This topic contains 315 replies, has 39 voices, and was last updated by 
IGMOW (I Go My Own Way) 2 years ago.
- AuthorPosts
Might I suggest, rather than continuing our bickering and incessant arguing, we come up with a more productive idea. Let’s say, for now we cannot change the system. So we can either A) Try to placing a MGTOW Manchurian candidate into office or B) Discuss how we can utilize the system to our advantage. Let’s discuss tax breaks (NOT EVASION) we might now be aware of, 401k or IRA,stock options,… simply something productive. I’d rather engage in that as opposed to the squabbling that going on getting us absolutely nowhere…ijs
Funny, isn't it? How women thrive on a mans time, attention and resources, while simultaneously telling him he isn't enough...
@ binary logic
A) politics is a waste of time
B) Many of us who are see things more like Veni are interested in operating as much as we can outside the system rather than with it. I like the idea of discussing those things, but they are better left for different threads. Our different views will make it impossible to discuss what the best way to move forward is.That said, I for one appreciate the attempt to move the thread in another direction.
If you were working class, you would know that.
If you actually had a job and ever did your own taxes, you would know that.
Don’t throw this bulls~~~ at me.
Lol, hypocrite.
I did the math, you’re not going to tell me that it was incorrect because I actually had the numbers, and yes I did my own taxes.
So are you saying if you make 100k off base pay you pay less taxes than someone who makes 50k base and 50k OT? If yes, you are wrong, its that simple. 100k payroll is 100k payroll…doesn’t matter if its straight time, over time, or commission, all uncle Sam looks at is your gross at the end of the year. Here’s the tax law if you want to read it…there isn’t anything in there about premium tax rates on overtime.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/1
Its simply as follows for a single person
Not over $22,100 15% of taxable income.
Over $22,100 but not over $53,500 $3,315, plus 28% of the excess over $22,100.
Over $53,500 but not over $115,000 $12,107, plus 31% of the excess over $53,500.
Over $115,000 but not over $250,000 $31,172, plus 36% of the excess over $115,000.
Over $250,000 $79,772, plus 39.6% of the excess over $250,000.So what’s that mean if you make 100k? On 0-22,100 you pay 15% of that money, on 22,10-53,500 you pay 28%, and on 53,501-100,000 you pay 31%. If you made 100k you’d pay…
22,100*.15=3315
53500-22100=31400*.28 = 8792
8792+3315=12,107 <—-see where those numbers are coming from?
100,000-53,500=46,500*.31=14,415
12,107+14,415 = 26,522.Its just how the system works man, I get paid bi-weekly. My first week at my job I started mid cycle…so when the government taxed me they took next to nothing out because 1400 dollars bi weekly means I was making 700*52=36400 a year as far as their system is concerned, so my check for that period was taxed accordingly. Similarly I had a period where I worked a bunch of overtime and earned a 6,000 dollar check, and I got clobbered in taxes, because I was taxed like I was making 3000*52=156,000 a year.
Just a little FYI if you’d appreciate a little education rather then stomping your feet like a 4 year old and demanding you are right because you say so with nothing to back it up.
I suppose you got your job without applying online? What did you use to fill out the application? Again, a person must have access to the internet to apply for a job, and you didn’t dispute that because you CAN’T, it’s an irrefutable fact. You probably used your home computer, which is an item that is exceptionally more expensive than a smart phone.
Yup, I applied from home because I can comfortably afford a home computer and it never hindered my ability to have an emergency fund set aside. If not, I could have showed up to work early and they’d have happily let me use one of the computers there as my boss knew I was looking around anyhow and never expected me to stay for a career. If that wasn’t an option I could have just asked a friend, neighbor, or family member to stop over and use their computer and none of them would have minded if they knew it was for a job hunt and not just to watch porn or play games. If that wasn’t an option I’d take a trip to the local library where we all have access to free computers. All those options wouldn’t have cost me a dime.
