Free Market Forever

May 19, 2012

Why You Should Flush Conscience Down the Toilet?

I think one of the greatest impediments to success with banging chicks are your conscience.

Your conscience is developed mainly by 2 sources:

1. Your every day McDonald experience. This is simply incompatible with prevailing norms in getting chicks.

2. What societies taught you is moral. Again, societies lie, and their moral “guidance” is there to prevent you from succeeding.

Either case, the profitable path is to be a realist. Don’t look at what’s moral, it’s self defeating. Don’t look at what’s legal, it’s vague. Look at whether people actually get punished for and avoid punishment while being as selfish as possible.

To see the world the way it really is. Defy the norm of societies and you may end up in jail. Obey it and you’re not getting the good stuff. So there’s a balance. Then there’s a hypocrisy for even more profit. The truth, is, that’s the real norm.

That’s what all winners do. Make rules so tight everyone is actually breaking it. And then create loopholes. That loophole, the narrow path, is the path of salvation.

Ignore ethic. Just look whether a certain act is actually punished or not. Say to your self, “I am a psychopath. I am a psychopath.” Either ignoring the societies’ norm all the way or obeying it too wholeheartedly will lead to catastrophic outcome.

For example, society may say don’t shag underage girls below 18. Now look, people do go to jail for doing that right? So don’t.

Should you go all the way to obey the spirit of the law? Should you aim only for girls your own age or those even older than you? No. That would be another mistake.

Society says paying women for sex is illegal. Should you do so? It’s one of those grey area.

Actually people would do some mistakes here. They go all the way believing that no women want money. They spent years and years learning how to seduce women without money.

Yes some can. Tom Cruise can. Some of us can shag women unscathed. The rest of us, mortal, will just have to absorb damage costs. Without damage costs, women are too powerful. Every man wants as many women as possible. Average looking women can get president. Look at the fat Monica Lewinsky. Paying her is just one of the most natural way to even out the imbalance.

Societies come up with a fine story of how all prostitutes are coerced or desperate for money. The truth is, even rich women want man that are even richer. That means they want even more money. And yes, they want the man to pay. Getting the man to pay is the most accurate way to measure the man’s wealth, and hence genetic quality, and sense of responsibility.

We all want to be appreciated. I too would rather a girl that want me for my brain rather than just my wallet. Women too want to be appreciated. How much you shower her with money is a way to show how much you value her. If you’re not paying, she will think you think she’s not important.

Some just ignore the norm all together, and commit polygamy or actually pay women up. These men go to jail, lost their cars, etc. Break the law, get screwed.

Another thing men often do is to go all the way and make the ultimate payment, namely marriage. You’ll see how Tiger Wood and Beatty Chadwick end up. Follow the law too much you’re screwed too.

There is no one right solution. It’s all in the balance.

What happen is, you pay. However, you hypocritically arrange that legally you’re not paying. There are many ways. Sugar relationship is one. Buying sport cars is another. Buying her expensive dinners would be another one. That’s effectively means burning money for her. You accomplish your purpose, namely showing her that you’re wealthy and she is worth it, without having to run against the cops.

By buying expensive dinners, feminazis can’t claim she is financially coerced to have sex with you. Anyone can live without expensive dinners. So it’s more acceptable. Of course, even if you pay her cash, chance is, she is still not coerced. But hei, feminazis have strong incentive to claim otherwise right?

And that’s how most of money in the world goes, men, cannot pay women directly, end up burning money for caviar, vacations, doodads, and conspicuous consumptions. Can’t blame the rich. That’s the only thing they can spend legally. If they want to spend to feed thousands of starving children instead, with a small catch that all must be their biological children of course, then it’ll be illegal.

Actually just look at what everyone else do, and do it, but remember to be balanced. That seems to be the way to go. Propriety is the keyword here. Tao would be another keyword.

Hypocrisy is also important. Yes love is bullshit. I’ve never met a beautiful girls that believe in love. They all want money because they know how much they worth in cunts. I don’t even bother saying it. It’s too cliche. Still, when you have to explain to the public, use that love word a lot. Dumping a wife? Say you no longer love her. Don’t say, she out lived her usefulness as fuck toy as her mate value deteriorates as a function of age. That’s politically incorrect, though factually correct.

