Supporting a Family on One Income - It's a Choice

Cappy's Map to Maximizing Hedonistic Pleasure

"The Menu: Life without the Opposite Sex" Now Available for Sale!

You can buy it here.

Everything You Need to Know About Investing

In one simple podcast:

The Economics of Grifting

This is an e-mail consultation I did for a client who wondered about the red pill/manosphere and grifting.  I've obviously made my money selling various books, classes, and consulting services, but because of my economics background, I believe I have a more accurate and unique take.

Dear Client,

Finally got time to answer this.

Here's the underlying economics of what's happening with all these guys and classes and grifters etc.

The United State and west in general has failed to raise the past three generations of men.  If you think about that, that is a TON of time parents did not invest in their children.  We are talking multiple trillions of human hours of training that should have gone into these men, and it hasn't.

So this is a MASSIVE economic undertaking, not only in the programming and reintroduction on an entire life philosophy for an entire sex, but also we ourselves had to research, test, recompile, and reconstitute this "data" or "information" or "philosophy."

Now, yes, modern day technology allows for the quick dissemination of that information making it free, but we're still early on in the relative compliation and reconstituting of this information.  And so the vast majority of the information out there IS available for free, but it is not categorized or organized like a library would have it.  THAT is the current stage we're at now, essentially organizing it into digestible bits that people can quickly reference.

So it's like walking into a library where the information you seek is in there, but, where it is is anybody's guess.

So the main service people are paying for in classes is for an expert in their relative field to compile all that information into a condensed form, be that a class or a book, etc.

So this is what you're seeing where people are all up in arms screaming "THIS IS FREE!!!!!  IT'S ON THE INTERNET!!!!" 

Yeah, but do you have the 40 hours to listen to all of Stephen Molyneux's podcasts to get the 45 minutes where he talks about The Non Aggression Principle?  Or are you willing to spend $15 for a book or even $100 for a teachable class to have it condensed and conveniently presented for you?

And that's why I think people are offering these class AND people are paying.  It's more of a convenience of time saving issue.  Say you're some immigrant coming to America to study engineering and want to get laid.  You do not have the time to listen to all of Rollo Tomassi's podcasts about American women. But you do have the time to buy his book, take MLD's dating course, and Troy Francis' pick up school.  May set you back $1,000, but that's better than 3 months of fulltime listening to get it all for free.

That being said I think as time goes on, the internet will naturally organize these things into digestable, specific and FREE information packets and you can already do that somewhat already.  I KNOW nearly every one of those guys are sick of talking about the same damn thing (hit the gym, get a good degree, do the work, diet, etc. etc.) and is why  you see them branch out.  BUt also in their defense, they are BUSY trying to onboard all these young lost guys because they just keep coming.  We literally cannot unplug these young men faster than the rate single moms are producing them.  And we only have so much time.  So there IS a higher demand than the supply of time we got and YEAH, we're charging for it.

So I think what a lot of young men in the red pill communtiy fail to see is THEY'VE BEEN A PART OF THIS COMMUNITY AND OVER YEARS have picked up this information for free.  Which is great, but a lot of new people are coming in, there's only so many of us, and nobody is putting a gun to anybody's head to force them to take it, so yeah, we're going to charge.

Finally, I'm of the firm belief that people don't do anything unless they pay a price.  And I get sick of red pill theoreticians who will read books, take classes, consume YEARS of podcasts only to not execute on the advice therein.  And though it doesn't directly hurt me or any other content producer, the hypocrisy still pisses me off.  Thus, why I charge not only for my time, but the near-guarantee these people AREN'T going to DO THE WORK.  I make them pay a price so AT LEAST they have a financial incentive to DO THE WORK and thus, earn their money back and thereby improve their life or solve their problem. 

But overall, the much simpler explanation is it's a free market and people are paying for it.  "What price do you charge? - What the market will bear."  But also "more than what my next highest opportunity will pay."  And right now there is nearly infinite demand for red pill truths from nearly ALL western men alive today who have been fed nothing but feminist lies and marxist propaganda their entire lives.

Think of nearly every penny, hour, and dollar that was invested in these men over the past 50 years, and realize it's going to take an equivalent amount of work, effort, resources, and time to undo all that programming and give them an operating system that funcitons in reality.  It's a monumental amount of work and there is obviously going to be money made in it.

How Inflation Destroys the Poor

 

The Girl Who Treated a Guy Nice

 

Calling Bullshit on American Depression

 

The Economics of Raising Two Generations of Useless People

 

Dating Advice for 40+ Women

 

How to Become "T-Rash"

Achieving Financial Excellence: The Most Direct Path Out of Poverty

I am offering a new class on Teachable - "Achieving Financial Excellence."

The main purpose of the class is to identify the quickest route out of poverty by identifying and cutting through all the bullshit that society throws at you in order to fool you (and profit off of you) as to what is real wealth.

Most of my regular readers/subscribers/viewers do not need this class, but if you are new, poor, or are having financial troubles and would like to resolve them, consider dropping the $99 on the course below:

Best Videos of Cappy

 Women Are Not Property

Women Are Just Not That Into You

No Young Person Can Succeed in California

What Would Asians Do?

Why Women Love Command Strips

US Colleges and Universities: Always Pay Somebody Else to Do Your Homework

This is an advertisement for my buddy Alex.  He runs the company "Academic Composition" and for years has been countering the stupid, irrational, and evil trend of colleges and employers requiring ever more and worthless classes in order to give you "permission" to work.  

THere is naturally "The Great Resignation" happening across the US and the West, but many of you are going to insist on improving your life and will unfortunately be forced into this rent-seeking world of marxist, leftist academics and HR cunts who love making poor, young people jump through unnecessary hoops to find employment.

If this is the case OR you are looking for employment that you can do from home, or in any other way want to AVOID this unfair system, may I recommend Academic Composition either as a potential employer or a service you would use:

Dear friends of Academic Composition,

You have been of enormous help in the last few years! We have come a very long way with you, and we need your help again.