Also…another option that is a hell of a lot more affordable than a smart phone for someone who can’t even scrape together a 1000 dollar emergency fund is to simply acquire a used laptop. I bought a new one for school a few years back for 400 bucks that was more than adequate for internet and school work…I could have gotten a cheaper one but I wanted to put a few games on it as well. I’m sure you could buy yourself a laptop that costs 1-2 months of what a cell package with a data plan costs and just go somewhere with free wifi. Lot’s of restaurants, cafes, and malls have it, or depending where you live you might be able to leech it off a neighbor. I know a guy around here that parks or sits on a bench in a local McDonald’s parking lot with his laptop when he wants to get online. if its cold out he’ll go in and buy a coffee and sits down inside for as long as he wants and nobody cares. He just doesn’t use internet much and doesn’t think its worth it to pay for it when he could do that for free the few times a month he wants to check something. Again…if you just want internet for applying for jobs, this idea isn’t quite free but its a hell of a lot cheaper then dishing out 100+ a month for a smart phone.
I did dispute that, because what you said was wrong, and rather than dispute what I’ve said you just say you are right and that is irrefutable fact. Its not a need to have a smart phone or even home internet for that matter, its a convenience measure and there are cheaper and even free alternatives available.
Do you view me as an opponent for a debate, or a collaborator for a discussion?
You obviously have me mistaken for someone who cares what your opinion of me is.
Then you probably shouldn’t ask how I view you, just to turn around and claim you don’t care what my opinion of you is, hypocrite.
I do not “despise” people who have passive income, I simply pointed out the hypocrisy of people who claim that “no one should earn your living for you”, while someone else earns their living for them.
Which is bulls~~~, because as I’ve already pointed out earlier in the thread the vast majority of millionaires…in other words people who have acquired enough wealth to live off passive income…are self made. To which you replied that’s, nobody is self made, nobody earns anything, blah blah. Apparently if I earn enough resources to purchase enough of a stake in rental properties and businesses to not have to punch a clock anymore someone else is “earning my living for me,” regardless of how much work and resource allocation it took me to get to that point. Sorry bro, nobody is earning that for me, I’m earning it for myself.
Discuss how we can utilize the system to our advantage. Let’s discuss tax breaks (NOT EVASION) we might now be aware of, 401k or IRA,stock options,… simply something productive. I’d rather engage in that as opposed to the squabbling that going on getting us absolutely nowhere
Its what Doc and I were discussing with Veni earlier in the thread, but he disliked the idea of passive income and seems to think nobody earns anything and nobody is self made. I worked hard in a s~~~ty warehouse job for years, paid my way through college, and utilized that education to obtain a higher paying job. Yes, I earned that, no, it wasn’t handed to me or didn’t just magically fall out of thin air.
Now that I have a higher income…what am I going to do with it? Simple, I am going to save and turn as much of it as possible into passive income streams so I can retire super early…but you know, Veni also claims passive income streams are exploiting people. Somehow if I purchase a property and let someone live in it and they pay me rent, I’m exploiting them. Somehow, if I buy shares in a business that creates a product and sells it at a profit, and then I get a cut of said profits via dividends…I’m exploiting someone.
So after all us successful guys are pretty much accused of not earning anything and exploiting people, Veni can’t seem to figure out why personal comments about him have been made. Sorry bro, when you s~~~ on people like that expect to be s~~~ upon in return.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that excessive government debt is a good thing, or that our current system is perfect, its just that short of a complete system melt down we aren’t going back to a gold standard, and even under the gold standard, like Doc pointed out, the money supply was inflated by issuance of notes not actually being backed by gold. No matter what we do, currency is simply a medium of trade, and relative worth between currencies, commodities, and labor are going to rise and fall as conditions change.
“Then you probably shouldn’t ask how I view you, just to turn around and claim you don’t care what my opinion of you is, hypocrite.”
At no point in time, did I ask you how you viewed me. This is a bold face lie, one which is impossible for you to prove, because you will not find a quote anywhere that says I asked your opinion of me, personally.. and yes, there is still no such thing as self made. Everyone who had success was provided that opportunity by someone else. Had they been told “no”, it would not have happened. No one is a success without the network. Period. The only reason you are still alive, is because someone else decided to let you live. If a big fish wants to shut you down, they will do it. A smart phone is the best option for lower income people to combine all of the things that you have access to from multiple devices and services, into a single device. Also, they have them starting at just over $18. This is me…still not caring what you think about me..