Societies lie to you. Those lies are what they want to hear. So give them lies. Every body happy. Got it?

Say you live in a country where everyone drive on the left. Say you insist on driving on the right. Then you tend to hit other drivers more.

The issue is not whether you’re more right or wrong than everyone else. The issue is that it’s too costly to be different.

It’s simply too costly to have different values than societies you live in. Most of the time, through self-deception or irrational logic, people simply conform.

Unfortunately, getting girls are governed differently than our normal behavior.

The fact is, in general, lying or defrauding girls so you can sleep with them is legal, but paying them is not.

Now, think for a while.

Imagine if you go to McDonald, and you try to seduce the cashier to get burger. Chance is not only you’re not going to get any, most people will think you’re crazy. The normal way to get burger, the normal way to get ANYTHING in life is to pay for it. Committing fraud is usually illegal. Sex is the exact opposite.

Your conscience is trained within that normal McDonald situation. When you use your conscience on dating, you’ll end up like drivers on the different side with everyone else.

You’ll be surprised by others simply lying openly and get away with it, you’ll get screwed a lot arguing why paying girls should be legal.

You tend to get used to the idea that moral comes from reasoning and hence must be consistent. The truth is, if there is any consistency between one area and another in morality, it simply is the interest of the powerful. In short, might, for all practical purposes, does make right. As interests of the powerful change all the time, so is morality from culture to culture and from time to time.

The sooner you accept that, and realistically maneuver reality rather than trying to fight it, the more peace you’ll have in this world and the more profit you get. After all, you too would do the same when opportunities arise right? You should.

Anyway, why McDonald’s ethic is different than anti-prostitution ethic?

Simple. McDonald situation is governed mainly by free market mechanism. Here, keeping customers happy is paramount. Otherwise you’ll go to burger king.

Your relationship with girls is governed mainly by politicians. Those politicians want vote from your competitors who simply don’t want you to be happy. Here keeping her happy, say by paying her, will make her choose you and that will make other males unhappy. So all the other males will say it’s illegal.

Most males do not care how happy girls will be. Other males are mainly concern that they are chosen.

In Afghanistan, for example, force marriage is common. Its sex outside marriage, that is, sex outside permission of the powerful, is the one that’s illegal. In US, prostitution is more politically incorrect than bullshitting girls. The latter is legal.

If lying is legal, and paying is not, then lie. Or at least realize reality the way it is.

Imagine if you live in a socialist country. Imagine if all the people have deep seated beliefs that every man deserve to be equally rich, irrelevant of how smart or diligent they are. Say you want to be richer. Can you do that the nice way?

Of course not. No matter how you get rich, someone somewhere somehow will say you’re wrong. Worst of all you will think that this whole thing is just a slight misunderstanding. You keep working hard thinking that everyone surely approves you, till one day you and your whole family are slaughtered by the mobs that think you’re wrong.

Can you get rich in a socialist country? Yes you can, by being a jerk.

Now, imagine if you live in a monogamous country. Imagine if all the people have deep seated beliefs that every man deserve equal number of hot babe (namely 1) no matter how tall, smart, diligent, or rich he is. Say you want to knock up more. Can you do it the nice way?

Of course not. No matter how consensual your deal is, someone somewhere somehow will say you’re wrong. Worst of all you will think that this is all just a slight misunderstanding. You keep seducing girls thinking that nobody would mind you’re sleeping with their wives, girlfriends, fiances, and concubines. I mean the girls consent, and you’re paying for it, so what? One day, you’ll just wake up with a big knife on your back.

The truth is, they mind. EVERY primate, with the exception of Bonobo, mind a lot when they see someone else is winning.

Can you knock up many hot babes? Yes by being a jerk. Last time I check terrorists and douche bag don’t have problem doing that. Nice businessmen do.

It takes a really big ball to live in peace. Bonobo live peacefully because they got big balls and their sperms, instead of they, fight. They live in peace, but they don’t create play station either.

The issue is not whether you’re hurting them or not. The issue is when you win they don’t. Period.

So how do you win?

