- Reaction score
- 11,938
Too much content for me to respond to immediately.
The Frequent "official" Origin Of My Recent Failures With Women
- Thread starter Afro_Vacancy
- Start date
Too much content for me to respond to immediately.
- Reaction score
- 461
Food for the 'soul'. Thank you.
- Reaction score
- 8,249
It is not intellect I was talking about it was looks.
If the looks standard was not a factor these guys (most at least) would be getting laid, having girlfriends and getting married.
They don't want 'ugly' women or fat woman. They prefer to be without.
If they did I think they would find someone.
not saying they should or shouldn't, it is their life, their decision, their choice.
Plenty of ugly intelligent women with hi IQs.
Last edited:
CaptainForehead
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 4,302
Why only Africa? Why not also the billions of people living in Asia who are in poverty?
After you import these billions into your country, why should your children be allowed to live in your home in comfort, while the new immigrants are in camps? Your house should be taken away, your bank accounts drained, and distributed to the newcomers.
But you worked for your house, and created some wealth for the explicit benefit of your children you say?
WTF do you thing your ancestors did when they claimed certain land as their country?
The world is unfair, always has been. Survival of the fittest and all. While you may subscribe to "equal opportunity for all", people from poorer countries (like me) know this is nonsense, having lived in an environment where there simply isn't enough for everyone.
- Reaction score
- 5,714
He lives in the leftists cuck fantasy world where everyone is nice, hardworking, and the resources are unlimited. Don't even bother try to reason with him with logic from the real world.
- Reaction score
- 764
@sunchyme1 https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/foot...nburg-hair-transplant-chris-hughton-marbella/ .. I didn't even think his hair was bad... Got that saudi money now, looksmaxing to get some young poon
- Reaction score
- 8,249
I am left-leaning but what you wrote is not really practical...you describe 'utopia' and it does not really exist.
you invite chaos with this thinking.
and I guess you do have chaos in Europe right now.
You are actually describing global communism I think.
communism does not work.
- Reaction score
- 11,938
There are vast resources available that are currently being squandered.
I used to be entirely convinced by the "government has no money" argument. Then I observed history. The instant the USA wanted to go to war, a few trillion were available. The instant the banks needed a bailout, tens of trillions were available. Once I saw that I noticed other things, such as the fact golf courses are still open in regions of drought.
Far more resources are available than most think.
- Reaction score
- 6,988
dudes a cue ball man
or least he should be. has had hair issues for long time
good for him tho. looks smart as f*** with that buzz cut
CaptainForehead
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 4,302
The war trillions are obtained by debt financing. Bank bailouts were financed by printing money (an indirect inflation tax).
Anyway, the major cost when letting refugees/poor people in is not the $ cost, but the social cost. This cost is manageable when the immigration number is small, but all sorts of persistent problems come up otherwise.
- Reaction score
- 461
In your last sentence you are alluding to that I have not had it hard in any meaningful way in this life, to really feel the burden of scarcity. Nobody should assume anything about anyone, because as far as I know, you don't know me nor my life story. And even if so, the argument should stand and have it's value not because of who wrote it, but because of it's content. Besides, as I have stated earlier in thread, I don't in any way intend to provoke, disrespect or hurt anyone in any way. I'm just speaking my mind about something I was sensing and felt different about. We all have our opinions, and that's alright.
As for the original discussion, I actually responded to a rhetorical question about ''whether European and American elites worry about the future of their children'', that ''it's time to fight those barbarians'' and that ''future generation will spit on those elites' graves because of their naivety''.
If you paid attention, I was never in any way denying that there exists environments in Europe where indeed extremistic ideologies are practised, that unemployment rates are higher, especially within certain immigrant groups, that higher crime rates have been observed and so on. The statistics are correct, yes. I have not argumented against the statistics. What I have advocated is that, the solution to the problem is not as simple as pointing fingers, discriminating, dividing into races, judging...and in the end - hate. Hate is not the solution. Hatred will only bring detruction and colamity. History has taught us that.
What I offer is another line of thought, where we dig deeper into the problems to find the real causes and relations. If we are able to identify the real cause to the problems we are experiencing, then we will not any longer be confined to patch up the wounds which are only the surface, but actually find a real, long lasting solution.
