Bible actually tell us (well, Jews actually), to attack another country, kill all the male, and rape all the virgin females. What religion says and what bible says have little in common. Religions are always ways to justify political motives.

Because the political structure in ancient time differs than now, it’s only natural that religions then have different interpretation now than before. In ancient time, the king rules. So polygamy is okay (because all kings want it). Now, we are democracy. So polygamy is not okay because swing voters don’t like it. Very simple.

Pick any 2 countries with Similar religion and you see differing custom. In Indonesia, which is democratic by now, polygamy is very politically incorrect that congress start making laws banning it. In Saudi, a monarch, it’s a different story.

Pick any 2 countries with DIFFERENT religion, and you’ll see the same custom. Polygamy is politically incorrect in both Indonesia and China, for example.

If you ask a Christian what the bible says, you can predict what his political agenda is. That’s it. People prohibits porn and go to war not because they are pious. They do so because they hate porn and like war.

I am talking to some Jewish friends that claim that hebrew bible has different meaning than the way it’s translated. Well, I’d like to know if there is some 5-10% trace of a REAL GOD, in judaism or whether it’s just another folklore. 90% of religions are definitely product of secular imagination.

What’s really funny is I saw a book about how a Christian writer use Solomo as a sample on how to get rich. I was like, Come the fuck on. Solomo got rich because he oppressed the people.

In fact, tax was so high during Solomo’s time that the kingdom split into 2. The “Shiah” Jews, also called Judah, believe that king must be David’s decendant, and the “Sunni” Jews, called Israelites, or Samaritants then believe they can pick their own leader.

Huahem…. Again and again. Oh ya, they kill each other over dispute on whether God is in mount Zion or in mount Moriah or something. Just like Christians. Some cultures never change.

There are many countries in the world where you cannot be rich honestly and productively. In fact, there is no country in the world where you can do so without some sort of penalty. In US, doing that is punishable by tax, and that’s not much different from (still?) communist countries like China.

But here is the magic, there is no country in the world where you cannot be rich or richer than your peer. Not even in North Korea.

Extermination of Jews is politically incorrect because the Jews have no choice. Yet extermination of political opponents by Stalin, and Mao, which are just as evil, are more politically correct. On the latter, people have a choice, despite a bad one, to simply kowtow to the power elite.

Think about it.

There is always choice. If you think positively and ignore your conscience, you will see that there is always a choice.

There are always a loopholes. Perhaps the purpose of all these censorship is to hide too loopholes so not too many people find it. You don’t have to get married. Forcing everyone to get married first before having sex will be very difficult. But governments ensure that all media information encouraging extra marital alternatives are “dangerous for minor.”

Perhaps the purpose of all sexual norms are there to put land mines across the loopholes so societies can say, ah you made a mistake. But there is always a choice.

Prostitution is illegal, but escort is not. You can’t pay for sex, unless you film it and show to the world (porn is legal). In countries where porn is illegal polygamy is okay, and informal marriage is fine too. In Iran, contract marriage like cohabitation agreement is legal.

So you just declare, every time you’re caught with some women, that you actually have married her informally. Or maybe made some arrangement before hand. In those countries laws are not clear anyway and public perception of moral matters more than whether you actually break the law or not.

In Indonesia, a country with muslim majority, porn is illegal, but sex outside marriage is not except in some small town you can easily avoid. I mean, all our politicians have several informal concubines there is no way they want to mess with that. Cops sometimes go to hotels and caught unmarried couple, but never to expensive 4 stars hotel .

Massage therapists often provide “extra” service, and no body care.

Income tax has plenty of loophole for those truly rich. Otherwise, the best and brightest among us will go on strike.

This should get our hope up. Be rich. Be careful. And we’ll get whatever we want without having too fight our society too much.

Oh ya, keep your mouth shut. If the loopholes are known, they will have to close it. That sort of thing. I guess the key for gene pool survival is then to do our best to pick the narrow road to salvation. Jesus would agree.

Think about it. With no fault marriage many complaint that couples can no longer make marriage commitment. The problem with that argument is that there are plenty of other reasonable, arguably more “fair” commitment people cannot legally make with each other outside marriage.

Why not let people make their own contract? Isn’t this the heart of libertarian feminist? Not a rhetorical question but you disagree with my explanation anyway.

Imagine a male saying to a woman, if you agree to have sex with me any time I want you got $10k/year. Also you’ll earn $5k/year for each of my biological children you give birth too. In addition the following are my reasonable exit clauses, pension plan, severance pay, etc.

