Upon returning from Wyoming and having no real job in hand, I revisited my life's motto of "security is security" and ended up working for a security company a friend owned. They specialized in armed security so most of the gigs were prisoner transport, body guard work, and the infamous "protecting spoiled rotten Saudi Prince brats and his entourage of 120 equally douchy elitists." However, before you were allowed to work one of these easier shifts, you had to prove your mettle working the hated "parking ramp shifts."
These "parking ramp shifts" were really nothing more than "baby sitting the night clubbers" shifts where you would prevent fights, stop people from pissing in the stairwells, watch black women fight over "their man," and even prevent the occasional Russian body builder from kidnapping a pass-out party girl. This was only made infinitely worse in the fact we had to patrol on foot which, during Minnesota winters, made life miserable.
But through all the headaches and hypothermia that comes with baby sitting the Twin Cities' club-going filth, I did notice something those 3 short years ago - there was only a FRACTION of the night clubs that used to be open during the 90's.
First Avenue (a night club) was still the "anchor club" of the Twin Cities and still in business. Same for The Gay 90's. And The Fine Line, another reliable standby, was also open for business. But nearly every other club or bar I went to was now gone. Daddy Rock's was no longer. Banana Joe's gone. Even Old Chicago (not a club, but just a bar) was gone too. And they weren't necessarily replaced with new clubs either. In short, there was by my quick economist eye only about 40% the amount of clubs that existed during my night clubbing days 20 years ago.
Fast forward three years to today and it's even worse.
Solera, gone.
The Times Cafe, gone.
Fhima (a St. Paul club), gone.
"Block E" (an entire BUILDING of night clubs) gone.
And the over-hyped, over-rated "Capital Grille" gone (thank god).
There is just nowhere near the night club life that once existed in the Twin Cities.
Of course, as economists are wont to do, they research things they see happening in real life. And after poking around on teh interwebz the death of the night club industry is an interesting and telling death.
First, there is not so much a "death" in the night life scene as a stagnation and a shift. Revenues for the "bar and nightclub industry" are stagnant, if not slightly dropping if you account for inflation. However, the Minneapolis club scene has not "stagnated," it's cratered. So how do these figures jive? Simple, the data is for the "BAR AND night club industry."
While nightclubs may be tanking, bars are doing quite well. This would explain why nearly every night club I attended during Clinton's administration are gone, but the neighborhood bars are still around.
Lee's Liquor Lounge, The CC Club, Jax Cafe, etc., all neighborhood bars, all still in business.
Second, this is corroborated by the most cited reason for the industry's decline- "The Great Recession." While Gen X may have been whooping it up in the Dotcom days, drinking and partying themselves into oblivion, they at least did not graduate into "The Great Recession." Their modern day Millennial peers have. And not only are the Millennials facing the worst job market since the Great DEPRESSION, they are also saddled with more college debt than any generation in the history of the world. Combine that with their worthless degrees and they plain don't have the money to afford a cover charge and drinks.
This has led to two behavioral changes. One, Millennials now pre-drink at home, getting within one drink of a proper buzz. And two, they avoid cover charges, commuting/parking expenses, and DWI's by walking to their local bar.
The third reason for the nightclub's demise, however, is the really interesting one. Because no professional publication or researcher can speak of it, even though it is the core and the heart of the nightclub business - sex. Specifically women.
When we wipe away all the politically correct "industry research" jargon and cut through the bullshit, night clubs are all about men wanting to get sex from women. And even though they may not come outright and say it, club owners are ACUTELY aware of this and it shows in their business models.
EVERY nightclub knows you have to get hot women into the club, otherwise the men (with their money) will not show up. Therefore you have "ladies night," drink specials for ladies, sometimes women even get to drink for free, and if you're a 20 something female in America you don't even know what a "cover charge" is.
This presents a problem however. Wherever there are hot women, horny and thirsty men are sure to follow. And their constant advances will inevitably scare away women. Therefore, how do you get women to show up AND stay AND return next week?
Make the nightclub environment incredibly hostile towards men and incredibly tailored towards women.
You ever wonder why nightclub music is not only shitty, but incredibly loud? It's so the girl can get you to buy her a drink, but not have to talk to you.
You notice how the music is the most monotonous remixed pop top 40's crap that has not an ounce of talent in it? It's because girls like it and men don't.
And you notice how you have to stand in line, while a cute girl with a short skit gets to jump in line? It's not only because they need her as "seed capital" to "get the party started." They need to wear you out so you don't have the energy to approach (and thus harass) women in the club.
It is this "love hate" relationship nightclubs have with men (and their money) that they must delicately balance where you are encouraged to part with your money, but deterred from actually having any sexual success with women. And if they do it right, you'll have spent at least $50 of your money with them and have no girl to show for it.
Now, for the past 40 years this business model has worked. And using back of napkin statistics men have transferred roughly a trillion dollars worth of wealth to women in the form of drinks, food, cover charges (and flowers if you were stupid enough to fall for that gag where the guy is hocking roses in a bucket). But there has been an incredible game changer as of recent. One that completely obsoletes this model and has completely rewritten the rules for many other industries as well.
The internet.
"Fun" as it is to go clubbing, because of the challenging environment it presents to men, it gets tiring. And even the most ardent of club-going men will burn out and seek for alternative ways to pick up women. So after spending 5 years in the nightclub scene, forking over $50 a night, to maybe, just MAYBE get laid 3 times, the majority of men will inevitably do a cost benefit analysis and leave. However, whereas in the past "leaving" meant giving up and basically staying home (or trying to "meet girls at church" or work, etc.), now men can get what they want (sex) by going online. And the reasons are just too compelling.
First you waste nowhere NEAR the amount of time you do going clubbing. There's no commute. There's no finding parking. There's no waiting in line. And there's no competing against 3 other guys for the same girl.
You fire up your laptop, set up a profile, and start firing off messages.
Naturally, the vast majority of your advances will be rejected and is the primary reason many men say online dating isn't worth it (for example a recently divorced friend of mine complained he had to spend a full hour a night online to get a date for that weekend). But a mere hour a night is NOTHING compared to what 20 something men pre-internet invested daily in their pursuit of women.
Second, the financial costs. Online dating is effectively free. Either by going through Plenty of Fish, Tinder, or meetup groups where you indirectly try to find women, there is really no significant added marginal cost to start online dating. Contrast that with 40 nights a year of clubbing for 5 years at $50 a pop, and you save yourself $10,000 in explicit financial costs merely going online.
And finally, the sanity you save. In going online you avoid the nearly impossible environment that nightclubs have become:
Women who have their "bitch shields" up as they gussied themselves up earlier that evening with their friends in sort of a "pre-game pep talk," making them froth at the chance to shoot men down (and consequently cry themselves to sleep later that night because "they can't find a man.")
The 100%-USDA-Certified-Full-Backing-and-Faith-of-the-US-Government GUARAN-FREAKING-TEE that there will be a fatty cockblocker there to pull ANY girl you're having success with away.
The "herd" you must masterfully penetrate or wait until a weak one separates herself from the herd, only to have the mother hen fatty cockblocker come in and "save her from you."
All while under the constant and never ending assault and barrage of the monotonous bass-beating of hiphop, rap, regatone, or whatever the latest "girl power" top 40's song that came out that week.
No, you just pour yourself a nice scotch, throw on Jazz24.org, and click away.
Certainly, there are economic reasons for the decline in night clubs. And certainly there are sociological/demographical reasons for the decline in nightclubs. But although the data is not perfect (there is a report I found for $1,500, but I'm not going to buy it), the real threat nightclubs face is that they no longer hold a monopoly on (effectively) the only legal means by which men ultimately pay for sex/dating. And in the face of competition from the internet their current business model is too punishing financially, mentally, and time-wise for any young man with the slightest bit of self respect and common sense.
Perhaps, with luck, there will be no need to patrol those parking ramps in the future.
________________________________________________________________
http://aaron-clarey.podomatic.com/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Monday, August 24, 2015
Friday, August 21, 2015
Episode #106 of The Clarey Podcast
Procrastinating writing books
The key to success is execution
Stop majoring in stupid shit ladies
The law school bubble is bursting
and MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
(buy your "Official" Clarey Podcast mug here)
The key to success is execution
Stop majoring in stupid shit ladies
The law school bubble is bursting
and MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
(buy your "Official" Clarey Podcast mug here)
The Music School Bubble
A guest post from the Great Matt Baldoni:
My music education began at age 8 in my hometown, when I began taking
guitar lessons. It continued through junior high and high school where I was
participating in public school music programs for jazz and classical music. I
played my first professional gig with a rock band at age 16. Also that year, the
guidance counselors started pressuring all of us to pick a major. So, I decided
I'd better major in music in college. I had already received a small amount of
attention (and even a few bucks) for what I believed was my passion and my
talent. It should be noted that the word “prodigy” was NEVER used in
reference to me. I don't believe I have any natural gifts or talents, I simply
believe that I was able to discover a sort of “natural affinity” and general
interest for playing music and practicing hard when I was a young kid.
My boomer parents and everyone else told me that I absolutely had to go to
college, there was no other option for me. So, I did what I thought I should, I
applied and sent audition cassettes (remember those?) to all of the top
schools I was reading about in the magazines: GIT at Musician's Institute, USC,
University of North Texas, and Boston's Berklee College of Music. I was offered
money by each of these schools to attend, but I did not attend any of them.
They were “too expensive and too far away”, but all located in hot music towns
where there was a lot going on. I was disappointed. So I took a full tuition
scholarship for $2000 per year at a small state college 70 miles from my small
hometown and got a degree in classical guitar performance. You see, I
“absolutely HAD to go to college”, but it had to fit the criteria of what the
boomers were actually willing to pay for, which was next to nothing. That
scholarship, incidentally, was for full tuition. College cost my family nothing. I
gotta hand it to 'em, they tricked me into doing whatever I could to save them
a few bucks.
While in college I tested out of certain curricula like ear training, aced music
theory, was a strong reader of sheet music notation by the standards of my
peers, and was working my way through school washing dishes and playing in
cover bands. By year 2 I could afford to not have another hourly job ever
again. I was also eventually teaching a few college courses TO my peers,
including the classes I tested out of myself. After graduation I was just anxious
to get to work, teaching guitar and playing five nights a week without all the
hassle and horse shit of being in class every day when I could've been sleeping
or making the girl brekfast I had brought home from the bar gig the night
before.
That didn't last long, I accepted a fellowship at USC's prestigious Studio/Jazz
guitar program, getting my tuition paid for by teaching undergrads. I arrived
there and was absolutely SHOCKED at the high level of playing that the
younger guys were exhibiting. But I took a minute to think about it, and
eventually I found out why. They went to the top private arts high schools,
they were from areas like Marin County, Montauk Long Island, and Beverly
Hills, and...here's the kicker...they never had to have JOBS in high school. They
all came from highly wealthy families, had access to the best resources,
unlimited money for top level equipment and private teachers, and lots of free
time to practice. They also had access from their early teens to the best
musicians and teachers in large major cities full of working entertainers. My 4
years of hauling dirt and scraping plates in high school had me woefully behind
many of these guys. However, I was already making a living.
I dropped out of USC about five minutes after I had some good gig offers. The
fact is, I couldn't fucking stand the place. It was impossible to legitimize things
like rock and blues music at the ivory tower level, and none of my teachers
seemed to be playing that many jobs. None of the commercial styles that were
actually making me my rent money were even discussed in passing at a USC
music class. The teachers who WERE playing jobs of any significance often got
fired for subbing out their teaching hours too much. It was at that point I
decided I didn't belong there. See, I never cared what the fuck I had to play in
order to make a living, I just wanted to be good enough to make good money,
and it was a sad day when I realized that music school can not often give you
what you need to actually pull that off. So, I left. Turned down a full graduate
fellowship. Everyone was pissed...my parents were pissed because they were
more excited about me attending a famous expensive school than they were
when I later played for the fucking President. The school was pissed because
grad students are free labor. It costs them NOTHING to stick another guy in a
classroom when he's giving them the hours of a full time salaried professor in
exchange. To this day I feel like a fucking idiot for even entertaining the idea.
Let's now look at my music school experiences by the numbers:
This is easy to do these days because we are ALL connected on social media
now. It's very easy to see what everyone else is doing. So, I went to undergrad
college with 15 or 20 other guitar majors. Number of them who are making a
full time living as a live performer? One. Me. These guys play a lot but most
of them have to supplement or replace their gigs with a significant amount of
teaching. I went to grad school with 56 other guitar majors. Number of those
guys making a full time living as a live performer? From what I can tell from
the interwebs, about 6-10. Again, there are many, many guys who are teachers
full time, or at least teach more than they do play.
See, I believe that being a full time musician who plays live (and/or in the
studio) is the greatest badge of honor a musician can bestow upon himself.
Why? Because it's proof you can beat the odds. It shows you have no need for
the “stability” of teaching music. See, we all think we need to be teachers
because that is what MUSIC SCHOOLS tell us. They have a large stock in
keeping interest in becoming a music teacher, for it keeps them employed, and
the cycle continues. As of today, it's spiraled out of control. Our families all
want us to be teachers because they figure it's the closest thing to a “real job”
that a musician can have. It's a lot safer than playing in bars, touring, and all of
those “lifestyle” things that many people think are part of a music career.
When the recession began in 2007/8, things got interesting. All of the music
schools, even the most prestigious ones, lost a lot of revenue and interest
from young musicians. They were (are) far too expensive. So, young players
began checking out smaller, cheaper, less prestigious state colleges like the
one I went to. Well, the A-league schools said “We can't have that!”, so they
began slowly lowering their audition and testing standards while their tuition
prices have continued to skyrocket, just like their skyrocketing endowments
and assistance from state and federal governments. Today, they have more
money coming in than ever, and lower audition standards than ever. They are
now at their most expensive in history and are turning out the least talented
and equipped musicians they ever have. And I am laughing my ASS off,
because this whole thing is hilarious. They have literally dug their own grave,
and they are a ticking bomb.
The music business itself has also changed drastically in the last 20 years. No
one makes money selling records anymore, so everyone has to play live and
stay out on the road more than they used to. The steady stream of studio
work is gone, it's no longer a requirement to have good musicians on your
recording. The computer can fix everything, and the digital world turns
talentless hacks into international stars. The ProTools engineer is now at the
top of the music business food chain. Every two-bit asshole with a macbook
and garage band software can call himself an “artist” or “musician” or
“songwriter” or “producer”. The DJ, the karaoke bar, and the football game on
large plasma screens now stand where the live band once stood.
