Wednesday, May 30, 2012
God Hates Communists
This will make your day if you're having a bad one. It will also make your day if you're having a good one. It will just plain make your day if you work for a living, love America and freedom, insist only citizens should vote and in general and hate parasites.
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
The Perfect Graduation Gift
Graduation is coming up. Lots of little kinder will be graduating and off to bigger and better things. Matter of fact many of you probably have little kinder graduating or even nieces, nephews or neighborhood kids you've seen grow up over the years. Regardless, the question is what do you get them for a graduation gift? Very simple. "Worthless."
My regular readers already know what Worthless is about, but for those of you unfamiliar with the book it is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT BOOK high school and college-age kids can read. It IS the perfect graduation gift and I do not say that out of hyperbole or salesmanship. I say it because I believe it's true. "Worthless" is the perfect graduation gift.
The reason why is very simple. Millions of kids make a huge and life-destroying decision every year - they major in a worthless subject. Take your emotions or feelings out of it. In today's economy, we really cannot afford the luxury of sparing their feelings and lying to them, saying,
"Hey kid, follow your heart and the money will follow. You're going to be a great French Art History major!"
as we nervously put on a fake smile hiding our concern.
The amount of money they (or you) are going to spend on tuition, not to mention the sheer volume of their youth they will spend pursuing a degree, can NOT be wasted simply because nobody had the courage to tell the kids the truth about economics and the realities of the labor market.
But you don't have to. The book will do it for it you.
"Worthless" explains first and foremost to the reader that the reason somebody got them this book is because that person really cares about them. And while it may not be what they want to hear, they will end up appreciating it in the future. "Worthless" also goes into detail and explains in clear, understandable language the economics behind the labor market, showing the reader how and why some degrees are worthwhile and others are literally worthless.
The book is $13 in paperback and only $5 on Kindle. A miniscule fraction of the tuition and time costs of earning a four year degree. Because of its potential to prevent kids from making a VERY costly mistake, the cheap price practically compels you to at least consider it.
So do a graduate you care about a huge favor. Buy them "Worthless" for a graduation gift. And if you're so kind, do me a favor and simply spread the word by sending people this post.
My regular readers already know what Worthless is about, but for those of you unfamiliar with the book it is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT BOOK high school and college-age kids can read. It IS the perfect graduation gift and I do not say that out of hyperbole or salesmanship. I say it because I believe it's true. "Worthless" is the perfect graduation gift.
The reason why is very simple. Millions of kids make a huge and life-destroying decision every year - they major in a worthless subject. Take your emotions or feelings out of it. In today's economy, we really cannot afford the luxury of sparing their feelings and lying to them, saying,
"Hey kid, follow your heart and the money will follow. You're going to be a great French Art History major!"
as we nervously put on a fake smile hiding our concern.
The amount of money they (or you) are going to spend on tuition, not to mention the sheer volume of their youth they will spend pursuing a degree, can NOT be wasted simply because nobody had the courage to tell the kids the truth about economics and the realities of the labor market.
But you don't have to. The book will do it for it you.
"Worthless" explains first and foremost to the reader that the reason somebody got them this book is because that person really cares about them. And while it may not be what they want to hear, they will end up appreciating it in the future. "Worthless" also goes into detail and explains in clear, understandable language the economics behind the labor market, showing the reader how and why some degrees are worthwhile and others are literally worthless.
The book is $13 in paperback and only $5 on Kindle. A miniscule fraction of the tuition and time costs of earning a four year degree. Because of its potential to prevent kids from making a VERY costly mistake, the cheap price practically compels you to at least consider it.
So do a graduate you care about a huge favor. Buy them "Worthless" for a graduation gift. And if you're so kind, do me a favor and simply spread the word by sending people this post.
Why Saint Frick Doesn't Pay Minneapolis Property Taxes Anymore
“The kids eat a lot of junk already, and they get it at home,” said Nakisha Tyus, a mother of two. “If kids can get a better meal at the park, who better to give it to them then the city.”
Monday, May 28, 2012
But I'm Just an Idiot
Read this.
Then read this.
But whatever you do, don't listen to me. No, I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm an idiot and on top of it, I have no gray hair. Me and the likes of me have not the ability or the youthful idealism and vision to revolutionize economies to the point our little debt problems would be squashed mercilessly into oblivion by massive economic growth. And we wouldn't want that. So whatever you do, don't listen to me and I hope you like cheap nursing homes because the status quo is your god.
Then read this.
But whatever you do, don't listen to me. No, I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm an idiot and on top of it, I have no gray hair. Me and the likes of me have not the ability or the youthful idealism and vision to revolutionize economies to the point our little debt problems would be squashed mercilessly into oblivion by massive economic growth. And we wouldn't want that. So whatever you do, don't listen to me and I hope you like cheap nursing homes because the status quo is your god.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Enjoy the Decline
Hey hey hey. You watch it with the plagiarism young man!
Regardless, you will visit. You will obey. You will conform. Compliance is not optional. Conformance is mandatory.
Regardless, you will visit. You will obey. You will conform. Compliance is not optional. Conformance is mandatory.
Friday, May 25, 2012
Press the Attack Forward, Men
Short story, then I'll get back to having fun.
I'm at a country bar right now. Place is packed. "Beatrice" who is 89 years old comes up and asks me to dance,
not once,
not twice
but thrice
She is happy as all hell to be dancing.
I find out she's was a WWII vet, part of the women's Air Corps. Worked on B-25's or B-19's, I can't remember which, the music was loud. Grin ear to ear when we're dancing.
Then I ask a 24 year old if she wants to dance. She says yes, fights me every inch of the way while I'm trying to lead, and then when I want to move across the floor (2 stepping) she says, "no, I don't want to go out there!" and she walks off the floor telling me to ask her friend to dance in the middle of the bleeping song.
Not terribly surprised, I return to my laptop, but then, you know me. Me and my "cynical theories" about modern day women compared to their older WWII idealistic counterparts. Certainly nothing there but spurious anecdotal evidence.
Regardless, I just had to know.
So I walk up to the 24 year old and I ask her what she does for a living.
Anybody want to guess?
Engineer? Pilot? Accountant? Surgeon? Military?
Nope!
"Elementary school teacher."
Heh heh.
Continue the attack men, continue that bleeping attack until they all start to act and behave like true women, just like Beatrice. I'll take an 89 year old WWII vet over a overpaid baby sitter any day, because that is a REAL woman. Not some naive ditz that couldn't handle algebra 2 and found commensurate taxpayer-paid employment.
Post post Lieutenants! Beatrice let me get a picture!
I'm at a country bar right now. Place is packed. "Beatrice" who is 89 years old comes up and asks me to dance,
not once,
not twice
but thrice
She is happy as all hell to be dancing.
I find out she's was a WWII vet, part of the women's Air Corps. Worked on B-25's or B-19's, I can't remember which, the music was loud. Grin ear to ear when we're dancing.
Then I ask a 24 year old if she wants to dance. She says yes, fights me every inch of the way while I'm trying to lead, and then when I want to move across the floor (2 stepping) she says, "no, I don't want to go out there!" and she walks off the floor telling me to ask her friend to dance in the middle of the bleeping song.
Not terribly surprised, I return to my laptop, but then, you know me. Me and my "cynical theories" about modern day women compared to their older WWII idealistic counterparts. Certainly nothing there but spurious anecdotal evidence.
Regardless, I just had to know.
So I walk up to the 24 year old and I ask her what she does for a living.
Anybody want to guess?
Engineer? Pilot? Accountant? Surgeon? Military?
Nope!
"Elementary school teacher."
Heh heh.
Continue the attack men, continue that bleeping attack until they all start to act and behave like true women, just like Beatrice. I'll take an 89 year old WWII vet over a overpaid baby sitter any day, because that is a REAL woman. Not some naive ditz that couldn't handle algebra 2 and found commensurate taxpayer-paid employment.
Post post Lieutenants! Beatrice let me get a picture!
Yes, I am That Good
The true purpose of Worthless however is not just to entertain
and embolden the faithful, to bestow strength and courage on those on
our own side. Clarey conceived and wrote the book with the goal of it
being used to deprogram teenagers and their parents, and save them from
the conventional wisdom that education, education and still more
education is the key to success. And this is where the book grows from
more than just a fun and entertaining rip on one of our society’s great
sacred cows, and becomes an incredibly effective tool you can use to
spare your friends and relatives the financial, intellectual and
spiritual costs of worthless education.
you can and WILL read more here.
you can and WILL read more here.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
Day Bang by Roosh V
Roosh V, if you know him, is no shrinking violet. Certainly part of the pick up segment of the Manosphere, which thusly means he curses, uses vulgarity and speaks like 1/2 the population does every day. Sadly it is his vulgarity and cursing people focus on instead of the substance of what he writes when they start forming opinions about him.
Does he speak the truth about the realities between men and women?
Yes.
Does he speak the truth when theorizing about male and female sexuality?
Yes
But are these truths uncomfortable (contradictory as truths being uncomfortable is)?
Yes.
And therefore he is an evil misogynist that must be silenced and black listed from society.
Now I knew this going into buying "Day Bang." I was expecting cursing, swearing and the use of words and terms even I find disagreeable, but actually, none of that materialized. Matter of fact what did materialize was a well thought out book deserving of mention and recommendation that is neither vulgar or insulting, but rather quite helpful for both sexes.
I bought "Day Bang" for several reasons. One, since I am already spoken for, it was the one book out of his series of books that piqued my interest the most. Night game, regular game, sure, been there, done that, learned it empirically. But how to pick up chicks during the day, now that's different. Two, I wanted to see if what I learned the hard way correlated with what a professional recommended. And three, well, he linked to my book and was kind enough to write a review, so you all better go and buy his book if this here review interests you.
First you must understand that this is not so much a novel or a book as much as it is a how-to manual. I was at first originally peeved with what seemed to be the same example recited over and over again. However, it dawned on me this wasn't The Grapes of Wrath. This was a guide for men, of all ages, how to approach women during the day. The examples were repetitive on purpose, but varied to
1. re-iterate the basic principles of approaching
2. give you multiple approaches and variations to adapt to different environments and situations.
The more I read, the more I realized Roosh has indeed thought these things through AND tested them multiple times AND in different environments so that readers would have an effective tool useable in many situations.
Second, to my surprise, the book had little to no vulgarity, let alone sexuality about it. It WAS a very serious, borderline scientific book. If you were expecting filth and foul and flarn and filth, you will be let down. I think there are MAYBE 4 vulgarities in the entire book. Additionally, he never mentions sex. It is only to get the girl on the date, which may or may not lead to sex. If anything it is a truly innocent book in that key to the entire strategy is having the mindset of an old, innocent man, approaching a young lady for help. He may have one thing on his mind, but it isn't in the gutter and it certainly wasn't obvious in the book.
Third, he addresses and emphasizes the limitations of the scientific method. He doesn't claim this is a silver bullet that will get a 100% success rate. He admits the limitations and the requirements of day game AND also states up front it takes effort and investment. You CAN'T just approach one girl per week. You have to approach at least 3 girls a day. You AREN'T going to get 90% of the girls to throw their numbers at you, at BEST it will be 40% with tight game. You SHOULD be natural, never rehearse your lines or force a pre-scripted conversation, but still run through a couple trial runs at home to get used to general flow and general bullet points you may want to bring up. If there is any "complaint" I have about the book, it's the FACT that you do have to put a lot of effort into this. MGTOW and aging alphas may be reminded of the sheer time cost and investment required to chase the ladies.
As I said before I am already spoken for and this book is not for those of you who upped your game and are having success, nor is it for "retirees" from game who decided to buy a motorcycle and go. But it IS a MUST for young men or boys who are about to enter the fray of dating, if for any other reason day approaches are easier and cheaper than night approaches. You needn't waste your time or money on covers, booze, drinks, parking, etc. You just go about the course of your regular day and the opportunities are bountiful and numerous.
In short, like many things in the Manosphere, "I wish I had this when I was younger." But thankfully there are a lot of young men and boys out there that should be reading this right next to their freshman comp book. Additionally, if you're a veteran, you might as well pick it up to see how your game compared, not to mention for the intellectual interest it provides for us old farts. I had many outright guffaws as many as "aha, I see said the blind man" moments with this book.
Regardless, buy Day Bang!
Also available in Kindle.
Does he speak the truth about the realities between men and women?
Yes.
Does he speak the truth when theorizing about male and female sexuality?