You lie. Either to yourself, to the girl, or to society. Everybody bullshits.

Think about it. Each male primate wants to mate with as many female primates as possible. All primates with the exception of Bonobo, wants to prevent every other male from accomplishing that. Gorilla would just bash weaker gorillas. Humans simply bullshit other humans.

How do they do so? They make highly inconsistent rules that if you look carefully, actually prohibit everything. Most rules in any country actually allow anyone to get caught.

The rules are justified by all sort of nonsense. At first it’s religion. Then it’s morality. After that we have this idea that certain acts demean women.

Obviously if they block everything then they too won’t get laid. Then they make a loop hole so they can pass and you don’t.

So a lot of moral reasoning in societies is about giving different names on essentially the same thing. The key of winning is to go through that narrow path or hypocritically pretend to everyone else you’re going through that narrow path.

Take a look at these:

Prostitutes- … this is just the definition of prostitution: (in most states) a lewd act for money or other consideration … (California courts have ruled that if someone mows your lawn and then commits a lewd act, the mowing of the lawn constitutes “other consideration” and therefore an act of prostitution has taken place). -what is a sex worker

Look at that carefully. Who among us will do anything without “consideration”? The law as it says actually prohibit virtually all sex. Yet there are loopholes.

One of the loophole is escort. Obviously an escort is a prostitute. Who would pay $100 per hour just to have a girl a company him? You think politicians do not know that? Another is massage therapists. The idea is nobody knows what you do with the therapists so the cop doesn’t have proof. The difference is simple. You just don’t rub it on their nose that you’re getting it. So they don’t jail you.

Then there is marriage. When a girl marries you, does she have “consideration”. Of course. Somehow magically it’s not prostitution. Why? Because marriage always favor the ruling class. In democratic countries, within marriage girls can only pick single males. Single males are males that don’t sale and are usually of low quality.

In short, marriage rules in any culture tend to favor those who are in power. Those people then simply declare that marriage is not prostitution. In democratic countries, for example, single males outnumber super rich males that can horde women. Hence, marriage tends to favor single males.

In arab countries, the king and religious leaders rule. So marriage laws there are favorable for the king and religious leaders. Polygamy is legal there, for example, and the rest should just jerk off themselves or channeled to be terrorists to kill you.

Confused? When you understand their incentive, there is nothing irrational or illogical about it. After all, single males and ugly women can vote too right?

Just like tariffs are there to kick out better cars, marriage is designed to kick out richer males. Getting married can get your damage cost really high. The most obvious sample is Tiger Wood and Beatty Chadwick. Marriage laws scare of the rich and middle class males favor that so much. Many males have committed suicide out of marriage.

Some middle ground is sugar relationship. Basically you enforce your own contract by splitting the deal into smaller pieces. She stop humping you stop paying. This put your damage cost under control. So far so good. Cops are not cracking down on sugar relationship yet and that’s as legal as it goes.

That’s how you live. Like water. If you insist on following your conscience, you’ll just get crushed.

Next we’re going to talk about managing damage costs. By the way, I got 1 daughter and still married.

May 6, 2012

Humans are Selfish and We Need to Know It

Many ideologies and religions are believable because people THINK strangers love them.

They simply overestimate those loves. Let’s face it socialism is selfishness. It’s the lazy selfishly try to rob the productive. Yet it’s packaged as love to appeal to the mass.

Feminazism is selfishness. It selfishly demand everyone to ignore beauty and naturally promoted by the ugly. Yet it’s packaged as love by claiming that the best jobs and deals, where beauties matter most, are too degrading.

Drug prohibition is mainly selfishness. It selfishly max out government control on what we can eat. Yet it’s packaged as love as if the world care your kids die.

Religion is selfishness. It’s there to maximize power of religious leaders and their followers. Yet it’s packaged as love as they actually care you go to heaven. They don’t.

Only capitalism is honest. And yes it’s selfish too. But it’s honest because it doesn’t need to lie. We will all be better off if free market take care of everything.

