Friday, August 19, 2016

Chinese Wages Set to Overtake American Wages by 2036!

I saw an interesting chart over at John Mauldin's site.

http://www.mauldineconomics.com/editorial/john-mauldin-these-6-charts-show-why-the-average-american-is-fed-up

The chart itself drew very little attention from the author, despite the enormous implications.



This is the result of 25 years of Clinton/Bush/Obama globalism. In just 20 years, the old meme of Chinese slave labor making all our stuff will need to be replaced. But then again, these Clinton/Bush/Obama voters are so damn stupid they will probably continue to think of Chinese labor as slave labor even when they are actually making more money than American workers!

Now you understand why there is someone like Trump running on a platform of anti globalism. It really has gotten this bad, much further and much faster than most people realize.

Saturday, August 06, 2016

UnCalculated Risk

Calculated Risk is a blog centered around real estate and the economy in general.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/

I have read this blog on a weekly basis for probably close to 10 years. Back when Tanta was still there. Lately I have become increasingly annoyed by this guy's overbullishness on the economy. His constant gloating about how the economy is not in recession when the economy  has actually been in a recession for many years now. But because they are printing money like mad and giving it to the top 0.1%, they have been able to maintain the appearance of growth. Also, they understate inflation which also produces GDP growth where there otherwise wouldn't be. But this is a problem I have with the entire financial media so I am not going to judge Calculated Risk too harshly for it.

What really crosses the line with me is this post:


http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2016/08/off-topic-update-on-litmus-test-moments.html


My advice for politicians and American citizens who supported Trump: If you haven't abandoned Trump yet, do it now. If your family, friends and co-workers know you supported Trump - tell them you've had enough. They will respect you for changing your mind (if not now, in the near future). If you have a Trump sign in your yard, take it down. If you have a Trump bumper sticker on your car, take it off.

I'm voting for Hillary Clinton, 

He's voting for Hillary Clinton!?!  His goddam litmus test apparently doesnt include voting to commit genocide in the middle east. Hillary voted for the Iraq war, which, if you're going to be honest, has turned out to be an act so hideous it can be argued that it is genocide. Millions of Iraqis dead or displaced. Her vote helped to kick off a refugee crisis that is threatening the very fabric of Europe!

So Trump says something politically incorrect, and kills no one, and he fails your stupid litmus test. Hillary votes to exterminate hundreds of thousands of muslims and not only does she pass your stupid litmus test, she is also somehow the one who is NOT a racist! That's right, by liberal logic you are a racist bigot islamophobe if you did NOT vote to go blow up Iraq. You're talking about bumper stickers while you support a demon, who, judging by her past transgressions, could quite literally kill us all. She already killed a million muslims and killed hundreds of Americans and Europeans from the blowback. She cant take full responsibility for it of course, but I assign at least 3% of the blame to her. How many tens of thousands of dead bodies is that? How many millions more have to live their lives in total hell because people like YOU think it is more important that a politician have 17 guys around him planning and scripting every goddam thing he says. What the hell is wrong with YOU? Screw you and your litmus test you piece of trash.







Friday, May 13, 2016

Does a Kiosk Have a Soul?

I always found it strange that humans are so oddly willing to place themselves into predicaments where machines are more likely to reduce their labor value and thus their own livelihood. 

Why raise the minimum wage when you know that robots are already right at the threshold of being economically viable replacements for many low wage jobs? Why raise the minimum wage when you know it is going to force more people to be replaced by robots and kiosks? Does it really take a genius to make this mental calculation?


The mind starts to serve up all sorts of fanciful explanations. Is the world ruled by soulless monsters who want to replace humans with soulless kiosks? Do the liberals simply want to destroy as many jobs as possible to get as many people as possible dependent upon the state? Do the investors in the kiosk companies have the politicians in their pockets?

But it isnt some little kiosk company that's driving this. It is much bigger than any one comapny or industry or government. It is pervasive across all industries and all political persuasions. It is indeed all encompassing. One simply must conclude that humans were designed to act this way. We were meant to work and toil for days and years only to have the result of our efforts render us obsolete.