Yes
But are these truths uncomfortable (contradictory as truths being uncomfortable is)?
Yes.
And therefore he is an evil misogynist that must be silenced and black listed from society.
Now I knew this going into buying "Day Bang." I was expecting cursing, swearing and the use of words and terms even I find disagreeable, but actually, none of that materialized. Matter of fact what did materialize was a well thought out book deserving of mention and recommendation that is neither vulgar or insulting, but rather quite helpful for both sexes.
I bought "Day Bang" for several reasons. One, since I am already spoken for, it was the one book out of his series of books that piqued my interest the most. Night game, regular game, sure, been there, done that, learned it empirically. But how to pick up chicks during the day, now that's different. Two, I wanted to see if what I learned the hard way correlated with what a professional recommended. And three, well, he linked to my book and was kind enough to write a review, so you all better go and buy his book if this here review interests you.
First you must understand that this is not so much a novel or a book as much as it is a how-to manual. I was at first originally peeved with what seemed to be the same example recited over and over again. However, it dawned on me this wasn't The Grapes of Wrath. This was a guide for men, of all ages, how to approach women during the day. The examples were repetitive on purpose, but varied to
1. re-iterate the basic principles of approaching
2. give you multiple approaches and variations to adapt to different environments and situations.
The more I read, the more I realized Roosh has indeed thought these things through AND tested them multiple times AND in different environments so that readers would have an effective tool useable in many situations.
Second, to my surprise, the book had little to no vulgarity, let alone sexuality about it. It WAS a very serious, borderline scientific book. If you were expecting filth and foul and flarn and filth, you will be let down. I think there are MAYBE 4 vulgarities in the entire book. Additionally, he never mentions sex. It is only to get the girl on the date, which may or may not lead to sex. If anything it is a truly innocent book in that key to the entire strategy is having the mindset of an old, innocent man, approaching a young lady for help. He may have one thing on his mind, but it isn't in the gutter and it certainly wasn't obvious in the book.
Third, he addresses and emphasizes the limitations of the scientific method. He doesn't claim this is a silver bullet that will get a 100% success rate. He admits the limitations and the requirements of day game AND also states up front it takes effort and investment. You CAN'T just approach one girl per week. You have to approach at least 3 girls a day. You AREN'T going to get 90% of the girls to throw their numbers at you, at BEST it will be 40% with tight game. You SHOULD be natural, never rehearse your lines or force a pre-scripted conversation, but still run through a couple trial runs at home to get used to general flow and general bullet points you may want to bring up. If there is any "complaint" I have about the book, it's the FACT that you do have to put a lot of effort into this. MGTOW and aging alphas may be reminded of the sheer time cost and investment required to chase the ladies.
As I said before I am already spoken for and this book is not for those of you who upped your game and are having success, nor is it for "retirees" from game who decided to buy a motorcycle and go. But it IS a MUST for young men or boys who are about to enter the fray of dating, if for any other reason day approaches are easier and cheaper than night approaches. You needn't waste your time or money on covers, booze, drinks, parking, etc. You just go about the course of your regular day and the opportunities are bountiful and numerous.
In short, like many things in the Manosphere, "I wish I had this when I was younger." But thankfully there are a lot of young men and boys out there that should be reading this right next to their freshman comp book. Additionally, if you're a veteran, you might as well pick it up to see how your game compared, not to mention for the intellectual interest it provides for us old farts. I had many outright guffaws as many as "aha, I see said the blind man" moments with this book.
Regardless, buy Day Bang!
Also available in Kindle.
The Alcoholism, Anger, Temper Excuse
The Manosphere, if you could categorize it, falls ever so generally into three categories;
Pick up community
Men's rights
Theory/Political Discussion
All of which is fine and dandy, but if and when I write about Manosphere issues, it is usually more for the "Boyosphere" than anything else. The reason why is that while men (our age and older) have used the Manosphere to compare notes across the internet to confirm that indeed something insidious, malicious and evil HAS BEEN perpetrated against us, understand that does nothing to address the poor boys of the FUTURE that WILL BE sent through the same meat grinder.
And therefore a plurality of my posts tend to be targeted more towards young boys so that there is at least something positive that comes out of this psy-ops war.
Today, though, I want to address something that no doubt you, me, and every other guy out there has gone through (thereby guaranteeing young boys coming onto the line are going to suffer the same) and that is the "Alcoholism, Anger, Temper Excuse" or "AATE."
Like many things, it took retrospect and hindsight to realize what was going on, but when you put the pieces of the puzzle together you realized a lot of women, if they don't want to go out with you any more, won't have the spine or gall to come outright and say,
"I don't think we should date anymore, I'm breaking up with you."
Instead they do something much worse. They claim you have a problem or have somehow changed, and use that as the excuse to have a time out or fully break up.
For example, all three of the excuses - temper, anger and alcoholism - have been used on me by multiple girls in the past.
One girl claimed I had anger issues and she couldn't deal with such a "volatile" person. Active? Yes. Bombastic? Yes. But was I "angry?" No. Or at least I didn't think so. Of course I was young and stupid, so I thought, "Wow, maybe I'm angry and I just don't know it. Maybe I'm unaware of how I'm scaring people or insulting them." All in vain, misleading and quite damaging because I was trying to solve a problem I didn't have.
Another claimed I had a "temper." I didn't have a temper. I was having a good ole time dating this gal. If anything I was relaxed and drunk half the time and never blew up once. It was so obvious I didn't have a temper, even I knew this was some kind of ruse or BS. When she broke up with me, it wasn't a surprise.
And finally, the "alcoholism" excuse. Ah yes, the favorite among naive goodie two shoes girls who think if you have two drinks in a night you are a full blown, raging alcoholic, hell bent on driving drunk and training vigorously to beat your future wife. Many-a-Christian girls used this one when they tried vainly to convince you to "find Jesus," but upon not being able to provide any conclusive, empirical proof Christianity is THE ONE TRUE religion, out they whip the "you're a raging alcoholic" excuse. Never mind if you are drunk you're more relaxed and happy and the farthest away you'd ever be from "raging." Nope, she knew this one friend of her's cousin whose uncle dated this woman whose sister had a father who got drunk and treated her mom mean one time back in the 70's. Translation - you are 100% guaranteed to beat me if we ever get married AND the children too!
Naturally none of these excuses stand up to logic, but that's the whole point. They're excuses, not reality. The damage AATE causes young boys is not that a girl wants to break up with you and thus resorts to BS excuses to rationalize it, but it misleads you into thinking you have problems you really don't have and thus you try to change those problems. It's just as bad as having problems you DO have and you DON'T try to change them. Neither are based in reality and only make you a worse person.
So boys, look out for the AATE excuses. And when delivered, just accept the girl doesn't want to date you, move on, and be happy someone so duplicitous is taking herself out of your life.
Pick up community
Men's rights
Theory/Political Discussion
All of which is fine and dandy, but if and when I write about Manosphere issues, it is usually more for the "Boyosphere" than anything else. The reason why is that while men (our age and older) have used the Manosphere to compare notes across the internet to confirm that indeed something insidious, malicious and evil HAS BEEN perpetrated against us, understand that does nothing to address the poor boys of the FUTURE that WILL BE sent through the same meat grinder.
And therefore a plurality of my posts tend to be targeted more towards young boys so that there is at least something positive that comes out of this psy-ops war.
Today, though, I want to address something that no doubt you, me, and every other guy out there has gone through (thereby guaranteeing young boys coming onto the line are going to suffer the same) and that is the "Alcoholism, Anger, Temper Excuse" or "AATE."
Like many things, it took retrospect and hindsight to realize what was going on, but when you put the pieces of the puzzle together you realized a lot of women, if they don't want to go out with you any more, won't have the spine or gall to come outright and say,
"I don't think we should date anymore, I'm breaking up with you."
Instead they do something much worse. They claim you have a problem or have somehow changed, and use that as the excuse to have a time out or fully break up.
For example, all three of the excuses - temper, anger and alcoholism - have been used on me by multiple girls in the past.
One girl claimed I had anger issues and she couldn't deal with such a "volatile" person. Active? Yes. Bombastic? Yes. But was I "angry?" No. Or at least I didn't think so. Of course I was young and stupid, so I thought, "Wow, maybe I'm angry and I just don't know it. Maybe I'm unaware of how I'm scaring people or insulting them." All in vain, misleading and quite damaging because I was trying to solve a problem I didn't have.
Another claimed I had a "temper." I didn't have a temper. I was having a good ole time dating this gal. If anything I was relaxed and drunk half the time and never blew up once. It was so obvious I didn't have a temper, even I knew this was some kind of ruse or BS. When she broke up with me, it wasn't a surprise.
And finally, the "alcoholism" excuse. Ah yes, the favorite among naive goodie two shoes girls who think if you have two drinks in a night you are a full blown, raging alcoholic, hell bent on driving drunk and training vigorously to beat your future wife. Many-a-Christian girls used this one when they tried vainly to convince you to "find Jesus," but upon not being able to provide any conclusive, empirical proof Christianity is THE ONE TRUE religion, out they whip the "you're a raging alcoholic" excuse. Never mind if you are drunk you're more relaxed and happy and the farthest away you'd ever be from "raging." Nope, she knew this one friend of her's cousin whose uncle dated this woman whose sister had a father who got drunk and treated her mom mean one time back in the 70's. Translation - you are 100% guaranteed to beat me if we ever get married AND the children too!
Naturally none of these excuses stand up to logic, but that's the whole point. They're excuses, not reality. The damage AATE causes young boys is not that a girl wants to break up with you and thus resorts to BS excuses to rationalize it, but it misleads you into thinking you have problems you really don't have and thus you try to change those problems. It's just as bad as having problems you DO have and you DON'T try to change them. Neither are based in reality and only make you a worse person.
So boys, look out for the AATE excuses. And when delivered, just accept the girl doesn't want to date you, move on, and be happy someone so duplicitous is taking herself out of your life.
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Enjoying the Decline!
Pictures from my weekend trip to Buffalo, WY. I also made a friend along the way.
I call him "Pookey" the friendly roadside snake.
Monday, May 21, 2012
Updating the Factors of Production
If you recall high school economics or college freshman economics (both were the same, colleges just made you pay extra to re-learn what you did in high school) there were "The Factors of Production."
These factors were essentially the ingredients you needed in order for a business or an individual to "produce" something. There were originally three of them:
Land - you can produce nothing without at minimum some kind of office space.
Labor - the machines will not only not take over the world, they'll just sit there unless a human spends his or her time running them
Capital - Nobody is doing nothing until they get paid. And that includes the people who produce the tools and machines you'll need to get started.
A fourth one was entered as they realized even with the above three, nothing would get produced. You needed a leader. An innovator. A man with the plan.
The entrepreneur.
Since there it was commonly accepted that there are three original, but most likely four real factors of production.
However, I would like to tender a fifth.
I'm doing this not to make things more complicated or to somehow be enshrined in the Economics Hall of Fame, but because our economy today practically proves there is a fifth and final factor of production that is required to produce, but is not accounted for in the current list. That fifth component is:
A future.
Some would call it "political" or "economic certainty." I'm calling it a future simply because if there is no hope an economy will be stable, MORE SO that you will be able to keep the majority of your gains, then you can have;
Land
Labor
Capital
and an entrepreneur raring to go
nobody's producing nuthin' if (oh, I don't know)
the government is racking up debts that literally call into question the integrity and viability of the future economy
the government is spending so much that it's a guarantee tax rates will go through the roof in the future
the people are so anti-business, anti-capitalism, anti-rich, anti-success that you're afraid they'll simply vote to take the fruits of your hard labor away.
I could go into more detail, but the point is simple enough. You see it not just in the economy (companies are sitting on trillions in capital, people are DESPERATE for jobs, enterprenuers can't wait to jump ship and move to Singapore...ooops, I mean...start businesses), but in the housing market (nobody new entrants in the market want to buy....well nobody can AFFORD to buy), and the stock market (the same).
It won't be until there are guarantees enshrined via constitutional amendments that the government cannot confiscate/tax beyond a certain level and that private individuals property and income rights are maintained, that you will get people to start investing in the US again. And so you can go ahead and come up with all the Keynesian stimulus you want. The vast majority of the United States' economic strength will remain dormant, or just outright afraid.
Enjoy the decline!
These factors were essentially the ingredients you needed in order for a business or an individual to "produce" something. There were originally three of them:
Land - you can produce nothing without at minimum some kind of office space.
