I'm about to board a plane and intend on listening to the Pushing Rubber Downhill podcast. However, you may want to tune into this particular episode of Adam's podast, the "Wymyn's" episode where Adam says, and I quote,
"I love all women. The pretty ones, and none of the others."
Wednesday, August 31, 2016
Black Canyon and Royal Gorge
Last pics from Colorado. These are primarily from Black Canyon National Park, which I would say is a must if you are visiting Colorado. The pictures fail to do the park justice as those cliffs range from 1,500 to 2,700 feet straight down. The "stream" you see there is actually quite a large and rapidly flowing river. Some other pictures include Royal Gorge and Red Mountain.
Operations/posts will get back to a normal schedule...until once again I get stir crazy and decide to randomly leave Minnesota for some other destination I've yet to visit.
Operations/posts will get back to a normal schedule...until once again I get stir crazy and decide to randomly leave Minnesota for some other destination I've yet to visit.
Episode #162 of The Clarey Podcast
Sleeping in the back of a Prius.
Black Canyon National Park and 2,700 foot drops.
Yes, I charge my girlfriend rent...and so should you!
Forcing people to sit-down dinners.
Death by Prius!
AND MORE on THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Brought to you by Captain's Quarterly, the quarterly publication GUARANTEED to piss off feminists! Also available in Kindle!
Black Canyon National Park and 2,700 foot drops.
Yes, I charge my girlfriend rent...and so should you!
Forcing people to sit-down dinners.
Death by Prius!
AND MORE on THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Brought to you by Captain's Quarterly, the quarterly publication GUARANTEED to piss off feminists! Also available in Kindle!
Tuesday, August 30, 2016
ITT Out of Business
Or almost anyway. And awwwww, that's just too bad.
Now when will the public universities go out of business? Or at least end their liberal arts programs?
Now when will the public universities go out of business? Or at least end their liberal arts programs?
The Solution to Colin Kaepernick
If you are a true American, at minimum Colin Kaepernick pisses you off. A rich minority millionaire football player who was adopted by white people who made headlines recently by not standing for the national anthem because (exhausted *sigh*) "racial equality." Such hypocrisy (and unoriginality/conformity) makes any normal person detest such a person, plus deep down inside your darwinistic instincts are scrambling for a "solution" for a traitor to your country.
Ergo, you'll call into the Sean Hannity Show.
You'll tweet it on your FriendFace.
Perhaps you'll get into a debate about him online.
But in the end you know this will have no effect because this is the narrative and the entire media, educational, and government systems are championing that narrative.
So how do you fight back?
Well, there is only one way.
You boycott the 49'ers.
This is an example of a theory I've been working on that there is a universal equilibrium when it comes to political attacks from your enemies. That for every political attack (or even "action") there is a succinct, simple, Occam's Razorish type response that would counter it. Think the laws of physics where for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Or in economics, markets are always trying to find equilibrium. It may take some time, but if you sit down and think about it, a clear and obvious solution to any political attack/action DOES invariably exist.
However, there are two problems that exist with the simple solution of boycotting the '49'ers.
One, they are from San Francisco and most people in San Francisco cheer on the ignorant demand of equal outcomes and not equal opportunities. They are for stealing money from white people to give to minorities that fucked up as badly as Colin's birth father (you can look that up). And they are all for replacing meritocracy, fairness, and justice with equal outcomes for a hatred of those who worked hard and earned what they have.
So you're not going to get anybody in SF to boycott Mr. Kaepernick.
Two, thankfully, you can still cause the NFL a sting if fans of any team playing against the 49'ers decide to boycott them. This may (once again) be the simple counter-reaction political solution we are seeking, but alas, remember what I've said before:
Republicans are pussies when it comes to boycotting.
While there is some hope with Target Corporation suffering financially for it's sickening virtue signaling, in general Republicans, SWPL's, RINO's, and suburbanites still give money to corporations and companies that hate them, or at least hate America and freedom. Starbucks and Apple are always patronized by suburban conservative folk because they just have to have their coffee and latest iPhone fashion statement. Lines go out the door at Chipotle as sheeple SWPL's get their "organic grass fed beef." I still, for the life of me, can't understand why people still have leftist MSM rags delivered to their squeaky clean White Fish Bay doors. And year after year, in major metro after major metro, the (predominantly white, republican) football fans bend over and spread their ass cheeks so the NFL can ass-rape them for billion dollar stadiums.
In short, yes, there is a simple solution and one that 50 years ago would have worked. Had some arrogant spoiled suburbanite brat QB failed to stand up for the pledge of allegiance and spew leftist hatred for white people as the excuse, I'd imagine the majority of football going fans would boycott any games he played, forcing the NFL to silence him or bench him altogether (truthfully, the NFL would probably never had let it get that far). Of course, the male football fans of today are pussies compared to the men of yesteryear, and (just like they get ass-raped paying for stadiums), they'd rather have this whinny child spit in their face and indirectly accuse them of being racist, than give up "sportsball" and stand for principle. Their lives are that meaningless and void of purpose, all they have is "the Sunday game" and will submit themselves as inferior men to this self-pitying race-pimp.
Alas, there is a solution, but it requires real men and women to implement it. And very few of these people are real men or women.
Enjoy the decline.
Ergo, you'll call into the Sean Hannity Show.
You'll tweet it on your FriendFace.
Perhaps you'll get into a debate about him online.
But in the end you know this will have no effect because this is the narrative and the entire media, educational, and government systems are championing that narrative.
So how do you fight back?
Well, there is only one way.
You boycott the 49'ers.
This is an example of a theory I've been working on that there is a universal equilibrium when it comes to political attacks from your enemies. That for every political attack (or even "action") there is a succinct, simple, Occam's Razorish type response that would counter it. Think the laws of physics where for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Or in economics, markets are always trying to find equilibrium. It may take some time, but if you sit down and think about it, a clear and obvious solution to any political attack/action DOES invariably exist.
However, there are two problems that exist with the simple solution of boycotting the '49'ers.
One, they are from San Francisco and most people in San Francisco cheer on the ignorant demand of equal outcomes and not equal opportunities. They are for stealing money from white people to give to minorities that fucked up as badly as Colin's birth father (you can look that up). And they are all for replacing meritocracy, fairness, and justice with equal outcomes for a hatred of those who worked hard and earned what they have.
So you're not going to get anybody in SF to boycott Mr. Kaepernick.
Two, thankfully, you can still cause the NFL a sting if fans of any team playing against the 49'ers decide to boycott them. This may (once again) be the simple counter-reaction political solution we are seeking, but alas, remember what I've said before:
Republicans are pussies when it comes to boycotting.
While there is some hope with Target Corporation suffering financially for it's sickening virtue signaling, in general Republicans, SWPL's, RINO's, and suburbanites still give money to corporations and companies that hate them, or at least hate America and freedom. Starbucks and Apple are always patronized by suburban conservative folk because they just have to have their coffee and latest iPhone fashion statement. Lines go out the door at Chipotle as sheeple SWPL's get their "organic grass fed beef." I still, for the life of me, can't understand why people still have leftist MSM rags delivered to their squeaky clean White Fish Bay doors. And year after year, in major metro after major metro, the (predominantly white, republican) football fans bend over and spread their ass cheeks so the NFL can ass-rape them for billion dollar stadiums.
In short, yes, there is a simple solution and one that 50 years ago would have worked. Had some arrogant spoiled suburbanite brat QB failed to stand up for the pledge of allegiance and spew leftist hatred for white people as the excuse, I'd imagine the majority of football going fans would boycott any games he played, forcing the NFL to silence him or bench him altogether (truthfully, the NFL would probably never had let it get that far). Of course, the male football fans of today are pussies compared to the men of yesteryear, and (just like they get ass-raped paying for stadiums), they'd rather have this whinny child spit in their face and indirectly accuse them of being racist, than give up "sportsball" and stand for principle. Their lives are that meaningless and void of purpose, all they have is "the Sunday game" and will submit themselves as inferior men to this self-pitying race-pimp.
Alas, there is a solution, but it requires real men and women to implement it. And very few of these people are real men or women.
Enjoy the decline.
Saturday, August 27, 2016
Charity Isn't Necessary
Remember if you'd like to support the Captain, donations and charity are NOT needed. Just do your weekend online shopping here (and book mark the URL if you'd be kind enough to).
Friday, August 26, 2016
Curse Free Episode #3 of The Clarey Podcast!
Cappy's 20 year regret.
What Metallica teaches us about homeschooling.
Leftist Millennials are The Borg/The Flood.
An 80 year old fan writes Cappy a very humbling letter.
AND MORE in THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Sponsored by "Reconnaissance Man!" Available in paperback and kindle, a must-read for every 20 and 30 something lost wandering the desert in life.
What Metallica teaches us about homeschooling.
Leftist Millennials are The Borg/The Flood.
An 80 year old fan writes Cappy a very humbling letter.
AND MORE in THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Sponsored by "Reconnaissance Man!" Available in paperback and kindle, a must-read for every 20 and 30 something lost wandering the desert in life.
Thursday, August 25, 2016
Margaret Cho: The Gen X Millennial
This won't be a long one, but one that should be noted.
Margaret Cho, if you didn't know, is a "comedian." Those air quotes are the largest ones I could order from China, but they are currently building aircraft carrier-size ones that they will ship to me once completed. Regardless, the only reason I know of her was a friend of mine, who was gay, said I just "had to see her." So I watched about 10 minutes of a video and had to turn it off when she did a "comedy" skit about eating pussy.
This was about 15 years ago, and I distinctly remember two things about her:
1. She is NOT funny.
2. Much like Amy Schumer is today, she was championed by the pacifier sucking Gen-X at the time as a female comedic genius.
And then she went away.
Perhaps she "went away" much like Saturday Night Live "went away" in my life, because it was only funny to sophomoric 7th graders. ie - it still exists, but you either grow up, or realize it just isn't that funny. Perhaps her career stalled and people had their fill of "eating pussy jokes." But whatever the case, Margaret Cho, in all of her media-hyped "comedy" was no longer at the forefront.
Which brings us to today. For while perusing my facebook, the Talented Mr. Aurini sent me this:
Let me explain something to the young Millennial women, or perhaps even the Gen X women that think Margaret Cho is anything of intellectual value.
This is a now-approaching 50 year old woman. And this is what she's doing.
Let that sink in.
This isn't a 14 year old girl pulling a prank.
This isn't a 24 year old college student protesting something or other.
This is a 67%-life-over woman who's legacy she is choosing to leave is wearing a full-body sweater penis.
If you can't see that Margaret Cho's life's purpose has simply been to serve as a warning for others, then I can't help you. And if you're of the leftist variety to think this is some how "cool" or "edgy" and you're "sticking it to the man," your entire life will be a waste. But if you're a younger woman, who still has her beauty, and still deep down inside would like to get married, have a family, and a shot at a traditional life, you cannot listen to these leftist, Hollywood, viruses. This is where their path leads. This is where you will end up. Choose your path wisely and enjoy the decline.
Margaret Cho, if you didn't know, is a "comedian." Those air quotes are the largest ones I could order from China, but they are currently building aircraft carrier-size ones that they will ship to me once completed. Regardless, the only reason I know of her was a friend of mine, who was gay, said I just "had to see her." So I watched about 10 minutes of a video and had to turn it off when she did a "comedy" skit about eating pussy.
This was about 15 years ago, and I distinctly remember two things about her:
1. She is NOT funny.
2. Much like Amy Schumer is today, she was championed by the pacifier sucking Gen-X at the time as a female comedic genius.