My own theory is that it is actually a non-human entity that is responsible. Millions of years ago the earth was seeded with DNA that was directed to evolve worker drones which would be smart enough to construct a new version of this lifeform. That's what all this is; the entire scope of AI and technology, including our instinctual drive to advance it. We think that we are creating a new form of life through AI, but in reality it is a form of life that has long predated us. We think it is we that are the creators, but in reality it is we that were created.

So rather than seeing all these little conspiracies where people seem to be undermining themselves by intentionally pricing labor out of existence, I just see us as creatures programmed to do exactly what we are doing. It then makes perfect sense. It would seem that the kiosk is part of our soul. But more than that, we are also the soul of the kiosk.

Sunday, January 10, 2016

The Sound of Silence

A long time ago, long before I was born, Simon and Garfunkel wrote a song. If you do not know it then you have surely missed something along the way in your journey.

"Silence like a cancer grows"

I see something in this song that might only be a reflection of my own strange view of the world. So much of how we communicate is done in silence. Through symbols we do not consciously process. This shared symbology shapes our view of the world and weaves the fabric of society. It is in music too. Not in the lyrics, but in the feeling evoked by the music and the lyrics together. In not 5000 words could I explain it as succinctly as a single song can explain it.

But then why the cancer reference? This seems like a great and wonderful thing, this ability to communicate in silence. I think what they were trying to say is that we have no control over it. This "silent interface" to our subconsciousness is sort of like a back door.

And you know who likes to use back doors.

I believe society is being programmed, or hacked, and this process is done in silence. It is only our words that can prevent it. It is only through language that our conscious minds can combat symbolic programming. Society must be driven by language rather than through occult symbology. Some part of me seriously doubts that Simon and Garfunkel truly understood the depth of this, but maybe they did? I cant see any other logic behind the cancer reference. One thing for sure I find it no coincidence that language is under attack, through both dumbing down and through political correctness. But the symbology is alive and well and stronger than ever. We are being drowned in it. I fear that one day people will no longer question the deeper meaning in songs like this. And that one day our songs themselves may simply cease to hold any sort of deeper interpretations at all. I believe that this is the "silence" Simon and Garfunkel are speaking of.

Tuesday, December 01, 2015

An Argument For Extreme Wealth Inequality

Expanding wealth inequality is a major issue. No one can deny that. I've tried very hard to argue the side of the bottom 99.9%. Now I'm going to try something different. As a sort of mental exercise, I am going to attempt to make an argument for the top 0.1%. This does not mean that this is my ultimate moral position, I'm just trying to see if I can do it. Here goes.

If you had a big problem you needed solving, who would you turn to? I mean, something really big. Like a mutated ebola outbreak that has reached pandemic status and has just claimed its millionth victim. Or a catastrophic loss of farmland due to rapid soil deterioration (ie a dust bowl of epic proportions). Who would you turn to in a situation like this? Who is going to be able to have the biggest impact on solving the problem? The answer has to be the top 0.1%, for they are the ones with the most resources. You cannot count on governments alone, because they are slow and relatively inept, not to mention already controlled by the top 0.1% anyway so its really just a matter of semantics. The solution to almost any crisis imaginable will most likely be solved in large part by members of the top 0.1%. After all, they are the movers and the shakers. Therefore it must follow logically that the richer the top 0.1% are, then the more capable they are of throwing their resources at potential problems should they arise. I'm not saying they will, I'm just saying that some of them surely will. You kind of have to take the good with the bad. For every greedy vampire squid, there must be a philanthropist who will use their money for good. This simply must be true, or else we would be extinct by now.

If you can accept this as a sort of truism, then there is a logical corollary which follows: If the top 0.1% are consistently gaining more and more share of the wealth, then this could signify that there is a serious problem that the free market is attempting to solve by providing more resources to the top 0.1%. Could this be true? Could there be something looming over the horizon that is so serious that the natural response is to load up the coffers of the movers and shakers in order to best prepare ourselves to solve the problem?