Labor - the machines will not only not take over the world, they'll just sit there unless a human spends his or her time running them
Capital - Nobody is doing nothing until they get paid. And that includes the people who produce the tools and machines you'll need to get started.
A fourth one was entered as they realized even with the above three, nothing would get produced. You needed a leader. An innovator. A man with the plan.
The entrepreneur.
Since there it was commonly accepted that there are three original, but most likely four real factors of production.
However, I would like to tender a fifth.
I'm doing this not to make things more complicated or to somehow be enshrined in the Economics Hall of Fame, but because our economy today practically proves there is a fifth and final factor of production that is required to produce, but is not accounted for in the current list. That fifth component is:
A future.
Some would call it "political" or "economic certainty." I'm calling it a future simply because if there is no hope an economy will be stable, MORE SO that you will be able to keep the majority of your gains, then you can have;
Land
Labor
Capital
and an entrepreneur raring to go
nobody's producing nuthin' if (oh, I don't know)
the government is racking up debts that literally call into question the integrity and viability of the future economy
the government is spending so much that it's a guarantee tax rates will go through the roof in the future
the people are so anti-business, anti-capitalism, anti-rich, anti-success that you're afraid they'll simply vote to take the fruits of your hard labor away.
I could go into more detail, but the point is simple enough. You see it not just in the economy (companies are sitting on trillions in capital, people are DESPERATE for jobs, enterprenuers can't wait to jump ship and move to Singapore...ooops, I mean...start businesses), but in the housing market (nobody new entrants in the market want to buy....well nobody can AFFORD to buy), and the stock market (the same).
It won't be until there are guarantees enshrined via constitutional amendments that the government cannot confiscate/tax beyond a certain level and that private individuals property and income rights are maintained, that you will get people to start investing in the US again. And so you can go ahead and come up with all the Keynesian stimulus you want. The vast majority of the United States' economic strength will remain dormant, or just outright afraid.
Enjoy the decline!
Sunday, May 20, 2012
But Women Are Equal Now
Badger misses the fast ball across the plate, but I forgive him. The correct response to this absurdity that "men don't pick up on our signals" is....
"Men and women are equal now. Start acting like a man and approach us 50% of the time and express clear and obvious interest."
**"the absurdity of feminism" sigh**
OK, time for the lesson that the leaders of the 70's failed to tell you morons about choosing this idiotic path the country has obviously decided to go down:
Ahem....
You lovely ladies of the western world do not get to have it both ways. You wanted to be treated like men, well little ladies, you got it. Start "manning up," step up to the plate and start asking men out point blank. You no longer get the excuse "well men should just be the aggressors" or "WELL I SENT HIM OBVIOUS SIGNALS!!! I LOOKED AT HIM!!!!."
So sorry, that won't do. We're now going to pull up our lawn chairs, break them out, light up cigars, treat you like men and wait for you to approach. Matter of fact, we have a lot of time to make up for when the men were oppressing you women. Out of respect and retroactive apologies for our forefathers' evil oppressive behavior, we should just let you do all the approaching and asking for AT LEAST the next 50 years as reparations for our misogynistic behavior over the centuries.
But, I'm sorry.
You know what.
That just isn't enough.
No. I'm with you sisters!!!
We really oppressed you.
I mean we REALLY oppressed you.
And for that I am TRULY sorry.
So to make it up to you, we'll even do you the favor of "womaning up." And by that I mean practicing our shooting down skills, our mockery laughter and our "say yes, but then cancel at the last moment" skills so you get the full male treatment. I don't know how to flake, but I'm going to figure it out. Trust me, you'll like it, because that's what you've always wanted, right? To be treated as equals? To be treated like men? I'm with you sista, I am going to make DAMN SURE all you girls get what you deserve and are entitled to, and that is to be treated as GENUINE equals.
Heh heh.
I am so going to enjoy this decline.
"Men and women are equal now. Start acting like a man and approach us 50% of the time and express clear and obvious interest."
**"the absurdity of feminism" sigh**
OK, time for the lesson that the leaders of the 70's failed to tell you morons about choosing this idiotic path the country has obviously decided to go down:
Ahem....
You lovely ladies of the western world do not get to have it both ways. You wanted to be treated like men, well little ladies, you got it. Start "manning up," step up to the plate and start asking men out point blank. You no longer get the excuse "well men should just be the aggressors" or "WELL I SENT HIM OBVIOUS SIGNALS!!! I LOOKED AT HIM!!!!."
So sorry, that won't do. We're now going to pull up our lawn chairs, break them out, light up cigars, treat you like men and wait for you to approach. Matter of fact, we have a lot of time to make up for when the men were oppressing you women. Out of respect and retroactive apologies for our forefathers' evil oppressive behavior, we should just let you do all the approaching and asking for AT LEAST the next 50 years as reparations for our misogynistic behavior over the centuries.
But, I'm sorry.
You know what.
That just isn't enough.
No. I'm with you sisters!!!
We really oppressed you.
I mean we REALLY oppressed you.
And for that I am TRULY sorry.
So to make it up to you, we'll even do you the favor of "womaning up." And by that I mean practicing our shooting down skills, our mockery laughter and our "say yes, but then cancel at the last moment" skills so you get the full male treatment. I don't know how to flake, but I'm going to figure it out. Trust me, you'll like it, because that's what you've always wanted, right? To be treated as equals? To be treated like men? I'm with you sista, I am going to make DAMN SURE all you girls get what you deserve and are entitled to, and that is to be treated as GENUINE equals.
Heh heh.
I am so going to enjoy this decline.
The Sexual Attractiveness of Liberal "Men"
I have a long and lengthy theory about the socio-sexual-psychological-etc. of liberal men.
But the very short version is they're not attractive.
But the very short version is they're not attractive.
Job Creation Bush vs. Obama - Update
Time to update the data as a reader pointed out a story to me about job creation under democrats and republicans.
Turns out from last we spoke, Obama and Bush are still more or less neck and neck in terms of job creation at this point in their presidencies. At my last post Bush had lost 100k more jobs than Obama at this time, now he is only 40k down (one could also make the point Census workers should be taken out of this and close the gap further, but, eh). Regardless, you'll note in the chart, just like Bush's first term, it's put up or shut up time for the Obama administration. Both at this point in time during their first terms had suffered lack luster economic growth and a lack of a booming economic recovery that typically follows recessions. Bush pulled through (though I don't believe it is a president who can create jobs and this whole discussion is moot), while Obama's growth has started to trend below Bush's.
The only additional thing I will point out is that while both presidents are essentially neck and neck in job creation, Bush managed to do this with a mere fraction of the amount of debt Obama has. But don't let me ruin your fragile little Keynesian Land of Make Believe by pointing out the spectacular failure.
Turns out from last we spoke, Obama and Bush are still more or less neck and neck in terms of job creation at this point in their presidencies. At my last post Bush had lost 100k more jobs than Obama at this time, now he is only 40k down (one could also make the point Census workers should be taken out of this and close the gap further, but, eh). Regardless, you'll note in the chart, just like Bush's first term, it's put up or shut up time for the Obama administration. Both at this point in time during their first terms had suffered lack luster economic growth and a lack of a booming economic recovery that typically follows recessions. Bush pulled through (though I don't believe it is a president who can create jobs and this whole discussion is moot), while Obama's growth has started to trend below Bush's.
The only additional thing I will point out is that while both presidents are essentially neck and neck in job creation, Bush managed to do this with a mere fraction of the amount of debt Obama has. But don't let me ruin your fragile little Keynesian Land of Make Believe by pointing out the spectacular failure.
Friday, May 18, 2012
Destroying the Division of Labor
I am starting to believe more and more this was done by:
1. Nefarious forces
2. Originating from the Soviet Union during the cold war
I am not one of conspiracy theories, but the more and more I look at stuff like this or "global warming" I am finding it harder and harder to believe it wasn't orchestrated.
To destroy a country that is strong you must do it from the inside. No better way than to start by destroying the natural and biological relationship between men and women.
1. Nefarious forces
2. Originating from the Soviet Union during the cold war
I am not one of conspiracy theories, but the more and more I look at stuff like this or "global warming" I am finding it harder and harder to believe it wasn't orchestrated.
To destroy a country that is strong you must do it from the inside. No better way than to start by destroying the natural and biological relationship between men and women.
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Sinking the Men of the Yamato
Through my own personal conversations, the conversations retold to me
of other men, and even those conversations I've heard on the Tom Leykis
Show, all of us men have at one point in time or another been asked by
women,
"Who screwed you over in the past?"
or a variant
"What girl did this to you?"
Usually this happens when women ask you about your opinions of dating, courtship, romance, etc., and when you speak the truth they are shocked and horrified that you have such a cynical or pessimistic attitude towards dating or women in general. The logic they employ leads them to only one possible solution or explanation:
That ONE girl completely screwed you over and thus, unjustifiably and unfairly, soured your opinion of ALL women.
They believe there was this ONE, SINGLE, SOLE perpetrator that did not represent or resemble the majority of women and that is why you have this "irrational" or "inappropriate" response or view of women. That the majority of women are too numerous and prevalent that it was only sheer dumb luck you ran into a single, sole, renegade operator who warped your perception of women so unjustifiably so.
So let me introduce a little reality into the situation.
For the most part, I believe most women subscribe to the theory that "ONE" person did this to you, and therefore scarred you for the rest of your life, because it's simple. The human brain (male or female) is more prone to select the simpler theory because it takes too much effort to accept and rationalize complex ones. This is not a criticism of women, because men are just as susceptible to believe in a "simple" theory than a complex one. But it's just easier to believe there was this ONE, SINGLE, MEAN, BADDIE of a girl that did something really mean to you and thus you swore off women forever.
The REALITY is however, quite the opposite.
Yes, there are men who unfortunately suffered one, single death-knelling blow and they never got up again. But for the majority of men, it is more akin to the sinking of the Yamato than anything else.
The Yamato was the premier Japanese battleship of WWII. It was more or less unsinkable from sea and thus they had to resort to aerial bombing to sink her. She took an AMAZING amount of punishment. Three separate waves of attacks, from air and sea and she still kept on going.
Inevitably she DID capitulate and sink, but understand it was no one single bomb or torpedo that did her in. It was a relentless, constant, repetitive, barrage and assault that essentially bludgeoned her into submission and defeat. And thus is the way of most men you will face today above an age of 25.
The sheer hell and punishment, NOT in terms of single punishing blows, but in terms of constantly repetitive, NEVER ENDING attacks is what molds or galvanizes men into what they are today. The accomplished Hugh Grant-like bachelor that eschews meeting your friend that is "perfect for him" was not sunk by a single woman, but a barrage of flake outs, stand ups, drama queens and suicide threats. The confirmed bachelor who prefers to hang out with his buds instead of go to a club and meet a girl has had his deck strafed repeatedly. The 40 something executive, committed to his job and his career and maybe calls you when he's in town, remembers starkly those days of getting the hell bombed out of him by ditzy girlfriend after cheating girlfriend after money-sucking girlfriend.
Did some girls cause more damage than others?
Yes.
Did any one of them sink the individual man?
No.
And so in the end if you look at the autopsy of this former "good guy" or "reliable man," you'll find that the cause of death was no single girl that hurt his feelings "really bad" back in college, but a never ending litany of flakes, frauds, drama queens, liars and just plain evil women/girls that were never strong enough or significant enough on their own to cause major damage to such a vessel, but a never ending barrage of them that just plain wore him down to the point of defeat.
Ergo, stop trying to blame the sinking of "good men" on mythical single, sole villains and start casting a wider net. It is a problem that is more pervasive and wide-spread than most women will admit. And much like Christianity did, and Islam must in the future -have a reformation- so too must modern day women purge and shame through their ranks the women who find it fashionable, funny, entertaining and enjoyable to bomb, strafe, torpedo and attack men.
Because understand, those of us men of the Yamato class are simply forced to make a decision based on statistics and probability. Enough girls attack, drop their bombs, and shoot torpedoes into our sides, we have no choice but to treat you all as enemies and give no one the benefit of the doubt, even the genuine and true "good girls." And so there you sit at the age of 32 wondering "where have all the good men gone." Whether you're a good girl or a bad girl, it doesn't matter. By this point in the game it's revenge by proxy time. If you're upset about that, then take it up with the feminists and evil women in your ranks that found it so necessary to villainize, mock, stand up, play mind, etc. with young men/boys, not the sinking Yamato's themselves.
