Jump, if you will, into the co-pilot's seat of the Captain's personal F-22 fighter plane. We're going to fly really high because we are going to need a very high bird's eye view in order for me to make my point. So high that your brain will disassociate itself from its current environment, allowing you to have the perspective to see what I see.
As it stands right now, be you left or right, we are looking for government to do something to get us out of this economic mess. The left votes for more government action, while the right votes for less government action. Regardless, both require government action. "Lowering taxes, increasing taxes. More regulation, less regulation. My question is one that you need to be high up to observe:
"What business is it of the government's how well the economy does anyway?"
Stick with me here.
I don't know if it was ever like this (though I presume it was upon the founding of the country), but why should the government or the people in the government worry about what its private citizens do? In my "ideal world" of how government would work, it would provide the basics of public goods that protects its citizens and allows for an efficiently operating society, but beyond that, the government (for better or worse) should have no skin in ANY regard of its people.
It wouldn't care if the economy was booming or not.
It wouldn't care if gays or straights want to get married in that it wouldn't license such things.
It wouldn't care if a company went green or not (and it certainly wouldn't finance any of them ala Solyndra or the SBA).
And if the people so mismanaged a business (GM, the banks, etc.) it wouldn't bail them out.
The government would be a very distant, cold and remote entity who if anybody came in and said, "You need to help us" it would say, "not my problem. We do roads, defense, infrastructure and law. Your economic problems are not under our jurisdiction. Deal with your own mistakes."
In short the government would leave the people to enjoy and suffer 100% of their successes and mistakes, allowing the population to learn (and thereby advance) much more rapidly than had it intervened all the time either trying to make things "fair" or "better."
Now with that concept in mind, I have a question -
What arrogant idiot decided it was OK to have the government start intervening in people's affairs?
And once again we have to be high up in the sky for you to realize the question I'm asking.
For example, who decided it was the government that was going to tell us private citizens how much bio-diesel we are going to make in 2013?
Who decided light bulbs were no longer good for us?
Who decided it's only the Fed that can get us out of our economic woes?
I could go on and on about the veritable Nazis Fuhrers Bloomberg and Obama (Michelle) telling us what to eat.
I know the answer is (usually) leftists and crusaders, but my question goes beyond individual, specific things that are obviously a violation of a person's individuality and freedom. I'm talking something much more fundamental. AND I'm talking about who or what group of people ORIGINALLY decided it was OK to cross this line and start destroying freedom.
For example the concept of "expansionary" and "contractionary" fiscal policy. What arrogance and bravado did it take for somebody to say, "Hey, the government can be used to expand and contract the economy in order to control inflation and growth!" It's none of the government's damn business whether an economy grows or contracts. That is up to the private citizens. Additionally, wouldn't you presume a government fiscal policy (it any at all) would be constantly expansionary? Wouldn't the government set up minimal rules and regulations that would result in a perpetual expansionary policy, conducive to maximum economic growth and be done with it once and for all, never to revisit it again?
No, it took some idiot, some power-hungry totalitarian to decide that, "Hey, I know what's better/best for the people! AND IT'S MY JURISDICTION TO INTERVENE!"
So my question is this - who was that guy? Who committed this "first, original cardinal sin of Keynesianism?"
Was it John Maynard Keynes himself? I doubt it, governments had been intervening long before he hit the scene. Woodrow Wilson maybe? Somewhere, I imagine, at least in US history, there was a group or a person who over-stepped the boundaries and deemed it the government's domain to cross that line and start taking a vested and unwarranted interest in what its peoples' private affairs.
Anybody with a better background in US history have an answer?
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Mortgage Cops!
"Mortgage cops!"
Actually, it kind of reminds me of "Police Cops" from the Simpsons. "Police....Cops... Police-cops"
Actually, it kind of reminds me of "Police Cops" from the Simpsons. "Police....Cops... Police-cops"
Monday, September 17, 2012
Proof We Need to CUT Education Funding
Cripes. Can't make it up.
So I presume we're all supposed to pay more in taxes to support these little brats' "college experience" without expecting them to learn anything.
I was hopeful there was an echelon or two of Gen Y students who "got it" and realized BO wasn't their savior after all. But now I realized for every one of those truly independent minded people there's a score of complete f$#%ing retards that really think college is supposed to be an "experience."
The crash can't come soon enough.
So I presume we're all supposed to pay more in taxes to support these little brats' "college experience" without expecting them to learn anything.
I was hopeful there was an echelon or two of Gen Y students who "got it" and realized BO wasn't their savior after all. But now I realized for every one of those truly independent minded people there's a score of complete f$#%ing retards that really think college is supposed to be an "experience."
The crash can't come soon enough.
Which of These Keynesian Stimuli Isn't Like The Others-Part 2
In my previous post I asked which of the three major Keynesian stimuli is NOT like the others. The three being:
WWII
Ronald Reagan
and
Bush/Obama
Many answers were tendered AND MANY WERE RIGHT FOR MULTIPLE REASONS, but I recall only one person getting the answer I was personally looking for.
There was a future in two of them, there is no future in the third.
I addressed this before, but I feel I have to address this again because idiots like Bernanke and His Magic Federal Reserve keep hammering away with their impotent tools to get the economy to grow again and so let the lesson begin.
During WWII, forget fighting for our future, we were just fighting to survive. We did not want the socialist fascist government of the Nazi's nor did we want the religious worship of an emperor as they did in Japan. We wanted to continue to be America and in fighting this second world war, further defined what it meant to be America and American. When the troops got back, we were not only victorious, but (unlike Vietnam and to a lesser extend today) the rest of the country were proud of what the troops did and supported them. In short we were all on the same page and pro-American. The troops and the rest of society then continued on to build a greater America by investing in businesses, homes and families.
During Reagan, yes there was an element of a cold-war going on, but the primary reason the Reagan Keynesian stimulus worked is because, once again, there was a future. Reagan was no doubt pro-America. More importantly he was pro-production, pro-individualism, pro-freedom, pro-business, pro-economic growth. The producers of this society knew he was on their side and thusly had faith in the short to medium term future of the country.
Today you may have been able to claim Bush was somewhat pro-America, but the same cannot be said of Obama. Additionally, you know for a fact Obama is not "pro-Business, "pro-Individualism," or "pro-Entrepreneur." He comes from a cabal of politicians who hate business, hate success, hate production and the only real "economic" plan he has is "well, all those green jobs will save us" (even though those green jobs aren't economic). Additionally, the economic stimulus he has pursued hasn't been focusing on tax cuts as much as it has been a galactic pissing away of future generations' money on frivolous social programs and government programs that produce nothing. Certainly not capital goods that would be used for future production, not even consumer goods that could be used for immediate consumption. Just initiatives, grants and a free-for-all for his armies of worthless-degreed people-come-social-workers/activities.
So Krugman can call for all the government spending he was.
Bernanke can promise the Fed will genetically engineer job-farting unicorns.
It won't matter.
This "Keynesian stimulus" is nothing more than a money grab and the administration is doing nothing more than criminalizing and destroying the American way of life.
Enjoy the decline!
WWII
Ronald Reagan
and
Bush/Obama
Many answers were tendered AND MANY WERE RIGHT FOR MULTIPLE REASONS, but I recall only one person getting the answer I was personally looking for.
There was a future in two of them, there is no future in the third.
I addressed this before, but I feel I have to address this again because idiots like Bernanke and His Magic Federal Reserve keep hammering away with their impotent tools to get the economy to grow again and so let the lesson begin.
During WWII, forget fighting for our future, we were just fighting to survive. We did not want the socialist fascist government of the Nazi's nor did we want the religious worship of an emperor as they did in Japan. We wanted to continue to be America and in fighting this second world war, further defined what it meant to be America and American. When the troops got back, we were not only victorious, but (unlike Vietnam and to a lesser extend today) the rest of the country were proud of what the troops did and supported them. In short we were all on the same page and pro-American. The troops and the rest of society then continued on to build a greater America by investing in businesses, homes and families.
During Reagan, yes there was an element of a cold-war going on, but the primary reason the Reagan Keynesian stimulus worked is because, once again, there was a future. Reagan was no doubt pro-America. More importantly he was pro-production, pro-individualism, pro-freedom, pro-business, pro-economic growth. The producers of this society knew he was on their side and thusly had faith in the short to medium term future of the country.
Today you may have been able to claim Bush was somewhat pro-America, but the same cannot be said of Obama. Additionally, you know for a fact Obama is not "pro-Business, "pro-Individualism," or "pro-Entrepreneur." He comes from a cabal of politicians who hate business, hate success, hate production and the only real "economic" plan he has is "well, all those green jobs will save us" (even though those green jobs aren't economic). Additionally, the economic stimulus he has pursued hasn't been focusing on tax cuts as much as it has been a galactic pissing away of future generations' money on frivolous social programs and government programs that produce nothing. Certainly not capital goods that would be used for future production, not even consumer goods that could be used for immediate consumption. Just initiatives, grants and a free-for-all for his armies of worthless-degreed people-come-social-workers/activities.
So Krugman can call for all the government spending he was.
Bernanke can promise the Fed will genetically engineer job-farting unicorns.
It won't matter.
This "Keynesian stimulus" is nothing more than a money grab and the administration is doing nothing more than criminalizing and destroying the American way of life.
Enjoy the decline!
Three Little Girls and the Captain
I walked outside my townhome this afternoon and surprisingly saw two little girls looking at the stones that I had used to adorn my sidewalk. MOST people don't know those "stones" are actually fossils and agates I deemed to be unworthy of showcase materiel and since I had a surplus of them, I decided that "sidewalk adorning" was their best use. But these mere 9 year old girls had a trained eye and noticed the pattern of the ammonite shell differentiated those "stones" from the rest of the stones members of the HOA used.
Originally I had a better intention for those fossils. For those fossils were no ordinary fossils upon discovery. No, they were my first veritable "find" of fossils I ever had in my life. A find nobody else found, and so I loaded up no less than about 400 pounds of those fossils.
Of course I found out later there are billions of these fossils available for sale on the internet, but at the time it was in my humble life a "historic find."
Confirming my "discovery" was nothing special was when I decided to take some of my lesser samples and sell them at the local flee market. Oh, yes, I polished, cut and coated all the fossils in enamel to make them marketable and appetizing to the young boys who would no doubt beg their parents to buy them some. But sadly in the end I only sold one fossil.
One measly little fossil to some nerdy kid.
It begat a philosophical reaction in me.
"If young boys can't be interested in fossils then where the hell has this country gone!?"
I don't know about you, but have any of you ever held a fossil? Have any of you ever held the former remains of a creature that was here multiple-millions of years ago?
I thought it was pretty cool. I thought that was pretty neat.
But, alas, as I am a capitalist first and foremost, it doesn't matter what "I" find interesting, it only matters what the masses find interesting, and thus, more people find Apple's latest 'screw you over gadget' er...I mean ...."product" more interesting than the physical remains of a pre-historic octopus.
Regardless, despite my spectacular failure to sell fossils and thinking no kids in the entirety of the United States had any interest in fossils, there sat before me two young girls rummaging through my "sidewalk crap fossils."
I said, "So, do you like fossils?"
They looked at me all scared like (as they should because they are only little young girls and I am a mean, evil puppy kicking republican male).
"yeah" one sheepishly said.
"Well those are all crap-fossils. You don't want none of those. I have a lot better fossils that are in storage."
There was a bit of an impasse as I looked at them blankly and they looked at me blankly. Then it dawned on me that they're kids and I better take the lead plus they were probably scared of me.
"Stay here, I'll show you some real fossils."
And so I went down into my basement, grabbed from my collection an ancient clam STILL with some of its original shell, a jaw bone of an oredont, a fish fossil I found in Kemmerer, and a handful of quality ammonites and clams.
But when I returned, they had spawned into THREE little girls.
One of their little buddies just popped out of nowhere.
"Who the hell is this?"
"This is our friend Amy"
"Oh."
"She's 11"
"Uh..oh...well ummm..good for her."
And so I went to show them some of the better pieces of my collection and engaged in some discussion about paleontology.
Now by this time I had already told them that I had some much better pieces in storage AND I told them they could take whatever they liked from my crap sidewalk fossils AND to check back with me later when I retrieved my fossils in storage. I was thinking this statement and my showing them some better pieces would send them on their way and they would take the hint.
But no. They're kids. They don't pick up on those subtleties normal adults do. They look at you like you're going to say more.
And so I had to say,
"well, look girls. I have to go do some adult stuff. But why don't you stop by later next week and I'll make sure to have enough fossils for all of you."
They still sat there with blank stares on their faces.