Many of you have used our services, and some have joined us as writers. While returning customers and writers are the backbone of our organization, we need stellar marketers to help us grow. Over the last few years, over 200 of Aaron’s readers have joined us as marketers, and we have expanded to the point where we need more.

Despite the enormous demand for our services, the Great Resignation is a crude reality for all businesses, and ours is not an exception. 

We need additional marketers, and the scheme is simple: you post our ads on social media, and we will pay you $5 for each person who responds. In light of the recent labor shortage, we will offer an additional incentive: you will also be paid $5 for the service of posting an ad. Each week, you can expect to receive a few leads, and you will need just a few minutes to post the ads. Effectively, you will be making more than a dollar per minute: many of our marketers average $20-30 per week in less than five minutes of work. During the high season, they earn $50-75.

In summary, this is how you will be compensated.

1. $5 for the service of posting the ad

2. $5 for each person who responds

To get started, please follow these basic steps.

1. Create a new gmail address

 

2. Activate the gmail forwarding feature. You may either follow the tutorial below or share the password to your new account, which will enable us to complete the forwarding authorization for you.

https://youtu.be/DpHes_HgPaA

If you choose to activate the forwarding feature on your own, please make sure that all incoming emails are directed to Aleksey.Bashtavenko@gmail.com

3. Use that new gmail address and create an account with Craigslist. 

For additional questions or comments, please email us at Aleksey.Bashtavenko@gmail.com or academiccomposition@gmail.com

 

The Red Pill and Suicide

 

Why Millennials Think the Government is Their Friend

This is a guest post from Alex, who as you know is the proprietor of Academic Composition.  His company writes papers for college students who don't want to write their own, and naturally he's had great insight into the younger generations' psychologies as they make the transition from high school to college to the adult world.  His post below is not necessarily an advertisement for his services, but in today's world where 50% of your college courses literally have NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR EDUCATION, consider hiring him and his team at Academic Composition.

Why Millennials Think That the Government is Their Friend

The majority of Millennials are overwhelming in favor of a broad variety of “progressive” policies, most of which involve the expansion of government. They are more likely than Generation X to support government policies that penalize people who make seemingly offensive comments, such as using the wrong gender-pronouns, criticizing ethnic minorities, or saying anything that can even remotely be construed as “insensitive“. Clearly, this reflects their collective belief that the government is a force for good, which puts them at odds with older Americans who have an instinctive distrust of centralized authority.

One may ask why this is so, and the answer seems simple: they were raised in a way that instilled a positive view of adults in their lives. While many Boomers and Gen Xers sought independence from their parents, Millennials have been much less likely to do so. One reason this may be so is that they were born at a time that one may describe as the “moral panic over children”. Starting with the 1980s, American cars began displaying “baby on board” stickers and adults started taking an increased interest in the lives of youngsters. This pro-youth mentality stands in sharp contrast with the upbringing that Gen X received, which were known as the “latchkey kids” and the most aborted generation in American history.

The older age cohort of Gen X who were born in the 60s and early 70s have been steadfastly Republican, while the tail-end of Gen X are more receptive to moderate or even progressive views. By contrast, all age cohorts within the Millennial generation tend to be progressive. The connection between the nature of one’s upbringing and political leanings seems intuitive and straightforward: people who grew up with authoritarian or absentee parents are more likely to be conservative or libertarian. By contrast, people who have always enjoyed a warm relationship with their parents and other adults are more likely to see authority figures as a force for good.

In “Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think”, George Lakoff argued that one’s conception of family life shapes their view of politics. In light of this, it is clear how the student activists who cheered at Mario Savio’s famous Sprout Hall speech about “bodies upon the gears” speech were rebelling against repressive and controlling adults. They saw adult authority as an infringement upon their inalienable right to develop their personalities and cultivate the capacity to make autonomous decisions. By contrast, today’s student activists are advocating for precisely the opposite cause: they demand free speech to be limited. The explanation is as simple as it is straightforward, their early life experiences led them to develop a beatific view of authority.

In “On Liberty“, John Stuart Mill famously argued that healthy skepticism of authority is necessary for liberty to thrive. He believed that political discourse should be modeled on scientific inquiry where participants freely exercise their prerogative to challenge the views of one another, as nobody can be certain that they have the last word on any given issue. However, Millennials are skeptical of liberty because of their sheltered upbringing, which makes them also mistrust democracy.

The explanation is simple and plausible: they have grown up in a culture where they have always expected adults to protect them from even the most trivial of setbacks, which is why they see democracy as a source of chaos. Their view of liberty is necessarily negative, as they have little to no experience with genuine abuse of adult authority. At any rate, they tend to see the risk of enduring the abuse of authority as less severe than the risk of accepting the responsibility that comes with living in a free society. By its nature, freedom comes with responsibility, and people who expect their caretakers to shield them from it cannot see the positive value of freedom. In light of this point of view, what reason do they have to prefer democracy to a technocracy?

Another fundamental reason why Millennials are wary of liberal democracy is that their understanding of history tends to be deficient.    In “Defense of Politics”, Bernard Crick advanced a compelling case in favor of the necessity of politics, showing that this is the only alternative to autocracy. However, in order to participate in a political process, one must have a fairly nuanced understanding of history, social science, and civics, which Millennials lack. As a result, they find themselves hopelessly bamboozled by an incessant onslaught of vague, confusing, and often incoherent streams of information. Because they lack a basic understanding of history, they are not aware of the atrocities that have been committed by authoritarian regimes as recently as 30-40 years ago. As far as they are concerned, politics is merely a vulgar spectacle, on par with Jerry Springer or the American Idol, which is why they see no compelling reason to vote. After all, if voting is a waste of time, what’s wrong with a dictatorship?