Is there still room for highly skilled musicians? Absolutely. There is great
demand for a good live band in thousands of places all over the world. Artists
need sidemen to play behind them for their concert dates, churches need
musicians, people need a band for their wedding or Christmas party, and the
list goes on and on. These types of gigs are the bread and butter for a
musician's work throughout the year. Does music school teach you what you
need to know to get these jobs? Absolutely not. I make a very good living at
what I do, and I got 100% of my abilities from the street. I did have a few good
teachers, yes, but even they aren't making what I make or playing as much as
me. Are there musicians better than me? Faster? Richer? More able to raise a
family? Of course there are. But none of them are turning down as much work
as I am simply because they're always booked.
The charlatans in the halls of music schools are taking your money and telling
you if you do what they say and ace the test, you'll make a living and get a gig.
That's a lie. If someone deceives you for their own financial gain, that's
committing fraud. If I pay money for a specific service, and that service is not
rendered, I should be able to get my fucking money back. Worse yet, the
charlatans KNOW they're lying, and they keep right on going. I don't know
how they sleep at night. I've been hired and fired a million times over for all
sorts of reasons, many of which were actually my fault, just as many were not.
It's a tough and shitty business with really great perks and rewards, but you
need very, very thick skin to survive it. You need to be able to take rejection
WELL a million times over, and then a million more. This makes most of us
pretty tough, and many of us skeptical, jaded and cynical. These attributes are
bare bones requirement for making it in my business.
That thick skin and the ability to take rejection is another thing music schools
will never be able to teach. Why? Because the vast majority of people
teaching in music schools never actually had to go through it. They went right
from being a student to being a teacher, having spent no significant amount of
time in the actual workforce they're claiming to supply with employable
candidates.
I just spent last week in Boston. One of America's great cities and a great
music town too. While there I was guesting with the renowned Boston Pops,
one of America's most beloved groups of musicians. It was a wonderful
experience. While there, I ha the opportunity to make a few observations.
The first was seeing that a guitar degree from Berklee now costs a quarter of a
million dollars. It didn't surprise me when I heard that, but it struck me again
what a bad investment it is. If I invest $250,000 in anything, even just put it in
the bank, I should expect a return on that investment very soon if not
immediately. They'll give any 18 year old punk with a pulse and a guitar case
the loans to get the degree, and most of them will never pay it back in their
lifetime, no matter how hard they work or how great the gig is they get, if they
even get a gig at all.
I also spoke with an old friend who is a professional drummer in the Boston
area. He spoke very happily about how busy he was, not in a boastful way, but
proud of himself for being able to raise his son and daughter by playing the
drums. I know the guy's a phenomenal musician, he's a dear friend and I've
worked with him a great deal, but I wanted to hear from HIM why he thinks
he's working so much.
He told me that the Boston area is inundated with Berklee grads, everybody's
out of work, and they all “play too much”. See, now I'm gonna tell you the
other area where music schools fuck up. They're gigantic locker rooms with a
bunch of young jocks in them who are constantly measuring their dicks to see
how fast and complicated they can play their instruments. My drummer buddy
has the ability to do all that too, he has incredible technique and can play
anything. However, he just goes in to the job and “bangs out the time”. He
just plays his instrument as simply and effectively as he can for the song and
the occasion. He's got nothing to prove with his chops. Consequently he's the
busiest guy around, while the other cats are playing in ways that don't get
them the call back even though they desperately need the money (to pay back
that quarter million). But as they were spending the quarter million, the
institution somehow forgot to mention to them that they need to shut the
fuck up with all the scales and stick control exercises and just simply play the
minimum part that's required for each song with the maximum of authenticity
and effectiveness. In a way I don't blame these kids for going out and fucking
up potential accounts by playing too much, they were not properly prepared.
But once again, at some point you gotta blame them for spending that much
money on such a stupid investment in the first place.
Every decision I make as a professional musician is an economic one. I remain
single and childless and living as a bachelor because I can only have the life,
freedoms, and luxuries I want if I am by myself. I only take a gig if it makes
economic sense to me, and if it does not, I say no. I buy guitars used or get
them on endorsements because I refuse to pay full price for them. And I do
NOT recommend going to music school because it's a BAD economic decision.
It's an investment in thin air. You might as well burn your money. You'd have a
better ROI if you bought a home or just put it in the fucking bank. Even Wells
Fargo can guarantee you more return on your money than music schools can.
Here's what I do recommend for young musicians: Get ONE good private
teacher who tells you the truth. Find a musician you admire who's making a
living you want to make for yourself and begin following him around. I say
him, ladies, because most of us are men. It's not sexism, it's a fact. There is
not one woman on my list of subs. When people wanna see a rock guitar
player bangin' out some notes and screaming some lyrics, they wanna see a
dude. And not a fat or ugly one either. Oops, I almost forgot, that's another
thing music schools don't tell you: Fat, ugly motherfuckers don't work as much
and lean and handsome guys do.
Anyway, find that guy and follow him around. Get on youtube and scan
through the billions of guitar lessons on there, or lessons on whatever
instrument you choose. Practice your ass off and learn how to play, you don't
need to spend money to do that anymore, you just need to work hard. The
music teacher I DO know say that's the biggest problems with their students,
by the way, they all say they're all too lazy.
If you're gonna pick an instrument, pick the guitar or the keyboard. Why? It
gives you the most options. You can play gigs solo, duo, trio, on up to playing
with orchestras like I just did. Drummers can't do that. Singers can't do that
(unless they also play guitar or piano). Horn players can't do that. If you pick
one of those two instruments, learn how to sing, and learn how to read and
interpret sheet music, you'll always work. The last thing is most important:
KNOWING SONGS. You have to know a lot of fucking tunes to work steady. At
this point it's about five decades worth of songs in about 8-10 styles. I'd say I
probably know how to play and/or sing a thousand or more.
Choose the minimalist lifestyle, drive the cheapest car and live in the cheapest
apartment you can afford. Don't knock anybody up. Don't move your
girlfriend in. Don't get married, and don't accrue any significant debt. Above
all else, do NOT fall prey to the fraud sold to you by the charlatans that hide
behind the banner of the music school or conservatory. It's a dead end road.
Get out now instead and just start working.
My music education began at age 8 in my hometown, when I began taking
guitar lessons. It continued through junior high and high school where I was
participating in public school music programs for jazz and classical music. I
played my first professional gig with a rock band at age 16. Also that year, the
guidance counselors started pressuring all of us to pick a major. So, I decided
I'd better major in music in college. I had already received a small amount of
attention (and even a few bucks) for what I believed was my passion and my
talent. It should be noted that the word “prodigy” was NEVER used in
reference to me. I don't believe I have any natural gifts or talents, I simply
believe that I was able to discover a sort of “natural affinity” and general
interest for playing music and practicing hard when I was a young kid.
My boomer parents and everyone else told me that I absolutely had to go to
college, there was no other option for me. So, I did what I thought I should, I
applied and sent audition cassettes (remember those?) to all of the top
schools I was reading about in the magazines: GIT at Musician's Institute, USC,
University of North Texas, and Boston's Berklee College of Music. I was offered
money by each of these schools to attend, but I did not attend any of them.
They were “too expensive and too far away”, but all located in hot music towns
where there was a lot going on. I was disappointed. So I took a full tuition
scholarship for $2000 per year at a small state college 70 miles from my small
hometown and got a degree in classical guitar performance. You see, I
“absolutely HAD to go to college”, but it had to fit the criteria of what the
boomers were actually willing to pay for, which was next to nothing. That
scholarship, incidentally, was for full tuition. College cost my family nothing. I
gotta hand it to 'em, they tricked me into doing whatever I could to save them
a few bucks.
While in college I tested out of certain curricula like ear training, aced music
theory, was a strong reader of sheet music notation by the standards of my
peers, and was working my way through school washing dishes and playing in
cover bands. By year 2 I could afford to not have another hourly job ever
again. I was also eventually teaching a few college courses TO my peers,
including the classes I tested out of myself. After graduation I was just anxious
to get to work, teaching guitar and playing five nights a week without all the
hassle and horse shit of being in class every day when I could've been sleeping
or making the girl brekfast I had brought home from the bar gig the night
before.
That didn't last long, I accepted a fellowship at USC's prestigious Studio/Jazz
guitar program, getting my tuition paid for by teaching undergrads. I arrived
there and was absolutely SHOCKED at the high level of playing that the
younger guys were exhibiting. But I took a minute to think about it, and
eventually I found out why. They went to the top private arts high schools,
they were from areas like Marin County, Montauk Long Island, and Beverly
Hills, and...here's the kicker...they never had to have JOBS in high school. They
all came from highly wealthy families, had access to the best resources,
unlimited money for top level equipment and private teachers, and lots of free
time to practice. They also had access from their early teens to the best
musicians and teachers in large major cities full of working entertainers. My 4
years of hauling dirt and scraping plates in high school had me woefully behind
many of these guys. However, I was already making a living.
I dropped out of USC about five minutes after I had some good gig offers. The
fact is, I couldn't fucking stand the place. It was impossible to legitimize things
like rock and blues music at the ivory tower level, and none of my teachers
seemed to be playing that many jobs. None of the commercial styles that were
actually making me my rent money were even discussed in passing at a USC
music class. The teachers who WERE playing jobs of any significance often got
fired for subbing out their teaching hours too much. It was at that point I
decided I didn't belong there. See, I never cared what the fuck I had to play in
order to make a living, I just wanted to be good enough to make good money,
and it was a sad day when I realized that music school can not often give you
what you need to actually pull that off. So, I left. Turned down a full graduate
fellowship. Everyone was pissed...my parents were pissed because they were
more excited about me attending a famous expensive school than they were
when I later played for the fucking President. The school was pissed because
grad students are free labor. It costs them NOTHING to stick another guy in a
classroom when he's giving them the hours of a full time salaried professor in
exchange. To this day I feel like a fucking idiot for even entertaining the idea.
Let's now look at my music school experiences by the numbers:
This is easy to do these days because we are ALL connected on social media
now. It's very easy to see what everyone else is doing. So, I went to undergrad
college with 15 or 20 other guitar majors. Number of them who are making a
full time living as a live performer? One. Me. These guys play a lot but most
of them have to supplement or replace their gigs with a significant amount of
teaching. I went to grad school with 56 other guitar majors. Number of those
guys making a full time living as a live performer? From what I can tell from
the interwebs, about 6-10. Again, there are many, many guys who are teachers
full time, or at least teach more than they do play.
See, I believe that being a full time musician who plays live (and/or in the
studio) is the greatest badge of honor a musician can bestow upon himself.
Why? Because it's proof you can beat the odds. It shows you have no need for
the “stability” of teaching music. See, we all think we need to be teachers
because that is what MUSIC SCHOOLS tell us. They have a large stock in
keeping interest in becoming a music teacher, for it keeps them employed, and
the cycle continues. As of today, it's spiraled out of control. Our families all
want us to be teachers because they figure it's the closest thing to a “real job”
that a musician can have. It's a lot safer than playing in bars, touring, and all of
those “lifestyle” things that many people think are part of a music career.
When the recession began in 2007/8, things got interesting. All of the music
schools, even the most prestigious ones, lost a lot of revenue and interest
from young musicians. They were (are) far too expensive. So, young players
began checking out smaller, cheaper, less prestigious state colleges like the
one I went to. Well, the A-league schools said “We can't have that!”, so they
began slowly lowering their audition and testing standards while their tuition
prices have continued to skyrocket, just like their skyrocketing endowments
and assistance from state and federal governments. Today, they have more
money coming in than ever, and lower audition standards than ever. They are
now at their most expensive in history and are turning out the least talented
and equipped musicians they ever have. And I am laughing my ASS off,
because this whole thing is hilarious. They have literally dug their own grave,
and they are a ticking bomb.
The music business itself has also changed drastically in the last 20 years. No
one makes money selling records anymore, so everyone has to play live and
stay out on the road more than they used to. The steady stream of studio
work is gone, it's no longer a requirement to have good musicians on your
recording. The computer can fix everything, and the digital world turns
talentless hacks into international stars. The ProTools engineer is now at the
top of the music business food chain. Every two-bit asshole with a macbook
and garage band software can call himself an “artist” or “musician” or
“songwriter” or “producer”. The DJ, the karaoke bar, and the football game on
large plasma screens now stand where the live band once stood.
Is there still room for highly skilled musicians? Absolutely. There is great
demand for a good live band in thousands of places all over the world. Artists
need sidemen to play behind them for their concert dates, churches need
musicians, people need a band for their wedding or Christmas party, and the
list goes on and on. These types of gigs are the bread and butter for a
musician's work throughout the year. Does music school teach you what you
need to know to get these jobs? Absolutely not. I make a very good living at
what I do, and I got 100% of my abilities from the street. I did have a few good
teachers, yes, but even they aren't making what I make or playing as much as
me. Are there musicians better than me? Faster? Richer? More able to raise a
family? Of course there are. But none of them are turning down as much work
as I am simply because they're always booked.
The charlatans in the halls of music schools are taking your money and telling
you if you do what they say and ace the test, you'll make a living and get a gig.
That's a lie. If someone deceives you for their own financial gain, that's
committing fraud. If I pay money for a specific service, and that service is not
rendered, I should be able to get my fucking money back. Worse yet, the
charlatans KNOW they're lying, and they keep right on going. I don't know
how they sleep at night. I've been hired and fired a million times over for all
sorts of reasons, many of which were actually my fault, just as many were not.
It's a tough and shitty business with really great perks and rewards, but you
need very, very thick skin to survive it. You need to be able to take rejection
WELL a million times over, and then a million more. This makes most of us
pretty tough, and many of us skeptical, jaded and cynical. These attributes are
bare bones requirement for making it in my business.
That thick skin and the ability to take rejection is another thing music schools
will never be able to teach. Why? Because the vast majority of people
teaching in music schools never actually had to go through it. They went right
from being a student to being a teacher, having spent no significant amount of
time in the actual workforce they're claiming to supply with employable
candidates.
I just spent last week in Boston. One of America's great cities and a great
music town too. While there I was guesting with the renowned Boston Pops,
one of America's most beloved groups of musicians. It was a wonderful
experience. While there, I ha the opportunity to make a few observations.
The first was seeing that a guitar degree from Berklee now costs a quarter of a
million dollars. It didn't surprise me when I heard that, but it struck me again
what a bad investment it is. If I invest $250,000 in anything, even just put it in
the bank, I should expect a return on that investment very soon if not
immediately. They'll give any 18 year old punk with a pulse and a guitar case
the loans to get the degree, and most of them will never pay it back in their
lifetime, no matter how hard they work or how great the gig is they get, if they
even get a gig at all.
