Marriage Down, Dystopia Up

The number of people age 25-34 who have never married has surpassed the number who are married for the first time in a century. The Chateau prophesied multiverse rupture continues imploding right on schedule.

Among all people over age 18, the number of married couples fell 5 percentage points from 2000 to 2009, a mere nine year span. (The importation of “family values” peasants by the millions from Mexico likely contributes to this trend. ¡No, no podemos!)

Among the total population 18 and older, the share of men and women who were married fell from 57 percent in 2000 to 52 percent in 2009 — again, the lowest percentage since the government began collecting data more than 100 years ago. The share of adult women who were married fell below half, to 49.9 percent.

Naturally, the New York Beta Times frames the Census data as evidence that the recession is discouraging people who really, truly do want to get married from doing so. But the chart they include puts the lie to their spin.

Marriage has been in decline since 2000, well before the current economic unpleasantness. A bad job market is simply accelerating an already established trend.

The real reason for the continuing abandonment of marriage?

Two factors contribute to the decline in marriage among adults ages 25 to 34, said Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University: less marriage and more cohabitation, which has become far more socially acceptable, even with children.

Less marriage — duh. Don’t hold back, Mr. Cherlin. What’s really on your mind?

Cohabitation. Sure. Why buy the cow, etc.

Dismantling of societal shaming mechanisms. Yes, true. Shame is a powerful motivator, particularly of women’s behavior, as women are herd animals whose greatest fear is deviating from the norms.

But there are other, deeper reasons why marriage is being treated like the plague by men who are finally wising up.

But Mr. Greiner says the talk of economics may be cloaking the primary issue. “It’s more a fear of intimacy and fear of marriage,” he said.

This therapyspeak needs a truthifying translation:

“It’s more a fear of divorce theft, fat wives, screaming brats and gradual sexual impoverishment.”

There, FTFY.

(Yes, one study has shown married people have more sex than singles, but that study has to be put in a context that matters — it needs to compare married people to single alphas, not just to any old single. The celibate betas and omegas drag down the average. No doubt a proper comparison would show that single men who are good with women get a lot more sex — and higher quality sex — than married men who have been married for longer than three years.)

According to the federal data, the share of young adults who have never married climbed from 35 percent at the start of the decade to 46 percent in 2009.

The indicators are starting to pile up that America is without doubt an empire in steep decline.

There have long been large racial differences in marriage rates, with blacks far less likely to marry than whites, but that difference has been shrinking as cohabiting becomes more popular with whites, Dr. Cherlin said.

Class imitation inversion. It used to be the lower classes strived to be more like the upper classes. Now, the reverse is happening.

And many young adults, he said, are postponing marriage rather than forgoing it altogether.

When it doesn’t much matter anymore. Men aren’t the only ones running from marriage. While women want to be married more than men do, they are being encouraged to postpone nuptials by men’s intransigence as well as by their own temptation to play the field far longer than their predecessors did in the past. The Four Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse (now with a Fifth! Status jockeying!) explain these choices very well.

Mr. McElroy in Atlanta said he would definitely start thinking about a wedding once he gets a new job and the economy picks up.

“Not very romantic, is it?” he said with a laugh.

Modern Western marriage has its foundation in companionate love, and yet it has morphed into an institution without a shred of romance. There’s a lesson there.

Marriage version 2010 is like a speeding bullet. It isn’t courage, or duty, or manly obligation to stand in its path and take one for the good of society.

It’s stupidity.

(Some may wonder how dedicated hedonists like those who lounge idly on the Chateau piazza could note the connection between a healthy marriage institution and a country’s well-being. As has been noted here many times, what is good for the individual is not necessarily good for society. Materialism and scientism have elevated individuation. Those of us without the shackles of a higher calling or ethical compunction extract the last ounce of advantage from this transcendental individualism, while the organism as a whole slowly unravels sinew by sinew.)





Comments


  1. Is that last a paragraph a response to the currently ongoing discussion on Dennis Mangan’s blog?

    Like


  2. In the long run- it is women, not men, who benefit more from marriage and will therefore miss it.

    Like


  3. The economy is discouraging marriage? Maybe discouraging women from shacking up with unemployed men, but a roommate is the best living arrangement in tight times, and what is marriage if not institutionalized cohabitation? I call bullshit on that excuse.

    These conclusions in sociological studies are always pulled out of someone’s ass anyhow. They present their data and then make up reasons to explain it when the data should speak for themselves.

    Like


  4. I was talking to a young sales girl at the GAP. She looked

    like a model from a fashion magazine. No photoshoping

    needed. As I was complimenting her I said all she needed

    was a ring on her finger. To which, she replied I wish.

    I starting thinking how sad that this girl thinks her chances of

    getting married is like a young girl wishing for a pony for her

    birthday.

    Like


  5. The male birth control pill (or a similar, private form of birth control for men) will herald in the baby strike. Once men have reproductive control, birthrates in 1st world countries will drop precipitously and the era of the marching morons will be upon us.

    I’ll be on the veranda sipping cocktails and apathetically watching the social destruction.

    Like


  6. Dan,

    Consider the possibility that she puts out on the second date and is subsequently confused when men wont commit. If she were a virgin or had a very low count her attitude would be much different as she would be accustomed to receiving respect from men.

    Like


  7. FAIL

    This is old news…at least throw up the charts showing multiple partners by age from your other post

    The DUKE fuck list is #1 on google

    Like


  8. “Class imitation inversion.”

    Call it as it it, a race to the bottom. After all, Democracy has proven to be the kingdom of the mediocre. Only when the consequences affect personally the welfare sector they will change.

    The lesson is that Marriage was never about romance in the first place, and, as I suspected, the Victorian concepts of love were just a trap to catch suckers and keep them out of the gene pool.

    After watching divorces being the rule rather than the exception, and after watching what happens in said divorces, both with our own eyes, cohabitation seems like a way out. At least, until marriage is changed to include it. Which is already happening.

    Like


  9. i still wonder if I meet a girl who’s bad enough, if i’ll put a ring on it.

    Like


  10. Dan, you sound like a total symp. WTF are you talking to her like that for. Compliments? She needs a ring on her finger? ugh.

    Like


  11. on October 1, 2010 at 11:29 am Mnemosyne's Brother

    One of the best things that happened to my game was to have the tubes capped with titanium clips. Being older (54) my need for more children is down to zero. Knowing that I am protected against accidental pregnancy, a profound comfort.

    Not that I tell ‘dame-co-eds.

    Like


  12. This could just as well be due to delay in marriage, rather than abandonment of marriage. Note that the lower end of that age range is 25 – most perfectly normal guys are not married at that age.

    Like


  13. Paul

    No, From my life experience this young lady was was a very kind and sweet girl, The problem is that as been stated in previous post very good looking girls are rarely approached by normal guys and if they are not attracted to the puas then they lead a lonely life. In my younger days I would not of had the balls or the words to talk to this women.

    In my experience flirting with younger girls I feel their thirst for a man to make them feel like a woman.

    Like


  14. http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-all-the-single-ladies-are-closing-the-gender-wage-gap/?TrackID=obpaid&obref=obnetwork

    Cliffnotes: Women under 30 earn 8% MORE nationwide than males of the same age, due to increased rates of singlehood, childlessness and university degree attainment.

    Like


  15. Another outcome of the marriage strike and the current entitlement culture.

    What I’m witnessing first hand is that men that have children are being preyed upon childless women to impregnate them. A guy that works for me has 3 kids from two women, one due this month and he met another just last week that will have sex with him. Even after explaining his current situation, she’s OK with it.

    I put it in his mind that what this current interest has as far as intentions go are and that they really don’t have anything to do with him at all. It’s about her and her wanting to get pregnant. Maybe that woke him up a little as he’s one of these guys that rates his masculinity based upon his access to sex. That he works two jobs, is always broke and borrows money from me all the time should be an example that he hardly qualifies in that regard whatsoever. And that another woman doesn’t even care about that and will still have sex with him is scary as hell.

    That all his kids are or will be on some form of assistance is not only a disgrace, but something that needs to be dealt with. That women will settle for this and don’t have any sense of their future, live only in the moment and only think of themselves is why many men won’t attach themselves to them.

    I myself could support a wife and family on my own if I wanted to. But guess what, I lost faith in women as a whole because I know what they are. Unfortunately the legal system affirms their own sick perverted mentality and makes men that can be providers run far away.

    Like


  16. Overall then, our society seems to be a pretty good deal for men.

    I would feel that way if I were assured that in my old age thrity-forty years from now I will walk into any restaurant or store and see a young pretty girl behind the counter.

    If the future is glowering orcs, our society’s goodness is illusory, like living large on a credit card binge.

    Like


  17. Dan, you are in fact a puss. You are the guy this site rails against because you ruin women for everyone with your simpering white knighting.

    You confuse flirting with pedestaling and complementing. Why would a pretty girl need ANOTHER complement to swell her head?
    You clearly have a lot to learn, my neophyte friend. Stick around a while.

    Like


  18. the problem with macro level data and macro level trends is that it attempts to aggregate whole range of behavior into a couple of neat lines. and that leads you to say things like this:

    Class imitation inversion. It used to be the lower classes strived to be more like the upper classes. Now, the reverse is happening.

    i don’t know if that’s really it. is it upper class whites who are doing most of the cohabitating? a few high profile examples aside, i don’t think so. the reality is that marriage is still the preference for the upper middle class and the rich. it’s among the lower classes of all races that the institution is fading into obscurity.

    more and more we will be moving towards two americas: one were wealthy people go to good schools, get professional jobs, marry their peers and raise kids with similar trajectories and the other where what used to be the middle class continues their descent into poor educations, low-paying service jobs and broken homes.

    the really sad thing is that well-meaning liberals, through the creation of an all-encompassing welfare state, are actual enabling this process. the more people see government as their means of salvation, the more things like marriage, entrepreneurship and civil society fade into obscurity.

    Like


  19. Marriage rates have been obviously trending downward for decades.

    Those academic prognosticators making astute and correct future predictions in the 70s-80s [about our present decline] would’ve made interesting points today – were they not shitcanned for an African-American Lesbian Studies professorships.

    Beware Liberal Ivory Tower academics who sound more like they belong as a partner in a Manhattan Tax Lawyer’s firm.

    No, the value is in not sifting through the debris of a failing empire, but postulating where we shall be in 2 decades.

    I have my own theories and I’ve been always correct.

    Like


  20. Yes, one study has shown married people have more sex than singles, but that study has to be put in a context that matters — it needs to compare married people to single alphas, not just to any old single.

    Are you arguing that most married guys are alpha? If not, why compare them with single alphas?

    Like


  21. Wasn’t marriage traditionally reserved for the aristocracy, and not much more than a financial arrangement between 2 families?

    Like


  22. Nice girl anne coulter pointed out that the one big change in marriage law was a supreme court decision several decades ago that made unmarried men responsible for their bastards. Up until that point, you got pregnant without a ring, you are on your own. Now, even if the baby daddy is insolvent, uncle sugar will make sure you’re taken care of. That’s why the government cheese crowd don’t get hitched anymore.

    Like


  23. More and more guys realizing that getting married is a fools errand…. file it under ‘No shit, Sherlock.’

    Like


  24. PA

    Overall then, our society seems to be a pretty good deal for men.

    I would feel that way if I were assured that in my old age thrity-forty years from now I will walk into any restaurant or store and see a young pretty girl behind the counter.

    Sure, if you like the half Black, half Mexican look. America will resemble Brazil by then.

    White girls will be reserved for NFL/NBA stars. We will prosper by selling our jizz to Kardashian Farms.

    Like


  25. “In fact, other happiness surveys indicate that men’s, as opposed to women’s, happiness has been steadily increasing over the past 3 or so decade. Overall then, our society seems to be a pretty good deal for men.”

    As a never-married man in my 30s, I agree. With few exceptions, my married friends are miserable compared to me. While I have probably not been as motivated as I would have been with a marriage/kids/mortgage to drive me, I have been able to take more risks with my career and have done far more interesting things. As I continue to gain status and knowledge, I have never been more attractive to young women than I am now. And the feminist movement has given these young women the freedom to fool around with me unseriously without guilt.

    However, I can see how this situation is not ideal for building and maintaining a strong society. If I had been peer-pressured into marriage at 22, I would have provided the machinery of the economy with a much more willing cog. The concept of seeking a 4-hour work week — and spending the rest of my time on activities that really only benefit me — would have been totally foreign to me. Just as the process of natural selection doesn’t care about human happiness, productive societal structures are also agnostic on the matter, as CR points out.

    Unlike CR, however, I don’t give a shit. The overall direction of Western Civilization over the next century is beyond my ability to influence. I am also unable to determine with any confidence that we won’t figure out how to make this all work. After all, men *are* happier already. Maybe perpetual economic growth (the motivating force for heartless production systems) is not a necessary goal, and we can be happy without it. In any case, I know that *I* can be happy without it.

    I honestly don’t understand those men who correctly perceive that they have been given a free banquet yet choose to dwell on the potential negatives. I’d speculate that it’s a failure to overcome the tribal instinct (my White People tribe has been doing well here for a few hundred years, so I must defend their traditions) or just an obsession with being cranky. If men were still being pressured into unhappy marriages, they’d just be complaining about that.

    Like


  26. […] on the decline, first time in 100 years Marriage Down, Dystopia Up Citizen Renegade makes total […]

    Like


  27. “Paul

    No, From my life experience this young lady was was a very kind and sweet girl, The problem is that as been stated in previous post very good looking girls are rarely approached by normal guys and if they are not attracted to the puas then they lead a lonely life. In my younger days I would not of had the balls or the words to talk to this women.

    In my experience flirting with younger girls I feel their thirst for a man to make them feel like a woman.”

    Dan, you are an old man…and old dumb man.

    That dumb bitch could easily have a boyfriend (or even husband) if she wanted one.

    That girl probably gets hit on several time a day (and not just by PUA’s). She needs only to put in minimal effort to get into a relationship.

    Problem is she wants it all…

    Like


  28. The only ring I’m interested in is a cock ring for my future man. He can wear it in the shower.

    Like


  29. i only take baths

    Like


  30. This post was unfocused and undisciplined, another contribution by somebody other than the founder of this blog (who does, apparently, appear in the last italicized paragraph).

    We all know marriage is in decline, and a lot of people are unhappy in their marriages. But this post was sloppy and it comes off as pissy.

    Like


  31. on October 1, 2010 at 1:15 pm Sage of Baltimore II

    Dan, are you serious? Not sure how a reader of this blog can be so deluded, but whatever …

    Dr Devlin’s predicted “marriage strike” is with us, the evidence is this post. It’s all over now, the marriage, sexual, and gender trends building since the mid-1970s have finally come together in a truly dystopian fashion.

    I could care less, it’s fun being a spectator to the fall of a joke civilization that deserves a good collapse. The barbarians (ie Bigtime Alphas) will eventually return in Mad max fashion and the real fun will commence … eventually someone, somewhere will start the rebuild, someone always does. Maybe even a lesson or two will be learned from the internally-guided collapse of the postmodern West … but I’m inclined to doubt that.

    I’m enjoying the booze stash I’ve got here, complete with all the pussy I can get (which is ample), until the Mohammedans take it away. They haven’t forgotten how to keep reproducing, probably because they effectively keep bitches in line quite nicely.

    I love this blog even though it really came too late for me. My horrible wife ditched me before R/CR came online — for no reason other than she could, she took my kids far away, and as I write she is on a tropical holiday getting laid and drunk with my money — but I console myself that maybe some unfortunate young man will read and learn.

    I’m ok, I’m a natural alpha and have made up for the awful divorce (and the usual horrible child custody fight which, being a father, I naturally lost despite her long record of awful, even criminal, behavior) with a ridiculous amount of quality poon, and I am truly glad to have that harridan out of my life.

    However, guys, don’t get married in the first place. For any reason. Ever.

    That simple.

    Like


  32. It’s not the sex, it’s the money.

    The financial incentives to stay single, keep a couple eligible for WIC, gov’t subzidized housing, gov’t-subsidized food, earned-income-credit, child-care credits, section 8 housing, Medicaid, free-and-reduced school meals, gov’t-subsidized recreation.

    Example: Medicaid maternity benefits are available for single moms up to incomes of $40,000 /varies by state. With Obamacare, states are partially incentivized to raise the eligibility. Single moms are disincentivized to marry.

    Only the wealthy can afford to marry.

    Like


  33. Fred

    I honestly don’t understand those men who correctly perceive that they have been given a free banquet yet choose to dwell on the potential negatives.

    While containing many true observations, yours is an argument of positivism versus dystopia and does not address the actual data in this discussion of declining marriages.

    Like


  34. If you have not seen it yet this is a perfect example of why less and less are getting married:

    http://deadspin.com/5652280/the-full-duke-university-fuck-list-thesis-from-a-former-female-student/gallery/

    Like


  35. Vodka and Ground Beef,

    You are not funny.

    And you look like a female Kenny G.

    CR sends his regards.

    Like


  36. Holy shy Mehcan, you’re right Vodka looks like Kenny G bought a straightening iron….

    @ Dan – you and all the symps in urban areas are the reason these bytches are spoiled, entitlement princess-babies. Kissing a bytch’s arse like that. It reminds me of all the herbs I see in Toronto (aka homoville) throwing themselves, prideless at every woman they see. Which is precisely why aloof asshole game works so good here.

    @Sage – I had a child out of wedlock. Mother wouldn’t put my name on the birth certificate, and asked for no money. I’ve a feeling she too will retain custody despite her own criminal bahaviour.

    Like


  37. on October 1, 2010 at 1:49 pm Professor Woland

    There will be increasing pressure from women, feminists in particular, to socialize our economy. With the economic opportunity for women and the financial security from marriage / children drying up, they will be forced to grift elsewhere. The obvious sugar daddy is the government. My guess is that we will see a continuing push for “universal healthcare”, padding social security, AA, and a steep increase in progressive income taxes. All are areas which will benefit women in general at the expense of men.

    Like


  38. there’s also the loss of the shotgun marriage. a high percentage of marriages in the olden days were forced. now that pregnancies happen less often, men feel less compelled to get married. of course, as all of that happens the social pressure to marry erodes in lockstep.