It’s not a coincidence that the world has seen a rash of authoritarian neo-populist regimes in the early 2010s, right around the time when the last age cohort of the Millennials entered young adulthood. Even if they did not vote, they unwittingly created a cultural milieu receptive to authoritarian ideas; this clearly has been the case in the USA, Mexico, Brazil, Hungary, and the Philippines, all of which have been governed by demagogues of this sort in the last decade.

The follow-up question that comes charging in is what can one expect when the Millennial generation enters the next stage of life? By the 2030s, the Baby Boomers will be either deceased or retired from politics, and Gen X is too small to countervail the political influence of Millennials, who are the largest living generation today. Gen Z will also be too small to put up any resistance to the collective will of their next-elders. We now live in a world where free speech, free markets, personal liberty, and democracy are increasingly becoming an older person’s point of view. It is inevitable that the congress and the presidency will be controlled by Millennials, and how will such a generation wield their power? Clearly, they share none of their elder’s skepticism of centralized power, the due process of law, individual freedom, and democracy.  Far from seeing free speech as a resource that empowers a healthy exchange of ideas, they see it as a distraction that prevents authorities from safeguarding their feelings. So, why would they not repeal the First Amendment? Why not abolish the free markets and criminalize private property? Today, such insinuations appear ludicrous because half of the Millennials still live with their parents, so their hands are tied: they are not in the position to turn their vision into a reality. Yet, it’s inevitable that the nation’s circumstances will change: they will inherit their parents’ money and emerge as the dominant generation that will mold the country into their own image."

Man's Purpose in Western Civilization

With the suicide of Fred (among others) and an increasing amount of young men approaching me about "what am I supposed to do in life," I found this consultation I did somewhat helpful in providing lost men a roadmap or at least some basics in terms of how to deal with their existence, and more importantly what to do with it.  Gone are the traditional reasons people had to live in western society.  One sex is completely disinterested and absolving themselves of the other.  Laws are making interacting with the opposite sex and family formation too risky.  And false gods of politics, socialism, activism, the state, and all other "isms" have replaced love for one's fellow man and community.  And since this is what traditionally gave people (religion or secular) reason to life, but now it is gone, three generations of men (and women) are looking for a new point and purpose in living so their finite life isn't wasted.

It isn't an end-all-be-all answer, but it's as far as my logic takes me.  And if you enjoy reading the below, please consider purchasing some of my books which generally address existentialism through an economics lens.

Hi Anon,

OK, I got some time to answer this.  However, first, I would recommend watching the video on "The Red Pill and Sucide" that I did yesterday as I think it will touch on many of the topics.

First, understand that nihilism isn't wrong.  It's right.  We are all going to die.  The earth will be torched when the sun turns into a red giant star, eliminating any records of what you did.  And unless you believe in the afterlife or a religion, you ARE a nihilist.  MOst normal people don't think their assumptions about the afterlife through to their final conclusion, but smart people do and then became aware they re nihilists.  The issue is how they handle it.

If you end up believing in a religion, boom!  Your problem is solved.  But the problem is no religion has any proof it is correct, and it is a faith or a belief that people genuinely become religious, not knowledge.  So that contradiction with religion is something you have to wrestle with.

However, what I am going to assume is that you are too scientific minded and too intelligent to believe in religions, and so now you get to wrestle with your nihilism and finiteness.

This then brings in the incredibly difficult chore of what to do with your finite and brief life.

Historically, your purpose and reason in living was to find a quality girl you liked, fall in love, have a family, love your children, raise them, and then get to spoil your grand children.  And while that may still exist in non-western countries, that dream/birthright is fully dead here in the US. 

Yes you may find a quality girl.

Yes you may get married.

Yes you may have kids and be happily ever after.

But given the low grade slop most humans have become in the US, your chances are very low.  Worse, it's not just the women who are shit, but the men too.  You are unlikely to find good quality friends, let alone a significant amount of them to create an engaging and fulfilling social life.  You throw in your intelligence, and man, good luck finding anybody who doesn't sound a like a complete retard compared to you.  And don't even get me started about people who may agree with you philosophically, but are too fat and lazy to go and enjoy life.

Additionally, your background was harsh enough that you saw the dark underside of most western humans and don't even want to engage in some kind of socializing or romance.  Your brain is perpetually in the lower-two levels of maslows hierarchy of needs because you see a ton of threats to your existence both today and in the past, and your primary concern is survival and stability, not love or belonging.  And so not only are most people shit, you can't gamble on investing significant personal time and resources in personal relationships (romantic or not) that don't pay off, or worse (in the case of divorce) cost you greatly.

So for multiple (good) reasons, you are not able to find purpose and reason in living today that most people (nihilists included) found in the past.

And so I wish I had a solution for you, but I don't, because frankly, there is no solution.

You can find purpose and reason for living outside of family and friends in adventuring.  You can find purpose and meaning in work.  You can find purpose and meaning in any one of an unlimited number of hobbies out there.  But you are not going to find it through other people (or the chances are very very low).

All this being said, none of this changes that you are biologically hardwired to WANT to get with other people (romantically or socially).  And since not satisfying that scratch will at least put some depressionary pressures on your mind, I'm not against putting some tacit, but well placed interest in finding some quality human relationships.  The key thing is to ALIGN YOUR EXPECTATIONS WITH THE LIKELIHOOD YOU WILL FIND THIS.

So first, use the internet to find true intellectual equals.  It is a large and fine net that will certainly find you some quality friends over the internet, and maybe even some quality women.

Second, invest the time and money to visit these people.  For the most part, nobody is going to come visit you.  YOu will have to visit them. But whether it's a very promising young lady who seems to have her shit together on a dating profile, or a really cool guy you bond with like a brother, you are likely going to have to fly to visit them.  And though it may sound like a significant time investment (and it is) that is a FRACTION of the time you will spend trying to find some quality people in your local area, sifting through all the turds of humans at bars and clubs or meet up groups to find barely entertaining ones.

