Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Economics would tell us "go down" but what's funny is markets are not rational all the time. Matter of fact they can remain quit bubbly for extended periods of time. ESPECIALLY when the market participants (AHEM AHEM, COUGH COUGH - AMERICANS) are addicted to "high asset prices" because it fools them into thinking they don't have to work for a living. Asset prices just magically go up without the necessary production and profits to rationalize the price increases. And this can go on "forever" or at least until the delusional (and lazy, I might add) Americans retire.
We see this today where the dividend yield is still at a historic low going back to 1890 and the PE ratio is still above it's historic average of 15x's. The profits are simply not there to rationalize the lofty prices. However, there is something more amiss going on beyond the simple "retirement dollars flooding market" and it may not be obvious to the naked eye.
With the DJIA breaking 13,000 and the economy showing signs of a tepid recovery, you would think the market would be doubly flooded with money. The monies flowing in from automotonic 401k retirement drones AND the new monies flowing in from people with new-found hope that the economy is indeed turning around and America has a future once again.
There's just one problem - the volume isn't there to support it.
If you look at the volume of the NYSE, it's cratering. It's lower than it has been in over a decade
This doesn't jive with the prices we see in the market. In basic economic theory, the more trading volume there is in a market, the higher prices should be in that is shows a demand for those stocks. Additionally, with increased volume comes increased "liquidity" which in itself provides a premium that should translate into higher prices. We are now getting the opposite.
So what is happening?
Well, your humble Captain has a theory.
The reason volume is tanking is because, despite what heavily-spun news you might hear about GDP, consumer confidence, the reality is that the economy still sucks. Unemployment, though down, is still 2 full percentage points above the WORST it ever was under George Bush. If you want to consider the "underemployment" argument, that many people have left the labor force, you could argue unemployment is closer to 11%. Additionally, even with today's revision of 3% RGDP growth, it's nothing compared to the booming quarters we had after most recessions (even the hated, incompetent,evil puppy-kicker GW managed a quarter above 6%). Also delivering a dose of realistic doom to the economy is the massive amounts of debt we have. And finally, unemployment is particularly high amongst the youth, who are not only necessary to bail out older generations via their public pensions, but whose retirement dollars are also necessary to keep the 401k Bubble/Ponzi scheme going as well. But just like the housing market, you need jobs in order to afford a house. And so, I'm sure if you looked at it, a huge reason for the lower volume is the lack of "new blood" entering the retirement/401k market, plus the fact people just don't plain have the disposable income to afford IRA contributions.
While this explains the collapse in volume, it doesn't explain why prices are still so high. And here is the nefarious side of the theory:
Something nefarious is going on.
When you see Apple with a market cap of 1/2 trillion dollars, you start to wonder why Apple is so valuable. And as it turns out it's because hedge funds and mutual funds all want to own Apple. No real financial reason for it, hedge fund managers, mutual fund managers and other incompetent perma-bubble Wall Street dolts like shinny new electrical doo-dads just like their spoiled brat, humanities-majoring children at home in Connecticut do. But what this shows you (or at least alludes to) is that it is institutions, not individuals, that are accounting for the majority of the buying and selling of the stocks. You also throw in electronic trading programs or "computerized trading" and it's no longer real investors with real money, as much as it is a potentially rigged beast of its own trading on itself.
It reminds me of a now-deceased publication called "Lake Minnetonka Magazine." This magazine was basically the socialite magazine for Minneapolis' uber-rich western suburb. Here is where Cargill, Carlson Companies and many more firms are based, as well as the hundreds of trust-fund babies these empires spawned. The magazine itself though was a self-absorbed love fest within itself. Written by the trustfunders about the trustfunders and all the parties they went to and who bought what Italian car or what worthless trophy wife opened up what worthless trinket shop with her hubby's money. Essentially it was a club or an entity that didn't produce anything and when its founder (ahem ahem-Tom Petters) was arrested for what was then the largest fraud in the history of the US (soon to be outdone by Bernie Madoff), the magazine went bye bye (ironically, shortly after, there were a LOT of for sale signs on the prestigious Lake Minnetonka, what handsome, dashing, chiseled motorcycle riding, fossil-hunting, bad-boy economist would have predicted that!).
In short, the stock market is being artificially inflated, if not, limped along, by the sanctimonious (or perhaps, oblivious) yutzes trapped in their own nepotistic, inbred echo chamber called "The East Coast." They trade amongst themselves, they believe that the stock market is a finite, mathematical beast that can be predicted. They have NEVER seen a real stock market crash, as they're perpetually bailed out by Dotcom Bubble after Housing Bubble after QE-LXI Bubble. They are truly oblivious to all the work, toil, labor and entrepreneurialism that gives those worthless pieces of paper (they so love to trade and sell and take commission on) value.
The question is if you wish to join this little clique or social party. Do you want to "hang" with all the fake and plastic of the paper-rich, asset-poor, and soon to be bankrupt class? Then by all means, throw that $16,500 max of your money into an inflated stock market every year. You'll be one of the cool people. But if you're more like me and want to hang out with your non-stab-you-in-the-back buddies at a reasonably priced bar, entertained with good intelligent conversation, and darn fine food, you may want to look elsewhere and hang out where there is real value.
In the meantime, enjoy the decline!
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Children need both fathers and mothers to be brought up effectively in this world. And I get really sick and tired of single parents deciding to have children on their own because THEY want to have children, immediately evidencing how much more important they view themselves over their yet-to-be-born children. I don't like children, but by god, they are innocent little kids and they at least stand a shot before some greedy (or just outright stupid) morons bring them into this world for their own selfish purposes.
Maybe I'm flying at a higher altitude and can see this clearly, but does anybody else see how this is directly tied to the cheap nursing homes that are going to be very popular in the future?
Perhaps they could have a disclosure at the end:
"No Women's Studies majors were hurt during the development and creation of this awesome railgun....because...well...we had no use for them and they weren't around."
Most English teachers are lousy at English.
They only know the structure and logic of the language, they have no ability to speak or write. And they certainly lack the creativity to engage a reader in pretty much anything. Ergo, they are forced to teach a language they're not only fluent in, but to kids who are also fluent in the language. The reason I bring this up is so that you're not concerned if you are only getting "C's" in English. Chances are it's your teacher simply not liking you and using the amorphous nature of English to knock you down a grade or two (notice I used the word "amorphous" and I also flunked out of 7th grade English).
Why do I bring this up? See below, it's a comment from this post here. I don't want people being told by the the "English Profession" they're not good at English. There are negative consequences, consequences nobody has to go through because some 20 something moron who couldn't major in a real subject decides to boost their ego by ripping or nitpicking on others' English ability.
A college degree was the equivalent of a high school diploma in the Fifties? If only.
My father was born in 1924 in a tiny fishing village — an island in the Chesapeake Bay, actually, remote and isolated from mainland life — and there were maybe 12 graduating seniors in 1942. But Pop was not among them. He quit high school at the age of 16 because he simply could not get a passing grade in English. He served in WWII (survived the entire Battle of the Bulge) and earned a two-year business degree on the GI Bill. But he was so sensitive about what he considered to be his poor grammar, Mom did all of his writing assignments. Pop was good at math, just couldn’t write worth a darn. Or so he thought. He was a cost accountant for most of his working days and always felt inferior to the college grads who were paid more and promoted more often.