Regardless, I sure hope it was fun (not to mention, worth it) playing with young boys' feelings and emotions in middle school through college. Hope it was fun with the drama and suicide threats, and ultimatums and mind games and sh!t tests and whatever else Cosmo told you to do. I hope "playing hard to get" and stringing along men/boys provided invaluable entertainment. Because there couldn't possibly be a consequence to all that now could there?
You lovely western ladies enjoy that decline!
On a intellectual note, from Wikipedia about the sinking of the Yamato and just what kind of punishment it endured:
Yamato avoided being hit for four minutes until, at 12:41, two bombs obliterated two of her triple 25 mm anti-aircraft mounts and blew a hole in the deck. A third bomb then destroyed her radar room and the starboard aft 127 mm mount. At 12:46 another two bombs struck the battleship's port side, one slightly ahead of the aft 155 mm centreline turret and the other right on top of the gun. These caused a great amount of damage to the turret and its magazines; only one man climbed out alive.[48][N 7] At 12:45 a single torpedo struck Yamato far forward on her port side sending extreme shocks throughout the ship. Because many of the hit's survivors were later killed by strafing or were trapped when Yamato sank, the details are uncertain, but authors Garzke and Dulin record that little damage was caused.[48] Shortly afterward up to three more torpedoes struck Yamato. Two impacts—on the port side near the engine room and on one of the boiler rooms—are confirmed; the third is disputed but is regarded by Garzke and Dulin as probable because it would explain the reported flooding in Yamato's auxiliary steering room. The attack ended around 12:47, leaving the battleship to list 5–6° to port; counterflooding—deliberately flooding compartments on the other side of the ship—reduced the list to 1°. One boiler room had been disabled, slightly reducing Yamato's top speed, and strafing had incapacitated many of the gun crews who manned Yamato's unprotected 25 mm anti-aircraft weapons, sharply curtailing their effectiveness.[48]
Yamato photographed during the battle by an aircraft from USS Yorktown (CV-10). The battleship is on fire and visibly listing to port.
The second attack started just before 13:00. In a coordinated strike,
dive bombers flew high overhead to begin their runs while torpedo laden
aircraft approached from all directions at just above sea level.
Overwhelmed by the number of targets, the battleship's anti-aircraft
guns were less than effective, and the Japanese tried desperate measures
to break up the attack. Yamato's main guns were loaded with Beehive
shells fused to explode one second after firing—a mere 1,000 m
(3,300 ft) from the ship—but this had little effect. Four or five
torpedoes struck the battleship, three or four to port and one to
starboard. Three hits, close together on the port side, are confirmed:
one struck a fireroom that had been hit earlier, one impacted a
different fireroom, and the third hit the hull adjacent to a previously
damaged outboard engine room, increasing the water that had already been
flowing into that space and possibly causing flooding in nearby
locations. The fourth hit (though unconfirmed) may have struck aft of
the third; Garzke and Dulin believe this would explain the rapid
flooding that reportedly occurred in that location.[49] This attack left Yamato
in a perilous position, listing 15–18° to port. Counterflooding all of
the remaining starboard void spaces lessened this to 10°, but further
correction would have required either repairs or flooding the starboard
engine and fire rooms. Although the battleship was in no danger of
sinking at this point, the list meant that the main battery was unable
to fire and her maximum speed was limited to 18 knots (33 km/h; 21 mph).[50]
The third and most damaging attack developed at about 13:40. At least four bombs hit the ship's superstructure and caused heavy casualties among her 25 mm anti-aircraft gun crews. Many near misses drove in her outer plating, partially compromising her defense against torpedoes. Most serious were four more torpedo impacts. Three exploded on the port side, increasing water intake into the port inner engine room and flooding yet another fireroom and the steering gear room. With the auxiliary steering room already underwater, the ship lost all maneuverability and became stuck in a starboard turn. The fourth torpedo most likely hit the starboard outer engine room which, along with three other rooms on the starboard side, was in the process of being counterflooded to reduce the port list. The torpedo strike increased the rate of water intake by a large margin, trapping many crewmen before they could escape.[51]
At 14:02 the order was belatedly given to abandon ship. By this time Yamato's
speed had dropped to 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph) and her list was
steadily increasing. Fires were raging out of control in some sections
of the ship and alarms had begun to sound on the bridge warning of
critical temperatures in the forward main battery magazines.
"Who screwed you over in the past?"
or a variant
"What girl did this to you?"
Usually this happens when women ask you about your opinions of dating, courtship, romance, etc., and when you speak the truth they are shocked and horrified that you have such a cynical or pessimistic attitude towards dating or women in general. The logic they employ leads them to only one possible solution or explanation:
That ONE girl completely screwed you over and thus, unjustifiably and unfairly, soured your opinion of ALL women.
They believe there was this ONE, SINGLE, SOLE perpetrator that did not represent or resemble the majority of women and that is why you have this "irrational" or "inappropriate" response or view of women. That the majority of women are too numerous and prevalent that it was only sheer dumb luck you ran into a single, sole, renegade operator who warped your perception of women so unjustifiably so.
So let me introduce a little reality into the situation.
For the most part, I believe most women subscribe to the theory that "ONE" person did this to you, and therefore scarred you for the rest of your life, because it's simple. The human brain (male or female) is more prone to select the simpler theory because it takes too much effort to accept and rationalize complex ones. This is not a criticism of women, because men are just as susceptible to believe in a "simple" theory than a complex one. But it's just easier to believe there was this ONE, SINGLE, MEAN, BADDIE of a girl that did something really mean to you and thus you swore off women forever.
The REALITY is however, quite the opposite.
Yes, there are men who unfortunately suffered one, single death-knelling blow and they never got up again. But for the majority of men, it is more akin to the sinking of the Yamato than anything else.
The Yamato was the premier Japanese battleship of WWII. It was more or less unsinkable from sea and thus they had to resort to aerial bombing to sink her. She took an AMAZING amount of punishment. Three separate waves of attacks, from air and sea and she still kept on going.
Inevitably she DID capitulate and sink, but understand it was no one single bomb or torpedo that did her in. It was a relentless, constant, repetitive, barrage and assault that essentially bludgeoned her into submission and defeat. And thus is the way of most men you will face today above an age of 25.
The sheer hell and punishment, NOT in terms of single punishing blows, but in terms of constantly repetitive, NEVER ENDING attacks is what molds or galvanizes men into what they are today. The accomplished Hugh Grant-like bachelor that eschews meeting your friend that is "perfect for him" was not sunk by a single woman, but a barrage of flake outs, stand ups, drama queens and suicide threats. The confirmed bachelor who prefers to hang out with his buds instead of go to a club and meet a girl has had his deck strafed repeatedly. The 40 something executive, committed to his job and his career and maybe calls you when he's in town, remembers starkly those days of getting the hell bombed out of him by ditzy girlfriend after cheating girlfriend after money-sucking girlfriend.
Did some girls cause more damage than others?
Yes.
Did any one of them sink the individual man?
No.
And so in the end if you look at the autopsy of this former "good guy" or "reliable man," you'll find that the cause of death was no single girl that hurt his feelings "really bad" back in college, but a never ending litany of flakes, frauds, drama queens, liars and just plain evil women/girls that were never strong enough or significant enough on their own to cause major damage to such a vessel, but a never ending barrage of them that just plain wore him down to the point of defeat.
Ergo, stop trying to blame the sinking of "good men" on mythical single, sole villains and start casting a wider net. It is a problem that is more pervasive and wide-spread than most women will admit. And much like Christianity did, and Islam must in the future -have a reformation- so too must modern day women purge and shame through their ranks the women who find it fashionable, funny, entertaining and enjoyable to bomb, strafe, torpedo and attack men.
Because understand, those of us men of the Yamato class are simply forced to make a decision based on statistics and probability. Enough girls attack, drop their bombs, and shoot torpedoes into our sides, we have no choice but to treat you all as enemies and give no one the benefit of the doubt, even the genuine and true "good girls." And so there you sit at the age of 32 wondering "where have all the good men gone." Whether you're a good girl or a bad girl, it doesn't matter. By this point in the game it's revenge by proxy time. If you're upset about that, then take it up with the feminists and evil women in your ranks that found it so necessary to villainize, mock, stand up, play mind, etc. with young men/boys, not the sinking Yamato's themselves.
Regardless, I sure hope it was fun (not to mention, worth it) playing with young boys' feelings and emotions in middle school through college. Hope it was fun with the drama and suicide threats, and ultimatums and mind games and sh!t tests and whatever else Cosmo told you to do. I hope "playing hard to get" and stringing along men/boys provided invaluable entertainment. Because there couldn't possibly be a consequence to all that now could there?
You lovely western ladies enjoy that decline!
On a intellectual note, from Wikipedia about the sinking of the Yamato and just what kind of punishment it endured:
Yamato avoided being hit for four minutes until, at 12:41, two bombs obliterated two of her triple 25 mm anti-aircraft mounts and blew a hole in the deck. A third bomb then destroyed her radar room and the starboard aft 127 mm mount. At 12:46 another two bombs struck the battleship's port side, one slightly ahead of the aft 155 mm centreline turret and the other right on top of the gun. These caused a great amount of damage to the turret and its magazines; only one man climbed out alive.[48][N 7] At 12:45 a single torpedo struck Yamato far forward on her port side sending extreme shocks throughout the ship. Because many of the hit's survivors were later killed by strafing or were trapped when Yamato sank, the details are uncertain, but authors Garzke and Dulin record that little damage was caused.[48] Shortly afterward up to three more torpedoes struck Yamato. Two impacts—on the port side near the engine room and on one of the boiler rooms—are confirmed; the third is disputed but is regarded by Garzke and Dulin as probable because it would explain the reported flooding in Yamato's auxiliary steering room. The attack ended around 12:47, leaving the battleship to list 5–6° to port; counterflooding—deliberately flooding compartments on the other side of the ship—reduced the list to 1°. One boiler room had been disabled, slightly reducing Yamato's top speed, and strafing had incapacitated many of the gun crews who manned Yamato's unprotected 25 mm anti-aircraft weapons, sharply curtailing their effectiveness.[48]
The third and most damaging attack developed at about 13:40. At least four bombs hit the ship's superstructure and caused heavy casualties among her 25 mm anti-aircraft gun crews. Many near misses drove in her outer plating, partially compromising her defense against torpedoes. Most serious were four more torpedo impacts. Three exploded on the port side, increasing water intake into the port inner engine room and flooding yet another fireroom and the steering gear room. With the auxiliary steering room already underwater, the ship lost all maneuverability and became stuck in a starboard turn. The fourth torpedo most likely hit the starboard outer engine room which, along with three other rooms on the starboard side, was in the process of being counterflooded to reduce the port list. The torpedo strike increased the rate of water intake by a large margin, trapping many crewmen before they could escape.[51]
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Affirmative Action Job Does NOT Equal "Independent"
When you fleece the taxpayers
to pay for make work jobs that nobody wants
then you cannot claim to be independent or "self-reliant."
You are really nothing more than a welfare recipient playing "make believe corporate professional worker."
But don't let reality get in the way of you becoming the best taxpayer paid social worker professor non-profit administrator director you can possibly be.
I often wonder if the concept of the free market = reality is lost on most people.
to pay for make work jobs that nobody wants
then you cannot claim to be independent or "self-reliant."
You are really nothing more than a welfare recipient playing "make believe corporate professional worker."
But don't let reality get in the way of you becoming the best taxpayer paid social worker professor non-profit administrator director you can possibly be.
I often wonder if the concept of the free market = reality is lost on most people.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
The Captain's Great Utah Adventure
You need to watch up to the point I slide down about 500 feet on a glacier on my butt.
Monday, May 14, 2012
Stock Market as a Hedge Against Inflation
Two competing theories going on in my mind.
1. The market is overvalued because of trillions of retirement dollars hitting the market over the past 40 years and the younger generations not having the purchasing power to continue to inflate that bubble.
vs.
2. The market derives its value from future cash flows and profits. These future cash flows generated by the assets of these companies will be priced in "future dollars" as the company will naturally increase prices to keep up with inflation and maintain profitability. Additionally, a higher and higher percentage of sales are coming from foreign countries to offset the craptastic business prospects here in the US, providing an additional hedge against inflation.
Discuss and resolve!