And then she went away.
Perhaps she "went away" much like Saturday Night Live "went away" in my life, because it was only funny to sophomoric 7th graders. ie - it still exists, but you either grow up, or realize it just isn't that funny. Perhaps her career stalled and people had their fill of "eating pussy jokes." But whatever the case, Margaret Cho, in all of her media-hyped "comedy" was no longer at the forefront.
Which brings us to today. For while perusing my facebook, the Talented Mr. Aurini sent me this:
Let me explain something to the young Millennial women, or perhaps even the Gen X women that think Margaret Cho is anything of intellectual value.
This is a now-approaching 50 year old woman. And this is what she's doing.
Let that sink in.
This isn't a 14 year old girl pulling a prank.
This isn't a 24 year old college student protesting something or other.
This is a 67%-life-over woman who's legacy she is choosing to leave is wearing a full-body sweater penis.
If you can't see that Margaret Cho's life's purpose has simply been to serve as a warning for others, then I can't help you. And if you're of the leftist variety to think this is some how "cool" or "edgy" and you're "sticking it to the man," your entire life will be a waste. But if you're a younger woman, who still has her beauty, and still deep down inside would like to get married, have a family, and a shot at a traditional life, you cannot listen to these leftist, Hollywood, viruses. This is where their path leads. This is where you will end up. Choose your path wisely and enjoy the decline.
Curse of the High IQ Available in Audio
For those of you who insist you get a run in or some work done while taking in a book via audio, you'll be happy to know "Curse of the High IQ" is available in AUDIO now!
Wednesday, August 24, 2016
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
Monday, August 22, 2016
Episode #161 of The Clarey Podcast
#Womenwithdegrees!
Dumping UK husband for Jamaican lover.
Mail order brides.
Target losing business.
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Dumping UK husband for Jamaican lover.
Mail order brides.
Target losing business.
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Why Manveer Heir Shouldn't Be (and Brendan Eich Should Never Haven Been) Fired
If you don't know the kerfuffle surrounding Manveer Heir, he is a developer at Bioware games that has made some tweets and social media commentary that some deemed racist. And while I can certainly understand criticizing various races, or pointing out shortcomings in an aim to constructively criticize (or perhaps even vent about) said races, I kind of drew the line at this:
Naturally, whether genuinely racist or not, calls for Heir's head have come forth. There's even a petition to get the man fired (I sent an e-mail to Bioware and as of yet don't know if he's still employed). However, after getting over the visceral reaction of loathing a man that seems to loathe you merely for your skin and gender, a more somber analysis (hat tip to Honey Badger radio) is required. For if we merely insist SJW's get theirs in return, we miss a much larger and more important threat to all of us - the freedom of speech.
Tempting as it may be to get your pound of flesh against somebody who hates you for irrational reasons, the larger issue here is one of the freedom of speech. And disgusting as you may find Mr. Heir's comments, he does have the right to say what he wants (or perhaps not in Canada, given the latest ruling by the Canadian Human's Rights commission). Regardless, simply turn the tables and let us revisit Mr. Brendan Eich. Eich was the former CEO of Mozilla until it was discovered he made a political donation to a campaign to ban gay marriage. For him exercising his right to the freedom of speech he was summarily fired...and we all stopped using Firefox as a browser. But while we can highlight a tit for tat exchange between leftists and rightists getting fired for their political views, the larger point though is that Americans (and Canadians) EFFECTIVELY do NOT have the freedom of speech. Not because of government or a tyrannical state, but because of....
employers.
I have argued before that people either HAVE the freedom of speech or they DON'T. And it doesn't matter if it's the government infringing upon your freedom of speech, but ANY entity in a position of power over you. And so while the government may not care if you ramble off racist tweets, sexist YouTube videos, or controversial Instachats, your employer might, and that effectively infringes on your speech.
We've seen this in another arena as well, not just with employers, but also college campuses. Though colleges are NOT the law and they are NOT your employer, because they are the only way by which you can get a degree, and thus employment, you are effectively answering to a defacto fourth layer of government. This allows colleges to not only force you to attend a kangaroo court if falsely accused of rape and force whatever kind of political indoctrination upon you, but if you violate their speech codes you get punished, expelled, you career ruined, etc. Again, (and TRULY ironically) you don't have the freedom of speech ON A COLLEGE CAMPUS!
In short, because of these "quasi" layers of government in the form of employers, colleges, even social media giants (with their "community guidelines), nobody REALLY has the freedom of speech. And since nobody has the freedom of speech, great ideas, controversial ideas, and ideas that will genuinely advance and progress society (not to mention ideas we'd like to just talk about without the fear of consequences) cannot come to the forefront or be advocated.
This is why, in my humble opinion, legislation should be passed that prohibits employers (and colleges) from firing (or hiring) people based on what they say on the internet or in public. It is none of their business, it does not concern them, and if employers TRULY cared about CSR or "virtue signaling" their liberal credentials they would advertise the fact they do NOT investigate, monitor, or inquire about your internet or social life. The only form of "justice" or comeuppance would come in the form of the market place of ideas and debates on the internet. Racists, communists, facists, homophobes, etc., would all be outed and publicly shammed/ostracized. So distasteful would their ideas and commentary be, they'd have to turn off the likes/dislikes ratio and comments and deal with the hate mail in private. And people would choose with their time and dollars whether or not to deal with these people. Besides which, there is a huge benefit to letting people TRULY have the freedom of speech - they'll show their true colors. And if you can find out somebody doesn't like you because of the color of your skin, or they intend to blow up a building because they don't like a particular religion, it makes you wonder why Facebook, Google, Youtube, etc. have community guidelines at all. Because I for one (not to mention the FBI and CIA) would like to know who these people are. So please let them exercise their freedom of speech uninhibited.
Naturally, whether genuinely racist or not, calls for Heir's head have come forth. There's even a petition to get the man fired (I sent an e-mail to Bioware and as of yet don't know if he's still employed). However, after getting over the visceral reaction of loathing a man that seems to loathe you merely for your skin and gender, a more somber analysis (hat tip to Honey Badger radio) is required. For if we merely insist SJW's get theirs in return, we miss a much larger and more important threat to all of us - the freedom of speech.
Tempting as it may be to get your pound of flesh against somebody who hates you for irrational reasons, the larger issue here is one of the freedom of speech. And disgusting as you may find Mr. Heir's comments, he does have the right to say what he wants (or perhaps not in Canada, given the latest ruling by the Canadian Human's Rights commission). Regardless, simply turn the tables and let us revisit Mr. Brendan Eich. Eich was the former CEO of Mozilla until it was discovered he made a political donation to a campaign to ban gay marriage. For him exercising his right to the freedom of speech he was summarily fired...and we all stopped using Firefox as a browser. But while we can highlight a tit for tat exchange between leftists and rightists getting fired for their political views, the larger point though is that Americans (and Canadians) EFFECTIVELY do NOT have the freedom of speech. Not because of government or a tyrannical state, but because of....
employers.
I have argued before that people either HAVE the freedom of speech or they DON'T. And it doesn't matter if it's the government infringing upon your freedom of speech, but ANY entity in a position of power over you. And so while the government may not care if you ramble off racist tweets, sexist YouTube videos, or controversial Instachats, your employer might, and that effectively infringes on your speech.
We've seen this in another arena as well, not just with employers, but also college campuses. Though colleges are NOT the law and they are NOT your employer, because they are the only way by which you can get a degree, and thus employment, you are effectively answering to a defacto fourth layer of government. This allows colleges to not only force you to attend a kangaroo court if falsely accused of rape and force whatever kind of political indoctrination upon you, but if you violate their speech codes you get punished, expelled, you career ruined, etc. Again, (and TRULY ironically) you don't have the freedom of speech ON A COLLEGE CAMPUS!
In short, because of these "quasi" layers of government in the form of employers, colleges, even social media giants (with their "community guidelines), nobody REALLY has the freedom of speech. And since nobody has the freedom of speech, great ideas, controversial ideas, and ideas that will genuinely advance and progress society (not to mention ideas we'd like to just talk about without the fear of consequences) cannot come to the forefront or be advocated.
This is why, in my humble opinion, legislation should be passed that prohibits employers (and colleges) from firing (or hiring) people based on what they say on the internet or in public. It is none of their business, it does not concern them, and if employers TRULY cared about CSR or "virtue signaling" their liberal credentials they would advertise the fact they do NOT investigate, monitor, or inquire about your internet or social life. The only form of "justice" or comeuppance would come in the form of the market place of ideas and debates on the internet. Racists, communists, facists, homophobes, etc., would all be outed and publicly shammed/ostracized. So distasteful would their ideas and commentary be, they'd have to turn off the likes/dislikes ratio and comments and deal with the hate mail in private. And people would choose with their time and dollars whether or not to deal with these people. Besides which, there is a huge benefit to letting people TRULY have the freedom of speech - they'll show their true colors. And if you can find out somebody doesn't like you because of the color of your skin, or they intend to blow up a building because they don't like a particular religion, it makes you wonder why Facebook, Google, Youtube, etc. have community guidelines at all. Because I for one (not to mention the FBI and CIA) would like to know who these people are. So please let them exercise their freedom of speech uninhibited.
Monday Morning Linkage
I do believe fat women are the least honorable and trustworthy people. It's simply the biggest, boldest, most honest tell about their personality.
Target's virtue signaling backfires.
Meanwhile in Venezuela.
Target's virtue signaling backfires.
Meanwhile in Venezuela.
Sunday, August 21, 2016
Friday, August 19, 2016
A Very Capitalist Weekend
Remember to do all your online shopping this weekend via my Amazon link. Costs you nothing, and all proceeds go to an evil white republican male to do evil white republican male things.
Curse Free Episode #2 of The Clarey Podcast!
What if college girls dressed like the 1950's?
Captain's Quarterly is out.
Amy Schumer pulls an Obama and writes about herself.
Millennials aren't have sex because they're not sexy.
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Captain's Quarterly is out.
Amy Schumer pulls an Obama and writes about herself.
Millennials aren't have sex because they're not sexy.
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
"Captain's Quarterly"
Happy Day Lieutenants!
After a three week work binge some of my projects are coming to fruition. And while Reconnaissance Man was recently published, I also put the finishing touches on another project "Captain's Quarterly."
"Captain's Quarterly" is basically backing up the best works of this blog. However, instead of doing that every 3-5 years (which resulted in the 900 page monstrosity that "Captain Capitalism - Reserved" was), I'm backing up the blog every quarter to make it more digestible, thus Captain's Quarterly. I have also added some eye candy to the project in part to give you something more than charts and data to look at, in part because I appreciate the 1950's looking woman, but also to piss off feminists because they hate truly beautiful women. Thus each issue of "Captain's Quarterly" will have a new model dolled up in classy 1950's attire and lingerie (that's if I can keep finding reliable, timely models, so if you know any, send them may way).
The only problem is that "Captain's Quarterly" is made first to be an analog back up of my works, and second as a work of art. Therefore it's in color and it's price is well...rather pricey. Each issue is estimated to cost around $20 an issue, which I hope in the future will go down with advances in technology. That being said, the Kindle version, not being limited by color-printing technology, I set at the lower price I could possible at $2.99 per issue.
Regardless, if you are interested in purchasing a copy, you can find both paperback and kindle versions on Amazon.com. And many thanks to all of you for your support!