So I took it on faith that Pop was a dullard when it came to writing.
My parents went through a horrible divorce in ’72, and went their separate ways. I received a one letter from him when I was a college sophomore, read it, and promptly forgot about it. Pop died in ’76, still a relatively young man.
Then, one day when my wife and I were preparing for a move (this must have been around 1984), I found the letter he had written. And re-read it. And I wondered, who was this man? It was a very well-written letter, in his own bold cursive writing style. By this time, I had been reading National Review for almost twenty years, and had thoroughly digested the writings of William Buckley, Hugh Kenner, James Burnham, Joe Sobran, and the rest of that talented bullpen. I could not kid myself: this was not the writing of a poor writer. This is the writing a thoughtful, sensitive man whose anguish at the mistakes he had made was palpable. It was easily better than typical college-student writing, and technically more correct than my own from a grammatical perspective.
Let me repeat: this was from a high-school dropout.
It seems to me that many of us paid thousands of dollars for a college degree and for the most part received a license to feel entitled.Oh, and kids, before you head off to college, buy my book. It's worth more than all of your English classes combined, plus it's likely to get banned in your high school.
Monday, February 27, 2012
I sat through about 40 minutes of "Act of Valor" and cannot lie - I walked out of the movie.
No disrespect to the fine veterans who starred in the film, I certainly do appreciate what they've done for the country, not to mention the time they spent pursuing something that is not their profession, but the movie was just not my cup of tea.
To be fair, I am not the most patient person as you all know. I am also not the touchy feely type, so again, my judgment is biased. So keep in mind this review is just my humble opinion and if you are the patient, touchy feely type, you may like this movie. But there are some major drawbacks to this film.
First, I'm willing to cut the vets some slack in that they're not actors. But it was still painful for them to read their scripts. I don't believe this was their fault in I believe the director should have just filmed these guys in their natural habitat, hanging out at the local bar as they would in the real world, almost a documentary or reality type show. It would have been much more natural and real. I don't want to see Navy SEALs acting, I want to see Navy SEALs being normal Navy SEALs. Even if it isn't perfectly cinematic.
Unfortunately they force this squeaky clean American pie theme and script that was just so fake. It's "Miller Time" at the bar, there's a bonfire and surfing at the beach with the family, the kids and the spouses are all perfect. There was a glimmer of hope when they mention one of the SEALs who came from Trinidad dirt poor, was a Muay Thai fighter and became a SEAL, and I was like "alright! Tell me more about this guy!" But then they quickly go back to the Perfect-Happy-Fun Family theme. I left the moment once one of the SEALs was saying good-bye to his wife and then bends down to talk to the belly of his wife (because she is pregnant). That was the HUGE snowflake that caused the avalanche and I bolted.
Again, I'm not the touchy feely type.
Second, one of the SEALs is reading letters or "sayings" or something from his father that are interspersed with a spotty subplot going on in the Philippines and Costa Rica. It's touchy feely stuff, no doubt thoughtful and true, but too much touchy feely. I didn't even understand half of what was said as it was almost poetic. It ruined the movie and also created a very jarring effect where we go back and forth from the "picturesque American life" to people getting killed in Costa Rica and back to soothing poetic readings with waves crashing on the beach back to a bus blowing up.
Third, the sheer time spent on developing the background that yes, these are real human beings with real families. These are not just automotonic drones programmed to kill. They are real men and women making real sacrifices. I get that, and agree that this would have to be part of the movie. But not half of the movie. I was already running out of patience with "Man on Fire" in how long it took to develop the relationship between Creasy and the little girl. "Act of Valor" may have actually spent less time on "family development," but it was so painful it felt about three times as long. At least Creasy was teaching the kid how to swim. At least he was an alcoholic. Something slightly entertaining or character developing was going on. Act of Valor was about 40 minutes of watching family videos. Again, I'm not a patient man.
What happened afterwards, I don't know, but I do know I can Netflix it and fast-forward through the first half, essentially turning it into a one hour action flick, or at least I hope the plot thickens and there's some action.
In short, I recommend not wasting your time and money seeing this move in the theater. If you are the touchy feely type and have more patience than the Captain, then maybe Netflix/Redbox it, but I have a hard time rationalizing expending the resources to drive, park, pay and watch this in the theater. OR, perhaps you could use "Man on Fire" or even "Heat" as proxies as to how much "touchy feely" you can tolerate in a movie before you start demanding action. "Man on Fire" redeemed the first part of the movie with the action and plot that followed. "Heat" was "barely" tolerable to me with the amount of interpersonal crap I had to tolerate to see Pacino and DeNiro duke it out with fully-automatic weapons. So if you really liked "Heat" and thought the interpersonal stuff improved the movie, you'll probably want to see this in the theater.
If not, again, benefit from the Captain's experience and save yourself some time and money.
PS- I forgot to mention there was an acoustic guitar on the beach. And you all know how much I associate acoustic guitars with communism.
Who in the Patron Saint's Name of Frick has meetings to see how they (the artists) should dictate how they can lead the community? Who says the community wants their input, let alone be "led" by these tyrannical brats?
Actually, now that I think about it, if it just takes a couple spoiled children to decree themselves some kind of "community leader" then I should have the equally undeserved right to declare open season on Hipsters in Brooklyn.
"Everybody grab your AR15's! It's Hipster season!"
"Where do we go Hipster hunting?"
"Brooklyn. I hear the land's teaming with them."
"What do we use for bait?"
"We'll post fliers in the area that we're a major recording label holding auditions looking for acoustic guitar playing girly men who want to sing songs about the injustices of reality and the real world. We'll have them "audition" at a specific time and location. It will be an organic turkey shoot!"
"Wow, I better get more ammo!"
This presents a paradox for young men, or perhaps "trap" is a better word, and so let me explain. (I am also forewarning people with thin skin and prone to complain about candid reality-based observations between the sexes that you may want to exercise your freedom of choice, and not read further).
Dancing is essentially the parallel or counterpart to sex when it comes to matters of courting. What I mean by that is IN GENERAL men like sex more than women, and when it comes to dancing, women like dancing more than men. This presents men with a golden opportunity to level the playing field, however, most of the men interested in learning to dance squander it.
For example, I was at the local dance bar in town and a young man saw me and one of the elder ladies light up the floor. He, along with everybody else in the joint, was very much impressed. When I returned to the table I found out he was a beginner dancer and was very eager to improve his skills. He started interrogating me about how to become a better dancer, when to go, what kind of classes were available, etc. etc. The next song came on and he immediately asked one of the girls at the table to dance. I knew her. She was a nice gal, also VERY good at dancing, but she had a bit of a chip on her shoulder because she was one of the few good looking girls in town. So I took the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone - teaching him a lesson about dancing and to give her guff.
I said, "What the hell are you doing?"
He looked at me and said, "I'm going to go dance?"
"No no no! What are you, crazy? You don't just go and offer dances for free!"
"I don't?" he asked.
"No! Look, dancing is like sex, except women want it more than men. So you don't just give it away for free. You gotta make them earn it. You don't just be a "dance whore" and dance with every girl at every opportunity. You get to be choosy!"
Naturally the girl protested, but her smiling face gave away that I was onto her.
She contested, "No, you go ahead and dance with whatever girl you want! There's nothing wrong with that. Don't listen to him!"