    Like


  39. @Thursday.

    Also, the question didn’t specify whether it was better for the person surveyed to go through life married rather than single. It didn’t ask guys, for e.g., “Do you think its better FOR GUYS to go through through life married rather than single?”, and it didn’t ask women “Do you think its better FOR WOMEN to go through through life married rather than single?”

    I personally agree its better for nearly all women to go through life married rather than single. Its also better for some guys. I’d probably agree with the statement, but I don’t agree with the statement for me.

    Also, IMO, single women are more prone to lie about that question than guys, because their single reality hurts more than they want to admit.

    On another note, I postulate that another reason for declining marriage rates is the explosion of girl-girl sex.

    Finally, thank you for the closing parenthetical. People ask the same question about me.

    Like


  40. HI MY NAME IS DAN
    ALL YOU NEED IS A RING ON YOUR FINGER
    WILL YOU MARRY ME

    Like


  41. on October 1, 2010 at 2:04 pm Half Canadian

    (Some may wonder how dedicated hedonists like those who lounge idly on the Chateau piazza could note the connection between a healthy marriage institution and a country’s well-being. As has been noted here many times, what is good for the individual is not necessarily good for society. Materialism and scientism have elevated individuation. Those of us without the shackles of a higher calling or ethical compunction extract the last ounce of advantage from this transcendental individualism, while the organism as a whole slowly unravels sinew by sinew.)

    So, you’re a parasite?

    Like


  42. on October 1, 2010 at 2:07 pm Professor Woland

    Most Northern European countries such as Sweeden and Germany, etc. have proportional representitive governments. One reason they are far more Socialist than the US is that the Lumpenmensch have far more political economic clout there than here. It is no accident that most women in Europe vote for government schemes and are ok with high taxes. They consume a disproportionate share of the resources and pay less in taxes. They don’t need to have children to get a man’s money which is why none of them have children anymore.

    Like


  43. You know, I’m a little sad about this. I’ve always wanted a family. Too bad I wasn’t born into a rich moooslim family, then I could have had as many kids as I wanted. After learning the truth from sites such as this one, and learning the fine art of asshole game, I see no point to marraige. Id still like kids tho.

    ill just have to move to brazil someday

    Like


  44. Professor Woland

    There will be increasing pressure from women, feminists in particular, to socialize our economy. With the economic opportunity for women and the financial security from marriage / children drying up, they will be forced to grift elsewhere. The obvious sugar daddy is the government. My guess is that we will see a continuing push for “universal healthcare”, padding social security, AA, and a steep increase in progressive income taxes. All are areas which will benefit women in general at the expense of men

    Look to the White House. The fact an ACORN activist and black racist is President is proof buying mino votes with Welfare, WIC and Amnesty works.

    That means, you WILL see MORE of it.

    Like


  45. Mehcan

    Vodka and Ground Beef,

    You are not funny.

    And you look like a female Kenny G.

    well, i think she IS funny in a kooky way – and she looks NOT like Kenny, but a good lay

    Like


  46. It’s not rocket science, men are the party that make the decision to get married. They buy the ring, propose etc. When half of marriages end in divorce (almost all initiated by women), only a fool would enter into such an arrangement.

    The men who do end up marrying are the douchebags that either believe in love or are convinced that marriage ensures sexual gratification on a long-term basis. This demographic of men comprise the ‘betas’ we refer to. They are cashed in by their wives as an eventuality and the divorce rate increases.

    In a mere generation, marriage will become a completely outmoded institution, save for the elite who will always hold conservative values. Why? So the money and power stays in the family. Anyone remember families?

    Like


  47. If you are a male living in the USA you have to be an idiot to get married under a misandrist legal framework who treats men like criminals in family courts, and place yourself in a very risky legal and economic situation. These are good news for America, it shows that there is a number of American men who are not that stupid or at least they learned the lesson.

    Like


  48. Thursday

    The fact an ACORN activist and black racist is President is proof buying mino votes with Welfare, WIC and Amnesty works.

    It is ironic that the current president with his overspending ways will be the cause of the eventual dissolution of many cherished social programs.

    I’m not convinced this will happen. Black Welfare and Black and mexican Amnesty ‘programs’ will be the last goodies cut, to buy off our brown ‘brothers’ from taking to the streets in revolution. Taking away their massive welfare tit will be the one and only stimulus to motivate them out of ghetto laziness.

    Like


  49. This Duke Fuck List thing is gold, not just because it’s fun to laugh at sluts, but because of the details she includes. Most of the quotes are great examples of direct or cocky-funny game. It’s telling that this is the stuff she remembers. Assertive come-ons and dirty talk linger a lot longer than polite conversation.

    I think it’s worthy of a post here at the Chateau.

    Like


  50. Firepower, and she looks NOT like Kenny, but a good lay

    I had that problem too, once, until I got better glasses. 🙂

    OTOH, her face reminds of a natural brown bag (no allusions to her skin tone). So, I s’posse as long as the orifice is there, it would be enough for you.

    Also, she’s crazy as a loon. Granted, it may be interesting for a minute or two.

    Like


  51. Morsellaux

    So, I s’posse as long as the orifice is there, it would be enough for you.

    i’m not sure
    but I suspect
    i’ve just been given
    the Big Belgian Waffle

    Like


  52. Obviously a result of gay marriage! That’s gotta be it! (/snark)

    Like


  53. Thursday—

    In fact, other happiness surveys indicate that men’s, as opposed to women’s, happiness has been steadily increasing over the past 3 or so decade.

    By a very small amount as I recall. These kinds of surveys don’t impress me much. Are they really measuring happiness? Perhaps men just feel more like losers now than three decades ago if they say they’re not so happy. Perhaps e.g. they feel that will be interpreted more as gender conflict resentment and being “bitter” as feminists like to taunt now, versus three decades ago framing things more as impatience with social progress. The interesting thing about the survey I’m recalling is that it showed women going in the opposite direction, more unhappy now, and more unhappy than men. Though again I think this is heavily mediated by what the media is telling people to think and what their response on happiness indicates about them. Our post feminist culture generally tells women it’s ok to complain, men are still shites, but tells men if they complain or are real unhappy, it’s their fault and they’re losers. And yeah I think both those opposite messages to the genders have increased greatly over the last three decades.

    Contra much of the MRA crowd, our society is actually overall a much better place for men than societies of the past.

    Thinking of all men at once has limited utility. I’d say that society has become considerably worse for upper middle class and lower upper class betas and most greater betas since 1970. In 1970 such men got 8s for wives very often, and divorce theft 2.0 hadn’t set in yet. They had a very good shot at a hot wife with few or no other full sex partners. There wasn’t a fifty fifty (or really usually worse) split in the man’s saved wealth yet except maybe just a few years earlier in California. The divorce rate was way way below 50% prior to 1970.

    Things have in many ways improved for all alphas in various social classes, so long as they don’t get married and divorced.

    The way to go instead of marriage if you’re at that point is to live together with a simple cohabitation agreement.

    That should say you don’t wished to be considered to have a common law or any other sort of marriage, or for either partner to have the sorts of financial obligations (except with respect to children) that pertain or may in the future pertain to married couples, or couples living together who haven’t signed a mutual agreement to the contrary. It could and probably should go into some more detail on property division, basically according to who bought stuff that wasn’t a gift, with jointly held stuff divided according to contribution pro rata, or if neither party can or wishes to figure that out, pro rata according to total respective after tax earned income during the cohabitation period (investment earnings on separately held property not included).

    Like


  54. on October 1, 2010 at 4:30 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    lozlzlozlzlzlzlzlzz

    Hey!!!!! sorry iposeted his in the wrong comments section just a bit ago. this is the rigt one lzozlz

    another idea for a ms paint cartoon!!!!

    have a women in a bussiness suit
    all tiered and haggard
    tired and haggard in a business suit with a sore anuth
    with lotsa cocka cum all over her
    and fiat dollzrz stcking out of her pockets zlozlzolzlz and an mba and ivy league degrees lzozlzlz and student loan debt certiicate slzozlzlz
    and losta cats behind her

    and then have her looking at
    a owmen cradling a baby and with three small chicldren
    and a husband just coming home
    and a white picket fence lzozlzlz

    and have the women in the business suit saying, “boy am i glad i’m not just someone’s property.”

    lzozozlzlzlzlz!

    lzozoolzozlzozolzlzozzo

    Like


  55. Thursday–

    “Seven years ago the CDC conducted a study on people and their desire to get married. Do you know which gender agreed more with the statement, “It is better to get married than to go through life being single”? The men. Even among conservative protestants, the breakdown was roughly 68% men vs. 59% women.”

    ***

    Women tend to avoid marriage and only go marriage crazy when there an alpha (hmv) around they want to lock up.

    Relatively high social status alphas and greater betas both.

    I think what that statistic is mostly showing is that lots of lower betas and higher omegas want to get married as the only way of having sex. They also are inaccurately fatasizing about what kind of girl might marry them.

    Like


  56. Firepower

    @Mehcan–“ Vodka and Ground Beef,

    You are not funny.

    And you look like a female Kenny G.

    well, i think she IS funny in a kooky way – and she looks NOT like Kenny, but a good lay.

    Yuup. Agreed.

    Like


  57. Here’s how jaded I’ve become. So used to putting up the shields around women that I had to do a double-take when a receptionist I gave a delivery to was nice and asked me how I was.

    She is probably wondering what my problem was when I mumbled ‘good’ but I was only wondering whether she was an apparition.

    Like


  58. @Advocatus Diaboli:

    In the long run- it is women, not men, who benefit more from marriage and will therefore miss it.

    I agree. Marriage was invented to create a social safety net, to provide some controls in ensuring the father is biologically the father, providing him with a reason to stay and raise his children. I think to an extent it is a very natural development. Everybody gets somebody and in a world with no media, looks were less important. Most people didn’t have access to fancy soaps or cosmetics anyway and generally lived spartan lives. It made it easier to survive. It enabled agriculture to become common, to ensure a minimally decent environment for children to grow up in, and the payment for it is sex and companionship. Most men don’t get that anymore. Most of our modern social safety net is designed to replace these basic functions of marriage. Each one is another nail in the coffin of traditional marriage. Marriage was invented mostly for the benefit of women, but they have chosen to dismantle it because they can replace it social programs. This is classical Daniel Amneus thinking.

    Like


  59. This fuck list is hilarious.

    Like


  60. @Dan:

    I was talking to a young sales girl at the GAP. She looked

    like a model from a fashion magazine. No photoshoping

    needed. As I was complimenting her I said all she needed

    was a ring on her finger. To which, she replied I wish.

    I starting thinking how sad that this girl thinks her chances of

    getting married is like a young girl wishing for a pony for her

    birthday.

    You should ask her out and game her. I think a lot of women want this but have been taught not to seek it or are confused. Long term marriage is the bedrock of society. All this talk of a baby strike is also self defeating for our society.

    Like


  61. Thursday –

    Hyperinflation will happen before the social programs are cut. If the programs are cut, the populatiion will vote in someone who will reinstate the programs. America’s bankruptcy looms, and with it, the collapse of the dollar.,

    Like


  62. Or perhaps Vodka and Ground Beef has outed itself as an homosexual troll.

    Like


  63. on October 1, 2010 at 6:21 pm Sage of Baltimore II

    Although the societal damage wrought in recent decades has pushed us over the cliff, I increasingly think American society and culture were effiminate and misandrist from the start. The Italian philosopher Julius Evola wrote the following in 1945 (!):

    “The much-vaunted sex appeal of American women is drawn from films, reviews and pin-ups, and is in large part fictitious. A recent medical survey in the United States showed that 75 per cent of young American women are without strong sexual feeling and instead of satisfying their libido they seek pleasure narcissistically in exhibitionism, vanity and the cult of fitness and health in a sterile sense. American girls have ‘no hang-ups about sex’; they are ‘easy going’ for the man who sees the whole sexual process as something in isolation thereby making it uninteresting and matter-of-fact, which, at such a level, it is meant to be. Thus, after she has been taken to the cinema or a dance, it is something like American good manners for the girl to let herself be kissed – this doesn’t mean anything. American women are characteristically frigid and materialistic. The man who ‘has his way’ with an American girl is under a material obligation to her. The woman has granted a material favour. In cases of divorce American law overwhelmingly favours the woman. American women will divorce readily enough when they see a better bargain. It is frequently the case in America that a woman will be married to one man but already ‘engaged’ to a future husband, the man she plans to marry after a profitable divorce.”

    Like


  64. “Modern Western marriage has its foundation in companionate love, and yet it has morphed into an institution without a shred of romance. There’s a lesson there.”

    I disagree. Western marriage has long thought to be the result of romantic or passionate love, in contrast to Eastern civilizations that stress companionate love. IMO the impulsiveness underlying passionate/romantic love has evolved into the mess we see today.

    Like


  65. Thinking of all men at once has limited utility. I’d say that society has become considerably worse for upper middle class and lower upper class betas and most greater betas since 1970. In 1970 such men got 8s for wives very often, and divorce theft 2.0 hadn’t set in yet. They had a very good shot at a hot wife with few or no other full sex partners. There wasn’t a fifty fifty (or really usually worse) split in the man’s saved wealth yet except maybe just a few years earlier in California. The divorce rate was way way below 50% prior to 1970.

    Things have in many ways improved for all alphas in various social classes, so long as they don’t get married and divorced.

    The way to go instead of marriage if you’re at that point is to live together with a simple cohabitation agreement.

    Pretty much agreed, Doug.

    I think that the difference is that for the upper middle class and most greater betas, things were simply “easier” in terms of women than they are today. Things are “better” for them today if (1) they avoid marriage and (2) they acquire a bit of Game (wasn’t needed before, so that right off the bat is more effort required) and (3) are sensible about whom they shack up with.

    For the rest of the men who are neither greater betas/upper-earning betas nor alphas, it’s worse, when it comes to women, but better when it comes to “freedom”. These guys have the freedom to slack off their jobs, play World of Warcraft, spend their money on motorcycles and trips to Vegas and so on — but they have a much, much smaller chance of getting laid regularly than they did under the old regime. So if they can accept that exchange of personal freedom (i.e., the lack of “expectations” of getting married and being respectable and so on) for the sexual security (perhaps illusory as it was) of marriage, they can also be “happier” than they were before, even in real terms. But it’s an odd kind of socially maladaptive happiness, really — perhaps more like “Happines 2.0 — the narcissistic kind”, because the other option is off the table.

    Like


  66. “New York Beta Times”

    The New York Trotskyite.

    There FTFY.

    Like


  67. You know, I’ve been thinking. Isn’t it possible to get a non-government sponsored private marriage? If so, why don’t more people do it?

    Like


  68. Doug 1 and Novaseeker: Excellent comments.

    Woland: Sweden actually has one of the highest birth rates in Europe, and applies to ethnic Swedes as well.

    Like


  69. If NAMs and other people are no longer useful to the elite, they will be thrown under the bus.

    I agree and for that reason suspect that Population Replacement will eventually be stopped and reversed. One, generational succession of elites brings new sensibilities. Two, eventually the elites will tire of the ugliness.

    Like


  70. @novaseeker

    For the rest of the men who are neither greater betas/upper-earning betas nor alphas, it’s worse, when it comes to women, but better when it comes to “freedom”. These guys have the freedom to slack off their jobs, play World of Warcraft, spend their money on motorcycles and trips to Vegas and so on — but they have a much, much smaller chance of getting laid regularly than they did under the old regime. So if they can accept that exchange of personal freedom (i.e., the lack of “expectations” of getting married and being respectable and so on) for the sexual security (perhaps illusory as it was) of marriage, they can also be “happier” than they were before, even in real terms. But it’s an odd kind of socially maladaptive happiness, really — perhaps more like “Happines 2.0 — the narcissistic kind”, because the other option is off the table.

    You hit the nail on the head, nova.

    Like


  71. It’s a funny thing the way liberals get so much flak. I’ve always been libertarian/conservative, but I’ve noticed that materially, I always did better under liberals. Then when my taxes became ridiculous under a liberal regime many years ago, I decided the simplest way to go was to sell up, get out of business and live on as little as I could. I never have cared much for luxuries anyhow.

    Sure enough, it was the best move I could have made. I now live a much happier and simpler life, and am of no use to anyone but myself. I can get by on nothing, and if I have to get out quickly, I can be gone in a few hours. Once again, I have liberals to thank for giving me the proper incentive to look beyond the way I was brought up, evaluate the true worth of my convictions and to realize that being constantly frustrated by them wasn’t serving any useful purpose. Adapt or die. That’s all any of us needs to know.

    Still can’t bring myself to vote for the bastards though.

    Like


  72. Hey Vodka chick. I want to work you over and just treat you filthy in the bedroom. I’m 6’2, 195 lbs, 22 year old, athlete. I like sports, traveling, whiskey, gambling and you, what else you need to know? You can either meet me in Vegas at the Bellagio on the 16th or come to Austin, let me know.

    Like


  73. Seeing how so much has changed, what I’d like to know from you guys is if you were 21 again, what would you do differently?

    Like


  74. the economic and political analysis here is no better than the game analysis on a popular economics site:

    http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2010/10/what-is-the-incidence-of-game.html#comments

    Like


  75. Sage of Baltimore II,

    That’s not a bad idea – booze and cooze while waiting for the end. The West is fucked, so we might as well sit back and watch the fireworks.

    When I was younger, I used to be really angry at how our civilisation has been destroyed by the feminazis and their ilk. But that’s pointless – laughter is the only reasonable response. We’re all on an airliner with a drunk crew.

    Like


  76. Can men over 50 not post on this blog please? They are so out of touch with reality it is pathetic. They are stuck in a bygone era that doesn’t exist. Read this fucking blog you morons. Maybe you can learn a thing or to about girls these days. Fuck.

    Like


  77. Arnie,

    If I was 21 again, I would have avoided the pedestalizing and white-knighting tendencies that made me a lesser beta. I’d have learned game then, too.