"Uh, I have to GO and do things. I PROMISE I WILL bring you back some fossils. Just stop by later. You have to go now."
I think they finally got the hint and so they slowly shoved off. They walked down the sidewalk with the handful of fossils I gave them and I thought "Bonus Cappy Cap Points for spreading the word of paleontology."
Thinking I was rid of them I started running my errands, until 2 hours later when they knocked at the door to see if I had retrieved those fossils in storage.
"No, girls. Not yet, it will be a week. They're in Wisconsin and far north. I have to go get them. Stop by later. And by "later" I mean a week!"
So they kind of sadly shoved off again, and SO FAR they haven't been back this evening.
Now, I know you schmoes. You're all getting warm fuzzies about how I had this triumvirate of girls show up at my joint and I wasn't the mean, evil, republican type that yelled at them and told them to get off my property at the end of a shotgun.
THAT IS NOT the lesson to be pulled from here.
The lesson is WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING TO THE BOYS OF THIS COUNTRY?
I have three GIRLS pilfering my joint, interested in fossils????
Where the hell are the boys????
I was at least HOPING some young boys would at least have the decency to STEAL some fossils so I could slowly unload all my crap fossils. But, no, young boys in America today can't even do that. No, I need three 9 year old girls to sheepishly look over my crap-sidewalk fossils and then ask politely to have some, and then stop by two hours thinking they've been delivered.
Sad day in America when the girls are starting to show more scientific promise and curiosity than the boys.
Originally I had a better intention for those fossils. For those fossils were no ordinary fossils upon discovery. No, they were my first veritable "find" of fossils I ever had in my life. A find nobody else found, and so I loaded up no less than about 400 pounds of those fossils.
Of course I found out later there are billions of these fossils available for sale on the internet, but at the time it was in my humble life a "historic find."
Confirming my "discovery" was nothing special was when I decided to take some of my lesser samples and sell them at the local flee market. Oh, yes, I polished, cut and coated all the fossils in enamel to make them marketable and appetizing to the young boys who would no doubt beg their parents to buy them some. But sadly in the end I only sold one fossil.
One measly little fossil to some nerdy kid.
It begat a philosophical reaction in me.
"If young boys can't be interested in fossils then where the hell has this country gone!?"
I don't know about you, but have any of you ever held a fossil? Have any of you ever held the former remains of a creature that was here multiple-millions of years ago?
I thought it was pretty cool. I thought that was pretty neat.
But, alas, as I am a capitalist first and foremost, it doesn't matter what "I" find interesting, it only matters what the masses find interesting, and thus, more people find Apple's latest 'screw you over gadget' er...I mean ...."product" more interesting than the physical remains of a pre-historic octopus.
Regardless, despite my spectacular failure to sell fossils and thinking no kids in the entirety of the United States had any interest in fossils, there sat before me two young girls rummaging through my "sidewalk crap fossils."
I said, "So, do you like fossils?"
They looked at me all scared like (as they should because they are only little young girls and I am a mean, evil puppy kicking republican male).
"yeah" one sheepishly said.
"Well those are all crap-fossils. You don't want none of those. I have a lot better fossils that are in storage."
There was a bit of an impasse as I looked at them blankly and they looked at me blankly. Then it dawned on me that they're kids and I better take the lead plus they were probably scared of me.
"Stay here, I'll show you some real fossils."
And so I went down into my basement, grabbed from my collection an ancient clam STILL with some of its original shell, a jaw bone of an oredont, a fish fossil I found in Kemmerer, and a handful of quality ammonites and clams.
But when I returned, they had spawned into THREE little girls.
One of their little buddies just popped out of nowhere.
"Who the hell is this?"
"This is our friend Amy"
"Oh."
"She's 11"
"Uh..oh...well ummm..good for her."
And so I went to show them some of the better pieces of my collection and engaged in some discussion about paleontology.
Now by this time I had already told them that I had some much better pieces in storage AND I told them they could take whatever they liked from my crap sidewalk fossils AND to check back with me later when I retrieved my fossils in storage. I was thinking this statement and my showing them some better pieces would send them on their way and they would take the hint.
But no. They're kids. They don't pick up on those subtleties normal adults do. They look at you like you're going to say more.
And so I had to say,
"well, look girls. I have to go do some adult stuff. But why don't you stop by later next week and I'll make sure to have enough fossils for all of you."
They still sat there with blank stares on their faces.
"Uh, I have to GO and do things. I PROMISE I WILL bring you back some fossils. Just stop by later. You have to go now."
I think they finally got the hint and so they slowly shoved off. They walked down the sidewalk with the handful of fossils I gave them and I thought "Bonus Cappy Cap Points for spreading the word of paleontology."
Thinking I was rid of them I started running my errands, until 2 hours later when they knocked at the door to see if I had retrieved those fossils in storage.
"No, girls. Not yet, it will be a week. They're in Wisconsin and far north. I have to go get them. Stop by later. And by "later" I mean a week!"
So they kind of sadly shoved off again, and SO FAR they haven't been back this evening.
Now, I know you schmoes. You're all getting warm fuzzies about how I had this triumvirate of girls show up at my joint and I wasn't the mean, evil, republican type that yelled at them and told them to get off my property at the end of a shotgun.
THAT IS NOT the lesson to be pulled from here.
The lesson is WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING TO THE BOYS OF THIS COUNTRY?
I have three GIRLS pilfering my joint, interested in fossils????
Where the hell are the boys????
I was at least HOPING some young boys would at least have the decency to STEAL some fossils so I could slowly unload all my crap fossils. But, no, young boys in America today can't even do that. No, I need three 9 year old girls to sheepishly look over my crap-sidewalk fossils and then ask politely to have some, and then stop by two hours thinking they've been delivered.
Sad day in America when the girls are starting to show more scientific promise and curiosity than the boys.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
The Trinity of Women's Choice
A dark, but still funny saying is
"When it comes to women you can have
sanity
beauty
intelligence
Choose 2."
It's funny (to quote Faud from Family Guy) "because it's true."
But while that may be the question men get to face when potentially courting a woman, women also get to ask themselves a question:
"Husband
Children
Career
Choose 2."
It just popped into my head, but I realized I liked it more in that in selecting any 2 mutually excludes the third.
Sorry ladies, just isn't enough time in the day to "have it all." But don't listen to me.
"When it comes to women you can have
sanity
beauty
intelligence
Choose 2."
It's funny (to quote Faud from Family Guy) "because it's true."
But while that may be the question men get to face when potentially courting a woman, women also get to ask themselves a question:
"Husband
Children
Career
Choose 2."
It just popped into my head, but I realized I liked it more in that in selecting any 2 mutually excludes the third.
Sorry ladies, just isn't enough time in the day to "have it all." But don't listen to me.
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Revisiting Playboy Majors
I was onto the education bubble a while ago when I studied what the Playboy Playmates majored in (hint - NOT ENGINEERING), but a reader sent me this and now that "Princeton" studied it, it makes it official. Language warning of course.
You Stupid College Children
OK, I spy with my little eye something that explains why you idiotic college students are paying higher and higher tuition. Do you see it?
"Dear Girls Who Want to Date My Son"
Out-freaking-standing.
Of course I remember what my mom told me.
"Maybe you're looking in the wrong places."
"Maybe you attract the wrong type of girl."
"Maybe your attitude is scaring off all the good girls."
All that did was make me redouble my efforts to find something that was wrong with me, that didn't exist.
I will warn you, a huge language warning, I guess this is what a Mama Bear looks like.
Stay frosty, boys.
Of course I remember what my mom told me.
"Maybe you're looking in the wrong places."
"Maybe you attract the wrong type of girl."
"Maybe your attitude is scaring off all the good girls."
All that did was make me redouble my efforts to find something that was wrong with me, that didn't exist.
I will warn you, a huge language warning, I guess this is what a Mama Bear looks like.
Stay frosty, boys.
Friday, September 14, 2012
The Minimalism or Riches Dichotomy
The life of minimalism is great.
I wake up every day around 10-11AM. I run or work out. Have my cup of coffee at the local pub (maybe something stronger). Have breakfast at home. Do a little typity-type here on teh interwebz. Work on various hobbies or projects I have. Play some video games. Then go out at night with my friends and simply repeat the process till I'm dead.
I pay little, if anything, in taxes because I make so little. I also contribute nothing to a retirement program. While this means no asset accumulations, that also means I have no assets I have to worry about being confiscated or seized. Plus, with little income and no assets, we have the added bonus of all those caring, compassionate Minnesota liberals that have voted in a plethora of tax breaks and benefits to people like me who are deemed "poor" (most of which I have yet to inquire about because I just haven't had the time to see if I qualify for "food stamps" or whatever other socialist malarkey they've voted in).
It is a life of maximum freedom I'm still getting used to and still have yet to fully comprehend, but in the few feet I've burrowed down this rabbit hole further I have come up with an interesting realization.
Despite your best efforts to be a minimalist and make as little as possible, you're arguably the most likely candidate to be filthy rich.
Allow me to explain why.
Nobody really makes it "rich" by "working hard" and "being loyal" to their employer. ALL employers have the goal of profit maximization which aligns their interests completely against yours. They are looking to not just keep your salary low, but eliminate you if at all possible. This leads to not only wage stagnation, but job insecurity. This would seem a bad deal that nobody would participate in, however if you saddle yourself with liabilities like a house, children and a spouse, then you really have no choice. You must abide by the terms of "traditional" employment, pursue it, play their games, suffer the politics, constantly be "leanring new skills" to keep up with CPE, in the hopes they don't lay you off in the next round of lay offs. You never invent anything. You never create anything. You MUST obey your employer. Check your individuality and ideas at the door, you're our newest valuable member to "Team Corporate Bitch."
In short, you are the furthest thing from an entreprenuer. You are a corporate slave. You need to play the game and endure the pettiness of corporate politics because you have liabilities and responsibilities to pay for, namely a wife, children and a mortgage. You never get to pursue what YOU want as you are too busy doing what other people tell you.
Contrast that now to your "loser" minimalist counterpart living in the basement of a buddy's, sleeping on a couch. This individual only has to work enough to support him/herself. A true minimalist will realize this only takes about maybe 10 hours of work per week, especially if they keep their expenses low. But (and here's the kicker) what does that person do with the other 30 hours per week of leisure while all their married-with-children-counterparts are busy at work, unable to play?
Well, if you're like any regular guy, you're inevitably going to be driven insane loafing around with nobody to talk to and inevitably you're going to start getting creative. Something, ANYTHING to occupy your mind. And that's when you'll start becoming really innovative.
And innovation is the most direct route to riches.
It may not be a book. It may not be a new piece of code. It may not be a new and revolutionary idea. But it will be SOMETHING that the loafing minimalists will come up with that their fully-engaged-and-enslaved corporate bitch counterparts never have the time to come up with themselves. In other words, the minimalist and the corporate slave may have the same intellectual capacity for creation and innovation. It's just that the minimalist actually has the time to actually pursue and implement these ideas.
A perfect example is the gal who wrote the Harry Potter books.
Shoot, you pay me a government check for being a single mom and I'll write books.
But what of her otherwise employed mom counterpart? The one who works all those extra hours at the local law office or social services department. When that counterpart is done with her 8-10 hour day with an extra 1-2 hour commute, and another hour of picking up her children form the Child-Outsource-Department...err...I mean..."daycare." Do you think she has the intellectual and creative energy to start writing fantasy books at the end of the day?
Of course not. Which brings about the dichotomy.
Though you, I and others may be minimalists, realize one of (if not "the") biggest advantages we have is that we have the option of working "smarter." We get to create and innovate. And not just create and innovate, but pursue. AND that is without some aging, old fart yutz dismissing our ideas and getting in our way. And though we may make peanuts now compared to our counterparts, if we ever pursue an idea and any one of those ideas actually take off, it is we who will be the genuine self-made millionaires vs the "$400,000 McMansion senior project manager with a $450,000 mortgage, SUV, and no time for ourselves" type people.
ie- there is only an upshot for being a minimalist.
At MINIMUM you have the majority of your time and life to yourself. You're not slaving away, you're not working for somebody else. You're not suffering the psychological torture of mismanaged and dysfunctional employers. You get to live your life.
However, at the same time, in getting to live your life, you are in a supremely better position to actually make riches as it is ideas and creations that make money, not "getting an MBA and putting in those extra hours after 4 billion hours of additional CPE certifications and kissing Bob's ass in the HR department."
So don't just think outside the box ladies and gentlemen. Actually get outside the box and make things happen....except for those of you with children, spouses, mortgages, SUV's, credit card bills and other things you can't afford. You need to stay in the box and be a team player. ;)
Enjoy the decline!