Smirking I retorted, "Hey, look, listen to me. Remember how many girls didn't want to have sex, or made you hold out? You were all for it, but they played their little games? This is god's gift to us to do the same. It's pay back time. For once we have something they want and we just aren't into it that much."
He said, "Yes, but I love to dance!"
I immediately hushed him up, "SHHHHHHH!!!! Jesus Christ!!!! Are you trying to ruin it for everybody??? You don't TELL them that! Fine, YOU like to dance, but most men don't. That makes you special. That makes you the sole supplier of what they want. You gotta play it cool. You reward them with a dance! You don't just give it away because you like it."
The girl by now was smiling and laughing, "You know, you're ruining it for the rest of us!"
I said in a sly come-hither look, "You know it's true! You just don't like it when we get to reverse the game and play it back on you!"
Of course the two young kids went and danced anyway, but this little anecdote highlights the point I'm trying to make. Why buy the dancing cow when the dancing milk is for free?
On the dance scene we had a name for guys who just went willy nilly dancing with every girl. We called them "Dance Whores." Now there is nothing wrong with being a dance whore, matter of fact, it's a great way to learn, and learn fast you will. You'll make a lot of friends AND it can be the best time in your life IF there is a vibrant and healthy dance community (ie-everybody wants to dance with everybody and there are no cliques or drama involved).
However, every dance scene has a life-expectancy. The fad will die out. The dance scene will get invaded by desperate singles groups. Eerie middle aged men desperate for wives will scare away all the other girls. Heck, people get married and don't go dancing any more. And soon what was the greatest dance community is nothing more than a desperate singles group or pick up joint. And all you have left is the dance skills you picked up.
But this was not all in vain. You now have a skill that very few men have. AND A LOT OF WOMEN DESPERATELY COVET! Yes, on the dance scene, EVERY guy knew how to dance, and therefore, you were nothing special. But if you go out into the non-dance scene world, you are hot tamales my fine young friend!
Of course, there are problems or drawbacks. Notably if you go to a wedding or a bar where dancing is not the main attraction or there is not enough of a dancing community, most girls will shoot you down for a dance PRIMARILY because they don't know you are a great dancer. This is why you need a good Wing-Woman. A woman who knows how to dance. A woman who will dance with you early on in the evening, showing and advertising to all the other women that you indeed are a great dancer. Once you've demonstrated you can beget 100% of the attention on the floor with a girl, THEN you start approaching girls seeing if they want to dance.
But again, you don't flood the market with dances. You hold back on production, just like OPEC. You are your own One Man Cartel of Dancing. You keep that price high as possible. Choose only the girls you want to dance with. Dance with them ONLY once. I also STRONGLY recommend grabbing older women and dancing with them. Not only will Grandma Tilly say yes, and not only will Grandma Tilly have the time of her life dancing with you, every younger girl who thought they were top shizzizle is wondering how the heck you are choosing women to dance with.
Dating it's the same thing. It may seem counter-intuitive, but you NEVER take a girl out on a dancing for the first date or use dancing to entice her into a date. You take her to a movie, or diner, or what have you and then through the normal course of conversation you let it slip that you "are an accomplished tango dancer." Or that you "love to salsa dance." Once you plant that seed, it will grow, quite rapidly, into a tree of desire to go dancing.
But, just like the kid on the block who was the first one to get a Nintendo or a Playstation 2, you don't let the entire neighborhood come over and play. You be stingy with the dancing. You, again, use it as a reward. If she makes you dinner, you go dancing. If she's nice and not a drama queen, you go dancing. If she starts in with the mind games and being late and nagging - NO DANCING FOR YOU! You are the prize because you got the goods.
So boys, and even men of the married caliber, remember to use dancing to your advantage. Learn it, pick it up, it's a great skill to have. But once that dance scene goes the way of Christian singles groups, the good times are over, and you must hang up your dance whoring attire. However, you have a skill that pretty much every red-blooded female wants, but less than 1% of the male population has, and that is dancing.
Don't botch it up by flooding the market with it.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Want some sound advice that speaks directly to people your age and will prove practical?
Or do you just plain need some training in data, statistics and economic research to help fight the tides of socialism at your school? (because, good Lord, you College Republicans desperately need it!)
Then look no further! Have the Captain come to campus!
For airfare, a decent hotel, rental car, a Chipolte fajita and a fee that is a mere fraction of what Ann Coulter or Dennis Prager will charge, you can have the Captain visit your little realm of Academia and dispense his patented "super-awesome economic genius." Be it a speech about choosing the right major, a training seminar on how to educate yourselves about economics and statistics, or consulting your student organization to become more strategic and effective, the Captain is more than happy to help out you youth.
My goal is not to make a "killing" charging you poor college students "$20,000" for a visit you can't afford, but rather to help as many students as possible get educated about politics, economics, education and statistics to help you become more capable of defending and advocating freedom, liberty and capitalism.
So if you are a member of a student organization that doesn't have billions in funds to afford limitless number of speakers, consider contacting the ole Captain.
You can reach me at
Saturday, February 25, 2012
And by "help" I mean tell you the truth.
Now I know a lot of people have issues with the truth. You can scream and yell and pout and even threaten me, but that doesn't change the truth. So you have a choice, accept and appreciate the truth (thereby making decisions based in reality which will be more effective and beneficial to your lives) or deny it and ignore it and try to fight against it. Again, the second option I usually equate to arguing with a tornado about to barrel down on your house. I'll leave the choice to you.
So let our lesson begin.
In listening to the radio, going on teh interwebz, reading, etc, I find that if you were to ask younger women to list their qualities or why men should find them attractive, without a doubt they will list that they're "educated" or "have an education."
Now, as I've gone into great detail before, it depends on what you got that education in. If you have your Masters in Electrical Engineering with an undergrad in Computer Science, sign me up right now for the Hot IT Chick Fan Club! If you have your degree in accounting and are a controller at a company, I shall be your personal little intern-slave-boy any day. And if you're in pre-med I shall volunteer to be your guinea pig. But if you are like the millions of other young women who simply followed the herd, got a worthless liberal arts degree and then merely doubled down on it and got a masters, eh, sorry, not impressed. The reasons why are:
1. Those degrees have no intellectual rigor. ie-just because you have a degree does not mean you're smart. Do not confuse the two and please don't brag about the worthless degree as if it has some intellectual merit.
2. They're not practical and they serve no purpose in the real world. We find women who are productive and self-supporting sexy and genuinely attractive because they really are independent women. Not somebody who got on the cushy make-work government job gravy train.
3. Furthermore, it's nothing unique or special. There's a million "Art Fashion" majors or "Cosmetology" majors out there. Common as blades of grass. You don't stand out.
Now, I know, I know, "We don't live our lives for you" and "we're not doing it for MEN!" and blah blah blah.
But I'm not talking about whether you go to school for men (which I hope you don't). We're talking about listing education as a badge of honor or something you think men will find attractive on your Match.com profile.
List your Masters in Nuclear Physics? - hell yes.
List your Doctorate in Chemistry? - hell yes.
List your PhD in "East Asian Studies?" - sorry, not going to impress us.
Thankfully, however, men are not primarily concerned about what you got your degree in. Yes, we are impressed if you have your CPA. Yes, we are impressed if you know how to program ACL statements on a Cisco router. But outranking all of that is whether you are nice.
