Snorrius
Librivorator
"The Intellectual". Or "Le Intellectuel". Sounds good
.
What are you going to do after dollar's collapse?
- Thread starter Snorrius
- Start date
.
Kozmos
Jew Detective
By what virtues? Excluding notions of biggest color on map.
Harv
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,949
I did not read all the pages of this thread, but here is what I took from 2008:
The US Dollar has a value in that it pays debts that are denominated in US Dollars. So when the price of everything was collapsing in 2008, there was a need for lots of US Dollars to pay off the debts. I never before imagined that deflation was possible in the US economic system, given a paper currency. I thought the endgame was massive inflation.
Is the whole thing happening again because we did not address the issues? I don't know. It sure looks like a mess.
Regarding the original post, I do not think the scenario can happen unless the US Dollar loses its status as the reserve currency (and we go back to gold or silver?) or perhaps the USA decides to eliminate the debt ceiling.
What can I do about it? I do not know. Gold and silver might store value after the situation has stabilized. Copper might be good. It is a little harder to steal $100K worth of copper than it is to steal $100K of gold. Shotgun shells might be the barter currency of choice.
I imagine it is very difficult to get out of the country with any meaningful quantity of these. I think I would have to have the physical commodity stockpiled outside the country. I also imagine to the OP, this is only sensible and he is trying to tell us to wake up.
Failing all that, and assuming we go back to a barter economy - My skills are mostly intellectual and not much use in a barter economy. However, my back is good for a while.
The US Dollar has a value in that it pays debts that are denominated in US Dollars. So when the price of everything was collapsing in 2008, there was a need for lots of US Dollars to pay off the debts. I never before imagined that deflation was possible in the US economic system, given a paper currency. I thought the endgame was massive inflation.
Is the whole thing happening again because we did not address the issues? I don't know. It sure looks like a mess.
Regarding the original post, I do not think the scenario can happen unless the US Dollar loses its status as the reserve currency (and we go back to gold or silver?) or perhaps the USA decides to eliminate the debt ceiling.
What can I do about it? I do not know. Gold and silver might store value after the situation has stabilized. Copper might be good. It is a little harder to steal $100K worth of copper than it is to steal $100K of gold. Shotgun shells might be the barter currency of choice.
I imagine it is very difficult to get out of the country with any meaningful quantity of these. I think I would have to have the physical commodity stockpiled outside the country. I also imagine to the OP, this is only sensible and he is trying to tell us to wake up.
Failing all that, and assuming we go back to a barter economy - My skills are mostly intellectual and not much use in a barter economy. However, my back is good for a while.
So this certain thread has turned into a hymn to a natural selection, preventing the unneeded line from the reproduction (if i correctly got the complaints listed) simply to move an attention from the some years old incompetent analysis case fail? Good job, Nature, i guess.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
The funny thing is, this whole "men used to be able to conquest and plunder and get babes" thing is still going on. There are a few men dominating the rest and getting all kinds of groupie gals. "I miss the old days when a few great men could dominate the many"... it's like, dude, this is the old days, and you're the many.
Snorrius
Librivorator
You are wrong. "Traditional society" exactly were trying to curb this behaviour by encouraging women to select mate more responsibly. Now, exactly, a woman, liberated from shackles of culture, uses select strategies which work wonderful in African savannah but not really quite good in modern society. "Traditional society" was an effort to "update" human, "emancipation" and "progress" returns us to pre-historic times.
Well, whatever. If this or that civilization decided commited suicide then what I can do? If only enjoy the decline
.
azzaman333
meh
You are wrong. "Traditional society" exactly were trying to curb this behaviour by encouraging women to select mate more responsibly. Now, exactly, a woman, liberated from shackles of culture, uses select strategies which work wonderful in African savannah but not really quite good in modern society. "Traditional society" was an effort to "update" human, "emancipation" and "progress" returns us to pre-historic times.
Well, whatever. If this or that civilization decided commited suicide then what I can do? If only enjoy the decline
I reckon you need to look at your own personal inadequacies rather than blaming society for your inability to pick up chicks and get laid. You're like those guys who are all "hurr durr im nice to girls they should suck my dick" while ignoring the fact that their personalities are completely intolerable. If you want to get your dick wet you've gotta be appealing to the womenfolk, not just exist.
Snorrius
Librivorator
You have one misconception and one false aspiration.
Your first misconception is that I have problems with "picking up chicks". You also, it seems, think that for me it a matter of utmost importance. Those are probably stems from your own simplificated life. Having no other goals in life excluding "getting laid", eating, and drinking, you can not fathom there are things more important. I know you will not believe it as your mind is constrained, so I am not going to try to convince you.
Your false aspiration is that you want me change me my mind using monkey-escew blabbering on "getting laid" et cetera, and not using rational arguments. Hear yourself -- you only can speak in animalistic language, full of primitive instincts. Detestable.
azzaman333
meh
Mate, I couldn't give a stuff about getting my dick wet. Pitches cost money, I'd rather spend that money on getting blind drunk that some unreliable other. But I see blokes who have no intellect whatsoever picking up chicks through their confidence and humour. They're thick as a brick, but the birds don't care, he's funny, moderately attractive and doesnt have the personality of a brick wall, so they spread their legs or open their mouth or whatever. You're clearly jealous of these meatheads, and you're blaming society for your own inadequacies. Get over it, work on not being a dullard and pick up some of that puss you desperately crave.
jackelgull
An aberration of nature
I wasn't going to say anything as watching Snorrius getting lambasted is like watching a slow moving train wreck in the making with the train being full of jerks. On one hand, I feel a little bad, on the other, this is entertaining, and I have little sympathy for a person with such views. However I find the attitude of "Dude,just get laid" to be troubling. What of I don't want to get laid, or go through the motions of picking up chicks? Does that make me abnormal, or wrong? Does that mean that I'm not embracing my manliness?
azzaman333
meh
Nah, nothing wrong with that. No one needs to go out on a Saturday night and find some drunk slut to bang. If that's what you wanna do, go ahead, if you don't wanna do it then that's fine too. Just don't come out and complain about how society is wrong for not providing you with a reliable root when you're not getting it.