I wake up every day around 10-11AM. I run or work out. Have my cup of coffee at the local pub (maybe something stronger). Have breakfast at home. Do a little typity-type here on teh interwebz. Work on various hobbies or projects I have. Play some video games. Then go out at night with my friends and simply repeat the process till I'm dead.
I pay little, if anything, in taxes because I make so little. I also contribute nothing to a retirement program. While this means no asset accumulations, that also means I have no assets I have to worry about being confiscated or seized. Plus, with little income and no assets, we have the added bonus of all those caring, compassionate Minnesota liberals that have voted in a plethora of tax breaks and benefits to people like me who are deemed "poor" (most of which I have yet to inquire about because I just haven't had the time to see if I qualify for "food stamps" or whatever other socialist malarkey they've voted in).
It is a life of maximum freedom I'm still getting used to and still have yet to fully comprehend, but in the few feet I've burrowed down this rabbit hole further I have come up with an interesting realization.
Despite your best efforts to be a minimalist and make as little as possible, you're arguably the most likely candidate to be filthy rich.
Allow me to explain why.
Nobody really makes it "rich" by "working hard" and "being loyal" to their employer. ALL employers have the goal of profit maximization which aligns their interests completely against yours. They are looking to not just keep your salary low, but eliminate you if at all possible. This leads to not only wage stagnation, but job insecurity. This would seem a bad deal that nobody would participate in, however if you saddle yourself with liabilities like a house, children and a spouse, then you really have no choice. You must abide by the terms of "traditional" employment, pursue it, play their games, suffer the politics, constantly be "leanring new skills" to keep up with CPE, in the hopes they don't lay you off in the next round of lay offs. You never invent anything. You never create anything. You MUST obey your employer. Check your individuality and ideas at the door, you're our newest valuable member to "Team Corporate Bitch."
In short, you are the furthest thing from an entreprenuer. You are a corporate slave. You need to play the game and endure the pettiness of corporate politics because you have liabilities and responsibilities to pay for, namely a wife, children and a mortgage. You never get to pursue what YOU want as you are too busy doing what other people tell you.
Contrast that now to your "loser" minimalist counterpart living in the basement of a buddy's, sleeping on a couch. This individual only has to work enough to support him/herself. A true minimalist will realize this only takes about maybe 10 hours of work per week, especially if they keep their expenses low. But (and here's the kicker) what does that person do with the other 30 hours per week of leisure while all their married-with-children-counterparts are busy at work, unable to play?
Well, if you're like any regular guy, you're inevitably going to be driven insane loafing around with nobody to talk to and inevitably you're going to start getting creative. Something, ANYTHING to occupy your mind. And that's when you'll start becoming really innovative.
And innovation is the most direct route to riches.
It may not be a book. It may not be a new piece of code. It may not be a new and revolutionary idea. But it will be SOMETHING that the loafing minimalists will come up with that their fully-engaged-and-enslaved corporate bitch counterparts never have the time to come up with themselves. In other words, the minimalist and the corporate slave may have the same intellectual capacity for creation and innovation. It's just that the minimalist actually has the time to actually pursue and implement these ideas.
A perfect example is the gal who wrote the Harry Potter books.
Shoot, you pay me a government check for being a single mom and I'll write books.
But what of her otherwise employed mom counterpart? The one who works all those extra hours at the local law office or social services department. When that counterpart is done with her 8-10 hour day with an extra 1-2 hour commute, and another hour of picking up her children form the Child-Outsource-Department...err...I mean..."daycare." Do you think she has the intellectual and creative energy to start writing fantasy books at the end of the day?
Of course not. Which brings about the dichotomy.
Though you, I and others may be minimalists, realize one of (if not "the") biggest advantages we have is that we have the option of working "smarter." We get to create and innovate. And not just create and innovate, but pursue. AND that is without some aging, old fart yutz dismissing our ideas and getting in our way. And though we may make peanuts now compared to our counterparts, if we ever pursue an idea and any one of those ideas actually take off, it is we who will be the genuine self-made millionaires vs the "$400,000 McMansion senior project manager with a $450,000 mortgage, SUV, and no time for ourselves" type people.
ie- there is only an upshot for being a minimalist.
At MINIMUM you have the majority of your time and life to yourself. You're not slaving away, you're not working for somebody else. You're not suffering the psychological torture of mismanaged and dysfunctional employers. You get to live your life.
However, at the same time, in getting to live your life, you are in a supremely better position to actually make riches as it is ideas and creations that make money, not "getting an MBA and putting in those extra hours after 4 billion hours of additional CPE certifications and kissing Bob's ass in the HR department."
So don't just think outside the box ladies and gentlemen. Actually get outside the box and make things happen....except for those of you with children, spouses, mortgages, SUV's, credit card bills and other things you can't afford. You need to stay in the box and be a team player. ;)
Enjoy the decline!
Which of These Keynesian Stimuli Isn't Like The Others?
Since WWII, there has been "roughly" three major "Keynesian Stimuli" of expansionary fiscal policy.
The first one was WWII itself. Arguably the godfather of all Keynesian stimuli, it got us out of the Great Depression.
The second was Ronald Reagan. Reagan, despite his reputation was a HAYOOOGE spender, driving up deficits to the point the debt had to be addressed. Regardless, that got us out of the of oil-embargo/lazy-hippie-infestation/generally crappy 70's economy.
The third is today with what I will intellectually-honestly call "Bush-Obama" because Obama merely took Bush's deficit spending and magnified it. Still Keynesian, still deficit spending, still expansionary, BUT....
One key thing missing.
A recovery.
Now I know three instances or case studies of Keynesian economic policy does not make a trend, but there is a difference between the Keynesian stimuluses of WWII and Reagan versus that of Bush/Obama.
And it is the same reason why this galactic DF of a stimulus has failed.
Anybody care to guess what that reason is?
I'll give you a clue. Modern day Keynesians are focusing too much on economics and not something else.
POST-POST - Ok,it seems people are missing the forest from the trees. I am playing devil's advocate and using liberal arguments and assumptions to only further my point. So let's just "assume" it was WWII and other Keynesian type things that got us out of these recessions. What is missing from this current Keynesian splurgefest that explains the lack of recovery.
The first one was WWII itself. Arguably the godfather of all Keynesian stimuli, it got us out of the Great Depression.
The second was Ronald Reagan. Reagan, despite his reputation was a HAYOOOGE spender, driving up deficits to the point the debt had to be addressed. Regardless, that got us out of the of oil-embargo/lazy-hippie-infestation/generally crappy 70's economy.
The third is today with what I will intellectually-honestly call "Bush-Obama" because Obama merely took Bush's deficit spending and magnified it. Still Keynesian, still deficit spending, still expansionary, BUT....
One key thing missing.
A recovery.
Now I know three instances or case studies of Keynesian economic policy does not make a trend, but there is a difference between the Keynesian stimuluses of WWII and Reagan versus that of Bush/Obama.
And it is the same reason why this galactic DF of a stimulus has failed.
Anybody care to guess what that reason is?
I'll give you a clue. Modern day Keynesians are focusing too much on economics and not something else.
POST-POST - Ok,it seems people are missing the forest from the trees. I am playing devil's advocate and using liberal arguments and assumptions to only further my point. So let's just "assume" it was WWII and other Keynesian type things that got us out of these recessions. What is missing from this current Keynesian splurgefest that explains the lack of recovery.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Fight the HR Power
From our Canadian Agent in the Field and I want you youth to pay attention to this.
Now I want you youth to pay attention. I know you have student debts. I know you have dreams of working hard and becoming the best at what you do. And I know you want to find an employer and give it your best in the hopes they reward you with a promotion and additional income.
However, your dreams and desires are NOT worth the humility, shame, and mockery that is required today by most employers. Namely the BS you have to go through to demean yourself in front of what can be described as nothing more than power-tripping HR bastards in the mere hopes that you maybe, possibly, hopefully get that precious little interview.
The above e-mail comes from a more-than-talented individual who is capable of doing not only the job he was interested in, but his would-be boss' job. When he applied he was requested to spend 75 minutes of his precious life filling out questions. Questions that have nothing to do with the job and are nothing more than a myriad of hurdles created by the psychotic HR matrix to create themselves "make work" to make it seem like they are relevant to the hiring process.
Now, again, I know you want to do well. But inevitably you need to have self-respect. And it is here that HR and its minions have crossed the line and you (youth as a collective) need to stand up for yourselves and draw the line. Additionally, without such guidance, you will be condemned to spend more time applying for jobs than you did getting your degree, so please heed this advice.
1. Don't think for a second it is you that should be "grateful" for being able to have the "honor" to work for these schleps. This is a two way street sold to you as a one way street. COMPANIES NEED EMPLOYEES JUST AS MUCH AS EMPLOYEES NEED JOBS. However, because of the lousy economy employers think they can just lord jobs over the masses and make you little pawns dance (and I have heard more than one HR lady say "well, with 9% unemployment we can just choose whoever we want"). Frankly, fuck them. If they're going to engage in such trivial antics and make you dance for a job, to hell with them. First, you wouldn't want to work for a company that is that psychologically twisted. And second, for once, the socialist government policies can actually help you. Collect a government check before working for these assholes. If you don't believe me that they're being trivial, please click on the link above and then click the "next" button in the bottom right. Start taking the quiz, step back and ask yourself the question, "how pathetic and sad is it they're asking me such questions?"
2. If you don't think HR has a power-trip problem, ask yourself another question - what gall does it take to ask for your facebook password? And forget facebook passwords, who looks people up on Google? What you don't understand is that the people who are in positions of power in HR are old fogeys. They don't realize that a fair amount of your private/social life is on the internet. It was never intended to be your business life and no doubt you keep your personal and business lives separate. But the old farts in the corporate world lack the intellectual honesty to leave your personal life out of their hiring decision. And so they deem it their territory and right to invade your personal life.
Why would you tolerate this? Why would you work for such a firm?
Yes, they are the ones offering the job. But you are the one offering your labor. And until the HR rep allows you to investigate her/his personal life to the level of "The Firm" then they should not be asking of you the same. Besides, any forward thinking employer would realize their future is with the youth and the youth have a fair amount of their social lives on the internet and thus, their social lives are none of the employer's god damned business.
3. Understand you stand a better shot at finding employment REFUSING to interview with companies that require HR interviews and going directly to the hiring manager. The HR personnel usually conducting the interview is going to be a 20 something female who has NO CLUE about what your field is or the job you're applying for and is going to ask asinine questions. Your time is better spent refusing such interviews and applying for additional jobs.
4. Speaking of applying for other jobs. Don't bother filling in Taleo or Brass Ring resumes. You know the companies that require you upload or e-mail your resume, but then also require you re-enter that exact same data into their special little "application template." You can send out 20 more resumes to more competent and professional employers in that time if you don't bother with such hurdles. If they HR department is so lazy they can't bother reading through resumes and rely on "parsing" technology simply looking for key words, they weren't going to hire you anyway.
5. And finally, attitude. You may think the above e-mail would ban the applicant from ever getting a job. Quite the contrary. It's been my experience that I've gotten more job offers or interview offers where I've been direct, blunt, even insubordinate and said, "No, I'm not interviewing with HR" or "No, I'm not filling out this application" or "No, here's my resume, if you don't like it, fine, but I'm not filling out your brass ring." I even got two jobs from me cursing saying, "If you're another piece of shit little community bank that can't get its act together, then I'm not interested." You must treat HR like you would women (because, well, they are pretty much one and the same). Be strong and frankly, treat them like crap. You'll get a better response than being supplicant and confirmatory. And at least you'll find a job/employer that jives better with your personality.
In short, the lesson is simply this - HR and employers have in large become so arrogant that they can start demanding requirements that are not just insulting, but invade your personal lives. That has crossed a line. You can either choose to hold the line and tell them to pound sand or become supplicant, jump through all their hoops, waste away what finite little time you have on this planet, and, (in the rare instance they hire your) work a sucky job that YOU KNEW WOULD BE SUCKY because only sucky employers employ such sucky hiring tactics.
HR needs to be obsoleted. And the only way that is going to happen is when employees and applicants start standing up for themselves like our hero above and starve employers out of their labor. I don't care what the unemployment rate is, I don't care if you have to accept government money, there is a line and HR has crossed it. Please have a modicum of self-respect and refuse to apply for positions that require HR interviews and such inane surveys.
This has been a PSA from your beloved Captain.