To demonstrate I shall link to this link here. I do not agree with the "mail order bride" aspect of the post, but rather I just want the men to look at the pictures and tell me if that doesn't outrank a "Masters in English" any day. The pictures are also simply an amazing amalgamation of food and Uncle Elmer is one lucky guy.
Heck, who knows. Such kindness and pampering may actually (GASP!) LEAD TO A LONGER LIFE EXPECTANCY AND BETTER HEALTH!!!! Even (GASP) a BETTER RELATIONSHIP! Of course we wouldn't want that! Better to get your "Masters in Peace Studies" and lord it over whatever guy you date. I'm sure that will get them banging down your door.
I was wondering where a slight (and I do mean slight) bump in traffic came from, and it was Reddit. We all know Reddit is more or less populated with people leaning to the left and younger lefter leaning folk at that, but when I looked at the comments it has confirmed several sad things:
1. I'd hope that the youth would appreciate truth over being lied to, to help boost their self-esteem. Apparently my book will not do as well as I want, as youth today preferred to be lied to so they have warm fuzzies TODAY as opposed to genuine happiness and success tomorrow. Oh well, it isn't my life.
2. I'm still amazed at the emotional response by the handful of commenters who just plain refuse to listen to what I just said. "Men prefer kindness to your worthless degree." That's a fact. Do they accept it? No, they lash out at it and refuse to believe it. I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm amazed how emotions trump reality in this situation and how (primarily) girls readily dismiss reality. Which is the crux of what i'm saying - How do you DISMISS REALITY? Perhaps my parents were rich enough to bring me up to have such a delusional and entitled mentality that I have the luxury of ignoring reality.
3. I can't wait till these kids hit the labor market. Just can't wait.
4. Perhaps I think too simply, but when a guy says, "This is what men want" shouldn't that be more or less be accepted? An unquestionable premise? No, not to these children. There must be something WRONG with men then. "You don't want what we want you to want, therefore you're wrong." I wish these girls the utmost of success with the strategy of ignoring what men want and being so bold as to lecture them for wanting what they want.
Regardless, the ability of youth to ignore reality simply because "they don't like it" is a very entertaining phenomenon. I will continue to sit and watch Gen Y lie to themselves about how the real world works as it will be as entertaining as seeing 40 something women tell themselves "they can have it all and 40 is the new 20" while the tornado of reality barrels down upon them...both groups oblivious to it...both groups oblivious to how they're wasting the precious minutes they have on this planet away.
Be thankful that you, me and other "pessimists" are smart enough to realize our mortality and are smart enough to live in the real world and, therefore, enjoy the decline!
Friday, February 24, 2012
Fortunately I knew this billboard in Phoenix was coming up, and had my camera at the ready and was able to take a snapshot of it.
Kids (and parents stupid enough to pay for their kids' ways through college), let me explain something to you.
If the colleges have to BUY BILLBOARD SPACE to advertise their degrees, chances are it's a worthless school and a worthless degree. The "Carlson School of Management" had a billboard up for its MBA program in St. Louis Park. Do you REALLY think Harvard and Yale have to resort to this? MIT I doubt buys commercial ads on daytime TV. And I seriously doubt The Chicago School of Economics has infomercials running on late-night TV.
Do yourselves a favor, do not attend schools that advertise on billboards. Also, do yourselves another favor and read my super awesome book. It's definitely worth more than an MBA from the "Carlson School of Management" and a heck of a lot cheaper too.
The single worst thing I have to do is delete a comment that is brilliant or has a point because it is also marred by an unacceptable level of crassness, swearing or uncalled for remarks.
Keep the cursing to a minimum. The slandering and threatening of other people non-existent. And the sexual commentary reasonably clean.
Not that I'm running a church here, but we're not running a prison either.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Duly noted I have to print it out because if I need it, chances are there is no electricity to power my laptop to open said PDF file.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Thankfully we have the League of Extraordinary Bloggers that I can link to when I'm lazy...errr...looking to provide you with the same wit, intelligence and insight that I normally provide!
Say you're a burglar and you have a choice. Target a modern day pansified millineal hipster. A slightly-awakened Gen X'r who may have some regrets about voting for hope and change and unicorns. A baby boomer who uses Cialis regularly and "relives" his youth going to Sturgis on a bike he cannot pilot. Or a WWII vet who went 3 months without running water, killed 20 men trying to kill him in his 20's, fought for this country and has no problem killing you. Yeah, that's what I thought. Stay away from the nursing homes. The men there are more manly than our modern day men.
Charty goodness from St. Cloud, MN.
When the Captain runs a kitchen. I love how he puts the elite snobs in their place.
Won't somebody please think of the children...and completely forget about practicality at the same time.
The Exciting Adventures of Hypergamouse! (I have several ideas for a comic, but I have no artistic ability).
Now you know why I prefer to stay in shape, learn to disassemble my own gun and more or less train myself in when the Chinese come running over the hill.
Looks like we stirred a bee's nest. Note the comments of rationalization.
HOw's that Global Warming Scam coming along? Getting all the lemmings to follow you?
Sunday, February 19, 2012
Saturday, February 18, 2012
I can only name a few that have not been ruined by some hollywood exec morons trying to get an extra 10% market share by pandering to women in a movie that had no right having woman stuff in it:
The Good, The Bad and the Ugly
Duck You Sucker
Bridge Over the River Kwai
The Great Raid
The Dirty Dozen
There are more, but they aren't coming to mind right now.
Now, most women get pissed when I complain about movies being destroyed by forcing a romance plot on a movie that is NOT a romance movie. But they quickly acquiesce when I ask if "Steel Magnolias" or "Eat Pray Love" would have been improved with Bruce Willis coming in and killing a ton of terrorists on the side.
All that aside, I just watched a movie that has completely escaped my movie radar and its name is "The Train."
Don't know why I haven't heard of it before. I have no older brother or cousins to guide me, and the older men in my life never took me under their wings, but I'm mightily peeved I've gone 36 years in life without knowing about this movie.
In any case, the ole Captain STRONGLY recommends "The Train." Just look at the poster and tell me you don't want to watch it.
And some other bad ass nazi guys.
All trying to steal a train.
"Steal a train" is actually the worst I can do to explain this movie because there's a TON of strategy and subversion that goes into it. So I won't ruin it for you, because you will all obey me and do as i say and watch this movie for yourself. But seriously, just go get this on Netflix or Blockbuster or whatever you do.
If you die before watching this movie, god says you're going to hell.
Friday, February 17, 2012
I'm writing this not just for humorous purposes for the guys, but more importantly for the younger women out there who are now facing the fork in the road as to whether to take the modern day feminist route or a more traditional route. Admittedly, it isn't a black and white choice, you can work and be a housewife. Nobody says you can't be come an engineer. But I'm talking more about how you're going to interact with men and what is ultimately going to lead to your happiness. You want to take the feminist fork in the road, this is where it leads.
Sheesh! Now I know why tigers eat their young!
Regardless, the whole point of this post is to highlight where the road of feminism leads. THis is it ladies. A woman who is nearly dead, alone and, frankly, sounds about as exciting to hang out with as Buzz Killington.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Read it first, before continuing on.
You read it yet?
OK, here we go.
I like the article and very much agree with everything that's been said because it is essentially "WGTOW." Women of a certain age are starting to realize their perceptions and strategies were not quite accurate or effective when it came to choosing an appropriate suitor, and now that they are no longer the "hot little thing" they were when Milli Vanilli was popular, they are forced to accept reality and abide by it. It's a healthy decision to realize you are on this planet this one time and you better make the best of it, and so to see a movement akin to MGTOW with women, I can and do tip my hat to them.