Let me ask you this simple question: Do you view me as an opponent for a debate, or a collaborator for a discussion?
At no point in time, did I ask you how you viewed me.
Actually, you did, I just opted not to take one of your choices because neither was accurate.
Everyone who had success was provided that opportunity by someone else. Had they been told “no”, it would not have happened.
And this is why I don’t see eye to eye with you. I happen to believe not many of us simply fall into success, we work for it and create it. Its not like someone just magically implanted an engineering degree in my brain while I was sleeping and offered me a 6 figure job the next morning, and then told me don’t worry about showing up and actually doing anything productive, we’ll just pay you anyhow. Between education, skills, and on the job experience my job isn’t one that you can just go pull some random off the street and have them do, and I’m compensated for that accordingly
No one is a success without the network. Period.
And how do you build said network? I didn’t just happen to get great academic and professional references just because people thought I looked like a nice guy. It was because I earned good grades in school, you know the same school I worked at a s~~~ty job for years to pay for, and was a hard worker and good employee. It was because of an ex-professor of mine that I got an interview at my current company who was willing to go to bat for me because he knew I wouldn’t make him look like an idiot when I got the job, and I can’t imagine it didn’t help when they called my previous employer and both my immediate supervisor and the company owner both of whom I had worked under for 10+ years put a good word in for me of which neither was under no obligation to do.
The only reason you are still alive, is because someone else decided to let you live. If a big fish wants to shut you down, they will do it.
Glad I don’t live in a lawless society or participate in illegal activity in which I have to live in constant fear of random people or “business” partners wanting to knock me off on a whim.
A smart phone is the best option for lower income people to combine all of the things that you have access to from multiple devices and services, into a single device. Also, they have them starting at just over $18.
Lol…even though I’ve suggested multiple cheaper options, and in case you can’t figure it out, its not the actual cost of the phone itself that is the issue, you can probably get a “free” one if you look around, its the service that ends up costing you in the long run.
I laughed at people nonstop in college who would bitch about their student loans and then talk about how they just dumped hundreds of dollars on the newest iPhone and spend 130 a month on some premium data package when all they had to do was walk 100 feet down the hall to a computer lab and free internet. Did they need that phone? Hell no, they’d have been better served putting that money towards their school so they had less debt. My point is, some people are just financial retards. If someone can’t scrape together 1,000 bucks for an emergency fund but can dump 1,000+ a year on a smart phone the problem isn’t the system is designed to f~~~ them, the problem is they are an idiot. I know if I was hurting for cash a 9.99 land line and an occasional trip to the library, a friends, a family members, or a neighbors house if I needed to use email or apply for some jobs would do the exact same job any smart phone would, and it would save me a bundle of money.
I have to concede the telephone issue to Beer; telephones are absurdly expensive.
I used to have Skype ($20 / mo), but decided I did not need a telephone as it would suffice to use e-mail.
I have to concede the telephone issue to Beer; telephones are absurdly expensive.
I used to have Skype ($20 / mo), but decided I did not need a telephone as it would suffice to use e-mail.
Being cheap is the only way to win in the current system. Shaving money off your monthly expenses is every bit as good for your finances as getting a raise at work, but unfortunately for some people they just lack the ability to differentiate between needs and wants.
I know far more people that are slaves to consumerism than slaves to a system stacked against them. I feel kind of bad so many people are their own worst enemies and so oblivious to it. I used to work with one idiot who worked a full time job and 2 part time jobs. He’d brag about his 170 dollar a month cell phone package all the time, and brag how he had some ridiculously over priced cable package with all the premium channels, that ironically he was never home to enjoy because he worked 3 jobs, and regardless of which job he was going to he’d pick up an iced coffee and sometimes a snack from DD on the way…probably averaged 10 dollars a day with that habit. He literally could have dropped the 200+ dollar a month cable bill and picked up 8 dollar a month Netflix of which he’d never run out of content on with the amount he was actually home to watch it, and got some basic 40-50 dollar a month cell phone package, and dropped the buying coffee out habit and probably banked at least an extra 500 a month…but no, he NEEDED all that stuff. He could have literally quit one of the part time gigs if he made a few cuts and had more free time and more money. He’d also brag about taking girls out and spending money on them(typical blue piller seeing vagina validation)…I can’t imagine what he blew taking random skanks out either.