Dear Mr. BOB, I was going to apply for the job of RFP proposal writer, but I got about halfway through your absolutely retarded human resources survey, (http://www.profileperformancesystem.com/survey.html?SL=32402) and gave up. I can only tolerate a limited amount of this kind of drivel, which likely makes me a poor match for this job, and for your agency. If you're interested in discovering candidates with genuine experience and a useful skillset, this is not the way to discover them. Yours truly, BILL BILLSON
Now I want you youth to pay attention. I know you have student debts. I know you have dreams of working hard and becoming the best at what you do. And I know you want to find an employer and give it your best in the hopes they reward you with a promotion and additional income.
However, your dreams and desires are NOT worth the humility, shame, and mockery that is required today by most employers. Namely the BS you have to go through to demean yourself in front of what can be described as nothing more than power-tripping HR bastards in the mere hopes that you maybe, possibly, hopefully get that precious little interview.
The above e-mail comes from a more-than-talented individual who is capable of doing not only the job he was interested in, but his would-be boss' job. When he applied he was requested to spend 75 minutes of his precious life filling out questions. Questions that have nothing to do with the job and are nothing more than a myriad of hurdles created by the psychotic HR matrix to create themselves "make work" to make it seem like they are relevant to the hiring process.
Now, again, I know you want to do well. But inevitably you need to have self-respect. And it is here that HR and its minions have crossed the line and you (youth as a collective) need to stand up for yourselves and draw the line. Additionally, without such guidance, you will be condemned to spend more time applying for jobs than you did getting your degree, so please heed this advice.
1. Don't think for a second it is you that should be "grateful" for being able to have the "honor" to work for these schleps. This is a two way street sold to you as a one way street. COMPANIES NEED EMPLOYEES JUST AS MUCH AS EMPLOYEES NEED JOBS. However, because of the lousy economy employers think they can just lord jobs over the masses and make you little pawns dance (and I have heard more than one HR lady say "well, with 9% unemployment we can just choose whoever we want"). Frankly, fuck them. If they're going to engage in such trivial antics and make you dance for a job, to hell with them. First, you wouldn't want to work for a company that is that psychologically twisted. And second, for once, the socialist government policies can actually help you. Collect a government check before working for these assholes. If you don't believe me that they're being trivial, please click on the link above and then click the "next" button in the bottom right. Start taking the quiz, step back and ask yourself the question, "how pathetic and sad is it they're asking me such questions?"
2. If you don't think HR has a power-trip problem, ask yourself another question - what gall does it take to ask for your facebook password? And forget facebook passwords, who looks people up on Google? What you don't understand is that the people who are in positions of power in HR are old fogeys. They don't realize that a fair amount of your private/social life is on the internet. It was never intended to be your business life and no doubt you keep your personal and business lives separate. But the old farts in the corporate world lack the intellectual honesty to leave your personal life out of their hiring decision. And so they deem it their territory and right to invade your personal life.
Why would you tolerate this? Why would you work for such a firm?
Yes, they are the ones offering the job. But you are the one offering your labor. And until the HR rep allows you to investigate her/his personal life to the level of "The Firm" then they should not be asking of you the same. Besides, any forward thinking employer would realize their future is with the youth and the youth have a fair amount of their social lives on the internet and thus, their social lives are none of the employer's god damned business.
3. Understand you stand a better shot at finding employment REFUSING to interview with companies that require HR interviews and going directly to the hiring manager. The HR personnel usually conducting the interview is going to be a 20 something female who has NO CLUE about what your field is or the job you're applying for and is going to ask asinine questions. Your time is better spent refusing such interviews and applying for additional jobs.
4. Speaking of applying for other jobs. Don't bother filling in Taleo or Brass Ring resumes. You know the companies that require you upload or e-mail your resume, but then also require you re-enter that exact same data into their special little "application template." You can send out 20 more resumes to more competent and professional employers in that time if you don't bother with such hurdles. If they HR department is so lazy they can't bother reading through resumes and rely on "parsing" technology simply looking for key words, they weren't going to hire you anyway.
5. And finally, attitude. You may think the above e-mail would ban the applicant from ever getting a job. Quite the contrary. It's been my experience that I've gotten more job offers or interview offers where I've been direct, blunt, even insubordinate and said, "No, I'm not interviewing with HR" or "No, I'm not filling out this application" or "No, here's my resume, if you don't like it, fine, but I'm not filling out your brass ring." I even got two jobs from me cursing saying, "If you're another piece of shit little community bank that can't get its act together, then I'm not interested." You must treat HR like you would women (because, well, they are pretty much one and the same). Be strong and frankly, treat them like crap. You'll get a better response than being supplicant and confirmatory. And at least you'll find a job/employer that jives better with your personality.
In short, the lesson is simply this - HR and employers have in large become so arrogant that they can start demanding requirements that are not just insulting, but invade your personal lives. That has crossed a line. You can either choose to hold the line and tell them to pound sand or become supplicant, jump through all their hoops, waste away what finite little time you have on this planet, and, (in the rare instance they hire your) work a sucky job that YOU KNEW WOULD BE SUCKY because only sucky employers employ such sucky hiring tactics.
HR needs to be obsoleted. And the only way that is going to happen is when employees and applicants start standing up for themselves like our hero above and starve employers out of their labor. I don't care what the unemployment rate is, I don't care if you have to accept government money, there is a line and HR has crossed it. Please have a modicum of self-respect and refuse to apply for positions that require HR interviews and such inane surveys.
This has been a PSA from your beloved Captain.
From Our Spaniard Agent in the Field
Been meaning to put this up here for a while but got lost in the move. Apparently one of our agents not only lives in Spain but also close to Sadhill Cemetery, the final scene to "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly." I've said before I'd love to be "that father" who forces his kids to go see Sad Hill cemetery while on a European trip instead of The Luve (or however it's spelled). Well our agent went hiking out there and took some photos. Apparently it has not been kept up, but if you hike into the mountains and look down you can see the circles. Enjoy the photos, but before you do, open this in a different window to get the full effect!
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Mandatory Listening
I like podcasts because I dislike reading. Reading you have to focus your eyes on and therefore can't be walking or running or doing anything else. So it shouldn't be too hard for you to listen to this.
I cannot emphasize enough how Murray Rothbard CLEARLY and PRECISELY explains a lot of the things I've/we've talked about here. Additionally he is VERY succinct. It is lengthy, but then again you should be running or listening to this in your car or something.
I cannot emphasize enough how Murray Rothbard CLEARLY and PRECISELY explains a lot of the things I've/we've talked about here. Additionally he is VERY succinct. It is lengthy, but then again you should be running or listening to this in your car or something.
Smarter, Better, Faster, Stronger
Follow me on this.
The reason capitalism has been so successful is because it acknowledges AND INCORPORATES human nature into it's basic bylaws. Humans will always operate in their best interests and maximize profit. Why fight these natural urges? Just tailor a government and economy around and based in those natural urges.
Communism, on the other hand, "hopes" and "prays" people altruistically do "the right thing" and if you don't, by god, we have camps for the likes of you.
Debate ensues about what "should" be done, but I always like hard core, cold stone instances of empirical proof as to what is the reality of human nature and thus, which economic model is feasible and which is "hopey changey."
Enter the illegal drug trade.
What I LOVE about the illegal drug trade and why I CHEER ON THE DRUG CARTELS is because they are not only empirical proof a government should NEVER get into moral or social issues and merely stick with economic issues, but because they highlight the pure genius and power of the human mind and the individual. The innovation that gives capitalism the ultimate edge over socialism and makes it the defacto/default economic reality.
You morons keep making all the rules you want. Smarter, faster, better, stronger people will subvert you.
The reason capitalism has been so successful is because it acknowledges AND INCORPORATES human nature into it's basic bylaws. Humans will always operate in their best interests and maximize profit. Why fight these natural urges? Just tailor a government and economy around and based in those natural urges.
Communism, on the other hand, "hopes" and "prays" people altruistically do "the right thing" and if you don't, by god, we have camps for the likes of you.
Debate ensues about what "should" be done, but I always like hard core, cold stone instances of empirical proof as to what is the reality of human nature and thus, which economic model is feasible and which is "hopey changey."
Enter the illegal drug trade.
What I LOVE about the illegal drug trade and why I CHEER ON THE DRUG CARTELS is because they are not only empirical proof a government should NEVER get into moral or social issues and merely stick with economic issues, but because they highlight the pure genius and power of the human mind and the individual. The innovation that gives capitalism the ultimate edge over socialism and makes it the defacto/default economic reality.
You morons keep making all the rules you want. Smarter, faster, better, stronger people will subvert you.
How 45% Can Be So Stupid
I understand that pollsters and MSM types like to oversample Democrats. And I understand that previous to the Reagan Carter election Carter was ahead by a wide margin.
That still doesn't assuage my anger that at least 45% of Americans are so stupid to still vote for Barack Obama.
That still doesn't assuage my anger that at least 45% of Americans are so stupid to still vote for Barack Obama.
A View Into an Evil Woman's Mind
I don't normally call people evil. I think that requires a combination of selfishness, amorality and genuine psychological issues. Most people I disagree with are usually misled, uninformed, misinformed, or brainwashed. Not evil.
However, Andrea qualifies as one of those genuine evil people. She writes in response to "Faking a Wife and Kids to Have a Vasectomy."
Andrea said...You are no different from the people you criticize: maximize pleasure now, no responsibility later. If you had decided not to have kids by being celibate, by the way, my estimation of you would have grown. That's courageous. Vasectomy? Not so much.
Let break this down bit by bit to show where she's incorrect and being intellectually dishonest and then delve into the dark and scary recesses of her mind.
1. I, and other men who have vasectomies, ARE different than those we criticize. The people we criticize are people who who maximize pleasure now, but then jettison their responsibility to other people, namely the taxpayer. The examples are limitless - single parents, people buying houses they can't afford, people driving without insurance and fleeing the scene, etc. - whereas we are engaging in an activity that ELIMINATES responsibility. She is unable to accept that technology has advanced to the point people can engage in certain behaviors that DID have a risk, but that technology eliminates the risk. It would be akin to me lecturing women for using birth control. Or lecturing a little 5 year old for having a tetanus shot. I can see it now, me yelling at a 5 year old...
"You are no different from those non-vaccinated children on the playground you criticize! Except they are courageous enough to accept the responsibility when they get tetanus. You coward! Getting a vaccination!"
It leads me to believe she is either a religious fanatic trying to force her religious views on me and others, or she's evil, or both.
2. If I decided to not have kids by being celibate her estimation of me would have grown.
Oh, darn. Shoot, and my whole life was about impressing delusion and psychotic strangers on the internet. Not to mention, being so dedicated to that I would give up sex for a random stranger's opinion.
Now, let's going into the world of Andrea.
There are three things that make me convinced she's not just insane, but evil.
1. Her inability to be intellectually honest. In not admitting or recognizing having a vasectomy is actually a responsible act and something responsible men do, but rather trying to warp that into something "bad" it tells me she has no desire to have her thinking based in reality. This is nearly 100% of the time a sign the person is trying to ply a double, NON-logic based standard on you, so you have to essentially abide by their logic and terms which are usually flawed and politically motivated.
2. Control. Who lectures you about what form of birth control you use? Who lectures you about anything as long as you aren't hurting anybody? Control freaks, that's who. Dictators, tyrants and crusaders. People who are unable to discern where their authority ends and where your sovereignty begins. They have no respect for you as a person and in a very evil manner decide, all on their own, they have the right to dictate to you what you are going to do with your personal life.
3. No fun for you/doesn't like sex. Is there anything more sick and wrong than a person who doesn't like fun? Also, I NEVER, NEVER trust anybody who doesn't like sex. That is a 100% correlation to somebody with problems. And I'm not talking the 18 year old girl who is scared of having sex the first time or maybe isn't secure with herself just yet. I'm talking the full grown woman that not only uses sex as a weapon, but just outright hates it. Red flag, red flag, red flag. WARNING WILL ROBINSON!
Now I could go all over the place with this. How to avoid these people, why never to date them, etc. etc. But I will merely point out that there are people like this out there men (and ladies). Evil people. People who are pscyhologically incapable of respecting you, respecting your freedoms and through a lack of morality have no problems getting into and controlling your lives. And I'm willing to bet, when push comes to shove and men start having more and more vasectomies AND decide to go Galt, not man up, not marry up, the likes of Andrea and her ilk will deem it their AUTHORITY and RIGHT to start pushing for legislation that we pay a "bachelor tax" or dare to even go so far as to eliminate vasectomies.
Her mind is darker and scarier than that, and I could say more but I'm sorry. I'm here to enjoy the decline. And by "enjoy the decline" I mean have sex with no costs or ramification because of my vasectomy.