I also spoke with an old friend who is a professional drummer in the Boston
area. He spoke very happily about how busy he was, not in a boastful way, but
proud of himself for being able to raise his son and daughter by playing the
drums. I know the guy's a phenomenal musician, he's a dear friend and I've
worked with him a great deal, but I wanted to hear from HIM why he thinks
he's working so much.
He told me that the Boston area is inundated with Berklee grads, everybody's
out of work, and they all “play too much”. See, now I'm gonna tell you the
other area where music schools fuck up. They're gigantic locker rooms with a
bunch of young jocks in them who are constantly measuring their dicks to see
how fast and complicated they can play their instruments. My drummer buddy
has the ability to do all that too, he has incredible technique and can play
anything. However, he just goes in to the job and “bangs out the time”. He
just plays his instrument as simply and effectively as he can for the song and
the occasion. He's got nothing to prove with his chops. Consequently he's the
busiest guy around, while the other cats are playing in ways that don't get
them the call back even though they desperately need the money (to pay back
that quarter million). But as they were spending the quarter million, the
institution somehow forgot to mention to them that they need to shut the
fuck up with all the scales and stick control exercises and just simply play the
minimum part that's required for each song with the maximum of authenticity
and effectiveness. In a way I don't blame these kids for going out and fucking
up potential accounts by playing too much, they were not properly prepared.
But once again, at some point you gotta blame them for spending that much
money on such a stupid investment in the first place.
Every decision I make as a professional musician is an economic one. I remain
single and childless and living as a bachelor because I can only have the life,
freedoms, and luxuries I want if I am by myself. I only take a gig if it makes
economic sense to me, and if it does not, I say no. I buy guitars used or get
them on endorsements because I refuse to pay full price for them. And I do
NOT recommend going to music school because it's a BAD economic decision.
It's an investment in thin air. You might as well burn your money. You'd have a
better ROI if you bought a home or just put it in the fucking bank. Even Wells
Fargo can guarantee you more return on your money than music schools can.
Here's what I do recommend for young musicians: Get ONE good private
teacher who tells you the truth. Find a musician you admire who's making a
living you want to make for yourself and begin following him around. I say
him, ladies, because most of us are men. It's not sexism, it's a fact. There is
not one woman on my list of subs. When people wanna see a rock guitar
player bangin' out some notes and screaming some lyrics, they wanna see a
dude. And not a fat or ugly one either. Oops, I almost forgot, that's another
thing music schools don't tell you: Fat, ugly motherfuckers don't work as much
and lean and handsome guys do.
Anyway, find that guy and follow him around. Get on youtube and scan
through the billions of guitar lessons on there, or lessons on whatever
instrument you choose. Practice your ass off and learn how to play, you don't
need to spend money to do that anymore, you just need to work hard. The
music teacher I DO know say that's the biggest problems with their students,
by the way, they all say they're all too lazy.
If you're gonna pick an instrument, pick the guitar or the keyboard. Why? It
gives you the most options. You can play gigs solo, duo, trio, on up to playing
with orchestras like I just did. Drummers can't do that. Singers can't do that
(unless they also play guitar or piano). Horn players can't do that. If you pick
one of those two instruments, learn how to sing, and learn how to read and
interpret sheet music, you'll always work. The last thing is most important:
KNOWING SONGS. You have to know a lot of fucking tunes to work steady. At
this point it's about five decades worth of songs in about 8-10 styles. I'd say I
probably know how to play and/or sing a thousand or more.
Choose the minimalist lifestyle, drive the cheapest car and live in the cheapest
apartment you can afford. Don't knock anybody up. Don't move your
girlfriend in. Don't get married, and don't accrue any significant debt. Above
all else, do NOT fall prey to the fraud sold to you by the charlatans that hide
behind the banner of the music school or conservatory. It's a dead end road.
Get out now instead and just start working.
Thursday, August 20, 2015
More Cappy Crap
A coffee mug of The Clarey Podcast now available at Cappy's Crap.
However, ladies, I won't lie because you'll be tortured between that and whether you buy a coffee mug with Mr. Brown's epic picture from BMGOP. It IS a tough choice.
More crap coming once I figure out what might sell.
However, ladies, I won't lie because you'll be tortured between that and whether you buy a coffee mug with Mr. Brown's epic picture from BMGOP. It IS a tough choice.
More crap coming once I figure out what might sell.
How Much of an Advantage Do Hot Conservative Women Get?
DISCLAIMERS:
1. I do not HATE anybody in the group of women used in this study (bar Katie Kieffer, who I don't even hate, I just have no respect for). Many of them are intelligent and accomplished, some of whom I do listen to regularly...while many are not. Do not take this personally if you know you are one of those women who are talented, who do make original content and do NOT mere regurgitate conservative talking points.
2. I am aware that there are other people on the lists you would like to see. These lists were compiled with what I had and in a non-scientific fashion. I will gladly add others to help the accuracy of the study. But for now, this is the data I had to work with.
3. Data was adjusted for Dana Loesch's insanely high twitter followers. The official "final" ratio was calculated taking an average of all three "final" ratios. Criticize the methodology as you like.
______________________________________________________________________________
A well known fact about life is that pretty girls have it easier.
That's not an opinion.
That's not a guess.
That's a fact.
However, I was curious just HOW MUCH of an advantage there is.
Specifically, instead of being a super awesome economic genius trapped in a 5'9" average looking male body, what if I was instead a very average mind trapped in a cute 20 something female body with a nice set of perky tits?
So I set out and asked all my agents in the field to send me examples of hot conservative or libertarian babes that had an internet presence. I then averaged both the number of their Twitter followers and YouTube subscribers. I did the same within my professional circle of right leaning MALE internet celebrities and then calculated the ratios of female Twitter followers to male Twitter followers, as well as the ratio of YouTube subscribers.
This was the result:
In short, when you average it out women are paid a premium of 512% over their internet male micro-celebrity counterparts.
Now, again, this is nothing new. And I'm not even going to argue against it, for it is human nature. A hot conservative or libertarian female is much RARER than an average looking conservative or libertarian male. What I will, however, file a complaint about is the quality of each group's work.
Certainly there ARE accomplished, intelligent, insightful people on both sides. However, when you average it out, it is just not comparable. The sheer number of ditzes in the female list REALLY DO get by on their looks. Again, I don't "hate" anyone on either list, but when a girl is essentially paid 5 times to regurgitate talking points Limbaugh made before they were born, or epiphanies I realized on my blog when they were in grade school, don't tell me all the men in the conservative or libertarian movement are "deep philosophical types." They're just your regular average horny guys who happen to vote Republican. That is the market you are serving. Not your high-minded economic and political intellectuals.
Finally, (and I have mentioned this to my pretty AND SMART conservative and libertarian female friends) if you are:
1. A pretty AND SMART conservative or libertarian female
2. Who is looking for a job,
3. And have the slightest bit of camera presence
4. And are willing to show off some leg and cleavage,
you will find no easier career than being a "COLBOTI" (Conservative Or Libertarian Babe on the Internet). You will make 5 times the audience your male counterpart has in 1/5th the time, making 5 times the money. And if you happen to actually be SMART and not just a cute set of tits, you can write your own ticket for the rest of your life.
I know this post sounds cheeky. I know it sounds arrogant. I know it may have insulted some people.
Too bad it's 100% true.
Ladies, take advantage of that 500% advantage.
____________________________________________________________________________
http://aaron-clarey.podomatic.com/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
1. I do not HATE anybody in the group of women used in this study (bar Katie Kieffer, who I don't even hate, I just have no respect for). Many of them are intelligent and accomplished, some of whom I do listen to regularly...while many are not. Do not take this personally if you know you are one of those women who are talented, who do make original content and do NOT mere regurgitate conservative talking points.
2. I am aware that there are other people on the lists you would like to see. These lists were compiled with what I had and in a non-scientific fashion. I will gladly add others to help the accuracy of the study. But for now, this is the data I had to work with.
3. Data was adjusted for Dana Loesch's insanely high twitter followers. The official "final" ratio was calculated taking an average of all three "final" ratios. Criticize the methodology as you like.
______________________________________________________________________________
A well known fact about life is that pretty girls have it easier.
That's not an opinion.
That's not a guess.
That's a fact.
However, I was curious just HOW MUCH of an advantage there is.
Specifically, instead of being a super awesome economic genius trapped in a 5'9" average looking male body, what if I was instead a very average mind trapped in a cute 20 something female body with a nice set of perky tits?
So I set out and asked all my agents in the field to send me examples of hot conservative or libertarian babes that had an internet presence. I then averaged both the number of their Twitter followers and YouTube subscribers. I did the same within my professional circle of right leaning MALE internet celebrities and then calculated the ratios of female Twitter followers to male Twitter followers, as well as the ratio of YouTube subscribers.
This was the result:
In short, when you average it out women are paid a premium of 512% over their internet male micro-celebrity counterparts.
Now, again, this is nothing new. And I'm not even going to argue against it, for it is human nature. A hot conservative or libertarian female is much RARER than an average looking conservative or libertarian male. What I will, however, file a complaint about is the quality of each group's work.
Certainly there ARE accomplished, intelligent, insightful people on both sides. However, when you average it out, it is just not comparable. The sheer number of ditzes in the female list REALLY DO get by on their looks. Again, I don't "hate" anyone on either list, but when a girl is essentially paid 5 times to regurgitate talking points Limbaugh made before they were born, or epiphanies I realized on my blog when they were in grade school, don't tell me all the men in the conservative or libertarian movement are "deep philosophical types." They're just your regular average horny guys who happen to vote Republican. That is the market you are serving. Not your high-minded economic and political intellectuals.
Finally, (and I have mentioned this to my pretty AND SMART conservative and libertarian female friends) if you are:
1. A pretty AND SMART conservative or libertarian female
2. Who is looking for a job,
3. And have the slightest bit of camera presence
4. And are willing to show off some leg and cleavage,
you will find no easier career than being a "COLBOTI" (Conservative Or Libertarian Babe on the Internet). You will make 5 times the audience your male counterpart has in 1/5th the time, making 5 times the money. And if you happen to actually be SMART and not just a cute set of tits, you can write your own ticket for the rest of your life.
I know this post sounds cheeky. I know it sounds arrogant. I know it may have insulted some people.
Too bad it's 100% true.
Ladies, take advantage of that 500% advantage.
____________________________________________________________________________
http://aaron-clarey.podomatic.com/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
Announcement: "Cappy's Crap"
Howdy All,
Finally getting around to opening up a Cafe Press shop to sell various Cappy memorabilia affectionately titled:
"Cappy's Crap"
Right now there is only ONE item, a bumperstick titled "Enjoy the Decline" but I will be adding more.
On account you are the market, let me know if there is something you wanted in particular and I can likely make it.
Mucho thanks,
Cappy
Finally getting around to opening up a Cafe Press shop to sell various Cappy memorabilia affectionately titled:
"Cappy's Crap"
Right now there is only ONE item, a bumperstick titled "Enjoy the Decline" but I will be adding more.
On account you are the market, let me know if there is something you wanted in particular and I can likely make it.
Mucho thanks,
Cappy
The Economics of Waifu
The world, I have concluded, will never cease to amaze me. And thus, once you get to that point you'll say, "nothing shocks me anymore." And so once again ole Cappy went head long, cluelessly into a whole new world where he learned about "Waifu."
If you don't know what "Waifu" is, that's alright. It means you're normal and frankly avoided a sad aspect of humanity. But while it originally meant "favorite female Japanese anime character," (and there's nothing wrong with that) it has also morphed in some circles to mean where men have actually formed imaginary relationships with these fictitious characters, some times even marrying them. This not only explains the inside joke on Archer where Krieger has a pink-haired hologram for a girlfriend, but also explains the existence of "Waifu dolls/pillows."
My initial reaction to all of this was "thank god I'm dying in 30 years," but that annoying part of my brain dedicated to economics wouldn't turn off. It just "had to" do some research, and look into what possible incentives existed for this to even be a thing. And the observations were very interesting.
First, economically speaking, the only way a boy/man would choose to date/court/marry a fictional girl instead of a real one is because the costs required to get a real one is just too high. At first you may scoff at this (and I surely did), but upon running some numbers and thinking about, it IS a very expensive endeavor. If you think back to when you hit puberty on, precisely how much have you spent in terms of
Time
Money
Labor
Effort
Mentality
Stress
Strife
Fear
Regret
and plain ole other sources of calories of energy dealing with women?
My figures are of course HIGHLY subjective and up for debate, but if you take into consideration direct financial expenses, mental costs, and opportunity costs, the total costs to find a wife ever so roughly hover around $720,000. Enough for most single people to retire on.
These costs are not insignificant, and only certainly higher for less social or good looking men who (likely) populate the "Waifu Community." So even though they are very UNLIKELY to run and crunch the numbers I did above, intuitively their brain does some kind of cost benefit analysis and concludes it's not worth the $700,000+ in life expense to chase after a real girl. Not entirely irrational.
However, enter in the concept of substitute and inferior goods.
Just because a young man decides it's not worth the total expense to get a girl in the real world, doesn't mean he can't (albeit delusionally) satisfy some of his romantic desires with non-human substitute goods. Sex can be more than adequately (though inferiorly) be replaced with porn. A loving relationship can be replaced with one's imagination (think Wilson in "Castaway"). And a marriage or confirmation of a relationship can be replaced by fake ceremony where you marry a video game character (or in the case of an increasing # of American women, marrying yourself). And so instead of becoming a hermit or a virgin "MGTOW" where you have no relationship with women, some men escape into a fantasy world where they get themselves a Waifu.
Now naturally everybody's mind is focusing on the delusional aspect of this mentality. However, I want to again reiterate and refocus our attention to the economic aspect of this. Whether you agree with them or not, whether you find them sane or not, they are at least being RATIONAL to a certain extent. And we can't deny the fact that they've made the conscious choice to choose a fake girlfriend over a real one. But the fact ANYBODY is making this choice consciously speaks volumes as to the price and costs of finding a real woman today.
Consider not just the various financial, time, labor, and opportunity costs associated with finding a quality real world girl. Consider the lack of drama and the mental pain associated with having an "imaginary girlfriend." Not only do you save yourself $700,000 in explicit and implicit costs, you also save yourself;
Being stood up
Being shot down
Drama
Temper tantrums
Girls cheating on you
Girls leading you on
Bi-polar freaks
Feminism
Blue balls
and every other form of scourge and fire-laden hurdles you and every other man had to jump through during his teens and 20's.
