Demography is Destiny

From Ann Coulter's Demography is Destiny:

Liberals brag about having won the hearts and minds of America, as if, through logic and argument, they’ve persuaded people to accept their bankrupt European socialist ideas. 

Democrats haven’t changed anyone’s mind. They changed the people. 

Most Americans don’t realize that, decades ago, the Democrats instituted a long-term plan to gradually turn the United States into a Third World nation. The country would become poorer and less free, but Democrats would have an unbeatable majority!

Liberals need to import people because they have such a low birth-rate that they're unable to transmit their values, culture, and genes to the next generation.

Of course, conservatives don't have the same problem, but as with anything else, it is easier to just outsource reproduction.

Why house prices are so high

I came across an article while I was researching same-sex marriages:

"Suppose there were a law forbidding anyone to own more than one car. It seems obvious enough that the abolition of that law would increase the demand for cars. Sellers of cars would be better off. Buyers who did not take advantage of the new opportunity--those who bought only one car--would be worse off, since they would have to pay a higher price. Buyers who bought more than one car would be better off than if they bought only one car at the new price (otherwise that is what they would have done) but not necessarily better off than if they bought one car at the old price, an option no longer open to them."

Substitute "houses" for "cars" and you have your answer. I met someone recently who told me that he had actually bought about 15 houses. Who benefits from these arrangements? Bankers, who else!

The greater numbers of single people also drive up prices for pretty much everything, as I've explained in a previous article. They also drive down wages.

Delayed childbearing is good... for the childcare and retirement industries

On Saturday, the Bush Dance Display Group (of which I'm a member) were performing at a retirement village. Some of us started talking during the halfway break about life, ageing, children, etc. Sometime during our chat, I realized that the childcare and retirement industries benefit when women as a whole delay childbearing.

When women marry young and bear children when they're young, their parents (let us call them "the grandparents" to avoid confusion) - who may be in their mid to late forties - can help with childrearing and childminding. Thus such families will be less likely to outsource childcare. In addition, the grandparents themselves are much less likely to need care themselves at that time. When the children are adolescents, they depend less on their parents, so the parents are more likely to be able to care for the grandparents.

On the other hand, when women marry late and bear children in their 30s, the grandparents who will likely be in their 60s are less likely to be able to help with childrearing and childminding. In fact, many grandparents will need substantial care themselves at that age. And most parents will neither have the time nor resources to look after 2 sets of dependents (children and grandparents). Thus, with the lack of grandparental help in childrearing, parents are forced to live on one income or outsource childcare to the childcare industry. In addition, parents may have to move the dependent grandparents into being looked after by the retirement industry (because they're too busy looking after their young children).

Pensions and social security wouldn't even be needed if people looked after their own parents. Instead, these social programs were trying to fix a problem that didn't exist in the first place. When people are offered "free healthcare" they stop looking after themselves ("why should I look after my health when I can get free healthcare?"). When welfare programs are started to help the needy, people stop being charitable ("the government is looking after the poor, so why should we?). When people are offered "free care for the elderly" they stop looking after their elderly ("they have pensions and social security, so they can look after themselves").

All this is very good for the childcare and retirement industries, but detrimental to society as a whole. Some might call these parasitic industries, but perhaps a better name for them is "cannibalistic industries", because they cannibalize the society (of which they're a part), destroying it and eventually themselves in the process. But this process once started cannot be stopped because short term gains are always more attractive than long-term gains.

A man wants to be a woman's first love. A woman wants to be his last.

I came across this quote on Facebook today:

"A man wants to be a woman's first love. A woman wants to be his last."

Maybe the reason why so many relationships fail these days is because women can't give men <what the men want> anymore. The less women bring to the table, the less men will bring to the table as well.

Political correctness

I came across this interesting video on political correctness:

Essentially, Marxism was first an economic theory. Because it was unsuccessful in that domain, it changed its focus, so that modern Marxism now focuses on culture as its target rather than economics. The video makes quite an interesting point about the Marxist "Critical Theory" and how it is used as a weapon to silence and create guilt and thus destroy whatever is its target.

At 6:40, the guy in the video explains how:

1. Feminism uses "critical theory" to attack Western civilization's treatment of women, while turning a blind eye to the treatment of women by other cultures throughout history. Thus the economic basis for the treatment of women is ignored, and instead the culture is blamed and attacked.
2. Minorities use critical theory to attack Western civilization's treatment of blacks and other minority races, while again turning a blind eye to the treatment of these races by other cultures throughout history. Thus again, the economic basis for slavery is ignored and instead the culture is blamed and attacked.

It is quite apparent to any intelligent person that economics is one of the unifying principles of life itself. It is one of the pillars of evolution.

Male infidelity

In this post, I will try to explain why, if you are a married woman, in many cases you should not worry about your husband's infidelity, and in those cases where you should, I will explain what exactly you should worry about. I will deconstruct male infidelity, so that you can understand better what exactly you should worry about and what you needn't worry about.