Personally, I'm probably in the same boat as you more or less. Not particularly interested in going out and getting laid every weekend. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. You're not expecting society to provide you with your wants and desires, so it's not a criticism of you at all.
plarq
Crazy forever
I certainly would not blame chicks for using basic instinct as criteria of selecting mates, anyway, evolution strategy is collective. There does not exist a strategy only considering free-moving individuals.
If one does not care to make it with the ladies, there is no excuse for that person not to have got us to Mars by now.
Zkribbler
Deity
gay_Aleks
from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!
There's no women on Phobos. Our dear MRAs can hope that there are little green (wo)men out there in Mars, but by what we've seen, there's nothing there on Phobos.
Snorrius
Librivorator
Why do not you start "pick up" courses? It seems to be a little bit higher then your abilities but a man is something which should be trancsended.
Now, if you have some other thoughts on topic except third-rate advices, feel free to share.
I remark as a side note, that anyone who really wish to "pick up chicks", better not to follow his advices, because:
He certainly saw this happening but evidently was not a participant. No suprise here as majority of those who started to give ridiculous advices do not really have a clue what are they talking about. I did not want to press it, so the serious topic of feminism's heinosity would not went astray.
I will recap what we have now.
Basically, I won, because almost no rational arguments were not voiced. There was sure a lot of ad hominem arguments but they are not really arguments, because ad hominem arguments are voice by intellectually challenged people who just envious of me being so smart. I advice them to stop for a time futile attempts to get laid and read a book.
jackelgull
An aberration of nature
Hey Snorrius, I'm curious how comfortable is your head when it is stuck so far up your...
Let me try to channel my frustration in a more constructive direction. So your argument is essentially- if women and men don't follow certain gender roles, society and the world will end. You say that feminism has encouraged irresponsible practices by females like one night stands and the like. You claim that the world would be better if the government provided a wife to great men so the colonize new worlds and not worry about reproduction. Am I right? I want to see if I have your argument right before I criticize it.
Let me try to channel my frustration in a more constructive direction. So your argument is essentially- if women and men don't follow certain gender roles, society and the world will end. You say that feminism has encouraged irresponsible practices by females like one night stands and the like. You claim that the world would be better if the government provided a wife to great men so the colonize new worlds and not worry about reproduction. Am I right? I want to see if I have your argument right before I criticize it.
Snorrius
Librivorator
Essentically, correct.
Close but I do not think government should do it like a modern government does it. I.e. it will not hand out women directly.
Traditional European society solved several problems:
1) First, by supporting set of rules which encouraged women and men to marry one on one, they gave most men a stake in society in form of family. They also encouraged him to be a head of family so he would have something to live, work and achieve for.
2) If you set people free from chains of culture, they revert to very simple mode of operation. A result is promiscious women mate with men most desired by their older brain structures -- basically guys who are wonderful to be around in African savannah but not so good in settled society. Culture is trying to override these unproductive patterns employing human ability to override these older patterns with learned new. It is not only women who were put in chains of culture, of course, and not only this specific activity. When feminism preaches liberation of women -- it preaches slavery to animalistic passions. One-night stands are surely not the sign of civilization or self-restraint.
2) Now about the government. I would start somewhat more humble -- first, to make women who decided to follow feminist ways to take responsibility for the choice done, i.e. remove welfare, most of child support etc., stop feminist propaganda. Actually, feminist ways are so irrational that they need to be overwhelmly supported. Battle with discrimination -- is the way to redistribute created wealth from men to women using government policies. Remove them, and see, how long feminism will stand on its own.
Another way would be actually force feminists to accept logical conclusions of their dogma. For example, woman owns here body now and can decide whether she wants a child or not. Why man forced to pay for the child irrelevantly of his own desires? It is her body -- her responsibility. These days women have necessary information as well as necessary tools to control their pregnancy. If we accept that woman "owns her body", she is fully responsible for what happens with it, so guy should make voluntary decision if he wants to support this child or not. If we do not accept that woman is responsible for her body, it means we do not accept she actually owns it and can make meaningful decisions. In this case she should be guided.
Next one, most important, what government should do is to allow long-term contracts. In my opinion, the main problem with modern marriage is that it is way one-sided deal -- and you can not plan it. People should be able to sign a long-term contract which they would not be able to break easily. Modern no-fault marriage is not a such contract.
That's for starters.
Now, there is also another thing. Actually, feminism, as I said, is not a decease itself. It is just one of the most of its ugly companions. That's why I am not "fighting" with feminism specifically, it is quite useless. I like to "fight" democracy more as it is closer to the root of the evil. Feminism is just something to be utterly ridiculed.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Good points.
Woman alone should not be allowed to decide only by herself whether to give birth to a child or not, because this child is only 50% her.
Father of a child should have a right to sue a woman in court if she wants abortion and he doesn't want it, and compromise is impossible.
Similar threads