Stay frosty, boys.
However, Andrea qualifies as one of those genuine evil people. She writes in response to "Faking a Wife and Kids to Have a Vasectomy."
Andrea said...You are no different from the people you criticize: maximize pleasure now, no responsibility later. If you had decided not to have kids by being celibate, by the way, my estimation of you would have grown. That's courageous. Vasectomy? Not so much.
Let break this down bit by bit to show where she's incorrect and being intellectually dishonest and then delve into the dark and scary recesses of her mind.
1. I, and other men who have vasectomies, ARE different than those we criticize. The people we criticize are people who who maximize pleasure now, but then jettison their responsibility to other people, namely the taxpayer. The examples are limitless - single parents, people buying houses they can't afford, people driving without insurance and fleeing the scene, etc. - whereas we are engaging in an activity that ELIMINATES responsibility. She is unable to accept that technology has advanced to the point people can engage in certain behaviors that DID have a risk, but that technology eliminates the risk. It would be akin to me lecturing women for using birth control. Or lecturing a little 5 year old for having a tetanus shot. I can see it now, me yelling at a 5 year old...
"You are no different from those non-vaccinated children on the playground you criticize! Except they are courageous enough to accept the responsibility when they get tetanus. You coward! Getting a vaccination!"
It leads me to believe she is either a religious fanatic trying to force her religious views on me and others, or she's evil, or both.
2. If I decided to not have kids by being celibate her estimation of me would have grown.
Oh, darn. Shoot, and my whole life was about impressing delusion and psychotic strangers on the internet. Not to mention, being so dedicated to that I would give up sex for a random stranger's opinion.
Now, let's going into the world of Andrea.
There are three things that make me convinced she's not just insane, but evil.
1. Her inability to be intellectually honest. In not admitting or recognizing having a vasectomy is actually a responsible act and something responsible men do, but rather trying to warp that into something "bad" it tells me she has no desire to have her thinking based in reality. This is nearly 100% of the time a sign the person is trying to ply a double, NON-logic based standard on you, so you have to essentially abide by their logic and terms which are usually flawed and politically motivated.
2. Control. Who lectures you about what form of birth control you use? Who lectures you about anything as long as you aren't hurting anybody? Control freaks, that's who. Dictators, tyrants and crusaders. People who are unable to discern where their authority ends and where your sovereignty begins. They have no respect for you as a person and in a very evil manner decide, all on their own, they have the right to dictate to you what you are going to do with your personal life.
3. No fun for you/doesn't like sex. Is there anything more sick and wrong than a person who doesn't like fun? Also, I NEVER, NEVER trust anybody who doesn't like sex. That is a 100% correlation to somebody with problems. And I'm not talking the 18 year old girl who is scared of having sex the first time or maybe isn't secure with herself just yet. I'm talking the full grown woman that not only uses sex as a weapon, but just outright hates it. Red flag, red flag, red flag. WARNING WILL ROBINSON!
Now I could go all over the place with this. How to avoid these people, why never to date them, etc. etc. But I will merely point out that there are people like this out there men (and ladies). Evil people. People who are pscyhologically incapable of respecting you, respecting your freedoms and through a lack of morality have no problems getting into and controlling your lives. And I'm willing to bet, when push comes to shove and men start having more and more vasectomies AND decide to go Galt, not man up, not marry up, the likes of Andrea and her ilk will deem it their AUTHORITY and RIGHT to start pushing for legislation that we pay a "bachelor tax" or dare to even go so far as to eliminate vasectomies.
Her mind is darker and scarier than that, and I could say more but I'm sorry. I'm here to enjoy the decline. And by "enjoy the decline" I mean have sex with no costs or ramification because of my vasectomy.
Stay frosty, boys.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
The Single Hinge of Liberalism
This is a short piece because it's more of an observation.
If you boil down every liberal/left argument today it inevitably hinges on one thing -
the rich paying more of what communists like to call "their fair share."
Forget what precisely is their "fair share." Forget numbers, forget statistics.
My question is this.
What kind of an ideology is it where your ENTIRE ideology is dependent on ONE SOLE group of people doing something that goes against their best interests?
I mean, right off the bat, you're essentially declaring your ideology unsustainable AND parasitic.
"Everything works out great as long as there's this group of people we can constantly criminalize and fleece for their money."
Well that's not an independent ideology. Heck, that's not even "ideal." It's slavery. And the only reason people tolerate it is because the slaves happen to be "rich."
But don't worry. Even in your most harsh, idealistic communist country the rich have two other options
1. Not work.
2. Flee.
And I already told you what would happen if you decided to confiscate all their assets if those nasty evil rich people decided to flee.
12 years, max.
But still, I want a liberal or a socialist to explain to me right now how this is a FEASIBLE ideology. One where the MAJORITY of your people are dependent upon a MINORITY. Tell me how that works in terms of long term logic and stability. And I want numbers, math. None of this decaying vomit your president passes onto you lemmings as a "speech" which is nothing more than pablum.
If you boil down every liberal/left argument today it inevitably hinges on one thing -
the rich paying more of what communists like to call "their fair share."
Forget what precisely is their "fair share." Forget numbers, forget statistics.
My question is this.
What kind of an ideology is it where your ENTIRE ideology is dependent on ONE SOLE group of people doing something that goes against their best interests?
I mean, right off the bat, you're essentially declaring your ideology unsustainable AND parasitic.
"Everything works out great as long as there's this group of people we can constantly criminalize and fleece for their money."
Well that's not an independent ideology. Heck, that's not even "ideal." It's slavery. And the only reason people tolerate it is because the slaves happen to be "rich."
But don't worry. Even in your most harsh, idealistic communist country the rich have two other options
1. Not work.
2. Flee.
And I already told you what would happen if you decided to confiscate all their assets if those nasty evil rich people decided to flee.
12 years, max.
But still, I want a liberal or a socialist to explain to me right now how this is a FEASIBLE ideology. One where the MAJORITY of your people are dependent upon a MINORITY. Tell me how that works in terms of long term logic and stability. And I want numbers, math. None of this decaying vomit your president passes onto you lemmings as a "speech" which is nothing more than pablum.
Now On Twitter
Well, I have been for a while, but I didn't use it. However, there's been a cacophony of youse guys that I get on it.
So I am.
Sure am twittering really good now. Look at me go! All hip and hop with the latest interwebz media thingies. Why, someday I may even get a phone that texts! And then, look out world!
So I am.
Sure am twittering really good now. Look at me go! All hip and hop with the latest interwebz media thingies. Why, someday I may even get a phone that texts! And then, look out world!
Who Wants to Hire Chee Xiong
"I will say, no he will not be able to tap into the exact same energy that was 2008. That's a whole different story. I don't think that would be fair to compare at all," said senior Chee Xiong, 22, a communications major who voted for Obama in 2008 and plans to volunteer with the campus Students for Obama chapter this election.
What does get students excited, he said, are policies that expand Pell grants and allow them to stay on their parents' health insurance policies for years after they graduate.
Let's hear it for Chee Xiong ladies and gentlemen. Yes, whose life long dream and life time aspirations are perpetual education with no end and living in his parents' basement till he's 47. No, no reason to ACHIEVE anything. Just loaf around the U of MN campus studying "communications" and equally worthless crap.
To para-quote Joe Soucheray,
"You have a pathetic life if those are your goals."
Keep going Chee! You're an inspiration to us all.
What does get students excited, he said, are policies that expand Pell grants and allow them to stay on their parents' health insurance policies for years after they graduate.
Let's hear it for Chee Xiong ladies and gentlemen. Yes, whose life long dream and life time aspirations are perpetual education with no end and living in his parents' basement till he's 47. No, no reason to ACHIEVE anything. Just loaf around the U of MN campus studying "communications" and equally worthless crap.
To para-quote Joe Soucheray,
"You have a pathetic life if those are your goals."
Keep going Chee! You're an inspiration to us all.
Monday, September 10, 2012
The Captain's Declaration of Independence
In light of the impossibility to work
1. honestly
2. efficiently
3. void of politics
4. void of drama
in Corporate America, it has occurred to me that I (and many others) are simply just not cut out for the type of work that is being offered to us. It is not an issue of laziness, sloth or unprofessionalism, it simply boils down to the fact I (and many others) do not have the patience, lack of self-respect or tolerance for ineptitude, incompetence and idiocy that is required by today's modern employers. We psychologically cannot withstand the pettiness, the power trips, the nepotism, the cronyism and the outright psychological bullshit that previous generations have imbued into today's corporate America culture. Our lives are too short and too valuable to us that the price you pay us in terms of a wage is not worth the psychological costs we must bear in terms of lying, deceiving, ignoring, politicking and whatever other immoral "skills" you require of us to be a "team player" or deemed a "successful employee."
Instead of standing for virtue, efficiency, professionalism, profit and excellence, you instead embrace ass-kissing, brown-nosing, compliance, submission, rent-seeking, lying, affirmative action, CSR and anything else that goes against common sense and profitability. You are corrupt entities no longer worth engaging and participating in and certainly not worth any of us "dedicating" any small percentage of our finite lives.
Everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY wants nothing more than to quit their jobs and tell you to ef off. Nobody has any loyalty to you, just as you have no loyalty to them. And frankly, most would have no problem showing up the next day and plugging you full of holes if there were no legal ramifications. And while you have the upper hand when it comes to parents with mortgages and children they can't afford, and can make them your "corporate bitch for life," there is a group of us who do not have to suffer your corporate sadism. Those of us who live cheaply, without children, and without debts.
Without children, without debts, and with the simple skill of fiscal austerity, I and people like me are not owned by you. We don't need you. Matter of fact, as long term corporate profit prospects dwindle and tank, you could probably do with outside-the-box people like us. Regardless, we don't need your jobs. We don't need to suffer the HR ditz pelting us with stupid questions and 5 subsequent rounds of interviews to get that whopping $55,000 per year job. We don't need some middle aged gray hair changing our job description every 3 months, nor do we have to suffer the psychoses of your wholly psychologically unstable labor force prone to sexual harrassment complaints, filing complaints and bitching and whining about petty and irrelevant things.
We don't need a Corvette. We don't need a McMansion. We don't need luxury trips to Europe. We don't need children. And we don't need you. The life we would suffer with a 2 hour round trip commute and a mind-destroying 40 hour per week job is nowhere near worth the crappy salary you pay us, along with the 0% job stability. The minimalistic life and the psychological health that comes with it is more valuable than you could ever pay and we can do it on the cheap (especially with all those taxes your hard working employees and you are paying to subsidize low-income people like me!)
And so, in light of such obvious logic, I would like to declare my independence.
As of today, the Ole Captain is no longer working for anyone. Because of his fiscal austerity, cheap living, financial discipline and the lack of children his expenses are so low he can now officially afford to live off of blogging.
I want to say that again.
I can actually make a living off of blogging.
How pathetic and sad is it that you corporate schmucks are slaving away, working all those hours, hoping to get promoted, while suffering what can only be described as psychological torture while I get to wake up at 1030AM every morning. Go for a run or a motorcycle ride. Have my coffee, do what I want to do, oh, and subsequently, barely pay anything in taxes. And how sad is it that it's easier to make a CAREER IN BLOGGING than working a CORPORATE CAREER????
And let's be VERY clear about something. The reason I can do this is because of 100% me. Not because of any guidance or "leadership from my "elders." There's no middle aged fart complaining or asking me how Excel works. There's no moron, washed up former high school football player saying, "well, we didn't do that back in the 80's." And it certainly isn't because of any "wisdom" or "tricks" I picked up working for corporate America or some old blowhard in finance.
It's because I'm so efficient.
because there's only ONE BOSS (ME)
because of my ideas and thoughts I have translated and implemented into reality,
because I HAVE SET UP AND DESIGNED THE SYSTEM MYSELF
I can make an actual living off of BLOGGING!
Did you hear what I just said? You morons slaving away 60 hours a week, paying for parking, and then walking blocks to go to a job you hate with a boss equally as miserable as you and underlings as insufferable as me. And then you get to go home to a family that (probably) hates you. Certainly you bring home more than I do. Why you're a "successful corporate man!" What, $70K? $80K? Heck, even if it was $100K you take out taxes, living expenses, cars and houses you don't need, but the spouse demands. No, no, I'm sure your insufferable life and the brain damage you've suffered over the past 3 decades working in corporate America is much more enjoyable than my minimalist life financed by a blog. Yes, you just keep telling yourself late at night that I'm "disgruntled" and a "loose cannon." Just irked I couldn't make it to the "big time." Whatever helps you sleep at night and keep your mind off of whether you've pissed away your finite life on this planet and your wife is more on the 60/40 slash of divorcing you.
