Tuesday, January 31, 2012
God, Please Make It Stop
I had a marketing idea for "Worthless." Find blogs of the poor unfortunate kids who had been lied to for all these years that they could "follow their heart and the money would follow," send them an e-mail or a link to "Worthless" and hopefully save them $45,000 in tuition for a worthless degree.
So I did a simple search on the internet:
"blog" and "I'm majoring in"
The results were hilarious, but absolutely painful, meriting a post unto itself. I'm warning you however, it is PAINFUL to read some of these blog profiles. I found the RARE IT major and threw those in there to provide your brain a break, but, no, seriously, pour yourself a martini first:
A "Woman's" Life and Passions. And THIS qualifies as writing??
You Too Can Have an Exciting Career in Digital Media Arts!
Shazika will be majoring in Sociology, minoring in English, and living with or off of her parents till she's 34.
Please do not tell me teachers are not baby sitters. What's the economic model here? Everyone in the US becomes a teacher while the Chinese "make all the stuff?"
I'm majoring in Children and Family Studies, which is basically code to say that I'm majoring in people! God, shoot me now.
Yeah, math is tough kid. You know what's tougher? Unemployment.
I'm going to go to school for 6 years so I can teach ELEMENTARY topics to ELEMENTARY students. No, no, there's no education bubble here.
FINALLY, somebody who is actually going to produce something in this economy AND not have a government job. Atta boy Dustin!
Three cheers for Aditya!
I love cats, Battlestar Galactica and walks on the beach.
My mom threw something like this up on the fridge when I was 7.
Majored in "Sustainable Tourism." But he got "good grades."
Good for you, pursue a career in the military. If you haven't noticed, everybody else is majoring in "Elementary Education" too.
Wait, wait, wait! Lemme guess! Yet ANOTHER 20 something girl majoring in (oooohhh...could it beeeee???) ELEMENTARY EDUCATION?
If you can turn that passion for "writing" that every 20 something seems to have and turn in into a passion for writing code, that might help. But wait, wait, lemme guess. The math would be too hard?
Don't worry, I'm sure Ashraf prefers to pay the extra taxes to create-make work jobs for all you "elementary education" majors.
"Heaven's Wrath" the sequel to "Faster Than the Speed of Love."
I love having 3 months a year off and avoiding any major that requires math or intellectual rigor...err... I mean "I love kids and I want to make a difference in their lives." Can I have my government check now?
Hey, I wanted to be an F-16 Fighter Pilot, chocolate ice cream taster, lingerie consultant, international spy when I was young too. I just grew up.
"PIANO PEDOGAGY???" I don't know what that is, but something tells me her parents will be preparing her old room she had before she left for college.
Ug, "global studies?" Good thing she went to Ecuador and help revolutionize the economy. I hear Ecuador is the booming economy nowadays and will save the global economy from its credit crisis it's in today. All those Peace Corps and global studies majors finally paid off!
Majoring in "human performance." Eat, Gag, Barf.
I have to end on a positive note. Thank you Arnab for being a productive member of society.
So I did a simple search on the internet:
"blog" and "I'm majoring in"
The results were hilarious, but absolutely painful, meriting a post unto itself. I'm warning you however, it is PAINFUL to read some of these blog profiles. I found the RARE IT major and threw those in there to provide your brain a break, but, no, seriously, pour yourself a martini first:
A "Woman's" Life and Passions. And THIS qualifies as writing??
You Too Can Have an Exciting Career in Digital Media Arts!
Shazika will be majoring in Sociology, minoring in English, and living with or off of her parents till she's 34.
Please do not tell me teachers are not baby sitters. What's the economic model here? Everyone in the US becomes a teacher while the Chinese "make all the stuff?"
I'm majoring in Children and Family Studies, which is basically code to say that I'm majoring in people! God, shoot me now.
Yeah, math is tough kid. You know what's tougher? Unemployment.
I'm going to go to school for 6 years so I can teach ELEMENTARY topics to ELEMENTARY students. No, no, there's no education bubble here.
FINALLY, somebody who is actually going to produce something in this economy AND not have a government job. Atta boy Dustin!
Three cheers for Aditya!
I love cats, Battlestar Galactica and walks on the beach.
My mom threw something like this up on the fridge when I was 7.
Majored in "Sustainable Tourism." But he got "good grades."
Good for you, pursue a career in the military. If you haven't noticed, everybody else is majoring in "Elementary Education" too.
Wait, wait, wait! Lemme guess! Yet ANOTHER 20 something girl majoring in (oooohhh...could it beeeee???) ELEMENTARY EDUCATION?
If you can turn that passion for "writing" that every 20 something seems to have and turn in into a passion for writing code, that might help. But wait, wait, lemme guess. The math would be too hard?
Don't worry, I'm sure Ashraf prefers to pay the extra taxes to create-make work jobs for all you "elementary education" majors.
"Heaven's Wrath" the sequel to "Faster Than the Speed of Love."
I love having 3 months a year off and avoiding any major that requires math or intellectual rigor...err... I mean "I love kids and I want to make a difference in their lives." Can I have my government check now?
Hey, I wanted to be an F-16 Fighter Pilot, chocolate ice cream taster, lingerie consultant, international spy when I was young too. I just grew up.
"PIANO PEDOGAGY???" I don't know what that is, but something tells me her parents will be preparing her old room she had before she left for college.
Ug, "global studies?" Good thing she went to Ecuador and help revolutionize the economy. I hear Ecuador is the booming economy nowadays and will save the global economy from its credit crisis it's in today. All those Peace Corps and global studies majors finally paid off!
Majoring in "human performance." Eat, Gag, Barf.
I have to end on a positive note. Thank you Arnab for being a productive member of society.
Good News Everyone!
The socialist state known as "California" is going to run out of money. Fry, I want you and Leela to go the California and see if you can pick up some of the few remaining conservatives in an effort to expedite their capital and intellectual flight. Zoidberg, see if you can go there and mock all the liberals and just generally annoy them.
HAR!!!!
I'm not a big Star Wars fan, nor one of those nerdy types that have a thing for Leia, but I think the nerd population just cumulatively had a massive cardiac arrest.
Anybody know the author of this for proper dues?
Monday, January 30, 2012
Your Economic "No Freaking Duh" Moment of the Day
Apparently, those brilliant Fed economists in San Francisco no less have finally figured out ONE MAN cannot turn around the economy all on his little lonesome.
Apparently, the economy is a bit more dynamic than that. Because I always though the recession was "Bush's Fault." And the recovery would be SOLELY due to Barry Obama.
I mean, because it's foolish, outlandish even to suggest it would be the remaining 299,999,998 people in the country that would actually have something to do with an economic recovery. Nope, it has to be a handful of reaaaaaaaaally powerful people that can turn this country around. Especially a few people in an institution like the Fed. Because we know monetary policy is 100% responsible for the economic production of all nations.
Am I the only one that isn't a f#cking moron in the economics profession? For the Patron Saint's Name of Frick.
Apparently, the economy is a bit more dynamic than that. Because I always though the recession was "Bush's Fault." And the recovery would be SOLELY due to Barry Obama.
I mean, because it's foolish, outlandish even to suggest it would be the remaining 299,999,998 people in the country that would actually have something to do with an economic recovery. Nope, it has to be a handful of reaaaaaaaaally powerful people that can turn this country around. Especially a few people in an institution like the Fed. Because we know monetary policy is 100% responsible for the economic production of all nations.
Am I the only one that isn't a f#cking moron in the economics profession? For the Patron Saint's Name of Frick.
Last Christian Standing - Compliment or Shot Across the Bow
From The Last Christian Standing:
Captain Capitalism has left the church and now lives with the fruits of nihilism: a clear minded despair and misanthropy moderated by the use of cheap liquor
I only posted this because:
1. It's forcing me to look up two different words - nihilism and misanthropy
2. It's one of those things I don't know if it was meant to be a compliment or an insult
3. Even if it was intended as a good-hearted insult, I'm predicting it will still probably be taken as a compliment.
Will report back once I look up dem der fancy words.
Post post - Not only was he accurate, it was a genuine compliment too! Thanks LCS!
PS - Rumpleminze isn't cheap.
Captain Capitalism has left the church and now lives with the fruits of nihilism: a clear minded despair and misanthropy moderated by the use of cheap liquor
I only posted this because:
1. It's forcing me to look up two different words - nihilism and misanthropy
2. It's one of those things I don't know if it was meant to be a compliment or an insult
3. Even if it was intended as a good-hearted insult, I'm predicting it will still probably be taken as a compliment.
Will report back once I look up dem der fancy words.
Post post - Not only was he accurate, it was a genuine compliment too! Thanks LCS!
PS - Rumpleminze isn't cheap.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Antioch College Accurately Prices Liberal Arts Degrees
You may vaguely recall "Antioch College" and the reason why is that it was in the Capposphere before. I strongly recommend reading the original post to get the background, but the short version is the school was traditionally a conservative college. Was overrun by liberals and feminists. Gets shut down because of poor management. The Spearhead and myself cheer. A mom of one of Antioch's graduates brags about how great Antioch College was and how we're evil. My crack staff of Agents in the Field find out her daughter works at a non-profit, government funded theater in Ohio. We all laugh as once again, it proves the school produces nothing.
BUT GOOD NEWS EVERY ONE (Prof. Farnsworth accent)
Antioch College is back and charging NO TUITION.
The ONLY economic commentary I have on this, and the sole reason I recapped everything above is simply this:
Finally, a liberal arts school that accurately prices its programs. $0 for a worthless degree.
Now children will merely waste their time and not their money.
BUT GOOD NEWS EVERY ONE (Prof. Farnsworth accent)
Antioch College is back and charging NO TUITION.
The ONLY economic commentary I have on this, and the sole reason I recapped everything above is simply this:
Finally, a liberal arts school that accurately prices its programs. $0 for a worthless degree.
Now children will merely waste their time and not their money.
A Pair is Grown at Boundless.org
Boundless.org is THE place preachers kids like me go to get a good laugh at the sheeple who follow, blindly, whatever the church tells them. They have forfeited any ounce of sentient, independent thought, they reference bible passages to explain their behaviors and mistakes, and they fully throw themselves to fateism, allowing them to chalk horrendously stupid decisions on their part to "god's plan," while taking full personal responsibility for the rare decision they make that pays off. But what makes this site so entertaining is to see this mindless, blind, lazy jettisoning of intellect to a religion run full steam, head on into the realities of human nature and sexuality.
There was, however, one man who is no doubt ruffling feathers at the (veritable) cult of Boundless.org.
David Murrow.
he dared to write a piece that was critical of the modern day church and suggested the church has become more feminized to the point it alienates men. By default (and whether he did this knowingly or not, I don't know) he implied that women were looking for biological and Darwinistic men who displayed NON-christian traits of manliness, impatience, independence and the lack to conform. He also pointed out the glaringly obvious fact that church by its nature, weeds out real men. To stick with the "modern day" church is essentially against male nature. Which means the few males that remain are pansified, listless, indecisive, conformists. Traits women viscerally LOATHE, but "good" modern day christian traits women of the church artificially champion.
The train wreck happens when the christian women start complaining about the lack of manly men in church, while at the same time hypocritically demanding any man that courts them follow christianity to the point of "beta-ness."
I enjoy watching them try to reconcile this irreconcilable situation. Mr. Murrow makes an honorable and well-intended attempt to help them.
But we all know what happens to those who do good deeds.
To quote Jesus from the Book of Matthew, Chapter 28, Verse 213, Section B, Subsection aa:
"Enjoyeth the decline."
There was, however, one man who is no doubt ruffling feathers at the (veritable) cult of Boundless.org.
David Murrow.
he dared to write a piece that was critical of the modern day church and suggested the church has become more feminized to the point it alienates men. By default (and whether he did this knowingly or not, I don't know) he implied that women were looking for biological and Darwinistic men who displayed NON-christian traits of manliness, impatience, independence and the lack to conform. He also pointed out the glaringly obvious fact that church by its nature, weeds out real men. To stick with the "modern day" church is essentially against male nature. Which means the few males that remain are pansified, listless, indecisive, conformists. Traits women viscerally LOATHE, but "good" modern day christian traits women of the church artificially champion.
The train wreck happens when the christian women start complaining about the lack of manly men in church, while at the same time hypocritically demanding any man that courts them follow christianity to the point of "beta-ness."
I enjoy watching them try to reconcile this irreconcilable situation. Mr. Murrow makes an honorable and well-intended attempt to help them.
But we all know what happens to those who do good deeds.
To quote Jesus from the Book of Matthew, Chapter 28, Verse 213, Section B, Subsection aa:
"Enjoyeth the decline."
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Councilman Michael Brown
There are just some guys you wish you could purge from the Guild of Real Men.
And wow, who would have guessed! Just like Barry he has no real world experience either! He also has the tell-tale sign he never had any intention of working a real job, based on his worthless degrees!
Political Science undergrad with a MA in "Public Administration" aka "I'll Tell You What to Do, And You'll Like It!"
Just another worthless, crusading human being.
And wow, who would have guessed! Just like Barry he has no real world experience either! He also has the tell-tale sign he never had any intention of working a real job, based on his worthless degrees!
Political Science undergrad with a MA in "Public Administration" aka "I'll Tell You What to Do, And You'll Like It!"
Just another worthless, crusading human being.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Milltronic Machines Morons
Company in Waconia "can't find the precisely, finely tuned, only to our specified product line and business model, fresh out of college, ready and competent, labor" to fill their jobs.
Because, of course, you could major in "Milltronic Machines" at the U of MN.
I remember that being a very popular major in my day. Many students majored in "Milltronic Machines."
Yep, to get that PRECISE, FINITE, SPECIFIC training to fill that PRECISE, FINITE, SPECIFIC job.
Oh, no.
No no no no no no no!
It's below Milltronics Machines to create an (GASP NO!) ON THE JOB TRAINING PROGRAM!!!!!!!!!! (enter 50's chick screaming here). That would cost TOO MUCH MONEY for some aging geezer to get off his ass and maybe train the next generation to do what he does. No, that kid should HAVE KNOWN EXACTLY WHAT TO DO once he left the IT department at the U of MN.
Look, I'm just as ready as the next guy to lecture and berate idiotic Minnesotan suburbanite children for majoring in "Musical Therapy," but you gray hairs in industry better come to grips with the reality real fast that labor can't just go from school to the assembly line without SOME training.
Honest to god, sometimes I think the Gen Y OWS brats actually have a point. But what do I know? I'm sure simply telling youth today that they "need to hit the ground running" is the equivalent of a significant and thorough training program equipping them with the skills they need to do a successful and productive job. I know I loved it when my bosses said to me "I don't have time to explain this to you." Or quoted the holy chant "this is a steep learning curve." Yep, that sure prepared me for the job at hand!
Am I the only one here who isn't a moron?
Because, of course, you could major in "Milltronic Machines" at the U of MN.
I remember that being a very popular major in my day. Many students majored in "Milltronic Machines."
Yep, to get that PRECISE, FINITE, SPECIFIC training to fill that PRECISE, FINITE, SPECIFIC job.
Oh, no.
No no no no no no no!