In a sense, a whore is actually free while a wife is a whore that agree to let government be the pimp. Yet every time I promote legalization of various consensual sex for money arrangement people would knee jerkly say I demean women. At the end, I kind got a kick off in actually offending the feminist

Why not use that instead of marriage? That way no body have to bitch that marriage law is unfair right? Just make their own contract that they think is fair and let the woman decide. Is the contract more fair? Is it a good deal for woman? Why not let the woman decide? Basically illegal last time I check. Not a rhetorical question like usual In fact this is what motivates me to write my e-book. I wanted to have a purpose in life. Something with meaning. I want to make thousands of kids and I am very surprised that there is simply no normal way you can do that legally no matter how rich and attractive you are.

Of course, it’s pretty useless trying to understand others’ argument that’s based on prejudice anyway. But let’s check.

One argument is that there is the “child”’s interest. It’s kind of funny. There are plenty of child that is born into poverty and still cost huge amount of taxpayer money. Yet government simply criminalize a billionaire that pay say, 10k per year for his wife and child. Somehow government set that wife and child deserve money proportional to a man’s wealth rather than letting supply and demand relationship decide “price” like usual. It’s like price control. Yea the kids’ interest is problematic but parents’ interest typically coincide with their blood line far more than government right? Sounds a lot like price control there.

Seems to me there is no easy way an American male can mate and reproduce without significantly risk ALL his wealth isn’t it?

Here, in my country, there are plenty of kids in the street that are sodomized, forced to beg, or whatever. People don’t care. Yet if you put your kids to programming school at age 6 people will say you “abuse” your child. Also people keep saying that porn is dangerous for minor. Yet giving birth of kids into poverty is not a crime, despite obvious adverse effect to the kid. Hmmmm… What kind of utility function the law makers really have? Any guess??

But curiously. Maybe you disagree a lot with me with many area. What’s your idea of child support should be? Should parent be able to decide before hand the amount of support they want to make before conception. Of course within reasonable limit. Say, $5k/year

Originally Posted by amanda11 The Jews at the Federal Reserve won’t let this happen.

Stop antagonizing the best and brightest or you ended up like German in world war 2. That being said, the German and Napoleon were pretty nice to Jews in previous war before that and lost anyway. So don’t give them too many special privilege either.

I think the Jews are pretty reasonable people. There was once upon a time I was accused of damaging my dorms’ washing machine. Many knows I didn’t do it. No body spoke up. One did. She is a Jew. A professor that went the extra mile so I can keep going to school is a Jew.

There was a class I got an AB in Math because when I asked the professor how to get a good grade the prof simply said to work hard and try to understand. In the next class, I easily got the highest score. I scored perfect. The next best score was like 75 or something. The professor in that next class, is a Jew and I bet the prof in the previous class isn’t.

“But you were taking honor classes. The other students are very smart there,” said a mediating professor. What’s his point anyway? I tearfully explained how my other friends all got A but me. Then I have to further explained that they got A on THE university. That is, the university he’s working for, the university I was taking the class, the relevant one.

At that time I should have known my whole academic career is over. If only I knew how to start a biz.

Latter I took graduate math course straight without prerequisite while I only have 2 days to learn before mid and final. I got A easily and the professor is once again a Jew. Hell I’ll vote for Jews to rule the world . Just kidding.

A psychiatrist that helped me understand life was a Jew. A forum owner where I hang around a lot is a Jew. There are nice reasonable normal people all over the world from many different race that are nice to me. Why is it when someone is “reasonable” there is a high chance he/she is a Jew?

Evolution and prosecution force them to be smart and it’s natural that the smart and diligence earn more money.

Hell, if we keep breeding the smartest chimpanzees and slaughtering those that don’t figure out how to avoid it eventually they’ll be pretty smart too.

However, most cultures like Chinese or Europe have dysgenic laws that prevent the best and brightest from reproducing. Monks don’t get married. There is virtually no way a rich smart male in US can mate with women without risking his WHOLE money.

Pretty women’s choice are either free sex or full blown life long monogamous marriage.

In free sex, the women got roses and chocolate that expire quickly and they have to keep coming back for more. Evolutionary psychologists say that’s what makes chocolate and roses romantic.

In marriage, government is the pimp that enforce some form of price control to protect most voters from adverse effect of free fair competition. In marriage, the bitch got full life long monogamous commitment with exclusive supplier contract, exorbitant severance pay, and a blank check to have all her kids provided irrelevant of who actually knocked her up.

Too many “couples” would consensually choose somewhere between if the choices were legal and that’s why somewhere between choices are usually illegal or legally impossible.