Incoming search terms:

  • powered by phpBB balanced politics
  • powered by phpBB define legal terms
  • powered by phpBB human breeding
  • powered by phpBB show up
  • powered by phpBB competition nature photography in ohio
  • powered by phpBB how to earn money at
  • powered by phpBB government stimulus check
  • powered by phpBB allegiance health
  • powered by phpBB christian art competitions
  • powered by phpBB supply distribution

April 27, 2012

Women are never wrong

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , — admin @ 9:01 am

It’s men that have to adapt to what women want.

Customers are never wrong. It’s businessmen that have to adapt to what customers want.

The people are never wrong. It’s the politicians that have to adapt to what the people want.

The world is never wrong. It’s us that have to adapt to the world.

If women, customers, people, or the world, are wrong, it’s us that have to adapt our bullshit to whatever they believe in.

Incoming search terms:

  • powered by phpBB beauty light
  • naked model photos
  • pretty women naked

April 18, 2012

Who You Are is More Important Than the Actual Deal

I really don’t understand you guys.

If you have a daughter, don’t you want your daughter to end up with the best of the best? Millionaires, billionaires or someone with high IQ? If you have a son, do you want your son to end up like Beatty Chadwick? Do you want your son to get married at all? What do you want for your sons or daughter anyway. I want to know my self.

How the relation works out is secondary. It could be casual sex. It could be sugar babies. It could be formal marriage. It could be religious marriage. He could be her boss (as long as it’s the actual owner rather than just supervisor). Who care?

People concentrate so much on what kind of deal a woman get. Marriage, then good. Prostitution then bad. Free sex, then somewhere in the middle. Bosses, then exploitation. Have to share, then bad. Move to richer country to find a mate then really really bad.

All those are secondary. I think most women and most father of women care more about WHO the man is, and not WHAT the exact deal is. The exact deal must not be too bad and I personally think that marriage is one of the most stupid deal.

However, WHO the man is, that is, how rich he is, is obviously far more important than other factors. Is he rich? Is he handsome? Is he tall? Does he speak C++? What’s his IQ?

Most of the women that are trafficked to europe have that in mind. Will the white male that fuck her be more handsome taller and richer than the cavemen that propose marriage to her back home.

If they can choose, they’d rather marry a rich smart tall handsome male. However, if they can choose between being a sex worker for a rich smart tall handsome male and be a wife of some poor guy back home, we know what they choose. Who the man is override what the deal is, in most circumstances.

The same way if I approach a woman, WHO the women is, namely how pretty she is, is what’s important. She can be on top. She can be submissive, or dominant, who care. Is she hot?

I don’t care if a man worship the earth my daughter walk on. If he’s poor, he has to get rich first.

Have you approached a woman? No matter how polite you are, if you’re poor, they don’t even look at you. If you’re rich, then you just approach them casually and tada….

Rich women do not need money. They still prefer the rich anyway for the same reason men prefer the pretty. At least that’s what I would prefer for my daughter. A very rich man. If my daughter got 2 proposal, one from a monogamous middle class and another from a billionaire playboy magnate, I would advice her to pick the billionaire magnate. Just make sure he’s really a billionaire as he said.

If I can reproduce my self by cloning, I wouldn’t need women at all. But hei, the most natural way is the cheapest cost effective way :)

Incoming search terms:

  • powered by phpBB best way to save money
  • powered by phpBB legal questions concerning wills made by ex husband
  • powered by phpBB women shoes
  • powered by phpBB origins of medicine
  • free market and prostituion
  • Prostitution actually helps maintain marriages and relationships
  • powered by phpBB women\s medical group
  • powered by phpBB ideal health
  • powered by phpBB division of child support services
  • people with high i q avoid marriage
  • male sugar babies
  • hot prostitution maRKET
  • high iq tend to free markets
  • rich men dont want sugar baby marriage

March 17, 2012

Biggest Difference Between Psychopath and Normal People

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , — admin @ 6:18 am

Is normal people justify his behavior to himself and others. Their acts don’t differ much. They both steal, kill, loot, rape, force, fraud, or who knows what if it serves their best interests. Psychopath just do it. Normal people bullshit first. Ah the victim is heretic. Ah, it’s God’s will I have the powah. Ah it’s for people’s best interests, etc. etc.

Real effects of atheism is removing hypocricy.