Cappy
After a three week work binge some of my projects are coming to fruition. And while Reconnaissance Man was recently published, I also put the finishing touches on another project "Captain's Quarterly."
"Captain's Quarterly" is basically backing up the best works of this blog. However, instead of doing that every 3-5 years (which resulted in the 900 page monstrosity that "Captain Capitalism - Reserved" was), I'm backing up the blog every quarter to make it more digestible, thus Captain's Quarterly. I have also added some eye candy to the project in part to give you something more than charts and data to look at, in part because I appreciate the 1950's looking woman, but also to piss off feminists because they hate truly beautiful women. Thus each issue of "Captain's Quarterly" will have a new model dolled up in classy 1950's attire and lingerie (that's if I can keep finding reliable, timely models, so if you know any, send them may way).
The only problem is that "Captain's Quarterly" is made first to be an analog back up of my works, and second as a work of art. Therefore it's in color and it's price is well...rather pricey. Each issue is estimated to cost around $20 an issue, which I hope in the future will go down with advances in technology. That being said, the Kindle version, not being limited by color-printing technology, I set at the lower price I could possible at $2.99 per issue.
Regardless, if you are interested in purchasing a copy, you can find both paperback and kindle versions on Amazon.com. And many thanks to all of you for your support!
Cappy
Why Citizens Should Have Access to Fully Automatic Weapons and M1 Abrams
Was interviewed on Crush the Street with Ken again, and we discussed my position on the 2nd Amendment. I frankly don't care about obscured gun/death statistics and view the right to gun ownership on a principled level - it was instituted to counter an oppressive government. Ergo, individuals should be armed to the level of soldiers and militias (in my opinion) should not only have access to tanks and other armament, but training in the use of them AND supplied with them.
We then went on to talk about how it's impossible for everybody to retire off of the stock market.
We then went on to talk about how it's impossible for everybody to retire off of the stock market.
Thursday, August 18, 2016
15 Lies Single Moms Tell You
Looks like the Ole Captain's advertisement made it to Terrence Popp's latest video!
Men Pay More In Taxes
Men pay egregiously more in taxes, resulting in a tax gap. I would also be curious to know if we collect less in government money. Wait, never mind, I already know.
When Yellow Journalism Infected Blogging
A very interesting analysis (video) by Bernard Chapin about how the drive for traffic and clicks has jettisoned the pursuit of truth and accuracy, resulting in very few blogs that are genuine vehicles of journalism.
Wednesday, August 17, 2016
Reconnaissance Man Is Meant for 20 Somethings
Glorious Karl of Glorious Hat fame did a review of my latest book "Reconnaissance Man."
However, I did want to dispel some myths about the book, namely who this book is written for. The most common complaint I get about my books is that they're of no use to people 50 or older. And...well...yeah, I can't really help you when your life is 70% done and all major decisions have been made. However, this book is not for high school, or even college aged kids only as people seem to think it is. It's for anybody who is wandering around the desert,clueless about what they want to do, and are contemplating or kicking around either attending or returning to college. Ergo, the target age was 18-35, with kids "ideally" picking up the book at 14.
Regardless, the whole point of the book is to make sure you either choose the right path the first time, OR, leave the wrong path you're on now and quickly identify the right one, easily saving you 10 years of your life, perhaps even 20. Yes, it is for kids about to enter college, but it's for anybody who is either stuck, listless, or directionless in life and cannot see any other way out. This book shows you that out.
However, I did want to dispel some myths about the book, namely who this book is written for. The most common complaint I get about my books is that they're of no use to people 50 or older. And...well...yeah, I can't really help you when your life is 70% done and all major decisions have been made. However, this book is not for high school, or even college aged kids only as people seem to think it is. It's for anybody who is wandering around the desert,clueless about what they want to do, and are contemplating or kicking around either attending or returning to college. Ergo, the target age was 18-35, with kids "ideally" picking up the book at 14.
Regardless, the whole point of the book is to make sure you either choose the right path the first time, OR, leave the wrong path you're on now and quickly identify the right one, easily saving you 10 years of your life, perhaps even 20. Yes, it is for kids about to enter college, but it's for anybody who is either stuck, listless, or directionless in life and cannot see any other way out. This book shows you that out.
The Father Could Not Be Reached for Comment
Those precious, heroic single mothers. How do they manage to do what they do?
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
How the Left Brought Racist and Sexist Trolling Upon Itself
Though brash and callous, I draw the line at using words like "nigger," "spick," and "kike." These words have no benefit or upside to them, and while I'm very critical of black, hispanic, American female, and other minority cultures, it is a constructive criticism that aims to improve their lot in life. However, whereas I draw the line at using outright insulting phrases and terms, the same does not hold true for others. For example I wince every time Matt Forney claims he's a Nazi and, frankly, won't listen to Chris Cantwell because of his frequent use of the term "nigger."
However, I know Matt Forney and (after listening to several of Chris Cantwell's shows), am familiar with Chris Cantwell. And if I had to put money on it, I'd wager Matt is no Nazi and I have serious doubts Chris Cantwell genuinely hates blacks. But their flagrant and flippant use of these words, even though deep down inside they likely don't believe a word of it, is an interesting phenomenon. For if you step back and look at it, it's a response, if not outright backlash to the left's obsession with accusing everybody of racism and sexism. And it is here that the left has created a monster that will forever hound and haunt them.
To understand this monster you have to understand its origins. And its origins come from the left's obsession with victim-politics. Without going into the long and belabored psycho-political explanation, leftists are at the core lazy people. They don't want to work. They don't want to do math. And so they approach life with a survival strategy of parasitism and forcing others to pay for them. However, life doesn't pay the parasitic, so leftists must become masters at rationalizing the theft of others. This results in the professional victim-whoring industry where they claim they're discriminated against because of their (choose any one of the following)
race
sex
gender
religion
ethnicity
mental illness
disability
etc. etc. etc.
And since they're "discriminated against" this gives them the right to your life-labor in the form of extra money and taxes you get to pay.
This pins not only the emphasis, BUT THEIR ENTIRE SURVIVAL on their ability to highlight discrimination. And so not only is every whiff of genuine discrimination highlighted, magnified, and brought to the forefront, but things that aren't bigotry, but can be construed as bigotry, are spun thusly so (and let's not mention minorities faking their own hate crimes). Add to this most leftists have no value, worth, or agency in life, and they trip over themselves to highlight sexism and racism as a faux-profession, notably in journalism.
The result in a constant cacophony of perpetually offended people who invariably blame the boogie man of "white males" for their laziness, sloth, parasitism, stupidity, and utter lack of achievement and success in life. It also results in a world of people (notably whites and males) having to walk around egg shells so as not to offend the precious, fragile feelings of the perpetually offended, not to mention avoid the career-destroying accusation of being a (GASP!!!!) RACIST/SEXIST! And so like the increasing cowards they are, men and whites tuck their tails behind their legs, and tip toe around the land mines the race-whores and sexist-pimps have laid out before them...except for one group of people.
Those (predominantly) white males who have nothing to lose.
The Great Recession had a great effect on the lives, and more importantly, futures of a entire generation. It more or less destroyed them. Saddled with $70,000 in student loans for a degree that land them zero jobs and released into the slowest growing economy since the Great Depression, millions of millennials (and Gen X'ers) have realized they will never achieve the American dream. They won't own a house, they won't have a loving, caring, or supporting wife. They won't have enough for retirement. And they won't have a career they were promised. Adding insult to injury, males and whites of these generations are falsely accused of having "privilege" and are constantly blamed for the failures of others when they themselves have no success to speak of. So with no job to lose, no career to be had, and no financial success to point towards, they simply say "fuck it" and rip apart the entire system.
This has resulted in a large digital, but veritable army of online bloggers, posters, commenters, and trolls with zero fucks to give. From their basements, their buddies' couches, or their local bar they slam and troll the precious sensibilities of the professional victim-whoring industry. Comments sections are filled with racial epitaphs, outright sexism, outright bigotry, and all manner of name calling. They blow through the mine-field of political correctness by jettisoning any pretense of political correctness, indifferent if they're accused of an "ism" or "ist," agreeing-and-amplifying with bulldoze force. And they only increase the ferocity of their attacks when the professional parasites whine about being attacked. In the end, these leftists who insist on being professional victims, are guaranteed to be hounded and harassed when they publicly post their whining and parasitism on line. And since that's how they get their money, they have condemned themselves to an entire life of online harassment, criticism, lecturing, and hatred.
Just one problem.
It's all trolling.
Certainly there are some genuine sexists and racists out there. And no doubt there are bigots and homophobes on teh interwebz as well. But the increasing army of posters and commenters aren't racist or sexist. They're just sick of the constant lecturing, proselytizing, whining, and bitching coming from the professional victim-whiner-whore industry. Even women and minorities are sick of it as they don't want their skin or plumbing to be associated with such a whiny, parasitic, pathetic, and loser class. But since reason, evidence, and empiricism doesn't work, then why not just troll them and increase their blood pressure? Why not mock them and ridicule them, by showing them what real bigotry and racism would look like? This is why the majority of articles from these ist-whores don't have the comments section available. This is why Anita Sarkeesian doesn't allow comment on her channel. They are such weak and worthless people, they can hypocritically (and falsely I might ad) blame others for their failings in life, but can't stand to take the criticism. And criticism is all they ever get in life.
In the end you have to take inventory of who is really winning this battle. Yes, to be a professional victim-whore may sound nice. You don't have to work (a real job anyway). Life is easy. And all you have to do is take whatever handouts you can get. But while that may sound easy, the lack of honor, agency, and purpose in life invariably becomes taxing and destroys your life. Have you seen a happy feminist? Have you seen a content BLM protestor? Just imagine that instead of producing something of value, or raising a family, or working as a mechanic, your entire life was just 65 years of panhandling and concocting excuses as to why you have the right to be a thief. You will have achieved nothing of genuine intellectual, emotional, romantic, artistic, or industrial worth. You're just a parasite.
But if you think that's bad, just imagine that life with millions of trolls harassing you everyday, exposing you for the fraud and leech that you are. And they're not going anywhere because you were so successful in implementing a socialist system you took away any future they might have had, any women they might have married, and dared to blame all of your failures on them.
It's great when Dr. Frankenstein dies at the hand of his own creation.
___________________________________________________
http://www.soundcloud.com/aaron-clarey/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Amazon Affiliate
However, I know Matt Forney and (after listening to several of Chris Cantwell's shows), am familiar with Chris Cantwell. And if I had to put money on it, I'd wager Matt is no Nazi and I have serious doubts Chris Cantwell genuinely hates blacks. But their flagrant and flippant use of these words, even though deep down inside they likely don't believe a word of it, is an interesting phenomenon. For if you step back and look at it, it's a response, if not outright backlash to the left's obsession with accusing everybody of racism and sexism. And it is here that the left has created a monster that will forever hound and haunt them.
To understand this monster you have to understand its origins. And its origins come from the left's obsession with victim-politics. Without going into the long and belabored psycho-political explanation, leftists are at the core lazy people. They don't want to work. They don't want to do math. And so they approach life with a survival strategy of parasitism and forcing others to pay for them. However, life doesn't pay the parasitic, so leftists must become masters at rationalizing the theft of others. This results in the professional victim-whoring industry where they claim they're discriminated against because of their (choose any one of the following)
race
sex
gender
religion
ethnicity
mental illness
disability
etc. etc. etc.
And since they're "discriminated against" this gives them the right to your life-labor in the form of extra money and taxes you get to pay.