Third, I would travel to truly different cultures that are traditional.  Obviously eastern cultures would be on this list, but former soviet countries, latin, even the mid east.  Not so much to find yourself a wife (though certainly that too), but just to find a culture that isn't such shit, so degraded, and so depressing.  A culture that likes itself, is proud of its accomplishments, and a culture that is beautiful.  Architecture, history, food, and basic civility and kindness of its people.  Heck, just being among people who aren't disgusting morbidly obese sows walking around in sweats would do wonders for your mentality.

And then finally, considering all these options, figure out what is the best this world can give you in terms of meaning and purpose and then pursue it.  It may be you stay here for a decade, making money off of the American system to then retire in a quiet village in Albania.  It could be you excel at your career here and get poached by a foreign country to work there and lead their industry to great new heights.  You might find a nice portly Mexican wife you loves you to death and just wants to cook for you.   Or you just don't have the personality type to mingle with people and so you travel the world and enjoy it.  But whatever it is, your sole mission in life is to figure it out, because you are going to suffer a miserable life until you do. 

beyond that I can't tell you what it is.  It took me decades to figure out I like hiking, motorcycle riding, fossils, working with my hands, and more or less being left alone in a quiet house to listen to jazz.  It's going to take everybody else in the west decades as well to replace "wife and family" with something else as well.  And understand most humans today will die not knowing what their purpose in life is/was supposed to be. 

So for now the minimum purpose of your life is to figure out what it's supposed to be about.  THAT in itself will at least ease the nihilism.  And about the only goal I can concretely describe you should have in life that will assuage your concerns about being a nihilist is to make sure on your death bed you have no regrets.  Beyond that, you got me.

Best of luck,

Aaron

How to Give Everyone a Free Education in America

 

Futility

If you remember Die Hard, there was a scene where the FBI decided that to flush out the terrorists, it would be best to cut off the power to the Nakatomi Plaza.  This resulted in an argument between the FBI agents and the city's electrical grid manager who insisted the individual building could not be turned off, but that instead an entire city grid would have to be taken down.  But while the city manager and the FBI agents argued, there was a lowly electricity worker, sitting in the manhole, who was trying to tell all of them he could turn off the building right then and there.  Naturally, they ignored the man, the FBI pulled rank, an entire city grid was taken down, and Hans Gruber could finally open his vault.

And it is here I find myself in a similar situation as the lowly electrical worker sitting in the manhole.

I know how to make education free (or nearly free) for all Americans.

I know how to end the education crisis tomorrow.

And it doesn't require anything grandiose like revamping the entire education system, bailing out liberal arts majors, or forcing the taxpayer to spend an additional $500 billion each year on paying for every one's education.

It's as simple as a switch and it will benefit every American today and into the future to the tune of trillions if we just do what I say.  

Unfortunately, like the lowly electrical worker, the powers that be are either too stupid or too politically and financially invested in the current education system to actually listen to what I'm going to say.  Furthermore, most Americans themselves are too stupid and short-sighted to do the same.  And so like many of my previous economic recommendations, this will merely be for posterity so I can make fun of even more impoverished and debt-laden Americans in the future.  Because you are truly a stupid people and I've found it very enjoyable to watch you suffer when you don't have to, especially today's "college graduates."

Technology is Hard

The current educational system we have is based in technology that has existed since we could make buildings.  And the reason I say that is because it's true.  Once there was a building to house people, you could house students in a localized area, protected and uninterrupted from the elements, and an individual teacher (be that Plato or the the school marm from Little House on the Prairie) could instruct or teach their students, conveying information.  Overtime this basic model has been supplemented with technologies such as electricity, lights, LCD projectors, and red-light pointers, but the model remained the same - get a large group of people within listening distance of a teacher and that individual teacher could pass on information to 10, 50, 100, even a thousands students at a time.

But 25 years ago there was a large and obvious technological innovation - the internet.  And the day you could stream video or at least audio over it, it gave teachers the ability to reach the entire globe of students.  And while I myself was a student at the time, I was very curious how soon it would be before we'd implement this technology to do away with the:

• trillions of dollars in physical buildings on college campuses
• the unnecessary parking that was required to attend class
• the overpriced college text books that could all be replaced for (near) free PDF's
• as well as nearly all the teachers and professors in the country as the top 2% of instructors in their respective fields could now teach all the students in the world with their superior teaching abilities

And so I waited....and waited...and waited, and much like American employers refusing to let their employees work from home, I realized our education system was not going to let students the luxury of learning from home either.

And so now for the past 25 years I've watched over 100 million American students unnecessarily waste 4-8 years of their lives, pointlessly wasting trillions of dollars and billions of hours on dubiously-valued degrees, attending an old, obsolete, and incredibly inefficient education system.  That, and now we all get to hear their howls and complaints that they were duped and now need us to pay for their overpriced pieces of toilet paper.

But for all their screams and howls, for all the whining about tuition prices, none of that will change.  Professors and college admin need the outdated and obsolete education system to remain because they are luddites.  They need the rest of society to be held back so that they can keep their jobs.  The democrat party also needs the traditional education system because that is how they get future voters, socialists, and otherwise financially ignorant NPCs.  The students, who you would think would want something like free education, do not in fact want the old and outdated education system to go away, because they do not view "education" as an investment in their future, but rather a birthright where they can party for 4 years and imagine themselves intellectuals (when in fact it is painfully obvious most of them don't even understanding compound mathematics).  And parents do not want the old education system to go away because ever since their children were 5, they have used America's education system as free babysitting.  And college is merely adult-child daycare so the kids inevitably leave home and give ma and pa the chance to fuck on the kitchen island again.

As I said before, Americans are truly a stupid people.  Very few Americans are interested in a genuine education.  An investment in themselves that will improve their career, finances, life and futures.  Most Americans want an escape from life's responsibilities or a means by which to profit at the expense of others.  And THAT is the true point and purpose of today's education system, and why no matter how obsoleted the internet has made it, it will remain until the US ends.