There's just a couple problems with the whole premise, and permit me to be blunt (not that you thought I was going to be anything but).
One, I don't believe it. Sorry, just don't. Normally I cite empirical data or statistics, but I have none. All I have is the totality of personal and anecdotal experience I've accumulated over the years to realize that women, especially in their 30's and 40's, AND ESPECIALLY IF THEY DON'T HAVE KIDS, become MORE desperate. Yes they'll tell themselves 30 is the new 20. And yes, they'll cite people like "Meg Ryan" or "Jennifer Aniston" who are still "hot" in their 40's. And yes, they'll read US or People magazine and watch reruns of "Tank Girl." But in the end, I don't believe women, like men in the MGTOW movement, believe it for one second. I believe it is their rationalization hamsters merely plagiarizing the MGTOW movement.
Two, while the two are analogous (MGTOW and WGTOW), the analogy ends in the origins of both movements. The origins of MGTOW hearkens back to when these men were in their early teens. Nerd or jock. Player or uber-beta. Virgin or porn star. All men have had to suffer the games, psychoses, drama, and just plain BS associated with dating and courting women/girls since puberty. Some men, with a low threshold for psychological pain or abuse (or as I like to call it "self-respect"), just give up. They make a conscious economic decision weighing the costs and benefits of continuing to pursue the opposite sex and came to the decision not to chase any more. To hop on their motorcycles, get the snippity snip, minimize their expenses and head out into the vast plains of life and maximize the time they have on this planet for their own benefit before they died.
This "process" or "epiphany" is different from the origins of WGTOW or how women decide going their own way is the best option. Most men go their own way in their prime. It's a conscious choice. It wasn't forced upon them. They purposely and consciously chose to quit because it was the wisest choice. Whereas with WGTOW, it's a situation that seems forced upon them. They wake up one day, at the age of 37, realize the past 7 years was not as fruitful as it was from 1990-1997 and are faced with the reality nobody cares about Winona Ryder anymore. They only care about Megan Fox. They never analyzed or assessed the ROI of their efforts on attracting a male. They never looked back and said, "Gee, I'm going to die here in a short 40 years, I better quit pissing away my time at the bars and go hiking in Glacier National Park." They just took the time to finally turn around and see men stopped chasing them back in Bush's first administration.
They then claim, "Oh yeah, me too! Fish-bicycle! I'm going my own way!" Sadly, because it's their only option. This, does not a deeply thoughtful (or intellectually honest) epiphany make.
Three, which is related to two, is an issue of human psychology. Specifically, hard wiring.
I truly believe when a man comes to the decision to go his own way, the romantic/social/dating/whatever environment was so hostile it overrode his hard-wired programming to chase women. This is NOT a light statement. Because if your external environment was so hostile, to the point it overrides your genetic programming, that's a pretty hostile environment. I also contend the environment is so hostile, it literally damages your hard-wiring, or perhaps your brain sabotages it on purpose so that you can continue on with a reasonably normal and enjoyable life before you die. You girls perhaps have ran into the "dark, but quiet" man who you theorize was hurt by some woman in the past and you wish to show him there's reason to live and love once again? Yeah, that's the guy I'm talking about.
Sadly, it's already too late. His wiring has been irreparably damaged. He's no longer capable of love or romance, he's in a sense a fully functional automoton, capable of all human functions bar romance and love. Try as you might, he can't be put back together. He is "damaged goods." It's a battery that is dead and just won't turn over. In short, it wasn't a choice for him. His heart or mentality was permanently "broken" and shan't ever be put back together again.
But this cannot be said for the WGTOW movement. I'm sure womens' hearts have been "broken" and this isn't to say you haven't fallen in love before, blah blah blah. But you have not been driven to the brink where your genetic programming and hard-wiring is damaged or impaired. You haven't been driven to the point where you actually are forced to think of your mortality and how you've been living your life and deciding it is genuinely better to go at it on your own and pack it in before you die, completely taken men out of the picture.
Well, truthfully (and here we go with that blunt stuff again), ON THE WHOLE (admitting there are exceptions) women have had it pretty good in this country when it comes to quality and caliber of men. They were just WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too picky (or perhaps preoccupied with playing little funny torturous mind games) when it came to men. I know and acknowledge there are women who have been genuinely abused.
But I'm not talking about them.
I'm talking about the other 98.5% of women in American who watched too much 90210, Oprah or what have you and whose expectations were outlandishly high.
These girls/women have not gone through anywhere NEAR the psychological torture necessary to irreparably damage their hard-wiring to just POOF, give up on men and GENUINELY go their own way.
Four, it's an issue of timing. Given a limitless time horizon, yes, I 100% accept and agree that women would go their own way. But their environment has not been that hostile LONG ENOUGH to essentially break their spirit and their hard-wiring. Men have been at this since they were essentially 13 or 14. You add 20 years of that kind of hostile environment of mind games, being stood up, drama, suicide threats, sh!t tests, flightiness, flakiness, divorce, blah blah blah, and he'll burn out. So by the time he's in his 30's, he's done, he's impaired, he's on his motorcycle and you just see a tailpipe obscured by a puff of exhaust.
Women don't start that training or suffer anything approaching that kind of a hostile environment until they're maybe 30 or 35. And given how society and media constantly artificially pump up their egos, the true learning can be delayed until they're 40 (because, as you know, Oprah said 40 is the new 30. And there's this cougar fad. And Katie Couric is on the news. And did you see Aston Kutchner! He's married to Demi Moore...oops...wait ;).
So if I'm to believe this, Katie Bolick and other 30 something women, in a mere short 2-4 years, have suffered enough of a hostile courting environment that it destroyed their genetic programming and hard-wiring?
Sorry, I don't buy it dear. It takes A LOT of pain, agony, suffering and a relentless, never ending massive assault of nuclear-powered psychological BS to destroy your hard-wiring. Men, frankly, have never launched such a long, vicious, vile or sustained assault on women in this country, leading me to once again believe it is the plagiarizing rationalization hamster.
Of course, there is a silver lining to all this. And that is equilibrium.
As an economist I am a big believer in equilibrium. It is a constant and natural state in all aspects of physics, economics and humanity. It cannot be denied or defied. It is a fact. Because, well, if any system (the universe, the economy, humanity, etc) were NOT to be in equilibrium, it would blow up or destroy itself (which in itself is achieving equilibrium - ahhhhh!). But my deep philosophical hookey pookey aside, the point is you WILL most definitely get to suffer enough to the point your hard wiring is impaired. You will most definitely get to earn your stripes and the right to claim GENUINE WGTOW status. Because, banter about it all you want, a large enough population of the single men out there, ESPECIALLY in their 30's-50's have sooooo been put through the ringer, you'll never have the chance you did to potentially woo them into matrimony back when they were 20 and reasonably functional, healthy and capable in terms of romance and love. Your options are now limited to damaged goods. You have no choice now.
So it's not like you won't be going your own way. Don't worry, another 15-20 years wandering in the harsh desert you've essentially created for yourselves and you'll rank right up there with the rest of us. And besides, it's guaranteed. You'll have the honor of turning highly functional automotons like us when you're 55! You will become 100$ USDA certified WGOTW's.