1. The market is overvalued because of trillions of retirement dollars hitting the market over the past 40 years and the younger generations not having the purchasing power to continue to inflate that bubble.
vs.
2. The market derives its value from future cash flows and profits. These future cash flows generated by the assets of these companies will be priced in "future dollars" as the company will naturally increase prices to keep up with inflation and maintain profitability. Additionally, a higher and higher percentage of sales are coming from foreign countries to offset the craptastic business prospects here in the US, providing an additional hedge against inflation.
Discuss and resolve!
Sunday, May 13, 2012
White Knighting in Charty Goodness Form
Heck, even I played Dungeons and Dragons and STILL didn't let my White Knighting days handicap me past the age of 18.
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Poetic Justice for California
Cuts in EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE and SOCIAL PROGRAMS!????? Under the Mighty O?
Wait wait wait. Lemme guess. It's still "Bush's Fault."
Couldn't have happened to a more deserving group of people.
Wait wait wait. Lemme guess. It's still "Bush's Fault."
Couldn't have happened to a more deserving group of people.
It's Called "Capital Flight"
You hipster 20 something Steve Job's worshiping DB's better start learning about economics. Zuckerberg and his cohorts are laughing their asses off at you.
Is anybody else enjoying watching the country collapse as much as I am?
Is anybody else enjoying watching the country collapse as much as I am?
Friday, May 11, 2012
Alec Loorz
Professional crusader whose ego is more important than your standard of living.
What
did
I
tell
you
about
CRUSADERS???? (and no, don't just watch the first video, watch the whole damn thing)
What
did
I
tell
you
about
CRUSADERS???? (and no, don't just watch the first video, watch the whole damn thing)
Shooting Themselves in the Foot
I had linked previously to this post before about various governments (CT, MN, etc.) trying to unionize day care providers which I was originally against, but after thinking about it, I am totally for. Unless my logic is flawed, the majority of women vote democrat and are always "for the children." Of course they never pay for whatever the latest, bloated and completely unnecessary government program is, the taxpayer does.
However, if day care providers are unionized the price of an already expensive service is going to go through the roof and most parents do pay for that. Even without unionization I've heard anecdotal stories of mothers opting to leave their job and (GASP!) RAISE THEIR CHILDREN because they were actually losing money going to work. You throw in a 40% price increase with a 50% drop in quality and competence, women will not only be rushing to pull their kids out of day care, they'll abandon the democrat party in droves.
Or is the Captain just high on enjoying the decline on this one?
However, if day care providers are unionized the price of an already expensive service is going to go through the roof and most parents do pay for that. Even without unionization I've heard anecdotal stories of mothers opting to leave their job and (GASP!) RAISE THEIR CHILDREN because they were actually losing money going to work. You throw in a 40% price increase with a 50% drop in quality and competence, women will not only be rushing to pull their kids out of day care, they'll abandon the democrat party in droves.
Or is the Captain just high on enjoying the decline on this one?
Shame on the Chronicle of Higher Education
I'll be brief because I'm hungry and it's Rumpie Time.
The Chronicle of Higher Education fires a blogger for being truthful and blunt about the merits (and I might add, employment prospects) of a hyphenated-American studies degree.
THEN they interview a PhD in History who can't find a job who also happens to be a minority.
Are the people at the Chronicle of Higher Education TRULY THAT STUPID and IGNORANT they can't piece it together? Or are they so cowardly they don't have the guts to tell minorities the realities of the labor market and that their degree is worthless in fear they'd be branded a racist/homophobe/sexist/bigot/etc?
Presumably the purpose of the Chronicle of Higher Education is to HELP PEOPLE in HIGHER EDUCATION.
Speaking the truth about the worthlessness of various liberal arts degrees, ESPECIALLY those whose primary victims are minorities, might be a great place to start.
Oh, but that would require a spine now wouldn't it?
The Chronicle of Higher Education fires a blogger for being truthful and blunt about the merits (and I might add, employment prospects) of a hyphenated-American studies degree.
THEN they interview a PhD in History who can't find a job who also happens to be a minority.
Are the people at the Chronicle of Higher Education TRULY THAT STUPID and IGNORANT they can't piece it together? Or are they so cowardly they don't have the guts to tell minorities the realities of the labor market and that their degree is worthless in fear they'd be branded a racist/homophobe/sexist/bigot/etc?
Presumably the purpose of the Chronicle of Higher Education is to HELP PEOPLE in HIGHER EDUCATION.
Speaking the truth about the worthlessness of various liberal arts degrees, ESPECIALLY those whose primary victims are minorities, might be a great place to start.
Oh, but that would require a spine now wouldn't it?
Thursday, May 10, 2012
"Permissive Parenting"
Holy crap, I thought one of my readers was just making it up.
Apparently it is true. And apparently you idiots think somehow a generation brought up on this tripe is going to have the gumption and industriousness to produce enough wealth to pay for everything, not to mention protect us from hordes of Chinese invaders with weapons.
I better order some more Rumpie.
Apparently it is true. And apparently you idiots think somehow a generation brought up on this tripe is going to have the gumption and industriousness to produce enough wealth to pay for everything, not to mention protect us from hordes of Chinese invaders with weapons.
I better order some more Rumpie.
Head Further West Young Man
I'm already pretty far west, but I am going to live a childhood dream this weekend and visit the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah.
Any Agents in the Field recommend anything in that particular area of Utah for hiking, dust devil chasing, fossil hunting and other activities that scare aware American females?
Any Agents in the Field recommend anything in that particular area of Utah for hiking, dust devil chasing, fossil hunting and other activities that scare aware American females?
A Spectacular Failure of a Father
She has a ring. Which indicates a husband. She has a kid. Which indicates a father. She's on the front cover of a national magazine with her 3 year old boy nursing. Which indicates she has anything but a real man heading up that household.
Blame feminism all you want, this is more of a damning conviction of the lack of real men in this country.
The Captain would have put his foot down a LOOOOONG time ago before anything like this would have happened with his theoretical wife. Not to mention there is no way in hell I would let my child, ESPECIALLY A BOY, have this hanging over his head upon entering middle school. This would be immediate grounds for divorce in the Cappy Cap home.
I predict she'll cheat on her husband, that's if she hasn't already...heck, I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't even the husband's kid.
Blame feminism all you want, this is more of a damning conviction of the lack of real men in this country.
The Captain would have put his foot down a LOOOOONG time ago before anything like this would have happened with his theoretical wife. Not to mention there is no way in hell I would let my child, ESPECIALLY A BOY, have this hanging over his head upon entering middle school. This would be immediate grounds for divorce in the Cappy Cap home.
I predict she'll cheat on her husband, that's if she hasn't already...heck, I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't even the husband's kid.
The Romney Obama Harlequin Romance Paradox
Permit me to chide a group of people in desperate need of chiding:
People who vote based on whether a candidate is good looking or not.
Now this can fall on both men and women (I am of course partial to Kristy Noem - she scores Super Num Num Points on the Cappy Cap Scale), but when it comes to presidential elections, since we've had nothing but male candidates, my ire in this particular instance is towards female voters.
So a question to all you ladies out there who've never watched CNN or Foxnews and instead get your political news form "The Daily Show" or "The Colbert Report" - how can you possibly choose between Romney and Obama?
I mean, it's gotta be like one of those Harlequin romance novels where the female hero is sought after by a rough and tumble blue collar stud AND AT THE SAME TIME a posh, Cary Grantish fellow, who is of course rich and powerful. How does the poor woman's torn heart choose?
Of course in this upcoming election your choice isn't between a bad boy and a rich man (both are rich, both are powerful), but rather a much simpler choice-
pecks or hair?
Now I can see how you all fell in love with Barack Obama and deemed him worthy to be leader of the free world - pecks. Yes, they were nice weren't they. And the media was all too willing to post pictures of them glistening as he walked out of the ocean.
But you have to admit Romney has some really GREAT hair. Not only is it full, but it has that touch of gray. And he is a mature man, an accomplished man a "real" man. Dare I say he almost has a twinge of "The World's Most Interesting Man?" His hair screams "stability" and "don't worry, I'll take care of you, I'm an accomplished man."
But how does the uninformed, uneducated and ignorant female American voter choose? Because unlike pulp fiction, there can only be one president and I'm very curious about the though process you ladies use to make such an important decision. Does People Magazine speculate about who would be better on a date? Does Cosmo give you detailed gossip about the private lives of both? Or do you and other Harlequin Political Junkies just gather around Starbucks after you drop your kids off at daycare and sup cups of cappuccino on your husbands' dimes and debate the merits of pecks vs. hair?
Regardless, I am VERY interested in how you come to an informed and wise decision, ESPECIALLY given how nice Barack's pecks are and how full and lush Romney's hair is.
Though methinks I know how you're going to vote anyway, despite what they've been trying to do to you.
People who vote based on whether a candidate is good looking or not.
Now this can fall on both men and women (I am of course partial to Kristy Noem - she scores Super Num Num Points on the Cappy Cap Scale), but when it comes to presidential elections, since we've had nothing but male candidates, my ire in this particular instance is towards female voters.
So a question to all you ladies out there who've never watched CNN or Foxnews and instead get your political news form "The Daily Show" or "The Colbert Report" - how can you possibly choose between Romney and Obama?
I mean, it's gotta be like one of those Harlequin romance novels where the female hero is sought after by a rough and tumble blue collar stud AND AT THE SAME TIME a posh, Cary Grantish fellow, who is of course rich and powerful. How does the poor woman's torn heart choose?
Of course in this upcoming election your choice isn't between a bad boy and a rich man (both are rich, both are powerful), but rather a much simpler choice-
pecks or hair?
Now I can see how you all fell in love with Barack Obama and deemed him worthy to be leader of the free world - pecks. Yes, they were nice weren't they. And the media was all too willing to post pictures of them glistening as he walked out of the ocean.
But you have to admit Romney has some really GREAT hair. Not only is it full, but it has that touch of gray. And he is a mature man, an accomplished man a "real" man. Dare I say he almost has a twinge of "The World's Most Interesting Man?" His hair screams "stability" and "don't worry, I'll take care of you, I'm an accomplished man."
But how does the uninformed, uneducated and ignorant female American voter choose? Because unlike pulp fiction, there can only be one president and I'm very curious about the though process you ladies use to make such an important decision. Does People Magazine speculate about who would be better on a date? Does Cosmo give you detailed gossip about the private lives of both? Or do you and other Harlequin Political Junkies just gather around Starbucks after you drop your kids off at daycare and sup cups of cappuccino on your husbands' dimes and debate the merits of pecks vs. hair?
Regardless, I am VERY interested in how you come to an informed and wise decision, ESPECIALLY given how nice Barack's pecks are and how full and lush Romney's hair is.
Though methinks I know how you're going to vote anyway, despite what they've been trying to do to you.
Wednesday, May 09, 2012
Icky, Yucky, Gross Capitalism
These are pictures from East Germany before and after reunification.
I originally thought it was bombed out buildings after WWII UNTIL I saw one picture with graffiti. Then it dawned on me, it was a simple, but stark comparison of the effects of socialism vs. capitalism.
Of course even this simple visual aid will fail to convert the Leftianity zealots.
I originally thought it was bombed out buildings after WWII UNTIL I saw one picture with graffiti. Then it dawned on me, it was a simple, but stark comparison of the effects of socialism vs. capitalism.
Of course even this simple visual aid will fail to convert the Leftianity zealots.
For Your Wednesday Night Reading Pleasure
Most fathers could be reached for comment, but let's imagine we're holy and virtuous like widows anyway.
A chart of hell and where California sits in it.
New Yorkers deserve to pay higher prices for everything...and they do.
Didn't I just explain this? It's called Jennifer Aniston Economics!
Oh ho ho! Dr. Helen, you sure are funny. "Picking up the check!" That's a good one!
I just refuse to donate because statistically chances are my organs would go to a liberal. I'm not joking.
Charlie goes into more detail about "Black Studies" than I cared too and pulls up what we all suspected. Leftist claptrap that does nothing to actually help blacks.
See, see! I included Tam this time! I didn't forget! (unlike how she forgot about me and my book...sniff sniff).
A chart of hell and where California sits in it.
New Yorkers deserve to pay higher prices for everything...and they do.
Didn't I just explain this? It's called Jennifer Aniston Economics!
Oh ho ho! Dr. Helen, you sure are funny. "Picking up the check!" That's a good one!
I just refuse to donate because statistically chances are my organs would go to a liberal. I'm not joking.