How Education Could Be Made Free

But let's say you're one of the 2% of American people who aren't a bunch of worthless, lazy parasites.  Let's say you had an intellectual or genuine interest in making education free for everyone and improving society.  How would a "free education" system work?  What would it look like?  How could we educate the most amount of people in the cheapest way possible?

The first thing would be to rebuild the entire system around what education originally set out to do - educate the most amount of people in the most affordable way possible.  And that would mean making the internet the primary vehicle by which we educate ourselves.

This is already done by nearly every college campus (though reluctantly).  Today's colleges and universities do offer some form of education online, but they still attach an absurd price to it, often times charging MORE for an online class than an in person one.  But the real efficiency loss is you have multiple, if not thousands of colleges offering the exact same fungible commodity on multiple platforms - education.

I don't care if it's a Harvard accounting class or a Biff Bifferson's School of Business' accounting class - accounting is accounting.  The education is the exact same.  And this goes for nearly all of the sciences, including the fake ones that go by the moniker "social sciences."  Like YouTube, you only need ONE platform to disseminate this information to the ENTIRE GLOBE OF STUDENTS.  And unless you were born into a wealthy family or like to suck cock for a living, "Harvard" and "Cornell" are just brand names, not education.  So the new-and-free education system would do away with all colleges and universities and there would only need to be one source of education to disseminate it to the global community of students.  So forget "Harvard School of Business" or "The Carlson School of Management" (which is forgettable because nobody knows who they are anyway), there would just be a "Degree in Accounting" and you would get it on "the internet."

This might lead people to think that this new education system would be a monopoly.  That there would be one, elite school, with only the world's best and most elite teachers generating a SINGLE AND AUTHORITATIVE class in each of their respective fields, and for ALL students in the world to consume.  And the slightly savvier among us would see the obvious risks of putting education into such an elite group of people, having fear and concerns that a censorious and politicized education system, akin to YouTube, would emerge.  But even that is too much overhead as we are using an outdated sense of education.  We think education must be "conferred" upon the student by some kind of educational authority.  That in order to become "educated" you need a school and teachers.  When in reality, becoming educated is just gathering knowledge.  And since all the world's knowledge is available for free on the internet, a Globo-Educorp type of evil monopoly is completely unnecessary.  And this introduces the two remaining ingredients we would need for a free education system - autodidactism and credential boards. 

Autodidactics are the Future

If you don't know what an "autodidactic" is, you can become one by looking it up on the internet.  Because what you'll find out is that an autodidactic is one who teaches himself.  And while many people will say, "well I do better in a classroom environment" that is:

1- too bad

2- complete bogus

because just like everybody dies alone, nearly everyone teaches themselves.

While no doubt some people will do better in a traditional (and incredibly expensive and inefficient) classroom environment, in the end EVERYBODY has to teach themselves.  Yes, there might be a teacher there.  Yes, there might be your parents there.  But let us be perfectly honest.  Most teachers suck, most parents suck, and in the end it is up to the student to do well.  Shoot, even the concept of homework is an admission that after having their students for 8 FULL HOURS 9 MONTHS A YEAR, teachers still can't fully and adequately teach your kids.  And besides which, even if you teach yourself through books or the internet, there still is ultimately a teacher who created that content you are using to educate yourself.

Furthermore, lets say you did indeed do better with a physical teacher in the room uttering the EXACT SAME WORDS as they would on an instructional YouTube video.  

Would you not be able to learn more if you didn't have to commute to a campus?
Would not EVERY K-12 student in America be able to learn more from spending 2 hours on the internet than 2 hours stuck on a bus ride...everyday...for 13 years...roundtrip?

And it is here I don't really care to try to convince the stupid people, but the smart ones.  Because the stupid people are using education for anything but.  But the smart ones actually do care about education.  And if you think about it, wasting time forcing kids to attend physical prisons - be that k-12 or overpriced college campuses - is a HUGE economic waste of time that could be much better invested through autodidactism.  Furthermore, with cell phones and MP3 players, education can be taken with and consumed anywhere.  I personally have an equivalent to an associates degree in European history just tuning into podcasts.  And while taking in this history, I was doing all sorts of things like hiking, working out, working on my home, and otherwise not being idle.  An EASY multi-trillion dollar opportunity cost to today's conventional education system is that you must sit still and do nothing else but listen to Ben Stein drone on about economics.  While obesity alone could be wiped out if everyone listened to their pre-req classes' lectures while hiking or walking.

This leads to the final ingredient for a free education system - credential boards.

Because with everybody teaching themselves and getting their education from the internet, in order to become employable the quality of their autodidactic education must somehow be confirmed.  And we already several models to pull from to see how they work.

The computer/IT industry is full of various certification and credentials IT/computer professionals need to have in order to work places.  The CPA society also sets up tests you need to take before you can become a CPA.  There are various nursing credentials and tests you need to take before becoming a nurse.  California doesn't require you attend law school, just that you pass the bar exam.  Even something as simple as getting your CDL (commercial driver's license) is an example of where the student does not need an overbloated education system.  

But what if we did that for ALL careers and professions?  That instead of unnecessarily forcing millions of young people every year to waste 4 years of their youth and $120,000 in student loans to make "Karen in HR" happy you have a bachelors degree, the government set up certification boards that would give you the equivalent of bachelors degree if you passed?  That instead of funding the education industry to the tune of $1 trillion per year, the government instead just spent $10 billion a year establishing, running, and administering testing facilities that would certify you educated in whatever field you wanted?  Better yet, what if the government forced employers and industries to set up their own testing and accreditation protocols, and/or mandated that credentialed people were to be treated just as equally as the morons who wasted 4 years in college on a "real degree?"

I know the next step would be to have employers provide on-the-job training (and what a "horror" that would be), but the larger point is this nightmare of higher education would be gone.  Students would no longer have to waste 4 years in college to get an entry level position.  Young people would not be financially crippled forever at 22.  Employers would be humbled to hire able people, not overly-educated ones.  And nobody would be wasting 2 years of their finite and precious youth on those infernal "pre-req" classes.