As for my readers, let me just say this.
It has been a long and painful road. I have saved up my pennies and dimes. I have refused to have children. Refused to buy cars I could (but shouldn't) afford, and have only allowed myself the very rare and occasional luxury. All of this has paid off.
After my return from Wyoming I now officially can afford to live off of blogging.
This is of course in part because of drastic financial decisions I've made in the past, but it also and equally has to do with all of my readers who made this possible.
Readers who help boost my stats.
Other bloggers who have linked to me.
Fans who have purchased my books or recommended me to other people.
People who have purchased items on the Amazon Affiliate program.
And the kind people who donate to my paypal account (although they could actually BUY THINGS and get something in return instead of warm Cappy Cap fuzzies).
It may not seem like a lot, but (then again) I don't need a lot. And all of you with your readership and patronage have made it possible I eek out a small enough income from this here blog to live. I wanted to say thank you and that in the future there will be more higher end quality posts as well as new book releases coming out as I am now allowed to solely focus on this venture.
My sincere heart felt thanks to all of you guys. YOu have no idea how happy you have made me and how much easier you have made my life.
It is now time to really start enjoying the decline.
1. honestly
2. efficiently
3. void of politics
4. void of drama
in Corporate America, it has occurred to me that I (and many others) are simply just not cut out for the type of work that is being offered to us. It is not an issue of laziness, sloth or unprofessionalism, it simply boils down to the fact I (and many others) do not have the patience, lack of self-respect or tolerance for ineptitude, incompetence and idiocy that is required by today's modern employers. We psychologically cannot withstand the pettiness, the power trips, the nepotism, the cronyism and the outright psychological bullshit that previous generations have imbued into today's corporate America culture. Our lives are too short and too valuable to us that the price you pay us in terms of a wage is not worth the psychological costs we must bear in terms of lying, deceiving, ignoring, politicking and whatever other immoral "skills" you require of us to be a "team player" or deemed a "successful employee."
Instead of standing for virtue, efficiency, professionalism, profit and excellence, you instead embrace ass-kissing, brown-nosing, compliance, submission, rent-seeking, lying, affirmative action, CSR and anything else that goes against common sense and profitability. You are corrupt entities no longer worth engaging and participating in and certainly not worth any of us "dedicating" any small percentage of our finite lives.
Everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY wants nothing more than to quit their jobs and tell you to ef off. Nobody has any loyalty to you, just as you have no loyalty to them. And frankly, most would have no problem showing up the next day and plugging you full of holes if there were no legal ramifications. And while you have the upper hand when it comes to parents with mortgages and children they can't afford, and can make them your "corporate bitch for life," there is a group of us who do not have to suffer your corporate sadism. Those of us who live cheaply, without children, and without debts.
Without children, without debts, and with the simple skill of fiscal austerity, I and people like me are not owned by you. We don't need you. Matter of fact, as long term corporate profit prospects dwindle and tank, you could probably do with outside-the-box people like us. Regardless, we don't need your jobs. We don't need to suffer the HR ditz pelting us with stupid questions and 5 subsequent rounds of interviews to get that whopping $55,000 per year job. We don't need some middle aged gray hair changing our job description every 3 months, nor do we have to suffer the psychoses of your wholly psychologically unstable labor force prone to sexual harrassment complaints, filing complaints and bitching and whining about petty and irrelevant things.
We don't need a Corvette. We don't need a McMansion. We don't need luxury trips to Europe. We don't need children. And we don't need you. The life we would suffer with a 2 hour round trip commute and a mind-destroying 40 hour per week job is nowhere near worth the crappy salary you pay us, along with the 0% job stability. The minimalistic life and the psychological health that comes with it is more valuable than you could ever pay and we can do it on the cheap (especially with all those taxes your hard working employees and you are paying to subsidize low-income people like me!)
And so, in light of such obvious logic, I would like to declare my independence.
As of today, the Ole Captain is no longer working for anyone. Because of his fiscal austerity, cheap living, financial discipline and the lack of children his expenses are so low he can now officially afford to live off of blogging.
I want to say that again.
I can actually make a living off of blogging.
How pathetic and sad is it that you corporate schmucks are slaving away, working all those hours, hoping to get promoted, while suffering what can only be described as psychological torture while I get to wake up at 1030AM every morning. Go for a run or a motorcycle ride. Have my coffee, do what I want to do, oh, and subsequently, barely pay anything in taxes. And how sad is it that it's easier to make a CAREER IN BLOGGING than working a CORPORATE CAREER????
And let's be VERY clear about something. The reason I can do this is because of 100% me. Not because of any guidance or "leadership from my "elders." There's no middle aged fart complaining or asking me how Excel works. There's no moron, washed up former high school football player saying, "well, we didn't do that back in the 80's." And it certainly isn't because of any "wisdom" or "tricks" I picked up working for corporate America or some old blowhard in finance.
It's because I'm so efficient.
because there's only ONE BOSS (ME)
because of my ideas and thoughts I have translated and implemented into reality,
because I HAVE SET UP AND DESIGNED THE SYSTEM MYSELF
I can make an actual living off of BLOGGING!
Did you hear what I just said? You morons slaving away 60 hours a week, paying for parking, and then walking blocks to go to a job you hate with a boss equally as miserable as you and underlings as insufferable as me. And then you get to go home to a family that (probably) hates you. Certainly you bring home more than I do. Why you're a "successful corporate man!" What, $70K? $80K? Heck, even if it was $100K you take out taxes, living expenses, cars and houses you don't need, but the spouse demands. No, no, I'm sure your insufferable life and the brain damage you've suffered over the past 3 decades working in corporate America is much more enjoyable than my minimalist life financed by a blog. Yes, you just keep telling yourself late at night that I'm "disgruntled" and a "loose cannon." Just irked I couldn't make it to the "big time." Whatever helps you sleep at night and keep your mind off of whether you've pissed away your finite life on this planet and your wife is more on the 60/40 slash of divorcing you.
As for my readers, let me just say this.
It has been a long and painful road. I have saved up my pennies and dimes. I have refused to have children. Refused to buy cars I could (but shouldn't) afford, and have only allowed myself the very rare and occasional luxury. All of this has paid off.
After my return from Wyoming I now officially can afford to live off of blogging.
This is of course in part because of drastic financial decisions I've made in the past, but it also and equally has to do with all of my readers who made this possible.
Readers who help boost my stats.
Other bloggers who have linked to me.
Fans who have purchased my books or recommended me to other people.
People who have purchased items on the Amazon Affiliate program.
And the kind people who donate to my paypal account (although they could actually BUY THINGS and get something in return instead of warm Cappy Cap fuzzies).
It may not seem like a lot, but (then again) I don't need a lot. And all of you with your readership and patronage have made it possible I eek out a small enough income from this here blog to live. I wanted to say thank you and that in the future there will be more higher end quality posts as well as new book releases coming out as I am now allowed to solely focus on this venture.
My sincere heart felt thanks to all of you guys. YOu have no idea how happy you have made me and how much easier you have made my life.
It is now time to really start enjoying the decline.
It's Called Capital Flight
And it's a feature, not a bug of socialism.
Now, imagine if the US would have eliminated all income taxes and instead of hating the rich tried to woo them to invest here.
This guy's $30 billion would have helped our economy, no?
But, no, no. I know, that's just too freaking complicated and difficult for you lefties to understand?
Now, imagine if the US would have eliminated all income taxes and instead of hating the rich tried to woo them to invest here.
This guy's $30 billion would have helped our economy, no?
But, no, no. I know, that's just too freaking complicated and difficult for you lefties to understand?
Faking a Wife and Kids to Get Vasectomy
Mentu takes the plunge.
All I can say is it was the best decision of my life and all men should get one.
First, a reminder of the financial benefits.
Second, an irrefutable philosophical argument for having one.
Though, again, I am not saying all men should have one or that I am against kids. Matter of fact, men who have vasectomies are the ones you WANT to have kids because they care enough about the unborn kids as to think about what kind of father they would be.
Enjoy the decline!
All I can say is it was the best decision of my life and all men should get one.
First, a reminder of the financial benefits.
Second, an irrefutable philosophical argument for having one.
Though, again, I am not saying all men should have one or that I am against kids. Matter of fact, men who have vasectomies are the ones you WANT to have kids because they care enough about the unborn kids as to think about what kind of father they would be.
Enjoy the decline!
Sunday, September 09, 2012
Where Do the Extra Men Go?
I have a question my brain is not large enough to answer and so perhaps one of you Cappy Cappites can answer this for me.
In polygamous societies you have one guy with multiple wives. Let's just say 4 wives to keep the math simple.
By default then, this means 75% of the men are WITHOUT wives/girlfriends.
So what do they do?
Originally I asked this about polygamous societies in general, however a friend of mine pointed out that in Mormonism it wasn't so much "just because they could do it," but rather the demands of early western pioneer life were so harsh and dangerous a lot of men didn't make it back. This then resulted in one man taking on the role of father/husband to multiple children/women.
OK, granted, got that. The other 75% of the men are dead. But then I talked to my buddy Khanh and his dad has 8 mistresses on top of his wife.
Now, Vietnam, communist as it may have been, is not the wild west and is already settled. So it isn't like there's a ton of Vietnamese guys getting knocked off leaving one poor guy to deal with 9 women. ie-there is a surplus of men. Throw in the overlap of Asian countries having a tendency to prefer males and selectively abort/abandon/kill females, there's even more of a numerical surplus (not just one dominant alpha male keeping 9 females off the market).
So again, what do the surplus of guys without women do?
Or is it that mistresses still sleep around and aren't really loyal to their sugar daddy?
I'm not trying to be off color, just curious if anybody knows more about this than me.
In polygamous societies you have one guy with multiple wives. Let's just say 4 wives to keep the math simple.
By default then, this means 75% of the men are WITHOUT wives/girlfriends.
So what do they do?
Originally I asked this about polygamous societies in general, however a friend of mine pointed out that in Mormonism it wasn't so much "just because they could do it," but rather the demands of early western pioneer life were so harsh and dangerous a lot of men didn't make it back. This then resulted in one man taking on the role of father/husband to multiple children/women.
OK, granted, got that. The other 75% of the men are dead. But then I talked to my buddy Khanh and his dad has 8 mistresses on top of his wife.
Now, Vietnam, communist as it may have been, is not the wild west and is already settled. So it isn't like there's a ton of Vietnamese guys getting knocked off leaving one poor guy to deal with 9 women. ie-there is a surplus of men. Throw in the overlap of Asian countries having a tendency to prefer males and selectively abort/abandon/kill females, there's even more of a numerical surplus (not just one dominant alpha male keeping 9 females off the market).
So again, what do the surplus of guys without women do?
Or is it that mistresses still sleep around and aren't really loyal to their sugar daddy?
I'm not trying to be off color, just curious if anybody knows more about this than me.
Saturday, September 08, 2012
The Window Shopping Housing Recovery
What I love about the historically low interest rates is the fact they're real, but you can't access them.
Be it banks that have overtightened lending standards
government programs that are nothing but red tape like HARP or HARP II
or the secondary market refusing to finance people because their house doesn't comply with a billion little standards,
ain't none of you going to be able to refinance because the restrictions and requirement either because of government regulation or banking idiocy.
Thus, it's like window shopping. You can't afford those rates (well, actually you CAN), we're just not going to let you in the door.
Enjoy salivating over low interest rates!
Be it banks that have overtightened lending standards
government programs that are nothing but red tape like HARP or HARP II
or the secondary market refusing to finance people because their house doesn't comply with a billion little standards,
ain't none of you going to be able to refinance because the restrictions and requirement either because of government regulation or banking idiocy.
Thus, it's like window shopping. You can't afford those rates (well, actually you CAN), we're just not going to let you in the door.
Enjoy salivating over low interest rates!
The Mathematical Impossibility for Gen Y to Save for Retirement
A quote from Goldfinger:
"Yes, well, I've worked out a few statistics of my own. 15 billion dollars in gold bullion weighs 10,500 tons. Sixty men would take twelve days to load it onto 200 trucks. Now, at the most, you're going to have two hours before the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines move in and make you put it back."
I've worked out a few statistics of my own, too. Back of napkin of course.
The average Gen Y youth as well as all future youth have to spend the first 18 years growing up and getting an elementary education. Another 4 years, more likely 5 with unnecessary liberal arts prereq's shoved down their throats make them 23 by the time they graduate with their bachelors degrees. However, their bachelors are worthless and most companies won't hire them anyway because of the lousy economy, so they return for another 2 years of school making them a quarter century old before they hit the labor force.