The guy was grossing 60-70k a year, never went to college so there is no way he had student debt, and the last I heard from him he was 35k in debt renting a basement out from a friend because he had nowhere else to stay. My highest grossing year at that point, like 42k, I had just finished paying for my second college degree, I had about 10k worth of equity in a property, and 30k in liquid assets…was it the system that put someone 10 years older than me making more money almost 100,000 dollars behind me, or just stupidity? Falling for the trap of consumerism is the closest thing we have to slavery in America.
Yes. Consumerism is part of the cult of the new world order, but so is callousness towards our fellow men.
We have a term for that in Australia. It’s called The Tall Poppy Syndrome and it makes me sick to my stomach.
Survivor: To me, specialization means efficiency and more free time. Despite what Snake says, if people’s quality of life were so great on small farms, you’d have population growth in Appalachia and people moving TO rural areas. Of course, we’ve experienced just the opposite, for over a century — we’ve had a mass migration to urban areas for greater economic opportunity… And this trend is global, not just in the US. In my opinion, people don’t move to rural areas because they desire consumer goods obtainable through monetary exchange, and they don’t like to work outside with their hands for long hours in all weather. I’ve lived in Appalachia for YEARS and the poverty is awful. A large fraction of the population in Appalachia receives government benefits.
I buy lots of goods and services, but I would argue I’m not part of the ‘cult of consumerism’ because I don’t carry crushing credit card debts and don’t buy s~~~ to impress others. S~~~, I own and live in a house built in the 1950’s.
I’ve read [Ayn] Rand; I’m familiar with the concept of individuals as an end in themselves.
Beer: Yes, yes, and yes! I bitch about Big Government like a f~~~ing madman, but the reality is, if someone is a ‘spender’, and government comprised only 10% of the economy, they’d still spend everything they made and run up their credit cards. You and me (‘savers’) are going to save regardless, but if government is smaller, we’ll get richer faster. And the economy will be better for everybody because resources will be directed by market forces instead of politics (less waste).
Survivor: Fuel could be saved by insourcing? Yes, but the fuel used for supertankers and bulk cargo transports, has virtually no other use; bunker fuel is thick and must be heated to even burn. Now, the pollution caused by burning low grade marine fuel, that’s a separate and interesting issue… Insourcing didn’t help in the 193o’s, look at the history of the Hawley-Smoot Tarriff. ‘Slavery’ to you is ‘opportunity’ to a Chinese peasant from a farm, who has moved to the city to grow rich working long hours in a factory. Why did he choose this over subsistence agriculture?
Survivor: ‘Dehumanizing’? ‘Race to the bottom’? Let me ask you this: Has the average standard of living worldwide INCREASED in your lifetime or decreased? That may be a better way to answer the globalization question. People keep talking about caring about your fellow man, but don’t give a s~~~ about the Chinese peasant who has improved his lot in the textile factory.
Economics is not a zero sum game. Let’s say 5 times as many Engineers graduate this year as past years and/or we allow more green cards for Indian Engineers. What will the result be? Wages in Engineering will go down, some engineers will work in other fields. Companies will pay less for engineers, lowering their costs, and lowering price points for goods and services, albeit marginally. Wages and prices are not independent. Many of our greatest inventors and entrepreneurs were immigrants, so I say, bring it on! These immigrants must eat, must have housing, health care, etc — so their consumption, creates more jobs. How are immigrants any different than native population growth? The economy grew even with population growth, did it not? How are immigrant workers any different? The only immigrants I don’t like are the ones that want to blow s~~~ up and shoot people, as well as the freeloaders.
More scientists/engineers, and lower wages for same will be a detriment for me personally, but would create an engine of innovation in America and a great boon to the economy. New companies, new products. I’d love to have all the Asian engineering students STAY HERE after graduation!
As for the ‘system working for me’, at the taxes I pay, I feel like I’m working for the system about 40% of my workdays.