It's below Milltronics Machines to create an (GASP NO!) ON THE JOB TRAINING PROGRAM!!!!!!!!!! (enter 50's chick screaming here). That would cost TOO MUCH MONEY for some aging geezer to get off his ass and maybe train the next generation to do what he does. No, that kid should HAVE KNOWN EXACTLY WHAT TO DO once he left the IT department at the U of MN.
Look, I'm just as ready as the next guy to lecture and berate idiotic Minnesotan suburbanite children for majoring in "Musical Therapy," but you gray hairs in industry better come to grips with the reality real fast that labor can't just go from school to the assembly line without SOME training.
Honest to god, sometimes I think the Gen Y OWS brats actually have a point. But what do I know? I'm sure simply telling youth today that they "need to hit the ground running" is the equivalent of a significant and thorough training program equipping them with the skills they need to do a successful and productive job. I know I loved it when my bosses said to me "I don't have time to explain this to you." Or quoted the holy chant "this is a steep learning curve." Yep, that sure prepared me for the job at hand!
Am I the only one here who isn't a moron?
She Liked How I Drove Standard Transmission
I never claimed to understand the fairer sex. I only claimed I knew how to respond in a very Pavlovian manner to their actions that would result in successful outcomes. It's kind of like not fully understanding how all the mechanics of a sports car works. You just need to know how to drive it very well. For example, flowers.
Flowers are stupid. They are dumb. They serve no function nor purpose. But girls like them and they can be deployed as an effective and useful tool when trying to court them.
Why do girls like flowers?
Heck if I know. And heck if you should care. All you have to know is that girls like flowers. Don't bother wasting your time and exploding your brain cells trying to figure out why. Just accept it as fact and use that fact in your strategies and schemings.
Now, of course, there are some logical theories as to why women do certain things. Girls probably like flowers because it psychologically shows them (just like diamonds) you're willing to waste money on a frivolous item to make her happy (ie-you're an easy mark). Girls like bad boys probably because bad boys Darwinistically are better fighters and are willing to protect her and the little ones when the heathens come to attack. Girls like dancing probably because it begets them attention on the floor. All these theories are brought to you by the Philosophy Department at Manosphere University and the cumulative wisdom of the men who have lived before you. However, sometimes women will display a trait or a behavior that is so weird that it leaves even the world's greatest pscyho-sexual philosophers speechless and dumbfounded.
For example, it has not happened once.
Not twice.
But thrice I have been complimented by a woman/girl about my ability to drive stick.
The first time it happened I merely dismissed it, almost to the point I forgot about it. My memory was jogged however when the second girl several years later said, "You drive stick really well." I was about to chalk it up to coincidence, until the third woman a couple years later mentioned how she "really liked how I could drive a standard transmission." In the end I accepted it, but could not for the life of me figure out;
1. Was I really that good at driving stick???
2. Does being able to drive a standard transmission actually turn women on???
3. What am I doing so uniquely in driving a stick that makes me stand out from the rest??? Do I "clutch" real well? Maybe I am an aggressive bad boy when I shift from 1st to (GASP, NO!) 3rd!!!
Another one was my voice. I've always, ALWAYS had a nasally kind of voice. Not terribly annoying, but I was surprised I ever got a radio show. Apparently some women find nasally voices attractive for there have been a handful of women who have complimented me on my voice. And not so much the voice, as much as my speech patterns as I was to find out.
SPEECH PATTERNS?
Understand it was not my vocabulary that impressed them. That would make a little bit of sense in that intelligence can be attractive. But my tone and pattern and sound, even mannerisms somehow was found attractive by several women.
Then the weirdest one of them all - "I like your natural scent." Keep in mind this, like my voice admirers, was not from women I was necessarily romantically involved with. These are friends, girlfriends, the occasional one-dater type. So this isn't like they liked me, they just liked my "natural scent." They weren't talking about my cologne. This was when I was wearing no cologne and they just liked the actual scent my body was giving off. Like I was a dog, marking my territory, running around trees and chasing cats or something.
Now why am I telling you young junior, deputy, official, aspiring and otherwise economists out there about this? So that when it happens to you, you don't question it or (as I did in one case) ridicule the girl for thinking I had a nice "scent." Your goal here is not to find out WHY, simply because you can't. Heck, half the time I bet the women don't even know why. Your goal is simply to accept and use it to your benefit.
If the girl likes the way you tie your shoes - accept.
If the girl likes how you smoke a cigarette - accept.
If the girl says she loves the shape of your elbows - accept.
I don't know why these things are the way they are, but certainly you have probably had the ladies express an admiration for a quality you were completely unaware of. Don't botch it up, don't become self-conscious, and don't ridicule or interrogate her about it, just accept the fact she gets really turned on based on how you water the plants and water your plants more.
This has been a public service announcement by Cappy Cap.
Flowers are stupid. They are dumb. They serve no function nor purpose. But girls like them and they can be deployed as an effective and useful tool when trying to court them.
Why do girls like flowers?
Heck if I know. And heck if you should care. All you have to know is that girls like flowers. Don't bother wasting your time and exploding your brain cells trying to figure out why. Just accept it as fact and use that fact in your strategies and schemings.
Now, of course, there are some logical theories as to why women do certain things. Girls probably like flowers because it psychologically shows them (just like diamonds) you're willing to waste money on a frivolous item to make her happy (ie-you're an easy mark). Girls like bad boys probably because bad boys Darwinistically are better fighters and are willing to protect her and the little ones when the heathens come to attack. Girls like dancing probably because it begets them attention on the floor. All these theories are brought to you by the Philosophy Department at Manosphere University and the cumulative wisdom of the men who have lived before you. However, sometimes women will display a trait or a behavior that is so weird that it leaves even the world's greatest pscyho-sexual philosophers speechless and dumbfounded.
For example, it has not happened once.
Not twice.
But thrice I have been complimented by a woman/girl about my ability to drive stick.
The first time it happened I merely dismissed it, almost to the point I forgot about it. My memory was jogged however when the second girl several years later said, "You drive stick really well." I was about to chalk it up to coincidence, until the third woman a couple years later mentioned how she "really liked how I could drive a standard transmission." In the end I accepted it, but could not for the life of me figure out;
1. Was I really that good at driving stick???
2. Does being able to drive a standard transmission actually turn women on???
3. What am I doing so uniquely in driving a stick that makes me stand out from the rest??? Do I "clutch" real well? Maybe I am an aggressive bad boy when I shift from 1st to (GASP, NO!) 3rd!!!
Another one was my voice. I've always, ALWAYS had a nasally kind of voice. Not terribly annoying, but I was surprised I ever got a radio show. Apparently some women find nasally voices attractive for there have been a handful of women who have complimented me on my voice. And not so much the voice, as much as my speech patterns as I was to find out.
SPEECH PATTERNS?
Understand it was not my vocabulary that impressed them. That would make a little bit of sense in that intelligence can be attractive. But my tone and pattern and sound, even mannerisms somehow was found attractive by several women.
Then the weirdest one of them all - "I like your natural scent." Keep in mind this, like my voice admirers, was not from women I was necessarily romantically involved with. These are friends, girlfriends, the occasional one-dater type. So this isn't like they liked me, they just liked my "natural scent." They weren't talking about my cologne. This was when I was wearing no cologne and they just liked the actual scent my body was giving off. Like I was a dog, marking my territory, running around trees and chasing cats or something.
Now why am I telling you young junior, deputy, official, aspiring and otherwise economists out there about this? So that when it happens to you, you don't question it or (as I did in one case) ridicule the girl for thinking I had a nice "scent." Your goal here is not to find out WHY, simply because you can't. Heck, half the time I bet the women don't even know why. Your goal is simply to accept and use it to your benefit.
If the girl likes the way you tie your shoes - accept.
If the girl likes how you smoke a cigarette - accept.
If the girl says she loves the shape of your elbows - accept.
I don't know why these things are the way they are, but certainly you have probably had the ladies express an admiration for a quality you were completely unaware of. Don't botch it up, don't become self-conscious, and don't ridicule or interrogate her about it, just accept the fact she gets really turned on based on how you water the plants and water your plants more.
This has been a public service announcement by Cappy Cap.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Get to the 10 Minute Mark
The intro is long, but download this and get to the first caller. You just can't make it up.
The first caller comes in around the 10 minute mark. The sheer SCREECHING in the background should make you run to your local urologist and get a vasectomy. It should also make you laugh as the woman tries to rationalize why she had a kid and the nervous laughter gives her true feelings away.
I'm pouring a martini and enjoying the silence.
The first caller comes in around the 10 minute mark. The sheer SCREECHING in the background should make you run to your local urologist and get a vasectomy. It should also make you laugh as the woman tries to rationalize why she had a kid and the nervous laughter gives her true feelings away.
I'm pouring a martini and enjoying the silence.
A Gift for My Swedish and Aussie Allies
I often have the horse blinders on and forget that the problems we're suffering in the US are also the same problems other freedom fighters are suffering in other countries. Save Capitalism for example is on the frontlines in Sweden and the Oz Conservative is (obviously) fighting in Oz. What I didn't realize though is in some cases the situation is much worse than it is here in the US depending on the "front" we're fighting.
Britain for example looks like their social decay is about 15-20 years ahead of ours. Greece, the unions are the envy of even the most unproductive Wisconsin teacher's union member. And Japan the men have become immobilized not by any threat of the government, but a lack of an economic future. However, of the key three fronts we're fighting against, feminism I believe has made greater progress in Sweden, (surprisingly) Australia and other countries than they have here.
While this is bad news, it made me realize a bit of good news. In hindsight, the Manosphere, the origins of which is from the good ol' US o' A, has actually made great progress. First, it has become a resource, available to the world to let men and freedom-loving women know there are others who believe the same things they do and it's alright to express them - ie no you're not crazy and no, you're not alone. Second, it is the millions of hours of wisdom consolidating and crystalized into helpful tomes of advice for young men so they need not suffer like their predecessors did. Third, it helps people identify and be aware of the threats and problems the communism/feminism ideology brings. And finally, it is essentially a think tank that comes up with ways to counter socialist and tyrannical forces that uses feminism as its clandestine delivery vehicle to infect (and ultimately) destroy democracies.
However, the "manosphere" is not like a vaccine that can just be given to men across the world and POOF! They're just as wise and as experienced as we are. You need to read copious amounts of philosophy, studies, statistics, even economics that is splattered across the hundred or so Manosphere blogs out there. It would take just too much time. But there is a very good starting point or stepping stone to at least vaccinate our foreign friends against the evils of feminism/communism and that is my gift to them:
Tom Leykis.
Tom doesn't broadcast his show anymore, but there is a depository of all of his shows. I recommend Leykis to my foreign friends as the first step to inoculate themselves, not necessarily because of the message, but because of the format (MP3) his show is in. Its easy to download, put on your MP3 player and listen away.
Understand though, Tom can be crass, and sometimes just outright wrong on a handful of things. He refers to women unacceptably at times, is unfair in a handful of instances and I believe would qualify at times of being a genuine misogynist (though, methinks he does this just for shock-jock value). I won't mention these instances because you'll hear them if you listen to the show, and frankly, they're not appropriate or advocated by this blog. However, the remaining 90-95% of his show does have merit and will at minimum open your eyes in terms of the relation between the sexes.
The next step would then be to go on the internet and start reading up on the Manosphere, but, if you're like me, you don't much like reading. Regardless, hopefully this is the first step that will wake millions of men from the brainwashing they've received and clearly identify the threats facing freedom and the west forced on you by feminism and their communist overlords.
Britain for example looks like their social decay is about 15-20 years ahead of ours. Greece, the unions are the envy of even the most unproductive Wisconsin teacher's union member. And Japan the men have become immobilized not by any threat of the government, but a lack of an economic future. However, of the key three fronts we're fighting against, feminism I believe has made greater progress in Sweden, (surprisingly) Australia and other countries than they have here.
While this is bad news, it made me realize a bit of good news. In hindsight, the Manosphere, the origins of which is from the good ol' US o' A, has actually made great progress. First, it has become a resource, available to the world to let men and freedom-loving women know there are others who believe the same things they do and it's alright to express them - ie no you're not crazy and no, you're not alone. Second, it is the millions of hours of wisdom consolidating and crystalized into helpful tomes of advice for young men so they need not suffer like their predecessors did. Third, it helps people identify and be aware of the threats and problems the communism/feminism ideology brings. And finally, it is essentially a think tank that comes up with ways to counter socialist and tyrannical forces that uses feminism as its clandestine delivery vehicle to infect (and ultimately) destroy democracies.
However, the "manosphere" is not like a vaccine that can just be given to men across the world and POOF! They're just as wise and as experienced as we are. You need to read copious amounts of philosophy, studies, statistics, even economics that is splattered across the hundred or so Manosphere blogs out there. It would take just too much time. But there is a very good starting point or stepping stone to at least vaccinate our foreign friends against the evils of feminism/communism and that is my gift to them:
Tom Leykis.
Tom doesn't broadcast his show anymore, but there is a depository of all of his shows. I recommend Leykis to my foreign friends as the first step to inoculate themselves, not necessarily because of the message, but because of the format (MP3) his show is in. Its easy to download, put on your MP3 player and listen away.
Understand though, Tom can be crass, and sometimes just outright wrong on a handful of things. He refers to women unacceptably at times, is unfair in a handful of instances and I believe would qualify at times of being a genuine misogynist (though, methinks he does this just for shock-jock value). I won't mention these instances because you'll hear them if you listen to the show, and frankly, they're not appropriate or advocated by this blog. However, the remaining 90-95% of his show does have merit and will at minimum open your eyes in terms of the relation between the sexes.
The next step would then be to go on the internet and start reading up on the Manosphere, but, if you're like me, you don't much like reading. Regardless, hopefully this is the first step that will wake millions of men from the brainwashing they've received and clearly identify the threats facing freedom and the west forced on you by feminism and their communist overlords.
Mexico is Immune to Tornados
Wow, didn't realize the Mexicans have figured out how to control the weather so well!
How Gen Y Will Undermine Asset Prices
My two favorite realtors are Diana Olick and Craig Kamman.
I like Diana because she is smart and hot.
I like Craig because he is smart and...well...kind of homely. But then again, I am not a girl, and I have been informed he looks like Napoleon Solo from Man from UNCLE.
Regardless, Craig has an optimistic tone to his real estate analysis, searching for the bottom so once again he and his fellow realtors can start looking for an upswing in real estate.
Sad to say, I don't think this upswing will ever materialize. The reason is simple:
Gen Y just isn't responsible enough for home ownership. Matter of fact, they're not responsible when it comes to a lot of things and this bodes very ill for asset prices, be it housing, stocks or bonds.
Housing for example requires too much maintenance, work, paper work, and just plain old-fashioned fiscal responsibility. You have to have your financial house in order before you qualify for a loan. You have to be able to have reliable and secure employment to make the payments. You have to pay for things like insurance or taxes you didn't notice before when you were renting. And, gosh darnit, you have to learn how to do basic house maintenance. These factors alone will deter the latest generation coming off of the dying American assembly line, but there is another factor that will keep them out of the housing market that isn't their fault - their horrendous employment prospects.