Additionally, though it isn't real and it IS delusional, imagine what nice, kind, compliant, and supporting personalities Waifu's have. She isn't a single mom. She isn't demanding you gotta do this and that. She isn't going to cheat on you. She's always happy to see you. She's PRECISELY at your EXACT same intelligence level (because she is you), etc. etc. It's a trait the inferior good has that is superior to the real thing. So when you consider all these factors through the lens of a (likely) unattractive male, you can start to see why they choose to be delusional instead of live in the real world.
The sad point I'm trying to make is that if men are willing to be irrational in the real world by choosing to live in a delusional one, the economics of having a Waifu make complete sense. What's even sadder, however, is that the cost differential between having a real girlfriend and a fake one is so huge in the real world, the concept of having a Waifu (or marrying yourself in women's cases) is actually becoming a real thing.
Enjoy that decline!
__________________________________________
http://aaron-clarey.podomatic.com/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
If you don't know what "Waifu" is, that's alright. It means you're normal and frankly avoided a sad aspect of humanity. But while it originally meant "favorite female Japanese anime character," (and there's nothing wrong with that) it has also morphed in some circles to mean where men have actually formed imaginary relationships with these fictitious characters, some times even marrying them. This not only explains the inside joke on Archer where Krieger has a pink-haired hologram for a girlfriend, but also explains the existence of "Waifu dolls/pillows."
My initial reaction to all of this was "thank god I'm dying in 30 years," but that annoying part of my brain dedicated to economics wouldn't turn off. It just "had to" do some research, and look into what possible incentives existed for this to even be a thing. And the observations were very interesting.
First, economically speaking, the only way a boy/man would choose to date/court/marry a fictional girl instead of a real one is because the costs required to get a real one is just too high. At first you may scoff at this (and I surely did), but upon running some numbers and thinking about, it IS a very expensive endeavor. If you think back to when you hit puberty on, precisely how much have you spent in terms of
Time
Money
Labor
Effort
Mentality
Stress
Strife
Fear
Regret
and plain ole other sources of calories of energy dealing with women?
My figures are of course HIGHLY subjective and up for debate, but if you take into consideration direct financial expenses, mental costs, and opportunity costs, the total costs to find a wife ever so roughly hover around $720,000. Enough for most single people to retire on.
These costs are not insignificant, and only certainly higher for less social or good looking men who (likely) populate the "Waifu Community." So even though they are very UNLIKELY to run and crunch the numbers I did above, intuitively their brain does some kind of cost benefit analysis and concludes it's not worth the $700,000+ in life expense to chase after a real girl. Not entirely irrational.
However, enter in the concept of substitute and inferior goods.
Just because a young man decides it's not worth the total expense to get a girl in the real world, doesn't mean he can't (albeit delusionally) satisfy some of his romantic desires with non-human substitute goods. Sex can be more than adequately (though inferiorly) be replaced with porn. A loving relationship can be replaced with one's imagination (think Wilson in "Castaway"). And a marriage or confirmation of a relationship can be replaced by fake ceremony where you marry a video game character (or in the case of an increasing # of American women, marrying yourself). And so instead of becoming a hermit or a virgin "MGTOW" where you have no relationship with women, some men escape into a fantasy world where they get themselves a Waifu.
Now naturally everybody's mind is focusing on the delusional aspect of this mentality. However, I want to again reiterate and refocus our attention to the economic aspect of this. Whether you agree with them or not, whether you find them sane or not, they are at least being RATIONAL to a certain extent. And we can't deny the fact that they've made the conscious choice to choose a fake girlfriend over a real one. But the fact ANYBODY is making this choice consciously speaks volumes as to the price and costs of finding a real woman today.
Consider not just the various financial, time, labor, and opportunity costs associated with finding a quality real world girl. Consider the lack of drama and the mental pain associated with having an "imaginary girlfriend." Not only do you save yourself $700,000 in explicit and implicit costs, you also save yourself;
Being stood up
Being shot down
Drama
Temper tantrums
Girls cheating on you
Girls leading you on
Bi-polar freaks
Feminism
Blue balls
and every other form of scourge and fire-laden hurdles you and every other man had to jump through during his teens and 20's.
Additionally, though it isn't real and it IS delusional, imagine what nice, kind, compliant, and supporting personalities Waifu's have. She isn't a single mom. She isn't demanding you gotta do this and that. She isn't going to cheat on you. She's always happy to see you. She's PRECISELY at your EXACT same intelligence level (because she is you), etc. etc. It's a trait the inferior good has that is superior to the real thing. So when you consider all these factors through the lens of a (likely) unattractive male, you can start to see why they choose to be delusional instead of live in the real world.
The sad point I'm trying to make is that if men are willing to be irrational in the real world by choosing to live in a delusional one, the economics of having a Waifu make complete sense. What's even sadder, however, is that the cost differential between having a real girlfriend and a fake one is so huge in the real world, the concept of having a Waifu (or marrying yourself in women's cases) is actually becoming a real thing.
Enjoy that decline!
__________________________________________
http://aaron-clarey.podomatic.com/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Tuesday, August 18, 2015
How Bernie Sanders Proves "Socialism" is No Longer a 4 Letter Word
A position I've held since I took my first college level economics course was that the democrat party was not functionally a political part that advocated democracy. It was, based on all measures, intents, and actions of its members a socialist party. Of course, I was laughed at when I said the democrats were socialists because "socialism" and "socialist" were pejoratives we reserved for the evil Soviet empire and communism during the 80's. However, there in my economics textbook, was statistics showing the government spending just shy of 35% GDP and the democrats were advocating for even MORE spending. This, combined with my independent mind, convinced me of precisely what the democrat party was.
The next twenty years passed by, and like Overton's Window, we've slowly, but surely moved more and more to the left. Also during this time my friends who once mocked and ridiculed me as "Oh crazy Clarey! You funny Republican you!" started having kids, jobs, and adult responsibilities. And soon I wasn't that "one crazy republican at the party, bringing the buzz down," but a respected economist that even my most ardent detractors of days past had to agree with.
So, as further proof that this country has moved to the left, and quite rapidly so allow me to point out a curious observation. Bernie Sander's poll numbers.
As it stands right now Bernie is the front runner for the democratic presidential nomination. Bernie as you know is an avowed socialist, replete with a lack of any real world private sector experience, 1960's hippie expertise, upper middle class upbringing, and an entire career as a soft-hands, work-free politician. However, what should be shocking to you is that a SOCIALIST, a person who advocates banishing private property, a person who wants to have the same economic system as the Soviets, Venezuela, Cuba, and Argentina, is so warmly welcomed by democrat voters.
This shift, though shocking, was entirely predictable. For while we were told and aware of the evils of socialism in the 1980's, nearly two new generations have since been brainwashed by the K-College government education system. Thus why we've gone from:
President Kennedy willing to go to war with the Soviets in 1962
To Ronald Reagan breaking their backs in 1985.
To Bill Clinton wetting the panties Gen X girls with his saxophone in 1992.
To Barack Obama wetting the panties of Millennial girls (and boys) with his government checks and nationalized health care in 2008 and 2012.
And now, so complete was this brainwashing of the younger generations, Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist, is the front runner of the democrat party, even beating out Hillary Clinton, no rightist herself.
The larger point is to point out and tip my hat to the democrat party and their various leftist organizations. They have MASTERFULLY taken over the country's key institutions with the conscious and intended purpose of brainwashing America's youth to the point they are so naive and ignorant about history they have NO PROBLEMS voting for a socialist. It is a PR stunt no different than getting two generations to vote for nazis (who actually have a lesser track record of murdering innocents than socialism).
However, to all my friends who patted me on the head 20 years ago dismissing me as alarmist. And to those of you who voted for Bill Clinton or even Obama in 2008 because you thought they were "cool," I just want to say "I told you so."
Socialism is no longer a four letter word.
Enjoy the decline.
The next twenty years passed by, and like Overton's Window, we've slowly, but surely moved more and more to the left. Also during this time my friends who once mocked and ridiculed me as "Oh crazy Clarey! You funny Republican you!" started having kids, jobs, and adult responsibilities. And soon I wasn't that "one crazy republican at the party, bringing the buzz down," but a respected economist that even my most ardent detractors of days past had to agree with.
So, as further proof that this country has moved to the left, and quite rapidly so allow me to point out a curious observation. Bernie Sander's poll numbers.
As it stands right now Bernie is the front runner for the democratic presidential nomination. Bernie as you know is an avowed socialist, replete with a lack of any real world private sector experience, 1960's hippie expertise, upper middle class upbringing, and an entire career as a soft-hands, work-free politician. However, what should be shocking to you is that a SOCIALIST, a person who advocates banishing private property, a person who wants to have the same economic system as the Soviets, Venezuela, Cuba, and Argentina, is so warmly welcomed by democrat voters.
This shift, though shocking, was entirely predictable. For while we were told and aware of the evils of socialism in the 1980's, nearly two new generations have since been brainwashed by the K-College government education system. Thus why we've gone from:
President Kennedy willing to go to war with the Soviets in 1962
To Ronald Reagan breaking their backs in 1985.
To Bill Clinton wetting the panties Gen X girls with his saxophone in 1992.
To Barack Obama wetting the panties of Millennial girls (and boys) with his government checks and nationalized health care in 2008 and 2012.
And now, so complete was this brainwashing of the younger generations, Bernie Sanders, an avowed socialist, is the front runner of the democrat party, even beating out Hillary Clinton, no rightist herself.
The larger point is to point out and tip my hat to the democrat party and their various leftist organizations. They have MASTERFULLY taken over the country's key institutions with the conscious and intended purpose of brainwashing America's youth to the point they are so naive and ignorant about history they have NO PROBLEMS voting for a socialist. It is a PR stunt no different than getting two generations to vote for nazis (who actually have a lesser track record of murdering innocents than socialism).
However, to all my friends who patted me on the head 20 years ago dismissing me as alarmist. And to those of you who voted for Bill Clinton or even Obama in 2008 because you thought they were "cool," I just want to say "I told you so."
Socialism is no longer a four letter word.
Enjoy the decline.
The Escape Velocity of Poverty
This was for a client, but came out better than I thought it did and deemed it worth sharing. It addresses how you can be so poor you can't escape poverty, making it so ALL your decisions have to be made right and paid off. It also addresses the crippling depression many college graduates have due to no jobs and student loans. Finally, it revisits the "God Complex" I mentioned in my video about suicide.
Also, if anybody out there is willing to hire this guy or is in Pittsburg and can point him in the right direction, that would be great:
Also, if anybody out there is willing to hire this guy or is in Pittsburg and can point him in the right direction, that would be great:
Precisely How Much Silver Do You Need Post-Collapse?
A concept I try to explain to either friends, clients, family members, or random hot chicks I try to seduce with my awesome economic knowledge on the street is that you don't need "that much" silver in order to hedge against an economic collapse.
The logic is simple.
If there was an economic collapse, all fiat currencies (ie - all major world currencies) would become worthless and an alternative currency (nearly practically guaranteed to be precious metals) would HAVE TO rise to replace them. This "last currency standing" would be the default world reserve currency and it's supply would then have to (by necessity) purchase all of the "post-economic collapse" world's GDP. And though that GDP would be less, there is far less precious metals in circulation to purchase said remaining GDP. This increase in the ratio of "production to currency" would increase the value of the world's supply of precious metals and is why you don't need "$1 million in silver" to insure $1 million today's assets.
Of course, this logic does not translate into precise mathematical figures and still leaves open the question,
"Well, if I have $500,000 in assets today, how much silver (or gold) would I need to purchase to effectively insure against an economic collapse?"
So I looked into it and though the numbers are of course VERY back-of-napkin, I think I've come up with a pretty good rule of thumb most people can operate by.
Assume first, that during an economic collapse the world's GDP would shrink by 80%. This would leave only $15 trillion left of the world's current $74 trillion in GDP in annual economic production.
Assume second, that the current world supply of silver of 1.4 million tons does not dramatically change AND that it is preferred over gold as gold is too precious (I know this is not a valid assumption, but just work with me on the math). When converted to ounces this results in 44.8 million ounces of silver, the effective world's money supply to purchase said annual post-economic collapse production of $15 trillion.
Using simple division we get a value of $330.36 per ounce.
As I write this right now, the spot price of silver is $15.10 per ounce. So buying one ounce of silver today would buy (under a post-economic collapse economy) $330.36 tomorrow. Essentially a ratio of 22 to 1.
Of course, this does not speak to the fact that the world's remaining silver supply would not just buy one year's worth of post-apocalyptic world's GDP. It would buy the world's GDP into the future until an alternative currency would replace it. Ergo, if one wanted to be mathematically "correct" about it, you would take the NPV of that ounce of silver's purchasing power. Here it's anybody's guess as to the "discount rate" one would use in a perpetuity calculation (don't worry if you didn't understand that, it's to get the finance nerd-technicalitists off my ass). But applying a heavily discounted rate of 30% that would imply a purchasing power in today's dollars of $1,100. A full ratio of 73.
Meaning for every $1 in silver you buy today you would have a theoretical insurance of $73 in a post-economic collapse future.
Now naturally silver will not be the sole currency left. And naturally the discount rate is not going to be 30%. And naturally, we don't know if global GDP would collapse by just 80%. But somewhere between a ratio of 22 and 73 is likely the value of "insurance" silver would provide in a post-economic collapse world.
I say, for the sake of simplicity, let's just take the average and call it 48.
So to translate all this economic mumbo jumbo into English for normal people, this is the take away:
If you have $500,000 in network and want to insure it against an economic collapse,
Divide it by 48, and that's how much in silver you need to buy today.
Again, just a rough measure. But a measure most thinking folk should consider.
And always, remember, Enjoy the Decline!
The logic is simple.
If there was an economic collapse, all fiat currencies (ie - all major world currencies) would become worthless and an alternative currency (nearly practically guaranteed to be precious metals) would HAVE TO rise to replace them. This "last currency standing" would be the default world reserve currency and it's supply would then have to (by necessity) purchase all of the "post-economic collapse" world's GDP. And though that GDP would be less, there is far less precious metals in circulation to purchase said remaining GDP. This increase in the ratio of "production to currency" would increase the value of the world's supply of precious metals and is why you don't need "$1 million in silver" to insure $1 million today's assets.