Nobody is being disallowed from being self reliant. Very few people are choosing that lifestyle. Granted, there are some restrictions (e.g. relatively modest property taxes), but that relatively low tax is NOT why people in the rural Appalachian county in which I resided for years, were not self sufficient. I knew somebody that lived the lifestyle, in a tent, along a river, and hunted ginseng. He quit after a while. It’s easier to work a minimum wage job and buy groceries than grow grain, keep a garden and livestock, etc.
As for growing rich working in factories, I know multiple hourly workers who have done JUST THAT… and this is in a period when manufacturing is in decline in Amerika. Granted, you need more skills (welding, pipefitting, electrical, etc) to make better pay, than you needed, say, in Detroit in the heyday of the auto industry. Most importantly, you need to be a SAVER like me and ‘Beer’ and not a ‘spender’.
Survivor: Beer argued costcutting on an individual basis was a gateway to prosperity — i.e. ‘save and invest’ to paraphrase him. I agree with him. At least that’s how I read his posts.
You failed to address my point of how the economy, on a per capita GDP basis, grew, even when population grew. Bear in mind, when you attempt to answer this, that much of the population growth was in immigrants.
Of course, the answer is, specialization and intensification — factory production — increased prosperity. As did agricultural intensification.
How does cheaper labor undercut the citizenry? Cheaper labor = lower costs of production = lower prices, all other things being equal. Do you want markets to set prices, or Big Government? I prefer markets.
In a ‘post industrial’ society, there are still plenty of SERVICE jobs available. I work in the dwindling manufacturing sector, but consume lots of services. I had my teeth cleaned yesterday. I had work done on my house the week before, and my car repaired the week before that.
As for conspiracy day, what conspiracies did I promote?
Most importantly, you need to be a SAVER like me and ‘Beer’ and not a ‘spender’.
Yeah, I need to save money from a nonexistent job. “Get a job you f~~~ing bums.”
In a ‘post industrial’ society, there are still plenty of SERVICE jobs available. I work in the dwindling manufacturing sector, but consume lots of services. I had my teeth cleaned yesterday.
One of my exes was a dental hygienist in the industry for 20 years and could not get a full time position anywhere. The market moves to the areas of opportunity, and then becomes saturated.
Crypto currency will be the new beginning of totalitarian earth state.
Ever watch a movie called ‘In Time’ with Justin Timberlake playing as the protagonist?
That is the future of crypto currency living condition and if we assume that it cannot be hacked from my point of view.
Let me ask you this simple question: Do you view me as an opponent for a debate, or a collaborator for a discussion?
At no point in time, did I ask you how you viewed me.
Actually, you did, I just opted not to take one of your choices because neither was accurate.
Everyone who had success was provided that opportunity by someone else. Had they been told “no”, it would not have happened.
Glad I don’t live in a lawless society or participate in illegal activity in which I have to live in constant fear of random people or “business” partners wanting to knock me off on a whim.
A smart phone is the best option for lower income people to combine all of the things that you have access to from multiple devices and services, into a single device. Also, they have them starting at just over $18.
I specified “opponent”, or not. I didn’t ask you your personal opinion of my intellect and knowledge. I asked you if you perceive me to be an opponent. That is not the same. I didn’t provide “Putz” as an option. Therefore, this is straw man fallacy. You do live in a live in a “lawless society”. Law is a religion to be believed only by the subjects. It does not apply to the ruling class. What the state cannot accomplish by legal means, it accomplished by illegal means behind the veil of secrecy and plausible deniability. We do not have the rule of law, what we have is the color of law; the law of the jungle. If this were not the case, espionage would not exist. Ken O’Keefe champions this fact on a regular basis:
If a person is to gain employment, they must have access to a phone, and the internet. It doesn’t mean they have to have the highest cost data plan to go with their phone, and even you conceded that people can even acquire smart phones for free. They can have them unlocked, and then buy a cheap Wal-Mart card to acquire service dirt cheap. I did this, so I know it to be a fact. Possession of a smart phone is in no way an indicator of frivolous spending. Your criticism is unwarranted. Even impoverished people from India can have smart phones now, and they do. In fact, India is the fastest growing market for mobile in the world right now. Have a look at how much it costs them per month for service. You might even bust out laughing.