This pins not only the emphasis, BUT THEIR ENTIRE SURVIVAL on their ability to highlight discrimination. And so not only is every whiff of genuine discrimination highlighted, magnified, and brought to the forefront, but things that aren't bigotry, but can be construed as bigotry, are spun thusly so (and let's not mention minorities faking their own hate crimes). Add to this most leftists have no value, worth, or agency in life, and they trip over themselves to highlight sexism and racism as a faux-profession, notably in journalism.
The result in a constant cacophony of perpetually offended people who invariably blame the boogie man of "white males" for their laziness, sloth, parasitism, stupidity, and utter lack of achievement and success in life. It also results in a world of people (notably whites and males) having to walk around egg shells so as not to offend the precious, fragile feelings of the perpetually offended, not to mention avoid the career-destroying accusation of being a (GASP!!!!) RACIST/SEXIST! And so like the increasing cowards they are, men and whites tuck their tails behind their legs, and tip toe around the land mines the race-whores and sexist-pimps have laid out before them...except for one group of people.
Those (predominantly) white males who have nothing to lose.
The Great Recession had a great effect on the lives, and more importantly, futures of a entire generation. It more or less destroyed them. Saddled with $70,000 in student loans for a degree that land them zero jobs and released into the slowest growing economy since the Great Depression, millions of millennials (and Gen X'ers) have realized they will never achieve the American dream. They won't own a house, they won't have a loving, caring, or supporting wife. They won't have enough for retirement. And they won't have a career they were promised. Adding insult to injury, males and whites of these generations are falsely accused of having "privilege" and are constantly blamed for the failures of others when they themselves have no success to speak of. So with no job to lose, no career to be had, and no financial success to point towards, they simply say "fuck it" and rip apart the entire system.
This has resulted in a large digital, but veritable army of online bloggers, posters, commenters, and trolls with zero fucks to give. From their basements, their buddies' couches, or their local bar they slam and troll the precious sensibilities of the professional victim-whoring industry. Comments sections are filled with racial epitaphs, outright sexism, outright bigotry, and all manner of name calling. They blow through the mine-field of political correctness by jettisoning any pretense of political correctness, indifferent if they're accused of an "ism" or "ist," agreeing-and-amplifying with bulldoze force. And they only increase the ferocity of their attacks when the professional parasites whine about being attacked. In the end, these leftists who insist on being professional victims, are guaranteed to be hounded and harassed when they publicly post their whining and parasitism on line. And since that's how they get their money, they have condemned themselves to an entire life of online harassment, criticism, lecturing, and hatred.
Just one problem.
It's all trolling.
Certainly there are some genuine sexists and racists out there. And no doubt there are bigots and homophobes on teh interwebz as well. But the increasing army of posters and commenters aren't racist or sexist. They're just sick of the constant lecturing, proselytizing, whining, and bitching coming from the professional victim-whiner-whore industry. Even women and minorities are sick of it as they don't want their skin or plumbing to be associated with such a whiny, parasitic, pathetic, and loser class. But since reason, evidence, and empiricism doesn't work, then why not just troll them and increase their blood pressure? Why not mock them and ridicule them, by showing them what real bigotry and racism would look like? This is why the majority of articles from these ist-whores don't have the comments section available. This is why Anita Sarkeesian doesn't allow comment on her channel. They are such weak and worthless people, they can hypocritically (and falsely I might ad) blame others for their failings in life, but can't stand to take the criticism. And criticism is all they ever get in life.
In the end you have to take inventory of who is really winning this battle. Yes, to be a professional victim-whore may sound nice. You don't have to work (a real job anyway). Life is easy. And all you have to do is take whatever handouts you can get. But while that may sound easy, the lack of honor, agency, and purpose in life invariably becomes taxing and destroys your life. Have you seen a happy feminist? Have you seen a content BLM protestor? Just imagine that instead of producing something of value, or raising a family, or working as a mechanic, your entire life was just 65 years of panhandling and concocting excuses as to why you have the right to be a thief. You will have achieved nothing of genuine intellectual, emotional, romantic, artistic, or industrial worth. You're just a parasite.
But if you think that's bad, just imagine that life with millions of trolls harassing you everyday, exposing you for the fraud and leech that you are. And they're not going anywhere because you were so successful in implementing a socialist system you took away any future they might have had, any women they might have married, and dared to blame all of your failures on them.
It's great when Dr. Frankenstein dies at the hand of his own creation.
___________________________________________________
http://www.soundcloud.com/aaron-clarey/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Amazon Affiliate
Amazon Affiliate Trial and Error
Hi All,
Without going into a long and detailed explanation, browsers have evolved a lot, so much so that some them are now putting in automatic ad-blockers which, among other things, blocks my Amazon Affiliate banner (top right banner, right below the ad for Curse of the High IQ). I think I programmed a work around, but won't know for sure until I can verify some purchases.
So if you are one of those kind souls who does all their shopping through my banner, please let me know if/what/when you purchased something so I can see if the new banner I programmed is capturing and recording your sales.
Many thanks,
Cappy
PS-If you don't do your online shopping through my Amazon Affiliate program, START!
Without going into a long and detailed explanation, browsers have evolved a lot, so much so that some them are now putting in automatic ad-blockers which, among other things, blocks my Amazon Affiliate banner (top right banner, right below the ad for Curse of the High IQ). I think I programmed a work around, but won't know for sure until I can verify some purchases.
So if you are one of those kind souls who does all their shopping through my banner, please let me know if/what/when you purchased something so I can see if the new banner I programmed is capturing and recording your sales.
Many thanks,
Cappy
PS-If you don't do your online shopping through my Amazon Affiliate program, START!
25,000 Subscribers on YouTube
Wanted to say thanks to all of you who followed and made not only my YouTube channel successful, but made Asshole Consulting possible as well!
Monday, August 15, 2016
Mark Dayton's Economic Minnesota Miracle
For the past couple years I've had the occasional brainwashed Minnesota leftist automaton regurgitate cud it received, pre-chewed by the Minnesota democrat party and say,
"Oh yeah!!! But what about Mark Dayton's economic miracle!!!!???? About how he taxed the rich and now Minnesota is the fastest growing state in the nation? Huh? What about that!!??? Huh huh???"
I'm old and experienced enough to ignore this because 100% of the time...
not 97%
not 98%
not 99%
but ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the time when I hear anything coming from the left it is either an outright lie or it is a half-truth making the entire statement a lie. Combine this with the fact no leftists (and not that many rightists either) care about empiricism or proof, I don't bother wasting my breath trying to argue, and just let the naive fool continue on his/her doomed leftist career path of non-profit work, academia, panhandling, or slinging Uptown coffee.
But when I heard it the fourth time, it was getting annoying. And so to have the data very handy I decided to look up this "economic miracle" and see for myself just what a great job Mark Dayton (and not the hard working people of Minnesota) did to get this economy booming. And true to form, you find out the left's claim of an economic miracle here in Minnesota, just isn't true.
Right off the bat there is no "miracle" happening here in Minnesota. If you look at GDP figures of Minnesota vs. the United States, we averaged a whopping 1/10th of 1% more than the nation since Mark Dayton has been governor. This right here is not a "miracle." It's a rounding error. Minnesota's economic growth has been IDENTICAL to the nation's.
Of course, then the left immediately cites unemployment as success of Dayton's trust-fund baby socialism, pointing out Minnesota's unemployment rate is much lower than the country's. This is true, but has always been true. Minnesota has always had a lower unemployment rate than the nation. Chalk it up to sociological factors of its people, not the governor:
About the only thing approaching "miracle" status is that of the government budget, which went from deficit to surplus under Dayton's reign. This is hardly shocking that the left would point to a growing state as "success" since they largely parasitically depend on it for their survival, but state finances are NOT the economy. Furthermore, this was the trend NATION WIDE. All states went through the worst recession in 2006-2010, most of their budgets went into deficit, and when the economy (sort of) rebounded, they went into surplus. About the only thing Dayton did was his same ole same ole Trust Fund Baby Socialism or "tax the rich" which may have begotten a healthier surplus than most, but at the expense of driving long term capital and investment away (um for those leftists reading this, "capital" and "investment" means companies who provide jobs).
In short, I would like to say that I am writing a biased or political piece. I would like to say I have a personal hatred for Dayton (which I do). But I don't have to. An empirical and intellectually honest assessment of Minnesota's economic performance will plainly show there is no booming economy here, let alone a "miracle." It's simply a lie that should be a text book case study for any student interested in studying political propaganda.
"Oh yeah!!! But what about Mark Dayton's economic miracle!!!!???? About how he taxed the rich and now Minnesota is the fastest growing state in the nation? Huh? What about that!!??? Huh huh???"
I'm old and experienced enough to ignore this because 100% of the time...
not 97%
not 98%
not 99%
but ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the time when I hear anything coming from the left it is either an outright lie or it is a half-truth making the entire statement a lie. Combine this with the fact no leftists (and not that many rightists either) care about empiricism or proof, I don't bother wasting my breath trying to argue, and just let the naive fool continue on his/her doomed leftist career path of non-profit work, academia, panhandling, or slinging Uptown coffee.
But when I heard it the fourth time, it was getting annoying. And so to have the data very handy I decided to look up this "economic miracle" and see for myself just what a great job Mark Dayton (and not the hard working people of Minnesota) did to get this economy booming. And true to form, you find out the left's claim of an economic miracle here in Minnesota, just isn't true.
Right off the bat there is no "miracle" happening here in Minnesota. If you look at GDP figures of Minnesota vs. the United States, we averaged a whopping 1/10th of 1% more than the nation since Mark Dayton has been governor. This right here is not a "miracle." It's a rounding error. Minnesota's economic growth has been IDENTICAL to the nation's.
Of course, then the left immediately cites unemployment as success of Dayton's trust-fund baby socialism, pointing out Minnesota's unemployment rate is much lower than the country's. This is true, but has always been true. Minnesota has always had a lower unemployment rate than the nation. Chalk it up to sociological factors of its people, not the governor:
About the only thing approaching "miracle" status is that of the government budget, which went from deficit to surplus under Dayton's reign. This is hardly shocking that the left would point to a growing state as "success" since they largely parasitically depend on it for their survival, but state finances are NOT the economy. Furthermore, this was the trend NATION WIDE. All states went through the worst recession in 2006-2010, most of their budgets went into deficit, and when the economy (sort of) rebounded, they went into surplus. About the only thing Dayton did was his same ole same ole Trust Fund Baby Socialism or "tax the rich" which may have begotten a healthier surplus than most, but at the expense of driving long term capital and investment away (um for those leftists reading this, "capital" and "investment" means companies who provide jobs).
In short, I would like to say that I am writing a biased or political piece. I would like to say I have a personal hatred for Dayton (which I do). But I don't have to. An empirical and intellectually honest assessment of Minnesota's economic performance will plainly show there is no booming economy here, let alone a "miracle." It's simply a lie that should be a text book case study for any student interested in studying political propaganda.
Episode #160 of The Clarey Podcast!
In this episode we interview Tom from Small Scale Life about setting up a simple garden for lazy bachelor survivalists or people who just want to get started on growing their own food. We also interview Ann Sterzinger and John Steele about the Millennial generation and how much they suck.
Sunday, August 14, 2016
Saturday, August 13, 2016
Thursday, August 11, 2016
Laurie Zoock and Cappy Cap Walk Into a Bar
and then have a great long conversation about IQ!
Anyway, was on The World of Laurie Zoock! Trust me, you want to listen to this woman.