Of course, this logic does not translate into precise mathematical figures and still leaves open the question,
"Well, if I have $500,000 in assets today, how much silver (or gold) would I need to purchase to effectively insure against an economic collapse?"
So I looked into it and though the numbers are of course VERY back-of-napkin, I think I've come up with a pretty good rule of thumb most people can operate by.
Assume first, that during an economic collapse the world's GDP would shrink by 80%. This would leave only $15 trillion left of the world's current $74 trillion in GDP in annual economic production.
Assume second, that the current world supply of silver of 1.4 million tons does not dramatically change AND that it is preferred over gold as gold is too precious (I know this is not a valid assumption, but just work with me on the math). When converted to ounces this results in 44.8 million ounces of silver, the effective world's money supply to purchase said annual post-economic collapse production of $15 trillion.
Using simple division we get a value of $330.36 per ounce.
As I write this right now, the spot price of silver is $15.10 per ounce. So buying one ounce of silver today would buy (under a post-economic collapse economy) $330.36 tomorrow. Essentially a ratio of 22 to 1.
Of course, this does not speak to the fact that the world's remaining silver supply would not just buy one year's worth of post-apocalyptic world's GDP. It would buy the world's GDP into the future until an alternative currency would replace it. Ergo, if one wanted to be mathematically "correct" about it, you would take the NPV of that ounce of silver's purchasing power. Here it's anybody's guess as to the "discount rate" one would use in a perpetuity calculation (don't worry if you didn't understand that, it's to get the finance nerd-technicalitists off my ass). But applying a heavily discounted rate of 30% that would imply a purchasing power in today's dollars of $1,100. A full ratio of 73.
Meaning for every $1 in silver you buy today you would have a theoretical insurance of $73 in a post-economic collapse future.
Now naturally silver will not be the sole currency left. And naturally the discount rate is not going to be 30%. And naturally, we don't know if global GDP would collapse by just 80%. But somewhere between a ratio of 22 and 73 is likely the value of "insurance" silver would provide in a post-economic collapse world.
I say, for the sake of simplicity, let's just take the average and call it 48.
So to translate all this economic mumbo jumbo into English for normal people, this is the take away:
If you have $500,000 in network and want to insure it against an economic collapse,
Divide it by 48, and that's how much in silver you need to buy today.
Again, just a rough measure. But a measure most thinking folk should consider.
And always, remember, Enjoy the Decline!
Monday, August 17, 2015
Proof Young Ole Cappy Had a Heart
A friend of mine started posting pictures from a NYE 2000 party I was graciously invited to. This was of course 15 years ago and in 15 years your forget a little bit of who you were, what you were, and start to question the beliefs you hold today.
This is of concern to me as it makes me think...
"Was it really that bad?"
"Did I really play my cards right?"
"Perhaps I screwed up and I've been wrong this entire time?"
In short, I question myself and my actions in the past as any erroneous thought back then would lead to an ill-informed and erroneous philosophy today.
Perhaps I was in the wrong.
Perhaps I didn't play my cards right.
Perhaps I was indeed a loser and just didn't realize it till now.
But then I saw this picture and one thing jumped out at me and consequently jumped my memory.
Her corsage.
I remember back when I was young I would buy my dates corsages if I liked them in particular and made it to the 3rd or 4th date. I would also take them out on dates that would warrant a corsage and my usage of a tuxedo. In this particular instance I remember BEING EMBARRASSED because my date had no straps on her dress and we had to pin her corsage to her side. But I still had the consideration to purchase her a corsage.
Now, I ask you this ladies.
When's the last time a guy bought you a corsage for a date?
That's right. NEVER.
So in hindsight, and with the use of this picture, I don't ever want to hear American women again about "where the good men are" or "why can't they find a man," because I have empirical proof they did exist, even if they themselves forgot about it. You shot them down, you fucked them over, you stood them up, so much so the entire CONCEPT of buying a date a corsage was not only abandoned but completely forgotten that it ever took place in a man's life.
So, in summary,
Fuck you
Fuck you
Fuck you
You enjoy that decline ladies. You've earned it.
This is of concern to me as it makes me think...
"Was it really that bad?"
"Did I really play my cards right?"
"Perhaps I screwed up and I've been wrong this entire time?"
In short, I question myself and my actions in the past as any erroneous thought back then would lead to an ill-informed and erroneous philosophy today.
Perhaps I was in the wrong.
Perhaps I didn't play my cards right.
Perhaps I was indeed a loser and just didn't realize it till now.
But then I saw this picture and one thing jumped out at me and consequently jumped my memory.
Her corsage.
I remember back when I was young I would buy my dates corsages if I liked them in particular and made it to the 3rd or 4th date. I would also take them out on dates that would warrant a corsage and my usage of a tuxedo. In this particular instance I remember BEING EMBARRASSED because my date had no straps on her dress and we had to pin her corsage to her side. But I still had the consideration to purchase her a corsage.
Now, I ask you this ladies.
When's the last time a guy bought you a corsage for a date?
That's right. NEVER.
So in hindsight, and with the use of this picture, I don't ever want to hear American women again about "where the good men are" or "why can't they find a man," because I have empirical proof they did exist, even if they themselves forgot about it. You shot them down, you fucked them over, you stood them up, so much so the entire CONCEPT of buying a date a corsage was not only abandoned but completely forgotten that it ever took place in a man's life.
So, in summary,
Fuck you
Fuck you
Fuck you
You enjoy that decline ladies. You've earned it.
Sunday, August 16, 2015
The Megyn Kelly Effect
Howdy All,
The ole Captain is intending to do some research, but needs some data points. Specifically, I need a list of women on teh interwebz who have either a YouTube channel or Twitter account where I can see NUMERICALLY how many "subscribers" or "followers" they have. However, they also have to be:
1. Conservative/Libertarian.
2. Decent looking
I am already aware of Julie Borowski, Katie Kieffer, etc., but aside from those two not much else.
If you could list some women below in the comments section who are on the Twitter or YouTube that are these cutsie "Tee Hee! I'm a Soccer Mom and I Like Sean Hannity! Yea for America!" types, I would greatly appreciate it.
Cappy
The ole Captain is intending to do some research, but needs some data points. Specifically, I need a list of women on teh interwebz who have either a YouTube channel or Twitter account where I can see NUMERICALLY how many "subscribers" or "followers" they have. However, they also have to be:
1. Conservative/Libertarian.
2. Decent looking
I am already aware of Julie Borowski, Katie Kieffer, etc., but aside from those two not much else.
If you could list some women below in the comments section who are on the Twitter or YouTube that are these cutsie "Tee Hee! I'm a Soccer Mom and I Like Sean Hannity! Yea for America!" types, I would greatly appreciate it.
Cappy
Saturday, August 15, 2015
Privatizing Governments
Got a couple inquiries about this since I mentioned it on the podcast. Basically, this was a business proposal that I turned into a kindle only short dowloadable "proposal." You can't call it a "book" because it is not.
Still, some people were intellectually interested in how one could go about privatizing governments and not only did I find a (of course, theoretical) way to do it, but a way to profit into the trillions of dollars' worth in the process.
I DID approach several investment banks and even Peter Thiel, but nobody was interested.
BUT! If you got the connections (or are just intellectually curious how a private government would work) here you go.
Still, some people were intellectually interested in how one could go about privatizing governments and not only did I find a (of course, theoretical) way to do it, but a way to profit into the trillions of dollars' worth in the process.
I DID approach several investment banks and even Peter Thiel, but nobody was interested.
BUT! If you got the connections (or are just intellectually curious how a private government would work) here you go.
Friday, August 14, 2015
Episode #105 of The Clarey Podcast 8-14-15
Whining about driving in a Corvette
"There's always a gun on my desk"
Capitalism vs. Socialism in terms of Logical Proofs
Running to the airport makes you manly
Coke commercials and the sheeple
Cappy's Global Domination (and world's first trillionaire) Plan
The Goldfinger theme song to be redone as "Cappyfinger"
60 years of the same medicine has not helped the black community
AND MORE
in THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
"There's always a gun on my desk"
Capitalism vs. Socialism in terms of Logical Proofs
Running to the airport makes you manly
Coke commercials and the sheeple
Cappy's Global Domination (and world's first trillionaire) Plan
The Goldfinger theme song to be redone as "Cappyfinger"
60 years of the same medicine has not helped the black community
AND MORE
in THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Late Night Listening with Your Local Podcasters
New podcast out by Davis, but I love how the SJW's are downvoting his podcast. If you want to do him a solid, stop on over, download it, and then upvote it.
Bernard also has a new podcast out over at Male Defender.
Bill Burr has his Thursday Afternoon Monday Morning Podcast.
And DT and the Man...well, they're recording now, but you can check in and maybe they'll have their Thursday night podcast up later.
Bernard also has a new podcast out over at Male Defender.
Bill Burr has his Thursday Afternoon Monday Morning Podcast.
And DT and the Man...well, they're recording now, but you can check in and maybe they'll have their Thursday night podcast up later.
Help Our Sponsor!
Howdy All,
Wanted to make sure I made a specific post here for Good Looking Loser who has a product called Phenibut that he is marketing. It is an anti-anxiety supplement that calms you down WITHOUT THE USE OF BOOZE. So if you're one of those people who needs a drink to relax, but you want to stop drinking, this here is what you may want to try.
Haven't tried it myself because I am always very calm and relaxed and never agitated at the slightest thing.
Regardless, if you think you could use Phenibut OR you want to visit his site (which has merits unto itself) consider visiting the Good Looking Loser.
Cappy
Wanted to make sure I made a specific post here for Good Looking Loser who has a product called Phenibut that he is marketing. It is an anti-anxiety supplement that calms you down WITHOUT THE USE OF BOOZE. So if you're one of those people who needs a drink to relax, but you want to stop drinking, this here is what you may want to try.
Haven't tried it myself because I am always very calm and relaxed and never agitated at the slightest thing.
Regardless, if you think you could use Phenibut OR you want to visit his site (which has merits unto itself) consider visiting the Good Looking Loser.
Cappy
Wednesday, August 12, 2015
Additional Gun Laws I Will Not Be Following
You always carry in National Parks. Even if the burnt out hippie woman park ranger from the 1960's tells you not to. You always carry in the National Parks.
A New Breed of Man SJW's Can't Beat
In the spirit of full disclose I must admit that:
1. I know Roosh and
2. I am an occasional guest writer for his site Return of Kings.
Having said that neither my personal nor professional relation with Roosh will affect nor color my analysis of his Canadian trip and the SJW drama that has ensued. The reason why is simple - his actions and experiences in Canada speak for themselves and tell a story that needs no editorializing.
As this post is being written Roosh has completed one of two Canadian speeches in his world speaking tour. The first speech (Montreal) was threatened by some SJW's, notably one who set up a petition to prevent him from even entering Canada, while another (Jessica Lelievre, the epitome of "spoiled brat rich daddy's girl") harassed him in public by dousing him in liquor (and foolishly filming it which has resulted in a lawsuit).
Now I can go on, and certainly the media will cover Roosh's travels through Canada and the SJW circus that will come with it. But instead of chronicling what's happened and then make some obvious observations about the mentally-ill culture of SJW's, I wanted to explain
1. Why this time it will be different
2. Why it is because of qualities and traits of men like Roosh that will make it different and
3. Why the SJW's will lose
What SJW's, leftists, socialists, and other vermin of society are used to is a tired, old, and worn out tactic of silencing somebody they disagree with or threatens to expose them for the parasites they are by accusing them of an "ism" (racism, sexism, ageism, etc.), which in turn then threatens that individual's career and thus livelihood. Mozilla firing Brendan Eich, Dr. Palmer's shooting of Cecil, doxxing and SWATing, even I've had people try to tell my clients I wrote "mean racist things."
Though dishonest, cowardly and tiresome, this tactic works and is highly effective. In threatening and holding hostage an individual's career and reputation, they also threaten that individual, his life, and his family. Alas, they can essentially shut down any social or political commentary from the productive classes, leaving only leftist, SJW and politically approved socialist thought in the public forum.
However, this tactic only works if there is something of value to hold hostage over the person saying things SJW's find disagreeable.
A dentist with a career.
An accountant with a family.
A professor with a 20 year track record.
But what the SJW's and leftists don't realize is that while they may find the world to be such a place of injustice and they "still have a long way to go," their leftist predecessors have made great strides in the past. They have managed to stagnate the economy. They have managed to create an education bubble. They have managed to destroy the labor market for young people. And, above all else, feminists have largely been successful in destroying young women for young men.
And it is from this environment a new strain of men have arisen. A strain of men immune to all SJW's tactics.
Take a look at Roosh and his background and you'll see a man who has nothing to lose, and therefore nothing the SJW's can threaten.
He tried (like all of us) to "do what was right." He went to college, tried his hand at a soul sucking job, and when his employer found out he was blogging under a pen name, they still threatened him with being fired. This not being exactly conducive to having the "freedom of speech" and with no real job prospects that were promised to him like the 1950's, he went on a South American trip which laid the foundation for what would be his career - traveling to different countries and then writing about how to get laid in these countries.
Of course, while that sounds great it wasn't easy. Traveling on buses in South America, constantly going to clubs, learning new languages, and the meticulous level of detail he had to take in terms of notes and writing made it a real (albeit exciting) job. But the larger point is that SJW's, socialism, leftism and feminism had made the US so hostile, if not impossible for the "9-5 job and wife with children and a white picket fence," he was practically compelled to go down this route of self-employment.
But what is doubly ironic is how precisely he makes his money. Most entrepreneurs can still be threatened by SJW's. The cupcake shop that doesn't make cupcakes for lesbians. The pizzeria that theoretically would not deliver pizzas to a gay wedding. They have a product that can still be assailed, assaulted, held hostage, and destroyed.
But what if your job is merely countering the political, economic, social, and psychological environment SJW's created? What if your job is to unplug as many Neo's out of "the Matrix?" What if your job is nothing more than being an SJW hunter? This is why Roosh is simply immune to any SJW's attacks. It's because he not only has nothing they can threaten or take hostage, but because his business is a direct result and response to the environment SJW's and leftists have created.
Alas, this is why Roosh is invincible against the SJW's and there's no way they can win. Unlike Mortimer Snerd, loyal accountant at KMPG for 30 years, with a mortgage, two car loans, a wife about to divorce him, and three kids in college, they cannot threaten Roosh's career or family as it doesn't exist. Worse for them, the more they attack, the more publicity he gets AND the more they get exposed for the psychopath, tyrants they are.