But, when they do hit the labor force, it won't be at a job they're capable of. It will be something mundane that they could have done in high school. Thus why underemployment rates are roughly 50% for the average 25 year old.
The problem is compounded because not only are the youth working jobs they could have done in high school (and at a commensurate wage), they have student debts they have to pay off. The next decade they muddle through lousy jobs with no hope for advancement or challenge due to the managerial ineptitude of the previous generations, finally paying off their student debts at the age of 35.
35, however, is pretty late in the game to "finally" be "starting a life." And by "starting a life" I mean starting families and getting a house. IF you were fortunate enough to not have a kid by this time, you could feasibly find a spouse and afford a house. If you were like everybody else however, you have a kid, still have student loans, and probably defaulted on your house. Your credit is shot, you won't be able to find a house soon and starting a traditional family is nearly impossible as men do not have the earning power (even in their 30's) to pay for a family and women are starting to push child-bearing into a risky age range.
You get a couple kids and you get a house. The kids will keep you financially strapped for the next 20 years, the mortgage 30. Of course, the mortgage will not be as much as a liability as it will be progressive property taxes that will increase to the point the house is no longer an asset, but a liability. Whatever the case, you're pushing 60 by the time these liabilities are paid off.
"60" did you say?
Yes, 60 and you haven't even started saving for retirement. And I am not blaming you. You never had the money to save for retirement. It took 25 years to get you educated to the point the Credentialism-Infected American labor market would even entertain hiring you. And another 10-20 years before they'd ever give you a decent wage or consider giving you a job with responsibility. This is of course requiring you to take "CPE" every 6 months while offering nothing in terms of employment security, job stability (ie-not changing your job duties every 3 months) let alone, sanity in your job.
Regardless, 60 years old is too late to save for retirement. Despite government promises of retirement at the age of 65, mathematically you are going to have to work till you're dead. I hope MI6 has a good pension, 007.
"Yes, well, I've worked out a few statistics of my own. 15 billion dollars in gold bullion weighs 10,500 tons. Sixty men would take twelve days to load it onto 200 trucks. Now, at the most, you're going to have two hours before the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines move in and make you put it back."
I've worked out a few statistics of my own, too. Back of napkin of course.
The average Gen Y youth as well as all future youth have to spend the first 18 years growing up and getting an elementary education. Another 4 years, more likely 5 with unnecessary liberal arts prereq's shoved down their throats make them 23 by the time they graduate with their bachelors degrees. However, their bachelors are worthless and most companies won't hire them anyway because of the lousy economy, so they return for another 2 years of school making them a quarter century old before they hit the labor force.
But, when they do hit the labor force, it won't be at a job they're capable of. It will be something mundane that they could have done in high school. Thus why underemployment rates are roughly 50% for the average 25 year old.
The problem is compounded because not only are the youth working jobs they could have done in high school (and at a commensurate wage), they have student debts they have to pay off. The next decade they muddle through lousy jobs with no hope for advancement or challenge due to the managerial ineptitude of the previous generations, finally paying off their student debts at the age of 35.
35, however, is pretty late in the game to "finally" be "starting a life." And by "starting a life" I mean starting families and getting a house. IF you were fortunate enough to not have a kid by this time, you could feasibly find a spouse and afford a house. If you were like everybody else however, you have a kid, still have student loans, and probably defaulted on your house. Your credit is shot, you won't be able to find a house soon and starting a traditional family is nearly impossible as men do not have the earning power (even in their 30's) to pay for a family and women are starting to push child-bearing into a risky age range.
You get a couple kids and you get a house. The kids will keep you financially strapped for the next 20 years, the mortgage 30. Of course, the mortgage will not be as much as a liability as it will be progressive property taxes that will increase to the point the house is no longer an asset, but a liability. Whatever the case, you're pushing 60 by the time these liabilities are paid off.
"60" did you say?
Yes, 60 and you haven't even started saving for retirement. And I am not blaming you. You never had the money to save for retirement. It took 25 years to get you educated to the point the Credentialism-Infected American labor market would even entertain hiring you. And another 10-20 years before they'd ever give you a decent wage or consider giving you a job with responsibility. This is of course requiring you to take "CPE" every 6 months while offering nothing in terms of employment security, job stability (ie-not changing your job duties every 3 months) let alone, sanity in your job.
Regardless, 60 years old is too late to save for retirement. Despite government promises of retirement at the age of 65, mathematically you are going to have to work till you're dead. I hope MI6 has a good pension, 007.
Friday, September 07, 2012
Take That, Feminist Commie Matrix!!!
Awwww, you didn't think ahead did you? You thought we'd just keep on slaving away.
Silly feminists. Leisure is for bachelors!
Silly feminists. Leisure is for bachelors!
The Reliability Factor
Let me tell you about my buddy Trixie.
Trixie is a girl I met in Wyoming. I met her in the last two months of my sabbatical there and I wish I had ran into her before. The reasons are many.
First, she is a spectacularly nice person. Very kind, very humble, not arrogant, and, frankly, altruistic and patient enough to put up with the ole Captain's brash and blunt personality. She had the maturity to know when I was joking, and was a spectacular sport when it came to me joshing her. AND no favor was too big for her to do. She even drove 4 hours to pick me up at the Rapid City airport late at night.
Second, she was able to keep up with me physically. In a state where the official state sport is drinking for men and having illegitimate children for the women, very few people are able to run 3 miles, let alone hike up a mountain. It is ironic that in a state where mountains and trails are not only numerous, but trailheads are no more than 10 minutes away, the people never avail themselves of those opportunities and opt instead to essentially sit on their asses. However, my buddy Trixie was always up to the physical challenges of a hike and was even in a hair better shape than me (though she was too kind to admit it as I would start to wane behind her in the later stages of some hikes).
Third, she was always game. I don't think she ever said no. "Want to go to Sturgis?" Yes. "Want to go on a 14 mile hike?" Sure. "Want to go pan for gold?" Yep. "Want to shoot guns?" Sure. Whether she had done these things or not, she would at minimum entertain the idea and try them.
But fourth, and arguably most important, she was reliable. I had ran into girls/women before in Wyoming and at first they may have looked to make for good friends, but in the end, inevitably all of them would flake out. They'd say they want to go for a hike, only not to return calls when it came time to go. They'd say they'd want to go for a motorcycle ride, only come up with an excuse at the 11th hour. They'd want to go out, but only to get drunk and go to loud bars where intelligent conversation was impossible. And keep in mind this was just to be FRIENDS, you aren't even trying to get romantic (though I surmise they viewed any requests for social outtings as romantic interest). Regardless, the reliability of the average woman in Wyoming was that of a middle school girl when it came to social activities.
But not Trixie. No. If she said she'd be there at 530PM ready for a hike, by god she was there at 530PM ready for a hike. If she said she wanted to go dancing, she meant it and would show up with her dancing shoes. And if she said she wanted to go for a motorcycle ride, she was there, with the appropriate gear, raring to go.
Unfortunately, I knew my time in Wyoming was going to be limited. And this saddened me a bit because I had found a really cool friend. And since I was leaving and because she was so kind, outgoing and reliable I had no problems "splurging" on her. Not that I was buying her attention or paying her to be my friend or vying to become a boyfriend, but because I hadn't met anybody in the entire state that was kind enough to hang out with me (not to mention I did feel some guilt leaving her to fend for herself in Wyoming's social life). Additionally, she wasn't loaded either and was the type of gal that wouldn't afford herself the occasional luxury. She was that "nice, sweet, American gal" of 1940's yore. So drinks were on me. I would pay for gas, grab her a sandwich. Got her a birthday cake for her birthday. And knowing the girl would pick me up in Rapid City, I got her a hair/salon/appointment/chick-thingy for her birthday that she'd never afford herself.
Sure enough, my two months were up. I made several trips transporting what meager worldly possessions and vehicles I own back to Minnesota. And as logistics would have it, I had to make one final trip out to Wyoming to pick up my motorcycle (which Trixie was kind enough to store for me). I flew in, did one final hike the next day, taught one final dance class the next night, and left the next morn at 615AM to avail myself of as much sunlight as possible as I dead-headed my bike back to Minnesota.
Of course, like hiking, riding your motorcycle for 12 hour stints grants you a lot of thinking time which results in a lot of SAEG (TM) epiphanies and philosophical observations. And it dawned on me that Trixie was a member of a small and elite group of girls in the ole Captain's life. Namely, a group of women that I had no problem spending a little money on.
Understand this "group" is NOT girlfriends. This group includes girls that are friends and girlfriends, but above all else nice girls who have treated me kindly. I have mentioned it before, I do not buy women drinks in an effort to impress them. I have only bought ONE woman ONE drink who I had just met at a bar and it did not work. I therefore save any kind of "drink buying" or "effort spending" on girls that treat me kindly and that I care about.
But as I drove I realized there was something much more precise about this elite group of girls than them merely just "treating me kindly." I realized that for them even to be around long enough to become friends or girlfriends they all had to have one thing in common - reliability.
My life, as is yours, is short and finite. The most valuable thing you or any other person has on this planet is time. Therefore, through a very simple Darwinian process of elimination, the people closest to you in your life are reliable on account you plain don't like wasting your time. People who flake, cancel out, etc. etc., don't make it to that elite group on account they are unreliable and waste your time and you don't want to hang out with such people (that or they also don't want to hang out with you either). The flakes never get to know you, spend time with you, and therefore never form friendships or romances. But by default then the flakes never get any of your attention - be it social, financial, romantic or favors.
And I want to say that again, so we all hear it.
"by default then the flakes never get any of your attention - be it social, financial, romantic or favors."
Are all you flaky women paying attention? Are you starting to understand the ramifications for your flaky behavior?
It is here now we must make a distinction or a discernation because I know some of you know where I'm going with this and are saying, "yeah, but but."
So let me explain further.
I understand that there are women who "flake out" at the last minute because they never had any intention of going out with you in the first place. I am also fully aware of women feigning interest to score free attention be it at a bar, a night club, at work or any other place on the planet. And I am also fully aware that there are men who will pay attention (in whatever form) to flaky women because they have no game and don't know any better.
That is not what I'm talking about here.
What I am talking about is a woman who does have interest, but still insists on playing the inane "hard to get."
If there is a logic or a geometric theorem that debunks that myth I hope it is the Reliability Factor. Because IF you are playing "hard to get" and then flaking out on purpose, you will quickly eliminate yourself from any kind of long running chances of getting future attention from your target. But my observation about The Reliability Factor goes well beyond that logic with Trixie.
Ask yourself a question:
"How many girls have you met in your life that are as reliable and game-free as Trixie?"
I look back and I can't think of more than maybe, MAYBE a dozen women that were that reliable, straight forward, and forthright. Where there was no games, no BS, no drama. Just "hey, you wanna go do activity X?" "Yeah, let's go do activity X!"
Now ask yourself another question:
"How many girls have you had any kind of "positive" (romantic or friendly) relationship with?"
I look back and I'd say easily hundreds. And that's dating alone. Friends, even more. But I can only recall 10-12 women in the past who didn't play games and just straight up Joe's like Trixie.
The reason I bring up the math is that it shows the MAJORITY of women who have become friends, girlfriends, dates, etc., DID have an interest, but still engaged in some kind of "play hard to get" tomfoolery. However, those same girls, either because they played "too hard to get" or such game-playing psychologically precluded them from any kind of long term relationship, didn't make it into the "Elite Girl Pool." They went by the wayside of life. The ones that DID make it into the "Elite Girl Pool" DID have an interest and DID NOT engage in such tomfoolery - ie -they were RELIABLE.
What did this reliability get them?
Frankly, the best men have to give.
Lifelong friendships, marriages, fun, and yes, sure, "free drinks" or other forms of "attention." But the point I'm trying to make is not "look at all the attention you can get," but rather the irony of how reliability is the single most sure fire way to get "attention," but so few women engage in it.
In the end The Reliability Factor paid off for young Trixie. Because she was so reliable, her and I were able to create a great friendship. Part of that relationship (not to brag) was her going from a noob ballroom dancer under my tutelage to probably the most accomplished dancer in town (heck, the state even). The dancing also gave her a reason to wear some dresses and heels she never had an opportunity to wear. So in the two months I was there, she went from an innocuous, quiet girl with jeans and tennis shoes, to not just the best dancer on the floor, but the prettiest-dressed as well.
The women noticed she was the center of attention on the dance floor.
The men noticed she was very prettily dressed and wearing heels.
No woman ever had that much attention in the history of Wyoming.
Then again, no woman has ever been that reliable.