You start of by, in my opinion, wrong constant in your analysis. This is that there is not enough for everybody. If you really care to look just a little more, just a little deeper, you will find that there is plenty. We all appr know the number of inhabitants of China, and the density of population in this country. So many people, so little land (ref. land is the only real scarcity on earth). Anyway, they not only have enough for themselves, but also export so much to others aswell. Of course, they import some things, but this is heavily outweighted by export(Trumps nightmare). And I would argue that I have not seen many refugees from China. I don't see many immigrants from Dubai either. Is their Islam in some way different to all other, so they suceed?
Now, you were mentioning Africa. You are talking as those ''billions'' that are supposedly coming over actually don't have anywhere else to be. Do you see the flaws of your logic? Africa is a huge continent, very rich in natural, raw commodities. In an earlier post, I have, with a very plain post, tried to explain why it's not in wests best interests that they control their own resources. What I'm trying to say is that, those huge masses of immigrant coming to Europe is western, and other imperialistic countries own doing.
Why do you actually believe that other cultures and religions can't make their own civilized world, where they come from? Well I believe they can, but forces from outside are keeping them from this. How? I think the 'golden recipe' has been to support and arm the few outliners in these societies, the extremes. If you look closer, you will also find that there is always, without exception extremes in every society, with ideas opposite to the government and the general population. What if they were encouraged to change the situation, and armed? Not a single (big enough)country in the world is united to that degree where this couldn't happen with enough ''encouragment''.
Why do you believe that those immigrants like your climate, your culture, your landscape and your language more than their own? Believe me, those people would rather have stayed where they are originally from. You will agree that centuries with legacy, family bonds, buried elders and ancestors hold huge meaning to many people. Why would someone choose to have their family scattered all over the world? Years of friendship and love torn apart. They throw away for lifetime their chances od belonging and practising religion the right way, and to carry on traditions. Who will they invite to their wedding? I don't think they will throw all this away for your tax money.
Refugees now come to Europe because their lives are not longer like they were before. It has now become a better option to move, than staying home. If the reason is economical, then the reason is good enough, because powers from outside have shred their economies to pieces. It's our bombs falling over their homes, and it's our elected representatives who corrupt their land, and support the worst among them. We are exploiting their territory, ruining their homes while squiting at the truth in front of us. It's imperialistic interests that drive this process, and while they try to escape the wrath of our greed, we welcome them with hatred and judgement. How do you think a person will react after you practically strip them of their lives and their legacy, only to expect them to show gratitude when you welcome them with crumbs?
- Reaction score
- 461
Yes, I went to far. ''Totally open the gates'' is not the solution either. Chaos is not the way to go, indeed, especially now that the civilization could potentially take such a hit, that it may never recover. We must thread carefully. However, capitalism in itself invites chaos also. If we keep on this track, the future does not seem bright. Cannibalism in it's purest form. Dangerous.
- Reaction score
- 461
You are alluding to that I have not had it hard in any meaningful way in this life, to really feel the burden of scarcity. Nobody should assume anything about anyone, because as far as I know, you don't know me nor my life story. And even if so, the argument should stand and have it's value not because of who wrote it, but because of it's content. Besides, as I have stated earlier in thread, I don't in any way intend to provoke, disrespect or hurt anyone in any way. I'm just speaking my mind about something I was sensing and felt different about. We all have our opinions, and that's alright.
- Reaction score
- 1,126
- Reaction score
- 8,249
To be honest?
The best solution is what we have done over the years in providing financial aid--which USA can actually well afford to do and is in our own best interest to do so....the stopping of foreign aid that Trump is proposing, that one of our head of military (cant be bothered to look up title or name--you can google it) even has said before congress that we don't have enough bullets to combat the good our foreign aid can do.
The difference of making peoples lives better/safer in their own countries is much preferable then having them ALL come here.
I'm in USA the most liberal area of USA--we are definitely a nation of immigrants we can integrate immigrants much better than in Europe--BUT we also should know the difference between people seeking refuge because their own countries are failing versus someone who is really 'wanting' or desiring to come to USA for a different way of life.
Not everyone has Western values--it's almost arrogant of us on Left to assume they do or would.