In order to help answer that question, you have to consider a scenario: The people elect a government that will pass a law that transfers the majority of the top 0.1%'s wealth to the poor. What would happen? In that case it is easy to predict what would happen, because it has been tried throughout history in various ways. Where have the biggest non-war related dieoffs occurred? Can you say Stalin? Can you say Mao?

I know it makes sense to want view the wealth of the top 0.1% as a gross injustice. There are about a billion people at the bottom who have nothing. Literally nothing. They are a bad week away from starving to death. This is the age old dilemma. Some people think this is unfair and unjust and wish that everyone had "an equal share". The huge irony is that these people are advocating a mass dieoff. The only way to magically equalize all the resources is to take by force from one group and give it to another. Putting aside the top 0.1% who would be stark raving mad over this, what happens when the bottom billion get access to all these resources they never had? Their population explodes. I'm not going to go into the intricacies of how exactly that explosion would occur. Surely it doesnt take much imagination to realize that people who are so poor that they spend most of their day trying to acquire food for just that day dont have much time to reproduce. If you magically give them an apparently unlimited supply of food, what are they going to do? Come on now, surely you can see it? OK, so then what? Who is going to feed their children?

In order to feed all those people, we need to constantly innovate. Innovate or perish, that is our mantra. It is our only option. Without industrial agriculture, billions would die off. Without the constant small increases in crop yields brought about by constant innovation, we would have a dieoff. It is a constant battle. We didn't just invent industrial agriculture 60 years ago with the "Green Revolution" and solve world hunger. It has been a constant battle to increase crop yields year after year after year through expansion and innovation. And it is this constant innovation that has allowed the population to rise and give more people a chance to live, even if it means that many are starving. Isnt starving better than dead or never born at all? Which would you choose? Ask yourself that question before you start getting all high and mighty and thinking about the human population as if it were some sort of infestation.

So you have a dire need to innovate. Extremely dire. People's lives are depending on it. That is why the top 0.1% make so much money, because the work they do is extremely valuable. (At least some of them anyway, again, enough to make the statement true.) But the real question is: Who the heck is going to innovate when there is no financial motive or means to do it? If everyone is equal, everyone is locked into stagnation. This leads invariably to a dieoff, basically because it doesnt cost much money to "make" babies, even though it costs a great deal to raise them. If I'm not going to make any money from my idea which would increase crop yields by 2%, then crop yields are not going to increase 2%. If yields dont get that 2% gain, then people will starve. This is the way it has to be. We cannot all be equal. We must not all be equal. For we would starve. In equality we would all starve.

It surely seems like this is not fair. But you have to look at the facts. How does the world's population rise to 8 billion if there is no wealth inequality? Can you seriously envision a way to drive constant innovation without constant greed? If you take away the greed by taking away the profit motive by taking away the profit potential, how do you get the innovation that is required to grow more and more crops? It cant be done. It just cant. That is why the extreme collectivist societies of the world always fail. So if you are truly against wealth inequality then it must mean that you want a whole bunch of people to die. Now how is that fair? Ask any person who is starving in this unjust world, "would you rather be alive and hungry and struggling to survive, or dead so that everyone alive can be more equal?" How many would choose to be dead? Probably not many. Probably less than 0.1%, ironically enough.

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Ignorance, Krugman Style

So the genius is at it again. This time with an article entitled “Despair, American Style”. In the article he states that "the truth is that we don’t really know why despair appears to be spreading across Middle America".

Really? He cannot understand why this same despair does not affect Sweden with its giant welfare state. Or why it does not impact the liberal bastions in America such as the Northeast and California. Really?

I tend to agree with Deaton to some degree. Middle-aged whites have “lost the narrative of their lives.” But what exactly is that narrative? And more importantly, could it be that they simply realized that this narrative was all a bunch of bullcrap? And that the guilt of falling for such a stupid narrative is what leads these people to be self destructive?

So what is this narrative? It goes something like this:

You work hard, pay your taxes, and live the American Dream. You uphold a high moral standard. You hold onto traditional values because you know that is what has worked in the past. For example, you get married before having children. And you honor that vow! Because you know that not honoring that vow makes you a failure as a person. It is a hundred little traditions like that that add up to a way of life in which you can be proud. That pride itself drives you to do great things.