Naturally many of them chose to major in Music Therapy or Chocolate Eating, so they deserve the long waits in the unemployment line. But lets face it, the previous generations have done a craptastic job of maintaining the US as a viable and growing economic concern and have left this latest generation with the worst labor market since the Great Depression. And without jobs, people can't afford houses. Plus you throw in the bad taste the housing crash has left in people's mouths, and you can forgive Gen Y being a bit reluctant to become home-owners, just as Gen X after seeing the Divorce Olympics put on by the Baby Boomers is now reluctant to get married.
Following the same thread that jobs permit people to afford a lot of things, investments or stocks would be another asset category suffering from poor job prospects. Since I've opted to make less than $30,000 a year to enjoy the decline, I haven't contributed to an IRA or 401k in years (this is also because I believe they will be confiscated away anyway, and their preferential tax treatments rescinded). But that is by choice for me. Tell Gen Y to invest in a 401k or IRA all you want, without jobs, they can't. They don't have the disposable income. Plus, I don't think they have the financial acumen to put together a budget, let alone a long term retirement plan. They're too busy playing X-Box (which I'm for) in their single-parent's basement (which I'm against). Regardless, since nobody looks at dividends or cash flow any more for their retirement plans and only focus on capital gains, I'm sorry to say the cash flows necessary to maintain the 12.83% rate of return the entire retirement industry banks on will not be there to inflate those capital gains into reality simply because Gen Y isn't responsible enough to save for retirement AND they just plain can't.
Finally, bonds are not that safe either. All the collections and past due loans I get to work through, not to mention my decade of previous experience, it is the teens and 20 somethings that are the worst abusers of credit. Some of them literally have no idea that they're supposed to pay what they borrowed back. It's almost as if the concept of BORROWING is lost on them just like our president. They think it's just a gift, and so they rack up credit card balances they can't pay, student debt loads they can never afford, and buy cars they could never pay back. Of course, Gen X and the Baby Boomers were no saints when it came to fiscal discipline, but it's not getting better with successive generations. It's getting worse.
Whatever your opinions on generational fiscal austerity are, the fact is dem der bonds you're relying on for the interest income and principal payment? Yeah, guess who will ultimately be responsible for paying back those debts? Be it federal treasuries, REIT, bonds, etc., you name it, it's going to be Gen X and Gen Y (and mercy, I'm afraid to think what will come after that.). Again, I don't see them as the fiscally responsible type capable of earning most bonds a AAA rating.
Sadly what we're witnessing here is how tough fatherly love translates into economic growth and fiscal responsibility, both of which are required for assets to maintain their value, let alone increase in value. But because we failed to install the harsh, fatherly love and fiscal discipline in future generations, those generations will frankly not be able to produce the economic production and profits that are necessary to prop up those asset prices. Future generations will rent, because owning homes is too hard, and so I predict demand for housing will drop well below what the historical trend has been, bringing prices with it. I believe because of a crippled economy, the idea of trillions of investment dollars artificially propping up stock prices and mutual fund prices, just isn't going to materialize as Gen Y lacks the means and ability to invest for retirement. And when you want that "safe haven" of bonds and fixed income? Well fixed income securities require responsible, fiscally disciplined people on the other end to pay you back.
In short, the (entirely falsely premised) retirement system that relies 100% on perpetual and unsustainable capital gains, will be crushed even sooner and the only real reason to invest in assets would be an inflation hedge against the dollar. That or you could invest in firms that outsource their jobs overseas to maintain profitability, and hope that foreign demand for goods made by US based firms (but produced overseas) more than offsets the decline in demand here.
But don't listen to me. I'm just a meanie, evil economist here to ruin everybody's good time.
I like Diana because she is smart and hot.
I like Craig because he is smart and...well...kind of homely. But then again, I am not a girl, and I have been informed he looks like Napoleon Solo from Man from UNCLE.
Regardless, Craig has an optimistic tone to his real estate analysis, searching for the bottom so once again he and his fellow realtors can start looking for an upswing in real estate.
Sad to say, I don't think this upswing will ever materialize. The reason is simple:
Gen Y just isn't responsible enough for home ownership. Matter of fact, they're not responsible when it comes to a lot of things and this bodes very ill for asset prices, be it housing, stocks or bonds.
Housing for example requires too much maintenance, work, paper work, and just plain old-fashioned fiscal responsibility. You have to have your financial house in order before you qualify for a loan. You have to be able to have reliable and secure employment to make the payments. You have to pay for things like insurance or taxes you didn't notice before when you were renting. And, gosh darnit, you have to learn how to do basic house maintenance. These factors alone will deter the latest generation coming off of the dying American assembly line, but there is another factor that will keep them out of the housing market that isn't their fault - their horrendous employment prospects.
Naturally many of them chose to major in Music Therapy or Chocolate Eating, so they deserve the long waits in the unemployment line. But lets face it, the previous generations have done a craptastic job of maintaining the US as a viable and growing economic concern and have left this latest generation with the worst labor market since the Great Depression. And without jobs, people can't afford houses. Plus you throw in the bad taste the housing crash has left in people's mouths, and you can forgive Gen Y being a bit reluctant to become home-owners, just as Gen X after seeing the Divorce Olympics put on by the Baby Boomers is now reluctant to get married.
Following the same thread that jobs permit people to afford a lot of things, investments or stocks would be another asset category suffering from poor job prospects. Since I've opted to make less than $30,000 a year to enjoy the decline, I haven't contributed to an IRA or 401k in years (this is also because I believe they will be confiscated away anyway, and their preferential tax treatments rescinded). But that is by choice for me. Tell Gen Y to invest in a 401k or IRA all you want, without jobs, they can't. They don't have the disposable income. Plus, I don't think they have the financial acumen to put together a budget, let alone a long term retirement plan. They're too busy playing X-Box (which I'm for) in their single-parent's basement (which I'm against). Regardless, since nobody looks at dividends or cash flow any more for their retirement plans and only focus on capital gains, I'm sorry to say the cash flows necessary to maintain the 12.83% rate of return the entire retirement industry banks on will not be there to inflate those capital gains into reality simply because Gen Y isn't responsible enough to save for retirement AND they just plain can't.
Finally, bonds are not that safe either. All the collections and past due loans I get to work through, not to mention my decade of previous experience, it is the teens and 20 somethings that are the worst abusers of credit. Some of them literally have no idea that they're supposed to pay what they borrowed back. It's almost as if the concept of BORROWING is lost on them just like our president. They think it's just a gift, and so they rack up credit card balances they can't pay, student debt loads they can never afford, and buy cars they could never pay back. Of course, Gen X and the Baby Boomers were no saints when it came to fiscal discipline, but it's not getting better with successive generations. It's getting worse.
Whatever your opinions on generational fiscal austerity are, the fact is dem der bonds you're relying on for the interest income and principal payment? Yeah, guess who will ultimately be responsible for paying back those debts? Be it federal treasuries, REIT, bonds, etc., you name it, it's going to be Gen X and Gen Y (and mercy, I'm afraid to think what will come after that.). Again, I don't see them as the fiscally responsible type capable of earning most bonds a AAA rating.
Sadly what we're witnessing here is how tough fatherly love translates into economic growth and fiscal responsibility, both of which are required for assets to maintain their value, let alone increase in value. But because we failed to install the harsh, fatherly love and fiscal discipline in future generations, those generations will frankly not be able to produce the economic production and profits that are necessary to prop up those asset prices. Future generations will rent, because owning homes is too hard, and so I predict demand for housing will drop well below what the historical trend has been, bringing prices with it. I believe because of a crippled economy, the idea of trillions of investment dollars artificially propping up stock prices and mutual fund prices, just isn't going to materialize as Gen Y lacks the means and ability to invest for retirement. And when you want that "safe haven" of bonds and fixed income? Well fixed income securities require responsible, fiscally disciplined people on the other end to pay you back.
In short, the (entirely falsely premised) retirement system that relies 100% on perpetual and unsustainable capital gains, will be crushed even sooner and the only real reason to invest in assets would be an inflation hedge against the dollar. That or you could invest in firms that outsource their jobs overseas to maintain profitability, and hope that foreign demand for goods made by US based firms (but produced overseas) more than offsets the decline in demand here.
But don't listen to me. I'm just a meanie, evil economist here to ruin everybody's good time.
Walker Recall Fraud
Received this and believe it is something worth forwarding to anybody who lived in Wisconsin as I truly believe the Wisconsin teacher's unions are absolutely 100% prepared to commit voter fraud.
A web site has been set up which will alert you if it is discovered that unknown to you your name and signature appears on a Walker Recall Petition. If you are interested there is no work except to add your name to the site which has the name verifytherecall.com Should you be listed among the signatures of dead or false signatures the crime includes identity theft. If interested several minutes of computer time will assist the monitoring system which is not yet operational. Anyone living or dead outside of Wisconsin is also potentially included in the petitions thus far checked .
A web site has been set up which will alert you if it is discovered that unknown to you your name and signature appears on a Walker Recall Petition. If you are interested there is no work except to add your name to the site which has the name verifytherecall.com Should you be listed among the signatures of dead or false signatures the crime includes identity theft. If interested several minutes of computer time will assist the monitoring system which is not yet operational. Anyone living or dead outside of Wisconsin is also potentially included in the petitions thus far checked .
Monday, January 23, 2012
You Can't Just Kill "Any Ole" Banker
In one of my more notorious pieces, I wrote about my DESIRE (not intent) to kill bankers. As you all know, I do not advocate going and murdering bankers simply because on the grounds it is illegal. Though that is the ONLY reason I (among many others) don't do a lot of things.
All that being said, when I look at my stats, I see a lot of hits coming from search engines where people have searched, "Kill the bankers," "let's kill some bankers," or "killing bankers." And what I see, especially in combination with this, is a lot of angry OWS protester types trying to find other people who may indeed want to kill bankers. Tis a bit eerie.
There is, however, a problem with this, aside from its illegality. You just can't kill any ole banker and hope that the banking industry will all of the sudden straighten up and fly right. Blanket targeting bankers won't solve the problem because there are good bankers, just as there are bad bankers. And it is the bad bankers you need to purge from the system.
Now, the reason I bring this up, is not because of whetting the appetites of anarchists that want to murder people. It's to bring up a very important point about regulation. Regulation currently deployed and pursued by the government has this same "blanket approach" to regulating ALL bankers to death. The problem again is it doesn't target the genuinely greedy, evil or incompetent bankers, it targets the entire banking industry. And for those bankers that kept their noses clean, they must now suffer the mistakes of their evil banking counterparts.
It won't happen, but this is why I am advocating (once again for posterity's sake) a witch hunt of all the bad bankers and purging them from various sorts of vital components of the economy (banking, finance, government, military, etc.)
This wouldn't be hard to do because when loans are approved bankers and loan officers must sign off on these loans. And it doesn't matter where these bankers moved to or took another job elsewhere, because, in the banking industry, everybody knows where everybody went. It would simply be a matter of sending agents to different banks to find out where "Jim" went, tracking him down till you inevitably find him and forcibly firing him out of the banking industry forever.
So to those of you looking to kill bankers, please be discerning in who you target. And for those regulators out there that want to make us innocent people suffer for the bone-headed moves of genuinely evil, stupid or ignorant bankers, why don't you cleanse the industry of them before lumping volumes of regulations upon us, thereby crushing the industry, thereby crushing the economy? I'll even volunteer to be the lead Witch Hunter, and I can bag you some doozies of banksters in a matter of seconds. Start cleaning up the banking industry real quick.
But, no, I know, I know. That would be too simple and too many government regulators are making too much money on this racket. Like I said, I was writing for posterity.
All that being said, when I look at my stats, I see a lot of hits coming from search engines where people have searched, "Kill the bankers," "let's kill some bankers," or "killing bankers." And what I see, especially in combination with this, is a lot of angry OWS protester types trying to find other people who may indeed want to kill bankers. Tis a bit eerie.
There is, however, a problem with this, aside from its illegality. You just can't kill any ole banker and hope that the banking industry will all of the sudden straighten up and fly right. Blanket targeting bankers won't solve the problem because there are good bankers, just as there are bad bankers. And it is the bad bankers you need to purge from the system.
Now, the reason I bring this up, is not because of whetting the appetites of anarchists that want to murder people. It's to bring up a very important point about regulation. Regulation currently deployed and pursued by the government has this same "blanket approach" to regulating ALL bankers to death. The problem again is it doesn't target the genuinely greedy, evil or incompetent bankers, it targets the entire banking industry. And for those bankers that kept their noses clean, they must now suffer the mistakes of their evil banking counterparts.
It won't happen, but this is why I am advocating (once again for posterity's sake) a witch hunt of all the bad bankers and purging them from various sorts of vital components of the economy (banking, finance, government, military, etc.)
This wouldn't be hard to do because when loans are approved bankers and loan officers must sign off on these loans. And it doesn't matter where these bankers moved to or took another job elsewhere, because, in the banking industry, everybody knows where everybody went. It would simply be a matter of sending agents to different banks to find out where "Jim" went, tracking him down till you inevitably find him and forcibly firing him out of the banking industry forever.
So to those of you looking to kill bankers, please be discerning in who you target. And for those regulators out there that want to make us innocent people suffer for the bone-headed moves of genuinely evil, stupid or ignorant bankers, why don't you cleanse the industry of them before lumping volumes of regulations upon us, thereby crushing the industry, thereby crushing the economy? I'll even volunteer to be the lead Witch Hunter, and I can bag you some doozies of banksters in a matter of seconds. Start cleaning up the banking industry real quick.
But, no, I know, I know. That would be too simple and too many government regulators are making too much money on this racket. Like I said, I was writing for posterity.
Real vs. Fake
Continuing on with our "happiness" program-
Fake picture:
Real picture:
Normally I'm not the sappy type of guy, but you gotta love it when two people who are in love give the proverbial verb to tyrants.
Fake picture:
Real picture:
Normally I'm not the sappy type of guy, but you gotta love it when two people who are in love give the proverbial verb to tyrants.
Friday, January 20, 2012
My Most Humbling Blogging Experience
So I saw that the reviews for my super awesome book are starting to come in, but I didn't realize you could "video review."
So I see this, and I am speechless. I am really flattered to receive this review, not just because of the review, but because it helped the kid get off his ass and go to school AND helped him choose the right major.
Just one question.
Why does everybody think my last name is "Clancy?"
So I see this, and I am speechless. I am really flattered to receive this review, not just because of the review, but because it helped the kid get off his ass and go to school AND helped him choose the right major.
Just one question.
Why does everybody think my last name is "Clancy?"
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Amalgamated Wisdom
I'll go to war for this. But I will never go to war for this.
Housing will have to overcorrect because of the bad taste the housing bubble has left in potential buyers' mouths. Oh, that and the sheer hell one must go through now to get qualified for a house.
"There is no "I" in "team." Yeah, but there is an "I" in "You freaking morons are the god damned turkey's that keep me from soaring with the eagles. You'll never amount to anything, but that doesn't mean I won't and have to live your sucky life. Now get the ef out of my way and let me excel at what I do."
The legal liabilities are too great to have children...in Norway....but give it time.
I'm going to say it again for the cheap seats - Education is NOT for the children. It's to employ people who have no skills, offer nothing to society, and can only serve as overpaid baby-sitters, otherwise known as public school teachers. Just do me a favor and read this.