Presume that everyone is a psychopath and ignore anything they said. You’ll be surprised how less suprise you will be.

Incoming search terms:

  • powered by phpBB faith and family
  • powered by phpBB how to help my family if husband addicted drugs
  • powered by phpBB legal dictionary the world covenit in a will

March 8, 2012

Why Eugenic Measure is Not Necessary and Why Simple Libertarianism Will Work Better

I am not sure what I can categorize with eugenic.

There are 3 eugenics movements.

1. Fascist. Government decide those who are unworthy and neutralize or sterilize them. Quite often, our smartest subspecies, like the jews, are the one getting slaughtered. I am against this.
2. Techie. My kids can regrow limbs. Okay that’s cool. But it’s kind of freaky and can’t be done on large scale yet. I think it’s people’s right to do so.
3. Libertarianism. Yap simple normal standard libertarianism without even trying to be eugenic. Most of them don’t even think they’re eugenic and hate eugenics.

I believe that the third way will naturally improve humans’ genetic quality as a very nice side effect. Yap the 3rd is actually very eugenic and that’s what I want to explain.

This is the idea that I want to promote. That simple libertarianism have eugenic side effect.

Also many people think that unbridled capitalism will cause war, famine, great disparity of wealth, income inequality, violence, women oppression, etc.

I think the opposite. I think pure libertarianism or at least something closer to libertarianism from what we have now will eliminate poverty, reduce income inequality, reduce war, reduce violent, help the poor, etc. Not that I consider all those goals ideals, but if that’s what ideals for you, libertarianism is the key even for that.

Most people in western civilization think that libertarianism will be disgenic. I think the opposite.

Libertarianism varies but it at least support decriminalization of:
1. Explicit sugar babies agreement (currently illegal due to anti prostitution laws)
2. Consensual women trafficking (currently illegal despite consent under contemporary anti trafficking laws)
3. Porn
4. Drugs or saver drugs like ganja. Pure libertarian support legalization of all drugs and moderate ones support saver drugs like ganja.
5. Buying and selling organs

6. Elimination of welfare program

Pure libertarianism oppose redistribution of wealth at all. Some moderate ones like Milton Friedman advocate negative income tax. Both tend to be eugenic.

Why will this be eugenic?

I think the real reason behind dysgenic tendency doesn’t come from free market. It comes from government.

1. Monogamy actually ration females in equal share for everyone. It ensures the dumbest most stupid and violent males will get a wife anyway. Those males can get females simply because it’s illegal to pick more attractive richer males. Attractive males tend to be best sellers, and quite often already married. Monogamy means women can only pick singles. Also marriage laws are very hostile against the rich. Many rich attractive males simply don’t want to get married. Free sex is simply not toward the best interest of beautiful women that can get tons of financial support for her beauty. Polygamy ration females on the whim of politicians, that get votes from the poor. In Iran, for example, government want to pay cash for those who breed. Sugar babies eliminate this issue and libertarianism will legalize that.
2. Anti women trafficking laws prevent women in countries where they are oppressed from fleeing to better countries with better system and richer males. If women can consensually move, males in every countries will have strong incentive to make their country rich, embrace capitalism, etc. Women will be less oppressed everywhere because otherwise they’ll simply move.
3. Even though most women prefer the rich, not all are pretty enough to get rich males. Well, porn will ensure that the ugly don’t get picked.
4. Cheap availability of drugs will give the poor and “fuck up” people something else fun to do besides breeding.
5. If organ selling is legalized, parents can inherit more wealth to their children when they die. Also the rich can live longer and reproduce better.
6. Pure libertarianism opposes welfare. This will obviously very eugenic because it’ll make the poor starve. But pure libertarianism is not even necessary. Currently government spend so much money supporting “our children”, which often is simply not ours, at least not biologically. This provide strong incentive to breed especially among the poor. Welfare recipients deliberately produce many kids so they can collect more food stamps. If government spend the same amount of money for those with kids and those without, that incentive will be reduced.

So what do you think?

Next post would be on why socialism is not necessary and why simple libertarianism will work.

February 26, 2012

People Having the Same Chance

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , — admin @ 9:55 pm

Insisting that all people have the same chance to be successful is like insisting that iPhone should have the same chance of getting market share as much as pagers and typewriters.