    Like


  78. Ah, yea Brian, we would learn especially by reading your posts, I presume.

    Out of curiosity, would you be so kind and flesh out your assertion by specific examples? To elucidate us with your wisdom? Much appreciated.

    Like


  79. Arnie

    Different? Easy: bangs and wealth instead of brains and health.

    But things even out over time.

    And I’d have negged my 8’s a lot more.

    Like


  80. Bob

    White knighting is useful for gaming burnt out 9’s in their early 30’s facing their down market. Just don’t make it a habit.

    Like


  81. Hi

    I’m DAN

    Wanna go try this on and suck me off?

    Like


  82. Unrelated Game note/ thought-out-loud:
    I wonder if forcing a smile can change mood? All the receptor sites/nerve endings on the various muscles of the face that might get “tripped” and their associations with happiness in times past could perhaps have an effect on mood? If one makes themselves smile for about 20 seconds straight, they are almost forced to “feel better” and their mood brightens. The cheeks draw back during a smile, there is a slight pressure on the muscles around the ears, their is an upward pressure on the eyes, the adams apple draws upward, the mouth stretches side-to-side. Maybe the various nerve-endings that get “tripped” during this act lead to slight changes in chemical release in the brain/cortex?

    Its old wisdom to “make her laugh”, but I wonder if a guy running into a stone wall chick might tease her to smile, “just to see her dimples”, “just to prove she can actually smile”, “let me see you smile to guage just how pretty you could be if you wanted to”, “lets see if we can break your smile record for a sip of my drink, hold for twenty seconds”, etc. Maybe it could break an icy set before a guy bails on it, or maybe not. Might be worth trying for just the fun of it three or four times a night right before a venue bounce…

    ————————————————————————

    On marriage: Marriage can be great, and is great for people who are in love and are devoted to each other and their children. Women now have financial incentives to marry-and-divorce for economic reward. Men now have financial incentives to avoid marriage in fear of economic enslavement to the state on pain of incarceration in a hell-hole called the county lockup with gang-bangers as his new bunkmates. Is it any wonder men are so leery of getting married now? The state has done everything it could do to make it unappealing to him and to make him fear the reprocussions of a marriage gone wrong.

    On retirement in the future and how we will afford it. Get used to this word; euthanized.

    Like


  83. z,

    I made your mom smile.

    She liked it.

    A lot.

    Like


  84. Marriage used to be a religious institution between two people who loved each other. Then the government came in and ruined it by having a monopoly on granting marriage licenses, saying who can get married, tax benefits for married couples, etc.

    Now that women have voted to expand government in the form of their own personal ATM through the welfare state, marriage as in institution already has its tombstone up in the graveyard.

    It’s one case where if the libertarian position had won out and the government would have gotten its filthy hands out of our wallets and sacred institutions, we wouldn’t be staring at the unavoidable destruction of America.

    Like


  85. Apparently Karen Owen is being approached by publishers with offers for a book deal and a big payday. And why not? Let’s reward degenerate skanks as much as possible! A new role model for young girls is born!

    Like


  86. And in other news, Rick Sanchez got fired by CNN today for saying a bunch of controversial, quasi-racialist stuff about jews and Jon Stewart.

    Like


  87. In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, act three, scene one Hamlet says….

    “to be, or not to be-that is the question…..

    Year 2010…

    “to marry, or not to marry -that is the question…..

    hmmmmm

    Like


  88. “Apparently Karen Owen is being approached by publishers with offers for a book deal and a big payday. And why not? Let’s reward degenerate skanks as much as possible! A new role model for young girls is born!”

    Attention is a woman’s primary emotional currency.

    Cash only serves to buy more attention.

    Like


  89. “Happiness is happiness; it is what is felt. I think your real complaint is that this isn’t a particularly noble way of living. I’d agree. It’s the old question, whether you’d rather be a happy pig or a sad Aristotle. I wouldn’t want to live knowing that the woman I was supposed to end up was part of an alpha’s harem while I retreat into the world of Xbox.”

    I disagree. I wouldnt call retreating back into xbox land “happiness”, perhaps pleasure of the most fleeting sort. To achieve great heights, to live to one’s fullest, to build something, that’s more akin to happiness imo.

    Thursday, I have read your posts with interests as I am in the midst of a personal crisis due to all this marriage 2.0 stuff. As someone who has dated in the xian realm would you say it’s still possible to snag a relatively attractive loyal feminine wife within the Church ?

    Like


  90. Stop deceiving yourself – deep in your heart you are a nice guy, who wants to be an upstanding citizen and a pillar of the community. For a would be rascal you show too much concern about the decline of our civilization. Don’t be shy, being a fundamentally good guy isn’t the same as being a chump … and the best chicks desperately hope to find some moral substance underneath dastardly charm. At least that’s what my current chick tells me ….

    Like


  91. “Dudes, meet your new leading light —

    http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/2010/08/05/booty_call

    written by a woman no less. amazing

    Like


  92. Thursday, in other words, they are just like any other women, but subject to a cultural layer override. If you are aware of these factors, then with the core of the fundamentals that form the underlying reality of the Game, you’d do just fine.

    The moment you start indulging in fantasies involving the romantic notions about some sort of sainthood or purity of the woman (or bunch of them thereof), you start writing pages of your own doom.

    Like


  93. Seems I’m in an invisible moderation worm hole. After cross posting to two threads here, my latest urgent delivery of wisdom was posted to my blog.

    Like


  94. And in other news, Rick Sanchez got fired by CNN today for saying a bunch of controversial, quasi-racialist stuff about jews and Jon Stewart.

    GOD.

    DAMN.

    JEWS!!!!

    Like


  95. what, “to marry, or not to marry -that is the question…..

    You don’t have much of a dilemma, the answer is very likely yes in your case.

    But you would need to assure that your man is knowledgeable of the basic notions that form the roots of the Game. May seem counter intuitive (probably not to you but to some women that read here), but you would do precisely that if you want your marriage to be successful. You’d drag him here even if he is kickin and screamin (hopefully he’d have enough sense in him not to have tantrum, I trust you you’d pick well).

    Like


  96. I wouldn’t want to live knowing that the woman I was supposed to end up was part of an alpha’s harem while I retreat into the world of Xbox.

    Not sure I’m parsing this correctly. Are you saying you wouldn’t want to live knowing the women you *could* have been with are part of an alpha’s harem, and thusly retreat into the world of Xboxes, or that the women you *do* end up with were *once* part of an alpha’s harem (as is often the case these days) and therefore retreat into the Xbox as comfort from this disconcerting realization?

    Like


  97. This seems to have deep roots in our brains: religious people ascribe a much higher value to purity as a moral factor and this is, IIRC, highly heritable.

    As is low libido.

    Like


  98. Thursday- What are the odds of finding a loyal, virginal christian chick who will do filthy, raunchy things in the sack, 6 nights a week, IYO? Or is that wishing for utopia?

    Like


  99. Thursday

    Women tend to avoid marriage and only go marriage crazy when there an alpha (hmv) around they want to lock up.

    And the reverse can happen. Push enough attraction triggers, and you are working with a whole new set of rules.

    As it’s illegal to chain a hottie to your bed, marriage is the next best way to tie her up.

    Like


  100. Dan

    The problem is that as been stated in previous post very good looking girls are rarely approached by normal guys and if they are not attracted to the puas then they lead a lonely life.

    A lot of guys with the confidence to approach a super-hottie will go about it all wrong. My girlfriend often gets cat-calls as she walks down the street. Or her doctor will flat out ask her to marry her. No sense of building attraction what so ever.

    A hottie can be lonely.

    Like


  101. Marriage gives security at old age for women more than to men. Women fear of the fact that they may end up single (Bridget Jone’s Diary).
    Salman Rushdie says that women feel happy when in wedding dress and that is why they prefer to get married.

    Like


  102. Professor Woland

    There will be increasing pressure from women, feminists in particular, to socialize our economy. With the economic opportunity for women and the financial security from marriage / children drying up, they will be forced to grift elsewhere. The obvious sugar daddy is the government. My guess is that we will see a continuing push for “universal healthcare”, padding social security, AA, and a steep increase in progressive income taxes. All are areas which will benefit women in general at the expense of men.

    And so why live within that system? Just go off the grid.

    Go off the grid. You can’t get divorce raped if you are off the grid. You can up and leave any time to any place.

    Keep your woman from working, and have her no she is dependent on you, for ALL of her wellbeing.

    She’ll love you more for it.

    Like


  103. lawyerjourno, if they could, they would get married every three weeks. Not necessarily with he same man.

    Like


  104. 2 guys

    well, i think she IS funny in a kooky way – and she looks NOT like Kenny, but a good lay.

    Yuup. Agreed.

    Thirded.

    Like


  105. socialism isn’t all that bad. actually, one could argue Canada, where I’m from, has the freest market in the world.

    but it’s a light version of socialism: only health care is socialized, which pleases me immensely.

    Now Scandinavia -that’s socialism. I don’t want to go near that shit.

    But Canada, Japan, Korea, Australia, UK etc, that’s where socialism works.

    I don’t think people fully comprehend the enormity of the financial meltdown: its akin to the fall of the soviet union. America as you’ve known it for the past five decades is no more. It’s gone. Vanished. The new paradigm is sluggish growth, high unemployment, and high taxes. For at least a decade. Keynesian economics is over. Buried. Reaganism -buried.

    There’s a new alignment taking shape. China, Europe, Russia, Brazil and India are going to assert themselves; America will no longer be the city on the hill. It’ll just be another economic zone amongst several.

    Like


  106. But it’s an odd kind of socially maladaptive happiness, really — perhaps more like “Happines 2.0 — the narcissistic kind”, because the other option is off the table.

    ah Novaseeker, always good to read your comments. Yep, it’s a weird kind of happiness. You’ve described me. No wife, no kids and just turned 41. I dumped my girlfriend today, too. I look forward to finding another, this time even better, hotter, tighter.

    So yes, it is a maladaptive form of happiness. But as CH has pointed out, we’re also living in the age of class imitation inversion. The elites are copying the looks and form of the lower classes, rather than the other way around. It’s not uncommon to find wealthy upper class professionals sporting tribal armband tattoos and tongue rings.

    We just live in strange times, that’s all.

    Like


  107. z

    Its old wisdom to “make her laugh”, but I wonder if a guy running into a stone wall chick might tease her to smile,

    What you do is tell her not to smile. Then make a big frown on your face. At the slightest sign of the corners of her mouth turning up, pounce on her with an accusing finger and cry “aha! stop that!”

    My girlfriend claims the reason she went from seeing me on the first date as someone to learn english from to dating me romantically was because I was always making her laugh. Laughing and laughing through the whole date. Little does she know that the reason she was laughing is because she respected my status and authority over her. The two concepts are intertwined – if she laughs, she respects you, if you make her laugh, she respects you.

    It’s about endlessly fucking with their heads – every sentence contains some twist or other.

    Like


  108. Finally, someone got up off his lazy ass and did some googling. Good job Thursday. I’ve been mentioning the same subject for almost two years now. I’ve even posted links a few times. People simply don’t want to know.

    Once again, from Thursday

    See Haidt’s thoughts on the five factors of morality here:
    http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html

    And there are plenty more articles on the subject out there. Put this genetic work together with the social studies of Bob Altmeier and you have an entirely new way of looking at the human condition.

    It is a condition of castes.

    Like


  109. on October 2, 2010 at 5:23 am almost 40 year old virgin

    Discovering game is the bestest thing ever happened to me.

    Now I know precisely how to not accidentally attract one of these bastard popping credit leeches and dream killers.

    Keeping on my natural “nice guy anti-game” so I swim among them unmolested and undetected.

    Bliss.

    I pity the foo wasting time on useless females ..

    Like


  110. @Morsellaux

    Yup, thank God things are not in their volition otherwise yes they would have been doing it. What is your opinion on women avoiding marriages till they come across with Alpha. But it is also a fact that Alphas to avoid marriages so in some way or the other non-alpha i.e. Beta end up in marrying!

    Like


  111. See Haidt’s thoughts on the five factors of morality here:
    http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/haidt08/haidt08_index.html

    He’s the liberal version of Kalb……..and wrong.

    Like


  112. re: Tim

    Thank Gawd America’s day is over. It just got too expensive keeping world peace and being the driver of global human rights, scientific and technological innovation, and economic growth. Let the Chinese do that.

    Remember that unpleasantness in the Balkans during Bill Clinton’s Presidency? (Good Gawd!!! It was the Serbs, again, with Germany on one side and the Russians on the other, just like 1914!) This time, there won’t be a USA up front in that sort of fight, and Europe can lapse into another of its fratricidal/suicidal episodes.

    How long before something brews up in Asia among the Koreas, China, and Japan?

    Frankly, when the rest of the world goes it own way, I expect the USA to rebound quickly on their ashes, just like 1946.

    By the way, Tim, who will Canada look to for help when the USSR starts to make territorial claims? How many divisions does Canada have?

    Regarding the decline and fall of Western Civilization and our responsibility: We have none. We are just flotsam in a raging river. The most tragic figures in history are those men who tried to change the trajectory of their societies. Study the history of Julian the Apostate, the French revolution, and of Lenin and the Russian revolution, for examples. The smart guys keep a low profile and work with whomever. Most people forget that guys like Jean Paul Satre played very well with the Nazi’s after they defeated and occupied France.

    Like


  113. re Tim and Reaganism:

    Reagan has become a slogan for people who don’t like the capitalist system. For those people too young to remember Reagan, in economics, he tamed the stagflation of Jimmy Carter by:
    1. Indexing tax tables to the inflation rate. Result: The govt was no longer making money from inflation. So, inflation stopped. Duh. I guess now we know who was causing the inflation. Middle class Americans now paying the AMT must wonder why the Democrats didn’t index the AMT to inflation.

    2. He made the income tax system much more rational, which had a dramatic impact on this country’s economics. When you are paying a marginal income tax rate of 70%, which wasn’t hard to do then, the rates were so steep, rational investments like dividend paying stocks or a business that makes real money just don’t make sense. Everybody, before Reagan, was looking for tax free returns and tax deductions. Doctors for example, were the major owners of cattle herds in Texas, since that somehow had a tax exemption. Highly questionable real estate deals, which could be structured to avoid taxes, were also common. It was a mess. Believe me. I lived this. After Reagan’s reforms, my marginal income tax rate fell to about 30% from 70%, which was a Godsend. I paid exactly the same amount of income tax under both the old and the new systems of taxes, but now, for the first time, I could rationally save and invest money. REAGAN DIDN’T CUT TAXES. Look it up. Federal tax receipts were flat the year after his tax cuts kicked in, that is, they were the same as the year before.

    So, people who use Reagan for a negative slogan sound very naive to people who lived through the Reagan era. When you compare our current crop of politicians to Reagan, it is depressing.

    Like


  114. Grampa,

    “When you compare our current crop of politicians to Reagan, it is depressing.”

    True, now we got nutsy Nancy Pelosi.

    But not sure about the futility of saving our civilisation. There’s a lot of men throughout history who revived dying or collapsing states: Charles Martel kicked the arabs out of France, Otto saved central Europe and even Lincoln saved a collapsing republic.

    It can be done, though in this beta age the chance of a true hero rising is slim to nil.

    Like


  115. So Citizen Renegade,
    How does the fall of marriage in the US compares to the fall of marriage in Europe?
    What caused its fall in the former is clear, but what about what caused its fall in the latter? Is it the same?

    Like


  116. @Morsellaux

    “what, “to marry, or not to marry -that is the question…..”

    “You don’t have much of a dilemma, the answer is very likely yes in your case.”

    You’re right…I’m bred and wired to marry, The guy who has caught my eyes now is super confident, smart and strong emotionally( he’s got to be able to handle the challenges I throw him!!!!hee! hee!) ….a quiet confidence and well grounded—the best type and the sexiest type!

    he’s here!!! hee! hee!

    til death do us part!!wooooo

    Like


  117. @Morsellaux

    “My brothers said “Man, he’s got to be tough enough to handle you or insane!!!! shit!”!!!!!heeeeee! heeee!”

    He’ going to have funnnn!!!hahhaha!!

    Like


  118. Excellent post, even more cool for the terms: intransigence and the swipe at the “NYbetaT”.

    Like


  119. […] Marriage Down, Dystopia Up « Citizen Renegade Posted on October 2, 2010 by The LP 999 Marriage Down, Dystopia Up « Citizen Renegade. […]

    Like


  120. Grampa,

    excellent comments. I didn’t mean to come across as smug, and awaiting the downfall of the U.S. What I meant was socialized medicine isn’t so bad. You are already half way there with medicare and the VA.

    Regarding Reagan, I didn’t mean to slander him; what I was suggesting was his era is over. It was good times for many follks when he was around. However, to fully comprehend the financial meltdown, one must compare it to the collapse of the soviet union, it’s that big. This isn’t just another recession- it’s beyond that. This is a complete restructuring of society.

    Like


  121. Thank Gawd America’s day is over. It just got too expensive keeping world peace and being the driver of global human rights, scientific and technological innovation, and economic growth. Let the Chinese do that.

    Remember that unpleasantness in the Balkans during Bill Clinton’s Presidency? (Good Gawd!!! It was the Serbs, again, with Germany on one side and the Russians on the other, just like 1914!) This time, there won’t be a USA up front in that sort of fight, and Europe can lapse into another of its fratricidal/suicidal episodes.

    How long before something brews up in Asia among the Koreas, China, and Japan?

    Frankly, when the rest of the world goes it own way, I expect the USA to rebound quickly on their ashes, just like 1946.

    By the way, Tim, who will Canada look to for help when the USSR starts to make territorial claims? How many divisions does Canada have?

    Normally I like your posts, but this one just reeks of Jewish neoconservatism and blank-slatism.

    How will America “rebound” if half the kids under 5 aren’t even Americans in any recognizable sense of the term? How will we “rebound” with no manufacturing base? Come to California sometime and I’ll show you what el futuro de los Estados Unidos looks like.

    We bombed the wrong side in the 90s also. We bombed ethnically Christians Serbs in favor of Saudi-sponsored Muslim terrorists – “Heckuva job, Brownie!”