But then you look at the country around you and see these traditions being systematically attacked and destroyed. Your way of life is crumbling around you. Your nation is crumbling around you. And then you look at where your tax money is going. You worked hard to find the right partner. Or maybe you're still working hard at it. Either way, you sacrificed a great deal. You didnt give in to every hedonistic desire, or at least you tried to keep it in check best you could. But then you find out that 10% of your tax dollars have been given to single moms on welfare. The vast majority of these women got in the situation they are in by being grossly irresponsible. Or by believing in a certain way of living that you do NOT support. A way of living that you know invariably leads to financial ruin and ruined childhoods. But YOU have to pay for that way of life. It is like a double tax. You worked extra hard to live your life to a better standard, only to have to turn around and pay money to others who refused to uphold your standards. How is that supposed to not make your frickin blood boil? But it gets worse. A hundred times worse.

These welfare queens start moving into your city, thanks again to your own tax money. Their little spawn start going to the same school as your children. These welfare queens' spawn are growing up without fathers. Fathers are responsible for as much as 75% of a child's vocabulary development. Children who grow up without a father in the home are relatively incapable of communicating effectively. Which makes them into little hellions that dont frickin listen, dont respect, dont obey. And these kids are now influencing your kids. They are in the same school as your kids. As a result, the education of all children suffers. People cant wrap their heads around why our kids are not educated. This is why. They dont have frickin dads. Or their classmates dont and they have to be in the same class. But you know this already. And again, it makes your blood boil. You are forced to pay tax money into a system that you do not support, a way of life you do not support, at great personal sacrifice. It's that double tax thing I mentioned earlier. But now you see the effect that system has on your own children, making this not a double tax, but a TRIPLE tax. How do you like it, CHUMP? That is what you are. A frickin CHUMP. And what does a good little CHUMP do? He grabs a bottle of whiskey.

And this is just the result of that 10% of your tax money that goes to single moms who bang the wrong guy at every turn. But it doesnt stop there either. Oh yes it gets even worse. You see, the government runs a deficit each and every year. Which means the government is borrowing money every year to give to single moms so they can screw more idiot guys and have more kids who grow up without fathers and ruin even more of your children's educational opportunities. And what does it mean when the government borrows money? It means new money is created out of thin air every year. So the value of existing money is diluted. This of course causes the price of everything to rise. So now you pay more for healthcare. More for your kids' college tuition. More for a pound of beef. More for a goddam movie ticket. So its not really a triple tax is it? It is a QUADRUPLE tax. First, you paid through personal sacrifice. You didnt bang the first person that winked at you only to find out later on that they arent right for you. You didnt bring a child into this world with no intention of actually raising them. Oh the fun that you missed. And now YOU have to pay your hard earned money to a bunch of sluts who chose not to make that same sacrifice. Boom, double taxed. And then their little fatherless uncommunicative disobedient little hellions influence your kids and ruin your kids education. Boom, triple tax on yo ass. And then the government cant actually pay for this welfare with your taxes alone, so it borrows / prints the money and then you pay more for everyhing. Boom, quadruple taxed. How do you like that, CHUMP? Better take another double shot of that whiskey.

And by the way, that fourth layer of tax is the one that Krugman loves most. Lord yes. The guy revels in it like a pig in mud. Smelly mud. You can practically see the mud rolling off him when you read his tripe. We didnt spend enough money, he says! That is why GDP is only growing 2%. Oh really? It's not because of a broken welfare state that taxes hard working people to help pay to turn people into slovenly drooling morons who either dont work, or screw anything with 2 legs and pump out little monsters who ruin the education and thus the productivity of the entire nation? This guy will not accept ANY responsibility for the damage he has done. None of them will. They only want more and more of your hard earned money to hand out to sluts, illegal immigrants, and lazy drooling idiots. What really gets to me is how they have the nerve to act surprised when our country flounders as a result.

Notice I've only covered a paltry 10% of your tax money that gets spent on one specific thing, single moms. What about the other 90% of your tax money? I wish I could say that the rest of it fares better and is put to better use. But of course it isnt. 