Excuse my ignorance, because i’m not a native english speaker, what is shiznickel?
Well Survivor, between yourself and Veni, I’m honestly feeling a renewed sense of faith in humanity. You’ve both managed to convey, far more clearly than I ever could, my own sincere misgivings about the state of ‘the state’ and its respective global proponents within the establishment. I honestly think the worlds’ population is suffering from a sort of collective trauma since I can’t believe that any sane person could be so utterly and unashamedly bovine in the face of such conspicuous exploitation.
I think it’s a shame, though understandable, that whilst so many of us discovered MGTOW as a result of a growing sense of indignation towards the increasing disparity in ‘gender politics’, that sense of social injustice, for some, apparently ends there. Surely, MGTOW isn’t just about men opting to free themselves from restrictive social conventions but also, to free ourselves from ANY would be oppressive influences. It strikes me that, even in ‘relationship politics’, where the dynamics of power are frequently cited as the catalyst for destructive marital breakdowns, money is often the chief culprit.
FrankOne, you strike me as a very pleasant, optimistic, individual but, and I realise this is entirely subjective, to me, you seem to reside in a dreamland, completely divorced from the reality to which the vast majority of the population are exposed. You speak of ‘rich’ factory workers and the benign influence of mass immigration. Those factory workers and engineers or whom you speak, for the most part, have no interest in aspiring to US citizenship, they just want to pilfer the last of your silverware. That paltry $12 an hour that so many of your so-called indigents are so reluctant to break their backs for is the equivalent of a Doctors salary to an immigrants estranged but eminently resourceful family and that’s just where most of it’s headed.
Oh, also, saturating the job market with imported blur collar workers does not, to my knowledge, result in ‘cheaper’ goods and services, it merely increases the contractors profit margin.
Bob: MOST of the factory workers I know, are NOT rich; they live hand-to-mouth, paycheck-to-paycheck, and want/need advances. The minority — the ones that ARE wealthier have made SOUND financial decisions. These typically comprise saving and investing, but some are so ambitious, they own and maintain rental property. They also get more responsible, as they get older typically. This distinction even transcends their pay or skill levels; the ones that save and invest responsibly, are wealthy and have a plan for retirement, even if they aren’t among the highest paid, though the two often do go together. Hell, the JANITOR where I work, owns stocks.
I’m hardly a defender of the State as presently constituted; my politics are libertarian, and in some areas, anarcho-capitalist, with a belief in competing governments.
Regarding the immigrants, if you look at a chart of population and GDP, you’ll see, they both increased simultaneously. I think this is possible even today, but the freeloader problem needs to be eliminated by a reduction in entitlements.
I disagree about migrant workers repatriating their incomes being so detrimental (I’m not an economist, but the technical term, is foreign remittances). If you take what is arguably the largest group, Hispanics, they’re only sending 10% of their income back home https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remittance#The_United_States but as you so correctly note, that amounts to 50-60% of the income of the recipients in their home country — this income goes a LONG way in Mexico. How are they ‘pilfering my silverware’ when they’re WORKING? Some migrant workers DO wish to become citizens. There is a waiting list. These remittances are peanuts; about $60 billion from US to all of Latin America. Total US wages are something on the order of 14,000 billion = 14 trillion. I do believe if you suddenly allow too many foreign workers in at one time, it would create a problem or a shock to labor markets. But these foreign workers still need to eat, enjoy entertainment, and consume services.
I also completely disagree about labor costs vs costs of goods. If I can hire Mexican workers for $0.10 on the dollar, I will do so, compete with existing entrenched companies, and this will drive cost of goods down. Some industries are more sensitive to labor costs; others are more capital-intensive (e.g. the industry I work in, the Chemical sector, requires expensive equipment, and energy, which comprises more of our Production costs than our labor, typically. If this WEREN’T the case, why are labor-intensive goods from China significantly cheaper than US made goods? Take blue jeans, for example (I know there is still at least one domestic manufacturer of them in my State), they are priced at least twice as much as foreign-made jeans. The ‘contractors aren’t just realizing increased profit margins’. Rather, the Chinese manufacturers compete with one another AND with Bangladeshi and even lower cost labor manufacturers. Manufacturers do not SET prices in free markets — the MARKET sets prices, and you’re missing this by making a statement like that. The Rise of the Rest is not necessarily the Decline of the West. Aside from oligarchies and government-granted monopolies, there is real competition.