Anyway, was on The World of Laurie Zoock! Trust me, you want to listen to this woman.
Curse Free Episode #1 of The Clarey Podcast
Curse free podcasting now.
Cappy hates State Fairs.
Cappy goes to a Sportsball Game.
Bernard Chapin does not heed advice.
Feminist Ocean's 11.
Christians are confused by MGTOW.
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Cappy hates State Fairs.
Cappy goes to a Sportsball Game.
Bernard Chapin does not heed advice.
Feminist Ocean's 11.
Christians are confused by MGTOW.
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Wednesday, August 10, 2016
The Father Could Not Be Reached for Comment
Cause Downunder...WE DON'T NEED NO STIIIIIINNNNNKING FATHERS!!!!
What Did You Think Was Going to Happen?
I like how the camera man is saying "Oh my god" as if this was a shocking and unexpected result.
Ahhhh, warm fuzzies.
Ahhhh, warm fuzzies.
Hollywood Doubles Down on "Feminist Ocean's 8"
In an increasing amount of empirical evidence that Hollywood has a political agenda and presumably no longer cares about profits, it seems they're going to ignore the flop known as "Affirmative Action Ghostbusters" and force another feminist lecture down your throat - Feminist Ocean's 11.
Of course it's called Ocean's 8, but there's nothing new here.
I mean, REALLY nothing knew.
They're plagiarizing a movie that plagiarized another one. And in more ways than one. They are simply taking a movie from the 60's, that was a remake in the 90's, and copy-cating the (oh so clever move) of replacing the entire male cast with women. Dang those creative crafty Hollywood types! How do they do it???
I don't know what to say that hasn't already been said about Affirmative Action Ghostbusters.
1. Hollywood is plum out of ideas if the best they can come up with is "Take 40 year old movie + Women."
2. It's plagiarism
3. It's forcing gender roles that don't work and nobody likes
4. It's the antithesis of feminism if you merely do what men did 30 years later
5. There's no originality
6. It's an admission of defeat that women can only repeat what men do, but can manage nothing original on their own.
7. It's forcing a political sermon on people who don't want it.
8. It's mixing fun with politics.
I really don't care if Hollywood wants to make the next 100 movies all female casts. It's their and the shareholders' money. But the fact they're pushing forward with this in light of the spectacular failure Feminist Ghostbusters was, suggests to me the higher ups in Hollywood view some of the movies they make as nothing more than CSR expenses to virtue signal and (vainly) try to capitalize on the naivety of women.
I wish you all in Hollywood good luck and look forward to the all-female cast remake of The Great Escape.
Super Cappy rant on YouTube here.
Of course it's called Ocean's 8, but there's nothing new here.
I mean, REALLY nothing knew.
They're plagiarizing a movie that plagiarized another one. And in more ways than one. They are simply taking a movie from the 60's, that was a remake in the 90's, and copy-cating the (oh so clever move) of replacing the entire male cast with women. Dang those creative crafty Hollywood types! How do they do it???
I don't know what to say that hasn't already been said about Affirmative Action Ghostbusters.
1. Hollywood is plum out of ideas if the best they can come up with is "Take 40 year old movie + Women."
2. It's plagiarism
3. It's forcing gender roles that don't work and nobody likes
4. It's the antithesis of feminism if you merely do what men did 30 years later
5. There's no originality
6. It's an admission of defeat that women can only repeat what men do, but can manage nothing original on their own.
7. It's forcing a political sermon on people who don't want it.
8. It's mixing fun with politics.
I really don't care if Hollywood wants to make the next 100 movies all female casts. It's their and the shareholders' money. But the fact they're pushing forward with this in light of the spectacular failure Feminist Ghostbusters was, suggests to me the higher ups in Hollywood view some of the movies they make as nothing more than CSR expenses to virtue signal and (vainly) try to capitalize on the naivety of women.
I wish you all in Hollywood good luck and look forward to the all-female cast remake of The Great Escape.
Super Cappy rant on YouTube here.
Why the Economy Won't Recover Without Men
Though a Asshole Consulting request, the video ends up explaining, in entertaining detail how:
Negative interest rates
The lack of economic growth
National debts and
The inevitable collapse of the West
is 100% dependent upon men and their sociological/romantic/sexual relationships with women. It is some of my finest (accidental) work and if you TRULY want to understand how economics works and how to get economies to boom, I suggest you listen to at least the first half:
Negative interest rates
The lack of economic growth
National debts and
The inevitable collapse of the West
is 100% dependent upon men and their sociological/romantic/sexual relationships with women. It is some of my finest (accidental) work and if you TRULY want to understand how economics works and how to get economies to boom, I suggest you listen to at least the first half:
Tuesday, August 09, 2016
How Much Does the Stock Market Have to Increase by for Us to Retire?
To be blunt, the entire US retirement system is a ponzi scheme. I'm not talking about social security or medicare (though, those are ponzi schemes as well), but the 401k's and IRA's that the government, the media, Hollywood, our employers, and our educators tell us we "just must" invest in. The reason why is very simple - we are relying on capital gains (ie - increasing prices) to fund our retirements and NOT increasing profits. This is why PE ratios are going up and dividend yields are going down because stock prices are increasing faster than the underlying profits corporations generate and the dividends they pay.
However, this got me thinking. Since the government more or less ordained the stock market as the primary vehicle by which we would retire, what kind of asset price increases would be required to adequately provide for the retirement of the Baby Boomer and Gen X generations? I know it's funny, and you're all laughing at me, but let's just say this crazy ponzi scheme works (or at least keeps working long enough for me to retire). How much would stocks have to go up by in order to provide enough money for each person in each generation to retire?
This mental and mathematical exercise of course requires some assumptions and simplifications, all of which will be proven wrong as time goes on. But just to see how feasible this whole "throw all your money into your 401k's" plan is, I just wanted to get some ballpark figures. Ergo, I assumed each generation retires separately and cycles over/sells their investment to the previous generation. I also assumed younger people accumulate mainly stocks and older people hold onto their bonds. I assumed every baby boomer is retiring today into today's market and that all Gen X'ers will retire 20 years from now. I assumed Americans can ONLY invest in US stocks/bonds. And I also assume a 2.5% annual rate of inflation. Again, none of these assumptions are true, but I'm just trying to do some back of napkin economics to get some ballpark figures.
The first thing I wanted to do is take a look at how much the stock and bond markets would have to be worth to effectively retire the entire baby boomer generation today. Right now there are 77 million baby boomers. Each of these boomers are going to require $800,000 in retirement funds to provide $40,000 per year in living expenses, as well as increased medical bills for the estimated 20 years of their life they'll be living. This means they need a total market capitalization of $61.6 trillion in order to retire. And thankfully the total market capitalization of US stock and bond markets are $23.4 trillion and $37 trillion respectively, for a total of $60.4 trillion, just a trillion shy of what's required.
Normally, this would be welcomed news as there's enough wealth in US stocks and bonds to retire the entire generation. However, there's a problem with the distribution of ownership of stocks and bonds. One, 30% of stocks and bonds are NOT owned by households, pensions, retirement programs, or mutual funds. They're held by other entities that are either institutional owners, brokers, traders, international investors, etc., that aren't likely going to be cashed out to pay for the baby boomers' retirement party anytime soon (bonds are even held by a smaller percent). Also, depending on which leftist rag you want to quote, "the rich" (whatever that means, and they fail to say) own anywhere between 50% and 80% of the stock and bond markets. Unless they're charitably going to "spread the wealth" you can expect the majority of boomers are going to have a shortfall. And then there's corporations like Apple that hold stock in other companies (in Apple's case I think it's up to $22 billion now) that they're not going to be selling (let alone, giving to baby boomers) anytime soon. So when you make the following adjustments/assumptions:
1. Lop off 10% of the baby boomers who are "rich" leaving the main 90% of boomers who "need" 401k's to retire
2. Subtract out the 30% of securities not earmarked for retirement
3. And subtract out the 50% ownership that goes away when you take out the richest 10%
you're left with 63.9 million boomers who need $55.4 trillion to retire, but only have....
$22.8 trillion in likely retirement accounts (and even this is a high number).
This results in a shortfall of $33.5 trillion meaning prices would have to double in both the stock and bond markets..umm....basically....RIGHT FREAKING NOW in order for baby boomers to fully retire. Alas, this is why today boomers are still working, relying on social security, and reverse mortgages. In other words, generation-wise, the 401k/IRA retirement system has failed the boomers.
The hypothetical retirement of Gen X, however, provides an even more interesting case in that we have to forecast inflation and infer what kind of growth rate would be required of the stock, bond (or both) markets to adequately provide for Gen X'ers. First there's 99 million Gen X'ers. Assuming they all retire in 20 years, and also need $40,000 a year in today's money to retire, we come up with $1,311,000 in required retirement funds per Gen X'er, which translates into $130 trillion in stock and bond market capitalizations. We of course have to whittle this down just like we did for the Baby Boomers, so we adjust for the 10% of the rich, 50% of their wealth, and 30% of securities not earmarked for retirement and the Gen X generation will need $117 trillion to retire, but will likely only have ...
$46 trillion in their names-a $71 trillion short fall (but hey, at least in 20 years they'll maybe have their student loans paid off!)
Therefore, to make that $46 trillion the $117 trillion NON-RICH Gen Xer's will need to retire, the entire stock and bond markets will have to grow to a combined market capitalization of $329 trillion. A 14 fold increase from today.
Now, is this possible?
If we erroneously assume that Gen X exclusively invests in stocks and they do not rely on bonds (as younger people aim for higher growth, not to mention bonds have no hope of providing the required returns), the stock market would have to grow by 14% per year for the next 20 years to make good on the 401k promise. This is VERY unlikely as it took the S&P 500 33 years to increase the required 14-fold since 1983 that must be done under 20 years starting today. And given the power of compounding, Gen X will be woefully short on retirement funds without those extra 13 years of growth (54% short if we use the S&P 500's historical growth and retroactively apply it).
We can also assume the scenario where both stocks AND bonds are purchased in full from the baby boomers which would change the required rate of growth of 8.9% per year. However, this is just outright laughable with those whopping 1% interest rates on treasuries, not to mention negative interest rates right around the corner.
In short, using these-certainly flawed, back of napkin calculations, this whole 401k, IRA retirement thing just isn't feasible. It constantly requires a "perma-Tulip Bulb bubble mentality" of relying on the religion of "because I can sell it more for latter" to work. It requires an ignorant population that doesn't read financial statements, can't compare prices of securities versus their underlying profits, and has a sheeple-ish mentality that is easily duped by the powers that be. Thankfully, (well, for Wall Street and the government anyway) they have precisely that. So over the past 40 years you've had millions of dupes flooding the market with trillions of dollars...paying trillions along the way in commissions, managerial fees, and taxes.
But sure enough like all bubbles it will burst (or perhaps be inflated away with QE infinity). I'm particularly curious what PE ratios and dividend yields are going to look like if we need 8.9% in annual price increases when the economy can only manage to fart out 2% per year in economic growth. It may even get so bad, like government bonds, the sheep will be paying businesses dividends and not the other way around! Regardless, I do believe it's time for Gen X and perhaps even Millennials to question the same generation that brought us
1. The Ozone Layer
2. "The kids in Africa are starving"
3. The Housing Bubble and
4. "EVERYBODY MUST GO TO COLLEGE!"
about why the hell should we be investing in the stock market for retirement? Because as far as I can tell, it's like all their other advice - not only worthless, but damaging, even life destroying.