Charlie goes into more detail about "Black Studies" than I cared too and pulls up what we all suspected. Leftist claptrap that does nothing to actually help blacks.
See, see! I included Tam this time! I didn't forget! (unlike how she forgot about me and my book...sniff sniff).
Have At It
Hell, I say let them.
In the meantime I would like Megan Fox to show up at my doorstep with a new F-22 fighter plane and Barack Obama to resurrect Frank Sinatra so he can sing in my new 3,000,000 square foot house located on Mars.
In the meantime I would like Megan Fox to show up at my doorstep with a new F-22 fighter plane and Barack Obama to resurrect Frank Sinatra so he can sing in my new 3,000,000 square foot house located on Mars.
Tuesday, May 08, 2012
Eliminating "Black Studies" Would Help Blacks
I'll try to be brief.
Understand any "hyphenated-American" studies doesn't teach its students a skill or a trade that would help them secure employment in life. It doesn't increase their earnings power, it doesn't help them close any wage gaps. All it does is teach them woeismeism and brings about a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure (not to mention a healthy dose of racism, sexism, and bigotry of the left's side of the isle as well).
In my book I PURPOSELY WARN minorities and women about degrees that PURPOSELY target them because of their gender or race, NOT because these college programs desire to help them, but because of the exact opposite. They wish to profit off of them and the victim mentality they want to instill in them.
It is here, of course, we run into the paradox of people who genuinely wish to help minorities, women and other non-white-male classes, are usually punished by the powers that be, not to mention (ironically) accused of racism/sexism/whateverismleftistshaveintheirinventoryofbullshit.
I once tried to stand up for women being treated poorly in second and third world countries and was called a racist because I critiqued the cultures that kept women at home and out of schools. Ironically no women or women's rights groups in this country came to my aid, matter of fact, they merely also accused me of racism, and so, now you know where the Captain's loyalty stands today in America and what he thinks of chivalry.
Ergo, I say, just remain quiet and let these people waste their money and lives majoring in worthless subjects. If they're going to accuse you of racism or sexism or whatever variant of bigotry is being served this week, when you're merely trying to prevent them from making a major mistake in their lives majoring in a worthless degree, to hell with them.
They can continue to enjoy their pay gap despite our best efforts to close it.
Understand any "hyphenated-American" studies doesn't teach its students a skill or a trade that would help them secure employment in life. It doesn't increase their earnings power, it doesn't help them close any wage gaps. All it does is teach them woeismeism and brings about a self-fulfilling prophecy of failure (not to mention a healthy dose of racism, sexism, and bigotry of the left's side of the isle as well).
In my book I PURPOSELY WARN minorities and women about degrees that PURPOSELY target them because of their gender or race, NOT because these college programs desire to help them, but because of the exact opposite. They wish to profit off of them and the victim mentality they want to instill in them.
It is here, of course, we run into the paradox of people who genuinely wish to help minorities, women and other non-white-male classes, are usually punished by the powers that be, not to mention (ironically) accused of racism/sexism/whateverismleftistshaveintheirinventoryofbullshit.
I once tried to stand up for women being treated poorly in second and third world countries and was called a racist because I critiqued the cultures that kept women at home and out of schools. Ironically no women or women's rights groups in this country came to my aid, matter of fact, they merely also accused me of racism, and so, now you know where the Captain's loyalty stands today in America and what he thinks of chivalry.
Ergo, I say, just remain quiet and let these people waste their money and lives majoring in worthless subjects. If they're going to accuse you of racism or sexism or whatever variant of bigotry is being served this week, when you're merely trying to prevent them from making a major mistake in their lives majoring in a worthless degree, to hell with them.
They can continue to enjoy their pay gap despite our best efforts to close it.
Jennifer Aniston Economics
As I have gotten older, done more and more research and honed my "Super Awesome Economic Genius (TM)," I have learned that we folks of the capitalist, liberty, free-market stripe are not so much battling a legitimate counter theory to our free-market economics, as much as we are a spectacular level of ignorance. So spectacular that I wouldn't even call it "ignorance" as I believe it really is more of a mental disorder ("delusional" is what I believe psychologists call it).
Of course I am miffed in that I foolishly credited my ideological opponents with having intelligence, veracity, intellectual honesty and a desire to seek what is best for mankind. Miffed, not because they turned out to be nothing but self-serving spoiled brats with no interest in searching for the truth, but miffed because I wasted so much time trying to engage them on an intellectually honest and mature adult level. Literally thousands of hours wasted compiling chart after chart, pulling up data, crunching numbers, all the while thinking,
"Ah, this will prove my point and convince them! And soon they will vote based on fact, empirical data and what's best for the country. And soon our country will reap the benefits of an informed and educated population and we'll achieve new heights and income per capitas of $100,000."
But now that I've been proven to have overestimated the honor and integrity of my ideological opponents, there's just one thing left to do.
Mock them.
Of course they make this laughably easy in that they exhibit their delusion daily, refusing to live in the real world. And I know that in violating The Reality Principle they are merely setting themselves up for an even harder crash in the future, but it's still fun to make fun of them while they're accelerating their lives into an inevitable brick wall. But their behavior is so delusional it almost warrants it's own subsegment of economic study. And so with this let me introduce a new concept:
"Jennifer Aniston Economics."
As you know the Captain has a soft spot for Jennifer Aniston. If she were to show up at my doorstep in a drunken stupor, I suppose I would do the good, correct and right thing all preacher's kids do and help the poor girl out. She would make lewd advances at me and I would have to refuse those advances because it would be inappropriate. She would no doubt recognize who I am and say,
"Say, aren't you Cappy Cap? World famous economist, ballroom dancer, motorcycle rider, author and fossil hunter extraordinaire? Please, let me don this french maid outfit I conveniently have in my car!"
And again, because of my pure and virtuous nature, I would have to refuse her wanton advances.
But that is the point right there about "Jennifer Aniston Economics."
I'm delusional.
Never mind the chances of Jennifer Aniston showing up at my apartment in an inebriated state is unlikely. And never mind she has no clue who I am (despite my world-renown Super Economic Economic Genius (TM)). I'm not going to let FACT or REALITY get in the way of what I want to believe. That is the epitome of "Jennifer Aniston Economics" and a trait that is the hallmark of every liberal and socialist in the world. And so permit me a little case study in "Jennifer Aniston Economics" that prompted me to write this little post.
I saw this article about people voting in the "anti-austerity" party or "voting bloc." And it really drove the point home to me not only how delusional people were about the fiscal REALITIES of their countries, but how pervasive and widespread this mental sickness is. In France the majority of voters spoke and opted to pursue a delusional, impossible reality. In Italy and Greece people are starting to rally against the "austerity parties." But whichever country and whichever the case, you have to realize the sheer insanity and sickness these people have. Voting against the "austerity parties" is like voting against "gravity" or "air" or "Newtonian physics." It's REALITY. There's nothing you can do about it.
For example, I could show this chart to every idiotic moron in France, Italy and Greece who thinks the party can continue on;
and they'll all ignore it, no doubt calling me names in the process.
So that leaves us with only one option. Let's test our Junior, Deputy, Aspiring, Renegade, Official or Otherwise Economist skills, shall we?
Do we:
a) vote for more government spending
b) pray to the gods that Jennifer Aniston shows up at the Captain's house in an impaired state
c) work harder to pay more in taxes
d) enjoy the decline
e) b and d
Of course I am miffed in that I foolishly credited my ideological opponents with having intelligence, veracity, intellectual honesty and a desire to seek what is best for mankind. Miffed, not because they turned out to be nothing but self-serving spoiled brats with no interest in searching for the truth, but miffed because I wasted so much time trying to engage them on an intellectually honest and mature adult level. Literally thousands of hours wasted compiling chart after chart, pulling up data, crunching numbers, all the while thinking,
"Ah, this will prove my point and convince them! And soon they will vote based on fact, empirical data and what's best for the country. And soon our country will reap the benefits of an informed and educated population and we'll achieve new heights and income per capitas of $100,000."
But now that I've been proven to have overestimated the honor and integrity of my ideological opponents, there's just one thing left to do.
Mock them.
Of course they make this laughably easy in that they exhibit their delusion daily, refusing to live in the real world. And I know that in violating The Reality Principle they are merely setting themselves up for an even harder crash in the future, but it's still fun to make fun of them while they're accelerating their lives into an inevitable brick wall. But their behavior is so delusional it almost warrants it's own subsegment of economic study. And so with this let me introduce a new concept:
"Jennifer Aniston Economics."
As you know the Captain has a soft spot for Jennifer Aniston. If she were to show up at my doorstep in a drunken stupor, I suppose I would do the good, correct and right thing all preacher's kids do and help the poor girl out. She would make lewd advances at me and I would have to refuse those advances because it would be inappropriate. She would no doubt recognize who I am and say,
"Say, aren't you Cappy Cap? World famous economist, ballroom dancer, motorcycle rider, author and fossil hunter extraordinaire? Please, let me don this french maid outfit I conveniently have in my car!"
And again, because of my pure and virtuous nature, I would have to refuse her wanton advances.
But that is the point right there about "Jennifer Aniston Economics."
I'm delusional.
Never mind the chances of Jennifer Aniston showing up at my apartment in an inebriated state is unlikely. And never mind she has no clue who I am (despite my world-renown Super Economic Economic Genius (TM)). I'm not going to let FACT or REALITY get in the way of what I want to believe. That is the epitome of "Jennifer Aniston Economics" and a trait that is the hallmark of every liberal and socialist in the world. And so permit me a little case study in "Jennifer Aniston Economics" that prompted me to write this little post.
I saw this article about people voting in the "anti-austerity" party or "voting bloc." And it really drove the point home to me not only how delusional people were about the fiscal REALITIES of their countries, but how pervasive and widespread this mental sickness is. In France the majority of voters spoke and opted to pursue a delusional, impossible reality. In Italy and Greece people are starting to rally against the "austerity parties." But whichever country and whichever the case, you have to realize the sheer insanity and sickness these people have. Voting against the "austerity parties" is like voting against "gravity" or "air" or "Newtonian physics." It's REALITY. There's nothing you can do about it.
For example, I could show this chart to every idiotic moron in France, Italy and Greece who thinks the party can continue on;
and they'll all ignore it, no doubt calling me names in the process.
So that leaves us with only one option. Let's test our Junior, Deputy, Aspiring, Renegade, Official or Otherwise Economist skills, shall we?
Do we:
a) vote for more government spending
b) pray to the gods that Jennifer Aniston shows up at the Captain's house in an impaired state
c) work harder to pay more in taxes
d) enjoy the decline
e) b and d
How Gen X & Y are Prohibited from Investing in the Retirement Ponzi Scheme
In addition to the social security ponzi scheme, a lesser known, though probably larger scheme, is the retirement bubble.
I've gone into detail at length before, but in short, with trillions of dollars already invested into retirement funds over the past 40 years, prompted by tax breaks provided by the government, all that has done is inflate stock prices above their intrinsic value. This makes mutual funds, stocks other investments a bad deal for any Gen Y or Gen Xer's entering their earning years and looking to stash away for retirement.
But there's another funny little aspect to this whole retirement program thing. Oh, you'll call me "cynical" for making this observation, but that makes it all the more true.
It's not an issue of whether younger generations SHOULD invest in retirement plans.
It's an issue of whether they even CAN in the first place.
In order to invest for retirement you need money. And not just money, but enough money to pay for food, clothing and shelter AND have enough disposable income left over for retirement investing. But given the wonderful economy we've had under President Fluffy Bunnies not only is that disposable income non-existent, the jobs necessary to provide ANY income is non-existent. And thus without jobs the retirement bubble ponzi scheme I believe will collapse quicker than I thought before.
To see if data had bore me out, I pulled some stats recently from the ICI (which provided me the statistics to the post I mentioned above 6 years ago). Since then they've made the data private, but I was still able to find two telling charts showing you that the flows into mutual funds just isn't there to continue to support the retirement bubble:
First is the net new cash flows into mutual funds. The ICI breaks it down between regular mutual funds and money market funds. Particularly shocking is not just the collapse of contributions to money market funds, but the complete withdrawal from them during 2009-2011. And not just a withdrawal, but more than enough to offset the NEW contributions into the other types of mutual funds.
Translation - people are selling their mutual funds to make ends, NOT reinvest in other funds.