I think it’s a shame, though understandable, that whilst so many of us discovered MGTOW as a result of a growing sense of indignation towards the increasing disparity in ‘gender politics’, that sense of social injustice, for some, apparently ends there. Surely, MGTOW isn’t just about men opting to free themselves from restrictive social conventions but also, to free ourselves from ANY would be oppressive influences. It strikes me that, even in ‘relationship politics’, where the dynamics of power are frequently cited as the catalyst for destructive marital breakdowns, money is often the chief culprit.
I have similar thoughts. You would think that more guys would be like “If I was lied to about marriage, maybe I’ve been lied to about other things as well.” For me the red pill was just one step in the search for truth and justice. I found it because of some things I learned previously. That said, it is cool that mgtow can attract such a variety of guys. Most people probably think of mgtow as “tin foil hat” folk as Doc put it, but mgtow also includes our non tin foil people too.
FrankOne, forgive me for fragmenting your very sound post, I find it easier to digest in smaller portions.
…The minority — the ones that ARE wealthier have made SOUND financial decisions. These typically comprise saving and investing, but some are so ambitious, they own and maintain rental property. They also get more responsible, as they get older typically. This distinction even transcends their pay or skill levels; the ones that save and invest responsibly, are wealthy and have a plan for retirement, even if they aren’t among the highest paid, though the two often do go together. Hell, the JANITOR where I work, owns stocks.
That’s all well and good Frank and I don’t mean to belittle those hard working men and women who have tried, some successfully, to rise above their stations, so to speak, but, these inspiring anecdotes are really only exceptions to the rule. I don’t think people are naturally idle nor I do believe that anyone is entirely talentless but I DO believe that ‘the system’ unjustly constrains individuals by forcing them put aside their aspirations for the sake of expediency. You couldn’t be a subsistence farmer even if you wanted to be, you’d eventually be forcefully evicted for not paying your council tax or whatever the US equivalent is.
So you find yourself some menial work which barely services your day to day living costs and as the days roll into months, then years and so on, what little money you might have scrimped and saved has been seriously undermined by the machinations of the International banking cartel. It’s a struggle for these people to stay motivated when the goalposts are constantly moving.
Regarding the immigrants, if you look at a chart of population and GDP, you’ll see, they both increased simultaneously. I think this is possible even today, but the freeloader problem needs to be eliminated by a reduction in entitlements.
Oh sure, I’m actually very anti-‘welfare’. In fact, I would argue that I’m probably less scrupulous than you in that respect since I don’t believe in ‘forced’ charity. Of course, I sympathise with those who have congenital disorders or debilitating injuries/illnesses but I think that the presumption that the community should share in their ill fortune without first appealing to their charitable natures on a voluntary basis is not the ‘correct’ thing to do, it just seems like another Keynesianesque distortion of social evolution. My guess is that most people would want to contribute a modest portion of their earnings to help those in need but it should not be an obligation. It also means that we’d get a far more accurate reflection of society’s true values and priorities, not just the pretence of moral rectitude.
I disagree about migrant workers repatriating their incomes being so detrimental (I’m not an economist, but the technical term, is foreign remittances). If you take what is arguably the largest group, Hispanics, they’re only sending 10% of their income back home .. but as you so correctly note, that amounts to 50-60% of the income of the recipients in their home country — this income goes a LONG way in Mexico. How are they ‘pilfering my silverware’ when they’re WORKING? Some migrant workers DO wish to become citizens. There is a waiting list. These remittances are peanuts; about $60 billion from US to all of Latin America. Total US wages are something on the order of 14,000 billion = 14 trillion.