Not only it wouldn’t work, the very reason why the chance is not the same is the very reason why technology improved.

Incoming search terms:

  • teen begging

February 18, 2012

First They Came

First they came for jews. But I didn’t speak because I am not jewish.

Then they came for drug dealers, but I didn’t speak because I prefer video games.

Then they came for highly paid workers, but I didn’t speak because I can’t afford them.

Then they came for sugar babies, but I didn’t speak because I can always do it silently anyway once I am rich enough as a sugar daddy.

Then they came for doubters, but I didn’t speak, because I do not like to offend people.

Then they came for sexy immigrants, but I didn’t speak, because I am no longer an immigrant.

Then they came for old people, but I didn’t speak because I am not old yet.

Then politicians are corrupt, economy collapses, jobs are moving away, jails are full, governments get bigger and bigger, and we laugh at them.

Incoming search terms:

  • powered by phpBB psychology
  • powered by phpBB the market
  • powered by phpBB motivation psychology
  • powered by phpBB flower garden
  • powered by phpBB married women

February 16, 2012

What People Think the Laws Prohibit, What the Laws Actually Said, and How it is Actually Enforced

When government prohibit consensual acts, quite often there is a huge gap between what most people think is being prohibited, what the law actually said, and how it is actually implemented.

Governments try to maintain lies that it try to prohibit something, and then prohibit totally different unrelated things.

If you have a girl friend. Say you give her a gift. Does that make her  prostitute? This is not a philosophical question. It’s a legal question actually. Most people would think not. However, if you read the law, she might. Both of you can get arrested.

What matter is what the judge and jury think. Most of the time, they are quite divided due to vagueness of the law and broadness of definition.

The root of the problem is allowing government to declare consensual crime illegal. What’s natural after that is that government will simply broaden the criminalization far beyond what most people think.

1. It’s far more broad than what most people think.

Anti prostitution is marketed to protect women from being forced by evil pimp to promiscuously have sex with really really ugly men with mental retardation problem and highly unusual violent fetish.

In fact, most people think that’s what prostitution is.

There is nothing in the law against prostitution that specify that prostitutes must be promiscuous, forced, or sleep with undesirable males. Quite the opposite, prostitution is often monogamous, consensual, with really really hot participants with plenty of other legal choices that simply choose better. There is nothing in anti prostitution laws that indicate that the johns must be unattractive.

Notice that marrying really really undesirable man is legal.

After all, marriage means government is the pimp. Government is simply the worst pimp. It’s so bad it has to keep so many things illegal just to stay competitive.

The law says prostitution is “a lewd act for money or other consideration,”  http://www.coyotela.org/getarrestedinfo.html.

What makes an act a prostitution is not the undesirability of the mate or the forced nature of the act or even the promiscuity of the women. It’s the incentive, which doesn’t even have to be financial.

By that definition of prostitution, virtually all women can be convicted. I give a girl a massage, that’s consideration. I give a girl attention, that’s consideration. I make a girl happy that’s consideration. In fact, I wonder where I can get the list of all the consideration that’s legal or illegal. Who knows what the lists are.

I can only wonder why marriage doesn’t count as consideration. Government pretty much control what kind of consideration is legal or not legal based on anything they wish. Now it’s your life. Why should their wish matter?

Notice the law need to be broad. If the law only prohibit accepting cash, the girl will take credit. If the law only prohibit accepting money, the girl will exchange that for food, lodging.

Now take a look at drug laws again. Most of us think that it’s there to get rid of dangerous addictive drug.

That’s not what the law said. There is nothing in the law saying that the drug must be dangerous or significantly addictive. And it’s not how it works in practice either. I was very surprised when I found this out.

(1) Schedule I.—

(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.

(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.

(C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.” [23]

See? Watch the word “accepted safety”. That looks like it has something to do with dangerous. It’s so vague. Anyone that took any English language class will point out that it’s a passive sentence. Accepted by who? Passive sentences are inherently unclear. Many doctors know many ways to use marijuana safely. As long as you don’t drive, it’s save. No body died out of marijuana overdoses yet.