    Like


  122. 1. Indexing tax tables to the inflation rate. Result: The govt was no longer making money from inflation. So, inflation stopped. Duh. I guess now we know who was causing the inflation. Middle class Americans now paying the AMT must wonder why the Democrats didn’t index the AMT to inflation.

    2. He made the income tax system much more rational, which had a dramatic impact on this country’s economics. When you are paying a marginal income tax rate of 70%, which wasn’t hard to do then, the rates were so steep, rational investments like dividend paying stocks or a business that makes real money just don’t make sense. Everybody, before Reagan, was looking for tax free returns and tax deductions. Doctors for example, were the major owners of cattle herds in Texas, since that somehow had a tax exemption. Highly questionable real estate deals, which could be structured to avoid taxes, were also common. It was a mess. Believe me. I lived this. After Reagan’s reforms, my marginal income tax rate fell to about 30% from 70%, which was a Godsend. I paid exactly the same amount of income tax under both the old and the new systems of taxes, but now, for the first time, I could rationally save and invest money. REAGAN DIDN’T CUT TAXES. Look it up. Federal tax receipts were flat the year after his tax cuts kicked in, that is, they were the same as the year before.

    For the record, I think Reagan probably gave another 20 years of life to this country but he definitely put a nail in its coffin with the 85 amnesty.

    EVeryone has their own orthogonal narrative on what happened under Reagan. Who do we believe?

    Also, everyone I talk to who was actually in the middle class under Reagan said that their taxes went up due to several loopholes being closed. You sound like you were/are wealthy or in the upper middle class, thus your taxes went down.

    Like


  123. To me it seems of a natural progression that gender cohabitation increased in response to overwhelming disadvantages(increased probability of divorce, alimony) to men in marriage. Of course, in the former case, it’s still possible to get caught in the trap of paying for cohabitation with a woman through the common law clause that some US states have. However, the traditionalist and romantic in me sees this outcome as somewhat tragic. I mean, based on the chart above, some people don’t wants to be faithful to their spouse/partner anymore and only seek semi-instant gratification or is vie for upgrades whenever trouble arise in their current relationship. The process is similar to that of buying a consumer product, have it broken, and then replacing it with a better/cheaper/faster one.

    Like


  124. For the record, I think Reagan probably gave another 20 years of life to this country but he definitely put a nail in its coffin with the 85 amnesty.

    One of the best summaries of the legacy of Ronald Reagan, the last American president.

    Like


  125. How long before something brews up in Asia among the Koreas, China, and Japan?

    not in my lifetime. Aging societies of low T men who can afford a Playstation do not fight wars.

    Frankly, when the rest of the world goes it own way, I expect the USA to rebound quickly on their ashes, just like 1946.

    Nyet, kamerad. In an optimistic scenario, it would take 3 or 4 years for the excess supply of housing to clear, allowing the housing sector to begin a recovery. Commercial real Estate is in an even worse shape. There could be no recovery in the US economy before real estate starts its own recovery. Not to say anything about the massive cognitive deterioration of the US population going on

    By the way, Tim, who will Canada look to for help when the USSR starts to make territorial claims? How many divisions does Canada have? +

    Given that canada, along with Scandinavia, is a major supporter of international leftism, it would be a huge benefict to the world if Holy Mother Russia annexed both. Sorry about it guys, but it is hard (though not impossible) to find an area of conflict between Russia and the Anglosphere in which Russia isn´t obviously right.

    But it is also a fact the current Russia is a dwarf compared to what she was, and she wasn´t so unimportant like she is today for centuries

    Like


  126. Modern Western marriage has its foundation in companionate love, and yet it has morphed into an institution without a shred of romance.

    the problem is the current economic system. Financial Capitalism is so productive that it is able to sustain an enormous number of parasites. the system is threatened only by aging, which by its own nature takes a long time to create real trouble and bubble popping, but zero interest rates are also capable of keeping zombie banks and firms afloat for decades

    Like


  127. what, glad to hear that!

    (We can still flirt, no? :-))

    Like


  128. @Morsellaux
    “what, glad to hear that!

    (We can still flirt, no? :-))”

    We can always flirt!!! hee hee!! YES!

    Like


  129. @Morsellaux,

    oops!!! you mean I’ve been flirting with you??? meee? NOOO. lol!!!

    Like


  130. Politics diversion…

    The old adage that “when US catches cold, the rest of the world catches pneumonia” is still valid.

    So is the old Chinese curse, “may you live in interesting times”. We’ll get plenty of that. Hold on to your hats, because the brown organic matter will hit the rotating blades soon.

    Tim, when someone is on waiting list for a life saving treatment and the waiting period is longer than the potential expiry date and the health care shopping south of the border is no longer available, then what? Costa Ricans are mulling over becoming a health care tourist country, but with 340 million potential tourists up north (US & CA), they would not be able to keep up with servicing the demand.

    One payer system is shit, no matter how you parse it. You are prolly young enough not having the need to put the Canadian health care system through a test.

    Like


  131. Why would you compare married betas to single alphas? As a married guy with game I have more sex than my single alpha friends.

    [Editor: Because most married men, like most single men, are betas. However, married men with game probably do get all the sex they want form their wives. Unfortunately for them, they only get one wife on whom to run their stellar game.]

    Like


  132. “Anonymous
    You know, I’ve been thinking. Isn’t it possible to get a non-government sponsored private marriage? If so, why don’t more people do it?”

    In California any kind of ceremony with or WITHOUT a license is a marriage and you must then go through the divorce process even if you NEVER got a marriage license or registered your marriage in any way, shape, manor or form.

    Be careful out there.

    Like


  133. “Arnie
    Seeing how so much has changed, what I’d like to know from you guys is if you were 21 again, what would you do differently?”

    EVERYTHING.

    Like


  134. what, I just had the vision of your best innocent face and were nearly convinced, but not entirely! 🙂

    Like


  135. old guy

    “Arnie
    Seeing how so much has changed, what I’d like to know from you guys is if you were 21 again, what would you do differently?”

    EVERYTHING.

    Not everything, but damn quite a bit. One thing definitely–getting lazy and complacent. Luckily, my natural core always came to rescue, no matter how many stupid things I did. And any temporarily negative results/setbacks I render as a learning experience and an opportunity.

    Like


  136. @Morsellaux,

    “what, I just had the vision of your best innocent face and were nearly convinced, but not entirely! :-)”

    It’s amazing. Is as if you can see me. Everyone says I LOOK really soft and innocent ….with a twist!!! hehehe!!!

    Like


  137. Older men (40’s 50’s) are great….is their experience and wisdom. yummy!

    Like


  138. what, It’s amazing.

    Magic. Heh.

    Like


  139. Re: Tim and Mr. Lincoln.

    I don’t know much about Charles Martel and Otto, but I have read the history of Mr. Lincoln.

    To make a long story short, Mr. Lincoln’s policies were a disaster both before and during the Civil War. Read about the events leading to the war, Mr. Lincoln’s interference with his generals, and especially read about “Reconstruction.” The last item is truly depressing. It was like what would have happened in Iraq if George Bush had withdrawn US troops 6 months after the defeat of Saddam’s army.

    The Civil War was a huge waste of time and money and life. Mr. Lincoln gets the credit for it.

    Like


  140. Idiocy poured fourth:

    Reagan has become a slogan for people who don’t like the capitalist system. For those people too young to remember Reagan, in economics, he tamed the stagflation of Jimmy Carter by:

    Gee, I wonder if the inflation had anything to do with high oil prices?

    It did end when oil prices when back down, but I suppose if you were an idiot, then you might think Regan did it.

    So Grandpa, are you an idiot?

    Like


  141. goddamn, there’s some idiocy there. The Regan experiment is over, it was a success, but hate filled lefties will never, ever admit it. The Reagan era has been replaced with the Pelosi-Obama-Reid bailout nation economic vision.

    Like


  142. on October 2, 2010 at 8:46 pm Junior Gorilla

    Reagan was a senile old fraud. Anyone lionizing him or acting nostalgic has already revealed his idiocy and moronic lack of grasp of reality. I’d say the same viz. Clinton.

    Like


  143. on October 2, 2010 at 9:01 pm Gunslingergregi

    We are in line for everyone in us to be married over an 18 year period.

    But

    1 in 5 marriages is to a foreigner.

    Wondering if that number is a change from past?

    Also wondering how many people might just be suckers for punishnent and if that might fuck numbers up.

    Then again look around the states where are all the fucking people?
    aborted?

    Like


  144. Junior Gorilla

    Reagan was a senile old fraud. Anyone lionizing him or acting nostalgic has already revealed his idiocy and moronic lack of grasp of reality.

    I see a lot of assertions, but no substance.

    FAIL

    Like


  145. Again? Lefty fags wanna get laid so they come here but question their faggy ideology and you’ll be sorry.

    Reagan wasn’t perfect, but he did a lot of good. Better than anyone in the 20 years before and 20 years after him. Any leftist that says different can go to Cali and suck Villagraosia’s tiny cock.

    Like


  146. 248,709,873 1990 census

    281,421,906 2000 census

    32,712,033

    10 years.

    ””’4/7/2009 · (AP) Hispanics made up nearly half of the more than 1 million people who became U.S. citizens last year, according to … Department data on the number of new citizens last …”””’

    22712033

    2,271,203 per year

    1991 4,111,000 16.2
    1992 4,084,000 16.0
    1993 4,039,000 15.7
    1994 3,979,000 15.3
    1995 3,892,000 14.8
    1996 3,899,000 14.7
    1997 3,882,000 14.5
    1998 3,941,553 14.6
    1999 3,959,417 14.5
    2000 4,058,814 14.7

    Read more: Live Births and Birth Rates, by Year — Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005067.html#ixzz11FssO7ag

    Something ain’t adding up.

    Like


  147. No one cares if you are getting married.

    Are you having kids/getting knocked up? No? Do what you want. You register near 0 on society’s scale.

    Not married but having kids? You are the net-negative. Thanks.

    Like


  148. “Those of us without the shackles of a higher calling or ethical compunction extract the last ounce of advantage from this transcendental individualism, while the organism as a whole slowly unravels sinew by sinew.)”

    This could be a quote from the kids who jump the turnstiles at the subway, if someone took the time to portray their mindless animal behavior as something more meaningful than it is.

    Like


  149. on October 2, 2010 at 11:42 pm Gunslingergregi

    2,423,712 deaths per year.

    Ok so it does add up

    Like


  150. on October 3, 2010 at 12:24 am So_What_Do_You_Value?

    “Harmonica” said:

    Reagan wasn’t perfect, but he did a lot of good. Better than anyone in the 20 years before and 20 years after him. Any leftist that says different can go to Cali and suck Villagraosia’s tiny cock.

    So what did he do?

    Well…

    he started the prison population on it’s vertical climb upward.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/US_incarceration_timeline-clean.svg

    He also created a horrible recession with very high interest rates!

    And let’s not forget that he created a soaring deficit and national debt!

    Oh wait….. I’m sorry, you Republican jackasses like shrieking about RESPONSIBILITY. Well your Regan sure could spend! He loved spending and you loved him!

    But let’s not forget, while he was jailing people Reganites don’t like, he was also KICKING OUT ON THE STREET TO DIE the mentally ill!

    Cause he needed to channel ALL MONEY from the Federal Government into his military campaign donors!

    http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-06-09/business/17430568_1_deficits-billion-defense-spending

    He GUTTED social services. For example:

    When homelessness first became a national issue, however, the Reagan administration all but turned a blind eye to the problem. Federal expenditures for low-cost housing plunged during Reagan’s watch from $32 billion in 1981 to just $7 billion in 1987.

    So yeah, you are swell guys. If you like free-spending thugs who expect their, and other peoples, children to pick up the tab for their handing money to the military industrial complex and jailing people they don’t like!

    Vermin.

    All of this took a few seconds on Google.

    Like


  151. on October 3, 2010 at 12:30 am Lets_Do_Facts

    So Regan worshippers, how does Regan’s “financial responsibility”, that is cutting federal money to poor people, jive with his massively increasing the federal deficit?

    I know, I know, you all jabber about free-spending Jimmy Carter, but his deficit was far lower than Regan’s deficits.

    And let’s not forget Regan’s massive ramping up of the prison population.

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/US_incarceration_timeline-clean.svg

    Of course, he did cut taxes…. by ballooning the national debt!

    And wasted huge amounts of money on the military industrial complex to.

    But, and here is the key, he WENT AFTER people you didn’t like. He WENT AFTER them like a rabid animal! And he gave you a big tax cut lolly-pop while he jailed the people you didn’t like and cut all their benefits!

    Sure, sure, he ran a massive military graft, but he funded that with debt that you expect your children to pay off, not you!

    So all is good for you there to!

    You are swell guys.

    Like


  152. on October 3, 2010 at 12:32 am Gunslingergregi

    ””””This could be a quote from the kids who jump the turnstiles at the subway, if someone took the time to portray their mindless animal behavior as something more meaningful than it is.

    ””””

    Your shit is just that shit.

    It might have meant something if men were not legislated to be societies bitch only with no reward in sight.

    Where is the reward for getting married and having kids as a man?

    Why do you think they are jumping the turnstiles they don’t care about having that future.

    All stick just makes for a beaten man.

    Like


  153. on October 3, 2010 at 12:40 am Lets_Do_Facts

    Grampa said:

    He made the income tax system much more rational, which had a dramatic impact on this country’s economics. When you are paying a marginal income tax rate of 70%, which wasn’t hard to do then, the rates were so steep, rational investments like dividend paying stocks or a business that makes real money just don’t make sense. Everybody, before Reagan, was looking for tax free returns and tax deductions.

    Everybody?

    EVERYBODY was in the income bracket that had a 70% marginal tax rate?

    Oh! EVERYBODY YOU KNOW was there! That is rich people! And, it turns out, it turns out, that a rich person feels Regan was good for rich people!

    Why yes, skip, yes he was!

    Regan was WONDERFUL for rich people!

    The other NINETY PERCENT of the population?

    Not so much.

    But really, who cares about the sub-human trash that are nine out of ten people in America? Are they the elect? Has their goodness been shown by having a big pile of money?

    I think not.

    Like


  154. Lets_Do_Facts, fuck off!

    Where you think internet came from. Yeah, the dreaded military-industrial complex.

    Like


  155. on October 3, 2010 at 12:56 am Lets_Do_Facts

    Where you think internet came from. Yeah, the dreaded military-industrial complex.

    I think that once you have telephone lines and transistors, “the internet” is inevitable.

    Oh yeah, and the people who actually invented it are most responsible!

    But as a state-worshiping thug, Morsellaux no doubt believes that “the Individual” is incapable of doing anything without The State guiding him!

    Also, the government could never just fund, you know, research!

    It has to fund research by spending 50% on graft, 45% on weapons, and 5% on research!

    This is the most efficient way! Yes!

    I’m sorry, are you used to respect for you insane raving?

    Like


  156. But as a state-worshiping thug

    You are trying to be funny! Or maybe it is just a projection.

    Any country without military is a snack for other, sooner or later. But any state without large bureaucracy and myriad of entitlement programs can survive pretty well, in fact it would thrive.

    As simple as that.

    Insane ravings, again, projection. Go back to huffpuff, koskids, or whence you came from.

    Like


  157. on October 3, 2010 at 2:00 am Lets_Do_Facts

    Trying to be funny, thug?

    I’m stating the truth, giggles-boy.

    Any country without military is a snack for other, sooner or later. But any state without large bureaucracy and myriad of entitlement programs can survive pretty well, in fact it would thrive.

    As simple as that.

    How many times do we need to be able to trigger nuclear winter and destroy all life on this world in order to finally be safe?

    3 times as many nukes as will destroy all life on earth?

    4 times?

    10 times?

    Please tell me Morsellaux! Cause you are clearly a reasonable person and I expect a reasonable answer from you!

    A major fight with the Russians was never in the cards. The United States needed a relatively small military to deal with small countries that are actually threatening us(for example, not Iraq). We did not need the rows upon rows of main-line battle tanks which have no use at all against comparably low-tech opponents.

    As simple as that.

    (Of course, most of the money was wasted on graft, but I expect Morsy to be a will-full moron on that as well)

    Like


  158. on October 3, 2010 at 2:06 am Lets_Do_Facts

    Oh yeah, and Morsellaux is a gutless little punk who refuses to answer most of my points as well.

    That’s cause he is a coward and a sneak and proud of it.

    Repeating, how is Regan “financially responsible” since he massively increased the budget?

    How is “limited government” the “police state”?

    Is a huge bureaucracy with the power to jail you for life somehow less enslaving than a huge bureaucracy that gives people money?

    How exactly did Regan, “double the prison population” boy “shrink government”?

    Like


  159. on October 3, 2010 at 2:07 am Lets_Do_Facts

    Meant:
    Repeating, how is Regan “financially responsible” since he massively increased the budget deficit?

    Again, this a a really fascinating question that I would like an answer to.

    Like


  160. First, let’s deal with this inanity:
    And let’s not forget Regan’s massive ramping up of the prison population.

    How did he pull it of, pray tell?

    Seems that the DOJ disagreed with the idea of criminals roaming freely. Yes, there are costs of incarceration, but there are also costs of doing nothing and they are usually higher. One may question the wisdom of locking up people for marihuana possession in amounts that indicate personal use, but that’s another issue.

    Now, back to military.

    Nukes — you provide very little historical context. But let me add one elucidating tidbit. While USSR was making them on a conveyor belt, it established and funded a plethora of anti-nuke western orgs. Why do you think that was?

    And don’t tell me that is not true. My father was a quite high ranking officer of Czechoslovak military counterintel and provided me with an access to materials that clearly indicated the form and scope of implementation of this policy/program. Yea, he was not supposed to do that, but he wanted us youngsters to understand what is behind Potemkinian facades.

    What changed after the dissolution of USSR? Nothing much. Actually, quite a bit. The nuclear club gained new members. Not because they felt threatened by US. Because they wanted an upper hand over their neighbors (like India and Pakistan). US did not nuke anyone, FYI, since 1945, but maintained a credible deterrent.