I know America's privileged little cunts wouldn't get their precious "college experience," but who cares about them?  They're the morons who can't understand how the compound interest works on their student loans.

The Clarey School System of Free Education

And so in its final form, this auto-didactic and near-free education system would go something like this.  

No matter how old or young you are, you are allowed to study anything you want for free on the internet.  And if you wanted, you could test at either an industry or government facility to earn your degree or credential in "Accounting" "History" "Education" or "Biology."  By government law, employers would be forced to treat your credential as a college equivalent.  And bar the fees it takes to pay for the test, you don't pay a dime in tuition.

You can study on your own time.  You can study while you work the night shift at a warehouse.  You can study while you're on a cruise traveling.  And you can study at 12 if you're smart enough, thereby bypassing the hell that is known as k-12 education, becoming an engineer at 16.

No more "Bachelors Required, Masters preferred."
No more student loan debt.
No more crippled financial futures.
And no more taxes for a K-college education system.

Public colleges and universities would be closed, the buildings of which could be repurposed to help alleviate the housing shortage/costs.  Professors and college administrators would have to get real jobs, perhaps maybe serve us our coffee for a change.  Stupid kids, with rich parents could attend private schools and waste their time on "the college experience."  And those of you with a penchant for teaching could make millions being the best "calculus" teacher or "home auto-repair" teacher on the internet (much like it is done today, and ALSO without a "PhD" or "teacher's license).

And never, ever, ever again
will a single American
EVER
have to take one of those worthless pre-req liberal arts classes.

But of course none of this will come to fruition.  Because American, as I've said before, are an incredibly stupid people.  Just let it never be said we didn't have a simple, simple solution to turn off the electricity to the Nakatomi Plaza.

______________________________________

Consider purchasing "Worthless: The Young Person's Indispensable Guide to Choosing the Right Major."  It costs $12.95.  You degree will cost $120,000.  Don't be stupid.

Also consider purchasing 

"Bachelor Pad Economics"

Removing Beauty and Sex from Women's Value

Image below links to YouTube discussion about how women are now demanding men no longer like them for beauty, youth, or sex, but for anything but.

Cappy and the Rule Zero gang discuss what this means for men still interested in women, and opine what the ramifications are for women with this change in value system.

The Black Widowization of the Sexes

 

 

Zoologist Cappy

Follow me on a journey if you will and assume we are zoologists.  We do not care about people's emotions or feelings, yet nor do we have any ill-will or malice towards anyone.  We're just going to make empirical observations in the human animal kingdom, much like Jane Goodall did with chimps.  And from those observations derive some pretty important questions facing men, though by necessitous default, society.

Fire from My Six

I was on teh interwebz surfing social media because in today's world that's where I get most of my conversing and socialization.  Naturally I have female friends and naturally they're not leftists, but this doesn't mean we all agree on everything.  Some believe in a small welfare state.  Some still defend their liberal arts degrees. And some, yes, are single mothers whose exs were indeed bad people.

But a trend I've noticed over the years was that despite these girls being true American women, true patriots, some even gun loving-, gun-tottin' rootin' tootin' 6 gun shooting gals, their relationship with men is not as clean cut as "traditional men good/soyboys bad."  No doubt, we've all had bad experiences with the opposite sex, but at least some of these ladies' experiences must have been bad enough that some of their statements and positions have been, frankly, shocking to me.

One gal I know very much dislikes going out in public because of all the attention she gets.  She's an attractive woman, but absolutely detests male attention.  She doesn't hate men per se, but has a preemptive apprehension to men in public, in general.

Another, along a similar vein, is afraid to go out at night because she is worried that there's a man about to assault or rape her around the corner, though it has yet to happen.  This isn't to say that preparation and self-defense are irrational, but this fear bothers her to the point it impairs her ability to enjoy life, and once again, resents men communally for it.

A third, is a 30 something virgin - whose virginity is too precious for any man yet to take.  She eerily obsesses over it like Golem does his ring, which paints men in her mind in a distrusting light.

And a fourth is a friend who was sympathetic (though did not explicitly endorse) a post where the poster said men who mislead women about commitment should be prosecuted for sexual assault (a sentiment that was roundly supported by female commenters on the post).

It was these posts and comments like them that prompted my original thought piece about "what if women just don't like men." But the statement about equating misleading women about commitment to sexual assault AND prosecuting men for it, made me believe there was something more to it.  An overly-retributive aspect I didn't understand.  And so I got off my lazy ass and fleshed out a theory that's been kicking around my head.  And that theory is society is moving the relationship between men and women to that of the black widow spider. 

Four Ways to Get Women REALLY Pissed Off At Men

Though not necessarily conscious or by design, society has done four things that made women REALLY not like men...or at least not as much as they did in the past.

The first thing was breaking the traditional social contract the sexes had with one another and replacing men with the government.  The simplified version is that men were traditionally responsible for the support and protection of women (and the family), but in being responsible for the family, they were also the final arbiter of all decisions.  They were the head of the household, and the wife was to support her husband, care for her husband, and ultimately abide by her husband's decisions.

Today, women no longer need men as they have the government, careers, or (more likely) a combination of both.  And with divorce being common and acceptable, men have absolutely no authority over any marriage or relationship.  It is completely voluntary.

But while this voluntaristic relationship seems much-improved in the eyes of women over the tyrannical traditional one, with no authority over women or what goes on in their household, men by logical consequence are are also free of any responsibility.  They are free to do as they please.  And men tend to not want to commit.

You get a girl pregnant?  You don't have to stick around, the government will pay for it.

Your girl asking "where is this going?"  Going "where" exactly?  Marriage is completely out of date and obsolete.  Besides you have your career and the government.  You don't "need" me, this is a temporary relationship of convenience.