It has little to do with the drug being dangerous. It has a lot to do with preventing you from using the drug you want so you ended up using other drugs they want you to use instead.

It’s easy for government to argue that a drug has no legitimate accepted medical use. Government simply choose not to accept. Yes baby. Marijuana is NOT dangerous. Just look at this graph:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana

Now take a look at women trafficking. Most of us think of women trafficking as those women in chain sent against their will kicking and screaming. The truth is the opposite. Those women quite often have a nice job or marriage offers in their country. Quite often they simply want to go to richer countries so they can meet even richer males. It’s like you having $10k per month and want $1 million per month instead. Such women compete with ugly women in rich countries and that’s why it’s prohibited.

Anti women trafficking laws actually have clauses saying that they include consenting women as “trafficked” if it’s done for sex.

Imagine if you are a jew during holocaust. Wouldn’t you want to get out anywhere? What about countries that accept you says, well, we can’t just let you in and feed you for free. Ah you got capital, you got to invest here. Oh you’re smart, see you got to work here. What would the jew did? Hope in. Unfortunately, during holocaust, very few countries wanted to accept jews. And that’s how Hitler can easily slaughter millions of them. Then every body blamed Hitler even though all of them sort of did it too. You see why jews don’t trust non jews? We messed up.

Quite often women are indeed forced to be trafficked, but not by the traffickers. Women are oppressed by the Taliban in some country. Imagine if you’re that women. Wouldn’t you want to get out anywhere? What about countries that accept you says, well, we can’t just let you in and feed you for free. Ah you’re hot. Some of our males want sugar babies, see if we can work something out. What would the woman do? Hope in still. Unfortunately, during prosecution of hot women all over the world, very few countries want to accept hot babes. And that’s how fascists can easily oppress womyn.

2. It’s vague.

Because it’s so broad every body will break it. So they need an excuse why they shouldn’t punish the acts they favor.

As for what “other consideration” is… the courts in California said that if someone “mows your lawn” that can be “other consideration.” – http://www.coyotela.org/getarrestedinfo.html

So it’s not okay to mow lawn for your girlfriend. That will make her a prostitute and both of you can get arrested. It’s okay to offer her marriage? What about if you give her a massage? Should you consult lawyers first?

There is one way to see that the definition is vague. Look at what people think http://sugarbabydaily.com/2011/10/07/high-class-hooke/#more-91

Some people think sugar baby is a prostitution, some people think differently. The law is vague. In fact, Matt Ridley simply points the obvious. Marriage is a form of prostitution. The difference is that government is the pimp and anti prostitution law is simply not enforced against married couple magically.

Look at laws against women trafficking. It’s there to prevent “exploitation”. What is exploitation? Anything. Coca cola companies, exploit me to make money, for example in pretty much the same sense Pepsi does. Government, can simply declare that selling Coca Cola is an exploitation and don’t enforce the same principle against Pepsi. If it’s exploitation, so what?

What is exploitation? If I hire a secretary is that exploitation? Why it’s an exploitation if I hire her to work hard but not an exploitation if I hire her for sex? Exploitation is not an objective word.

If exploitation is defined as taking advantage of others, isn’t that what all we do? When I go to a shop buying a gum, am I not exploiting the shop owners for my own interest of getting the gum? Isn’t the shop exploiting me to get money? So what? Exploitation is simply the basis of all human interaction, whether consensual or not. It’s simply too broad and hence can be used to condemn anything.

Allowing government to prohibit “exploitation” is like giving them blank cheque. It’s so easy to argue that anything is exploitation. What isn’t?

Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs;

Check the law again. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum bla bla bla. Is there anything there that said what exploitation doesn’t include? How do you know, for example, that trafficking a woman for the purpose of getting her a better hair cut is not an exploitation? Why consensual commercial sex is an exploitation and often less consensual marriage is not? What’s the limit? Who knows.

Look at laws against drug. It’s there to prevent “abuse” of drugs. What is abuse of drugs? Anything. Any use can be argued as abuse.

3. It usually comes demonization of the consensual acts or people in negative light. Before nazi slaughtered the jews, they portrayed jews as backstabbing traitorous bastards. Most normal germans did not think they were being rascists. They thought they were getting rid traitors. The same way, most normal people actually believe that all prostitution are non consensual.