Trixie is a girl I met in Wyoming. I met her in the last two months of my sabbatical there and I wish I had ran into her before. The reasons are many.
First, she is a spectacularly nice person. Very kind, very humble, not arrogant, and, frankly, altruistic and patient enough to put up with the ole Captain's brash and blunt personality. She had the maturity to know when I was joking, and was a spectacular sport when it came to me joshing her. AND no favor was too big for her to do. She even drove 4 hours to pick me up at the Rapid City airport late at night.
Second, she was able to keep up with me physically. In a state where the official state sport is drinking for men and having illegitimate children for the women, very few people are able to run 3 miles, let alone hike up a mountain. It is ironic that in a state where mountains and trails are not only numerous, but trailheads are no more than 10 minutes away, the people never avail themselves of those opportunities and opt instead to essentially sit on their asses. However, my buddy Trixie was always up to the physical challenges of a hike and was even in a hair better shape than me (though she was too kind to admit it as I would start to wane behind her in the later stages of some hikes).
Third, she was always game. I don't think she ever said no. "Want to go to Sturgis?" Yes. "Want to go on a 14 mile hike?" Sure. "Want to go pan for gold?" Yep. "Want to shoot guns?" Sure. Whether she had done these things or not, she would at minimum entertain the idea and try them.
But fourth, and arguably most important, she was reliable. I had ran into girls/women before in Wyoming and at first they may have looked to make for good friends, but in the end, inevitably all of them would flake out. They'd say they want to go for a hike, only not to return calls when it came time to go. They'd say they'd want to go for a motorcycle ride, only come up with an excuse at the 11th hour. They'd want to go out, but only to get drunk and go to loud bars where intelligent conversation was impossible. And keep in mind this was just to be FRIENDS, you aren't even trying to get romantic (though I surmise they viewed any requests for social outtings as romantic interest). Regardless, the reliability of the average woman in Wyoming was that of a middle school girl when it came to social activities.
But not Trixie. No. If she said she'd be there at 530PM ready for a hike, by god she was there at 530PM ready for a hike. If she said she wanted to go dancing, she meant it and would show up with her dancing shoes. And if she said she wanted to go for a motorcycle ride, she was there, with the appropriate gear, raring to go.
Unfortunately, I knew my time in Wyoming was going to be limited. And this saddened me a bit because I had found a really cool friend. And since I was leaving and because she was so kind, outgoing and reliable I had no problems "splurging" on her. Not that I was buying her attention or paying her to be my friend or vying to become a boyfriend, but because I hadn't met anybody in the entire state that was kind enough to hang out with me (not to mention I did feel some guilt leaving her to fend for herself in Wyoming's social life). Additionally, she wasn't loaded either and was the type of gal that wouldn't afford herself the occasional luxury. She was that "nice, sweet, American gal" of 1940's yore. So drinks were on me. I would pay for gas, grab her a sandwich. Got her a birthday cake for her birthday. And knowing the girl would pick me up in Rapid City, I got her a hair/salon/appointment/chick-thingy for her birthday that she'd never afford herself.
Sure enough, my two months were up. I made several trips transporting what meager worldly possessions and vehicles I own back to Minnesota. And as logistics would have it, I had to make one final trip out to Wyoming to pick up my motorcycle (which Trixie was kind enough to store for me). I flew in, did one final hike the next day, taught one final dance class the next night, and left the next morn at 615AM to avail myself of as much sunlight as possible as I dead-headed my bike back to Minnesota.
Of course, like hiking, riding your motorcycle for 12 hour stints grants you a lot of thinking time which results in a lot of SAEG (TM) epiphanies and philosophical observations. And it dawned on me that Trixie was a member of a small and elite group of girls in the ole Captain's life. Namely, a group of women that I had no problem spending a little money on.
Understand this "group" is NOT girlfriends. This group includes girls that are friends and girlfriends, but above all else nice girls who have treated me kindly. I have mentioned it before, I do not buy women drinks in an effort to impress them. I have only bought ONE woman ONE drink who I had just met at a bar and it did not work. I therefore save any kind of "drink buying" or "effort spending" on girls that treat me kindly and that I care about.
But as I drove I realized there was something much more precise about this elite group of girls than them merely just "treating me kindly." I realized that for them even to be around long enough to become friends or girlfriends they all had to have one thing in common - reliability.
My life, as is yours, is short and finite. The most valuable thing you or any other person has on this planet is time. Therefore, through a very simple Darwinian process of elimination, the people closest to you in your life are reliable on account you plain don't like wasting your time. People who flake, cancel out, etc. etc., don't make it to that elite group on account they are unreliable and waste your time and you don't want to hang out with such people (that or they also don't want to hang out with you either). The flakes never get to know you, spend time with you, and therefore never form friendships or romances. But by default then the flakes never get any of your attention - be it social, financial, romantic or favors.
And I want to say that again, so we all hear it.
"by default then the flakes never get any of your attention - be it social, financial, romantic or favors."
Are all you flaky women paying attention? Are you starting to understand the ramifications for your flaky behavior?
It is here now we must make a distinction or a discernation because I know some of you know where I'm going with this and are saying, "yeah, but but."
So let me explain further.
I understand that there are women who "flake out" at the last minute because they never had any intention of going out with you in the first place. I am also fully aware of women feigning interest to score free attention be it at a bar, a night club, at work or any other place on the planet. And I am also fully aware that there are men who will pay attention (in whatever form) to flaky women because they have no game and don't know any better.
That is not what I'm talking about here.
What I am talking about is a woman who does have interest, but still insists on playing the inane "hard to get."
If there is a logic or a geometric theorem that debunks that myth I hope it is the Reliability Factor. Because IF you are playing "hard to get" and then flaking out on purpose, you will quickly eliminate yourself from any kind of long running chances of getting future attention from your target. But my observation about The Reliability Factor goes well beyond that logic with Trixie.
Ask yourself a question:
"How many girls have you met in your life that are as reliable and game-free as Trixie?"
I look back and I can't think of more than maybe, MAYBE a dozen women that were that reliable, straight forward, and forthright. Where there was no games, no BS, no drama. Just "hey, you wanna go do activity X?" "Yeah, let's go do activity X!"
Now ask yourself another question:
"How many girls have you had any kind of "positive" (romantic or friendly) relationship with?"
I look back and I'd say easily hundreds. And that's dating alone. Friends, even more. But I can only recall 10-12 women in the past who didn't play games and just straight up Joe's like Trixie.
The reason I bring up the math is that it shows the MAJORITY of women who have become friends, girlfriends, dates, etc., DID have an interest, but still engaged in some kind of "play hard to get" tomfoolery. However, those same girls, either because they played "too hard to get" or such game-playing psychologically precluded them from any kind of long term relationship, didn't make it into the "Elite Girl Pool." They went by the wayside of life. The ones that DID make it into the "Elite Girl Pool" DID have an interest and DID NOT engage in such tomfoolery - ie -they were RELIABLE.
What did this reliability get them?
Frankly, the best men have to give.
Lifelong friendships, marriages, fun, and yes, sure, "free drinks" or other forms of "attention." But the point I'm trying to make is not "look at all the attention you can get," but rather the irony of how reliability is the single most sure fire way to get "attention," but so few women engage in it.
In the end The Reliability Factor paid off for young Trixie. Because she was so reliable, her and I were able to create a great friendship. Part of that relationship (not to brag) was her going from a noob ballroom dancer under my tutelage to probably the most accomplished dancer in town (heck, the state even). The dancing also gave her a reason to wear some dresses and heels she never had an opportunity to wear. So in the two months I was there, she went from an innocuous, quiet girl with jeans and tennis shoes, to not just the best dancer on the floor, but the prettiest-dressed as well.
The women noticed she was the center of attention on the dance floor.
The men noticed she was very prettily dressed and wearing heels.
No woman ever had that much attention in the history of Wyoming.
Then again, no woman has ever been that reliable.
Thursday, September 06, 2012
Again, Don't Bother Saving for Retirement
I've been playing this tune for a while now, but again I'm "fringe." I'm "evil right wing reactionary."
So maybe somebody more mainstream might back me up.
So maybe somebody more mainstream might back me up.
"Masters in Graffiti Art"
Honest to f#cking Christ.
I mean, seriously, when does this country wake up and admit there's a bubble?
Can't even make this stuff up if I tried.
I mean, seriously, when does this country wake up and admit there's a bubble?
Can't even make this stuff up if I tried.
At Work, At Play
Greetings all,
My apologies for my absence, but I was involved into moving two vehicles across the fruited plains, and by "fruited plains" I mean about 750 miles. I was also at play lodging one final hike for the year in the Big Horns with my buddy "Dirty Harriet." (on a side note, you male schmoes who are regular Cappy Cap readers would do yourselves a favor getting into my good graces as Dirty Harriet is a single lady, more on that later).
Posts will be returning to a regular pace as I unpack and settle in. In the meantime here are some pics from the latest adventure. Most are pics from a hike to "Lost Twin Lake" in the Big Horns, but there is also some pictures of a forest fire at night and a photo of the ladies in my dance class. The forest fire pics are not impressive until you realize that fire is about 3 miles away and about 2 miles wide. The ONLY thing remaining now is tornado chasing which will be next year's adventure.
My apologies for my absence, but I was involved into moving two vehicles across the fruited plains, and by "fruited plains" I mean about 750 miles. I was also at play lodging one final hike for the year in the Big Horns with my buddy "Dirty Harriet." (on a side note, you male schmoes who are regular Cappy Cap readers would do yourselves a favor getting into my good graces as Dirty Harriet is a single lady, more on that later).
Posts will be returning to a regular pace as I unpack and settle in. In the meantime here are some pics from the latest adventure. Most are pics from a hike to "Lost Twin Lake" in the Big Horns, but there is also some pictures of a forest fire at night and a photo of the ladies in my dance class. The forest fire pics are not impressive until you realize that fire is about 3 miles away and about 2 miles wide. The ONLY thing remaining now is tornado chasing which will be next year's adventure.
Monday, September 03, 2012
Crusaderism Mom...Absentee Father
I didn't read the whole thing, but I'm going to guess the father could not be reached for comment.
Am I right?
Am I right?
A Billion Holly Stuards
Wow, yet ANOTHER HR major with an MBA!
It's not like there ain't a billion of those out there on the labor market now is there? Oh, and I can't WAIT for this lady to actually land a position where she then gets to ask the idiotic questions of
"Have you ever been in a situation where you disagreed with your boss"
or
"Where do you see yourself in 5 years."
Did anybody ever teach these people math or economics?
No, wait, I know, I know.
"Math is tough!"
hat tip.
It's not like there ain't a billion of those out there on the labor market now is there? Oh, and I can't WAIT for this lady to actually land a position where she then gets to ask the idiotic questions of
"Have you ever been in a situation where you disagreed with your boss"
or
"Where do you see yourself in 5 years."
Did anybody ever teach these people math or economics?
No, wait, I know, I know.
"Math is tough!"
hat tip.
Saturday, September 01, 2012
Confiscate or Inflate - DISCUSS!
Two camps have formed in the Capposphere when it comes to 401k's and IRA's. Namely will they be confiscated or inflated away?
I have not thought through the two options nor assessed the political landscape enough to determine which is more likely.
That's why I have readers who are all blessed with SAEG (TM)!
Discuss and resolve!
I have not thought through the two options nor assessed the political landscape enough to determine which is more likely.
That's why I have readers who are all blessed with SAEG (TM)!
Discuss and resolve!
The Kid Has No Father
Yes, there is a male in the house.
Yes, there is a person who had genetic material mix with a female's genetic material.
And yes, a child was produced.
But there is no father here.
Yes, there is a person who had genetic material mix with a female's genetic material.
And yes, a child was produced.
But there is no father here.
The Bloggosphere is Now Officially the 4th Branch of Government
Originally it was supposed to be that the media was the fourth branch in government, conducting good, quality journalism to ensure the public sector institutions (as well as private sector institutions) were serving the people and avoiding becoming corrupt.
The media has obviously failed in this regard.
However, there is one segment of the "new" media that has stepped up to the plate. The likes of you and me in our little blogging world.
I therefore decree (with just as much authority, if not more, than the traditional MSM) that we are now the 4th branch of government and the media is nothing more than a political arm of the democrat party.
Continue as you were.
The media has obviously failed in this regard.
However, there is one segment of the "new" media that has stepped up to the plate. The likes of you and me in our little blogging world.
I therefore decree (with just as much authority, if not more, than the traditional MSM) that we are now the 4th branch of government and the media is nothing more than a political arm of the democrat party.
Continue as you were.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)