I knew this would happen. I knew liberals would come up with the "white collar crime" argument. That argument usually deployed when you say, "uh, poorer neighborhoods usually have more crime." Then, without hesitation, "oh yeah! well what about all that white collar crime!" Funny thing is an accountant embezzling money won't land me in the hospital.
No sh#t Sherlock! She too could have done well to read my book. I'm kidding, I'm actually a fan of The Evil HR Lady. She's slowing coming around on the economics stuff.
Puke, gag and barf. Nathan, Sarah is going to divorce your sniveling, whiny ass once she runs into a bad boy preacher's son like me.
Why I support Ron Paul.
Some darn good economic research that I would have done in my early blogging days.
Housing will have to overcorrect because of the bad taste the housing bubble has left in potential buyers' mouths. Oh, that and the sheer hell one must go through now to get qualified for a house.
"There is no "I" in "team." Yeah, but there is an "I" in "You freaking morons are the god damned turkey's that keep me from soaring with the eagles. You'll never amount to anything, but that doesn't mean I won't and have to live your sucky life. Now get the ef out of my way and let me excel at what I do."
The legal liabilities are too great to have children...in Norway....but give it time.
I'm going to say it again for the cheap seats - Education is NOT for the children. It's to employ people who have no skills, offer nothing to society, and can only serve as overpaid baby-sitters, otherwise known as public school teachers. Just do me a favor and read this.
I knew this would happen. I knew liberals would come up with the "white collar crime" argument. That argument usually deployed when you say, "uh, poorer neighborhoods usually have more crime." Then, without hesitation, "oh yeah! well what about all that white collar crime!" Funny thing is an accountant embezzling money won't land me in the hospital.
No sh#t Sherlock! She too could have done well to read my book. I'm kidding, I'm actually a fan of The Evil HR Lady. She's slowing coming around on the economics stuff.
Puke, gag and barf. Nathan, Sarah is going to divorce your sniveling, whiny ass once she runs into a bad boy preacher's son like me.
Why I support Ron Paul.
Some darn good economic research that I would have done in my early blogging days.
There's Only One Way Out of This Mess
(my apologies in advance for the font. I have no clue why it's doing this)
I very much dislike writing for posterity. It indicates that at the point in time I was writing something, society was so brainwashed, so ignorant, and so stupid, that I had to resort to writing down something to provide a historical record that, “yes, I know what the hell I’m talking about.” And “yes, you people were so galactically ignorant back then, that now, with hindsight, what I predicted has come true, and you must feel awfully stupid for not listening to me.” I of course am not talking about you fellow Cappy Cappite readers, matter of fact this post will probably bore you because it is something you, I, and everybody with an ounce of brain know. But I’m going to spell it out anyway, not just to have a historical record permitting me an “I told you so” in the future, but to perhaps crystalize our thoughts about economics, politics, etc., or perhaps to precisely and succinctly make our case.
Right now, whether you are on the left or the right or in the spineless “inbetween,” we can all agree that the economy sucks, the future of the US is crippled, and nobody is happy with the direction the country is headed. The solutions deployed thus far are largely Keynesian in nature where we take money and resources from one group of people OR we borrow it from the future and give it to other groups of people in the hope of “jump starting” the economy. This strategy is the “status quo” because Keynesian economics is drilled day in and day out into young economists’ brains from high school into college and into their careers.
So when it’s blindingly apparent that the Keynesian stimulus has failed, because Keynesianism is so entrenched you get the idiotic, “We just didn’t do ENOUGH of it. We need MORE stimulus. We need MORE taxes. We need MORE government intervention.” And then the layman on the streets says, “The government needs to do something.”
However, let me suggest an alternative strategy. One not based on “sloshing money around the economy” in the hopes it all of the sudden “jump starts” and we have a booming 1940’s America once again.
Production-based economics.
You see, if you permit me to just wipe clean your brain of what you think you know about economics and politics, and start from the ground up, I believe I can provide you a much clearer and (MUCH) simpler model in how economics works.
You must understand, first and foremost, what an economy consists of. An economy consists of one simple thing – production. Specifically the production of goods and services. It’s a boring term “goods and services,” but if I said:
“Martinis, Ferraris, clothes, video games, Ipod’s, cell phones,etc, etc,” much more exotic stuff, you can see where people are incented by production.
We want STUFF. That’s all economics or any economy in the history of the world has been about. STUFF.
If you don’t believe me, perhaps an example that will prove it AND teach you a very important lesson about money.
If I have a wad of $100 bills and I release it at a crowded state fair, what do you suppose will happen?
A riot will happen, that’s what. People will scramble and knock each other out of the way to get that money.
But what value does the money have? What can you do with a $100 bill?
Functionally nothing. A $100 bill is a piece of paper with ink on it. It has no more value than a scrap of paper or garbage on the ground. But people instinctive, viscerally, and most likely, violently will scramble for it. Not necessarily even thinking about why they are punching the teeth out of grandma to get another $100 bill, but because their brain unconsciously knows full well it can buy STUFF with that $100 bill.
In short, the success of an economy is not based on how much money it prints, but rather how much STUFF it produces. Money is merely a tool by which to convert your time into a medium or tool that you can purchase STUFF with.
Related to STUFF and production is another aspect people don’t think about and that is innovation.
Innovation is the creation of new, better and more-kick-ass STUFF. Vaccines, faster planes, better computers, or whole new inventions we haven’t even thought of yet. Innovation is arguably even more important than an economy’s mere volume capacity to produce stuff, because it allows an economy to produce better stuff with less time and resources. Take for example automobiles. Before hand you travelled by horse or on foot. Transport of goods and services relied on beasts of burden or canals and boats. But with the combustion engine we could now haul TONS more STUFF, further distances and at a fraction of the cost. The benefit was more STUFF delivered to more people AT A CHEAPER PRICE. The innovation of the combustion engine benefited not just its inventor and the “evil corporation” that made it, but made prices lower for everybody thereby increasing standards of living for all people (ie-why do you hate Wal-Mart so much when it’s done the exact same thing today?)
It is these two things – the ability to produce stuff and the ability to create NEW stuff – that determines how successful, rich and prosperous an economy and a people are.
Now, assuming you believe what I laid out above (and if you don’t, then I can’t convince you because you’re psychotic, insane or just intellectually dishonest and there’s no reason trying to convince you), ask yourself how today’s current government policies help promotion the production of stuff and the innovation of new stuff?
The answer is, it doesn’t.
Matter of fact it punishes people who produce stuff or dare to create or innovate new stuff.
The current government policy is not to promote economic growth, but is instead based on spreading out what stuff we make now more “fairly” or “equitably.” It also foolishly assumes spreading out the “stuff” will somehow magically result in an economic boom.
The problem is look at who the policies reward and “punish.”
Right now we do not champion the producers or innovators of society. We champion the losers. All of our efforts and focus is on people who are unemployed, underemployed, old, aging, decrepit, oppressed, disadvantaged, blah blah blah. And so we tax people who produce stuff and transfer it to those who don’t produce stuff.
I am not commenting on the morality of whether those NOT producing stuff deserve it or are oppressed or somehow deserve the transference of stuff. I am merely pointing out the fact that we are transferring stuff from producers to non-producers. And whether there is a moral imperative to do so, is irrelevant to this point. The fact people who produce stuff in this society are taxed for producing more stuff means they are punished for doing so. And because the act of producing or innovating or creating is punished, the incentive to continue to do so is impaired.
You can see this come to a head with the hypocrisy of your typical OWS protestor. They all want jobs, but they want to tax the “evil corporations.” They all want the stock market to go up so their 401k or pensions are fully funded and increase in value, but they want corporations to “pay their fair share.” It is ignorance like this that allows such idiots like Barack Obama to get into office because they merely have to advocate transferring wealth from producers to non-producers to buy the votes to put them into office. But this strategy has a cost – it impairs the engine of the economy to the point of stagnation by destroying any incentive the producers have to keep on producing.
And so the more you protest and demand producers pay for your stuff, the more corporations will move offshore, set up plants in foreign countries, and the more the “evil rich people” will invest outside the country or just outright pick up and leave.
There is of course another option, and frankly it’s your only option. To grow ourselves out of our economic problems. To take the focus off of the non-producers, the “poor,” the “old,” the “disadvantaged,” the “oppressed” and put the ball back into the hand of the producers and innovators and pray to god they are able to reinvigorate the economy.
This, unfortunately, means no more free food for teenagers that couldn’t keep it in their pants. This means no more rewarding idiotic and stupid behavior like bailing out companies or having the government finance companies that never had any intention of making a profit. This means no more government money for idiot 20 somethings who major in hobbies that ultimately produce no stuff. This means requiring the millions of people who just laid on their backs with their hands out expecting the producers to carry them from cradle to grave NOT all of the sudden get an epiphany and realize they should get off their lazy asses and join the productive crowd (no, we know you’re too lazy for that).
But rather, you go on a diet and so if you are collecting some form of a government check, you CAN’T afford the latest Iphone or fanciest car. That if you are collecting a government check, instead of eating out at restuarants all the time, you instead scale back to ramen and let the much-needed harsh lesson of poverty and hunger kick your lazy ass into a job or school so you can join the producers. The money saved would instead go to the producers who would create those jobs you’re all clamoring for and instead of just sloshing around money in the economy, hoping your morons get your heads out of your asses and start voting and working in a way that helps the country and economy grow, brings the economic reality VERY CLEAR to you so you realize what kind of responsibility you have.
Of course there will be howls and cries about how “unfair” this approach would be. And how “can you take the food out of my 6 babies’ from 7 different fathers’ mouths.” But two simple points:
1. There is no other choice. The system is bankrupt and the currently policies pursued by the government are not sustainable. You think you’re in poverty NOW? Just wait until there is NO government check. And even if there was a government check, imagine if there is no food in the isles to buy because the producers of the food decided to just up and quit or move their operations overseas?
2. This option is actually going to result in an even better standard of living. The reason why can be beautifully pointed out by North Korea vs. the US. North Korea is a communist country. They went down the road of championing the losers and punishing the producers. You would think with such an approach, poverty would be wiped out in North korea, but it is the poorest country on the face of the planet bar some craptastic countries in Africa. While the US, at least originally, rewarded the champions, rewarded the producers and more importantly, rewarded the innovators. And while as a percentage the US didn’t transfer as much wealth from the rich to the poor, in being able to create new and better stuff as much cheaper prices, even the “poor” in the US are infinitely wealthier and lead better lives than the “rich” of North Korea.
In short, we have two options. We can keep going the route we have been, demanding other people pay for our stuff, feeling sorry for ourselves and finding whatever rationale to take other people’s stuff (sexism, racism, ageism, nepotism, conspiracy, classism, woeismeism, etc.) and you can naturally expect the amount of stuff being produced stagnate or decline
OR
We can focus on the production of stuff. Revolutionize the US economy back to it’s 1880’s-1950’s heyday. And produce so much stuff that it DWARFS the debt and our current economic problems. We don’t worry about “oh, well Jimmy has $5 more than Steve and so that’s unfair.” You get off your ass, you quit bitching about how “unfair” life is, you start voting in people who are “Pro-Producing of Stuff” and the US booms once again, making stuff so cheap and plentiful we all make effectively $250,000 and our “poor” is considered to be those making “only” $50,000 per year.
I know which one I prefer. And what’s funny is it’s the only option that’s going to work. Because your only other option is to fail and continue on into poverty and mediocrity. Or to quote Robert Mitchum from the Longest Day:
“Only two types of people that are going to stay on this beach. Those that are already dead, and those that are gonna die. Now get off your butts!”
Choice is yours
.
I very much dislike writing for posterity. It indicates that at the point in time I was writing something, society was so brainwashed, so ignorant, and so stupid, that I had to resort to writing down something to provide a historical record that, “yes, I know what the hell I’m talking about.” And “yes, you people were so galactically ignorant back then, that now, with hindsight, what I predicted has come true, and you must feel awfully stupid for not listening to me.” I of course am not talking about you fellow Cappy Cappite readers, matter of fact this post will probably bore you because it is something you, I, and everybody with an ounce of brain know. But I’m going to spell it out anyway, not just to have a historical record permitting me an “I told you so” in the future, but to perhaps crystalize our thoughts about economics, politics, etc., or perhaps to precisely and succinctly make our case.
Right now, whether you are on the left or the right or in the spineless “inbetween,” we can all agree that the economy sucks, the future of the US is crippled, and nobody is happy with the direction the country is headed. The solutions deployed thus far are largely Keynesian in nature where we take money and resources from one group of people OR we borrow it from the future and give it to other groups of people in the hope of “jump starting” the economy. This strategy is the “status quo” because Keynesian economics is drilled day in and day out into young economists’ brains from high school into college and into their careers.
So when it’s blindingly apparent that the Keynesian stimulus has failed, because Keynesianism is so entrenched you get the idiotic, “We just didn’t do ENOUGH of it. We need MORE stimulus. We need MORE taxes. We need MORE government intervention.” And then the layman on the streets says, “The government needs to do something.”
However, let me suggest an alternative strategy. One not based on “sloshing money around the economy” in the hopes it all of the sudden “jump starts” and we have a booming 1940’s America once again.
Production-based economics.
You see, if you permit me to just wipe clean your brain of what you think you know about economics and politics, and start from the ground up, I believe I can provide you a much clearer and (MUCH) simpler model in how economics works.
You must understand, first and foremost, what an economy consists of. An economy consists of one simple thing – production. Specifically the production of goods and services. It’s a boring term “goods and services,” but if I said:
“Martinis, Ferraris, clothes, video games, Ipod’s, cell phones,etc, etc,” much more exotic stuff, you can see where people are incented by production.
We want STUFF. That’s all economics or any economy in the history of the world has been about. STUFF.
If you don’t believe me, perhaps an example that will prove it AND teach you a very important lesson about money.
If I have a wad of $100 bills and I release it at a crowded state fair, what do you suppose will happen?
A riot will happen, that’s what. People will scramble and knock each other out of the way to get that money.
But what value does the money have? What can you do with a $100 bill?
Functionally nothing. A $100 bill is a piece of paper with ink on it. It has no more value than a scrap of paper or garbage on the ground. But people instinctive, viscerally, and most likely, violently will scramble for it. Not necessarily even thinking about why they are punching the teeth out of grandma to get another $100 bill, but because their brain unconsciously knows full well it can buy STUFF with that $100 bill.
In short, the success of an economy is not based on how much money it prints, but rather how much STUFF it produces. Money is merely a tool by which to convert your time into a medium or tool that you can purchase STUFF with.
Related to STUFF and production is another aspect people don’t think about and that is innovation.
Innovation is the creation of new, better and more-kick-ass STUFF. Vaccines, faster planes, better computers, or whole new inventions we haven’t even thought of yet. Innovation is arguably even more important than an economy’s mere volume capacity to produce stuff, because it allows an economy to produce better stuff with less time and resources. Take for example automobiles. Before hand you travelled by horse or on foot. Transport of goods and services relied on beasts of burden or canals and boats. But with the combustion engine we could now haul TONS more STUFF, further distances and at a fraction of the cost. The benefit was more STUFF delivered to more people AT A CHEAPER PRICE. The innovation of the combustion engine benefited not just its inventor and the “evil corporation” that made it, but made prices lower for everybody thereby increasing standards of living for all people (ie-why do you hate Wal-Mart so much when it’s done the exact same thing today?)