    And it looks once the Norks figure out why their test nukes fizzle, they are in, beside Iran getting closer too.

    So the question is… What would probably work better to prevent a global termonuclear war? Having large enough arsenal and a policy attached to it “if you get any ideas about using your nukes, we’d turn you into a gloving parking lot”? Or by canceling the whole program hoping that others will get on with the program too?

    If you say the second, I have a bridge to sell you.

    As for graft, yea, what else is new? But the problem is that if the people involved in graft were locked in prison, that would certainly increase the prison population by quite a bit, which seems to be your pet peeve. So, what you’d do? Shoot them?

    Like


  161. Reagan massively increasing budget deficit.. In comparison with Bush and even moreso with Obama which breaks all the records many times over all of the previous evil doers combined, it was a chump change. Period.

    Like


  162. Oh yeah, and Morsellaux is a gutless little punk who refuses to answer most of my points as well.

    You don’t want to be civil, nothing to discuss anymore with you.

    I have better things to do than addressing your “talking points”, which are totally of topic in any case.

    Like


  163. @RC,

    Nice ass-covering in the final paragraph.

    Getting married isn’t necessarily beta.

    It’s how you do it and how you behave that makes it beta. I know. I did it.

    I see married guys that are anything but beta.

    They easily get what they want if they want it.

    The question is wanting it.

    Like


  164. […] David Alexander on Oct.03, 2010, under Mental Clutter, Women It seems that Novaseeker is one of the few people that has slowly realized some of what I’ve routinely discussed in […]

    Like


  165. on October 3, 2010 at 4:20 am Lets_Do_Facts

    You don’t want to be civil, nothing to discuss anymore with you.

    Conservatives are never polite or decent. And neither are you.

    Morsellaux thugged it up:

    Insane ravings, again, projection. Go back to huffpuff, koskids, or whence you came from.

    A thug. But also a crybaby. “Waa! Waa!” goes Morsellaux, “the bad man mocked my claims of moral superiority! He should be civil!”

    Mockery is so much more fun

    Reagan massively increasing budget deficit.. In comparison with Bush and even moreso with Obama which breaks all the records many times over all of the previous evil doers combined, it was a chump change. Period.

    Regan ran deficits higher than had ever been run before. More than doubled the deficit in fact. Look, you are a conservative, right? So you know about “Gateway Drugs”, right? Like Ritalin. A kid will start out doing a soft drug like Ritalin, and then move unto the harder stuff. So Regan was like, you know, a “Gateway Drug”.

    Morsellaux said:

    Seems that the DOJ disagreed with the idea of criminals roaming freely. Yes, there are costs of incarceration, but there are also costs of doing nothing and they are usually higher. One may question the wisdom of locking up people for marihuana possession in amounts that indicate personal use, but that’s another issue.

    Funny, cause those marijuana users are in jail, so I “guess” they add to the prison population!

    In fact, drug crime combined with increased sentences for trivial crimes are almost the entire reason why the prison population increased!

    But Morsellaux is telling us that in the “bad old days” of 1978 they let mass-murders roam free!

    It’s funny how conservatives like to hallucinate that mass-rapists roamed the streets taking the virginity of innocent school girls under the reign of Evil King Carter until Regan the Good came and CHANGED IT ALL.

    Notice the word CHANGE. Cause in these NEW TIMES the CONservatives were forced to shake off the shackles of Tradition and BOLDLY CHANGE THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL SYSTEM! Indeed, even what constituted a crime had to be changed!

    Cause doing dope is the same as rape!
    Shop lifting is the same as murder!

    (2005) State prisons held a total of 1,296,700 inmates on all charges at yearend 2005. In absolute numbers an estimated 687,700 inmates in State prison at yearend 2005 (the latest year for which offense data is available) were held for violent offenses: 166,700 for murder, 177,900 for robbery, 129,200 for assault, and 164,600 for rape and other sexual assaults. In addition, 248,900 inmates were held for property offenses, 253,300 for drug offenses, and 98,700 for public-order offenses.

    Half of the prison population is in jail for completely non-violent crimes! And almost half the remainder for crimes of questionable violence level, robbery and assault. Remember, kiddies, to Officer Morsellaux, punching someone is assault and makes someone a “violent offender” who SHOULD BE in jail!

    Non-violent offenders constitute most people in jail.

    Only about 1/4 of people in jail are in jail for murder or sexual assault. One quarter. And how many of the sexual assaults are “Morning Regret” “rapes”?

    So it really doesn’t matter if I think rapists should be shot at dawn. In the real world, the prison system didn’t swell into the bloated *bleep* that it is because of jailing murders or rapists. As is fairly obvious to any honest person actually looking at the question.

    As for graft, yea, what else is new? But the problem is that if the people involved in graft were locked in prison, that would certainly increase the prison population by quite a bit, which seems to be your pet peeve. So, what you’d do? Shoot them?

    I think I can quite honestly say Morsellaux would rather die than see one poor innocent hard-working graft trough feeding porker go to jail. After all, he only stole millions of dollars! So really, we don’t have to worry about them being punished, do we?

    Now, a black man who steals a wallet with two hundred dollars in it?

    Jail for life. Maybe the firing squad.

    Like


  166. Insane ravings

    Go and do a search and see where “Insane ravings” appears first. I just quoted it, though for your comprehension and to refresh your memory, I should have put it in quote marks.

    You:
    1. Ad hominem.
    2. Putting words you say in mouths of others.
    3. More ad hominem.
    4. Cherry picking and decontextualization.

    Why I should discuss anything with you? You aren’t interested in reaching any kind of truth, you already have formed your conclusions beforehand, or rather you repeat talking points that have been already made for your convenience. Thus, this is not a discussion, but essentially propagandizing.

    No más.

    Like


  167. […] Chateau – “Another Cougar Bites the Dust“, “Gaming Asian Girls“, “Five Minutes of Alpha“, “Attention Whore Hyperactivity Disorder“, “Marriage Down, Dystopia Up” […]

    Like


  168. on October 3, 2010 at 6:47 am Rupert Brandon Klemens

    Seeing how so much has changed, what I’d like to know from you guys is if you were 21 again, what would you do differently?”

    Well I am 33 and staring down the road of middle age and decided at oh around 21 never to get married and have children and it was the best decision I ever made!

    1.) Listen to Tom Leykis archives! He will spell out what the problems in marriage are!

    2.) No need to get married if one is just going to get divorced.

    3.) No need to have children, there are already 6 billion beings on this planet, no need to add anymore.

    Like


  169. Re: :Lets Do the Facts.

    Mr. Reagan tax policies were income neutral. Look it up.

    He increased the military budget, and in so doing destroyed the USSR, which went bankrupt trying to keep up with the USA.

    His deficits are dwarfed by Mr. Obama’s (whom I am not criticizing). Mr. Reagan destroyed the USSR without firing a shot. What did Mr. Obama get with his deficits?

    All the smart people, eg. New York Times, during Carter’s day, the President prior to Reagan, were saying that the USSR was here to stay, it was ascendent, and the USA was declining.

    People who lived through the Reagan years have a much higher opinion of him than people who only know about him from their history books and newspapers. Like Eisenhower, another very successful President who also gets a pretty bad writeup from the Liberal media and academics (How could an ex-military man, all of whom are jerks, make a good President?!), I think Reagan was just smarter than they were.

    Like


  170. ugh, still trying to bag on reagan? Look, all these hate-filled lefties have is their hate. It keeps them warm at night. Libs argue by projection, ignorance of counterargument, and arguing against their own stereotypes.
    Morsel, good luck dealing with vituperative, ignorant sluts.

    Like


  171. Re: AskJoe

    I am afraid you are quite correct about the Left’s tendency to project. It is scary when you see what they think “we” are thinking.

    Just some history for the youngin’s. Drug Resistant Tuberculosis. Who is to blame for that?

    In the early 1970’s, they began to release crazy people from hospitals in NYC. This was not due to Ronald Reagan. The progressives thought that with the new anti-psychotic drugs available, which by the way were remarkably effective in calming these people down, these people could live in supervised housing or on their own. They were not stupid, just crazy, and the drugs controlled their crazy symptoms. As you might expect, the stupid rightwingers were against this massive release of psychotics.

    So, a very large number of these people became homeless and malnourished. They got TB. Everybody knew that the way to get Drug Resistant TB was to partially treat a case of TB, that is, not take the drugs consistently and not finish your course of therapy. NYC in the 1970’s was run by the liberals (Wasn’t John Lindsay grooming himself for a run for the Presidency while the city went to hell?). They decided they could just give these homeless crazies a month supply of medicine and told them to come back after they had taken their medicine.

    Anyway, drug resistant TB exploded out of NYC, especially since it found an easy host in all those AIDS patients. AIDS was present in NYC in the 1970’s, despite the lies you hear about it not being around until the 1980’s. Unless you know another reason why Puerto Rican men in NYC had pneumocystis pneumonia in 1976. Again, you have to blame Reagan for AIDS. Why blame the actual “culprits”, aka victims.

    Anywho, next time some leftwing type seeks to blame whatever on the rightwing types, he/she should first learn some history.

    Like


  172. Well, we’re dissecting them, I just came across this discussion, where a typical self-congratulating lib reporter illustrates typical ignorance of counterargument (which really is just the manifestation of them arguing against their prejudices: “people who disagree with me are stupid and therefore they have no arguments worth considering”)
    http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/107245/
    Where a NYT’s reporter apparently never heard of Hayek and dismissed him as old and dusty.

    Like


  173. askjoe, the funniest thing is their sublimated racism and bigotry, as documented by: “Now, a black man who steals a wallet with two hundred dollars in it?”

    Not a poor man, or a hapless schmuck that does not know any better. He picks a black, because all he “knows” is that “black men steal”.

    Like


  174. on October 3, 2010 at 2:41 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    4. Cherry picking and decontextualization.

    My, my, I CHERRY PICKED the prison population of every state in the United States!

    A sample size of 1.3 million people proves nothing! It must be properly CONTEXTUALIZED first!

    Just like stuffing Ritalin down a normal, healthy child’s throat!

    In the CONTEXT of MAKING THE WORTHLESS CHILD ANIMAL DO WHAT CONSERVATIVES WANT Ritalin hardly counts as a drug! Cause Conservatives want to use it to PUNISH AND DISCIPLINE! Not for fun!

    Oh…. I see, you mean now! I can only ascribe to you the motives you choose to admit to!

    Anything else is hardly civil!

    Mr. Reagan tax policies were income neutral. Look it up.

    He increased the military budget, and in so doing destroyed the USSR, which went bankrupt trying to keep up with the USA.

    His deficits are dwarfed by Mr. Obama’s (whom I am not criticizing). Mr. Reagan destroyed the USSR without firing a shot. What did Mr. Obama get with his deficits?

    All the smart people, eg. New York Times, during Carter’s day, the President prior to Reagan, were saying that the USSR was here to stay, it was ascendent, and the USA was declining.

    People who lived through the Reagan years have a much higher opinion of him than people who only know about him from their history books and newspapers. Like Eisenhower, another very successful President who also gets a pretty bad writeup from the Liberal media and academics (How could an ex-military man, all of whom are jerks, make a good President?!), I think Reagan was just smarter than they were.

    Another thing you can Regan have in common is your acquisitive natures. You take credit for everything that happened near you that is good. Whether you have anything to do with it or not.

    USSR finally topples after almost a hundred years of Communism? Well, surely Regan did it all!

    Oil prices go down, and inflation stops?

    Regan did it all!

    Equally, you and Regan both don’t “take yourselves seriously” when you are being greedy scum. That has to be handled lightly, if at all. Anything else is hardly civil!

    For example, FACTUALLY… and really without any exaggeration, Regan started the stock bubble, and bailed his bubble out in 1987!

    Him and his fully supported Greenspan TRIPLED the stock market between 1980 and 1987! But of course, just like deficits, just cause he was there at the beginning, and ramped it up a huge amount doesn’t make him responsible! Because other people like Bush and Obama didn’t fix the problems he started!

    Where is their responsibility?

    Of course, anything bad… no Conservative gonna take credit for that! RESPONSIBILITY is for other people!

    Regan NO DO! BAD OTHER MEN DO!

    Like


  175. on October 3, 2010 at 2:48 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    In the early 1970′s, they began to release crazy people from hospitals in NYC. This was not due to Ronald Reagan. The progressives thought that with the new anti-psychotic drugs available, which by the way were remarkably effective in calming these people down, these people could live in supervised housing or on their own. They were not stupid, just crazy, and the drugs controlled their crazy symptoms. As you might expect, the stupid rightwingers were against this massive release of psychotics.

    So, a very large number of these people became homeless and malnourished. They got TB. Everybody knew that the way to get Drug Resistant TB was to partially treat a case of TB, that is, not take the drugs consistently and not finish your course of therapy. NYC in the 1970′s was run by the liberals (Wasn’t John Lindsay grooming himself for a run for the Presidency while the city went to hell?). They decided they could just give these homeless crazies a month supply of medicine and told them to come back after they had taken their medicine.

    So shamefully incompetent sterilization procedures in hospitals weren’t at fault?

    *BLEEP* INDUSTRIAL Big-Corp farmers feeding antibiotics in small amounts to ALL their animals kept in horrible conditions wasn’t responsible?

    It turns out, It turns out, that Gramps the rich person blames poor people!

    I stand AMAZED at such a claim! Imagine that! A rich person blaming poor people for all the countries problems!

    I have never seen such a thing before, and will no doubt never see it again!

    Like


  176. These hate-filled lefties, they never let it go. You’re wrong, you lost, your ideas are bad.
    Reagan, awesome president.
    Alger Hiss was a spy
    FDR created the Great Depression (just like Obama’s policies are eerily recreating the same thing, as he ostensibly modeled his econ policy after the same)
    gun control stemmed from a desire to disarm blacks
    planned parenthood was created for eugenics.
    BTW, the Reagan era…if it was so bad, why are we still the best country in the world, and countries who followed more, ah, lefty policies, giving up on them after 30 years of flat growth and stagnation?

    Like


  177. on October 3, 2010 at 3:15 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    FDR created the Great Depression (just like Obama’s policies are eerily recreating the same thing, as he ostensibly modeled his econ policy after the same)

    Black Monday:October 28, 1929
    FDR Inaugurated President:March 4, 1933

    Oh yeah. I’m sure I need a lot of CONTEXT for that one to make sense. Please spare me your CONTEXT CONservative.

    Like


  178. on October 3, 2010 at 3:16 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Did you know that CONservative positions only make sense with proper CONtext?

    Like


  179. Just like stuffing Ritalin down a normal, healthy child’s throat!

    In the CONTEXT of MAKING THE WORTHLESS CHILD ANIMAL DO WHAT CONSERVATIVES WANT Ritalin hardly counts as a drug! Cause Conservatives want to use it to PUNISH AND DISCIPLINE! Not for fun!

    No. Conservatives take their bouncy boys out of school system and homeschool them because of feminazi influence on paradigm what is supposed to represent a “normal” boys behavior and from that resulting a state sponsored drug abuse.

    You again ascribe leftist modus operandi to conservatives. Seems that you have your fact manufactured by your marxist professor, rather than based on any real data.

    Like


  180. goofball, just like your inability to understand the relationship between inflation and oil prices, you fail to understand other economic ideas: Recessions are cyclic; Depressions are policy driven. The stock market crash of 29 wasn’t the depression, it was the economic policies that came after it, i.e., the 15 years of it. That’s why people are talking about head and shoulders and double dips now.
    u need a nap and a sippy cup.

    Like


  181. Black Monday:October 28, 1929
    FDR Inaugurated President:March 4, 1933

    Your marxist professor “forgotten” to mention that by FDR’s inauguration, the economy was on its way to recovery. After FDR introduced his New Deal (in fact, rather a “raw deal”) of a bundle of socialist policies, the economy nosedived again.

    Like


  182. on October 3, 2010 at 4:09 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    No. Conservatives take their bouncy boys out of school system and homeschool them because of feminazi influence on paradigm what is supposed to represent a “normal” boys behavior and from that resulting a state sponsored drug abuse.

    What percentage of CONservatives home school?

    Less than five percent, I’m sure.

    OH WAIT! You are talking about Rich People putting their children in Private Schools!

    Yes, rich people are to good for Public Education.

    We have yet another point of agreement!

    You again ascribe leftist modus operandi to conservatives. Seems that you have your fact manufactured by your marxist professor, rather than based on any real data.

    Why wouldn’t I?

    Tell me, why did the United States hand all of Eastern Europe to the Russians at the end of World War II?

    Like


  183. on October 3, 2010 at 4:13 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Your marxist professor “forgotten” to mention that by FDR’s inauguration, the economy was on its way to recovery. After FDR introduced his New Deal (in fact, rather a “raw deal”) of a bundle of socialist policies, the economy nosedived again.

    Well, if you say it, then I gotta believe it! No need for facts or any Communist *bleep* like that!

    I haven’t heard one actual fact out of you party-point spewing retards yet.

    Like


  184. re: Let’s Don’t Bother with Facts

    The reason the United States handed Eastern Europe to Russia was the Russian army occupied all of Eastern Europe at the end of the war. They did that by losing millions of men fighting the Germans. You might as well ask why Russia handed Western Europe to the USA at the end of the war.

    Fact is, the war was fought supposedly over the territorial integrity of Poland. That minor issue got forgotten about by the time the war was over. You will have to ask FDR’s supporters why they got us into a war fought over the territorial integrity of Poland.

    Like


  185. goofball, just like your inability to understand the relationship between inflation and oil prices, you fail to understand other economic ideas: Recessions are cyclic; Depressions are policy driven. The stock market crash of 29 wasn’t the depression, it was the economic policies that came after it, i.e., the 15 years of it. That’s why people are talking about head and shoulders and double dips now.
    u need a nap and a sippy cup.

    Like


  186. What percentage of CONservatives home school?

    Less than five percent, I’m sure.

    About that. The main reason is that not everyone has that capacity. Also, many households would not be able to pay their bills if one spouse stayed home.

    However, homeschooling amongst liberals amounts to near big fat zero.

    OH WAIT! You are talking about Rich People putting their children in Private Schools!