The Arab is actually quite reasonable because they allow polygamy and contract marriage. Like the rest, those are not getting any also use religion or other supernatural out of this world explanation as excuses to limit sexual selection’s choice often far more violently. Well, the lesser cocks are hungrier in Arab I suppose.

It’s simple. If we truly are free to choose, we often choose someone else. We may even prefer to choose something else as in case of most males preferences to watch porn rather than marrying an ugly woman.

Those that won’t get chosen are often capable and jerks enough to make rules limiting our choices. Under NO country in the world men and women have right to choose their mate under ANY REASONABLE CONSENSUAL terms. There are just too many limitation that SERIOUSLY AFFECT SEXUAL SELECTION in favor of those sexually UNCOMPETITIVE.

Guess what? People think I am a delusional idiot. As always. As usual. As if what I am explaining is too outrageous to be true.

If you’re the best and brightest you just have to be complete jerks to win gene pool survival war in most cultures and most best and brightest people choose to be nice because they think they’ll win anyway despite their niceness. Minority groups like Jews in Europe or Chinese in Indonesia don’t have power or the luxury of killing each other and hence pick being competitive path more.

Those norms are created by and for economic losers that know they can’t compete with the best and brightest in the gene pool if they were nice. If not because of globalization, the world would be full with more and more angry socialists and religious bigots that enforce more bigotic norms. No wonder people become Nazis. Exterminating the best and brightest is how those bigot stay in the gene pool in the first place. Like father like son.

And don’t bother trying to understand their prejudice. The limit is imagination and the proof is faith. What is there to understand?

What about interest rate? Will it be negative too?

Interest rate would drop I suppose. I mean money neutrality means that unless government do some “surprise” gold standard would not change anything. Main proponent of gold standard demand gold standard to prevent “surprise” from government.

So if gold price raise by say 6%. Current interest rate is 4%. I suppose interest rate would be around -2% if we use gold standard. But negative interest rate doesn’t make sense. Why would anyone save money if interest rate is negative?

Then how do we value the price of asset then?

Say interest rate is 4%. Then the value of assets is such that price per earning ratio is 25.

If we use gold standard interest rate drop to say, 1%. Then the value of that asset suddenly become 4 times. What am I missing?

The second way is to consensually persuade the woman to mate with you. The problem is the world are filled with so many other males. Many are richer, smarter, taller, and more handsome.

Well but Tom Cruise, Bill Gates, and Kobe aim for someone higher than our typical target market. Not really. How do you know they want only one? Chinese emperor got 10k chicks and he didn’t even have flat TV and flush toilet.

The market does give more absolute wealth and prosperity to virtually everyone. If there is one thing the market don’t give to those politically powerful is relative wealth and power. The thing is, that’s what gets men laid.

Another problem is that consensually attracting women are often politically incorrect too. Most societies have so many norms prohibiting so many consensual acts for reasons that will be obvious shortly.

So consensually attracting hot babes is not the only thing most males count on.

The third way is then the most common way, namely to separate target market from competitors.

If target prefer Bob, it’s wrong because it’s not love. If target pick Hasan then it’s wrong because polygamy is bad. If target pick Liu Chan, then it’s wrong because prostitution is immoral. If target pick Mr. Tanaka then it’s wrong because hentai demean women. If target pick Jean Claude then it’s wrong because inter religious marriage is bad.

The list goes on and on. Women trafficking is illegal despite consent. No sex outside marriage. No sex for cash (but chocolate and flower is okay because it can signal wealth nevertheless in a spendthrift way). No contract marriage, no polyandry, no bullshit. If the male is honest then he’s arrogant.

Each kid need daddy to spend at least 8 hours a day and 20% of his income no matter how wealthy daddy is to ensure rich dad don’t have 1000 kids. No this. No that.

The limit is just imagination. The proof is faith. It’s useless trying to argue with bigots or working too much to comply with all the norms that any competitors would come up. It just won’t work.

Finally, unless you’re really bad, eventually the girl picks you. Then it’s sacred and a big OK.

But is it victimless?

Well, in a sense yes, in a sense no. Depends on how you define “victim”.

Say cheap product comes from China. The product is cheaper and is in better quality. Then many people buy the product. Is it victimless? No force involved. No fraud involved. It’s consensual. In fact, it’s more than consensual, it’s a good deal. Is it victimless? Well, does everyone support globalization and free trade?