__________________________________________
http://www.soundcloud.com/aaron-clarey/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Amazon Affiliate
However, this got me thinking. Since the government more or less ordained the stock market as the primary vehicle by which we would retire, what kind of asset price increases would be required to adequately provide for the retirement of the Baby Boomer and Gen X generations? I know it's funny, and you're all laughing at me, but let's just say this crazy ponzi scheme works (or at least keeps working long enough for me to retire). How much would stocks have to go up by in order to provide enough money for each person in each generation to retire?
This mental and mathematical exercise of course requires some assumptions and simplifications, all of which will be proven wrong as time goes on. But just to see how feasible this whole "throw all your money into your 401k's" plan is, I just wanted to get some ballpark figures. Ergo, I assumed each generation retires separately and cycles over/sells their investment to the previous generation. I also assumed younger people accumulate mainly stocks and older people hold onto their bonds. I assumed every baby boomer is retiring today into today's market and that all Gen X'ers will retire 20 years from now. I assumed Americans can ONLY invest in US stocks/bonds. And I also assume a 2.5% annual rate of inflation. Again, none of these assumptions are true, but I'm just trying to do some back of napkin economics to get some ballpark figures.
The first thing I wanted to do is take a look at how much the stock and bond markets would have to be worth to effectively retire the entire baby boomer generation today. Right now there are 77 million baby boomers. Each of these boomers are going to require $800,000 in retirement funds to provide $40,000 per year in living expenses, as well as increased medical bills for the estimated 20 years of their life they'll be living. This means they need a total market capitalization of $61.6 trillion in order to retire. And thankfully the total market capitalization of US stock and bond markets are $23.4 trillion and $37 trillion respectively, for a total of $60.4 trillion, just a trillion shy of what's required.
Normally, this would be welcomed news as there's enough wealth in US stocks and bonds to retire the entire generation. However, there's a problem with the distribution of ownership of stocks and bonds. One, 30% of stocks and bonds are NOT owned by households, pensions, retirement programs, or mutual funds. They're held by other entities that are either institutional owners, brokers, traders, international investors, etc., that aren't likely going to be cashed out to pay for the baby boomers' retirement party anytime soon (bonds are even held by a smaller percent). Also, depending on which leftist rag you want to quote, "the rich" (whatever that means, and they fail to say) own anywhere between 50% and 80% of the stock and bond markets. Unless they're charitably going to "spread the wealth" you can expect the majority of boomers are going to have a shortfall. And then there's corporations like Apple that hold stock in other companies (in Apple's case I think it's up to $22 billion now) that they're not going to be selling (let alone, giving to baby boomers) anytime soon. So when you make the following adjustments/assumptions:
1. Lop off 10% of the baby boomers who are "rich" leaving the main 90% of boomers who "need" 401k's to retire
2. Subtract out the 30% of securities not earmarked for retirement
3. And subtract out the 50% ownership that goes away when you take out the richest 10%
you're left with 63.9 million boomers who need $55.4 trillion to retire, but only have....
$22.8 trillion in likely retirement accounts (and even this is a high number).
This results in a shortfall of $33.5 trillion meaning prices would have to double in both the stock and bond markets..umm....basically....RIGHT FREAKING NOW in order for baby boomers to fully retire. Alas, this is why today boomers are still working, relying on social security, and reverse mortgages. In other words, generation-wise, the 401k/IRA retirement system has failed the boomers.
The hypothetical retirement of Gen X, however, provides an even more interesting case in that we have to forecast inflation and infer what kind of growth rate would be required of the stock, bond (or both) markets to adequately provide for Gen X'ers. First there's 99 million Gen X'ers. Assuming they all retire in 20 years, and also need $40,000 a year in today's money to retire, we come up with $1,311,000 in required retirement funds per Gen X'er, which translates into $130 trillion in stock and bond market capitalizations. We of course have to whittle this down just like we did for the Baby Boomers, so we adjust for the 10% of the rich, 50% of their wealth, and 30% of securities not earmarked for retirement and the Gen X generation will need $117 trillion to retire, but will likely only have ...
$46 trillion in their names-a $71 trillion short fall (but hey, at least in 20 years they'll maybe have their student loans paid off!)
Therefore, to make that $46 trillion the $117 trillion NON-RICH Gen Xer's will need to retire, the entire stock and bond markets will have to grow to a combined market capitalization of $329 trillion. A 14 fold increase from today.
Now, is this possible?
If we erroneously assume that Gen X exclusively invests in stocks and they do not rely on bonds (as younger people aim for higher growth, not to mention bonds have no hope of providing the required returns), the stock market would have to grow by 14% per year for the next 20 years to make good on the 401k promise. This is VERY unlikely as it took the S&P 500 33 years to increase the required 14-fold since 1983 that must be done under 20 years starting today. And given the power of compounding, Gen X will be woefully short on retirement funds without those extra 13 years of growth (54% short if we use the S&P 500's historical growth and retroactively apply it).
We can also assume the scenario where both stocks AND bonds are purchased in full from the baby boomers which would change the required rate of growth of 8.9% per year. However, this is just outright laughable with those whopping 1% interest rates on treasuries, not to mention negative interest rates right around the corner.
In short, using these-certainly flawed, back of napkin calculations, this whole 401k, IRA retirement thing just isn't feasible. It constantly requires a "perma-Tulip Bulb bubble mentality" of relying on the religion of "because I can sell it more for latter" to work. It requires an ignorant population that doesn't read financial statements, can't compare prices of securities versus their underlying profits, and has a sheeple-ish mentality that is easily duped by the powers that be. Thankfully, (well, for Wall Street and the government anyway) they have precisely that. So over the past 40 years you've had millions of dupes flooding the market with trillions of dollars...paying trillions along the way in commissions, managerial fees, and taxes.
But sure enough like all bubbles it will burst (or perhaps be inflated away with QE infinity). I'm particularly curious what PE ratios and dividend yields are going to look like if we need 8.9% in annual price increases when the economy can only manage to fart out 2% per year in economic growth. It may even get so bad, like government bonds, the sheep will be paying businesses dividends and not the other way around! Regardless, I do believe it's time for Gen X and perhaps even Millennials to question the same generation that brought us
1. The Ozone Layer
2. "The kids in Africa are starving"
3. The Housing Bubble and
4. "EVERYBODY MUST GO TO COLLEGE!"
about why the hell should we be investing in the stock market for retirement? Because as far as I can tell, it's like all their other advice - not only worthless, but damaging, even life destroying.
__________________________________________
http://www.soundcloud.com/aaron-clarey/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Amazon Affiliate
Monday, August 08, 2016
Episode #159 of the Clarey Podcast
Playing Pokemon Go
2 year olds will outlast you in the park
"The hand off!"
Fellatio Cafe
Girls getting dined and dashed by guys
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
2 year olds will outlast you in the park
"The hand off!"
Fellatio Cafe
Girls getting dined and dashed by guys
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Davis Aurini is Back
Apparently YouTube has given Davis back his full rights to broadcast. Remember, this is why you back up your work and you have an alternative Daily Motion or Vimeo channel.
Sunday, August 07, 2016
Boys Ditching Girls in Real World for Digital Ones
I like how the MSM, religious folk, and baby boomer types get around to discovering stuff the Manosphere did 5-10 years ago. So imagine my chuckle when a study was done and they discovered boys are preferring to play video games and watch porn than
work
date
get stood up
go to school
go into debt
and all the miserable shit they saw Gen X go through.
I was to quote John McClane and yell "Welcome to the party pal!"
work
date
get stood up
go to school
go into debt
and all the miserable shit they saw Gen X go through.
I was to quote John McClane and yell "Welcome to the party pal!"
New Podcast: "The World of Laurie Zoock":
New podcast to add to the podcast role - Laurie Zoock.
If you're looking for something outside of politics and is more of a variety show. You may want to check her out. She specializes in, however, delving and studying a subject deeply and then bringing on experts. She also owns a dog so extra points there. Anyway, if you're looking for another podcast to sample check her out.!
If you're looking for something outside of politics and is more of a variety show. You may want to check her out. She specializes in, however, delving and studying a subject deeply and then bringing on experts. She also owns a dog so extra points there. Anyway, if you're looking for another podcast to sample check her out.!
Saturday, August 06, 2016
Friday, August 05, 2016
Sponsor: Easy Mode Blogging
New sponsor and one I think some of you may be interested in. Basically "Easy Mode Blogger" sets up a blog for you. You may think "So what, I can set up a blog myself." Yeah, but it's usually under a private company like Google or Wordpress and then you have to abide by their community guidelines and rules.
This then requires you set up your own site AND learn how to program HTML on the fly. OR NOT. You can hire the guys at Easy Mode Bloggers that set it all up for you and all you have to do is start writing. AND you don't have to worry about offending the precious little millennials, SJW's, and other thin-skinned pussies of the world because it's your own site.
Anyway, consider contacting my buddy Pete at Easy Mode Blogger and tell him the Captain sent you!
This then requires you set up your own site AND learn how to program HTML on the fly. OR NOT. You can hire the guys at Easy Mode Bloggers that set it all up for you and all you have to do is start writing. AND you don't have to worry about offending the precious little millennials, SJW's, and other thin-skinned pussies of the world because it's your own site.
Anyway, consider contacting my buddy Pete at Easy Mode Blogger and tell him the Captain sent you!
Thursday, August 04, 2016
City Pages Meets the Real World of Journalism
If you don't know what "City Pages" is, don't worry. It's the pre-internet "what's going on in Minneapolis" weekly that you would consult to see...well..what was going on in Minneapolis every week in the early 90's. Of course, they wouldn't just leave it at that. That would be providing a genuine service to society with no pain nor cost nor sermoning. So they attracted a bunch of wanna be, journalistic failures who write (wait wait for it!!!!) LEFTIST (amazing, I know) skewed "articles" so they could feel like they're achieving something.
Never mind the platform was merely advertising. And never mind the only people who read City Pages for the articles are the same Minneapolitan dippy hippy dipshits who fashion themselves intellectuals. No, "City Pages" keeps going on like a zombie because hipsters in our "Uptown" need to read something when waiting for their organic coffee.
So when they came out with an article about Trump visiting Minneapolis, it was, as predicted, soaked with "sarc/snark/talk to the hand/oh snap" level writing. But it was also curiously closing the comments section.
Of course, this is what happens when old, obsolete, outdated, baby boomer media that is used to preaching to the choir comes full head onto the internet which is much more democratic and representative of the people. I guarantee you City Pages was used to its cozy echo chamber of spoiled brat trust funder baby readership, but when it made it into the real world via teh interwebz, the comments were just too "triggering" for its editorial staff to handle. And since we wouldn't want to upset these precious liberal arts majoring failures, the comments section was closed, and their little imaginary journalistic fiefdom was maintained.
Anyway, this is the only time I'll write about the "City Pages" because like the Star Tribune, for 20 years I had to tolerate their leftist slop as it was the only thing available. But now, thanks to the interwebz, City Pages is going down in history for what it truly was:
An advertising platform for bars, clubs, and museums to support the otherwise unsupportable and never-demanded journalistic hobbies of talentless, leftist hacks.
Never mind the platform was merely advertising. And never mind the only people who read City Pages for the articles are the same Minneapolitan dippy hippy dipshits who fashion themselves intellectuals. No, "City Pages" keeps going on like a zombie because hipsters in our "Uptown" need to read something when waiting for their organic coffee.