Also notable in the chart is how (despite the summer of recovery) investment in mutual funds just plain stopped in 2011. Aside from the financial crash of 2008, this is the lowest level of investment into mutual fund AND THAT INCLUDES THE RECESSION AND DOTCOM CRASH OF 2000-2001!
To paint an even clearer picture, just look at net contributions into equity funds. Ignore the red line as they are merely providing that as a reference to global stock price performance, focus only on the volume of money going into or out of equity mutual funds. What is not only painfully obvious is that no new money is flowing into equities. Worse still, is the volume being taken out of the market in 2011.
Again, what this suggests to me is not only is it so bad people are wary of the market,
not only is it so bad that the replacement generations don't have the money to invest in the market,
it's SO BAD PEOPLE ARE PULLING MONEY OUT OF THE MARKET TO MAKE ENDS MEET!
But, as you know, your beloved Captain always likes to end of a positive note, and thus the title of this post.
For you see, if there's one good thing Barack Obama did for the young blind lemmings salivating over his pecks or his turgid speeches it's that he made the economy so bad these 20 somethings won't have the money to invest in an overpriced market in the first place.
And that is the definition of "forward."
Enjoy the decline!
I've gone into detail at length before, but in short, with trillions of dollars already invested into retirement funds over the past 40 years, prompted by tax breaks provided by the government, all that has done is inflate stock prices above their intrinsic value. This makes mutual funds, stocks other investments a bad deal for any Gen Y or Gen Xer's entering their earning years and looking to stash away for retirement.
But there's another funny little aspect to this whole retirement program thing. Oh, you'll call me "cynical" for making this observation, but that makes it all the more true.
It's not an issue of whether younger generations SHOULD invest in retirement plans.
It's an issue of whether they even CAN in the first place.
In order to invest for retirement you need money. And not just money, but enough money to pay for food, clothing and shelter AND have enough disposable income left over for retirement investing. But given the wonderful economy we've had under President Fluffy Bunnies not only is that disposable income non-existent, the jobs necessary to provide ANY income is non-existent. And thus without jobs the retirement bubble ponzi scheme I believe will collapse quicker than I thought before.
To see if data had bore me out, I pulled some stats recently from the ICI (which provided me the statistics to the post I mentioned above 6 years ago). Since then they've made the data private, but I was still able to find two telling charts showing you that the flows into mutual funds just isn't there to continue to support the retirement bubble:
First is the net new cash flows into mutual funds. The ICI breaks it down between regular mutual funds and money market funds. Particularly shocking is not just the collapse of contributions to money market funds, but the complete withdrawal from them during 2009-2011. And not just a withdrawal, but more than enough to offset the NEW contributions into the other types of mutual funds.
Translation - people are selling their mutual funds to make ends, NOT reinvest in other funds.
Also notable in the chart is how (despite the summer of recovery) investment in mutual funds just plain stopped in 2011. Aside from the financial crash of 2008, this is the lowest level of investment into mutual fund AND THAT INCLUDES THE RECESSION AND DOTCOM CRASH OF 2000-2001!
To paint an even clearer picture, just look at net contributions into equity funds. Ignore the red line as they are merely providing that as a reference to global stock price performance, focus only on the volume of money going into or out of equity mutual funds. What is not only painfully obvious is that no new money is flowing into equities. Worse still, is the volume being taken out of the market in 2011.
Again, what this suggests to me is not only is it so bad people are wary of the market,
not only is it so bad that the replacement generations don't have the money to invest in the market,
it's SO BAD PEOPLE ARE PULLING MONEY OUT OF THE MARKET TO MAKE ENDS MEET!
But, as you know, your beloved Captain always likes to end of a positive note, and thus the title of this post.
For you see, if there's one good thing Barack Obama did for the young blind lemmings salivating over his pecks or his turgid speeches it's that he made the economy so bad these 20 somethings won't have the money to invest in an overpriced market in the first place.
And that is the definition of "forward."
Enjoy the decline!
Monday, May 07, 2012
PhD in Medieval History
Ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
You go grrrrrl!
You know, for the 1/20th the amount she receives in food stamps every month she could have bought "Worthless!"
You go grrrrrl!
You know, for the 1/20th the amount she receives in food stamps every month she could have bought "Worthless!"
Can't Imagine Why Your Tuition is Going Up
Hmm...lemme see.
Pay raises for everybody.
Three new staff members for Minnesota's PRESTIGIOUS "College of Design" (I know, it's world renowned!)
And you idiotic college students can't figure out why your tuition is going up.
Pay raises for everybody.
Three new staff members for Minnesota's PRESTIGIOUS "College of Design" (I know, it's world renowned!)
And you idiotic college students can't figure out why your tuition is going up.
Friday, May 04, 2012
Epic Fail
Oh you funny Keynesians. I sit with giddy anticipation to see how this is going to be spun as good news.
Thanks Frost!
Freedom 25 wrote a nice little review of Worthless!
Remember, Worthless is available on both Kindle and paperback for prices that are MUCH cheaper than what you'll pay for college tuition. To show just how much cheaper, I made a pie chart showing the Kindle cost ($5) as a percent of $50,000 in tuition. You'll have to click on the image and magnify it to see the Kindle, but I highlighted it in the green.
You see it? See it? It's there!
That's right boys and girls, mom and dad, uncles and aunts, "Worthess" is definitely worth the MINISCULE investment to make sure that you or your loved ones don't impoverish your entire family for a degree in "Anthropology."
So don't be stupid. Don't be naive. And for god's sake, don't become an OWS protester. Buy "Worthless" today!
Remember, Worthless is available on both Kindle and paperback for prices that are MUCH cheaper than what you'll pay for college tuition. To show just how much cheaper, I made a pie chart showing the Kindle cost ($5) as a percent of $50,000 in tuition. You'll have to click on the image and magnify it to see the Kindle, but I highlighted it in the green.
You see it? See it? It's there!
That's right boys and girls, mom and dad, uncles and aunts, "Worthess" is definitely worth the MINISCULE investment to make sure that you or your loved ones don't impoverish your entire family for a degree in "Anthropology."
So don't be stupid. Don't be naive. And for god's sake, don't become an OWS protester. Buy "Worthless" today!
Thursday, May 03, 2012
Kill the Individual, Hail the Parasite
This is a brilliant piece for more reasons than one. But what I particularly like about it is the reference to the "SBA loan" because it strikes close to home.
For those of you unfamiliar with the "SBA," it is a government agency set up to support idiotic, moronic, stupid, imbecilic, pathetic, losers and their equally idiotic, moronic, stupid, imbecilic, pathetic business ideas. ie- you suckers of taxpayers are paying America's DUMBEST (and I cannot stress how accurate that adjective is) "entrepreneurs" to pursue their hobbies, err..."dreams."
Did they have a business plan?
No.
Did they do the research necessary to make sure they didn't merely just take money from the taxpayer to pursue their stupid, idiotic bound-to-fail dreams?
No.
Did they have any real intention of running a legitimate business, let alone the business acumen to produce a profit?
Hell no.
Much as I'd like to besmirch the SBA as a failed venture capital firm that has no right financing or guaranteeing ANY private sector ventures with a taxpayer guarantee, but it is even more insulting than that. The SBA is nothing more than a charity financing the world's dumbest people's hobbies.
I've seen horse ranches, sports bars, "pajama restaurants" (that's one where you show up for breakfast in your pajamas - the collateral tendered was milk and inventory), and no end to red-neck hick "tractor trailer" independent contractor types all financed and guaranteed by the tax payer thanks to the SBA. Never mind none of these people have an IQ above 80. Never mind none of these people have the slightest clue what it takes to run a business. Never mind they all have 2 divorces, and 5 children from 3 different mothers (sorry, I've been living in the sticks too long), no, those dumb idiots at the SBA are going to guarantee (with YOUR MONEY) the loans the private banks made to these chromosomed-challenged individuals.
So when Peggy Sue's "brilliant" "pet grooming" business plan fails, guess who ends up paying?
That's right, YOU DO.
Worse still is a program the SBA came up with called the "ARC" loan during the recession. This was a program where you could borrow up to $35,000 if your company was having trouble. So not only would the SBA provide the initial start up capital, if you ran into trouble it would double down providing you an ARC loan. EVERY company I've seen with an ARC loan, the borrowers were stupefyingly stupid in their original business endeavor AND had no chance whatsoever to pay back the loan.
Regardless, I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
The SBA is nowhere near as big of a problem as social security, medicare or medicaid. But what irks me more than the fact this government entity has done nothing but waste billions in taxpayer's money, is how it legitimizes or validates the world's DUMBEST people as real "business people." The trailer trash yokel who collected welfare and WIC all of the sudden thinks he's a real "business man" when a bank, that would normally NEVER in a million years make the loan, only does so because the SBA guarantees it. This moron is no different than a welfare bum who collects a paycheck, BUT with the added benefit of having the attitude that "he's a business man." I'd much rather just simply pay a welfare check to a guy who says, "Yeah, I'm scamming the system, so what?" than some doofus playing "make believe businessman" on my dime.
Mark my words, you will hear about the SBA in the future, just like Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac.
For those of you unfamiliar with the "SBA," it is a government agency set up to support idiotic, moronic, stupid, imbecilic, pathetic, losers and their equally idiotic, moronic, stupid, imbecilic, pathetic business ideas. ie- you suckers of taxpayers are paying America's DUMBEST (and I cannot stress how accurate that adjective is) "entrepreneurs" to pursue their hobbies, err..."dreams."
Did they have a business plan?
No.
Did they do the research necessary to make sure they didn't merely just take money from the taxpayer to pursue their stupid, idiotic bound-to-fail dreams?
No.
Did they have any real intention of running a legitimate business, let alone the business acumen to produce a profit?
Hell no.
Much as I'd like to besmirch the SBA as a failed venture capital firm that has no right financing or guaranteeing ANY private sector ventures with a taxpayer guarantee, but it is even more insulting than that. The SBA is nothing more than a charity financing the world's dumbest people's hobbies.
I've seen horse ranches, sports bars, "pajama restaurants" (that's one where you show up for breakfast in your pajamas - the collateral tendered was milk and inventory), and no end to red-neck hick "tractor trailer" independent contractor types all financed and guaranteed by the tax payer thanks to the SBA. Never mind none of these people have an IQ above 80. Never mind none of these people have the slightest clue what it takes to run a business. Never mind they all have 2 divorces, and 5 children from 3 different mothers (sorry, I've been living in the sticks too long), no, those dumb idiots at the SBA are going to guarantee (with YOUR MONEY) the loans the private banks made to these chromosomed-challenged individuals.
So when Peggy Sue's "brilliant" "pet grooming" business plan fails, guess who ends up paying?
That's right, YOU DO.
Worse still is a program the SBA came up with called the "ARC" loan during the recession. This was a program where you could borrow up to $35,000 if your company was having trouble. So not only would the SBA provide the initial start up capital, if you ran into trouble it would double down providing you an ARC loan. EVERY company I've seen with an ARC loan, the borrowers were stupefyingly stupid in their original business endeavor AND had no chance whatsoever to pay back the loan.
Regardless, I've said it before, and I'll say it again.
The SBA is nowhere near as big of a problem as social security, medicare or medicaid. But what irks me more than the fact this government entity has done nothing but waste billions in taxpayer's money, is how it legitimizes or validates the world's DUMBEST people as real "business people." The trailer trash yokel who collected welfare and WIC all of the sudden thinks he's a real "business man" when a bank, that would normally NEVER in a million years make the loan, only does so because the SBA guarantees it. This moron is no different than a welfare bum who collects a paycheck, BUT with the added benefit of having the attitude that "he's a business man." I'd much rather just simply pay a welfare check to a guy who says, "Yeah, I'm scamming the system, so what?" than some doofus playing "make believe businessman" on my dime.
Mark my words, you will hear about the SBA in the future, just like Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac.
Charting the Manosphere
Greetings all.
Working on a project to document, categorize and chart The Manosphere. I have below the various categories and the corresponding blogs, however, these are just those off the top of my head. Would very much appreciate your help in filling out the list and making it a bit more thorough. Also would appreciate any "categories" that I haven't thought of.
Much appreciated.