A girl wants you to settle down and only date her?  Why exactly would you do that in 2021?  To what end or goal?

And to further deter men from commitment, "marriage" - the ultimate form of commitment - has become an untenable and unconscionable contract.  It is not only hugely risky for any man entering it, but has such a spectacular failure rate you would have to be a genuinely stupid person to enter it.

This would be fine and well as women (at least on paper) seem to be bowing out of marriage as well.  But a quaint little 50 year sociology experiment does not undo 2 million years of human evolution.  Even if a woman consciously and logically understands that her new relationship with the government obsoletes her need for a man, every cell in her nervous system, every strand of DNA is screaming at her to get a man to commit to her.  And when her high powered career, masters degree, or government check does not scratch this biological itch, she takes out the crushing totality of this cognitive dissonance on the only and obvious culprit - those damn commito-phobic men.

The second thing is a by-product of the first.  I am not arrogant enough to claim men don't need women.  Men love women.  Men want women.  It's the #1 reason I was pulled from writing about economics and instead write about "the economics of the pursuit of women" for my largely male audience. 

But if you take away women from men, exactly what do men have to strive for in life?

In the past men would go to incredible lengths to attract and ultimately get a girl.  Men would fight each other, go to war, invent nearly every technological innovation, and create nearly everything you see under the sun in an attempt to attract a girl.  But society has made it so difficult to pursue and attract a woman, that the pain and toil it would take to succeed in that endeavor is now more powerful than the male sex drive.  And many men are simply giving up on this otherwise species-long pursuit (or admittedly swapping it out for porn).

This, of course, is none of my female-friends' fault.  They did not vote for a welfare state that takes 40% of men's income.  They did not vote to unnecessarily force men to go $120,000 in debt to get a masters degree before women even consider dating them.  Nor did they vote for all this feminism that has essentially told men they aren't needed, need to operate at a handicap, and are the cause of all of women's problems.  But what this hostile, essentially anti-male environment has done is resulted in now three generations of men giving up on life and achieving nowhere near their potential.

This angers women, because political and sociological causes aside, women want strong, capable, supporting men.  They want manly men with real jobs, real incomes, who can throw a punch and protect the children.  They want a man they can fall in love with, respect, and ravish them in bed. Matter of fact it's the only reason we're on this planet, and once again women's genetics are screaming this at them.  So when society fails to deliver the quality, rugged, strong men women genetically and desperately want, women are denied their biological purpose and reason in life.  Their fleeting short existence in this universe has been snuffed.  And as a consequence THEY'RE PISSED!  And while sitting down and figuring out the pathology of this lack of real men would lead women to a real solution, it is much easier instead to cathartically lash out at the men who have failed to meet their traditional expectations.

"Man up!"
"Stop living at home!"
"Get a job!"

To which apathetic men ask "why," further raising the ire of women.

The third thing is the media.  Whether that's the old time girl magazines of yore (like Cosmo, Teen, Vogue, etc.) or their modern day equivalents or Hollywood or Madison Avenue or the music industry, all of American (and I would argue western) media has is no uncertain terms LIED to women about what they're entitled to and should expect from men.  All women of all political stripes are absolutely convinced they are not only entitled to a perfect man, but their Disney prince is just around the corner.  

Further reinforcing this is the recent phenomenon of social media and online dating, where women are now plied with an infinite amount of digital (though not real world) attention falsely validating their delusional expectations.  Podcasts such as Fresh and Fit and Kevin Samuels have made a mint prostrating delusional women making fools of themselves expecting a man who is 6 feet tall and makes $250,000 a year to date her single mom, debt-ridden, 38 year old ass.  And even "The Female Delusion Calculator" was made to statistically lampoon women about their expectations not being in line with reality.

But that is the quickest route and definition of misery - the difference between expectations and reality.  And with the media inflating women's expectations FAAAAAR beyond what reality can deliver, women are once again going to get INCREDIBLY pissed when 

• yet another man sleeps with her, but doesn't commit because he's got a ton of other women
• some "loser plumber" asks her out thinking he's somehow at her level when she has a masters degree and she's insulted
  
• or some 5'10" asshole who doesn't make 6 figures asks her out at a coffee shop
  

The final thing is feminism.  And once again my non-leftist female friends are not responsible for this, but feminism has simply thrown gasoline on this already raging fire.  Dividing and pitting men against women has long been an aim of feminists and feminism going back to at least the 60's and nobody is happier because of it.  But for any young woman looking for a whipping boy or a villain to blame her failing love life on, feminism has the largest and most comprehensive menu of reasons and rationales. 

If anything, I'm incredibly impressed with the logical theorems feminism uses to ignore male nature and abdicate any responsibility women would have in a relationship with the opposite sex.  They're actually incredibly crafty and intricate.  But neither here nor there, because of feminism's "us vs. them" mentality, this just further cements the adversarial relationship women have with men, and in many women's minds paint men as the enemy.  

You take these four things combined and it is actually quite understandable why women dislike, even hate men.  And in that context, I can see why women on my presumed ideological side would make the statements they did.  I don't agree with those statements, I can just see why they made them.

From Price to Punishment

I often receive criticism for saying that all relationships between men and women are transactional, meaning prostitution.  And perhaps I'm too literal of an economist as ALL transactions are prostitutional.  Everyone's a whore, everyone's a John.  I pay for a sandwich, the sandwich maker makes me a sandwich.  I'm the John, the sandwich maker is the whore.

But just as there's no shame in transacting money for a sandwich, I would also say there's no shame in transacting resources for sex because....(everyone put on their big girl panties and sit down, because things are about to get real y'all)

 that's what humans have been doing since time immemorial.

Yes, traditionally this transaction was sanitized under the sanctity of marriage, the guise of love, the approval of religion, with the (logical, obvious, and moral) economic purpose of supporting a family.  BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT, the only reason the husband was there, let alone forked over a penny of support, was so he could fuck his wife.  And you know something, there's nothing wrong with that.