So when they came out with an article about Trump visiting Minneapolis, it was, as predicted, soaked with "sarc/snark/talk to the hand/oh snap" level writing. But it was also curiously closing the comments section.
Of course, this is what happens when old, obsolete, outdated, baby boomer media that is used to preaching to the choir comes full head onto the internet which is much more democratic and representative of the people. I guarantee you City Pages was used to its cozy echo chamber of spoiled brat trust funder baby readership, but when it made it into the real world via teh interwebz, the comments were just too "triggering" for its editorial staff to handle. And since we wouldn't want to upset these precious liberal arts majoring failures, the comments section was closed, and their little imaginary journalistic fiefdom was maintained.
Anyway, this is the only time I'll write about the "City Pages" because like the Star Tribune, for 20 years I had to tolerate their leftist slop as it was the only thing available. But now, thanks to the interwebz, City Pages is going down in history for what it truly was:
An advertising platform for bars, clubs, and museums to support the otherwise unsupportable and never-demanded journalistic hobbies of talentless, leftist hacks.
Wednesday, August 03, 2016
Female Labor as a Commodity
Most of my epiphanies strike when I'm in the middle of nowhere, driving to some destination or another, where my mind has nothing to do but wander. And I remember precisely when this epiphany struck because it's the only way I'll ever remember the town of Midland, South Dakota. Specifically:
Why is it OK that Hershey's chocolate costs less than Godiva, but the world has its panties in a bundle that women make less than men?
This then sent my brain down the road of pricing, commodities, and efficient market theory, which I all sussed out by the time I reached Phillip, South Dakota. So let me explain.
Different commodities of different quality have different prices. This reflects the value they offer to whoever uses them. Hershey's chocolate, which is about the worst chocolate you can ever buy, is appropriately priced at 3 cents a pound (or whatever it is) because only kids with no palate can manage to eat that stuff. Godiva chocolates on the other hand are priced around $.50 to $1 per piece because they are not only made from superior ingredients, but also taste infinitely better.
Sweet crude oil has a higher price than heavy oil. This is because it's easier to refine and has a higher viscosity making it easier to pump and transport. Refiners and extractors know this and the market reflects this in sweet crude's pricing.
And coffee, of its infinite varieties and blends, has an amazing variation in pricing all based on its quality, where it's from, is it organic, is it fair-trade, and did it come out of a cats ass (not joking).
Matter of fact, nearly everything we buy, commodity or not, has price variation based on it's quality, efficiency, profitability, taste, and all the other variables that ultimately result in value.
Ferrari's versus Fiats.
Bush Mills Black vs. Canadian Windsor
Nordstrom's vs. Wal-Mart
Pure breds vs. mutts
Regular vs. premium
You name it, pretty much everything we buy in the market has gradiated pricing to reflect differing values.
And it's the exact same thing between male and female labor.
While the lie politically correct excuse for the lower pay of women is "sexism," my epiphany forces me to ask a simple question - why is the market efficient at pricing nearly millions of goods and services in the economy, but when it comes to women, it's all of the sudden "sexism?" Am I to believe the market, which prices everything accurately from lumber to licorice, from manure to moccasins, all of the sudden just "fails" when it comes to valuing women's labor?
The truth is the myth of the female wage gap has been thoroughly debunked that any intellectually honest person (male or female) knows and accepts this. They know women disproportionately major in worthless subjects, take more time off, work less, etc. etc. And when you account for these variables, the wage gap disappears. But I am not here to debate the wage gap any further. I know leftists and feminists will forever cling to it because it supports their religion and their profitable victim-whoring industry. I am here, however, to shoot another simple, but logical torpedo into the wage gap myth that the average idiot on the street can understand.
For example, Dennis Prager pointed out that if women made 25% less for EQUAL WORK, all corporations would fire all men overnight and only women would be employed. This is a simple, logical argument that normies and morons can comprehend. Because of this it does more to fight the lie of the female wage gap than any amount of studies, research, statistics, or math that flies over most people's heads. And though my argument may be a bit more nuanced with the concept of "efficient market hypothesis," the average idiot on the street, even your average liberal arts major, can understand that if the market can accurately price the varying qualities of millions of goods, services, and commodities, then it's also likely valuing female labor precisely where it should be.
Still, I wouldn't hold your breath in hope this bit of economic logic ends theprofessional victim-whoring wage gap debate.
______________________________________________
Buy my latest book "Reconnaissance Man!"
And if you really want to close the wage gap, buy my other book "Worthless!"
Why is it OK that Hershey's chocolate costs less than Godiva, but the world has its panties in a bundle that women make less than men?
This then sent my brain down the road of pricing, commodities, and efficient market theory, which I all sussed out by the time I reached Phillip, South Dakota. So let me explain.
Different commodities of different quality have different prices. This reflects the value they offer to whoever uses them. Hershey's chocolate, which is about the worst chocolate you can ever buy, is appropriately priced at 3 cents a pound (or whatever it is) because only kids with no palate can manage to eat that stuff. Godiva chocolates on the other hand are priced around $.50 to $1 per piece because they are not only made from superior ingredients, but also taste infinitely better.
Sweet crude oil has a higher price than heavy oil. This is because it's easier to refine and has a higher viscosity making it easier to pump and transport. Refiners and extractors know this and the market reflects this in sweet crude's pricing.
And coffee, of its infinite varieties and blends, has an amazing variation in pricing all based on its quality, where it's from, is it organic, is it fair-trade, and did it come out of a cats ass (not joking).
Matter of fact, nearly everything we buy, commodity or not, has price variation based on it's quality, efficiency, profitability, taste, and all the other variables that ultimately result in value.
Ferrari's versus Fiats.
Bush Mills Black vs. Canadian Windsor
Nordstrom's vs. Wal-Mart
Pure breds vs. mutts
Regular vs. premium
You name it, pretty much everything we buy in the market has gradiated pricing to reflect differing values.
And it's the exact same thing between male and female labor.
While the
The truth is the myth of the female wage gap has been thoroughly debunked that any intellectually honest person (male or female) knows and accepts this. They know women disproportionately major in worthless subjects, take more time off, work less, etc. etc. And when you account for these variables, the wage gap disappears. But I am not here to debate the wage gap any further. I know leftists and feminists will forever cling to it because it supports their religion and their profitable victim-whoring industry. I am here, however, to shoot another simple, but logical torpedo into the wage gap myth that the average idiot on the street can understand.
For example, Dennis Prager pointed out that if women made 25% less for EQUAL WORK, all corporations would fire all men overnight and only women would be employed. This is a simple, logical argument that normies and morons can comprehend. Because of this it does more to fight the lie of the female wage gap than any amount of studies, research, statistics, or math that flies over most people's heads. And though my argument may be a bit more nuanced with the concept of "efficient market hypothesis," the average idiot on the street, even your average liberal arts major, can understand that if the market can accurately price the varying qualities of millions of goods, services, and commodities, then it's also likely valuing female labor precisely where it should be.
Still, I wouldn't hold your breath in hope this bit of economic logic ends the
______________________________________________
Buy my latest book "Reconnaissance Man!"
And if you really want to close the wage gap, buy my other book "Worthless!"
Tuesday, August 02, 2016
URL: "Ultimate Reading List"
I wanted to introduce a new sponsor "URL" aka "Ultimate Reading List."
I've advertised with this guy before and he does indeed get results. So I'm not just being paid to be a whore, I've used the product AND I'm a whore! If you are an author and are willing to drop $100 for a month's worth of advertising you'll want to visit the site and contact Max. Of course, your book has to be good and of interest to intellectual/righter leaning folk, but it's at least worth one month of advertising on that site.
Remember to tell him "The Captain sent ya!"
I've advertised with this guy before and he does indeed get results. So I'm not just being paid to be a whore, I've used the product AND I'm a whore! If you are an author and are willing to drop $100 for a month's worth of advertising you'll want to visit the site and contact Max. Of course, your book has to be good and of interest to intellectual/righter leaning folk, but it's at least worth one month of advertising on that site.
Remember to tell him "The Captain sent ya!"
Where's the Historical Working Model of Socialism?
A simple, but important question occurred to me as I was driving my motorcycle out to Sturgis:
"Precisely where is the historical, functional working model of socialism that socialists can cite as proof that socialism works?"
You know, where socialists can point to a time in history and say, "Here, here it is. Here is the example of how socialism not only works, but succeeds?"
Something tangible and empirical that would provide economists, philosophers, politicians, sociologists, and even skeptics an actual model they could study and learn from and see with their own eyes how socialism works?
Because if that existed, then I could see where the left might have a point. They'd have empirical proof that socialism did indeed work (well, once, anyway), and we could study and learn from that example to see how and why. But as far as I can tell, it doesn't exist. There is no example throughout all of history that socialism works or ever has worked*. And this simple observation has GRAVE ramifications not only for socialists, but for all of society. Namely, the left is gambling the entire economic future of the world world on a...
theory.
Ignore the millennia of historical and economic proof that a freer people do better than an enslaved one.
Ignore the billions of people who have died over thousands of years and hundreds of wars to grant us the freedoms of Western Civilization.
And ignore the morality of letting people keep the majority of the fruits of their labor.
No, you see some really good theoreticians in Academia over the past 50 years studied the ideas of an 1840's parasitic hack who lived off of his buddy Engel's and never worked for a living. And they have this theory, see? And this theory is to eliminate private property and put everything under the state. Never mind it's never worked once in the history of the world. And never mind that it usually kills more people through starvation than nuclear bombs did in war when implement. The difference is these really smart people have DOCTORATES in the LIBERAL ARTS, and they know more than the cumulative 30 billion people that have lived since the Greeks (and certainly more than you). So let's risk the entire world's population's freedom, futures, and livelihoods on agamble un-proven theory.
It is this insane risk that not only appalls me, but frightens me. Damn well near half of the West's population (in the form of people who vote left) is willing to risk, basically everything, for a theory. A hunch. A gamble. A pathetic religion, just as unfounded as all the others, all so they can have "teh feelz" and actually fool themselves into thinking there's some magical path to a free lunch.
Of course, I wish it was only people's entire financial and economic futures the left is willing to gamble on an unfounded theory. But sadly, they don't stop there. Oh no. Enter in feminism.
Feminism today, no matter how you slice it, is simply matriarchy. That's cute you've all managed to train young college girls into thinking "it's just the equal treatment of men and women." (Very nice, now go participate in a slut walk and carry a mattress around). But I ask again, where in the entire history of the world does an example of a successful matriarchy exist? Is there any point in time forcing women to be men and vice versa resulted in a successful and longevous society? There's certainly examples of "matriarchies," but most of them are third-world crap-holes that don't have electricity (duly noting "Iceland," the one 1st world country dubiously included on the list, which STILL went bankrupt in 2007). Some might point to the Amazons of the middle east, but they are largely of Greek myth (and obviously short lived). About the ONLY historical account of a successful matriarchy was the AMAZONIANS (not to be confused with AMAZONS) of Futurama. And even there the entire male population was wiped out by Snu Snu.
But despite the absolute absence of a successful matriarchy (or perhaps "genderless society") those really smart, 1960's feminists had a theory, damnit! And that was the world's entire problems were caused by men! And if we could just get women to rule the world, then peace would ensue and we'd all be singing kumbaya together!
Of course, never mind this resulted in divorce rates not seen since ever. A decline in women's happiness. A division between the sexes. A welfare state. The replacement of fathers with a government check. And two full generations of mal-raised children. You see these self-important, upper-class, white feminists had a THEORY, and it was very important that they risk the entire romantic, familial, and love lives of the entire western world to make their socialist utopia a reality.