But what's worse for SJW's is there's (what I would estimate to be) millions more Rooshes with absolutely nothing to lose. Men who grew up in and are by products of the SJW/feminist culture, and are thus immune to it. My company, Asshole Consulting, NEEDS feminist, SJW culture to continue to brainwash young men and women into delusion otherwise I'd run out of clients. Jack Donovan NEEDS SJW's to continue to emasculate young boys otherwise nobody would need his books on masculinity. And that's just the tip of the iceberg when it has come to what is nothing more than a full-fledge industry of neo-masculinity that has arisen in the past decade to deprogram, explain, provide sanity to, and provide agency and purpose to MILLIONS of young men (and women) who are slowly waking up and realizing just how badly feminism, socialism, and their goose-stepping SJW's have ruined their lives.
What SJW's around the world need to realize is that Canada is just the first instance where SJW's have met a monster of their own creation in the form of Roosh. And not only can he not be stopped, but there are millions more who also have nothing to lose, are immune to you, and are very, very angry that you not only lied to them about the real world, but destroyed their birthright to western civilization.
And there's nothing you can do to stop them.
1. I know Roosh and
2. I am an occasional guest writer for his site Return of Kings.
Having said that neither my personal nor professional relation with Roosh will affect nor color my analysis of his Canadian trip and the SJW drama that has ensued. The reason why is simple - his actions and experiences in Canada speak for themselves and tell a story that needs no editorializing.
As this post is being written Roosh has completed one of two Canadian speeches in his world speaking tour. The first speech (Montreal) was threatened by some SJW's, notably one who set up a petition to prevent him from even entering Canada, while another (Jessica Lelievre, the epitome of "spoiled brat rich daddy's girl") harassed him in public by dousing him in liquor (and foolishly filming it which has resulted in a lawsuit).
Now I can go on, and certainly the media will cover Roosh's travels through Canada and the SJW circus that will come with it. But instead of chronicling what's happened and then make some obvious observations about the mentally-ill culture of SJW's, I wanted to explain
1. Why this time it will be different
2. Why it is because of qualities and traits of men like Roosh that will make it different and
3. Why the SJW's will lose
What SJW's, leftists, socialists, and other vermin of society are used to is a tired, old, and worn out tactic of silencing somebody they disagree with or threatens to expose them for the parasites they are by accusing them of an "ism" (racism, sexism, ageism, etc.), which in turn then threatens that individual's career and thus livelihood. Mozilla firing Brendan Eich, Dr. Palmer's shooting of Cecil, doxxing and SWATing, even I've had people try to tell my clients I wrote "mean racist things."
Though dishonest, cowardly and tiresome, this tactic works and is highly effective. In threatening and holding hostage an individual's career and reputation, they also threaten that individual, his life, and his family. Alas, they can essentially shut down any social or political commentary from the productive classes, leaving only leftist, SJW and politically approved socialist thought in the public forum.
However, this tactic only works if there is something of value to hold hostage over the person saying things SJW's find disagreeable.
A dentist with a career.
An accountant with a family.
A professor with a 20 year track record.
But what the SJW's and leftists don't realize is that while they may find the world to be such a place of injustice and they "still have a long way to go," their leftist predecessors have made great strides in the past. They have managed to stagnate the economy. They have managed to create an education bubble. They have managed to destroy the labor market for young people. And, above all else, feminists have largely been successful in destroying young women for young men.
And it is from this environment a new strain of men have arisen. A strain of men immune to all SJW's tactics.
Take a look at Roosh and his background and you'll see a man who has nothing to lose, and therefore nothing the SJW's can threaten.
He tried (like all of us) to "do what was right." He went to college, tried his hand at a soul sucking job, and when his employer found out he was blogging under a pen name, they still threatened him with being fired. This not being exactly conducive to having the "freedom of speech" and with no real job prospects that were promised to him like the 1950's, he went on a South American trip which laid the foundation for what would be his career - traveling to different countries and then writing about how to get laid in these countries.
Of course, while that sounds great it wasn't easy. Traveling on buses in South America, constantly going to clubs, learning new languages, and the meticulous level of detail he had to take in terms of notes and writing made it a real (albeit exciting) job. But the larger point is that SJW's, socialism, leftism and feminism had made the US so hostile, if not impossible for the "9-5 job and wife with children and a white picket fence," he was practically compelled to go down this route of self-employment.
But what is doubly ironic is how precisely he makes his money. Most entrepreneurs can still be threatened by SJW's. The cupcake shop that doesn't make cupcakes for lesbians. The pizzeria that theoretically would not deliver pizzas to a gay wedding. They have a product that can still be assailed, assaulted, held hostage, and destroyed.
But what if your job is merely countering the political, economic, social, and psychological environment SJW's created? What if your job is to unplug as many Neo's out of "the Matrix?" What if your job is nothing more than being an SJW hunter? This is why Roosh is simply immune to any SJW's attacks. It's because he not only has nothing they can threaten or take hostage, but because his business is a direct result and response to the environment SJW's and leftists have created.
Alas, this is why Roosh is invincible against the SJW's and there's no way they can win. Unlike Mortimer Snerd, loyal accountant at KMPG for 30 years, with a mortgage, two car loans, a wife about to divorce him, and three kids in college, they cannot threaten Roosh's career or family as it doesn't exist. Worse for them, the more they attack, the more publicity he gets AND the more they get exposed for the psychopath, tyrants they are.
But what's worse for SJW's is there's (what I would estimate to be) millions more Rooshes with absolutely nothing to lose. Men who grew up in and are by products of the SJW/feminist culture, and are thus immune to it. My company, Asshole Consulting, NEEDS feminist, SJW culture to continue to brainwash young men and women into delusion otherwise I'd run out of clients. Jack Donovan NEEDS SJW's to continue to emasculate young boys otherwise nobody would need his books on masculinity. And that's just the tip of the iceberg when it has come to what is nothing more than a full-fledge industry of neo-masculinity that has arisen in the past decade to deprogram, explain, provide sanity to, and provide agency and purpose to MILLIONS of young men (and women) who are slowly waking up and realizing just how badly feminism, socialism, and their goose-stepping SJW's have ruined their lives.
What SJW's around the world need to realize is that Canada is just the first instance where SJW's have met a monster of their own creation in the form of Roosh. And not only can he not be stopped, but there are millions more who also have nothing to lose, are immune to you, and are very, very angry that you not only lied to them about the real world, but destroyed their birthright to western civilization.
And there's nothing you can do to stop them.
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
A Masters in Male Studies
A professor wants to start an entirely new (and worthless) study - Men's Studies.
The problem is it already exists. It's called "history."
The problem is it already exists. It's called "history."
Monday, August 10, 2015
Were the Nazi's Socialist? Why Not Ask Them?
From our Agent in the Field (who makes the simple point of "why not go to the source to see if the Nazi's were socialists?")
I saw your article asking about National Socialism and am sending the above
link.
The above link is to one of many English translations of the Party Platform of the Nazi party. Once you get to around paragraph 11.
you start to see, from the original source document, that especially for the
times in question, they were a brand of socialism. I would suggest
you simply look for the Nazi Party Platform on your search engine to get other
translations of the original source document if you are interested.
To the extent practical politics deviated from party platform, this is a
common occurrence in modern times and one suspects it was no different then.
Compared to USA at the time, which had no federal minimum wage/ maximum
hours laws, no unemployment insurance, no social security, no federal pension
laws, no federal welfare benefits, and so forth, these proposals would have
seemed far reaching, national and socialist at the time.
Obviously, I understand you are not in favor of this group, its history,
and personalities; and I am not a fan either. I hope you find this
interesting and a good place to start, in answering your question about the
brand of socialism, if any, there was in Nazi Germany.
How Socialism Makes Women Barren
Arrogance and cockiness set aside, I would make an awesome dad. I did not forget what it was like to be a child. I know that once I had a child my life would be put on hold and dedicated towards raising "The Spawn of Clarey." I would not brainwash him to be a leftist, a feminist, a rightist or a Christian, but would instead impart upon it logic, empiricism, morality, philosophy, and independence letting it choose its own path in life. And above all else, unlike nearly all my Gen X parental counterparts, I would actually stay at home to raise The Clarey Child instead of outsource it to a government baby sitting farm or "day care" concentration camp facility. It is without a doubt that I would make a great dad.
The irony of course is that this entire discussion is moot since I had a vasectomy 10 years ago. And while the reasons for having a vasectomy was many, the primary one was that I just could not plain support a child, let alone myself. And bringing a child into this world would not only ruin what pathetic finances I had in the past, but would just not be fair to the theoretical Clarey Spawn.
Of course times change and now at the age of 40 I could theoretically afford a child. I work from home, I have a (albeit small) house. And my source of employment is stable (self employment) guaranteeing the income to put food on the table and pay the mortgage. But though this situation is specific to myself the question everybody should be asking as it applies to millions more is
"40?"
Think about it for a second. Biology and nature says I've been ready to have a child for about the past 28 years. Society, tradition, and law says I should have been able to have a child since I was 18. But why, a full 28 years after I'm able to, and 22 years after society says I "should" have children, is it now that I actually COULD have children?
The answer is economics.
I've pointed it out before, but there is a disconnect between human biology and our current political-economic system. Specifically, today's political-economic structure does NOT allow people to breed when nature is telling them they should. I first was MANDATED to go to school till the age of 18. This was largely a pointless exercise in that nobody today will hire a high school graduate, let alone pay one an adequate salary to raise a family on. This then mandated I go to college for an additional 4 years. Of course, this dumped me into a labor market that would be ravaged by the Dotcom crash and I would limp along employment wise eeking out a meager living teaching dance and working security for the next five years. There was hope working in the banking industry, but this hope was quickly dashed as it was so hopelessly corrupt and dysfunctional (not to mention low paying) that the income security needed to raise a child was never there. Throw in the financial crisis, the housing crash, and the Obama economy, and it wasn't until this Earth made 40 orbits around the sun that I would be in a position to support another human being in this world.
Of course, as mentioned before, this discussion is merely academic. But the point I'm making is that our society, economy, educational system, labor market, government, and employers are making it increasingly difficult, if not impossible to PROPERLY raise a family (and by "properly" I mean the 1950's way, not the ghetto culture, Wyoming way where women spread their legs and ask the government to replace the daddy). And this is sad for it is other humans that is the most important thing in life, and it is usually your spouse and your children that are the most important humans.
Now I can sit here and pontificate arrogantly and cockily because I have no skin in the game. Not only can I "not" have children, I still to this day definitely do not WANT them. But, even with a vasectomy if I wanted to I could still HAVE children. It would require either a direct extraction of sperm from the testes or a reversal of my surgery. But the REAL reason I can take this position is that my sperm does not have an expiration date. My sperm can impregnate any woman from here until I'm dead, carrying on the "great Clarey genetic legacy" if I so chose to.
But the same cannot be said for women.
Naturally, we all know by now that women's eggs have an expiration date. Menopause hits by a certain age, and even then the eggs start to deteriorate in quality post 30-32 running the risk of birth defects etc. We don't need to hammer this point anymore, we are all aware of it. But while women are acutely aware of the tickity tock of their biological clock, what they are completely unaware of is the non-biological side of this formula that is also working against them. Namely the same economic, political, and sociological forces that made it impossible for me to have children until the age of 40. And while that number, 40, may mean nothing to men, it definitely means something to women.
After 40, frankly, forget it ladies. It's over. You're not having kids. And if you try, you're gambling not just with your theoretical child's life, but your own. But before you get all angry at me for being the messenger telling you biological truths, you need to look back and ask who and what made it so it was basically impossible for you to have children and raise a family in today's society.
First there was the same mandatory K-12 education I had to take. In all honesty the average education delivered by the K-12 system could be shrunk down easily to K-8, allowing us an addtional 4 years of youth to pursue a career that would support a family. But who do you think is at the core of stretching out this now-economically worthless education to last 13 years?
Republicans?
Tories?
Conservatives?
The Patriarchy?
No, it's your good socialist friends in the democrat and labor parties who need tolive off of your entire childhood mandate you go to school until you're an adult so their main political contributors (teachers unions) have jobs. You're now 18.
Then there's college. Remember, K-12 education has been so diluted, so dumbed down, NOBODY will hire you. So now you need to spend another 4, more likely 6 years of your youth getting MORE education.
Who predominantly controls acaedemia and benefits from you postponing your life another 4-6 years?
Leftists. You're now 24.
Of course, unlike the first "13 years" of your education, you get to pay an egregious price for your last 6 years of education - tuition. And with that comes an inordinate amount of student debt. Certainly you can't start having a family until you pay this off. But complicating this issue is that the economy hasn't been growing this slow since the Great Depression, making good paying jobs scarce, and your student loans a monkey on your back for at least 6 years.
But who told you you needed to go to college? Who pushed you to get a masters? And who told you to vote against those "evil" corporations, rich people, investors, and all those other entities that create those JOBS you'd need to pay off your student loans?
Hmmm...that would be leftists. Congratulations, you're now 30.
Now here things are a little different, for while at this age men are FINALLY allowed to start working off their student loans, start a real career, and maybe work up a down payment for a house, women are barraged with propaganda to do something else. Namely, what feminists have been telling them to do for their entire post-pubescent lives - live life, party, you go girl (TM), travel, climb that corporate ladder, have it all, etc., etc., etc.
And so do women starve themselves, live in basements, get out of debt, and start looking for a proper suitor to raise a family with?
Hell no!
NOW it's time to PAAAARTAAAY!!!!!
Let the flirtini's flow, the car payments commence, and the accumulation of shoes begin as you store it all in an overpriced downtown flat you can barely afford! You've EARNED IT GIRLFRIEND!
And so prompted by feminism (not to mention corporate interests of the likes of Vogue, Oprah, etc.) you party another 10 years.
But if I recall correctly aren't Oprah, Jezebel, feminism, and all those writers at all those snarkey cheeky lifestyle magazines are leftist? Congratulations, you're now 40 (but don't worry, you're a "cougar!")
And finally, how can we forget the final nail in your eggs' coffin driven in by feminism? The blatant, bald-faced lie that looks don't matter.
You were GORGEOUS just the way you were girl!
You are BODY POSITIVE!!!!
Big is beautiful!!!
And any man has mommy issues if he doesn't want to sleep with a human oil tanker.
He's also "shallow" and a "jerk."
Of course looks do matter, tremendously, to men. But alas, you wanted to believe sweet lies over harsh truth and lived a lie your entire life, making you not only too old to have children, but physically unable to attract a mate. So super-congratulations! You believed the (again, LEFTIST ideology of) feminism and have now not only ruined any chance of having a family, but attracting a mate as well.