    That is a liberal kind of hypocrisy. According to their neo-marxist commandment: “Do as I say, not as I do”.

    Show me one of the liberal elites that does not do that.

    Search for net worth of Dems in senate and congress, to see who the rich people are. They love socialism as it is the best way to control people, in their opinion. They just dispense their due platitudes to proles and all’s peachy. Vive la nomenclatura!

    Like


  187. Another aspect impending homeschooling are truancy regulations in some states, designed to make is as difficult as possible (e.g. nearly impossible).

    There is a bunch of people working on providing homeschooling resources and the ways to comply with regulations. I am certain that homeschooling will increase in coming years, because of it.

    Like


  188. The dude illustrates that he’s just a hate-filled lefty who can’t let go of typical left-wing hate and he has NO clue about any counter arguments. I think the only way one can hold his positions is a lack of exposure to the rest of the world. Yeah, that’s right, everything is bad here, the rest of the world is teh best, blah blah blah.
    Projection, troll accuses someone of using talking points while he is incapable of anything more than a bumpersticker level of understanding.
    similarly, he seems to be arguing against his own stereotypes where he’s bashing home schooling.
    The troll is getting a little heated now, being poked so hard.

    Like


  189. Lets_Do_Facts:

    “””So shamefully incompetent sterilization procedures in hospitals weren’t at fault?

    *BLEEP* INDUSTRIAL Big-Corp farmers feeding antibiotics in small amounts to ALL their animals kept in horrible conditions wasn’t responsible?”””

    Indeed, neither are responsible for drug resistance development. You need to brush up your molecular Biology (or STFU, whatever you prefer).

    Inadequate sterilization procedures can and often are responsible for the spread of germs in compromised patients, but had zippity all to do with drug resistance development. Sterilization is not done with antibiotics, you know, but with either heat (for instruments and tools) or chemical methods (or radiation, funnily enough). The chemicals are, surprisingly, aggressively destructive compounds and not “silver bullet” antibiotics.

    Food animals are fed different classes of antibiotics than any used in humans. You may argue that it’s silly to exclude whole classes of compounds that could be useful in humans from the human antibiotic arsenal, but it is what it is. Moreover, you can’t develop resistance to TB drugs in human mycobacteria with a completely different kind of antibiotic made for, say, gram positive staphylococcus; even if it’s in humans, not even farm animals.

    As far as the development of drug-resistant TB, while possible that it developed in the 70s somewhere in the US, at this point it is merely academic or anecdotal. By far the largest brewing pot for resistant anything these days is Asia.

    Like


  190. on October 3, 2010 at 7:59 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Projection, troll accuses someone of using talking points while he is incapable of anything more than a bumpersticker level of understanding.
    similarly, he seems to be arguing against his own stereotypes where he’s bashing home schooling.

    I’m taking your talking-point mantra-chanting facts-free idiocy with the seriousness it deserves!

    Another loudmouth declared… without any facts or even theories:

    goofball, just like your inability to understand the relationship between inflation and oil prices

    Even CONservative mouthpieces agree the primary reason for high oil prices in the early 1980s was the Iran-Iraq war and Saudi Arabia massively cutting oil production.

    Then, Saudi Arabia massively increased production and prices went down!

    WHO WOULD HAVE GUESSED?

    Apparently not CONservatives. Their acquisitive natures force then to take credit for everything positive.

    I mean, supply effects prices? Sound like some sort of Communist Studies nonsense to me.

    Gramps hemmed:

    The reason the United States handed Eastern Europe to Russia was the Russian army occupied all of Eastern Europe at the end of the war. They did that by losing millions of men fighting the Germans. You might as well ask why Russia handed Western Europe to the USA at the end of the war.

    Actually, Russia tried to conquer Poland before that, and got their *bleeps* handed to them. They then made a deal with the Nazis. Later the Nazis attacked them and kicked their *bleeps*. Fortunately, the Americans bailed the Russians out.

    And then the Americans handed Russia millions of slaves to abuse however they wanted.

    Does that make you proud Gramps?

    Like


  191. @Facts

    That and FDR was a lover of the Soviet plan, even though he was more a fascist than a communist.

    Like


  192. Even CONservative mouthpieces agree the primary reason for high oil prices in the early 1980s was the Iran-Iraq war and Saudi Arabia massively cutting oil production.

    Pure fiction. The oil prices peaked in 1979, a while before Iraq-Iran war, and since then they were on a downward trend with one peak 1991 and then started to rise again in 1999, when “peak oil” stories started to appear in periodicals. The decline of prices in 80’s was only partially due to Soddy increase in production (the cutting went on during 70’s)–they did not exactly knocked themselves out, just enough to keep their cash flow leveled–but by increase of supply from Mexico, Canada, Venezuela and as Europe was concerned from Nigeria, and Norway.

    US consumption of ME oil for the last decade was between 18% to 16%. Europe is more dependent on ME oil, but the biggest consumers of ME oil are Japan, China and India.

    Like


  193. Off hand, I thought it was OPEC deciding to embargo the oil. On the other hand, Carter’s inflation was a result of monetary policy. In addition, the govt imposed rationing to prevent a rise in prices. Typically, inflation is a loss of the value of the currency, not a rise in scarcity of one good. So, whatever it was that led to the end of the embargo was good, but also the economic leadership that ended inflation was better too.
    But whatev’s, the troll proved my point, he needs a nap because he’s being very irritable now.

    Like


  194. askjoe, interest rates were stratospheric in early 80’s. It was a bitter medicine, but it rolled back the inflation.

    As for ending embargo by OPEC, the official story is that it was the Israel-Egypt peace agreement (the embargo started as a result of the Yom Kippur war in 1973). But in reality, Soddys realized that if they keep on with sitting on the well, they would miss out on the cashola as other non-OPEC nations started plugging in their supplies into the global economy.

    Like


  195. on October 4, 2010 at 12:07 am Lets_Do_Facts

    Glad to see your finally trotting out some non-facts.

    Pure fiction. The oil prices peaked in 1979, a while before Iraq-Iran war, and since then they were on a downward trend with one peak 1991 and then started to rise again in 1999, when “peak oil” stories started to appear in periodicals. The decline of prices in 80′s was only partially due to Soddy increase in production (the cutting went on during 70′s)–they did not exactly knocked themselves out, just enough to keep their cash flow leveled–but by increase of supply from Mexico, Canada, Venezuela and as Europe was concerned from Nigeria, and Norway.

    Unfortunately, I am a bad man, a bad man with access to Google. So your horse-ass certainty and willingness to wildly lie will serve the CONservative less well than in the past.

    The “spike” skip is referring to was December 1979. I’m not sure which country, Iran or Iraq, was assassinating whose minister at the time, but full-blown hostilities started September 1980. So by “awhile” he means “less than a year”. And “at the time of the spike, everyone thought the war was either likely or inevitable”. This of course, would have no effect on oil prices. The Iranian Revolution also seems to have had a major effect in getting the ball rolling. That also has nothing to do with Regan.

    Just listen to this expert lay that my wild lies to rest:

    In 1979 and 1980, events in Iran and Iraq led to another round of crude oil price increases. The Iranian revolution resulted in the loss of 2 to 2.5 million barrels per day of oil production between November 1978 and June 1979. At one point production almost halted.

    The Iranian revolution was the proximate cause of what would become the highest price in post-WWII history. However, its impact on prices would have been limited and of relatively short duration had it not been for subsequent events. Shortly after the revolution, production was up to 4 million barrels per day.

    In September 1980, Iran already weakened by the revolution was invaded by Iraq. By November, the combined production of both countries was only a million barrels per day and 6.5 million barrels per day less than a year before. Consequently worldwide crude oil production was 10 percent lower than in 1979.

    The combination of the Iranian revolution and the Iraq-Iran War cause crude oil prices to more than double increasing from $14 in 1978 to $35 per barrel in 1981.

    Well, it seems like the CONservative is just plain outright CONing. But he does have an authoritative tone that I’m sure entrances the women, so there is that.

    And here is Saudi Oil Production:
    http://www.eia.doe.gov/aer/txt/ptb1105.html

    One can OBSERVE… if one is not a liar like a CONservative, that the Saudi’s had, by 1985 cut their oil production from a peak of 9.9 million barrels per day down to 3.39 million barrels a day. That is they cut production by 2/3. In 1985 they cracked, and increased to 4.87 million per day in 1986. That is, a 50% increase in one year.

    However, it does appear that the savage drop in Iranian oil production was the “prime mover” for the really large price spike in 1980. And the Iranian Revolution would be primarily responsible for that. So I didn’t quite, you know, tell the whole story.

    Still don’t see Regan or the dancing monkey CONservatives anywhere. What I see is supply driven price. It’s pretty clear, unless you are a pathological liar.

    Like


  196. Reagan was a fake conservative who raised the budget deficit by a massive amount. The best President was Dwight Eisenhower. He was a real conservative and a very strong leader at the height of America’s power.

    Like


  197. Spot on. I do think this development is mainly male-based.

    Yet I suspect Alphas probably had little propensity for marriage anyway, at least since Casanova.

    It’s the betas like me who are not getting married anymore.

    And the deal gets worse due to, mainly, divorce theft.

    We betas don’t really care about fattening wives (we may simply go pay a whore) We don’t care much about screaming brats (they’re in bed when we come back) and cheating wives (we do not want to know, and moreover we’re equally unfaithful).

    I have another reason, though. What’s really common and psychologically quite more dreading, for betas in any LTR, is a woman who shit-tests you to death in spite of having no better marriage prospects. You can’t really run away from that except by leaving her altogether (you’re beta so by definition you don’t use game). Living together before marriage would enable you to spot women like this early, thus reducing both the marriage and divorce rate.

    Like


  198. Askjoe is on point. WTF is the deal w/ the CON label BS. As an effing history professor who has outlived most of you young fucks I agree – FDR entered the scene and catapulted the problem with the New Deal. Go to the library you bunch of ignorant hypocrites. His 1930 reforms plague the country today: capping acreage and agriculture, the management of UNIONS, une mployment insurance, SS and welfare, minimum wage, controlling utilities…GOV’T effing takeover, you bunch of job-killing, pot smoking libs. Stop puffing the reef and stay the hell off Wikipedia ’cause it isn’t an effing source for FACTUAL information! Not even going to waste time addressing the oil conspiracy theories. Reagan was a hero, as was Eisenhower. Go eat your coco puffs kids.

    For the record, sex with a wife far exceeds sex with a bunch of herpes covered sluts. I can personally attest to that. Living with a woman statistically increases the divorce rate so once again, your damn facts are little more than opinionated fluff.

    Like


  199. @Lets_Do_Facts

    I’m surprised you didn’t criticize the anti-male aspects of the GOP since its inception. Your discussion hasn’t touched on the religiosity, the way Republican males dressed up as women to protest Grover Cleveland’s having had a baby with a woman he wasn’t married to, the tacit support of the Women’s KKK, the opposition to the sexual revolution, etc.

    If you can discuss this plus explain why the Democratic Party is currently 100% beholden to the National Organization for Women…you’ll be doing OK here (unless some of the conservative guys here wake up and start discussing natural law vs mob rule).

    Just tone down the bile directed at regulars please. It takes away from your arguments.

    Remember that the Chateau is politically conservative as well.

    But getting back to the NOW control of the Democratic Party…a good reason why most of this blog’s readers would be voting Republican in November would be because of that.

    The GOP has gotten way too feminist-friendly on top of retaining a lot of its anti-sex ideology…but it still stands in opposition to the party that is completely controlled by the NOW.

    The Tea Party seems to have been coopted by feminists in the same way as the GOP and Dems (I don’t trust Sarah Palin to be pro-male), but they aren’t as 100% likely to agree with the NOW on any proposed law as Dems are.

    Christine O’Donnell might be a holy roller fruitcake….but her opponent Coons is 100% likely to vote for any law the NOW asks “him” to. Christine is likely to vote the way Jim Coburn tells her to (IMHO, it would be OK to see her lose to Coons all the same because that would tell the Tea Party Express to pick less religious people in the future).

    If Democrat male politicians started showing some spine against the NOW, I’d be willing to entertain a possible vote for one at least once in my life.

    Like


  200. Jerry,

    I wouldn’t hold your breath for that. I’m much more aligned politically with moderate-conservative democrat positions, but will never be a democrat because they are a structurally flawed party. They are a collection of minority interests that pursue agendas often in opposition to the desires or best interests of the nation as a whole. There are a lot of good democrat politicians, but because they are beholden to NOW, trial lawyers, hispanics, blacks, gay lobby, unions…they can’t be a consensus party representing the best interests of the majority. Many may want to, but they just can’t.

    Like


  201. @Lets_Do_Facts

    In gaming women and in being admired as an intellectual on blogs, its best to attack both American political parties.

    Its a big turn-off to women for a man to talk like he’s 100% behind one political party.

    He looks even worse if he gets emotional about and picks personal fights with those who disagree with him.

    This goes for the adherents of the right and the left.

    Overseas, I’ve seen liberal American guys get publicly shot down by women while trying to game women by criticizing US foreign policy. One Romanian woman actually stood up in the middle of being wooed by one young US liberal and said “George Bush (Senior) freed my country and we’re sitting in a square named after him…and you’re making the assumption that I will automatically admire the opposite opinion? Why?”

    Regarding WWII –

    1) The Soviet Union started the war by attacking Poland with Germany.

    2) The Soviet Union ended the war in complete possession of Poland.

    3) Although a practically minded Dewey Administration would have left that situation the way it was just like Truman did…it is true that there were full-scale communists working for FDR who were actually happy with East Europe’s subjugation by communism.

    You are aware how FDR’s VP (Wallace) was a communist who had to be removed at all costs before FDR’s death and replaced with Truman.

    The Democratic Party dodged a bullet there. If FDR had died earlier and Wallace had become president during WWII, the Dem leaders would have had to agree to immediately impeach him and remove him from office within days.

    Like


  202. Still don’t see Regan or the dancing monkey CONservatives anywhere. What I see is supply driven price. It’s pretty clear, unless you are a pathological liar.

    What is your point? Who said that prices are not driven by supply? Of course they are.

    I was playing it from memory. Should have checked, but sometimes there are other things to do.

    That being said, look at the last column of the production figures file you supplied. Saudi attempts for manipulation had somewhat marginal effect, as the wold total registered only a slight dip. Also, the production is one thing and other factors may be another. What the table does not show is the embargo in 1973 of OPEC countries to export to US, which hit the US economy rather hard (gas rationing at the embargo peak).

    You are also forgetting to index the prices for inflation. It makes the increase in prices less impressive than it is apparent especially in the period between 1977 -1981.

    If you look again at the last column figures of your table, it is apparent that though the supply-demand equation is the nominal factor, the dips and climbs in crude prices are suggesting that the other factors play a significant role. What those factors are is debatable. For the most part, perceptions about supply and demand influence the futures markets more than actual supply.

    The prices graph shows that the Saudi’s decrease in production did not impact the downward trend on prices in the early 80’s except the initial high as the world total could compensate for the discrepancy. By later 80’s Saudis wised up and adopted the perception model rather than the actual supply manipulation.

    I am sure that everyone is now bored to death.

    Reagan, ah yea, your dunce contention, that is where it started…

    Reagan, as every politician, had to deal with contingencies as they come. The inflation and resulting recession that were mainly caused by fiscal policies of Carter ‘s administration. It took nearly the whole first term to get things in check. As I stated, the oil prices increase impact was only marginal, if one indexes for inflation, the item purchased at $100 in 1977 would cost $150.20 in 1981. You’d have to wait till 1992 to repeat the same inflationary margin figure.

    Reagan emphasis on spending on military was driven by his belief that US can outspend USSR and bring it to an economic crash. However, there was no “massive” spending in that regard. Only a relatively mild increase as shown here: http://www.truthandpolitics.org/military-relative-size.php

    Though one may argue that the Eastern block was due to an economic crash at some point due to systemic problems, Reagan policy brought the crash at least 10-15 years earlier than it would have happened. I had a discussion about it with some Czech economists that could gauge the impact directly as it was transpiring and they were adamant that if Reagan had not pursued his policies of military outspending, the commies would have gotten a substantial lease before things got haywire. In the mid 80’s, the net gain of lording over the USSR satellites started to turn to net loss, but USSR was able to compensate that by sale of its gas supply to Western Europe. The perceived necessity of keeping up with the arms race was the thing that broke the camel’s back. Reagan was right.

    Like


  203. Let’s_Do_Facts,

    What’s your take on Martin Luther’s last book? It’s personally my favorite.

    Like


  204. The editor says: “However, married men with game probably do get all the sex they want form their wives. Unfortunately for them, they only get one wife on whom to run their stellar game.”

    There’s a word for guys who want decade after decade of casual unattached sex: homosexual.

    {Editor: There’s a word for guys who think this: women.]

    Like


  205. Jerry, I am not sure that being a waffle is so endearing. However, being a conservative does not translate to being a “party animal”. RINO’s chop my hide, frankly speaking. I am statism unfriendly (with exception of originally mandated areas like defense [and offense when necessary]).

    You’re right that using politics as a way to garner chick is an exercise in soft-headed thinking (with possible exception of ultra-lib chick that peck that off like hungry hens … but their patchouli marinade has been always a turn off for me beside their feminazi derangement…but boy, how they love the bad boy of the dark side, pupils dilated with a sheer excitement! And if you have a gun handy on a display, they wet themselves instantly.)

    Like


  206. There’s a word for guys who want decade after decade of casual unattached sex: homosexual.

    You do mean men with men, right?

    Like


  207. The economy is discouraging marriage? Maybe discouraging women from shacking up with unemployed men, but a roommate is the best living arrangement in tight times, and what is marriage if not institutionalized cohabitation? I call bullshit on that excuse.

    I agree.

    Reminds me of this:

    Like


  208. I find it hysterical that I’m the one with the potty mouth on here. I spent the better half of my morning reading articles that were…ahem…worse than my 100 word slam.

    Sidewinder said it best: “They are a collection of minority interests that pursue agendas often in opposition to the desires or best interests of the nation as a whole.”