Officially, they may only be sending 10% of their income back home but I’m talking about the colossal black hole that is the ‘off-the-books’ ledger. I see Poles and Romanians here whipping out their rolls of twenties every time they pay for a BLT at the local sandwich stall. There is a thriving, invisible, economy that most law-abiding citizens aren’t even aware of and it’s most rife at the fringes of society. Many immigrants are good, hard working people who DO aspire to a Western life but there are just as many, perhaps more (given the wholesale influx of less desirable types over the last decade). who see our ‘decadent’ Western cultures as nothing more than a free lunch. Any social improvements back home that come at the expense of the natively born population only serves to ‘equalise’ the living standards of the lower classes across respective National borders but no such compromise will ever be foisted on the upper echelons of society. As for the middle-class, they appear to be stratifying as economic pressures squeeze them at the centre. If you want to do away with welfare, the Nation is going to have to close ranks or witness its descent into social disorder.
I do believe if you suddenly allow too many foreign workers in at one time, it would create a problem or a shock to labor markets. But these foreign workers still need to eat, enjoy entertainment, and consume services.
Aaahhh but of course, you’re in the US, I’m really using the plight of Western Europe as an example, if for no other reason than to highlight the precedent for posterity. According to Wikipedia, the United Kingdom has a population density of 679 people/square mile (that’s double the density of China), in contrast to the US’s very modest 85 per square mile. In the West Midlands, Yorkshire and the Humber, and the North West, as well as in London, the most popular name for baby boys is ‘Mohammed’. Why do I mention this? Because the problem with mass immigration is not just economic, it’s social too – we simply can’t absorb that much foreign culture, but, for some reason, the policy makers appear to be indifferent. Also, again, these immigrants, for the most part, do not engage with the greater society, they ‘eat, enjoy entertainment and consume services’, all within the isolated communities they’ve established.
I also completely disagree about labor costs vs costs of goods. If I can hire Mexican workers for $0.10 on the dollar, I will do so, compete with existing entrenched companies, and this will drive cost of goods down. Some industries are more sensitive to labor costs; others are more capital-intensive (e.g. the industry I work in, the Chemical sector, requires expensive equipment, and energy, which comprises more of our Production costs than our labor, typically.
Aaahhh, well then, maybe this is the real point of contention. The only way I can justify the existence of ‘the state’ as a legitimate legal fiction, is if it priorities the concerns of its constituents above all others and that doesn’t include fast tracked ‘naturalised’ migrant voters. I’d like to see the UK adopt a protectionist policy. Now that would really expose the hypocrisy of the establishment. Sure, it may not be competitive, but it would be honest and equitable.
If this WEREN’T the case, why are labor-intensive goods from China significantly cheaper than US made goods? Take blue jeans, for example (I know there is still at least one domestic manufacturer of them in my State), they are priced at least twice as much as foreign-made jeans. The ‘contractors aren’t just realizing increased profit margins’. Rather, the Chinese manufacturers compete with one another AND with Bangladeshi and even lower cost labor manufacturers. Manufacturers do not SET prices in free markets — the MARKET sets prices, and you’re missing this by making a statement like that. The Rise of the Rest is not necessarily the Decline of the West. Aside from oligarchies and government-granted monopolies, there is real competition.
I think Veni did a good job of addressing that observation. China should not be held up as a paragon of political and social virtue, it’s an abomination. Also, I’m surprised by how trivial you perceive “oligarchies and government-granted monopolies” to be – systemic corruption is not a mere ‘aside’!
I have similar thoughts. You would think that more guys would be like “If I was lied to about marriage, maybe I’ve been lied to about other things as well.” For me the red pill was just one step in the search for truth and justice. I found it because of some things I learned previously. That said, it is cool that mgtow can attract such a variety of guys. Most people probably think of mgtow as “tin foil hat” folk as Doc put it, but mgtow also includes our non tin foil people too.
Exactly Tiga! I was a staunch advocate of the status quo once but red pill enlightenment has opened my eyes to a lot of social and political injustices. If there’s one thing I can’t stand, it’s hypocrisy.
- AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
921526
921524
919244
916783
915526
915524
915354
915129
914037
909862
908811
908810
908500
908465
908464
908300
907963
907895
907477
902002
901301
901106
901105
901104
901024
901017
900393
900392
900391
900390
899038
898980
896844
896798
896797
895983
895850
895848
893740
893036
891671
891670
891336
891017
890865
889894
889741
889058
888157
887960
887768
886321
886306
885519
884948
883951
881340
881339
880491
878671
878351
877678