Female Manosphere Bloggers
Smalldeadanimals
Booksbikesboomsticks
Dr. Helen
Hooking Up Smart
The Thinking Housewife
Grerp
Haley's Halo
Fullofgraceseasonedwithsalt
Kathy Shialde
Divorce/Marriage/Religious Bloggers
The Spearhead
Dalrock
Gaming My Wife
Everyday Life Advice
The Art of Manliness
Hawaiian Libertarian
Freedom 25
Economics and Political Philosophy
Vox Day
Save Capitalism
and of course me, Cappy Cap
PUA/Gaming Community
Roissy (arguably the Godfather and creator of The Manosphere)
Rooshv
The University of Man
MGTOW
(none are coming to mind right now)
Working on a project to document, categorize and chart The Manosphere. I have below the various categories and the corresponding blogs, however, these are just those off the top of my head. Would very much appreciate your help in filling out the list and making it a bit more thorough. Also would appreciate any "categories" that I haven't thought of.
Much appreciated.
Female Manosphere Bloggers
Smalldeadanimals
Booksbikesboomsticks
Dr. Helen
Hooking Up Smart
The Thinking Housewife
Grerp
Haley's Halo
Fullofgraceseasonedwithsalt
Kathy Shialde
Divorce/Marriage/Religious Bloggers
The Spearhead
Dalrock
Gaming My Wife
Everyday Life Advice
The Art of Manliness
Hawaiian Libertarian
Freedom 25
Economics and Political Philosophy
Vox Day
Save Capitalism
and of course me, Cappy Cap
PUA/Gaming Community
Roissy (arguably the Godfather and creator of The Manosphere)
Rooshv
The University of Man
MGTOW
(none are coming to mind right now)
Stupid, Stupid Savers
I remember a while ago calculating a chart showing household debt to GDP. This was back in the day when I was lecturing people for spending more than they earned and taking out all the money from their homes. Of course, recessions (coupled now with banks that refuse to lend), have a tendency to make people tighten their belts. The effect is obvious when household debt to GDP went from nearly 100%, down 14% to it's current day (though still-not-eviable) 86%.
You would think the government would do the same. Or, if it were of a particular Keynesian stripe, merely offset this decrease with an increase of 14%. Heck, if you really believe in Keynsianism, you wouldn't need 14%, because of the Magical Economic Farting Unicorn, whose farts bless the land below with it's magical "Multiplier Effect!" THank you Magical Economic Farting Unicorn! So the government would only have to increase spending by 2, maybe 3 percentage points.
No, you foolish, foolish person. The government increased it's debt in the same time by nearly 35%.
Good thing you all tightened your belts and saved so the government could incur $3 more in debt for every dollar you saved!
You would think the government would do the same. Or, if it were of a particular Keynesian stripe, merely offset this decrease with an increase of 14%. Heck, if you really believe in Keynsianism, you wouldn't need 14%, because of the Magical Economic Farting Unicorn, whose farts bless the land below with it's magical "Multiplier Effect!" THank you Magical Economic Farting Unicorn! So the government would only have to increase spending by 2, maybe 3 percentage points.
No, you foolish, foolish person. The government increased it's debt in the same time by nearly 35%.
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
Can a Rationalization Hamster Be Killed?
Short version - meet 56 year old woman in my dance class. She complains about not being able to find any quality guys her age in town, BUT I have a 54 year old buddy who would like to meet her, perfect age, perfect height (she is very tall, but he is even taller), and is quite good looking too. I find some pictures of my buddy, e-mail them to her. THen I get the,
"It's nothing against your friend, but I just got out of a relationship and blah blah blah blah."
I'm shocked, because here is a 56 year old woman - pretty late in the game. Not like "top of the 6th no outs, first at bat," late in the game. More like, "bottom of the 9th, 2 hours, full count, nobody on base, down by 12" kind of late in the game.
So I pitch one RIGHT OVER THE PLATE. I serve up to her on a silver platter a very qualified candidate, and instead of her taking a swing at it, I get an excuse, the validity of which wouldn't pass 8th grade muster. And so I sit there bewildered and befuddled.
Therefore:
Question - Can rationalization hamsters be killed? Or do they just get stronger over time, inevitably becoming invincible and only die when their host does?
Discuss!
"It's nothing against your friend, but I just got out of a relationship and blah blah blah blah."
I'm shocked, because here is a 56 year old woman - pretty late in the game. Not like "top of the 6th no outs, first at bat," late in the game. More like, "bottom of the 9th, 2 hours, full count, nobody on base, down by 12" kind of late in the game.
So I pitch one RIGHT OVER THE PLATE. I serve up to her on a silver platter a very qualified candidate, and instead of her taking a swing at it, I get an excuse, the validity of which wouldn't pass 8th grade muster. And so I sit there bewildered and befuddled.
Therefore:
Question - Can rationalization hamsters be killed? Or do they just get stronger over time, inevitably becoming invincible and only die when their host does?
Discuss!
1730, December 25th, 1993
This is a repost of a classic I wrote LONG ago, so at least 80% of you haven't read it. It was inspired by Badger when he wrote a post about flaking and I think it's high-time to revisit it.
I will explain this very clearly so we all understand.
Girls, there is a consequence and a price you pay for "flaking out" on innocent good boys in your youth. You may find it funny, you may get a kick out of it, you may be doing it for sick and twisted kicks, or you may just be a coward and are too afraid to go on the date, but regardless of the reason, when you and hundreds of other girls flake out on a good boy, he transforms. He never grows up to become a "good man," he becomes a player, a bad boy, a cad. And while you may enjoy the "bad boy" in your 20's and it's all fun, when it comes time that you want a family and children, you'll decide that NOW you want a "good man."
What's funny, though, is just how many 30 something and 40 something women are now asking where all the good men have gone. Not to mention how they complain about all these "Man-Boys" not manning up. It's almost as if there are no good men out there.
Kind of funny, because I knew a good man once. Back at 1729 hrs on December 25th, 1993. Never knew what happened to him.
I will explain this very clearly so we all understand.
Girls, there is a consequence and a price you pay for "flaking out" on innocent good boys in your youth. You may find it funny, you may get a kick out of it, you may be doing it for sick and twisted kicks, or you may just be a coward and are too afraid to go on the date, but regardless of the reason, when you and hundreds of other girls flake out on a good boy, he transforms. He never grows up to become a "good man," he becomes a player, a bad boy, a cad. And while you may enjoy the "bad boy" in your 20's and it's all fun, when it comes time that you want a family and children, you'll decide that NOW you want a "good man."
What's funny, though, is just how many 30 something and 40 something women are now asking where all the good men have gone. Not to mention how they complain about all these "Man-Boys" not manning up. It's almost as if there are no good men out there.
Kind of funny, because I knew a good man once. Back at 1729 hrs on December 25th, 1993. Never knew what happened to him.
Tuesday, May 01, 2012
It's Not the Current Tax Rate That Concerns Us...
it's the future tax rate.
People often ask,
"Captain, why do you look at spending as a percent of GDP instead of revenues as a percent of GDP when looking at overall tax burden?"
Simple, curious Cappy Cappite.
Because no matter what we tell ourselves today, the TRUE tax rate we face is driven by how much we spend, not what we collect at any given point in time in terms of tax revenue. Oh sure, we can postpone the inevitable taxation way into the future (long after current politicians have died and suckered their constituents into voting for them with the money of future chidlren), but do not be fooled, all those precious little social programs, health care programs and other socialist programs, they HAVE to be paid back by tax dollars.
Maybe the taxpayers of today won't pay it (which many politicians are banking on), but SOME taxpayer at SOME POINT IN TIME will.
That is of course unless the US inflates itself out of it or just refuses to pay the Chinese back, but we wouldn't do that now would we?
People often ask,
"Captain, why do you look at spending as a percent of GDP instead of revenues as a percent of GDP when looking at overall tax burden?"
Simple, curious Cappy Cappite.
Because no matter what we tell ourselves today, the TRUE tax rate we face is driven by how much we spend, not what we collect at any given point in time in terms of tax revenue. Oh sure, we can postpone the inevitable taxation way into the future (long after current politicians have died and suckered their constituents into voting for them with the money of future chidlren), but do not be fooled, all those precious little social programs, health care programs and other socialist programs, they HAVE to be paid back by tax dollars.
Maybe the taxpayers of today won't pay it (which many politicians are banking on), but SOME taxpayer at SOME POINT IN TIME will.
That is of course unless the US inflates itself out of it or just refuses to pay the Chinese back, but we wouldn't do that now would we?
When Jesus and Feminists Collide
"Yes, preaching on women’s responsibilities is a great idea. I have seen it done. The women revolt and the pastor is quickly fired. I have heard supposedly Christian women flatly say they will never, ever, ever submit to their husbands or obey what the Bible has to say about their role. The problem is not a lack of knowledge; it is a lack of obedience. As long as civil and criminal law is on their side they will continue to behave as they do. After all, they have every incentive to rebel. Who is going to stop them? The church? The government? The media?"
Ah, it's just like breaking out my folding chair, lighting up a cigar and watching the 4th of July fireworks. So glad I left the church. So glad I gamed up. Now it's like watching the communists and nazi's duke it out in the Battle of Kursk.
Ah, it's just like breaking out my folding chair, lighting up a cigar and watching the 4th of July fireworks. So glad I left the church. So glad I gamed up. Now it's like watching the communists and nazi's duke it out in the Battle of Kursk.
We Laughed, We Cried, We Linked
The real reason why they can't find a "good man."
I hate flakes.
Ooo! Watch out, the truth will get you in trouble Uncle Bob.
Certainly not the students.
I wonder what it's like to live in a world where you think there are no consequences. Must be fun, until you get older and reality comes crushing down on you. Oh well. Horrible to have happen to you, fun to watch though.
I officially approved of welfare last week. "Plunder" sounds more manly though.
"God has a plan." Yeah, his plan involves laughing at people who lack the courage to make decisions, are too cowardly to face and own the consequences, and outsource the sentientness he gave them by subscribing to fateism. Good thing "the lord will provide."
"Through sickness and health....unless I meet a real rockstar then all bets are off."
Boys, you know what to do - enjoy that decline!
I hate flakes.
Ooo! Watch out, the truth will get you in trouble Uncle Bob.
Certainly not the students.
I wonder what it's like to live in a world where you think there are no consequences. Must be fun, until you get older and reality comes crushing down on you. Oh well. Horrible to have happen to you, fun to watch though.
I officially approved of welfare last week. "Plunder" sounds more manly though.
"God has a plan." Yeah, his plan involves laughing at people who lack the courage to make decisions, are too cowardly to face and own the consequences, and outsource the sentientness he gave them by subscribing to fateism. Good thing "the lord will provide."
"Through sickness and health....unless I meet a real rockstar then all bets are off."
Boys, you know what to do - enjoy that decline!
Monday, April 30, 2012
What Were Erin's Mistakes
OK class, tell your Professor Cappy Cap what Erin's real mistakes were that led her to financial trouble. Anyone, anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Shove it up your ass and shove it hard.
Where do those "millions of dollars come from?"
Not the private sector I bet. Great, I get to subsidize spoiled people's hobby of "design" at a public institution. Can only imagine the quality of design being on par with the west bank's art department.
And yeah, I do have my facts straight. I stopped over at the old Art school (forget what it's called now) on the west bank to compile salary data going back to the 1970's because it isn't available on the internet. Something tells me your stats don't go back that far. Mr. "Recent years." (added for post)
I also noticed how since my time there's about 40% more employees at the U of MN and only about 12% more students.
And you jerk off "deans" and "administrators" not only increase in numbers, but your salaries MAGICALLY never go down. Only up and up more than inflation.
And GOOD if the state has cut funding to your worthless programs (though, if I recall as a percent of GSP it hasn't gone down as much as you purport). Two of my friends went to the U of MN's "School of Design" back in the 90's and they sure as hell aren't working in design. I think living at home in their 30's is their primary occupation because ST. PAUL MINNESOTA ISN'T THE MECCA OF FASHION DESIGN YOU MORON!
Yeah, I sure Tommy Hilfiger recruits heavily from the St. Paul campus.
But hey, don't let me and my FACTS get in the way of you milking naive kids from the Twin Cities suburbs out of their tuition money while fooling them into thinking they're going to become the next Ralph Lauren.
Cripes, "University of Minnesota School of Design." You rank up there with degree mills like "Globe College" and "Arts Institute Intenational" and "University of Phoenix."
Kids, don't waste your money on a degree at the University of Minnesota's "School of Design." Buy "Worthless" instead. Save your money, save your time, HAVE THE EXACT SAME EMPLOYMENT PROSPECTS in the fashion industry WITHOUT the debt and the worthless piece of paper.