I could go on, but the larger point I want all women to understand is that it is NOT
The "Patriarchy"
The Republican's "War on Women"
"Lad culture"
"Rape culture"
"White Males" or
"Evil Corporations"
who are ruining your lives.
It's the left.
It is the left who wants to enslave you at a school where you learn nothing till you're 18.
It is the left who mandates you into thinking you need a college education to have any worth in this society.
It is the left that tells you you are oppressed and need to be freed, replacing your family with a career.
It is the left that convinces you to ignore the biological programming and demands of the (necessary) half of humanity needed to bring and raise children in this world.
And it is the left that tells you you need to spend money on stupid crap to have fulfillment in life.
In reality, all they are doing is taking
your money,
your youth,
your vote,
your love,
your family, and
your life
just so they can stay in power and enrich themselves. And once they have sucked as much of your financial and life blood out of you, they will dump your ass into the real world. A world you are WOEFULLY unprepared for, and one you offer nothing of value to.
So please wake up and take the time to identify who your true enemies are. If not, enjoy your masters degree, cats, body-positive "slut walks," and articles about freezing your eggs.
_____________________________________________________
http://aaron-clarey.podomatic.com/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
The irony of course is that this entire discussion is moot since I had a vasectomy 10 years ago. And while the reasons for having a vasectomy was many, the primary one was that I just could not plain support a child, let alone myself. And bringing a child into this world would not only ruin what pathetic finances I had in the past, but would just not be fair to the theoretical Clarey Spawn.
Of course times change and now at the age of 40 I could theoretically afford a child. I work from home, I have a (albeit small) house. And my source of employment is stable (self employment) guaranteeing the income to put food on the table and pay the mortgage. But though this situation is specific to myself the question everybody should be asking as it applies to millions more is
"40?"
Think about it for a second. Biology and nature says I've been ready to have a child for about the past 28 years. Society, tradition, and law says I should have been able to have a child since I was 18. But why, a full 28 years after I'm able to, and 22 years after society says I "should" have children, is it now that I actually COULD have children?
The answer is economics.
I've pointed it out before, but there is a disconnect between human biology and our current political-economic system. Specifically, today's political-economic structure does NOT allow people to breed when nature is telling them they should. I first was MANDATED to go to school till the age of 18. This was largely a pointless exercise in that nobody today will hire a high school graduate, let alone pay one an adequate salary to raise a family on. This then mandated I go to college for an additional 4 years. Of course, this dumped me into a labor market that would be ravaged by the Dotcom crash and I would limp along employment wise eeking out a meager living teaching dance and working security for the next five years. There was hope working in the banking industry, but this hope was quickly dashed as it was so hopelessly corrupt and dysfunctional (not to mention low paying) that the income security needed to raise a child was never there. Throw in the financial crisis, the housing crash, and the Obama economy, and it wasn't until this Earth made 40 orbits around the sun that I would be in a position to support another human being in this world.
Of course, as mentioned before, this discussion is merely academic. But the point I'm making is that our society, economy, educational system, labor market, government, and employers are making it increasingly difficult, if not impossible to PROPERLY raise a family (and by "properly" I mean the 1950's way, not the ghetto culture, Wyoming way where women spread their legs and ask the government to replace the daddy). And this is sad for it is other humans that is the most important thing in life, and it is usually your spouse and your children that are the most important humans.
Now I can sit here and pontificate arrogantly and cockily because I have no skin in the game. Not only can I "not" have children, I still to this day definitely do not WANT them. But, even with a vasectomy if I wanted to I could still HAVE children. It would require either a direct extraction of sperm from the testes or a reversal of my surgery. But the REAL reason I can take this position is that my sperm does not have an expiration date. My sperm can impregnate any woman from here until I'm dead, carrying on the "great Clarey genetic legacy" if I so chose to.
But the same cannot be said for women.
Naturally, we all know by now that women's eggs have an expiration date. Menopause hits by a certain age, and even then the eggs start to deteriorate in quality post 30-32 running the risk of birth defects etc. We don't need to hammer this point anymore, we are all aware of it. But while women are acutely aware of the tickity tock of their biological clock, what they are completely unaware of is the non-biological side of this formula that is also working against them. Namely the same economic, political, and sociological forces that made it impossible for me to have children until the age of 40. And while that number, 40, may mean nothing to men, it definitely means something to women.
After 40, frankly, forget it ladies. It's over. You're not having kids. And if you try, you're gambling not just with your theoretical child's life, but your own. But before you get all angry at me for being the messenger telling you biological truths, you need to look back and ask who and what made it so it was basically impossible for you to have children and raise a family in today's society.
First there was the same mandatory K-12 education I had to take. In all honesty the average education delivered by the K-12 system could be shrunk down easily to K-8, allowing us an addtional 4 years of youth to pursue a career that would support a family. But who do you think is at the core of stretching out this now-economically worthless education to last 13 years?
Republicans?
Tories?
Conservatives?
The Patriarchy?
No, it's your good socialist friends in the democrat and labor parties who need to
Then there's college. Remember, K-12 education has been so diluted, so dumbed down, NOBODY will hire you. So now you need to spend another 4, more likely 6 years of your youth getting MORE education.
Who predominantly controls acaedemia and benefits from you postponing your life another 4-6 years?
Leftists. You're now 24.
Of course, unlike the first "13 years" of your education, you get to pay an egregious price for your last 6 years of education - tuition. And with that comes an inordinate amount of student debt. Certainly you can't start having a family until you pay this off. But complicating this issue is that the economy hasn't been growing this slow since the Great Depression, making good paying jobs scarce, and your student loans a monkey on your back for at least 6 years.
But who told you you needed to go to college? Who pushed you to get a masters? And who told you to vote against those "evil" corporations, rich people, investors, and all those other entities that create those JOBS you'd need to pay off your student loans?
Hmmm...that would be leftists. Congratulations, you're now 30.
Now here things are a little different, for while at this age men are FINALLY allowed to start working off their student loans, start a real career, and maybe work up a down payment for a house, women are barraged with propaganda to do something else. Namely, what feminists have been telling them to do for their entire post-pubescent lives - live life, party, you go girl (TM), travel, climb that corporate ladder, have it all, etc., etc., etc.
And so do women starve themselves, live in basements, get out of debt, and start looking for a proper suitor to raise a family with?
Hell no!
NOW it's time to PAAAARTAAAY!!!!!
Let the flirtini's flow, the car payments commence, and the accumulation of shoes begin as you store it all in an overpriced downtown flat you can barely afford! You've EARNED IT GIRLFRIEND!
And so prompted by feminism (not to mention corporate interests of the likes of Vogue, Oprah, etc.) you party another 10 years.
But if I recall correctly aren't Oprah, Jezebel, feminism, and all those writers at all those snarkey cheeky lifestyle magazines are leftist? Congratulations, you're now 40 (but don't worry, you're a "cougar!")
And finally, how can we forget the final nail in your eggs' coffin driven in by feminism? The blatant, bald-faced lie that looks don't matter.
You were GORGEOUS just the way you were girl!
You are BODY POSITIVE!!!!
Big is beautiful!!!
And any man has mommy issues if he doesn't want to sleep with a human oil tanker.
He's also "shallow" and a "jerk."
Of course looks do matter, tremendously, to men. But alas, you wanted to believe sweet lies over harsh truth and lived a lie your entire life, making you not only too old to have children, but physically unable to attract a mate. So super-congratulations! You believed the (again, LEFTIST ideology of) feminism and have now not only ruined any chance of having a family, but attracting a mate as well.
I could go on, but the larger point I want all women to understand is that it is NOT
The "Patriarchy"
The Republican's "War on Women"
"Lad culture"
"Rape culture"
"White Males" or
"Evil Corporations"
who are ruining your lives.
It's the left.
It is the left who wants to enslave you at a school where you learn nothing till you're 18.
It is the left who mandates you into thinking you need a college education to have any worth in this society.
It is the left that tells you you are oppressed and need to be freed, replacing your family with a career.
It is the left that convinces you to ignore the biological programming and demands of the (necessary) half of humanity needed to bring and raise children in this world.
And it is the left that tells you you need to spend money on stupid crap to have fulfillment in life.
In reality, all they are doing is taking
your money,
your youth,
your vote,
your love,
your family, and
your life
just so they can stay in power and enrich themselves. And once they have sucked as much of your financial and life blood out of you, they will dump your ass into the real world. A world you are WOEFULLY unprepared for, and one you offer nothing of value to.
So please wake up and take the time to identify who your true enemies are. If not, enjoy your masters degree, cats, body-positive "slut walks," and articles about freezing your eggs.
_____________________________________________________
http://aaron-clarey.podomatic.com/
http://www.assholeconsulting.com
https://www.youtube.com/user/AaronClarey
https://twitter.com/aaron_clarey
http://www.amazon.com/Aaron-Clarey/e/B00J1ZC350/
Sunday, August 09, 2015
Saturday, August 08, 2015
The Clarey Podcast Has Been Archived
Greetings All,
Well, seems we blew through bandwidth quicker and sooner than I thought and so I decided to archive episodes #25-99.
"WHAT HAPPENED TO EPISODES 1-24 CAPPY?"
They're gone, don't know. Don't ask. And don't complain if they're not on the thumbdrives because I can't find them. Maybe at some point in the future I'll dig them up.
Regardless, NOW if you want the archived episodes you will need to pay. I will burn them to a thumbdrive and mail them to you.
If you live in the US the cost is $40.
If you live in the UK the cost is $50.
If you live somewhere else we'll have to play it by ear.
I'm not trying to gouge anybody, just compensating me for my time, postage, and thumbdrive expense.
Anyway, if you wanted one, please send me an e-mail at CAPTcapitalism *at* yahoo (which is the same e-mail in my "about" section below). Send me your name and mailing address and I will give you instructions on where to pay. And remember, not only will you get some super awesome podcasts, you'll get a free thumbdrive out of the deal too.
Best,
Cappy
Well, seems we blew through bandwidth quicker and sooner than I thought and so I decided to archive episodes #25-99.
"WHAT HAPPENED TO EPISODES 1-24 CAPPY?"
They're gone, don't know. Don't ask. And don't complain if they're not on the thumbdrives because I can't find them. Maybe at some point in the future I'll dig them up.
Regardless, NOW if you want the archived episodes you will need to pay. I will burn them to a thumbdrive and mail them to you.
If you live in the US the cost is $40.
If you live in the UK the cost is $50.
If you live somewhere else we'll have to play it by ear.
I'm not trying to gouge anybody, just compensating me for my time, postage, and thumbdrive expense.
Anyway, if you wanted one, please send me an e-mail at CAPTcapitalism *at* yahoo (which is the same e-mail in my "about" section below). Send me your name and mailing address and I will give you instructions on where to pay. And remember, not only will you get some super awesome podcasts, you'll get a free thumbdrive out of the deal too.
Best,
Cappy
Friday, August 07, 2015
The Beauty of Having No Employees
Outstanding article about just what a pain in the ass it is having employees.
I'll say it again.
Humans are the number one cause of all problems in this world. And you do NOT want a business model that requires a lot of them. They break down, they whine, they complain, they sue, and they just plain suck.
Employ no one, unless you absolutely have to, and even then, you likely have the wrong business model.
I'll say it again.
Humans are the number one cause of all problems in this world. And you do NOT want a business model that requires a lot of them. They break down, they whine, they complain, they sue, and they just plain suck.
Employ no one, unless you absolutely have to, and even then, you likely have the wrong business model.
Thursday, August 06, 2015
Why Can't I Find a Maaaaaan????
I'm going to leave this post up here for several important reasons.
1. To remind everyone that discrimination against males (and whites) exists and that it is not a "joke" or conspiracy theory.
2. To remind you ladies that you have a choice. Like men or hate them. Very simple.
3. To remind you men that it is not worth risking your life, labor, capital or time helping or aiding stranger women you don't know, and that you should ONLY help women in your life you love and cherish. No one else.
4. To remind women who were either like these women in your youth or are like them today so when they ask "where have all the good men gone" they'll have an answer.
5. To remind young college age and 20 something men that, no, there's nothing wrong with you. It's really them.
and finally
6. To remind men that leftists, democrats, and socialists hate you.
Story here.
1. To remind everyone that discrimination against males (and whites) exists and that it is not a "joke" or conspiracy theory.
2. To remind you ladies that you have a choice. Like men or hate them. Very simple.
3. To remind you men that it is not worth risking your life, labor, capital or time helping or aiding stranger women you don't know, and that you should ONLY help women in your life you love and cherish. No one else.
4. To remind women who were either like these women in your youth or are like them today so when they ask "where have all the good men gone" they'll have an answer.
5. To remind young college age and 20 something men that, no, there's nothing wrong with you. It's really them.
and finally
6. To remind men that leftists, democrats, and socialists hate you.
Story here.
There are No More Calvins
It was within a very short period of time I knew that school, and teachers, were evil.
Oh laugh as you might, but I am not joking. There is no more evil institution in this country than the veritable prison we condemn our children to for a mandatory 13 year sentence. Yes we all turn a blind eye claiming it for "education" and the "future" of our children. But in the end the education system's real purpose is two fold:
1. To outsource children to a large baby sitting operation so (predominantly) women can pursue a career instead of raise their children and
2. Employ generations' worth of talentless, lazy hacks who want an easy way out, 3 months a year off, and are scared stiff of real work - teachers (and the increasing number of administrators).
This is not politics.
This is not hyperbole.
This is not me angry over a lost childhood.
It is the truth.
School is nothing more than child abuse as two distinct groups of adults are using it for ulterior purposes.
Naturally there are some "good teachers," and these teachers believe in education, try their best to educate the children, and genuinely want what's best for them. However, the remaining 98% of teachers are not "good teachers" and are there first and foremost for themselves.
This results in an environment that is toxic for children, and certainly not one that can achieve education. Year after year, children are forced to leave home and sit in buildings that are architecturally similar to prisons. The teachers (who by the way have the lowest IQ's out of most majors) are not only uninspired to teach them, but really don't care. Alas, overtime this combination results in teachers who are not just incapable of teaching, educating, and inspiring the curiosity of young children, but teachers who grow to resent the children, resulting in indifference (reading from the book), if not outright petty and indiscriminate punishment. Sure enough, over time a child goes from being wide-eyed and hopeful kindergartener, to a 4th grade zombie trying to stay awake.