All I ask is you please don't fake it in the meantime.
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
And I know you young kids are all too busy to sit through the 30 second commercial on Hulu, but just watch it. You'll thank the ole Captain later.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
And better yet, his wife was kind enough to write a review. To add icing to this cake, she titles it with light saber sharpness:
"Are Liberal Arts Colleges Becoming Finishing Schools for Women?"
Because of their linkage my book has gone from an Amazon rank of 60,000-ish to 31,000-ish, to now 2,000-ish (Mythical Cassandra has been keeping me updated). And sales thus far will afford me this nice scoped AR-15 I have my eye on.
Regardless, understand Instapundit is kind of like the conservative/libertarian version of Oprah's book club. It's the best you can hope for in this realm and is a very-welcomed bit of good news in the ole Captain's life.
I now of course have dreams of this mention creating kind of a bomb-hitting-the-magazine-in-a-ship type of chain reaction effect. People will forward to other people, all of NRO's authors will read it and want interviews, Dr. Walter E Williams will invite me over for martinis and basketball, Drudge will list it at the top of his web site, and Rush Limbaugh will invite me over for a round of golf...which I don't play...so I'll be his caddy or something. Oh! And I want hot Foxnews Babes to request me that I teach them how to salsa dance. Preferably Leeane Tweeden, but I'm not picky.
Now, I know all of my readers. You're all rough and tumble type yahoos, and you all like to shoot the old Captain a couple barbs his way in loving jesting fun. But just let me dream for now of becoming the next Vince Flynn wherein the Rumpie flows freely, motorcycles are on the cheap, Stugis is open year-round, and I can make fossil hunting my day time job....well, that or at least I'll be able to get that scoped AR 15.
Monday, February 13, 2012
I've been meaning to put together a lecture on money and production which would go a long way in simplifying people's understanding of economics, but just haven't had time.
Regardless, pour yourself a double shot o' Rumpie before taking on the link above.
Sunday, February 12, 2012
The term "centrism," though, I first ran into in college in the early 90's where everything was "euro-" or "anglo-" centric. Hard not to be when pretty much all inventions, innovations, technological advances and powerful economies herald from western civilizaiton. But as much as I loathe the term "centrism," I'll grant myself this one opportunity to use the word in that I plan on turning it around and using it against those who originally brought it into its existence.
I was out driving around smoking a cigar and enjoying the sun, when my mind wandered and I noticed for the most part that we live in a female sexual "centric" society. In other words the female version of sexuality is deemed "correct" or "proper" whereas male sexuality is considered "bad" or "wrong."
For example, when a guy says he just wants to have frivolous, meaningless sex, he's considered to be a cad, or shallow or sick or just plain "wrong." Whereas when a woman insists on having a relationship or some level of emotional involvement as a pre-requisite to sex, that's considered "good" or "proper."
I'll give you another one.
It's virtuous and noble to like somebody for their inner-beauty. Wow, what a kind and great person you are to find somebody's intellect attractive. But dare you say,
"I like long legs, long hair, pouty lips, and big gazongas"
SHAME! You are SHALLOW, HOLLOW and "only going after one thing."
I have a simple question:
Who in the Patron Saint's Name of Frick determined the male approach to sexuality was "bad" and the women's approach "good?"
If you look at society, it's more or less ordains female sexuality as the "appropriate" sexuality and more or less criminalizes or shames male sexuality.
This is funny because last I checked male and female sexuality was essentially binary in nature. For example in electricity you have either positive or negative. Computers are either on or off. And even though the words "positive" or "on" are considered better than "negative" or "off" in reality they are not words that describe morality. Merely states.
That wire is positively charged. That wire is negatively charged.
That computer is on. That computer is off.
00000000 00000001 (some IT humor there for the boys)
And male and female sexuality is the same thing. One is not better than the other. Nor is another worse than the other. They are merely two sides of the same coin. States or binary traits the sexes have.
Because they are neutral when it comes to morality, I'm just wondering why male sexuality is shunned or shamed, while female sexuality is championed? The reason I ask is I'm getting mightily tired of having my sexual programming be overlooked or even villainized, while I have to have the female version shoved down my throat.
BBW? Uh no.
"Large and in charge?" Uh no.
"Big is beautiful?" Uh no.
Lingerie for overweight people? Uh, DOUBLE NO!
Now you can go ahead and lecture me about how evil I am and how mean I am and blah blah blah. Not only will it make my point that men can't speak freely about their sexual preferences without incurring social wrath AND also point out society is female sexual "centric," your arguments are moot because it's like arguing that
HEY! THAT COMPUTER IS (GASP!) ON!!!!! Shame on you computer for being on!
HEY! That wired has a (GASP) NEGATIVE CHARGE!!! Shame on you wire for having a negative charge!
Hey! 00000000 00000001! 00100100 00111100 10110110 01111010!!!!
It would be like me lecturing women about (GASP!) PREFERRING TO HAVE CHILDREN!!!!
Additionally, arguing against something that is genetically programmed or hardwired in men, once against violates The Reality Principle. You can argue till your face is blue that you find it dirty and disgusting men prefer skinny, younger women over fat older ones. You might as well be arguing against gravity or arguing against the tornado about to barrel down on your house, because you're arguing against reality. However, there are consequences to arguing against reality, notably for the women who so desperately wish to ignore male sexuality.
The perfect example is the Herculean efforts and strides made to make fat women (and men I might add) feel proud about themselves. AND at the same time shame men for being "shallow" for daring to not find them attractive. The result is that the overweight woman lives in a very accommodating, but delusional world. She never loses the weight, but at the same time never finds a guy (and consequently has bad health too). She never really achieves any happiness (though I'm sure I can hear the screeching now about how "we don't need a man to be happy" and blah blah blah), because society lacked the spine to be upfront with her and accept male sexuality for what it is. So the poor woman dies, not living her full potential she could, wondering why men never came around simply because society never acknowledged what the other side of the coin might have to say.
So who is the real victim of female sexual centrism? Sadly, both men and women, because no matter how much each side may claim otherwise, we are in this boat together and would prefer each others' company. Men are silenced and oppressed on a psychological and social level from voicing their preferences and just being plain ole males. While women are misled about the true nature of male sexuality, let alone its very existence. Because of this, they violate The Reality Principle, operate on the false premise female sexuality is the only thing that matters, rendering their attempts and efforts to have success with the opposite sex fruitless or at least impaired (unhappy marriages, "my day" is somehow viewed as the BEST day in her life, husbands who get fat because she does, sexless marriages/relationship, etc. etc.). The end result, everybody is not as happy as they could be, divorce rates go through the roof, and society still recommends "female sexuality good, male sexuality bad."
Not until we treat it as 00000000 and 00000001 and realize there is no "right" or "wrong," men you can expect to see more of this, and ladies you can expect to see more of this.
This highly politically incorrect (and therefore, truthful) PSA brought to you by Cappy Cap.
I have been working out quite regularly, as well as participating in an excruciating jujitsu program for the past 6 months. I was never "not" in shape, but I was never chiseled or ripped at the same time either. Also, I started following the diet laid out in Freedom 25's book. The results are thus:
Again, I am by no means a ripped Ryan Reynolds, but there IS something to be said for the subsegment of the Manosphere that addresses dieting and eating right, as well as working out on a regular basis. A correct diet, as well as regular (and unfortunately) rigorous exercise, I am starting to believe is more of a must among men in this world. If we are going to list demands and hold women to certain standards, then we too much also stay in shape and be physically attractive to them. Not only for the health benefits it brings to ourselves, and not only to avoid being hypocrites, but also because staying physically fit is infinitely more economical and efficient than try to go to a bar and "game" some girl with chat, gab and charm.