It is these two things – the ability to produce stuff and the ability to create NEW stuff – that determines how successful, rich and prosperous an economy and a people are.
Now, assuming you believe what I laid out above (and if you don’t, then I can’t convince you because you’re psychotic, insane or just intellectually dishonest and there’s no reason trying to convince you), ask yourself how today’s current government policies help promotion the production of stuff and the innovation of new stuff?
The answer is, it doesn’t.
Matter of fact it punishes people who produce stuff or dare to create or innovate new stuff.
The current government policy is not to promote economic growth, but is instead based on spreading out what stuff we make now more “fairly” or “equitably.” It also foolishly assumes spreading out the “stuff” will somehow magically result in an economic boom.
The problem is look at who the policies reward and “punish.”
Right now we do not champion the producers or innovators of society. We champion the losers. All of our efforts and focus is on people who are unemployed, underemployed, old, aging, decrepit, oppressed, disadvantaged, blah blah blah. And so we tax people who produce stuff and transfer it to those who don’t produce stuff.
I am not commenting on the morality of whether those NOT producing stuff deserve it or are oppressed or somehow deserve the transference of stuff. I am merely pointing out the fact that we are transferring stuff from producers to non-producers. And whether there is a moral imperative to do so, is irrelevant to this point. The fact people who produce stuff in this society are taxed for producing more stuff means they are punished for doing so. And because the act of producing or innovating or creating is punished, the incentive to continue to do so is impaired.
You can see this come to a head with the hypocrisy of your typical OWS protestor. They all want jobs, but they want to tax the “evil corporations.” They all want the stock market to go up so their 401k or pensions are fully funded and increase in value, but they want corporations to “pay their fair share.” It is ignorance like this that allows such idiots like Barack Obama to get into office because they merely have to advocate transferring wealth from producers to non-producers to buy the votes to put them into office. But this strategy has a cost – it impairs the engine of the economy to the point of stagnation by destroying any incentive the producers have to keep on producing.
And so the more you protest and demand producers pay for your stuff, the more corporations will move offshore, set up plants in foreign countries, and the more the “evil rich people” will invest outside the country or just outright pick up and leave.
There is of course another option, and frankly it’s your only option. To grow ourselves out of our economic problems. To take the focus off of the non-producers, the “poor,” the “old,” the “disadvantaged,” the “oppressed” and put the ball back into the hand of the producers and innovators and pray to god they are able to reinvigorate the economy.
This, unfortunately, means no more free food for teenagers that couldn’t keep it in their pants. This means no more rewarding idiotic and stupid behavior like bailing out companies or having the government finance companies that never had any intention of making a profit. This means no more government money for idiot 20 somethings who major in hobbies that ultimately produce no stuff. This means requiring the millions of people who just laid on their backs with their hands out expecting the producers to carry them from cradle to grave NOT all of the sudden get an epiphany and realize they should get off their lazy asses and join the productive crowd (no, we know you’re too lazy for that).
But rather, you go on a diet and so if you are collecting some form of a government check, you CAN’T afford the latest Iphone or fanciest car. That if you are collecting a government check, instead of eating out at restuarants all the time, you instead scale back to ramen and let the much-needed harsh lesson of poverty and hunger kick your lazy ass into a job or school so you can join the producers. The money saved would instead go to the producers who would create those jobs you’re all clamoring for and instead of just sloshing around money in the economy, hoping your morons get your heads out of your asses and start voting and working in a way that helps the country and economy grow, brings the economic reality VERY CLEAR to you so you realize what kind of responsibility you have.
Of course there will be howls and cries about how “unfair” this approach would be. And how “can you take the food out of my 6 babies’ from 7 different fathers’ mouths.” But two simple points:
1. There is no other choice. The system is bankrupt and the currently policies pursued by the government are not sustainable. You think you’re in poverty NOW? Just wait until there is NO government check. And even if there was a government check, imagine if there is no food in the isles to buy because the producers of the food decided to just up and quit or move their operations overseas?
2. This option is actually going to result in an even better standard of living. The reason why can be beautifully pointed out by North Korea vs. the US. North Korea is a communist country. They went down the road of championing the losers and punishing the producers. You would think with such an approach, poverty would be wiped out in North korea, but it is the poorest country on the face of the planet bar some craptastic countries in Africa. While the US, at least originally, rewarded the champions, rewarded the producers and more importantly, rewarded the innovators. And while as a percentage the US didn’t transfer as much wealth from the rich to the poor, in being able to create new and better stuff as much cheaper prices, even the “poor” in the US are infinitely wealthier and lead better lives than the “rich” of North Korea.
In short, we have two options. We can keep going the route we have been, demanding other people pay for our stuff, feeling sorry for ourselves and finding whatever rationale to take other people’s stuff (sexism, racism, ageism, nepotism, conspiracy, classism, woeismeism, etc.) and you can naturally expect the amount of stuff being produced stagnate or decline
OR
We can focus on the production of stuff. Revolutionize the US economy back to it’s 1880’s-1950’s heyday. And produce so much stuff that it DWARFS the debt and our current economic problems. We don’t worry about “oh, well Jimmy has $5 more than Steve and so that’s unfair.” You get off your ass, you quit bitching about how “unfair” life is, you start voting in people who are “Pro-Producing of Stuff” and the US booms once again, making stuff so cheap and plentiful we all make effectively $250,000 and our “poor” is considered to be those making “only” $50,000 per year.
I know which one I prefer. And what’s funny is it’s the only option that’s going to work. Because your only other option is to fail and continue on into poverty and mediocrity. Or to quote Robert Mitchum from the Longest Day:
“Only two types of people that are going to stay on this beach. Those that are already dead, and those that are gonna die. Now get off your butts!”
Choice is yours
.
The Lost Art of Cocktailing
"Cocktailing" is a verb that I cannot claim to have created. Nor do I think my friend who introduced me to the term came up with it himself. I believe, because my friend is one of those guys with an IQ of 300 coupled with culture, he probably heard it from an older gentlemen who used it back in his youth when the term was more common.
Regardless, before I moved out of Minneapolis, cocktailing had become arguably my favorite thing to do. Not because of the booze (though Rumpleminze played a vital role in cocktailing), but because of the company and my friends.
Cocktailing essentially means going out to a quiet bar or lounge, savoring martinis or other drinks that take time and patience to consume, with the PRIMARY GOAL of conversing and having intelligent conversation with your friends. The music is generally jazz, quiet enough so you can converse. The environment is usually schwank or classy so you feel cozy and relaxed. And the attire is usually better than average so you not only feel like Cary Grant, but you have some eye candy to look at (even though those women are your friends).
In short it is what I believe to be the evolutionary pinnacle of "going out." It starts in its zygote stage when you're 18 and you go to loud raves or night clubs where the music is so loud and obnoxious you can't have a conversation anyway. It matures into a "fad" where a skill like salsa dancing becomes required, but you still have to dress up and abide by middle school morays if you wish to score a dance with a member of the opposite sex. It inevitably sheds it's "meeting the opposite sex objective" skin when you hit your 30's and just plain want to relax and enjoy what you want. It was like reaching the Nirvana of Nightlife where you finally went out for yourself, surrounded yourself with your friends, and never had a bad night out. Aside from vacationing and video games, it was the primary social activity to enjoy.
Unfortunately, moving out from Minneapolis separated me from my Cocktailing Crew. And making matters worse, there isn't a ton of "martini jazz club lounges" in South Dakota. Regardless, the principle of cocktailing doesn't necessitate high end lounges and jazz clubs, as much as it does a crew of intelligent people you could meet and have intelligent conversation with. And while it took a decade to form my Crew o' Cocktailers in Minneapolis, I was already starting to form a crew out here in the rural part of the country. Not a critical mass of people to pull it off, but the nucleus of a crew was forming.
Enter last weekend.
I received a call from one of the cells of the nucleus. She was going to host a party at her house and then we would go "hit a couple bars in town."
I was excited! These people were roughly my age, reasonably intelligent, quite educated and in conversations I had with them before, very engaging and entertaining. I was more than happy to hang out with this crew and do the rural version of "cocktailing." I had decided to lay off the booze for a while to pursue a physical work out and dietary change, and so offered to be the sober cab, the offer of which was quickly accepted. I was told to show up at 830, I showed up at 900PM.
I got there and only the host was home. She informed me everybody was spread out across the town at various bars. We were to pick up her friend at one bar (who had been there since 4PM) and rendezvous with the rest of the Proto-Crew at another bar in town. We were, however, in no rush, and so I spoke with the hostess for a bit about her week, what the latest was, how people were doing, etc. etc. What ensued was a pleasant and enjoyable conversation characterized with intelligence, humor and some wittiness. It was like getting a hit of heroin.
"Aaaaaahhhhh. Cocktailing!"
Soon enough though, her friend called wondering where we were, and off we went to pick her up.
We were to pick her up at this bar I had been before. It was a quiet joint, ran by an old man. Not a high end martini bar, but he played Frank Sinatra. So I knew it was going to be good. I opened the doors and
BLAM!!!!!!
I was hit by a combination of loud hip hop music, neon lights, and a loud group of patrons having a good time.
I saw the girl we were looking for at the bar. I ponied up next to her and yelled at the bartender,
"What happened to the old man and the Frank Sinatra music?!"
"WHAT????"
"I SAID, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OLD MAN AND THE FRANK SINATRA MUSIC????!!!"
"OH! HE SOLD THE JOINT 3 MONTHS AGO AND WE LIVENED IT UP A BIT!!!!"
"YEAH! I'D SAY!!!"
I didn't let it get me down, because I knew we were just here to pick up the girl and consolidate the crew at another bar. But I should have.
The "Crew" now consisted of me, the hostess and the girl we were to pick up. She was drunk, but functional. I started suggesting we leave to meet the rest of the crew, but was then informed NOBODY ELSE WAS GOING TO GO OUT! They had all bailed or just not returned her calls. And so what ensued was a discussion of where to go.
Now, understand, the two women I was with were 36 and 42. I didn't think they would want to roll back the evolutionary advancements made in the art of "going out." I started to suggest we go to this quieter joint I knew and get some food, but then they uttered the two most-hated phrases that no self-respecting alpha wants to hear:
"Sports bar."
and
"Girls night."
Now I know why the Proto-Crew bailed.
I all of the sudden realized they were not quite as far down the evolutionary path of "going out" as I was. And once I mentally took a step back, I realized I was stuck in the borderline-orbiter beta position as a sober cab driver for two women who seemed hell-bent on being "woo girls" for the evening.
I started planning my escape. Since I was stuck as sober cab and my car was back at the hostess' house, I first went the route of trying to suggest we ought to get something to eat first, knowing full well the "sports bar" with "girls night" had no food being served. This had some initial success because they both realized they were starving. But it still didn't get me off the hook because they said we could then go to the sports bar afterwards. But to remedy this, I had a moment of TRUE SUPER AWESOME ECONOMIC GENIUS! While they were partying it up at the sports bar, I would drive to Wal-Mart and do some much needed grocery shopping. I would return home, do some laundry and a litany of other chores I had to do, wait for their call, go back, pick them up, drop off #1, drop off #2, grab my car and at MOST have wasted 30 minutes of my night, while keeping to my word to be sober cab.
So off to one of the few restaurants that was still serving food. It was, unfortunately (you guessed it) another loud bar. Music was loud, people were loud, no place to sit, and so I scoped out a seat in the dining area where we could get food and it wasn't terribly loud. Trying to remain on the optimistic side of things, I figured it wouldn't be too bad. Both WERE intelligent women, we could still have some intelligent conversation, I was hungry anyway, and it's not like every night was going to be 100% Cocktailing Bliss, especially if you haven't formed a solid, well-vetted crew.
Waitress comes by, I order my food, they order their drinks and after placing our orders, the drunk girl grabs the hostess and says in slightly slurred speech,
"Follow me, I have to so you some guys. I want you to pick out the one you like."
I was partly shocked, partly bemused and partly amused all at the same time. The reason why was their age. It wasn't like they were 13 and 14, giggling at the local dance, where a bold Suzie grabbed a shy Jenny and ran over to try to flirt with some boys. These were 42 and 36 year old FULL GROWN WOMEN who were still acting like it was 1988 and they were at the local 18 and under club. The had fully reverted to pre-zygote stage of the going out evolutionary chain!
And that is why I told you this long and sordid story. There has been an arrested development of sorts when it comes to women (and men I might add!) and their means of going out and socializing. I don't know about you guys, but going out night clubbing, paying for cover charges and screaming over music to try to score a number from a girl got real old, real quick. I think the last time I was at a genuine "night club" was probably when I was 24. I then naturally followed the evolutionary progression going to swing and salsa dancing, and finally matured into the final stage of Cocktailing.
But what gets me is how it seems some women (and men) still deploy the same tactics they did when they were 20 years younger. It behooves so many questions and observations, all of which I don't think I could list, but I'll try:
1. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result. I usually would get the point in about 2-3 years. I don't think I would try it for 20 years.
2. The Patron Saint Frick has got to be saying, "What in the Patron Saint's Name of Myself are you girls doing, giggling and approaching guys at a bar like that when you're pushing middle age??!!!"
3. Is this just another example of your Captain being spoiled with really intelligent friends and alas, he will never achieve the high-level of Cocktailing he wished to recreate? Will he fail in his Johnny Appleseed quest to bring "Cocktailing" to the savages?
4. Damnit! How did I get into this situation!? It was like I was tricked into being "The Beta for the Night."
5. Texting texting texting texting. The constant texting only reconfirmed my staunch belief in not texting. The girls could not go more than 4 minutes without looking at their phones and texting. Again, are you 40 or 14?
6. And yes, manosphere readers - divorced, kids, all of you in the manosphere can absolutely guess the profiles, I don't have to provide details.
The night continued much like you could guess. The drunk girl, along with a drink I recommended, got the hostess pretty tipsy. The drunk girl's salesmanship also introduced the hostess to a nice young man. So nice that they talked for nearly 2 hours, denying us any opportunity to go to the sports bar (yea!!!!). Drunk girl finally got a text about where her friends were. We went to a "dance club," which by major metropolitan area was hilarious. It was, of course, loud, and this Proto-Crew decided to sit RIGHT NEXT TO THE SPEAKERS. I ponied up to the bar. Ordered an O'Douls. Listened to one of the many members of the Drunk Trailer Trash Tribe that populate the city yell and scream his woman problems at the woman sitting next to me. He liked to use words that start with "F" and it was very apparent why he had women problems. I managed to strike up a conversation with (oddly enough) a doctorate candidate in psychology, though it was difficult because of the loud hip hop music that was then being played. Sure enough, booze was taking its toll on the rookie crew and I was summoned to bring them back home. I dropped everybody off at their respective places, hoped into my POS, went home and went to bed swearing never to be the sober cab ever again.
I miss Mancini's.
I miss the St. Petersbourgh Vodka Bar.
I miss Jake O'Connors
I miss Axels Bonfire.
I miss Stogies on Grand
I miss The Perfect Ash
I miss Grove Tobacco
I miss the Chalet
I miss The Manor
I miss The Times Cafe
I miss Little Havana
I miss The Embassy Suites Lounge
I miss Psycho Suzie's
I miss Prohibition
I miss Floyd's
I miss The Embassy
Hell, I miss Perkins.