Of course, children may not understand the underlying political reasons why they're sent to a prison-like institution and the country's least competent or caring individuals are chartered with educating them. But they do have genetically programmed within them self-respect and intuitively know when they're getting screwed. Alas a natural animosity forms between students and their prison guard teachers. A healthy distrust between teacher and student. And soon in a very Calvin and Hobbes like way, students and teachers fall into their natural roles of sworn enemies.
Or at least that's how it was in the 80's.
For whereas back in the day this abuse galvanized us into distrusting our teachers, even hating them, the same cannot be said of young students today. For what I see now is NOT the independent minded spirit of a Calvin, questioning why he has to be in school, giving his teachers guff, fighting them at every corner, but instead mindless, conforming lemmings who have plain had the independent thought kicked out of them.
Now this could be due to any number of things.
Teachers becoming BFF's with their students instead of actually teaching (not that they could in the first place anyway)
Ritalin and other drugs destroying the Calvin's of the world making them docile and compliant.
Emasculated husbands breeding emasculated, testosterone deficient boys.
Or the forcing of young female behavior on young boys, turning today's classrooms into compliant, obedient classrooms full of sheeple (and consequently no independent, self-respecting thinkers).
But whatever the cause, there are no more Calvins. There are no more rebels. There are no more independent minded thinkers. And it is a devastation to society.
The reason can be amply seen in what I deem to be the first fully and completely brainwashed generation - The Millennials.
Nowhere can you find a group of people who adamantly insist they are independent minded, but are the epitome of conformist at the same time.
The Millennials all rush to sport hipster fashion to prove their independence...only to look like uniformly interchangeable cattle in the coffee shop.
They all claim to be smart, going to college, getting even MORE education...only to major in the same worthless liberal arts drivel, obviously unable to the 4th grade math that would have avoided this consequential financial fate of such stupidity.
Hey, those tattoos and earplugs are like TOTALLY you giving the bird to the system man! Only to sheepishly get the surgery done to remove them.
And oh yes, politics. The most "independent minded" and "educated" generation ALL, like lemmings, voted TWICE for a man who just mortgaged their futures with incredible peacetime deficit spending. And they were either too stupid, or too lazy to know it.
There are other examples (global warming, privilege, triggers, white males, and "evil corporations maaaan") and CERTAINLY the Millennials are not the only generation to be duped into conformity (grunge in the 90's anyone?), but the larger point is the one thing they claim to be is what they are precisely not.
Independent thinkers.
For while people may claim to be "rebels" or "Calvins" or "SJW/OWS Warriors" fighting against the "system" they don't realize they are 100%, completely owned, programmed, duped and operated by the system.
They actually BELIEVED their teachers.
They actually are BFF's with their teachers.
They not only have no problems going to a veritable prison from 5-18, but then are so hopelessly conformist, they consciously BORROW life-crippling levels of debt to to attend an additional 4-6 years more of the same educational-indoctrinist slop.
They swallowed whole what their government-sponsored teacher-indoctrinators told them and are just too stupid (or brainwashed) to realize it.
Sadly, this has serious costs and consequences to society because without independent thinkers, without genuine Calvins, there are no innovators. There are no creators. There are no geniuses who can look outside the box and come up the next cure for cancer. Technological advancement and economic growth will slow, resulting in lower standards of living than what we could have had. But worse, with nothing but a bunch of conforming sheeple, the "system" can easily manipulate, control, and own society. And that has always been the goal of the leftist education system.
Of course, try telling that to the "independent minded" tatted up, earloop wearing, liberal-arts-majoring "intellectual giants" who vote to mortgage their own futures while all claiming to be Calvins.
Oh laugh as you might, but I am not joking. There is no more evil institution in this country than the veritable prison we condemn our children to for a mandatory 13 year sentence. Yes we all turn a blind eye claiming it for "education" and the "future" of our children. But in the end the education system's real purpose is two fold:
1. To outsource children to a large baby sitting operation so (predominantly) women can pursue a career instead of raise their children and
2. Employ generations' worth of talentless, lazy hacks who want an easy way out, 3 months a year off, and are scared stiff of real work - teachers (and the increasing number of administrators).
This is not politics.
This is not hyperbole.
This is not me angry over a lost childhood.
It is the truth.
School is nothing more than child abuse as two distinct groups of adults are using it for ulterior purposes.
Naturally there are some "good teachers," and these teachers believe in education, try their best to educate the children, and genuinely want what's best for them. However, the remaining 98% of teachers are not "good teachers" and are there first and foremost for themselves.
This results in an environment that is toxic for children, and certainly not one that can achieve education. Year after year, children are forced to leave home and sit in buildings that are architecturally similar to prisons. The teachers (who by the way have the lowest IQ's out of most majors) are not only uninspired to teach them, but really don't care. Alas, overtime this combination results in teachers who are not just incapable of teaching, educating, and inspiring the curiosity of young children, but teachers who grow to resent the children, resulting in indifference (reading from the book), if not outright petty and indiscriminate punishment. Sure enough, over time a child goes from being wide-eyed and hopeful kindergartener, to a 4th grade zombie trying to stay awake.
Of course, children may not understand the underlying political reasons why they're sent to a prison-like institution and the country's least competent or caring individuals are chartered with educating them. But they do have genetically programmed within them self-respect and intuitively know when they're getting screwed. Alas a natural animosity forms between students and their prison guard teachers. A healthy distrust between teacher and student. And soon in a very Calvin and Hobbes like way, students and teachers fall into their natural roles of sworn enemies.
Or at least that's how it was in the 80's.
For whereas back in the day this abuse galvanized us into distrusting our teachers, even hating them, the same cannot be said of young students today. For what I see now is NOT the independent minded spirit of a Calvin, questioning why he has to be in school, giving his teachers guff, fighting them at every corner, but instead mindless, conforming lemmings who have plain had the independent thought kicked out of them.
Now this could be due to any number of things.
Teachers becoming BFF's with their students instead of actually teaching (not that they could in the first place anyway)
Ritalin and other drugs destroying the Calvin's of the world making them docile and compliant.
Emasculated husbands breeding emasculated, testosterone deficient boys.
Or the forcing of young female behavior on young boys, turning today's classrooms into compliant, obedient classrooms full of sheeple (and consequently no independent, self-respecting thinkers).
But whatever the cause, there are no more Calvins. There are no more rebels. There are no more independent minded thinkers. And it is a devastation to society.
The reason can be amply seen in what I deem to be the first fully and completely brainwashed generation - The Millennials.
Nowhere can you find a group of people who adamantly insist they are independent minded, but are the epitome of conformist at the same time.
The Millennials all rush to sport hipster fashion to prove their independence...only to look like uniformly interchangeable cattle in the coffee shop.
They all claim to be smart, going to college, getting even MORE education...only to major in the same worthless liberal arts drivel, obviously unable to the 4th grade math that would have avoided this consequential financial fate of such stupidity.
Hey, those tattoos and earplugs are like TOTALLY you giving the bird to the system man! Only to sheepishly get the surgery done to remove them.
And oh yes, politics. The most "independent minded" and "educated" generation ALL, like lemmings, voted TWICE for a man who just mortgaged their futures with incredible peacetime deficit spending. And they were either too stupid, or too lazy to know it.
There are other examples (global warming, privilege, triggers, white males, and "evil corporations maaaan") and CERTAINLY the Millennials are not the only generation to be duped into conformity (grunge in the 90's anyone?), but the larger point is the one thing they claim to be is what they are precisely not.
Independent thinkers.
For while people may claim to be "rebels" or "Calvins" or "SJW/OWS Warriors" fighting against the "system" they don't realize they are 100%, completely owned, programmed, duped and operated by the system.
They actually BELIEVED their teachers.
They actually are BFF's with their teachers.
They not only have no problems going to a veritable prison from 5-18, but then are so hopelessly conformist, they consciously BORROW life-crippling levels of debt to to attend an additional 4-6 years more of the same educational-indoctrinist slop.
They swallowed whole what their government-sponsored teacher-indoctrinators told them and are just too stupid (or brainwashed) to realize it.
Sadly, this has serious costs and consequences to society because without independent thinkers, without genuine Calvins, there are no innovators. There are no creators. There are no geniuses who can look outside the box and come up the next cure for cancer. Technological advancement and economic growth will slow, resulting in lower standards of living than what we could have had. But worse, with nothing but a bunch of conforming sheeple, the "system" can easily manipulate, control, and own society. And that has always been the goal of the leftist education system.
Of course, try telling that to the "independent minded" tatted up, earloop wearing, liberal-arts-majoring "intellectual giants" who vote to mortgage their own futures while all claiming to be Calvins.
Wednesday, August 05, 2015
Wednesday "Where's My Boxer Shorts" Linkage
Cavaricci Jeans Theory
Socialism, what a great idea.
Yeah, keep getting lippy with your "$15 Minimum Wage" demands.
None of this will matter on account an increasing percentage of people merely fake having a mental illness to collect a government check.
Our streets may not be paved with gold, but they are paved with government checks and immigrants don't care about the difference.
Good news! I am one of the writers for the Canadian flagship blog Rebel Media's "Megaphone."
Socialism, what a great idea.
Yeah, keep getting lippy with your "$15 Minimum Wage" demands.
None of this will matter on account an increasing percentage of people merely fake having a mental illness to collect a government check.
Our streets may not be paved with gold, but they are paved with government checks and immigrants don't care about the difference.
Good news! I am one of the writers for the Canadian flagship blog Rebel Media's "Megaphone."
Episode #104 - "Summer Vacation Bible School" Special!
Sleeping in your car
Hiking 14,000 foot mountains
What would Davis Aurini do with $1.2 billion?
Gen X Parents force marching their children up mountains
Mission Impossible Rogue Nation review
Back to School sales are child abuse
School is child abuse
Summer Vacation Bible School is DEFINITELY abuse
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Hiking 14,000 foot mountains
What would Davis Aurini do with $1.2 billion?
Gen X Parents force marching their children up mountains
Mission Impossible Rogue Nation review
Back to School sales are child abuse
School is child abuse
Summer Vacation Bible School is DEFINITELY abuse
AND MORE!
In THIS EPISODE of The Clarey Podcast!
Tuesday, August 04, 2015
Huntington Park, Democrats, and Illegal Immigration
A question democrats who are AGAINST illegal immigration have to ask themselves is if we're not going to bother defending the sovereignty of this nation, then why have a nation at all?
Never mind, just enjoy the decline.
Never mind, just enjoy the decline.
The Return of Cappy Linkage
Yes, it's because of "Evil Republicans" that your tuition is so high. Not worthless, bloated, leftist burueacracy.
This is what happens when you can't do math, no matter how pretty you are and how socialist you are.
Dr. Helen suggests a book I may have to look at later.
The "Structure and Genius of ISIS"
This is why I respect engineers infinitely more than their sociologist counterparts.
Chris Bechtloff is HILARIOUS and on fire in his latest podcast. Warning, incredibly foul (but hilarious) statements, some I don't even agree with, but was just rolling.
Posts, podcasts, and general vitriol will return to normal levels since I have returned.
ALSO PODCAST NOTE - Seems EVERYBODY did follow my advice and start downloading the podcasts in anticipation of me archiving them. However, we ate up my monthly allotment of bandwidth (which is pretty awesome). I think it reset on the 8-1-15, so you can continue downloading, but I wanted to say thank you, I'm now ranked consistently (albeit artificially) #1 or #2 in Podomatic's ranking for conservative radio.
This is what happens when you can't do math, no matter how pretty you are and how socialist you are.
Dr. Helen suggests a book I may have to look at later.
The "Structure and Genius of ISIS"
This is why I respect engineers infinitely more than their sociologist counterparts.
Chris Bechtloff is HILARIOUS and on fire in his latest podcast. Warning, incredibly foul (but hilarious) statements, some I don't even agree with, but was just rolling.
Posts, podcasts, and general vitriol will return to normal levels since I have returned.
ALSO PODCAST NOTE - Seems EVERYBODY did follow my advice and start downloading the podcasts in anticipation of me archiving them. However, we ate up my monthly allotment of bandwidth (which is pretty awesome). I think it reset on the 8-1-15, so you can continue downloading, but I wanted to say thank you, I'm now ranked consistently (albeit artificially) #1 or #2 in Podomatic's ranking for conservative radio.
Sunday, August 02, 2015
Mt. Bierstadt, 14,065 Feet
Happy Day Lieutenants! The ole Captain climbed his first 14,000 ft peak, Mt. Bierstadt.
Xenosystems
New blog added to the blogroll.
You may also be asking, "Hey Clarey, are the posts a little less meaty and kind of more linky?"
Yes, yes they are. I'm traveling. It's summer. And the audio is probably going to suck for this week's podcast because I left the mic at home. WHICH, if you haven't already, start downloading the podcasts because I think two more episodes and I'm archiving episodes 1-100 to free up space on the server. After that I'm charging $40 if you wanted the archives mailed to you on thumbdrive.
You may also be asking, "Hey Clarey, are the posts a little less meaty and kind of more linky?"
Yes, yes they are. I'm traveling. It's summer. And the audio is probably going to suck for this week's podcast because I left the mic at home. WHICH, if you haven't already, start downloading the podcasts because I think two more episodes and I'm archiving episodes 1-100 to free up space on the server. After that I'm charging $40 if you wanted the archives mailed to you on thumbdrive.
Saturday, August 01, 2015
My Latest Defense for Carrying a Gun
I once had a middle aged elitist woman in a snobby suburb come up to me and ask me why I was carrying a gun. I didn't realize it at the time, but she was one these psycho crusaderists who got off on having the rare opportunity to "display her wisdom and superiority" by trying to stump me with her "impervious" leftist logic.
Thinking she was genuinely interested I said, "In case I have to shoot somebody."
She then followed up, "But when would you ever have to shoot someone?"
I said, "At work. I'm on call for security."
She then stepped back, said, "Oh, well thank you for your service." and left.
It seemed odd, but once I had the hindsight to figure out what had transpired, I got pissed because it was just another worthless human being desperate to lecture somebody to validate her meaningless life.
So now, to prevent that from ever happening again, this is my response.
Thinking she was genuinely interested I said, "In case I have to shoot somebody."
She then followed up, "But when would you ever have to shoot someone?"
I said, "At work. I'm on call for security."
She then stepped back, said, "Oh, well thank you for your service." and left.
It seemed odd, but once I had the hindsight to figure out what had transpired, I got pissed because it was just another worthless human being desperate to lecture somebody to validate her meaningless life.
So now, to prevent that from ever happening again, this is my response.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)