    I’m a libertarian and don’t belong in this discussion anyway. Moving on to the marriage dilemma.

    I was married to a beauty of a woman for 15 years before she died. Casual unattached sex is nothing. You can get that anywhere, any day of the week. Even I have game at my age and can easily game a lady, as you kids call it, without any trouble. Women nowadays want to be pampered not loved. They want a man’s wallet not his heart.

    Love is a rarity and if you can find it secure it. That’s what makes a boy a man. Being able to love someone without regrets and not pushing some BS image out for the world to see. The image doesn’t last and then you’re left with slim pickings ’cause all the good ones are married. There’s nothing like having a loyal wife and kids. Sex in marriage is not a crutch and it gets better over time. It was better with her after 20 years than it is with perky 20-30 somethings who are emotionally immature, desperate and needy. You don’t need game with a wife.

    You boys have a lot to learn before you become men but I get it. You need to feel like men and gaming makes you feel good about yourself. Boosts your confidence and whatnot. I make seven digits a year and I’d give my last penny and everything I own to have my wife back. She was worth living for. Guns, bad boys, and sex with strangers nonsense is for little boys who don’t want to grow up. One day you will regret waking up in your fifties or sixties without any real and meaningful relationships.

    I can’t find anyone worth dating now. They are all culturized to the extent that they think in terms of controlling men with money. Probably because they can’t be themselves because of the gaming industry. I had a girl beg me to sleep with her last weekend. I turned her down because I couldn’t believe she wanted to shack up on the second date. Sex doesn’t mean anything to anyone-anymore. It’s free and it’s coerced.

    How do you suave Cassanovas find a decent girl with brains? One worth marrying?

    Like


  209. on October 4, 2010 at 4:36 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    I was playing it from memory. Should have checked, but sometimes there are other things to do.

    That being said, look at the last column of the production figures file you supplied. Saudi attempts for manipulation had somewhat marginal effect, as the wold total registered only a slight dip. Also, the production is one thing and other factors may be another. What the table does not show is the embargo in 1973 of OPEC countries to export to US, which hit the US economy rather hard (gas rationing at the embargo peak).

    You are also forgetting to index the prices for inflation. It makes the increase in prices less impressive than it is apparent especially in the period between 1977 -1981.

    Technically, you never knew the facts.

    You never cared about the facts.

    You never even thought about knowing the facts.

    Jerry makes a sound point that women don’t like a “confident alpha” being made fun of just cause he is a loudmouth idiot. In fact, they by in large admire loudmouth idiots.

    That pretty much explains the CONservative behavior entirely.

    Like


  210. 4 of your fingers are pointing at you. While I admit that I should have checked the data, that thought does never occur to you after you are proven wrong. You just misdirect to another goal post. Not an accusation, just a description of your mode operandi.

    Like


  211. Jerry makes a sound point that women don’t like a “confident alpha” being made fun of just cause he is a loudmouth idiot.

    Are you again trying to put words into mouth of others that they never uttered?

    Quote the paragraph where Jerry said it.

    Like


  212. LDF has a bee in his yarmulke .

    U mad, LDF?

    Like


  213. lvit2f8:

    “””Probably because they can’t be themselves because of the gaming industry.”””

    You got cause and effect wrong there.

    I’ll be getting off your lawn now.

    Like


  214. on October 4, 2010 at 8:10 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    4 of your fingers are pointing at you. While I admit that I should have checked the data, that thought does never occur to you after you are proven wrong. You just misdirect to another goal post. Not an accusation, just a description of your mode operandi.

    I was really wondering how you managed to apologize for ONE of your hallucinations. Now I see. You were taking the “high road” so you could demand that I take the “high road” FOUR TIMES as much as you did!

    How moral! How pure!

    Really, when is this “get me to apologize” *bleep* going to stop? I mean sure, you sorta managed to apologize once when proven totally wrong, but really buddy, your “buds” never apologized for anything.

    This ain’t work, and you can’t try to get me fired for “sassing” after you deliberately *bleep* in my face. That’s why this conversation is so unpleasant for you scumbags. All your usual tactics of rabid intimidation aren’t available. I feel sorry for you, but I’m afraid the “apology” is not coming. If only you could whine to the boss to fire me, then you could get what you want!

    CONservative, so good, so pure.

    But I’m kinda curious, where is my “shamefully wrong” statements?

    Are you talking about when I state motives you refuse to admit to? Am I suppose to confess that such a good and wonderful person as yourself could never have the motives I ascribe to you?

    That’s pretty funny. Sitting there and chanting about how wonderful you are does not, in fact, make you wonderful, CONservative.

    Perhaps if you could stop your acquisitive nature from claiming every good things that happens as caused by you, CONservatives… including the creation of this country “on CONservative principles”, then maybe you could have a more realistic assessment of your own wonderfulness, CONservative.

    Like


  215. Dude, you really have a reading comprehension problem, beside a massive projection issue. Your mental map reminds me of an echo chamber, with a reverb turned to a max.

    I am as fallible guy as any other. I don’t have any claim on infallibility. Your ascribing it to me (or conservatives at large) as if I thought I had is puzzling. I make mistakes and own them. How else one learns? Maybe you think your college gave you the cert to know it all, so what, I have 3 degrees and it may be good for fetching a decent job but nothing more.

    You seem to have a visceral, irrational hatred of conservatives. A need to demonize, else you’d discover that conservatives are as human as non-conservatives, with a somewhat different viewpoint. I guess you’ve never had an opportunity to live under a full blown socialism. I had. I sure wish you had that opportunity, it would be a life changing experience for you.

    I have no more to discuss with you, I have things to do and no need to engage in futile exercise, even though I am partially guilty of it.

    Like


  216. on October 4, 2010 at 10:01 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    I am as fallible guy as any other. I don’t have any claim on infallibility. Your ascribing it to me (or conservatives at large) as if I thought I had is puzzling. I make mistakes and own them. How else one learns? Maybe you think your college gave you the cert to know it all, so what, I have 3 degrees and it may be good for fetching a decent job but nothing more.

    Which no doubt is why you make extreme claims without any support at all. Your humility is awe-inspiring.

    Let’s quote the completely unsupported EXTREME CLAIMS made by CONservatives:

    Morsellaux:

    askjoe, interest rates were stratospheric in early 80′s. It was a bitter medicine, but it rolled back the inflation.

    As for ending embargo by OPEC, the official story is…

    Claim that high interest rates rolled back inflation. No evidence. Not even a recitation of the theory by which this would occur.

    Alger Hiss was a spy
    FDR created the Great Depression (just like Obama’s policies are eerily recreating the same thing, as he ostensibly modeled his econ policy after the same)
    gun control stemmed from a desire to disarm blacks

    FDR created the Depression, no facts, not even theory.

    goofball, just like your inability to understand the relationship between inflation and oil prices, you fail to understand other economic ideas:

    Categorically wrong. Also reflexive of the belief that the only country that exists in the whole world is the US. Homework:Why is the statement about US inflation causing world-wide oil-price increases fundamentally flawed?

    The dude illustrates that he’s just a hate-filled lefty who can’t let go of typical left-wing hate and he has NO clue about any counter arguments. I think the only way one can hold his positions is a lack of exposure to the rest of the world. Yeah, that’s right, everything is bad here, the rest of the world is teh best, blah blah blah.

    Facts? Even claims are lacking here. Nothing but puffed up wonderfulness.

    Typically, inflation is a loss of the value of the currency, not a rise in scarcity of one good.

    The sliminess oozes out. Cause you know, oil is just a “good” like wool or green-beans. The interested reader can compare the effects on the world of “all remaining crude oil vanishing” and all the green-beans in the world-vanishing to have a good giggle at this claim.

    [It’s even more funny when you consider green-beans are a renewable resource.]

    Some facts, a bit lacking on how they are applied:

    Indeed, neither are responsible for drug resistance development. You need to brush up your molecular Biology (or STFU, whatever you prefer).

    Inadequate sterilization procedures can and often are responsible for the spread of germs in compromised patients, but had zippity all to do with drug resistance development. Sterilization is not done with antibiotics, you know, but with either heat (for instruments and tools) or chemical methods (or radiation, funnily enough). The chemicals are, surprisingly, aggressively destructive compounds and not “silver bullet” antibiotics.

    The polite CONservative! STFU! Well, CHILD, maybe you should study basic math!

    So, RMM, if poor sterilization procedures in hospitals resulted in, say, a doubling of patients with TB, and thus a doubling of patients treated with antibiotics for TB, this would have NO RESULT AT ALL on how fast TB developed resistance to antibiotics?

    ARE YOU CERTAIN OF THAT?

    Like


  217. on October 4, 2010 at 10:02 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Some of these quotes were made by CONservatives besides Morsellaux, Defender of Regan the Good.

    Like


  218. @Morsellaux

    Some folks only have an ideology because it gives them a prepackaged group of people to hate and a group of people to share that hatred with.

    Like


  219. Old guy, I know. It just happens once a while that due to mugging by reality, some of them wake up and there is a small kernel present from some of the exchanges. Rarely, but happens.

    Interesting how he flaunts his googling but is lazy to do a simple search for “high inflation and interest rates”, which brings 7,080,000 results, many of them having the correlation stated in the excerpt. It is something one learns in basic economics for godsakes. He must be an expert in women studies, I guess.

    Like


  220. Lets_Do_Facts:

    I’m neither conservative nor polite, I just happen to be a molecular biologist.

    “””So, RMM, if poor sterilization procedures in hospitals resulted in, say, a doubling of patients with TB, and thus a doubling of patients treated with antibiotics for TB, this would have NO RESULT AT ALL on how fast TB developed resistance to antibiotics?

    ARE YOU CERTAIN OF THAT?”””

    Absolutely certain.

    Full courses of antibiotics are designed that way because they minimize the spread of the disease below the threshold of recovery for immunologically sound patients. Full courses of antibiotics under supervision (i.e., at a hospital) make the contribution of a higher rate due to improper sterilization statistically insignificant (if the rate of spontaneous multi-drug resistance development is one in quadrillions, having a few thousand patients or twice a few thousand patients makes, for all intents and purposes, no difference what-so-fucking-ever).

    I will answer your call for “basic maths” with a call for you to actually inform yourself and learn what you’re talking about. Resistance development is primarily and overwhelmingly led by not following the prescribed antibiotic courses, followed by the use of improper antibiotics and lateral gene transfer. Sterilization, for the development of antibiotic resistance, doesn’t even register as a threat. Spontaneous development of resistance under the full courses that are prescribed for the general population are DESIGNED to minimize the risk to such low numbers that even with several orders of magnitude more patients the result would not be altered much, if at all. And that’s why doctors like to keep a much more watchful eye on patients with diseases that do not have such effective treatments.

    You really, really have no idea how incredibly ignorant you’re coming across.

    Like


  221. I should have posted this here for discussion. CR posted this on Twitter recently.

    These are marriage before and after pics including some gorgeous women (photo 3 and 9 represent what I’d say are at least 9s if not 10s) in a before and after sequence:

    http://www.omgsoysauce.com/14746/marriage-before-and-after-10-pics/

    Like


  222. Jerry, your ratings… always a hoot! 🙂

    1. 5 (her friend is 6.5)
    2. 6
    3. 6
    4. 6 (picture does not give much to chew on, may be 6.5)
    5. 6

    There was a pic of a Jap girl on the page load, but as they change, I went to get a link. She is 8. No, I don’t have an asian fetish, just it was something that was handy for a comparison.
    http://2leep.com/news/58514/764/

    Like


  223. on October 5, 2010 at 12:29 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Well, the “magic force field” theory RMM has proposed is fascinating.

    You see, a “magic force field” prevents a semi-resistant TB strain from transferring on to the clothes/bed/tray/ect. of a sick patient BEFORE THE TREATMENT IS COMPLETE.

    This means that a partially resistant TB infection could NEVER EVER transfer from one host to another even when surrounded by such hosts in an environment of poor sanitation.

    ARE YOU SURE OF THAT, BUDDY?

    Like


  224. on October 5, 2010 at 12:33 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    followed by the use of improper antibiotics

    So a patient in a hospital….. newly infected with TB through poor sanitation, could never, ever be on antibiotics for something else!

    After all, no-one in a hospital is ever on antibiotics for anything BUT TB!

    YEAH! YEAH!

    ARE YOU SURE OF THAT, BUDDY?

    Like


  225. Let’s_Do_Facts sez,

    Yidout follows

    Like


  226. Hi, I’m one of those over-50 guys who had it so good back then, blah blah. Sorry about that. But I get it, I see it, and I have a non-sex question: has anyone here gone up to one of these urban-lefty professional harridans and just matter-of-factly asked her if she realizes how unimportant her job/career is? I’ve tried a few times, and the static blizzard gets so thick so fast that I haven’t really been able to enjoy watching the point sink in. I guess everyone here realizes it, but you know, what these chicks really enjoy way more than sex is their delusion of sophistication. You wanna hear some screaming, find a lawyer and ask her what percentage of her billings consists of going, “objection, overbroad,” or “objection, burdensome.” A real hoot.

    Like


  227. Lets_Do_Facts:

    “””Well, the “magic force field” theory RMM has proposed is fascinating.

    You see, a “magic force field” prevents a semi-resistant TB strain from transferring on to the clothes/bed/tray/ect. of a sick patient BEFORE THE TREATMENT IS COMPLETE.

    This means that a partially resistant TB infection could NEVER EVER transfer from one host to another even when surrounded by such hosts in an environment of poor sanitation.

    ARE YOU SURE OF THAT, BUDDY?”””

    Completely.

    TB becomes non-infectious after about two weeks of standard treatment. Any contamination that may happen at the hospital will happen when the patient is first taken in or very shortly afterwards, when the germ load is high.

    Which means there has been no strong selective pressure towards resistance yet.

    Which means garden variety TB.

    It’s not a magic force field, it’s Biology.

    I suggest you quit while you’re ahead, if you keep digging for straws to grasp at you will end up covered in dirt.

    Like


  228. Lets_Do_Facts:

    “””So a patient in a hospital….. newly infected with TB through poor sanitation, could never, ever be on antibiotics for something else!

    After all, no-one in a hospital is ever on antibiotics for anything BUT TB!

    YEAH! YEAH!

    ARE YOU SURE OF THAT, BUDDY?”””

    Yes I am, classes of antibiotics are clearly separated for diseases. If you bothered to look it up, you’ll see that Rifampicin et al. are never used for anything other than TB, except a couple of very specific cases for Streptomycin (and I do mean special cases, like Black Plague).

    Improper use of antibiotics generating transmisable resistance applies to broad spectrum antibiotics and improperly targeted bacteria – not the very specific ones like TB drugs. If the bacteria is completely unaffected by the antibiotic you use, then there will be no resistance developed because there is no selective pressure. It’s in the cases of bacteria that are only partially affected that resistance may develop quicker, and that happens with misdiagnosis.

    I.e., a newly infected with TB patient that is on, say, Penicillin for strep throat, will not develop a new resistance gene in his TB mycobacteria for Penicillin and pass it to the streptococcus… Because TB is naturally resistant to it. And the streptococcus won’t develop resistance to the TB drugs and pass it to the mycobacteria because it’ll be killed by the Penicillin.

    In other words, you saw “improper use” and jumped at it without thinking what it means. Next time, stop to think.

    Like


  229. Re: Factless:
    Off the top of my head:
    FDR did the following:
    1. High income tax.
    2. Prosecution of people who legally reduced their taxes. He had the justice dept go after Andrew Mellon for this. He called it tax avoidance. It was a crime NOT to pay the highest tax possible. Mellon was the Secretary of the Treasury for the three prior presidents.
    3. He proposed a tax on unspent corporate profits.
    4. He tried to nationalize the power generation in this country. The TVA was part of that effort.
    5. His efforts to impose a national economic policy, run from D.C., was finally thrown out by the Supreme Court. He then tried to destroy the court by packing it. That was defeated. Alistair Cook, remember him?, called it FDR’s own brand of national socialism. This was not a compliment.
    6. He fixed the price of gold arbitrarily. He prevented Americans from owning gold.
    7. He fought undeclared wars against Germany and Japan, all the while claiming to be working for peace.
    8. He gave lip service to black civil rights.
    9. Did you know his family money was drug money?
    10. He deliberately provoked the Japanese to attack this country by economic warfare. Imagine if OPEC cut off ALL supplies of oil to the USA, with the USA facing the certainty of NO oil supplies left in the country in 6 months.
    11. The depression only ended when WW II began AND Roosevelt finally decided he had to let the capitalists do their thing if we were going to win the war.
    12. His total stupidity regarding Stalin. He planned on having all US troops out of Europe within 6 months of Germany’s surrender. He thought France and Russia could keep order in Europe.

    Let’s not forget his personal vindictiveness to Linbergh, for opposing war with Germany, or his confused administrative habits , or his tolerance of Russian spies in his administration.

    He was so bad, after he died, they amended the constitution to make sure nobody would be able to repeat his performance.

    Like


  230. on October 5, 2010 at 11:28 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Hanged himself:

    Improper use of antibiotics generating transmisable resistance applies to broad spectrum antibiotics and improperly targeted bacteria – not the very specific ones like TB drugs. If the bacteria is completely unaffected by the antibiotic you use, then there will be no resistance developed because there is no selective pressure. It’s in the cases of bacteria that are only partially affected that resistance may develop quicker, and that happens with misdiagnosis.

    I.e., a newly infected with TB patient that is on, say, Penicillin for strep throat, will not develop a new resistance gene in his TB mycobacteria for Penicillin and pass it to the streptococcus… Because TB is naturally resistant to it. And the streptococcus won’t develop resistance to the TB drugs and pass it to the mycobacteria because it’ll be killed by the Penicillin.

    So, what I said could happen with other germs that have developed antibiotic resistance, but not with TB. Boy, I’m embarrassed. Well, not really. Cause ya see, you have kinda admitted that poor sanitation leading to a second infections while the patient is being treated for something else could result in the second infections being subjected to antibiotics it is partially resistant to or in insufficient amounts thus building antibiotic resistance in the second infection. Just not with TB. So you’ve kinda admitted your original claim that poor hospital sanitation can never ever result in antibiotic resistance is wrong for all those germs. Just not in the specific case of TB. So thank you. You were wrong. In your own words. Read them above again, and replace TB with some other germ that is partially resistant to antibiotics that ARE used to treat other diseases. You. Were. Wrong.