But most of all, I miss my top notch, Cracker-Jack Cocktailing Crew.
Enjoy the decline.
Regardless, before I moved out of Minneapolis, cocktailing had become arguably my favorite thing to do. Not because of the booze (though Rumpleminze played a vital role in cocktailing), but because of the company and my friends.
Cocktailing essentially means going out to a quiet bar or lounge, savoring martinis or other drinks that take time and patience to consume, with the PRIMARY GOAL of conversing and having intelligent conversation with your friends. The music is generally jazz, quiet enough so you can converse. The environment is usually schwank or classy so you feel cozy and relaxed. And the attire is usually better than average so you not only feel like Cary Grant, but you have some eye candy to look at (even though those women are your friends).
In short it is what I believe to be the evolutionary pinnacle of "going out." It starts in its zygote stage when you're 18 and you go to loud raves or night clubs where the music is so loud and obnoxious you can't have a conversation anyway. It matures into a "fad" where a skill like salsa dancing becomes required, but you still have to dress up and abide by middle school morays if you wish to score a dance with a member of the opposite sex. It inevitably sheds it's "meeting the opposite sex objective" skin when you hit your 30's and just plain want to relax and enjoy what you want. It was like reaching the Nirvana of Nightlife where you finally went out for yourself, surrounded yourself with your friends, and never had a bad night out. Aside from vacationing and video games, it was the primary social activity to enjoy.
Unfortunately, moving out from Minneapolis separated me from my Cocktailing Crew. And making matters worse, there isn't a ton of "martini jazz club lounges" in South Dakota. Regardless, the principle of cocktailing doesn't necessitate high end lounges and jazz clubs, as much as it does a crew of intelligent people you could meet and have intelligent conversation with. And while it took a decade to form my Crew o' Cocktailers in Minneapolis, I was already starting to form a crew out here in the rural part of the country. Not a critical mass of people to pull it off, but the nucleus of a crew was forming.
Enter last weekend.
I received a call from one of the cells of the nucleus. She was going to host a party at her house and then we would go "hit a couple bars in town."
I was excited! These people were roughly my age, reasonably intelligent, quite educated and in conversations I had with them before, very engaging and entertaining. I was more than happy to hang out with this crew and do the rural version of "cocktailing." I had decided to lay off the booze for a while to pursue a physical work out and dietary change, and so offered to be the sober cab, the offer of which was quickly accepted. I was told to show up at 830, I showed up at 900PM.
I got there and only the host was home. She informed me everybody was spread out across the town at various bars. We were to pick up her friend at one bar (who had been there since 4PM) and rendezvous with the rest of the Proto-Crew at another bar in town. We were, however, in no rush, and so I spoke with the hostess for a bit about her week, what the latest was, how people were doing, etc. etc. What ensued was a pleasant and enjoyable conversation characterized with intelligence, humor and some wittiness. It was like getting a hit of heroin.
"Aaaaaahhhhh. Cocktailing!"
Soon enough though, her friend called wondering where we were, and off we went to pick her up.
We were to pick her up at this bar I had been before. It was a quiet joint, ran by an old man. Not a high end martini bar, but he played Frank Sinatra. So I knew it was going to be good. I opened the doors and
BLAM!!!!!!
I was hit by a combination of loud hip hop music, neon lights, and a loud group of patrons having a good time.
I saw the girl we were looking for at the bar. I ponied up next to her and yelled at the bartender,
"What happened to the old man and the Frank Sinatra music?!"
"WHAT????"
"I SAID, WHAT HAPPENED TO THE OLD MAN AND THE FRANK SINATRA MUSIC????!!!"
"OH! HE SOLD THE JOINT 3 MONTHS AGO AND WE LIVENED IT UP A BIT!!!!"
"YEAH! I'D SAY!!!"
I didn't let it get me down, because I knew we were just here to pick up the girl and consolidate the crew at another bar. But I should have.
The "Crew" now consisted of me, the hostess and the girl we were to pick up. She was drunk, but functional. I started suggesting we leave to meet the rest of the crew, but was then informed NOBODY ELSE WAS GOING TO GO OUT! They had all bailed or just not returned her calls. And so what ensued was a discussion of where to go.
Now, understand, the two women I was with were 36 and 42. I didn't think they would want to roll back the evolutionary advancements made in the art of "going out." I started to suggest we go to this quieter joint I knew and get some food, but then they uttered the two most-hated phrases that no self-respecting alpha wants to hear:
"Sports bar."
and
"Girls night."
Now I know why the Proto-Crew bailed.
I all of the sudden realized they were not quite as far down the evolutionary path of "going out" as I was. And once I mentally took a step back, I realized I was stuck in the borderline-orbiter beta position as a sober cab driver for two women who seemed hell-bent on being "woo girls" for the evening.
I started planning my escape. Since I was stuck as sober cab and my car was back at the hostess' house, I first went the route of trying to suggest we ought to get something to eat first, knowing full well the "sports bar" with "girls night" had no food being served. This had some initial success because they both realized they were starving. But it still didn't get me off the hook because they said we could then go to the sports bar afterwards. But to remedy this, I had a moment of TRUE SUPER AWESOME ECONOMIC GENIUS! While they were partying it up at the sports bar, I would drive to Wal-Mart and do some much needed grocery shopping. I would return home, do some laundry and a litany of other chores I had to do, wait for their call, go back, pick them up, drop off #1, drop off #2, grab my car and at MOST have wasted 30 minutes of my night, while keeping to my word to be sober cab.
So off to one of the few restaurants that was still serving food. It was, unfortunately (you guessed it) another loud bar. Music was loud, people were loud, no place to sit, and so I scoped out a seat in the dining area where we could get food and it wasn't terribly loud. Trying to remain on the optimistic side of things, I figured it wouldn't be too bad. Both WERE intelligent women, we could still have some intelligent conversation, I was hungry anyway, and it's not like every night was going to be 100% Cocktailing Bliss, especially if you haven't formed a solid, well-vetted crew.
Waitress comes by, I order my food, they order their drinks and after placing our orders, the drunk girl grabs the hostess and says in slightly slurred speech,
"Follow me, I have to so you some guys. I want you to pick out the one you like."
I was partly shocked, partly bemused and partly amused all at the same time. The reason why was their age. It wasn't like they were 13 and 14, giggling at the local dance, where a bold Suzie grabbed a shy Jenny and ran over to try to flirt with some boys. These were 42 and 36 year old FULL GROWN WOMEN who were still acting like it was 1988 and they were at the local 18 and under club. The had fully reverted to pre-zygote stage of the going out evolutionary chain!
And that is why I told you this long and sordid story. There has been an arrested development of sorts when it comes to women (and men I might add!) and their means of going out and socializing. I don't know about you guys, but going out night clubbing, paying for cover charges and screaming over music to try to score a number from a girl got real old, real quick. I think the last time I was at a genuine "night club" was probably when I was 24. I then naturally followed the evolutionary progression going to swing and salsa dancing, and finally matured into the final stage of Cocktailing.
But what gets me is how it seems some women (and men) still deploy the same tactics they did when they were 20 years younger. It behooves so many questions and observations, all of which I don't think I could list, but I'll try:
1. The definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result. I usually would get the point in about 2-3 years. I don't think I would try it for 20 years.
2. The Patron Saint Frick has got to be saying, "What in the Patron Saint's Name of Myself are you girls doing, giggling and approaching guys at a bar like that when you're pushing middle age??!!!"
3. Is this just another example of your Captain being spoiled with really intelligent friends and alas, he will never achieve the high-level of Cocktailing he wished to recreate? Will he fail in his Johnny Appleseed quest to bring "Cocktailing" to the savages?
4. Damnit! How did I get into this situation!? It was like I was tricked into being "The Beta for the Night."
5. Texting texting texting texting. The constant texting only reconfirmed my staunch belief in not texting. The girls could not go more than 4 minutes without looking at their phones and texting. Again, are you 40 or 14?
6. And yes, manosphere readers - divorced, kids, all of you in the manosphere can absolutely guess the profiles, I don't have to provide details.
The night continued much like you could guess. The drunk girl, along with a drink I recommended, got the hostess pretty tipsy. The drunk girl's salesmanship also introduced the hostess to a nice young man. So nice that they talked for nearly 2 hours, denying us any opportunity to go to the sports bar (yea!!!!). Drunk girl finally got a text about where her friends were. We went to a "dance club," which by major metropolitan area was hilarious. It was, of course, loud, and this Proto-Crew decided to sit RIGHT NEXT TO THE SPEAKERS. I ponied up to the bar. Ordered an O'Douls. Listened to one of the many members of the Drunk Trailer Trash Tribe that populate the city yell and scream his woman problems at the woman sitting next to me. He liked to use words that start with "F" and it was very apparent why he had women problems. I managed to strike up a conversation with (oddly enough) a doctorate candidate in psychology, though it was difficult because of the loud hip hop music that was then being played. Sure enough, booze was taking its toll on the rookie crew and I was summoned to bring them back home. I dropped everybody off at their respective places, hoped into my POS, went home and went to bed swearing never to be the sober cab ever again.
I miss Mancini's.
I miss the St. Petersbourgh Vodka Bar.
I miss Jake O'Connors
I miss Axels Bonfire.
I miss Stogies on Grand
I miss The Perfect Ash
I miss Grove Tobacco
I miss the Chalet
I miss The Manor
I miss The Times Cafe
I miss Little Havana
I miss The Embassy Suites Lounge
I miss Psycho Suzie's
I miss Prohibition
I miss Floyd's
I miss The Embassy
Hell, I miss Perkins.
But most of all, I miss my top notch, Cracker-Jack Cocktailing Crew.
Enjoy the decline.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Richard Warman - The Epitome of Crusaderism
This blog was originally created as a data depot to provide and supply people with empirical evidence and data about economics, financial markets and politics. The goal was to provide people the ammunition to fight back socialism by simply pointing out the truth. After several years of throwing up some amazing data and research, it slowly dawned on me that the real battle wasn’t being fought on data and statistics, but rather on a psychological front. More specifically, people on the left plain don’t care about data, statistics, empirical evidence and truth, you have to fight them on a different front – psychology.
This presented a paradox because as Mark Twain said,
“Never argue with an idiot. Onlookers can’t tell the difference.”
Precisely how do you argue with somebody who has not an ounce of intellectual honesty in them? How do you argue with somebody who has no desire to get to the bottom of things and is so infected with cognitive dissonance they are mentally impaired. Worse still, how do you argue with somebody who fully well knows what they doing, but have no problems lying to your face because pushing a particular political agenda (no matter how unsustainable or detrimental to society) will profit them at the expense of future generations?
The answer is simple – you can’t.
Thus the blog metamorphosed from one of empirical data so merely pointing out and mocking the idiocy, ignorance, stupidity and outright evilness of the left. Since this transition (and as I’ve read and written more), I’ve realized that not only is this war not being fought on the empirical side of things, but there are three specific and key fronts it is being fought on:
1. Feminism
2. Education
3. Crusaderism
Crusaderism arguably being the most important one.
Now I didn’t create the videos on Crusaderism for s’s and g’s. I created them because after a lot of research, studying and reading, I was able to identify people who are the biggest threat to liberty, freedom, justice, progression and happiness. I was able to identify EARLY ON, through traits and characteristics, people who are on this planet for themselves and have no problem enslaving or using other people for their advancement and enrichment. It is arguably one of the best political tools or observations that has ever been developed and can not only identify who is your enemy, but fully explain their psychology so you can understand them and ultimately stop them from reigning tyranny over your lives.
So when I see crusaders fighting against freedom, you kind of all know what I do.
Without looking, I ask:
“Somebody tell me what this person’s background is”
And sure enough, my cracker-jack team of Deputy Economists go and research the individual in question and sure enough some common traits come up:
1. They have a worthless under grad. The reason why this is important is it shows you, that early on in the person’s life they had no desire to be a contributing member of society. They wanted to major in fluff and by that sole act they are yelling at the world “I want the rest of you to take care of me while do what I want to do, not what you would pay me to do.”
2. Because they have a worthless degree, they then pursue careers that are not of the skill level, like say, flipping burgers or laying sod. No, their egos are much too big for that. They then go into law or politics or activism where they can champion some kind of “crusade.” This does two things, it bloats their precious little egos, but it also provides them a “moral defense” of sorts they can hide behind. So when a rugged, no-nonsense guy like me comes in and exposes them, they go and run and hide behind “the children,” “the environment,” “the poor,” “the oppressed,” etc. etc. etc.
3. They come from the richer castes of society, which affords them the luxury of protesting like an OWS protester.
There are other traits, but those are the key ones. And the reason I do that is to show you THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP. THERE IS A TREND. I’m not just getting lucky, I understand these megalomaniacs’ psychologies. I'm onto something and there is merit in identifying Crusaderism.
So today’s crusader is Richard Warman. He has sued bloggers in Canada because they are (as far as I can tell)right wing. I didn’t know about him until I saw this.
I know his lawsuits are dated, but anybody want to go and check to see, once again, if he has a degree in engineering or accounting? Or if he majored in Puppies and Unicorns? Also, I'm willing to bet he came from a nice upper-middle class family that could afford him to pursue this as a "career." Anybody want to confirm the Old Captain?
This presented a paradox because as Mark Twain said,
“Never argue with an idiot. Onlookers can’t tell the difference.”
Precisely how do you argue with somebody who has not an ounce of intellectual honesty in them? How do you argue with somebody who has no desire to get to the bottom of things and is so infected with cognitive dissonance they are mentally impaired. Worse still, how do you argue with somebody who fully well knows what they doing, but have no problems lying to your face because pushing a particular political agenda (no matter how unsustainable or detrimental to society) will profit them at the expense of future generations?
The answer is simple – you can’t.
Thus the blog metamorphosed from one of empirical data so merely pointing out and mocking the idiocy, ignorance, stupidity and outright evilness of the left. Since this transition (and as I’ve read and written more), I’ve realized that not only is this war not being fought on the empirical side of things, but there are three specific and key fronts it is being fought on:
1. Feminism
2. Education
3. Crusaderism
Crusaderism arguably being the most important one.
Now I didn’t create the videos on Crusaderism for s’s and g’s. I created them because after a lot of research, studying and reading, I was able to identify people who are the biggest threat to liberty, freedom, justice, progression and happiness. I was able to identify EARLY ON, through traits and characteristics, people who are on this planet for themselves and have no problem enslaving or using other people for their advancement and enrichment. It is arguably one of the best political tools or observations that has ever been developed and can not only identify who is your enemy, but fully explain their psychology so you can understand them and ultimately stop them from reigning tyranny over your lives.
So when I see crusaders fighting against freedom, you kind of all know what I do.
Without looking, I ask:
“Somebody tell me what this person’s background is”
And sure enough, my cracker-jack team of Deputy Economists go and research the individual in question and sure enough some common traits come up:
1. They have a worthless under grad. The reason why this is important is it shows you, that early on in the person’s life they had no desire to be a contributing member of society. They wanted to major in fluff and by that sole act they are yelling at the world “I want the rest of you to take care of me while do what I want to do, not what you would pay me to do.”