Additionally, for those of us lucky enough to have found the rare woman that is the traditional, loving, sexy, caring 1940's type gal that had the intelligence to give establishment feminism the finger (and be more than willing to become the naughty June Cleaver in the kitchen heh heh), they of all women most certainly deserve a sexy, physically attractive man. Not some DB that just acts alpha and plays game and scratches his ass.
So, hence forth fellow junior, deputy, aspiring, official or otherwise economists of the male persuasion:
If you got an extra 20 pounds, lose it.
If you got the choice between staying home for 2 hours watching TV or going for a 10 mile walk, go for a walk.
If you eat crap, stop.
Not just because improving your physique will prove more productive in the end in your romantic pursuits, but if you're lucky like some of us to have a girl that tolerates our manosphere theology, AND SHE BELIEVES IN IT, can you think of a more deserving woman that is entitled to a better and sexier you?
US courts wants to sue a Swiss bank because they won't willingly betray their clients and give the US government their money.
BUT (here's the kicker)
Oh, that's right! It's a SWISS bank, not a US bank! And so the bank simply didn't show up to court.
The pure hubris of the federal government thinking they can violate a country's sovereignty when it comes to getting other people's money.
Saturday, February 11, 2012
God bless you Tommy Jordan.
Friday, February 10, 2012
Thursday, February 09, 2012
I then figured, "hey, why not convert US GDP in terms of gold?"
I will admit upfront this is not a completely fair comparison in that it is more reflective of the price of gold than it is the productive ability of the US, but it is interesting to note that if we used gold as the currency, GDP today would be a mere $400 billion, about what it was when the last time the economy sucked this bad - Jimmy Carter.
I'm just waiting for the next Ronald Reagan.
Wednesday, February 08, 2012
Ug, you youth. All you learn is socialism and how great you are for merely existing in school.
Tuesday, February 07, 2012
They will huff and puff, but it won't change the truth, which is most of them ARE effectively overpaid baby sitters.
I dream of the day we have high school seniors paid to teach k-6 grades at a mere fraction of the cost it takes us now with similar, if not, better results...and much lower property taxes.
Monday, February 06, 2012
Hey Cap, Huge fan from Ontario. I remember you describing your ideal woman as something like "a brilliant computer-engineer-type who likes to dress up, wear lingerie, go dancing, and act like a dude". Essentially, an approximation of a real-life Dagny Taggart. AGREED. Couple things - first, as a libertarian myself, I'm tempted to conclude that a romantic relationship with a liberal/democrat/socialist would inevitably fail. SO, have you ever seen it work? Furthermore, there aren't exactly many free-market/liberty-leaning females out there. Or at least, they're hard to find. Other than basically wedding-crashing on political/economic conferences, what do you recommend to track down these elusive ladies? Thanks a bunch,
-Canadian Agent "Charlie"
Our Canadian Agent asks an OUTSTANDING question that plagues many young collegiate males' minds:
How, or even, SHOULD we date liberal chicks, when that's all we have available to us?
And this presents us a very important "teachable moment."
Understand young male economists, that whereas it is commonly accepted that women want to change men (and we cannot be changed), that doesn't necessarily apply to women in reverse. Matter of fact women CAN EASILY be changed when it comes to things like politics, religion, etc. etc., simply because they've given no real serious thought, ponderance, let alone have rarely spent any time researching and actually looking up facts to determine whether their ideology or political beliefs are the correct ones. They (just like their young male collegiate counterparts), are predisposed to believe in liberalism or socialism not because of any intellectually honest soul searching, but were merely brainwashed by their k-12 indoctrinators.
In short, they are not wedded to their ideology and are merely parroting the same old liberal lines because it's either "popular" or they mindlessly "just care for the little people."
There is however one thing that can make a girl/woman quickly abandon her political ideology or religion and that is a man she is viscerally attracted to. I've seen it a million times before. The girl was a "rabid feminist" or a "huge liberal" in college, until her engineering husband she married explained things to her or started laying down the law. Without fail they will say, "you know, I used to believe in all that liberal stuff, until my husband started explaining things to me" as they go and now rear the three children they just had. Even religion. I know many women that merely abdicated their original religion to be in line with the man they were marrying. Oh, they were passionate christians/jews/muslims/etc., just as they were passionate liberals/feminists/pacifists/vegans, but once that dominant, sexy alpha male showed up, oh, they got rid of any previous ideologies real quick.
This means, fellow Collegiate Cappy Cappites of the Male Persuasion, that you should not refuse to date a girl just because she's a liberal. Matter of fact, you should view it as a child believing in Santa Claus - you pat her on the head and view it for how cute it is. Besides, the sheer statistical numbers make NOT dating liberals an impossibility because you essentially have nothing BUT liberal girls in college (and an aside if you will - you'll find most CONSERVATIVE college girls are just as clueless about politics and economics and simply "chose" to be conservative on equally flimsy grounds).
What you should be doing however, is not looking at what the girl is today - a naive 20 something whose parents are paying for her "elementary education" degree who has never visited the FRED database in her life. You should be looking at her long term potential.
You'll note that in speaking with most college students today (male and female) they are probably more conservative or libertarian than they are socialists. Their beliefs are conservative, their brains, however were too lazy to go and find out which political party those beliefs concur with. Of course, the always available teachers unions were more than willing to make that decision for them. So if the girl is cute, she's smart, she espouses logical, moral beliefs and (above all else) SHE IS NICE AND NOT A COMPLETE PSYCHO, don't dismiss her because she's a liberal. View her more in terms of high quality raw material that can be shaped into the "IT geek goddess that likes to wear lingerie and play video games."
There is of course the question then, "how do you get her to convert?" Or "how do you get her to realize her ideology is wrong?"
And it pains me you young Agents don't know the arsenal of weapons I've equipped you with in the field.
weapon you have is...
Assume, a couple premises and you will see how betting is hands down the best way to convince a woman (or anybody for that matter) you are right, they are wrong, but not alienate or anger them.
Premise 1 - The girl is viscerally and genuinely attracted to you.
Premise 2 - You have NOT mentioned your ideology at all and is thus far unknown to her
Premise 3 - She is intellectually honest and will listen to reason and, more importantly, fact.
Those three things are the only things you need to convert a liberal girl over to the factual-side of the force AND impress her romantically.
When the topic of politics comes up (which it will, but you WON'T bring it up), you will act nonchalant. Indifferent. Silent, but with a hint of superiority. She will ask you a question about politics, or she will say something you know to be FACTUALLY wrong. When she does this, you can spring your trap.
You say, "You know what, I bet you're wrong about how much we spend on the military."
She will retort, "Oh really?"
You say, "Yes, matter of fact, I'll enter a wager with you. If military spending as a percent of GDP is less than 10%, you have to come to my house, wear a french maid outfit and cook me dinner. If it's more than 10% GDP, I'll come over to your house and be your personal manslave for a day."
And in one cunning move you've not only turned her on even more, but you have politely (and quit sexually, I might add) introduced the concept she might be wrong.
