two things.
1. She now has something more important than her politics (her husband). And since supporting liberal causes was not really an passionate ideology for her as much as it was a "hobby" or something "fashionable" to do, she abandons it to pursue a family.
2. When kids come into the equation, HOOO BOY! Now the woman has genuine skin in the game in the future. And instead of being worried about whether there will be a Sex and the City 3, she now has plenty o' time to think about what kind of future her child will grow up in (which is why I LOVE it when liberal Gen X'ers start having children and all of the sudden start to take an interest in the federal deficit).
Of course, while this is disproportionately a phenomenon you see with women, men are the same to blame too. THough I like listening to him very much, Michael Medved was a liberal. And if I recall correctly Dennis Prager was one too (in his youth??? Or am I thinking of another talk show host?) Took my old man 55 years of life to finally get past "stage 1 thinking" and realize "just throwing money at the poor" doesn't solve anything. Here, I'm even more harsh on men because I want to say, "WHAT THE HELL!? Where the hell have you been??? You're FINALLY GETTING THIS NOW?! Great, thanks for effing up everything up with your past 30 years of voting. Oh, and look, you get to die off and not see the destruction you've wrought upon this country!"
Of course the catalyst which brings about men's realization that youthful leftism is stupid and ultimately unsustainable is usually the real world. The working world. That when you're done with college and the smoking pot and partying, you realize "claiming to be a liberal to score with chicks" might have some long term and serious consequences if you don't grow up. It's not because, "Oh, all of my buddies are Republican, so I am too!"
But now that I think about it. Perhaps not. How else can you explain union members religiously voting left all the time when Detroit has been gutted and the Iron Range is at a mere fraction it's former employment.
And let me explain why.
Politics, tainted as it may be as a "hobby," is one of the more noble ones in that it shows you actually care about the country. THis is why this blog is here and arguably why you are here. You care about the future of the country and so you opine, theorize, and if you're particularly intellectually honest, study and research the facts and then form an opinion.
But Bruni, all of the sudden, deciding she is "not so left wing anymore" is just another example of a another typical leftist-turned-conservative because "her husband is conservative." It's akin to the "Sean Hannity Trophy Wives" I spoke about before where a "typical" 20 something girl with the politically correct liberal arts degree, swallows the leftist BS whole and skips along in la la liberal land during her 20's with no serious or rigorous thought given to her supporting a leftist ideology and what the ramifications are for her country and future in voting so.
Then comes along the first REAL challenge and responsibility she ever has face - a husband and children.
This heavy dose of reality does two things.
1. She now has something more important than her politics (her husband). And since supporting liberal causes was not really an passionate ideology for her as much as it was a "hobby" or something "fashionable" to do, she abandons it to pursue a family.
2. When kids come into the equation, HOOO BOY! Now the woman has genuine skin in the game in the future. And instead of being worried about whether there will be a Sex and the City 3, she now has plenty o' time to think about what kind of future her child will grow up in (which is why I LOVE it when liberal Gen X'ers start having children and all of the sudden start to take an interest in the federal deficit).
Of course, while this is disproportionately a phenomenon you see with women, men are the same to blame too. THough I like listening to him very much, Michael Medved was a liberal. And if I recall correctly Dennis Prager was one too (in his youth??? Or am I thinking of another talk show host?) Took my old man 55 years of life to finally get past "stage 1 thinking" and realize "just throwing money at the poor" doesn't solve anything. Here, I'm even more harsh on men because I want to say, "WHAT THE HELL!? Where the hell have you been??? You're FINALLY GETTING THIS NOW?! Great, thanks for effing up everything up with your past 30 years of voting. Oh, and look, you get to die off and not see the destruction you've wrought upon this country!"
Of course the catalyst which brings about men's realization that youthful leftism is stupid and ultimately unsustainable is usually the real world. The working world. That when you're done with college and the smoking pot and partying, you realize "claiming to be a liberal to score with chicks" might have some long term and serious consequences if you don't grow up. It's not because, "Oh, all of my buddies are Republican, so I am too!"
But now that I think about it. Perhaps not. How else can you explain union members religiously voting left all the time when Detroit has been gutted and the Iron Range is at a mere fraction it's former employment.