Today, however, much like many other things, 2 million years of human tradition still spill over into our new and improved society.  And though officially (and in reality) women do not need men, they still out of genetics, tradition, or even unconscious instinct demand some kind of price be paid for their presence.  

Men still generally pay for the date.  The lion's share of webcam income is from men to women.  Sugar daddy sites exist.  A VERY common theme I see from traditional/conservative gals is that they will NOT accept a coffee date, but demand an "investment" of at least dinner.  Some guys I know even have women asking them to pay for their rent.  And as an economist what I absolutely CHERISH is how prostitution is OK if you barter it through marriage (meaning you pay for a house, a car, a woman's student loans, only to get divorced, pay half and then alimony)

that's OK.

But the second you pay cash for a call girl

that's shameful and you should go to jail!

Regardless, the larger point is women still demand men pay some kind of price to interact with them, whether that's as something as simple as a date or half your worldly asset for something complex as marriage/divorce.  And there is no shame in that as that's how it's genetically been for all of human history.  But what concerns me is not that men have to pay a price to be with women, but in today's current environment where women are so angry with men, even hostile, any misleading, misrepresenting, violation, infraction or flaw, no matter how major or minor is not met with a mere price, but punishment.  And now we have moved into Black Widow territory.

I Didn't Bat 1.000

Men today have to understand the precarious situation they're in.  This is not the 1950's where Suzie Q was upset you didn't pick her up for the sock hop and instead saw you at the soda fountain with Peggy Lee, and then got pouty.  Women today for the four reasons explained before are PISSED off at men.  You throw in the victimhood ideology of feminism and they're blaming everything on you.  So what would have been considered "normal-though-regrettable" behavior of men in the past, is viewed not only as a real crime against them, but one deserving of punishment.

For example, I broke up with two girls and curiously had my tires slashed shortly after breaking up with both of them.

I was punched in the face one time because I told a girl I wouldn't sleep with her again.

And (like many of you) I was subjected to temper tantrums of (presumably) full-grown adult women who threatened suicide.  Once because I didn't offer to buy a girl a soda and the other because I honestly can't remember the reason.

But that's getting off easy.  And having your tires slashed because you dared to dump a girl was par for course for men back in the 70's-90's.  Today, it is much, much worse.

The spate of false rape accusations on college campuses several years back was largely because some guys had sex with some girls, but no longer wished to continue to date them. I know several men who (stupidly) asked women out at work which landed them in the HR department.  If you remember, the comedian Aziz Ansari almost lost his career because he was simply guilty of being nerdy and awkward on a date once.  And then there's the meetoo movement that, while it has its legitimate complainants, there are many more using it as a weapon of vengeance.

But what's more worrying is the measures society is taking to retroactively incriminate men of social crimes.  There's a constant push to redefine what sexual assault and rape is.  There is also a push to constantly redefine what consent means.  And regardless of what you think about Brett Kavanaugh or Bill Cosby, it shows people are willing to go back many decades to get their pound of flesh.  And here's the problem - neither you nor I nor any other guy batted a thousand, and certainly not under the new and increasingly scrutinizing standards.

Admittedly, I've never drugged a girl before or sexually assaulted anyone.  But I have banged drunk chicks.  I've made drunken and inappropriate advances to women.  I tried to kiss a girl at a party once and got the cheek.  I've also got a ton of cheeks on door stoops dropping girls off on first dates.  And nearly every girl I dated I had no intention to committing to.

So under the forever-moving legal goal posts, will I be accused-and-found-guilty of:

rape?
sexual harassment?
sexual assault?

And heaven help my latino friends who were always coping feels on the salsa dance floors of the 00's!  Are we going to send an army of cops after them too?

And if we're going to be true equals does this mean I should hunt down the drunken old grandma lady who grabbed my junk during a dance class once 10 years ago?  What about the handful of girls who got a handful of my ass on the dance floor just the same?  Should we shoot them now or wait till we home?

Admittedly, I'm not a fan of modern day western women, but I don't hate them.  And certainly not enough to wage a nazi-esque witch hunt after them.

Reason or React with the Black Widow

The sad fact is men will increasingly have to approach an increasing percentage of women as a black widow spider.  You don't know who she is.  You don't know her conditioning, her opinions, or experiences with men.  You don't know whether she views you as a potential love of her life and source of happiness, or oppressor and adversary who must be punished.  And whereas I'd like nothing more than to have a bit of good news or a bit of evidence that women like men, I won't lie - seeing this desire to tax, charge, and ultimately punish men from conservative (or at least non-leftist women) is really disheartening.  Because if this is what girls "on our team" think, just what the heck do your rank and file women of today think of men?

Alas, men have two choices when it comes to interacting with women.  You can try to reason with them or react.  

Many of you will want to reason with them simply because you like them!  You'll try to get them to realize you are not the enemy, that just because a guy lies about his income or age doesn't mean he should go to jail, and no, the national guard should not be called if a man puts his hand on your ass on the dance floor.  But not only do I think such reasoning and discussion will fall on deaf ears, it puts the outcome outside of your control and into the hands of women.  And sadly I think women are just too ideologically compromised towards punishing men.

This leaves reacting which is the only thing you can do.  In the past millions of women met their husbands at work, now you have to react to the fact you could lose your job asking out Suzie in accounting.  You could take that girl home and have a great night of sex, perhaps convincing the girl and yourself you're made for each other, but you bought her two drinks and and you don't like jail.  You could ask that girl out in your sociology class, but according to campus rules that might be harassment and you'd get kicked out of school.  And you would've liked to get married, but you're going to have to make it very clear she needs to have her own residence and you guys can date, but never commit nor share a web.

It was one thing when the worst that would happen is you'd get your tires slashed by a woman scorned.  But today with jail time, a ruined career, a criminal record, and the ruined life that comes with it, we're just going to have to admit that relations are so bad between men and women we have devolved into black widow spiders.

____________________________________

Check out the book below