The upshot of liberal college girls is they are wrong on some many levels, the betting could go on forever. The budget, economic growth, history, etc. etc., you name it. So you could theoretically have her in your house being the "naughty nurse" or whatever everyday for the next 20 years.
There is however, a problem with betting. Once you force the typical liberal to attach something of value (money, french maid outfit, manslave, etc.) to their beliefs, they all of the sudden realize there IS a consequence for being ignorant. They WILL try to weasel their way out of it, change semantics, look for technicalities, which means you must peg down the PRECISE, SPECIFIC data you are going to use to prove either of you wrong.
So it can't be "I bet you that Bush didn't suck as much."
It has to be "I bet you that there was more jobs created under George Bush by this point in time in his presidency than there has been under Obama. And we'll use the BLS as a source."
There is also a totally alpha move if the girl doesn't want to go through with the bet. When she refuses to take the bet, you can simply say,
"Cool, then you can show up at my house in lingerie anyway and help me fix my motorcycle. I'll see you at 8:00."
It will certainly impress her more than the hipster-Seth Rogen, DB, goatee-wearing liberal arts pansy asking her to "get coffee" or see the latest craptastic "independent student film."
Saturday, February 04, 2012
Friday, February 03, 2012
These credentials, of course, will not be recognized by the rest of the educational system because it would destroy the monopoly they have over millions of innocent people. Thousands of worthless, washed up hippie professors would have to get real jobs instead of screwing over youth for $400 a credit.
There is good news however. What ultimately gives universities their power is not the fact they recognize each others' credits, but that employers recognize the credits or acknowledge the value of a degree from a university. I know people in this country are very slow, and HR consciously works against productivity and progress, but slowly companies are starting to realize just how worthless most college degrees and their graduates are. And I'm willing to bet that in due time employers will start to accept credentials from free online colleges like Khan's Academy or MITx as equal, if not better than a traditional brick and mortar university because the student was obviously self-motivated.
I therefore officially declare that I will hire graduates from MITx should I ever be in the position of power to hire people. Actually, I would prefer them. Now if the rest of the Fortune 500 companies would join me, we could fundamentally change the country for the better.
The tenants I found were great on paper, but had one major flaw:
The couple were 20 something liberals.
Worse still, they were the extreme vegan, eco-friendly, chemicals-are-bad, type nutjobs.
They had the upstairs unit so there was no mold, but when they found out there was mold in the basement, they raised hell. There was a token amount of mold that every basement had, but I've learned it's better not to piss off tenants that pay and go and deal with their minor problems.
So I got some "Killz" which is a chemically treated oil based paint that kills mold. Painted up the basement real good, got rid of the mold. And all was well.
Mr. Effeminate Goatee Wearing Spoiled Brat Preppy Suburbanite Male Whose Ass I Could Crush Because He Was Even Skinnier Than Me comes up to me in the Honey Badger voice and practically yells at me because of the chemically smell. I tried explaining that it was to get rid of the mold they were so complaining about. But it didn't matter. I was supposed to warn them. I was supposed to use environmentally friendly means to kill the mold. What if they got asthma. When in reality he should have been more worried about me losing my temper and busting his teeth (these were the dark days when the Captain had a very short fuse).
In the end, I learned that if I was going to rent to people the biggest tenant-risk isn't the section 8 welfare recipient or the frat boy partiers. It's the spoiled brat, entitlement minded liberal children who never worked for a living.
Fast forward 8 years now and lookie what's happening.
I can't wait till the unholy alliance between big corporations and the environmentalist movement they so wished to court starts to unravel. Then again, you big time corporations swallowed that CSR BS hook, line and sinker and so I once again
break out the lawn chair
pour myself a drink
light up a cigar
and enjoy the decline.
Thursday, February 02, 2012
The best part I would say hits around the 1:50 mark.
You can now get a degree in "Value Studies."
Apparently so after you graduate you can assess the value of your degree to be 0.
St. Reif cannot come down here and save us quickly enough.
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
The First Annual Charles Montgomery Burns Award for the Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence
We in the west rely on it desperately to find out who the real enemies of freedom and capitalism are!
Also in part by the fine men and women of Pettiness. Why dedicate your efforts and resources to productive means when you can simply fight and bicker amongst yourselves. Pettiness. Now available at all collegiate MBA programs, Fortune 500 companies and women's empowerment seminars.
Inflation. When statistics don't paint the reality you want, massage them with Inflation.
Purity Bear. I don't know what the heck it is, but it sounds painful and I am wincing before I click on the play button. Purity Bear - the result of emasculating men.
Linkage is also brought to you by the lazy men and women of AFSCME. Yes, AFSCME, "We don't work for you. You work for us. We own you. You're our bitches. Vote democrat or else!"
The Education Bubble. Ensuring millions of naive, youthful college students spend billions of dollars on worthless, washed up hippie professors. The Education Bubble. Screwing you over since 1970.
MBA's. Worthless, overpriced and now easily replaceable with people who do real work - engineers.
Capital Flight. Hate the rich? Hate the successful? Piss them off to the point they get up and leave or just throw in the towel. Capital Flight - It's the last thing liberals will expect.
Wingnut Musings. A book written by Fourthcheckraise, who you should visit frequently.
Keynesianism. Yes, if you want to be infantile in your beliefs about economics, nothing better than an economic theory that tells you working harder and smarter is for losers! Why believe the cold, harsh realities of truth when you can just say, "let's spend more government money, slosh it around the economy, and economic growth will magically happen!" Yes Keynesianism! It makes Krugman's Job Farting Unicorn Theories believable to those suffering cognitive dissonance!
However, it seems an anti-gun outfit is trying to boycott Starbucks. Why? Because Starbucks is allowing people who openly carry firearms to come into their stores in states where an open carry is legal.
The boycott is supposed to happen on the 14th. I shall purchase a fluffy foo-foo drink on the 14th at Starybucks. You should too.
I love watching the economic realities of a dying economy crush one of the most damaging aspects to the American economy, and that is HR.
Human Resources in the 1980's-early 2000's, as you all know, was nothing more than a failed experiment in affirmative action to load the employee ranks of corporations with women. When it turned out 22 year old HR reps who had NO CLUE what they were doing when it came to recruiting talented labor (especially in technical fields), they turned their focus instead on employment law and benefits and compensation (where HR does have some genuine merit and I would recommend pursuing a career). Of course, companies lost out on literally two decades of attracting the most qualified labor, but hey, at least we gave two generations of 23 year old HR generalist ditzes a good boost of self-esteem. And that made it worth the billions of dollars in lost efficiency, lower overall employment, lower labor productivity, lower international rankings and lower standards of living for the entire American populous.
But what I find hilarious today, is when you see aging, decrepit HR professionals still trying to advocate keeping HR in the hiring process. Still trying to make it seem like HR is relevant or somehow "vital" to the hiring process. What's even better is reading the comments where they try to self-rationalize their importance to the US economy and labor market. They even threaten you not to bypass HR.
I'm so sorry dearies, but you had your chance. You went on a power trip, proved yourselves to be inept, if not, worse, on a political vendetta to punish perceive political enemies at the expense of the company, and now corporations are relegating you to the legal department. Better swallow some of our own advice and get some of that there never ending "CPE" in benefits and compensation as you futilely pursue one of your own creations - "progressive credentialism!"
Enjoy the decline!