But I am not paranoid in this country as some have sounded in their postings here-we have a very long history of integrating refugees in great numbers in short time frames with a ton of criticism (Cuba and Haitian come to mind, which i lived through some of that and it was 'bumpy' but it was not 'Scarface' although that was the 'impression' the crime in Miami was mostly South Americans in drug game--Cubans were not in the drug game, most were just hard working people who lived through Hell in their own country. My friend saw his Grandfathers hands chopped off by soldiers because he hid chickens to feed his family--so not a great place to grow up.)
It's best to create a safe space in Syria for the people to 'stay' in their own country and provide aid then have them leave their country, their culture to come to West.
When I say 'best' I mean best for 'us' in the West as well.
Is it fair to USA economically to do this? Who cares if its 'fair' or not if it works and is in our own best interest.
Most people who b**ch about our budgets don't really understand our budgets to begin with in the fractions that go to aid vs other things.
And they don't really understand our taxes 'now' compared to the 1950s when everyone thinks of the as the 'glory years'. The truth is the wealthy paid more taxes back then...I'm for lower corporate tax so business come here--but personal taxes? I am for the top 5 to 10 families in the USA taking a bit more of a hit then they do. It's ridiculous the middle class is being decimated. And its even more ridiculous that people who make less think those people give a sh*t about them lol. When they think you are 'one of their own' you would be shocked at the monarch kind of thought process many of them actually have about most USA.
Where we realistically get into higher taxes on 'who' is debatable but I t think most reasonable people with strong economic backgrounds can come to a consensus on this which would benefit most Americans.
There is my morning Caffeine rant.
- Reaction score
- 11,938
The proper solution is to not create refugee crises in the middle east in the first place. See Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc. People are being displaced, that is inevitable.
However, if you think this is bad, you better be scared for global warming. The potential refugee crises from south Asia from a rise in sea levels exceeds several hundred million people. The bulk of Bangladesh will be completely wiped out.
Let's not worry about it until those lands become the Greater Sea of Bengal.
CaptainForehead
Senior Member
- Reaction score
- 4,302
I am for the top 5 to 10 families in the USA taking a bit more of a hit then they do. It's ridiculous the middle class is being decimated.
I don't think the tax revenue from the top 10 families will make much a dent.
In the end, taxes are somewhat of a red herring. It is irrelevant how many billions a person has -- if that person doesn't spend those billions, it's as if that person never got the billions in the first place. Money now is just some number in a computer, it has no value.
The middle class is being decimated because of automation, outsourcing, global competition and technology. There simply aren't that many easy middle class jobs around.
However, a natural question to ask is that automation, outsourcing, and technology are supposed to make life easier, so what is happening? These things are supposed to lower the cost of living, but that has not happened. The reason is inflation tax -- the govt is printing, and spending money that it does not have. Since direct taxation is politically too honest, it resorts to printing money and thereby taking the savings of people (existing and future). This was the reason of the 2008 depression, and will be the cause of the next one. We have Senõr Greenspan to blame.
In terms of costs for the middle class, these are the killers: housing, education, health.
Housing, like equity has been propped up due to inflation and money printing. Education is ridiculously expensive in the US simply because money is not being spent well. It is politically expedient to beat drums that more money needs to go into schools (where it is misspent) rather explain to people that parents, home environment and society largely determine how much children learn. Healthcare is also way more expensive than it needs to be in the US. I am extremely curious about how the healthcare money is being divvied up amongst doctors/administrators/lawyers etc. If anyone has information, please PM me.
- Reaction score
- 11,938
Don't worry -- they're spending it. They're spending a ton of money. I have family in Central Florida, the dominant industry there is catering to rich people. Taking care of their million dollar homes, selling them $5,000 perfumes and $250,000 cars, etc. When Donald Trump ran for president it actually impacted the social environment and economy there, as he used to host a ton of parties.
A relative meets major celebrities and the wives of celebrities at her job in sales. They buy up expensive makeup, perfume, shoes, clothes, etc, that's a large part of their life, going shopping. There's a Salvatore Ferragamo store near her work, they might sell two or three $500+ shoes a day, and that's enough to keep the place going. I never see a client in there buying anything yet it's been open for years. That's not an efficient partition of resources.
Meanwhile, the money on a computer also has an impact. The speculation and volatility can lead to economic recessions, inflation, etc.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 11,938
Health has been very inefficient here, though at least I'm getting services since my employer is a large organization.