    I am so tired of arrogant moron doctors.

    Completely.

    TB becomes non-infectious after about two weeks of standard treatment. Any contamination that may happen at the hospital will happen when the patient is first taken in or very shortly afterwards, when the germ load is high.

    Which means there has been no strong selective pressure towards resistance yet.

    Which means garden variety TB.

    It’s not a magic force field, it’s Biology.

    I suggest you quit while you’re ahead, if you keep digging for straws to grasp at you will end up covered in dirt.

    You really talk like a doctor. So, is TB non-infectious after two weeks of treatment for healthy people or for sick people? 90% less infectious? 95% less? 50% less?

    It doesn’t really matter, because you arrived at that time without any testing, study, or sampling. It’s just made up. What doctors “think is true”. I mean, what some doctors, working in some places, think is true. I’m quite sure I could find doctors that completely disagree with that. Well, that’s great. You have a nice, round, made up number. I am filled with confidence.

    You also “think” that NO resistance can be developed in two weeks…..

    Cause that’s how evolution works, right?

    No it doesn’t. That is NOT in fact how evolution works. Incremental resistance can build over the course of multiple reinfections jumping from patient to patient. This is not the most efficient method, but yes, yes it works.

    With considerably higher probability than your made up “1 in a quadrillion” or whatever nonsense you pulled out of your *bleep*. I have no idea how you would even calculate that. It’s insane.

    Save the made up numbers and made up “facts” for the women.

    (For any confused women, I suggest you read the first quotations, where he admits to that many diseases that have developed antibiotic resistance could have done so in the method I described. But not TB! NOT TB! He has proven a small point… and surrendered the rest.)

    Like


  231. on October 5, 2010 at 11:39 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Gramps, we are aware of rich peoples hatred of income tax and the idea that they have any responsibility to anyone else.

    We are equally aware that we should care profoundly for any injustices they have suffered. That is OUR responsibility to THEM.

    Going on, I specifically attacked the Conservatives insane claim that “FDR created the Great Depression” that the “Roaring 20s” with its “Greed is Good” and huge bubble had nothing to do with the Great Depression.

    It’s called shifting blame, Gramps. It’s what you do. Because a CONservative never admits to having caused problems.

    Even if you points showed how FDR “lengthened the Great Depression”, and they most certainly do not make that case, FDR did not create the Great Depression. Which was the claim of CONservatives. Your “points” are actually just more rich people whining about how unfair the world is to them. Believe me, I know how hard you have it. I feel your pain.

    FDR dared prosecute a rich person of an enemy political party? A CONservative would never do that unless he felt he could gain advantage from doing so!

    CONservatives. So noble, so good.

    Like


  232. Factless:

    “””So, what I said could happen with other germs that have developed antibiotic resistance, but not with TB”””

    Your reading comprehension is at an all time low.

    What you said is pointless. Part resistance due to wrong antibiotics develop because of misdiagnosis: You treat for X amount of time thinking it’s one bacteria and turns out to be another. Then you STOP COMPLETELY. Then the partly receding infection spreads again. And that’s why spread happens, you put non-lethal selective pressure and then allow the surviving bugs to thrive again, when you STOP treatment at the wrong time (sounds familiar?). If the misdiagnosis is identified and treated with another antibiotic then the resistance development becomes irrelevant.

    So that is already a very low incidence scenario.

    What you have said has even less relevance to anything. Person treated for one disease that gets infected by a second disease. Right. First off, this second disease has to be partially sensitive to that particular antibiotic (and somehow STILL manage to infect at low loads despite being into an antibiotic-laden environment to which it is at least partly sensitive, but sensitive enough that developing a resistance would give a significant survival advantage! Talk about squaring a circle!), then it has to somehow manage to thrive in this patient, despite him being pumped with antibiotics to which it is significantly but not completely sensitive and having come in low loads, and enough to cause disease, then this second magical disease has to be misdiagnosed, go untreated, and THEN it has to spread once again into the same hospital.

    Yes, I totally see that being the lead cause of resistance development. Far behind people not following prescribed courses.

    Dumbass.

    “””Read them above again, and replace TB with some other germ that is partially resistant to antibiotics that ARE used to treat other diseases. You. Were. Wrong.””””

    No, your scenario is just astronomically unimportant. You. Are. Clueless.

    “””It doesn’t really matter, because you arrived at that time without any testing, study, or sampling. It’s just made up.”””

    I see you’re past the incredibly unrealistic scenario phase and have entered the denial one.

    You’re the one with the made-up assumptions. The two-week figure comes from peer reviewed medical research and studies, that’s how drug regimes and recommended treatments are made (complete with clinical trials). I do suggest you go and ask several doctors to see what they say about how soon a patient becomes non-infectious. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

    Yes, for all intents and purposes no resistance is developed in two weeks. See, mycobacteria are slow growing and the drug regime includes bacteriostatics. During the infectious phase when you’re hitting with all drugs there is practically no growth or cell division. Can resistance appear in those two weeks? The odds are in the trillions. Technically you can consider yourself “right”, but the odds are close to those of being hit by a meteor, or drowning in the Sahara.

    “””With considerably higher probability than your made up “1 in a quadrillion” or whatever nonsense you pulled out of your *bleep*. I have no idea how you would even calculate that. It’s insane.”””

    No it’s not, but at least you managed to admit you don’t have any idea what you’re talking about.

    Resistance rates for the TB drugs are well known, and due to the fact that different drugs have different methods of action, resistances develop independently. The chances of a garden variety mycobacteria spontaneously having a mutation that confers resistance to each antibiotic varies from 1 in 10^7 for Ethambutol to 1 in 10^10 for Rifampin.

    Given that each mutation appears independently, the chances of a mycobacteria spontaneously having mutations for all drugs are, depending on the drug regime, up to about 1 in 10^33 for the typical 4-drug short course.

    A typical TB patient has about one trillion bacteria in his body, or 1^12. The chances of any of these having resistance for everything right off the bat are, indeed, astronomically small. A bit different than what the numbers suggest because a few other factors: bacteria can exchange genetic material and improve their odds, and the immune system is still killing bacteria reducing them, but 1 in quadrillions (which would be about 1 in 10^15) is about right.

    “””For any confused women, I suggest you read the first quotations, where he admits to that many diseases that have developed antibiotic resistance could have done so in the method I described.”””

    I did no such thing, you are just delusional.

    Your posts come across as someone who’s on the verge of a hysterical breakdown, and it all comes down to your earlier quote:

    “””I stand AMAZED at such a claim! Imagine that! A rich person blaming poor people for all the countries problems! “””

    You are DESPERATELY trying to shift blame, but ultimately drug resistance comes from mismanaged drugs, and overwhelmingly drugs are mismanaged by patients. Fact of life, learn to live with it.

    Like


  233. Because a CONservative never admits to having caused problems.

    Where is your data? Prove it!

    Also prove that liberals do admit causing problems!

    As for the rich and avoidance of taxes, the current cream of Democratic party is a substantial proof for your claim, so I grant you a pass.

    Like


  234. on October 6, 2010 at 12:43 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    What you said is pointless. Part resistance due to wrong antibiotics develop because of misdiagnosis: You treat for X amount of time thinking it’s one bacteria and turns out to be another. Then you STOP COMPLETELY. Then the partly receding infection spreads again. And that’s why spread happens, you put non-lethal selective pressure and then allow the surviving bugs to thrive again, when you STOP treatment at the wrong time (sounds familiar?). If the misdiagnosis is identified and treated with another antibiotic then the resistance development becomes irrelevant.

    The example I quoted wasn’t talking about a misdiagnosis, doctor-man, it was talking about a second infection, do to poor sanitation, occurring WHILE THE PATIENT WAS BEING TREATED FOR ANOTHER INFECTION. You really need to read what YOU wrote.

    If the misdiagnosis is identified and treated with another antibiotic then the resistance development becomes irrelevant.

    Well, if the second infection transfers to another patient, then I’m pretty sure that patient isn’t receiving proper antibiotics! So I guess that would be treatment being stopped!

    I know, I know, must protect Doctor. Must defend Doctor. Doctor do no wrong. Doctor do no wrong.

    Believe me, I understand.

    Given that each mutation appears independently, the chances of a mycobacteria spontaneously having mutations for all drugs are, depending on the drug regime, up to about 1 in 10^33 for the typical 4-drug short course.

    A typical TB patient has about one trillion bacteria in his body, or 1^12. The chances of any of these having resistance for everything right off the bat are, indeed, astronomically small. A bit different than what the numbers suggest because a few other factors: bacteria can exchange genetic material and improve their odds, and the immune system is still killing bacteria reducing them, but 1 in quadrillions (which would be about 1 in 10^15) is about right.

    Oh, so the one in “quadrillion” was the chance of the bacteria developing COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESISTANCE TO ALL ANTIBIOTICS AT ONCE. Boy, that’s an impressive goal post, buddy. You sure you don’t want to make it a little harder? Maybe it should also, in one infection, develop the ability to take over it’s host nervous system, transforming the host into a zombie with no other desire than to spread TB to other hosts! Why not add on another absurd goal?

    Evolution is incremental. I would expect it to develop partial resistance before jumping to another patient.

    So it develops resistance to one or more of the antibiotics, transfers to another patient, and the resistance evolution continues. Yeah. I’m pretty sure that’s how it happened, even if I were to buy your “poor people did it by not listening to doctor gods” theory. The disease developed resistance incrementally over the course of multiple infections with multiple poor people.

    Resistance rates for the TB drugs are well known, and due to the fact that different drugs have different methods of action, resistances develop independently. The chances of a garden variety mycobacteria spontaneously having a mutation that confers resistance to each antibiotic varies from 1 in 10^7 for Ethambutol to 1 in 10^10 for Rifampin.

    First of all, I doubt these numbers are correct at all. I doubt real studies, that actually follow any sort of procedure, were actually performed. I doubt doctor-man, and the other doctor-men, ability to find their own ass. But lets say, inexplicably, that I actually believe those rates FOR PETRI DISHES.

    Cause I *bleep* well know that didn’t arrive at those rates using real infected people. Then those numbers are completely absurd for real, infected, people.

    As an example of why these numbers are absurd, what density of antibiotics was used? Do I have any reason to believe such density is obtained, uniformaly in the human body? That the lethality level for that antibiotic in the human body at that density is the same for it in a petri dish?

    And of course, doctor-man, there are different strains of TB with different mutation rates and resistance to different antibiotics.

    I mean really, it’s nice doctor man, that you aren’t suffering from lack of confidence or anything, but really!

    Like


  235. on October 6, 2010 at 12:46 pm Lets_Do_Facts

    Because a CONservative never admits to having caused problems.

    Where is your data? Prove it!

    This thread. I rest my case.

    And no, tactically admitting to fault in one obvious place so you can wheel like a crazed beast on your opponent and start screaming at him to admit mistakes, mistakes PLURAL that is, doesn’t count.

    Like


  236. Not asking you to admit anything. Prove your assertion with data, no deflections or changing the frame.

    That’s all.

    Like


  237. And I agree, I don’t count, whether because I could be a flake, or whatever motivation you are ascribing to me. That should make proving your assertion a breeze, no?

    Like


  238. awwww, ldf, “no facts, not even no theory.” so cute.
    that’s right, you’re so smart, poor wittle baby can’t get taken seriously.
    A little troll just growing up while avoiding any action related to thinking or learning.
    nap time, sucker.

    Like


  239. Factless:

    “””The example I quoted wasn’t talking about a misdiagnosis, doctor-man, it was talking about a second infection, do to poor sanitation, occurring WHILE THE PATIENT WAS BEING TREATED FOR ANOTHER INFECTION”””

    I know, that’s why it’s pointless. Being misdiagnosed is the only way this MIRACULOUS second infection would be able to spread, because a correct diagnosis would quickly kill it.

    You’re grasping at this example as if it were the only lifeline capable of saving yourself from drowning on your own stupidity. I’ve already told you twice why it won’t work, but let me repeat it very slowly for you to understand:

    1. For a resistance to develop, the bacteria has to be at least partially sensitive to the antibiotic.
    2. If the bacteria is partially sensitive against said aintibiotic, you will not be able to accidentally infect someone that is currently taking that antibiotic in medical doses.

    Your scenario goes against everything we know about the prophylactic effect of antibiotics. You can’t have a bacteria that is both sensitive enough to an antibiotic to develop a resistance, but not sensitive enough that it’s capable of infecting someone at low germ loads who is high on that antibiotic.

    It. Doesn’t. Work. You’re talking about the squareness of a circle.

    And on top of that, this is all peripheral. This confers resistance to antibiotics that were not the most effective to begin with (which is annoying because they can be useful, but not the end of the world), it does NOTHING on the resistances against primary antibiotics, which come straight from mismanaging drugs.

    “””Oh, so the one in “quadrillion” was the chance of the bacteria developing COMPLETE AND TOTAL RESISTANCE TO ALL ANTIBIOTICS AT ONCE. Boy, that’s an impressive goal post, buddy. You sure you don’t want to make it a little harder?”””

    That’s the chance of a bacteria surviving in an environment where you _ARE_ giving the patient all four drugs at once.

    That’s how and why combination therapy works. And that’s why we use it against TB. You DO know that the TB treatment is of multiple drugs at once, right?

    Yes, we do want to make things really hard for pathogenic bacteria to survive. Fancy that.

    “””So it develops resistance to one or more of the antibiotics, transfers to another patient,”””

    And here you go again, back to Cloud Cuckoo Land. No, the TB mycobacteria would need to develop resistance against all four before it could possibly be able to thrive and increase in big enough numbers that it could start to transmit this resistance to other patients. In an environment where you have four antibiotics at once, having resistance against one or two will not allow the mutated bacteria to multiply wildly and spread, it will die like the rest of them. Multi-drug therapy effectively and decisively culls the founder effect to infinitesimal numbers. And that’s why it’s routinely used.

    Well, either that or you interrupt the drugs to let the bacteria grow again. That works too, you know.

    “””Cause I *bleep* well know that didn’t arrive at those rates using real infected people. Then those numbers are completely absurd for real, infected, people.”””

    Yes, I’m sure you know better than the World Health Organization and the researchers they base their plans on. I also like how you go about the “doctor-man” when you yourself are the one making unsubstantiated and ridiculous claims of how things REALLY work.

    “””And of course, doctor-man, there are different strains of TB with different mutation rates”””

    HAHAHAHAHA. You really don’t know anything about microbiology, do you?

    Soldier on, Last Hope of Mankind, soldier on.

    Like


  240. Love the blog, especially the comments. I usually only lurk, but wanted to give Grampa props. Dude, your words are always of high quality. It’s too bad everyone else is rushing to look as good, and now the whole thread is devolving to a discussion Reagan, antibiotics, and epidemiology.

    Now it’s time for Obsidian to come by and relate the whole thing to black people, so we can have tons of comments about racism. Anything except the actual topic at hand (as smart and generally badass as Obsidian seems to be, respect).

    @j r, 210607: that was a serious insight that really made me think. I’m mid 30s, never married, but I really want to marry and have kids. I see it as my Darwinian imperative: as society collapses — if it is, that remains to be seen — the challenge is causing so many men to self-select themselves out of the gene pool. Whereas I want my far-flung progeny to still be around in 5 million years, when humanity boards the flying saucers to escape our dying sun.

    Like


  241. BTW, I’ve learned so much here, from everyone. Thanks.

    I have gamed an 8 (9 genetically, but she’s damaged herself a bit) into a serious relationship. I intend to make her my wife, mother of my kids, and my best friend. As awesome as she is, thanks to this blog I’ll always work to remember the following:

    – always be assertive and clear about what i want and what i believe
    – even though she is the best woman I’ve ever had, all women are replaceable. ride it till it’s gone, then get another. maybe she’ll be good for the long haul, maybe not. there’s no way to know for sure, so, I’m going for it because I have giant balls.
    – game her based on her menstrual cycle. thanks, Dave from Hawaii!
    – I’m smarter and wittier than she is, and way too in control of myself to ever hit her. Domestic violence is off the table.
    – She is an American citizen, but, she was born in Europe and lived there until puberty. Large, conservative family. She has the best of their values, and thanks to this blog I recognize why that makes me so lucky. Thanks.
    – Don’t let her order you around, and from the beginning I’ve consistently refused to allow this (I’m a natural in this way). If she asks me to do something, I’ll usually do it with a smile because I love her, but if she follows it up with any other demand, I stop and confront her. This works, reassuring her that I’m in charge. What usually follows is her gagging on my cock, and then squirting all over me.
    – Every day we are together, literally every single day, I fuck her harder and better than she’s ever had before. i make her feel like a woman and she regularly tells me she has never been happier in her entire life. I’ve learned to use sex to dominate her and keep her in line.

    One more thing. I think I have the solution to Marriage 2.0:

    She is an aspiring professional. i’ll let her make more than me, and even support me, so i can win in divorce court and protect my kids if things somehow go horribly wrong. meanwhile she gets the thrill of being a fully empowered woman.

    Meanwhile, I will be constantly videotaping myself having a great time with my kids. I’ll keep copies of these videos with my best friend as evidence that I have always been a good father.

    This is a win/win and the solution to Marriage 2.0. I want her to be loyal, faithful, and happy. To ensure this I’ll put in tons of effort as described above. If she gets bored/goes crazy/betrays me, I’ll be on the winning side of the actual divorce issues.

    Best to you all. Especially the women who have the courage to post here.

    Like


  242. […] Renegade:Attention Whore Hyperactivity Disorder,Marriage Down, Dystopia Up, Anal Sex The New Technicality, and Are PUAs Douchebags […]

    Like


  243. […] do ordinary men and hedonists understand the reasons that Marriage is Down & Dystopia is Up but the religious do not? Civil Unions and Shared Parenting is not the answer. Men are avoiding […]

    Like