If you are a married woman, and your husband cheats on you, these are the the things to consider:

1. If you and your husband are of similar age, your sexual power will wane faster than his does. The greater the difference in your ages (him being older than you), the luckier you are: the less likely it will be that he will leave you for another woman. On the other hand, if you are older than he is, he is more likely to leave you for another (younger) woman.
2. The likelihood that he may leave you for the other woman also depends on her attractiveness (age, fertility, looks, etc) and character. Needless to say, if you have nothing to worry about, then you have nothing to worry about.
3. If you do not have any children, he will have less familial ties to keep him in your marriage. A study has shown that marital stability increases with increasing numbers of children, up to 4 (and then plateaus).
4. You should always worry about STDs that your partner may bring and pass on to you. Of course, the degree to which you should worry depends on how promiscuous the other woman is. If she used to be a prostitute, then that's a cause for alarm, but if she is not by nature a promiscuous woman, then there is less cause for worry. Of course you can insist that he get tested, though STDs take time to show up.
5. If you live in a society that doesn't enforce the marriage contract or doesn't impose any penalties for leaving a marriage (such as alimony, child support, etc), then you should worry because it makes it easier for him to leave you.
6. If you married your husband in haste, then be fully prepared to repent at leisure. If you married the wrong kind of man, then don't expect your marriage to last. You will have to put in more of an effort than is usual to keep your marriage together.
7. If the other woman got pregnant as a result of the affair and there is a chance that the state may compel your husband to pay her child support, then you should worry because his resources will be going to support another woman's children instead of your own.
8. If the other woman's husband is the jealous type, and there is a chance that he is a threat to your family, then you should worry.

Is there anything good about male infidelity? This is a difficult question to answer. Women are subconsciously in competition against each other, even while cooperating with each other. There is a fine balance between the two. Women will tend to cooperate when they are fewer in number and men are plentiful. Women will compete when they are more in number and men are scarce. Life can at times be a zero-sum game. If other women's marriages fail, it can be to your advantage, but not always. For example, if another woman's marriage fails (thus reducing her fertility), your children will have less competition when trying to find a mate. On the other hand, your children will have fewer potential mates to choose from.

So instead of feeling righteous indignation if your husband cheats on you, try thinking about the issue rationally. Society might expect you to be indignant, and you can put on a show for their sake, but if you secretly know that there's nothing to worry about, then why sacrifice your happiness for what's "right"?

Life is a game

Many years ago, this one time while I was reading random articles on Wikipedia, I came across some articles about Scientology. Soon I ventured in that direction outside Wikipedia and found this incredible article called "Life is basically a game".

Now this philosophy really made a big impact and it stayed with me because I understood games, having spent large amounts of time in my childhood playing computer games. But I couldn't quite directly use this knowledge. In fact, this reminds me of a book I have. It's almost 100 years old, and it's a treatise on the topic of advertising. While the book has some value, I don't really have much of an interest in the subject of advertising. So I keep it, hoping that some day it will bring me some value. Similarly, LRH's philosophy of the Game of Life stayed with me because I sensed that it had value, but I couldn't use it. Also, in retrospect, I can say for sure that LRH didn't quite get it right. One reason might be that there are claims that LRH was heavily medicated, and this would have affected his writings. LRH likely also had dishonest intentions, and as a result he could have deliberately made up all kinds of nonsense, thereby unknowingly and unintentionally producing this little gem. A bit like the monkeys typing Shakespeare.

In any case, a little gem it was, and this knowledge - this wisdom - stayed in my mind, dormant, a key waiting for the right lock to come by.

With my recent studies in sociology however, I've come to understand that all life is basically a game. And it is possible that LRH's philosophy was the key to me recognizing this fact. Here I will try to outline what I've found.

• All of life is basically a game.
• The vast majority of people don't realize that life is a game.
• The tiny minority of people who do realize that life is a game:
• of these, the vast majority:
• don't know the rules of the game.
• don't know the winning and losing conditions, and thus don't know how to measure their success or failure
• can only guess at the rules, and thus can't know for sure whether they're playing by the correct rules.
• The game never ends.
• A person can never objectively know, and ultimately won't care whether he succeeded or failed:
• but his success or failure will depend on the success or failure of those who came before
• but his success or failure will affect the success or failure of those coming after.
• so most people, even if they are aware of the game, don't care about it.
• Success can easily be undone by those that come after.
• Sometimes, failure (but not utter failure) can also be reversed by those that come after.
• No one will ever know whether the rules they're playing by are the correct rules.
• Those who aren't aware of the game use the strategy of "follow the herd", ie. do what everyone else is doing. This is a strategy that works, but only if the herd is doing the right things, which is most of the time because the herds that remain are the ones that did the right things. (Clue!) Sometimes though, the herd may start doing the wrong things.