Prior to an appointment, I get both a letter reminder and a phone call. Following my appointment, I get a letter from the insurance that's not a bill, a bill from the medical practice, that can be paid during work hours or online if I set up another user name and password. The same hopsital can have multiple independent websites for different kinds of bills and services, needing different usernames and passwords.
I have two separate dental insurance providers. One of them won't let me log on because they have made up a fake zip code for me. I called them, waited on hold for over an hour, I'm owed a lot of money now. They made me call one organization to find out what happens, then had to call another, who passed the buck to another, then I ended up on one person, I think I had to iterate this multiple times, one time I ended up somebody who said it wasn't her responsibility and she hung up on me. I start with the phone number on the back of my insurance card. But this final person, she couldn't update all of my information, because it turned out that the system also had the incorrect birthday for me on record, so we had to first take care of that. There was both an incorrect zip code and an incorrect birthday for me floating around.
Independently of that, I saw this morning that a local hospital has associated two independent numerical ID codes to my name. I will call them on Tuesday to find out what happened. I'm expecting to spend a couple hours on hold, with one person telling me to call the next, and the next, and the next, culminating in a laborious process to merge ID codes, or to have one ID code remain valid with all of the information on the other ID code discarded.
It's pure chaos here with the behemoth infrastructure of employers, HMOs, hospitals, etc which necessitates a lot of useless bureaucracy. There should be single-payer, would simplify everybody's life. Let's be honest, one of the reasons it's set up this way is to save money on poor people and less advantaged people who don't have the means to spend their lives fighting bureaucracy. Speaking personally, if I wasn't willing to fight bureaucracy, I would easily lose many thousands of dollars.
- Reaction score
- 8,249
I am being a bit humorous when I say the top ten families--but seriously I think you underestimate how much in taxes the Walmart family alone or the Koch brothers alone would be paying if it was another time period when taxes were higher on top 1%.
truth is they used to pay more in taxes--this was a given--it's is there, you can research it.
the fact that income distribution is becoming so two tiered in USA is what is making us weak.
of course there are other factors--BUT that is a HUGE factor and no way to get around it.
I agree education is ridiculously expensive in USA--but we used to have FREE options
My mother went to Hunter College, a pretty good school totally for free in the 1960s.
Community colleges used to be like $400 a semester in just the late 70's early 80s.
I went to college in the early Clinton years and my student loans were doable compared to todays students.
Health care has almost always been expensive in my lifetime I was born in 1970s--my Mother had no health insurance when i was growing up after her and my Father split...she finally got it I think she was in her 40s to 50s when she went to work for Government and had insurance. She was never able to afford to go to the Doctor--so this idea that it's 'new' to be so expensive for working class is untrue..t this was expensive during the 1970s and 80s when my mother could not afford health insurance OR to even see a doctor.
Obama care was flawed but at least it was/is something and my understanding is it is failing because a lot of conservative governors blocked it and did not take the expansion--and those who finally did reluctantly NOW don't want to see it go because it works and they know they will be unseated.
You made a valid point on companies outsourcing--something the government both democratic and republican allowed and it was a major mistake.
This idea that 'corporations' are people is ridiculous to be honest which was a ruling by our Supreme court.
I have a friend who works for a top art gallery--in 2009/10 she said to me 'well recession must be ending rich people are buying expensive art again' Independent filmmakers i knew were funding their projects around same time period with bored wealthy people looking for tax write offs--so they almost always have money to spend.
They have been making and spending money since the recession.
I even MADE money soon after the recession in stock market.
If i did wealthy people definitely did.
You just look for stocks you know will come back and by them. It's definitely not rocket science to figure out.
Who got fucked in recession? middle to lower middle class who lost a lot of their life savings.
Big rollers get bail outs. they get to play with other peoples money to make money.
The thing no one talks bout that is going to f*** everyone over next 10 years is robotics.
There should be a limit on how much industry can cross over to robotics to replace people--yeah that is socialist idea I guess but so what? the alternative is going to be a night mare.
I do agree with you about Greenspan...the problem in USA that is going on today compared to past is everyone is moving so far one direction or the other---
You are right--money should be better spent more efficiently--but it should also be higher taxes on top 1%..this are not opposing views points--you can hold both view points
BUT in Govt--you can't or they don't want to...its like all one way or all the other way.
And the people suffer.
The poorest of the poor and the wealthiest of wealthy are who government seems to work best for.
Last edited: