Jump to content

Darkpriest

Members
  • Posts

    1,394
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Darkpriest

  1. 2 hours ago, Hurlsnot said:

    This is really just standard 'back in my day, things were better' rubbish. Back in what day, exactly? Do you really think the 60's and 70's had less promiscuity and self gratification? 

    People are definitely waiting longer to have kids in the US. It has way more to do with financial implications than any hokey 'cultural decline'. Wake up sheeple, kids are expensive and the middle class is shrinking! :p 

    How sustainable demographically is a system, when you have people in labor force for about 40-45y, while outside of labor force expanded from ca 15-20y to 40-50y and at the same time generation replacement happens every 30y instead of 20y and it is usually below the 2.0 kids per couple? 

    The old days had subcultures being more promiscous, and it still was not entirely risk free. The advancments in medicine enabled more promiscous life style as the biggest risk of an adventorous intercourse (a child) has been mitigated to extremely low levels. 

    This factor enabled women to go early in the workforce and made them more masculine as they got drawn into corporate cogs. Now however you start seeing an outpour of a generation of unfullfilled expectations, where creating a family went into a backlog of things to do somewhere in the future, but now there are few men interested in pair bonding via marriage (see falling marrige rates), and there is an abundance of free, cheap sexual experiences, as long as you are somewhat tall and can make a 100k  per year. You removed incentives for men to get married and have families, you told women that its unfashionable and weak to have family and kids early, and put them through emasculating, highly competitive and time consuming corporate culture , made men and women compete for jobs, which historiaclly were better paid, but now they stagnated in salary growth due to oversupply of workforce (also, women rarely date down status/financially wise) , and you wonder why people have no money while they live 'single' lives? 

    • Hmmm 1
  2. 3 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

    Dark how many women  in Poland are brick layers or work in construction?

    If its like SA then very few, this is SEXIST and another example of the patriarchy !!! We need to pass laws to ensure we see proper representation and transformation in this sector :teehee:

    Not many, although there is a load of them going into architecture and interior design (they overrepresent there) 

  3. 12 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

    That is not happening, as societies get richer and more stable overall, people just stop wanting to have that many kids. In Europe this has been happening for like 40 or 50 years. The internet or "the promotion of dumb behavior" has nothing to do with it. I mean you either are so poor that you need extra kids as a work force, or you are rich enough that having kids stops being a financial and emotional burden. If you are in between (read "almost everyone in advanced economies"), you just aren't going to have that many kids. The fact of the matter is that the entrance of women into the work force has not increased families purchasing power as much as it should, especially considering that during the 20th century in advanced economies, kids went from being potential family income to dead weights (this is a good thing, in case you are wondering).

    People aren't having kids later because feminism is promoting it. People are leaving their parents' houses later and later because they can't afford it, they aren't having kids earlier because they can't afford it, and they aren't having more kids because they can't afford it. Real wages haven't kept pace with the growth of advanced economies in the past 50 years. That's it. If you want people to have more kids they have to make more money. Big companies across the board are making loads and loads more money every year, but that money isn't entering the economy in a real way.

    The Swedish government has been promoting having more kids for years, by the way. More money paid to families with more kids, more time at home with newborns, free child dental care, free college.  Anecdotally, I can say that upper middle class families appear have more kids now. It is not uncommon for me to see 3+ kids families around. Still, they are not having 6+ kids, which I imagine would be necessary to offset all the families that have between 0 and 2 kids. There's only so much one can do if wages are low.

    This will be a bit unpopular, but the whole point of enabling women into the workforce, was to keep the wages low. Suddenly you have more people competing for various level white collar jobs. You will notice that it in the white collar, most post uni jobs stall in growth of wages (you can see this now as more and more people are entering stem/tech jobs, the pace of money making is stalling) 

    On the other hand, jobs with vast overrepresentation of men (construction, plumber, electrician, truck driver, mariner) are keeping up with cost growths if not even outpacing them, and they have no burden of debt. 

    The guy, who was placing tiles in my house was earning much more than some asaociates or even senior associates of simple desk jobs in a bank. Heck, he was making more than supervisors and junior managers. 

     

    EDIT: and unfortunately social media do matter, if the current high schooler girls select their profession of choice to be an "influencer". They don't get that most of those 'careers' have a hard expiration date and often do not bring much money other than a season or two of novelty. 

    People are urged to go in debt, consume and not delay any gratifications. 

    I do agree, that we probably should not grow in numbers and more likely even contract to give some breathing space to mother earth, however our debt driven economy model, which requires continous growth of consumption and by extension populace, would simply collapse on its face if we cannot keep up minimal growth at or slightly above the replacement rate. 

    People should have kids in mid 20s at the latest, but hook up cultures, 'self-gratification' and destruction of a family unit as a base line unit in the society make the future really bleak. 

    Fun fact - China, which empowered women the most in the past and had one child policy is now figjtining 'feminism' and is urging people to couple up and have 2 childre per family

  4. 4 hours ago, Pidesco said:

     

    Extreme right wing parties were already on the rise since, at the very least, the 2009 crisis. I don't think this rise was significantly affected by the actual intake of refugees, given that the growth continued, more or less unabated, in almost all European countries, regardless of whether they took in a significant number of refugees or not. Racists going to racist, basically, and it is really easy to appeal to them, as they were feeling disenfranchised for a long time.

    The problem wasn't Germany accepting refugees, but rather almost all other countries balking at even the idea of it, thus putting too much pressure on Germany's resources in a very short time. In any case, Europe's population replacement rate isn't high enough to maintain populations without immigration, so it is actually necessary for the European economy. Severely limiting the intake of people from outside Europe is essentially condemning Europe to dying a slow death.

     

    Perhaps change the mind of natives and promote having families and kids? One thing that i hold a distain for a modern feminism is that from going for equal rights and opportunitiea, they made it 'unfashionable', 'weak', 'servile' to be a mother in a regular family unit, and that it promotes promiscuity among women (have fun, you have plenty of time), when in fact the one thing that women don't have, is time as the biology does not care about what you believe in. 

     

    The second nail in the coffin is the rise of social media and promoting shalow and dumb behavior. Dumb things on the internet get more clicks and views and likes and you get rewarded for that with money. This means that responsibility and family life are not rewarding for the 'me me me' braindeads

  5. 8 hours ago, Gorth said:

    Got a similar anecdote to share... I doubt i would be able to get a mortgage in Australia, as I don't have any debt (to prove I can pay back debt) and not having had a credit card for 8 years, not making the banks any money. Doesn't matter I make a decent living, if they don't have it on print that you are a profitable customer for them.

    I have a CC with like 2k limit, which i pay off regularly, sometimes leaving some used balance after a minimal payment for a mibth or two. Used for some streaming service and occasional purchase via interwebs. 

    I also have like a 10k limit within my debit account, in case of some unspeakable emergency, where I could not pull my savings due to some liquidity issue. 

    Just work on your credit scores from early years. 

    • Like 1
  6. So, I expect the midterms will be a reason, while we will see another cash injection into the economy by Dems. 

    With narrow margins it's possible that they mighy lose both House and Senate. 

    https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/white-house-downplays-transitory-inflation-democrats-quietly-panic-over-impact-midterm

    @Guard Dog would probably be very happy....

     

    Until Trump 2024 😂... 

  7. 13 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

    Of course democracy does not mean liberty. And for that matter dictatorship does not necessarily mean tyranny. You can absolutely elect your tyrant and it’s at least theoretically possible a dictator would be respectful of individual liberty. The list of elected tyrants is a long one indeed the list of benevolent dictator is short. In fact I can’t think of one off the top of my head.

    there are those here in this country who seem to think the democratically elected state is infallible because it represents “the will of the people“. That of course is a large quantity of night soil from a large male bovine.

    Depends how you view various monarchs, and their rules. 

  8. 1 minute ago, ArtistFormerlyKnownasKP said:

    Yeah, I think it was a building that housed equipment and stuff from MEE and Al Jazeera. The owner or manager was filmed on the phone begging for 10 minutes to get some of the equipment out before bombing, which was denied. The AP building got hit too (if it isn't the same one) and the BBC also ran into trouble I believe.

    IIRC it was one and the same. It contained a lot of press on premise. 

  9. Unorthodox opinion on the wealth accumulation. 

    https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-finance/praise-1-they-provide-improving-standards-living-99-percent

    While in principle I agree that this worked in the past, as wealth was built from investments, now it does not and will not work that well going forward, due to which investments return the most profit in the reality of free money provided by FED and tech leap displacing simple jobs and offshoring more complex jobs. 

    • Thanks 1
  10. @Ben No.4

    To be honest, it's been a while since any topic of high speed rail popped up on any serious level of decision making discussion. 

    There is a lot to take on, as tracks in different countries of EU are often incompatibile and to build a high speed rail infrastructure, which could compete with conveniece of air traffic, that would take trillions of EUR. Although if any money printing could be excused, this type of a project would be one to get a pass from me. The infrastructure could also revitilize economcially some smaller hubs along the rail path, something, which air traffic would never do. 

    Air traffic would be fine for travels outside of EU, should that ever be made reality. 

    • Like 1
  11. 6 hours ago, Gorth said:

    Did I mention that I think the world would be better off without Facebook?

    apparently the European Supreme Court does too

    https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2021/5/14/facebook-faces-devastating-data-transfer-ban-after-irish-ruling

    Facebooks claim that privacy protection violates free speech because it makes targeted advertising harder or some such was dismissed by court and transmission of personal information of European users to the US had to end very soon (because nobody trusts the US to respect European data privacy laws)

    I've told this somewhere last year, that there are rules across various companies, not to store non-US related sensitive data in US and if in the cloud service, just stream it as needed from other nodes. 

    US and privicy of data are oxymorons.

  12. 8 hours ago, Ben No.4 said:


    For an entirely different, but hugely important topic: climate change. The German constitutional court ruled in what can only be described as a landmark decision that the hitherto efforts of the German legislative to combat climate change were insufficient and ordered the parliament to draft newer, more far reaching laws. This decision mainly rests on two legal considerations. Firstly, Article 20a of the German constitution (the “Basic Law”) states that the protection of the natural environment is a core aim of the state. Secondly, the court views more drastic measures as a necessity to protect the freedom of citizens in the long run. As it recognises the insufficiency of Germany’s current efforts in combatting climate change, it argues as follows: inaction now leads to a worsening climate crisis, that would in the future make counter measures necessary. These however would be much more extreme than anything that would suffice if measures are already taken now. Therefore, citizens’ freedoms, when future generations are taken into consideration, will be much better preserved and protected to strong action now.

     

    As Germany is a central player in the EU, the decision is likely to have a far reaching impact.

     

    A short report on the decision and it’s context can be found here: https://verfassungsblog.de/the-constitution-speaks-in-the-future-tense/

     

    The courts decision itself is, of course, in German. But the courts press statement has been officially translated to English: https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/EN/2021/bvg21-031.html

    Before you will start virtue signaling, stop outsourcing pollution intensive jobs and stop buying services/products and components from pollution creating countries like China and India. Shut down air traffic over Germany as well

    If you will do that, then I'll believe that you are taking care of green issues seriously, instead if virtue signaling for feel good points, while still contributing indirectly by increased consumption of high energy footprint products and services. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1
  13. 2 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

    So let’s see here. Gas is seven dollars a gallon in some places. There are shortages and lines. Inflation has hit double digits. We appear to be in a malaise. The White House is occupied by feckless Democrat Who took over for an incompetent Republican. All we need now is for the Iranians to grab some hostages and it’s 1978 over again.

    Oh wait...KISS is releasing a new album! Quick somebody get a Biden a cardigan sweater.

    I'm happy, as I shorted along with funds on the tech index prior to CPI print (i expected it to be higher than consensus, but not that high on MoM basis) - Ez money (due to regulatory reasons i can invest in indexes only via third parties at their fixed conditions and with limited amount of monies).  And now stocks are getting pumped again, as if there was no bad data in the last 3 days. Market is sure FED will backstop and start buying stonks before large players would go broke and in the meanwhile it will keep markets high on free money. Not to mention, they don't want people to pull out cash from the markets as they would rather have inflation of assets values than that money increasing velocity on the MainStreet economy and skyrocketing inflation. 

    Lets see what June will bring with the next CPI print and added typical Q end volatility with realizng gains. 

    It will also be interesting to see if Dems and Biden will be forcing the issue with more debt and sending printed money to the streets. 

     

  14. 4 hours ago, Gorth said:

    First I thought it was a misspelling of Ambitious, but then I read the text underneath... 😂

    (being ambidextrous in real life myself, I was a bit familiar with the word, but it's not one you come across often)

    If not for DnD, I'd probably forget about thr word as well 😅

  15. If you guus think that YoY 4.2 CPI with MONTHLY 0.9 CPI was bad, the front running YoY PPI just hit 6.2, with MONTHLY core PPI going 0.7 for a second month in a row.

    Prepare your wheelbarrows. 

    Foreign buyers reluctant to buy 30Y TSY bonds, sending cost of long term debt higher. If that attiitude will spillover to 10Y TSY with next CPI print and Dems + Biden will still want to run some high cash printed money fueled "infrastructure bill" or worse - another run of stimmy checks, expect some pain. 

     

    Even this piece of crap notices the 'speedbumps' 

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/553222-biden-spending-plans-hit-speed-bumps

  16. 1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

    15% punishes the poorest.

    15% is considerable less than the wealthy pay.

    15% would vast increase the debt you is concerned 'bout, 'cause innumerable programs has durations which require 'em to be funded for more than the next couple years, and you are talking about a massive functional tax cut for the rich. massive revenue shortfall.

    etc.

    worst

    plan

    evar

    HA! Good Fun!

    ps point to anecdotal situations where an individual shows losses for a given year and is able to get a considerable refund is exceptions. the obvious response when such exceptions is inequitable is to make corrections so such exceptions is not exploitive. s-can the system 'cause o' uncommon exceptions is not reasonable. 

    Actually, the tax to be fair should be linear. I recall something around 17% was a good number. 

    Make sure that all income types are taxed, and that any offshore income is taxed as well witha difference in tax rates between locations. 

     

    How you help the people on the lower range of income is to assist in keeping prices for their regular spendings low.

    Some examples

    Have 0% sales tax on retail groceries, and have 30% sales tax on yachts, jewelry, etc. Make sure that you push a personal transactional wealth tax for any goods/assets bought abroad, which would meet certain criteria and differentiate those with various rates. Have some rent assist payment program for people with low incomes. Address housing market price bubbles by incresing tax rate on all owned real estate with each extra purchase beyond 2 or 3 and make the base dependant on the current market value or some combination of that. 

     

    There are many options to differentiate income sources for the budget, but you would not penelize people for investing in themselves and in the economy with a sloppy and an unfair solution of a progressive rate tax. 

     

    However, first you'd need to turn off the printing machine at FED and near 0 cost ez money for the top 1%

     

×
×
  • Create New...