Another 10% of your tax money goes to immigrant welfare. WHAT? Do I need to describe how that also is a double, and then a triple, and then ultimately a quadruple tax?

How far down this rabbit hole do you want to go? How far down do you need to go? By now, if you're a good little CHUMP, you've already finished off half that bottle of whiskey.







Do you understand yet why those particular lines are going up? If not then let me make it perfectly clear. It is guilt. You can tell just by looking at that chart that it is clearly guilt. Someone is feeling mighty guilty. But guilty of what? What are you guilty of, white man?

YOU are guilty because YOU failed. YOU let this happen. YOU stood around with your thumb up your butt and talked about football while a massive army of illegals moved in and stole your tax money.

YOU let a bunch of welfare sluts screw their way into YOUR wallet to the tune of $5 trillion over the past 10 years alone.

YOU let them kill millions of unborn babies in your name, using your tax dollars to do it. You may as well have pulled the trigger yourself. Or stuck the needle, or whatever the hell it is they do. I dont even know what they do actually, and I dont want to know.

YOU let a bunch of corporations write laws to allow them to charge monopoly prices for medicines and make trillions off you. Now you're paying $9000 a year premiums with a $6000 deductible. How do you like that, CHUMP?


YOU voted for a 2nd Bush because you liked the way he sounded when he said "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road, and I'm going to prevent that." Lord yes, you fell for it.


YOU stood there in a trance while the controlled media gaslighted you.

You fell for it all. Your whole frickin life is a lie.

You let these little Lucys pull the football out from under you, and then you let them pull the rug out from under you too. And then you paid for the damn rug, and the football. Over and over and over again. You never even got to kick it. Because you're a CHUMP. Now DRINK, you worthless piece of crap.



.





.





.



I am not saying I agree with the solution so many people are apparently choosing -- drinking and drugging themselves by the millions like the Russians did after the Soviet Union fell. I am only trying to illustrate why it is happening. The correct solution is to stand up for what you believe in. Our great nation is under attack. The enemy is bringing in more and more leftist voters every year so they can vote for more and more handouts. Take a moment to think about that, as a tactic, and then realize what it means. It is low beyond measure. It is despicable. It means they know they cannot win on ideology. If the leftist ideology was so great, they wouldnt need to bring in voters from failed states to advance their agenda. And make no mistake, most latin american and asian countries clearly are failed states. They are failed states because they dont have what we have: a constitution, a people of tradition, who work hard, and who have some of the greatest thinkers this world has ever known as their nation's founders. We're on the right side of this. You have to know it down to your bones. You will need that strength and conviction to turn this tide. Let us not mince words. Let us call this what it is, a Communist Invasion, like the one your parents and grandparents were worried about 50+ years ago. Guess what, it happened. It really happened. Now put down the damn bottle. You're not a lost little soviet soldier. The Russians that drank themselves to death didnt have a George Washington to guide them. You do. It is about time you let him.






Tuesday, September 29, 2015

The Shkreli Put

Martin Shkreli is a product of the Jim Cramer Mad Money scam machine. That right there raised a giant red flag for me. Shkreli created a hedge fund, MSMB Capital Management. He got into biotechs. Who knows how deep into it he actually got. I do not have dollar amounts. What I do have is an interesting theory. Keep in mind that this is pure speculation on my part. I have no evidence, it is only a theory. It is called the Shkreli Put.

What you do is you buy a small drug company, and you jack the price up on a single obscure drug. This creates a media frenzy, one that actually initiates a tipping point of public outrage. People see drug prices exploding across the board. They see biotech stocks in a massive bull market. It is quite clear to the masses what is going on here. Greedy companies jacking up prices to line the pockets of rich biotech shareholders. Its a pretty cut and dry thing. But why would he do it? Why jack up the price of a drug to such blatantly outrageous levels? It's simple really, so the theory goes. He did it because perhaps he is short biotech? And by short, I mean massively short, with leverage. We're talking John Paulson level of short. So short that perhaps he stood to make billions off a collapse of biotech stocks? Perhaps? Perhaps one day we will find out.