There's even a third unfounded theory the left insists gambling the future lives, safety, and happiness of the world on - multi-culturalism. Once again, show me where it's worked. Point me to the model where different races not only "tolerate" each other, but thrive and grow faster than they would separately. South Africa I think both blacks and whites agree it's not ideal. I'm sure if you talk to the Swedes in private about Malmo not everybody is happy. About the "best' model we have of true multi-culturalism is Brazil, and that is at best a second world, zika-infested, crap-hole.
But once again, the left have a THEORY. And by gum, despite there being no historical or empirical evidence (and a lot of genuine evidence to the contrary), they're going to shove multi-culturalism down your throats whether you like it or not. Because despite millions of years of evolution, history, and genetics, this time it's different because they're professors and academians from the 60's and 70's. And shucks howdy they know better than nature! (Oh, and by the way, if you disagree with them, then you're a racist).
The point is socialism, leftism, communism, whatever you want to call it, is a religion. It's a groundless, baseless, fanatical belief worthless people have to give their worthless lives faux meaning. And the three largest "tenets" or "principles" of the leftist religion today are forced economic equality, the elimination of the sexes, and the forced integration of the races. However, just like all religions, there is also no empirical proof that these things are preferable, let alone feasible. But feasibility and practicality be damned. It is more important to socialism's followers and zealots that humanity come to heel under their baseless religion than to let society advance, succeed, and live their lives as they see fit. Ergo leftists have no moral qualms about forcing humanity to gamble EVERYTHING, and I do mean, EVERYTHING on an ill-thought out, self-serving, psychotic theory, a bunch of ego-masturbating spoiled brat children from the 60's came up with.
The economic system that provides us the goods and services we need just so we can live?
Naw, let's tinker with it because Maduro and Chavez have a religious obsession with socialism.
The nuclear family which over 2 million years evolved to be the optimal structure to raise a family?
Screw that and screw the mental happiness and health of the children. We 60's feminists need validation for our doctorates in Women's Studies no matter how much it destroys the black community. Men are women, women are men, fish bicycle, exchange the father for a government check.
And the fact that humans naturally separate by race, though can peacefully interact with each other?
Screw that! Bring in a culture honeycombed with radical, suicide bombing, ideologues and let them lose among a population they're sworn to destroy.
In short, the left wants to risk everything that brings happiness, joy, and reason to live to satiate their religious egos. The ability of the economy to function normally and provide the necessities that are required for life. The ultimate happiness and joy that comes from finding love and having children. And the right to be safe and associate with whom you please. You take those three things away and you have the only real model of socialism that ever existed.
The USSR
North Korea
East Germany
Venezuela
Communist China
And the embryonic psycho circuses that Western nations are quickly becoming.
Only leftists could be so narcissistic, ego-maniacal, and evil to take such a gamble with other people's lives in the face of these historical odds all so in their little inferior minds they could play god for a short, mortal 75 years.
Oh well, enjoy the decline.
__________________________________________
http://www.soundcloud.com/aaron-clarey/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Amazon Affiliate
*Admittedly the left loves to run towards Norway, Sweden, and Denmark as the "working model" of socialism. Take away oil, you take Norway off the list. Give Sweden a couple more decades, and they will take themselves off the list. And Denmark highlights something all the handful of "successful" socialist models have - they're not that much more socialist than the US. Our taxation rates (bar Sweden) are all within 10% of each other. Add to this fact that the democrat party, not to mention all leftist/labor/left parties in Europe are still advocating MORE government, then obviously these countries are NOT the model they had in mind. They demand even more socialism.
The other minor thing is that outside these precious 4 Scandinavian exceptions to the rule, socialism's track record is horrible. For every Norway or Sweden there's 3-4 Ethiopia's, Zimbabwe's, North Korea's, USSR's, East Germany's, Greece's, Venezuela's, Cambodia's, China's, and Vietnam's. And not to mention the largest peace-time, and war-time death tolls. So before leftists come on here and present the "I Know a Tall Asian Argument," there really does not exist proof socialism has worked once in history.
"Precisely where is the historical, functional working model of socialism that socialists can cite as proof that socialism works?"
You know, where socialists can point to a time in history and say, "Here, here it is. Here is the example of how socialism not only works, but succeeds?"
Something tangible and empirical that would provide economists, philosophers, politicians, sociologists, and even skeptics an actual model they could study and learn from and see with their own eyes how socialism works?
Because if that existed, then I could see where the left might have a point. They'd have empirical proof that socialism did indeed work (well, once, anyway), and we could study and learn from that example to see how and why. But as far as I can tell, it doesn't exist. There is no example throughout all of history that socialism works or ever has worked*. And this simple observation has GRAVE ramifications not only for socialists, but for all of society. Namely, the left is gambling the entire economic future of the world world on a...
theory.
Ignore the millennia of historical and economic proof that a freer people do better than an enslaved one.
Ignore the billions of people who have died over thousands of years and hundreds of wars to grant us the freedoms of Western Civilization.
And ignore the morality of letting people keep the majority of the fruits of their labor.
No, you see some really good theoreticians in Academia over the past 50 years studied the ideas of an 1840's parasitic hack who lived off of his buddy Engel's and never worked for a living. And they have this theory, see? And this theory is to eliminate private property and put everything under the state. Never mind it's never worked once in the history of the world. And never mind that it usually kills more people through starvation than nuclear bombs did in war when implement. The difference is these really smart people have DOCTORATES in the LIBERAL ARTS, and they know more than the cumulative 30 billion people that have lived since the Greeks (and certainly more than you). So let's risk the entire world's population's freedom, futures, and livelihoods on a
It is this insane risk that not only appalls me, but frightens me. Damn well near half of the West's population (in the form of people who vote left) is willing to risk, basically everything, for a theory. A hunch. A gamble. A pathetic religion, just as unfounded as all the others, all so they can have "teh feelz" and actually fool themselves into thinking there's some magical path to a free lunch.
Of course, I wish it was only people's entire financial and economic futures the left is willing to gamble on an unfounded theory. But sadly, they don't stop there. Oh no. Enter in feminism.
Feminism today, no matter how you slice it, is simply matriarchy. That's cute you've all managed to train young college girls into thinking "it's just the equal treatment of men and women." (Very nice, now go participate in a slut walk and carry a mattress around). But I ask again, where in the entire history of the world does an example of a successful matriarchy exist? Is there any point in time forcing women to be men and vice versa resulted in a successful and longevous society? There's certainly examples of "matriarchies," but most of them are third-world crap-holes that don't have electricity (duly noting "Iceland," the one 1st world country dubiously included on the list, which STILL went bankrupt in 2007). Some might point to the Amazons of the middle east, but they are largely of Greek myth (and obviously short lived). About the ONLY historical account of a successful matriarchy was the AMAZONIANS (not to be confused with AMAZONS) of Futurama. And even there the entire male population was wiped out by Snu Snu.
But despite the absolute absence of a successful matriarchy (or perhaps "genderless society") those really smart, 1960's feminists had a theory, damnit! And that was the world's entire problems were caused by men! And if we could just get women to rule the world, then peace would ensue and we'd all be singing kumbaya together!
Of course, never mind this resulted in divorce rates not seen since ever. A decline in women's happiness. A division between the sexes. A welfare state. The replacement of fathers with a government check. And two full generations of mal-raised children. You see these self-important, upper-class, white feminists had a THEORY, and it was very important that they risk the entire romantic, familial, and love lives of the entire western world to make their socialist utopia a reality.
There's even a third unfounded theory the left insists gambling the future lives, safety, and happiness of the world on - multi-culturalism. Once again, show me where it's worked. Point me to the model where different races not only "tolerate" each other, but thrive and grow faster than they would separately. South Africa I think both blacks and whites agree it's not ideal. I'm sure if you talk to the Swedes in private about Malmo not everybody is happy. About the "best' model we have of true multi-culturalism is Brazil, and that is at best a second world, zika-infested, crap-hole.
But once again, the left have a THEORY. And by gum, despite there being no historical or empirical evidence (and a lot of genuine evidence to the contrary), they're going to shove multi-culturalism down your throats whether you like it or not. Because despite millions of years of evolution, history, and genetics, this time it's different because they're professors and academians from the 60's and 70's. And shucks howdy they know better than nature! (Oh, and by the way, if you disagree with them, then you're a racist).
The point is socialism, leftism, communism, whatever you want to call it, is a religion. It's a groundless, baseless, fanatical belief worthless people have to give their worthless lives faux meaning. And the three largest "tenets" or "principles" of the leftist religion today are forced economic equality, the elimination of the sexes, and the forced integration of the races. However, just like all religions, there is also no empirical proof that these things are preferable, let alone feasible. But feasibility and practicality be damned. It is more important to socialism's followers and zealots that humanity come to heel under their baseless religion than to let society advance, succeed, and live their lives as they see fit. Ergo leftists have no moral qualms about forcing humanity to gamble EVERYTHING, and I do mean, EVERYTHING on an ill-thought out, self-serving, psychotic theory, a bunch of ego-masturbating spoiled brat children from the 60's came up with.
The economic system that provides us the goods and services we need just so we can live?
Naw, let's tinker with it because Maduro and Chavez have a religious obsession with socialism.
The nuclear family which over 2 million years evolved to be the optimal structure to raise a family?
Screw that and screw the mental happiness and health of the children. We 60's feminists need validation for our doctorates in Women's Studies no matter how much it destroys the black community. Men are women, women are men, fish bicycle, exchange the father for a government check.
And the fact that humans naturally separate by race, though can peacefully interact with each other?
Screw that! Bring in a culture honeycombed with radical, suicide bombing, ideologues and let them lose among a population they're sworn to destroy.
In short, the left wants to risk everything that brings happiness, joy, and reason to live to satiate their religious egos. The ability of the economy to function normally and provide the necessities that are required for life. The ultimate happiness and joy that comes from finding love and having children. And the right to be safe and associate with whom you please. You take those three things away and you have the only real model of socialism that ever existed.
The USSR
North Korea
East Germany
Venezuela
Communist China
And the embryonic psycho circuses that Western nations are quickly becoming.
Only leftists could be so narcissistic, ego-maniacal, and evil to take such a gamble with other people's lives in the face of these historical odds all so in their little inferior minds they could play god for a short, mortal 75 years.
Oh well, enjoy the decline.
__________________________________________
http://www.soundcloud.com/aaron-clarey/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Amazon Affiliate
*Admittedly the left loves to run towards Norway, Sweden, and Denmark as the "working model" of socialism. Take away oil, you take Norway off the list. Give Sweden a couple more decades, and they will take themselves off the list. And Denmark highlights something all the handful of "successful" socialist models have - they're not that much more socialist than the US. Our taxation rates (bar Sweden) are all within 10% of each other. Add to this fact that the democrat party, not to mention all leftist/labor/left parties in Europe are still advocating MORE government, then obviously these countries are NOT the model they had in mind. They demand even more socialism.
The other minor thing is that outside these precious 4 Scandinavian exceptions to the rule, socialism's track record is horrible. For every Norway or Sweden there's 3-4 Ethiopia's, Zimbabwe's, North Korea's, USSR's, East Germany's, Greece's, Venezuela's, Cambodia's, China's, and Vietnam's. And not to mention the largest peace-time, and war-time death tolls. So before leftists come on here and present the "I Know a Tall Asian Argument," there really does not exist proof socialism has worked once in history.