2. Because they have a worthless degree, they then pursue careers that are not of the skill level, like say, flipping burgers or laying sod. No, their egos are much too big for that. They then go into law or politics or activism where they can champion some kind of “crusade.” This does two things, it bloats their precious little egos, but it also provides them a “moral defense” of sorts they can hide behind. So when a rugged, no-nonsense guy like me comes in and exposes them, they go and run and hide behind “the children,” “the environment,” “the poor,” “the oppressed,” etc. etc. etc.
3. They come from the richer castes of society, which affords them the luxury of protesting like an OWS protester.
There are other traits, but those are the key ones. And the reason I do that is to show you THERE IS A RELATIONSHIP. THERE IS A TREND. I’m not just getting lucky, I understand these megalomaniacs’ psychologies. I'm onto something and there is merit in identifying Crusaderism.
So today’s crusader is Richard Warman. He has sued bloggers in Canada because they are (as far as I can tell)right wing. I didn’t know about him until I saw this.
I know his lawsuits are dated, but anybody want to go and check to see, once again, if he has a degree in engineering or accounting? Or if he majored in Puppies and Unicorns? Also, I'm willing to bet he came from a nice upper-middle class family that could afford him to pursue this as a "career." Anybody want to confirm the Old Captain?
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
"Zeke" - The By Product of Single Motherhood
These are mandatory listening, but they should also be enjoyable. So get your MP3 out or whatever you need to listen to these two broadcasts and enjoy:
1. Zeke
2. "The Musician."
You will enjoy the decline.
1. Zeke
2. "The Musician."
You will enjoy the decline.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
The Sad Case of the Hot Springs VA
Your Captain is currently vacationing in Hot Springs, SD. A vacation needed after his holiday vacation which didn't include a lot of relaxing or lying around.
So I arrive and everywhere on the community center signs, fliers at the bar, posters at the gas station, etc. etc. are slogans and sayings to "Save the VA" since the VA is the largest employer in town and it is slated to be closed.
My observation is short and succinct.
Has America, (in this particular case - a heavy republican district) become so dependent upon government that the best "local economic plan" they can come up with is to beg tax payers from across the nation to subsidize a money-losing operation AS OPPOSED TO trying to lure and entice other employers to set up shop in the area?
I mean, really. Even when the VA wasn't going to be shut down, wouldn't most people say,
"Hey, you know, we're a one employer town. Maybe we ought to diversify our economy a bit and try to get some more employers into town."
Or, could somebody be so bold to say,
"Hey, you know. Forget just keeping the VA here. And forget just attracting ONE additional employer. How about we open up a can of Hong Kong and try to get as many businesses to set up shop here as possible. SAving only one employer is only going to save so many jobs. But pursuing other employers have an UNLIMITED potential."
But no, no. Our efforts are best spent lobbying congress to keep that ONE government agency in town.
Just born in the absolute wrong time in American history I guess if I have to ask outlandishly stupid questions like these.
So I arrive and everywhere on the community center signs, fliers at the bar, posters at the gas station, etc. etc. are slogans and sayings to "Save the VA" since the VA is the largest employer in town and it is slated to be closed.
My observation is short and succinct.
Has America, (in this particular case - a heavy republican district) become so dependent upon government that the best "local economic plan" they can come up with is to beg tax payers from across the nation to subsidize a money-losing operation AS OPPOSED TO trying to lure and entice other employers to set up shop in the area?
I mean, really. Even when the VA wasn't going to be shut down, wouldn't most people say,
"Hey, you know, we're a one employer town. Maybe we ought to diversify our economy a bit and try to get some more employers into town."
Or, could somebody be so bold to say,
"Hey, you know. Forget just keeping the VA here. And forget just attracting ONE additional employer. How about we open up a can of Hong Kong and try to get as many businesses to set up shop here as possible. SAving only one employer is only going to save so many jobs. But pursuing other employers have an UNLIMITED potential."
But no, no. Our efforts are best spent lobbying congress to keep that ONE government agency in town.
Just born in the absolute wrong time in American history I guess if I have to ask outlandishly stupid questions like these.
The Captain Saves a Soul
I have done my good deed for the day! Received this in the e-mail box
Captain,
"Worthless" saves the day again!
Captain,
I heard about your book through Dalrock's blog and, being a man in his early thirties with some college money coming his way from Uncle Sam, eagerly purchased it. I burned through it in a night, taking copious notes, but really, I'm surprised I hadn't seen it all to begin with. Supply and demand is everything in human life, whether it's preparing to enter the working world with marketable skills or pulling the 8 at the bar with better quality game than the other schmucks. I curse the world for not teaching me about this when I was young, just as I curse myself for not seeking out this information myself in all the time since. But for $5, you saved me from making a (at this point) permanent mistake, and for that I thank you.
I was a little surprised to find the anti-feminist (more like pro-common sense) bit you slipped in during the mythbusting segment. I hope the young women (hell, even the young men at this point) that do find this book in their hands take that bit to heart. A feminist undone could well be a marriage saved in the future, who knows?
- Daniel
"Worthless" saves the day again!
Friday, January 13, 2012
You Just Can't Make This Up
This kid, is not only wrong, but he is going to get SOOOOOOOO screwed over as he ages. Regardless, it is some hilarious entertainment for the weekend.
big hat tip.
big hat tip.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Socialism/Capitalism Video Newly Released
Howdy All,
A long time ago, in a land far far away (Minnesota), your Captain, because he foolishly thought the country still might be able to be saved, put together a video that was he effort to do what he could as a citizen to stem the flow of socialism.
The video was put up on the YouTube by a loyal reader, whose account has since been canceled.
I dug through the archives and found the "edited" version a buddy of mine had put together and reloaded it up there. It doesn't have all of the data, but it does have some funny moments due to his editing and is more or less a professional piece.
There are 6 parts.
I know you all don't watch all of the series and just watch the first one, but you'll miss the part about Jenifer Aniston if you don't watch them all.
Here is the link to the first one, you should be able to jump from part to part.
Some of you have expressed interest in just getting the DVD. I can burn copies, but you'll have to pay for the time and shipping. Shoot me an e-mail.
A long time ago, in a land far far away (Minnesota), your Captain, because he foolishly thought the country still might be able to be saved, put together a video that was he effort to do what he could as a citizen to stem the flow of socialism.
The video was put up on the YouTube by a loyal reader, whose account has since been canceled.
I dug through the archives and found the "edited" version a buddy of mine had put together and reloaded it up there. It doesn't have all of the data, but it does have some funny moments due to his editing and is more or less a professional piece.
There are 6 parts.
I know you all don't watch all of the series and just watch the first one, but you'll miss the part about Jenifer Aniston if you don't watch them all.
Here is the link to the first one, you should be able to jump from part to part.
Some of you have expressed interest in just getting the DVD. I can burn copies, but you'll have to pay for the time and shipping. Shoot me an e-mail.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Physical Fitness is Mandatory for All Men
One of the most damaging lies my mother told me (and by "most damaging" I mean "top three") was that:
"Women like kind, caring men. And jocks are just gross. Bleagh! Who likes jocks!?"
I took it to heart in my youth and instead of focusing on lifting weights and making myself physically attractive, I focused on my studies, tried vainly to figure out what being "sensitive" meant, and what exercise I did get was running and cycling a lot. I proceeded through the next (roughly) 8 years of my youth perplexed as to why all the rugged, buff jocks were getting the chicks, contrary to what my mother claimed.
She even had a zinger of a rationalization:
"Well, those girls aren't mature. They'll mature when you get to college."
That I believe ranked #2 in the most damaging lies.
Regardless, what I and many other men/boys had to suffer in our youth is not the same fate the current crop of teenage and 20 something boys must suffer. They can simply listen to Ole Cappy Cap (or the plethora of other manospherists out there) and learn from our mistakes. So, boys, heed me.
Physical fitness is a MANDATORY requirement if you wish to court or date. And I would go so far to claim it is the MOST IMPORTANT trait to have in your youth. Money, career, charisma, game, and charm, that all comes later, and frankly requires time to develop. But physical fitness is something you should put right up their with your studies and homework.
It should be daily.
It should be regular.
You should treat it seriously.
The reason why is even though working out and lifting weights is the most mind-numbing experience you're ever going to suffer, the price you pay is INFINITELY LESS than the other means by which you can attract women.
There was this rave/techno club in DT Minneapolis called "First Avenue." I think I spent over 500 hours in that place alone trying to scam and mosh with chicks. I think through all the noise and smoke (you could smoke in those days) I got a whopping 3 numbers, none of which led anywhere. However, if I merely spent a fraction of that, 200 hours, working out an hour per day, every other day, the benefits would have certainly been more than 3 phone numbers and a lot cheaper.
While there was merit in attending First Ave for the music itself, what I'm trying to specifically warn you against is attending things like "bars" or regular "night clubs" where it costs money to not just drink, but enter the darn place. You'll stand a much better chance of meeting girls being ripped or just "buffer than the average bear" in class than you will going to a bar, competing with kids whose parents have bigger checkbooks than you do.
Second, you also have to wear the appropriate clothes. My sensei in jujitsu is the most ripped man I have ever seen. But when I first saw him, his clothes were not tight, didn't show any kind of definition, and I frankly thought (because I had been working out) "I might be able to take him."
Then I see him in without his shirt on sparing against a guy who has 50 pounds on him.
I asked myself, "Well what the hell????? Why isn't he wearing tight fitting shirts?!?"
Regardless, the point is you will have to drop SOME money on tighter fitting clothes. The benefit is that you don't have to be ripped like my sensei, you just have to be in the top 10% of males, which means completing a simple work out regimen on a regular basis. For an old fart like me (and men of my age, trust me), it's SUPREMELY easy to put yourself in that top 10%. I walk into a joint or a bar or a dance with a tighter fitting shirt and I have noticed women turning their heads. And I'm not terribly "ripped," just "micro-buff" if you will.
There is, however, a very important third aspect to this. If you are going to demand physical fitness and beauty of your women, you better provide the same in return. Now women typically do not place as high of value of physical looks than men do, but physical looks are still a top requirement of them. And if given the choice between an average schlub who's "really nice" and the buff guy who won't give them the time of day, they will always go after the buff guy.
So when you get to college, or when you get to trade school, or when you start off your career, spend your time wisely. Don't go to church. Don't go to bars. Don't go to museums. Don't bother getting "cultured" by reading books or going to seminars. And for the Patron Saint's Name of Frick, whatever you do DON'T do what the girls tell you to do.
Go to the gym.
Pump iron on a regular and religious basis. Throw some running in there.
And for the most part you don't have to do anything more than that.
I know lifting weights suck. I know it's boring, but "unlike my day" we didn't have those "MP3 doohickies you kids have today!"
This has been a public service announcement form the Captain.
"Women like kind, caring men. And jocks are just gross. Bleagh! Who likes jocks!?"
I took it to heart in my youth and instead of focusing on lifting weights and making myself physically attractive, I focused on my studies, tried vainly to figure out what being "sensitive" meant, and what exercise I did get was running and cycling a lot. I proceeded through the next (roughly) 8 years of my youth perplexed as to why all the rugged, buff jocks were getting the chicks, contrary to what my mother claimed.
She even had a zinger of a rationalization:
"Well, those girls aren't mature. They'll mature when you get to college."
That I believe ranked #2 in the most damaging lies.
Regardless, what I and many other men/boys had to suffer in our youth is not the same fate the current crop of teenage and 20 something boys must suffer. They can simply listen to Ole Cappy Cap (or the plethora of other manospherists out there) and learn from our mistakes. So, boys, heed me.
Physical fitness is a MANDATORY requirement if you wish to court or date. And I would go so far to claim it is the MOST IMPORTANT trait to have in your youth. Money, career, charisma, game, and charm, that all comes later, and frankly requires time to develop. But physical fitness is something you should put right up their with your studies and homework.
It should be daily.
It should be regular.
You should treat it seriously.
The reason why is even though working out and lifting weights is the most mind-numbing experience you're ever going to suffer, the price you pay is INFINITELY LESS than the other means by which you can attract women.
There was this rave/techno club in DT Minneapolis called "First Avenue." I think I spent over 500 hours in that place alone trying to scam and mosh with chicks. I think through all the noise and smoke (you could smoke in those days) I got a whopping 3 numbers, none of which led anywhere. However, if I merely spent a fraction of that, 200 hours, working out an hour per day, every other day, the benefits would have certainly been more than 3 phone numbers and a lot cheaper.
While there was merit in attending First Ave for the music itself, what I'm trying to specifically warn you against is attending things like "bars" or regular "night clubs" where it costs money to not just drink, but enter the darn place. You'll stand a much better chance of meeting girls being ripped or just "buffer than the average bear" in class than you will going to a bar, competing with kids whose parents have bigger checkbooks than you do.
Second, you also have to wear the appropriate clothes. My sensei in jujitsu is the most ripped man I have ever seen. But when I first saw him, his clothes were not tight, didn't show any kind of definition, and I frankly thought (because I had been working out) "I might be able to take him."
Then I see him in without his shirt on sparing against a guy who has 50 pounds on him.
I asked myself, "Well what the hell????? Why isn't he wearing tight fitting shirts?!?"
Regardless, the point is you will have to drop SOME money on tighter fitting clothes. The benefit is that you don't have to be ripped like my sensei, you just have to be in the top 10% of males, which means completing a simple work out regimen on a regular basis. For an old fart like me (and men of my age, trust me), it's SUPREMELY easy to put yourself in that top 10%. I walk into a joint or a bar or a dance with a tighter fitting shirt and I have noticed women turning their heads. And I'm not terribly "ripped," just "micro-buff" if you will.
There is, however, a very important third aspect to this. If you are going to demand physical fitness and beauty of your women, you better provide the same in return. Now women typically do not place as high of value of physical looks than men do, but physical looks are still a top requirement of them. And if given the choice between an average schlub who's "really nice" and the buff guy who won't give them the time of day, they will always go after the buff guy.
So when you get to college, or when you get to trade school, or when you start off your career, spend your time wisely. Don't go to church. Don't go to bars. Don't go to museums. Don't bother getting "cultured" by reading books or going to seminars. And for the Patron Saint's Name of Frick, whatever you do DON'T do what the girls tell you to do.
Go to the gym.
Pump iron on a regular and religious basis. Throw some running in there.
And for the most part you don't have to do anything more than that.
I know lifting weights suck. I know it's boring, but "unlike my day" we didn't have those "MP3 doohickies you kids have today!"
This has been a public service announcement form the Captain.
Monday, January 09, 2012
Go Rationalization Hamster, Go!
Run your little heart out Rationalization Hamster
Run as fast as you can.
Tell yourself in your 50's
That you don't need no man
But he's just around the corner
Your investment banker, surgeon, astronaut prince
But as you rocket your host into the reality wall
Please forgive us as we wince.
Run as fast as you can.
Tell yourself in your 50's
That you don't need no man
But he's just around the corner
Your investment banker, surgeon, astronaut prince
But as you rocket your host into the reality wall
Please forgive us as we wince.
"I Have My Masters Degree"
Going through the Leykis archives and happened upon this one. (If you listen around 1/3rd the way through a caller that is probably my twin called in and made some good points.)
This is a very important lesson, not just for the girls out there, but the boys as well if you're contemplating going to college. In short, if you're going to blow all of your money and youth on a degree, then don't become a stay at home parent. If you're going to dedicate that amount of time, money and effort into getting a degree, NOT TO MENTION THE TAX PAYER SUBSIDY AT PUBLIC COLLEGES, then you damn well better not decide to "become a stay at home mom/dad." You better pay back society the resources you just consumed.
I had a buddy who got her masters degree in biology a while ago. I figured she'd go onto pharmaceuticals or the medical industry.
Nope, just went right into becoming a stay at home mom. Never worked a day in the field.
Of course the Minnesota state taxpayer subsidized her costly 6 year "exercise" in getting a degree. But, of course, they won't see one red cent in return because this was after all, nothing more than a very expensive hobby.
College is a very expensive and progressively risky thing kids. Please figure out what you want to do before you not only waste your time and money on it, but the taxpayer's as well.
This is a very important lesson, not just for the girls out there, but the boys as well if you're contemplating going to college. In short, if you're going to blow all of your money and youth on a degree, then don't become a stay at home parent. If you're going to dedicate that amount of time, money and effort into getting a degree, NOT TO MENTION THE TAX PAYER SUBSIDY AT PUBLIC COLLEGES, then you damn well better not decide to "become a stay at home mom/dad." You better pay back society the resources you just consumed.
I had a buddy who got her masters degree in biology a while ago. I figured she'd go onto pharmaceuticals or the medical industry.
Nope, just went right into becoming a stay at home mom. Never worked a day in the field.
Of course the Minnesota state taxpayer subsidized her costly 6 year "exercise" in getting a degree. But, of course, they won't see one red cent in return because this was after all, nothing more than a very expensive hobby.
College is a very expensive and progressively risky thing kids. Please figure out what you want to do before you not only waste your time and money on it, but the taxpayer's as well.
Foolish Swiss Banks
I was looking at getting a Swiss Bank account a while ago, just one minor problem - don't have any money to put in it. But if I ever did, then I figured I might as well do the leg work now in preparation for the point in the future I might need one.
What I did realize quite early on is that if I were to invest in a Swiss Bank (or Norwegian bank, etc.) I would have to make sure they didn't have any branches, operations or investments in the US because then this could happen.
Serves you foolish Swiss Banks right for being dumb enough to invest in the US.
Filed under "capital flight."
What I did realize quite early on is that if I were to invest in a Swiss Bank (or Norwegian bank, etc.) I would have to make sure they didn't have any branches, operations or investments in the US because then this could happen.
Serves you foolish Swiss Banks right for being dumb enough to invest in the US.
Filed under "capital flight."
I Love Diana Olick
Why can't there be more women like her?
On a related note, my book "Behind the Housing Crash" is now 99 cents on Kindle, so...like...come on. How can't you buy it? Heck, just as a joke even!
On a related note, my book "Behind the Housing Crash" is now 99 cents on Kindle, so...like...come on. How can't you buy it? Heck, just as a joke even!
Sunday, January 08, 2012
Recession Medicine
Language warning.
Which means if you're insulted you can go and file a complaint and whine and complain, or you can exercise your freedom to choose, choose not to view it, and not be a thought nazi.
Which means if you're insulted you can go and file a complaint and whine and complain, or you can exercise your freedom to choose, choose not to view it, and not be a thought nazi.
"We Want Our Chivalry Back"
Houseboy summarily deconstructs and hits this one out of the park. There is a language warning however.
But the larger point is how can there still be women demanding this garbage? I know it could be merely anecdotal that Mme is just one woman requesting men start opening doors and paying for dates again, while the majority of women now accept chivalry died off with the American dream. But seriously, the request is so outlandish it deserves mockery.
Besides, how better to enjoy the decline when you see naive socialists, feminists and liberals start complaining about the bed they made and having to sleep in it?
But the larger point is how can there still be women demanding this garbage? I know it could be merely anecdotal that Mme is just one woman requesting men start opening doors and paying for dates again, while the majority of women now accept chivalry died off with the American dream. But seriously, the request is so outlandish it deserves mockery.
Besides, how better to enjoy the decline when you see naive socialists, feminists and liberals start complaining about the bed they made and having to sleep in it?
"Top Economists" My Perfectly Sculpted Irish Ass
God, how does this pass for journalism?
Let alone, how does this pass for economics? The French tried this and it didn't work.
Hat tip.
Let alone, how does this pass for economics? The French tried this and it didn't work.
Hat tip.
Saturday, January 07, 2012
Cappy Cap's Christmas Stash!
Your old Captain was very happy with what Santa brought me. Among other things I got Snoopy Bandaids, Tabasco Sauce Boxer Shorts, and a Bottle O' Rumpie (of course!) But I wanted to highlight "The Man from UNCLE" DVD series (replete with secret agent attache case!) because this is a MUST if you wish to truly enjoy the decline.
If you have not watched it, then I STRONGLY recommend renting it or getting it on Netflix to see what I'm talking about. Everybody is in suits, except the women who are all in sharp, tight fitting business skirts and are ALL (surprisingly) hot, skinny, early 1960's motif chicks, ALL of which have GUNS HOLSTERED ON THEIR BACKS (because they are super awesome sexy spy chicks from the 1960's!)
The writing and the screenplay is also excellent. Sometimes those old TV shows are slow and kind of simplistic in their plots. But this is akin to the writing of Casablanca or "Peter Gunn" if you ever watched the show.
Regardless, it's libertarian, conservative, American mind-candy fantasy in that this was what America was meant to become by today's standards. That is until we let the communists, feminists, liberals, crusaders and effeminate males have a say in how the country should be run. But if you think about it, the liberal/commie/feminist/etc., types can only hold up "Murphy Brown" or "Teenage Mom" or modern day reality TV as the pinnacle of socialist achievement in television.
As Ilya Kiryakin and Napoleon Solo would say:
Enjoy the decline!
If you have not watched it, then I STRONGLY recommend renting it or getting it on Netflix to see what I'm talking about. Everybody is in suits, except the women who are all in sharp, tight fitting business skirts and are ALL (surprisingly) hot, skinny, early 1960's motif chicks, ALL of which have GUNS HOLSTERED ON THEIR BACKS (because they are super awesome sexy spy chicks from the 1960's!)
The writing and the screenplay is also excellent. Sometimes those old TV shows are slow and kind of simplistic in their plots. But this is akin to the writing of Casablanca or "Peter Gunn" if you ever watched the show.
Regardless, it's libertarian, conservative, American mind-candy fantasy in that this was what America was meant to become by today's standards. That is until we let the communists, feminists, liberals, crusaders and effeminate males have a say in how the country should be run. But if you think about it, the liberal/commie/feminist/etc., types can only hold up "Murphy Brown" or "Teenage Mom" or modern day reality TV as the pinnacle of socialist achievement in television.
As Ilya Kiryakin and Napoleon Solo would say:
Enjoy the decline!
The Friend Zone
My Favorite Martian, if you don't know what it is, is a band that comes out with somewhat hilarious cartoon music videos. They target a presumably younger audience, but this was pretty funny (though I think they could have made it more hilarious, watch till the end though). Another bit of advice for the 14 year old boys out there - avoid the friend zone:
Friday, January 06, 2012
Eat Pray Love II
God, please, MAKE IT STOP!!!!
What's worse is not only is this simply a regurgitation of Eat Pray Love, there's a bleeping sequel.
The fact these books/movies are not only so popular, but simply a rehashing of the same damn story, once again makes me think I ought to just try to write a crappy romance novel that would make Rationalization Hamsters across the fruited plain salivate. An impossible-to-resist buffet of 30 something, empowered women, living in New York, with multiple suitors, but finding themselves, replete with masters degrees.
Perhaps that would be something to get Grerp off of her ass and write a book. It would be a race to see who could finish first. She could write a legitimate book, with real, sincere advice that would help women, while I would serve up the same old rationalization-hamster slop American women are seemingly addicted to, that would only serve to worsen their lives.
And we'll see which one sells more.
What's worse is not only is this simply a regurgitation of Eat Pray Love, there's a bleeping sequel.
The fact these books/movies are not only so popular, but simply a rehashing of the same damn story, once again makes me think I ought to just try to write a crappy romance novel that would make Rationalization Hamsters across the fruited plain salivate. An impossible-to-resist buffet of 30 something, empowered women, living in New York, with multiple suitors, but finding themselves, replete with masters degrees.
Perhaps that would be something to get Grerp off of her ass and write a book. It would be a race to see who could finish first. She could write a legitimate book, with real, sincere advice that would help women, while I would serve up the same old rationalization-hamster slop American women are seemingly addicted to, that would only serve to worsen their lives.
And we'll see which one sells more.
Last Christian Standing
"Last Man Standing" is an awesome remake of "A Fist Full of Dollars" but with a 30's ganster style twist. Plus it stars Bruce Willis. I put it on par with "Man on Fire."
However, Pukeku, in New Zealand, I like to refer to as "The Last Christian Standing."
You all know my views about religion. I find it pointless, I find it is usually abused by its advocates to gain power over others, and I find it a haven to protect those that are intellectual hypocrites and wish to have a diety to blame their outcome on "fatism" or "the Lord's plan."
There are however a few remaining honest Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc., that I will stand up for in that they are adherent to their religion and more or less stay out of my life and leave me alone. More importantly, they follow the religion for the religion's intended purpose - following a god or being a good steward of society. Not to "join a club" or "meet a guy" or "find a wife."
Visit the Last Christian Standing when I cut it too close for religious folks' tastes.
However, Pukeku, in New Zealand, I like to refer to as "The Last Christian Standing."
You all know my views about religion. I find it pointless, I find it is usually abused by its advocates to gain power over others, and I find it a haven to protect those that are intellectual hypocrites and wish to have a diety to blame their outcome on "fatism" or "the Lord's plan."
There are however a few remaining honest Christians, Jews, Muslims, etc., that I will stand up for in that they are adherent to their religion and more or less stay out of my life and leave me alone. More importantly, they follow the religion for the religion's intended purpose - following a god or being a good steward of society. Not to "join a club" or "meet a guy" or "find a wife."
Visit the Last Christian Standing when I cut it too close for religious folks' tastes.
The Attention Bubble
An interesting observation (and language warning) from a New Zealander about texting and game. In short, with new venues of communications such as texting and Facebook, young women are interpreting that as "increased attention."
I was made aware of this at quite an early age. I'd say I was about 18 or 19 when I noticed if I approach a girl with a very innocent, non-romantic intention (say to find out where the book store was) her reaction (body language, eyes, posture, etc) indicated to me she thought I was hitting on her. It dawned on me that ANY attention I would pay to girls (whether it had sexual/romantic aims or not) would be viewed as sexual/romantic attention. This made it impossible to have a "normal" interaction with girls because they would always assume you were hitting on them, when frankly, you just wanted to know where the can was.
There are, of course, economic consequences to the young ladies of today misinterpreting "texting" or "likes" as attention instead of just mere socializing or neutral interaction. An "attention bubble" or an overvaluation of ones market value. And just as easy credit monetary policies of countries throughout the world led to a housing bubble, these new media (texting, facebook, etc.) are doing the same thing, flooding the market with "attention" and driving young ladies' ego's sky high.
The bubble, though, forms in the misreading of the "market pricing mechanism" or "market price signals." When "Joey" texts "Sally" and says;
"Hey, what time was our professor starting the lab?"
What Joey is really saying is
"Hey, what time was our professor starting the lab?"
Sally, however, misreads this price signal to read;
"OMG! Joey is SOOOOOO in love with me! Just like all the other guys who keep texting me. I am so hot! Joey is such a coward though, acting like he cares about what time the lab starts. He's obviously just using that as a ploy to talk to me."
This overvaluation of oneself can be represented quite simply by a classical supply and demand chart from Economics 101.
The "supply" of "Sallys" is represented by the green line and marked with an S.
The ACTUAL DEMAND for Sally is denoted with the blue line and marked with an "AD" (actual demand).
But, because of the new forms of media and communications, and the fact Sally takes the absolute value of ANY communication as proof positive a guy is hitting on her, she overestimates demand. This exaggerated demand is marked by the red line, labeled "TD" (text demand).
The results are what any good economists knows. The REAL price people are willing to "pay" for Sally is represented at P1. But because Sally is arrogant enough to think she's all that and a bag of chips (some 1990's jargon there for you kids), she perceives her market value at P2, much higher than the real price. This disparity leads to many suitable suitors pursuing Sally, but Sally turning them down because she has been led to believe she can do better.
In short, this chart is merely the graphical representation of "stuckupedness" teen and college-age men face in the courting battlefield in the western world. But don't worry, that TD line does inevitably shift to the left.
I, out of intellectual curiosity, would love to see any manosphere economists attempt to explain why.
I was made aware of this at quite an early age. I'd say I was about 18 or 19 when I noticed if I approach a girl with a very innocent, non-romantic intention (say to find out where the book store was) her reaction (body language, eyes, posture, etc) indicated to me she thought I was hitting on her. It dawned on me that ANY attention I would pay to girls (whether it had sexual/romantic aims or not) would be viewed as sexual/romantic attention. This made it impossible to have a "normal" interaction with girls because they would always assume you were hitting on them, when frankly, you just wanted to know where the can was.
There are, of course, economic consequences to the young ladies of today misinterpreting "texting" or "likes" as attention instead of just mere socializing or neutral interaction. An "attention bubble" or an overvaluation of ones market value. And just as easy credit monetary policies of countries throughout the world led to a housing bubble, these new media (texting, facebook, etc.) are doing the same thing, flooding the market with "attention" and driving young ladies' ego's sky high.
The bubble, though, forms in the misreading of the "market pricing mechanism" or "market price signals." When "Joey" texts "Sally" and says;
"Hey, what time was our professor starting the lab?"
What Joey is really saying is
"Hey, what time was our professor starting the lab?"
Sally, however, misreads this price signal to read;
"OMG! Joey is SOOOOOO in love with me! Just like all the other guys who keep texting me. I am so hot! Joey is such a coward though, acting like he cares about what time the lab starts. He's obviously just using that as a ploy to talk to me."
This overvaluation of oneself can be represented quite simply by a classical supply and demand chart from Economics 101.
The "supply" of "Sallys" is represented by the green line and marked with an S.
The ACTUAL DEMAND for Sally is denoted with the blue line and marked with an "AD" (actual demand).
But, because of the new forms of media and communications, and the fact Sally takes the absolute value of ANY communication as proof positive a guy is hitting on her, she overestimates demand. This exaggerated demand is marked by the red line, labeled "TD" (text demand).
The results are what any good economists knows. The REAL price people are willing to "pay" for Sally is represented at P1. But because Sally is arrogant enough to think she's all that and a bag of chips (some 1990's jargon there for you kids), she perceives her market value at P2, much higher than the real price. This disparity leads to many suitable suitors pursuing Sally, but Sally turning them down because she has been led to believe she can do better.
In short, this chart is merely the graphical representation of "stuckupedness" teen and college-age men face in the courting battlefield in the western world. But don't worry, that TD line does inevitably shift to the left.
I, out of intellectual curiosity, would love to see any manosphere economists attempt to explain why.