No. There are disgruntled envy competitors that just do not want to see YOU enjoying better deals. If better deals are available from you then you don’t need to buy from them. Those bigots then demand heavy punishments against acts that do not involve fraud or force. Often things are prohibited not because it’s bad, but because it’s TOO GOOD.

So good, it drives out governments’ endorsed alternative of competition. If government do nothing, there will be little intensive for lobbyist to spend millions of dollars to buy law makers. If you’re a law maker, what would you do?

The same way with free sex, though I won’t elaborate. I mean if the cause why people hate free trade is because of competition, it’s a very natural guess to think that people hate free sex out of the same reason too.

However, to prohibit something you need a reason. You need to convince others that somehow the prohibited things are so bad. You need to convince others. Unfortunately, wrong things cannot be proofed, by definition of proof. So you need something that makes people believe anyway DESPITE lack of evidence.

That is called faith.

Now we pay 30% income tax most of which goes into wealth redistribution. What else, given that the market can provide far superior service more efficiently anyway. So we are 15 times more generous.

World GDP is 300 times it was 200 years ago. Human race is 300 times richer.

If we have the same number of fuck ups now than we have 200 years ago, non of those fuck ups will be “poor” by 1800 standard.

So what’s the problem?

The problem is the fuck ups, irresponsible, lazy, stupid, socialists bigots out breed the prudent, smart, diligent and hard working. The problem is we got smart people like HaRRo that are too willing to sacrifice himself in altar of socialism to fed the parasites. Sorry HaRRo. We got to repent.

Anyone opposing freedom want to enslave others. Yielding to their kind is like cutting our own hand throwing it to lions hoping the lions will become vegetarian. If anything, the lions will just breed and breed and kill us.

If you run the fastest you simply have to show that you too can hit the hardest.

I love poor people. Many of them work hard for me and we both make a lot of money. None of those that work hard for me work as hard as me though. But well, we’re getting somewhere.

It’s the mindset that’s wrong. We encourage the poor to breed by subsidizing those that make kids. When subsidy is given, supply and demand curve no longer meet creating surplus of humans, causing unemployment giving rise to more justification for bigger government in never ending vicious poverty cycle.

Just pay anyone that don’t have kids and legalize commercial sex so the best brightest richest (like our mods) can knock up all the hot babes. Then encourage porn so no ugly women get laid. Hell those ugly feminists can always enjoy their right becoming astronauts, programmers, scientists, or some grenade thrower in the front line anyway. I totally support affirmative action for all womyn that want to throw grenade in the front line, if they’re ugly.

Within 1 generation, all kids will have rich smart dad and hot sexy mom. No need to resort to violent to “exterminate” those we deem inferior.

But even those benign peaceful method is politically incorrect. We’re like gladiator being forced to kill each other by our leaders with their irrational faith based “morality”.

Want of freedom is universal among those who can give better offer, more competitive, and hence want consumers to be free to choose.

Just like want of meritocracy is universal, among the productive.

The same way, want of sacrifice is also universal among those who want to sacrifice others. Want of control is universal among those who want to enslave others. Want of socialism is universal, among parasites. Want of religion is universal among those who want to blame others based on nonsense.

The military does not choose the objective, and I have been talking strictly in a military perspective, so what should be a military objective is a good talking point, but not what we were discussing. The thought is not Western, want of Freedom is universal. We could go on forever like you said earlier.

Originally Posted by luizeba This year, my family will ‘adopt’ a children for the Christmas and New Year week…it’ll be a 12 y.o girl She has parents, but she’s living in a State House due problems with her parents (probably in jail, I don’t know) It’ll be a great experience *-*

I got a better idea. Why not tell Dad to attract more women so you can have your own biological sister.

I mean if it’s his money that’s going to take care of her, why must it be someone else’s cock?

If I am paying, and the hot women prefer me, why should it be other man’s cock? If the women is not hot, I wouldn’t want to mate with her, nor would I want to raise her kid.

Oh because if women pick the rich, there are laws against polygamy, prostitution, pre conceive child support agreement, and so on and so on. But if some unproductive welfare parasites want to make kids, it’s human’s right. Yea some right. Right to rob taxpayers all their money.

Doesn’t make sense.

Once I am as rich as Bill Gates, I too will support millions of kids. All of which must be mine.

Heh… And capitalism is great folks. People in Africa and many part in Asia got poor because they don’t embrace capitalism to the fullest. Just import their prettiest women to be sex workers in rich countries and poof, there goes poverty. With porn, ugly women won’t get laid and the pretty will go somewhere. All the males in those countries will fight toe and nails for free market and everyone will get rich. Lest they go extinct.