Most people do not know that some prostitutes are paid $5500 per hour. In fact, the biggest irony of anti prostitution law is that the very incentive used to define prostitution is the very proof that the acts are indeed consensual. What would you not consensually do for $5500 per hour? Srsly. Killing? Murdering? Robbing? Assassinating Presidents? Fighting Taliban?

What about fucking? You wouldn’t fuck for $5500? Who or what wouldn’t you fuck even if they pay $5500 per hour? Okay quite a lot. But many of those prostitute clients are quite often some handsome rich men. Nothing in the prostitution laws say that the client must be undesirable. Even if the client is Brad Pitt, or Tiger Wood, which would rather pay than get married, it’s still prostitution legally.

Yes there are women forced into prostitution. Just like there are men forced to be programmer, soldiers, etc. So what? Why not aim for those who coerced others?

4. They contain many redundant terms already prohibited by many other laws.

Women trafficking is defined

[...] the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs;

Now watch the definition carefully. Using threat, use of force, forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, and deception is already illegal. Why is it prohibited again in this new law? Now look at what they wrote latter. “Giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve consent.” What is wrong with that?

The purpose of anti women trafficking law is not to prevent force or fraud. The purpose is to prevent consensual women that do want to move in.

5. They have motives that are too politically incorrect to be stated in front.

The motives are not too hard to figure out.

In case of anti prostitution laws. The motive is to prohibit all sex outside marriage. To be frank, quite often husbands can’t compete with johns, so they prohibit johns. It’s simple. I know extremely beautiful girls that just want a divorce and be mistress instead. They can’t.

Yes women can still have sex outside marriage for free. However, it’s tough. In a sense, offering her to have sex for free doesn’t really give her much choice. If she has kids who would pay for it? Who will pay for her food when she’s pregnant? Government? That’s fascism. Even if she wants you, she can’t choose you unless you pay.

But why would government want to prohibit all sex outside marriage? That’s obvious. They want to be the pimp of all hoes so they can sell those hoes to voters that can’t compete with rich smart johns.

Why feminazis hate women trafficking? Not because of all the fraud and force involved. They simply don’t want competitors. Many feminazis are ugly women. Monogamy protect them from extinction. If they have to compete with influx of hot cheaper babes, they’ll be out of the gene pool in one generation.

Why government prohibits some safe drugs? Many reason. To prevent you from having fun is one thing. Another is so that more dangerous drugs that are paid by lobbyists can sell. If you look at all celebrities that  use drugs, none of them die out of marijuana. All of them are death out of legal drugs that they have to use because the saver marijuana is illegal.

Wealth is a form of power and true wealth is simply power. When government have power to decide terms of your mating, and what kind of fun you can have, they can control you. That means you are their slave. Who wouldn’t want more slaves?

6. Conclusion

At the end whether prostitution should be legal or not, whether drug should be legal or not, and whether consensual women trafficking should be legal or not depends on one question. Do you want to be governed by free market or by government? It’s that simple.

Incoming search terms:

  • powered by phpBB collection laws
  • powered by phpBB beauty companies
  • hot prostitutes with ugly guy

February 11, 2012

If We Believe in God and Stay Still

We will believe that some good outcome will happen anyway explainable away by the almighty being doing the heavy lifting. Because not even us know how exactly the outcome will happen, quite often, no body can sabotage it.

Because others see what we believe, others may believe too. After all we have so many arguments in the world. What is more convincing than to see someone, out of his selfish interest, believing the same thing?

When people believe something, they bet on it. Say you believe that Yuan will go up, you too will long Yuan and short USD right?

When people bet on something they have strong intensive to make things happen. This process is well studied and known. It’s called Nash equilibrium after John Nash, a schizophrenic Nobel Laureate that’s awarded to him for discovering the phenomena.

Beliefs are indeed very self fulfilling.

And hence, by just staying still and believing, you really do move mountains. The world have changed mainly because our beliefs have changed.

All these are inspired by just a sentence uttered by a carpenter 2 thousands years before John Nash that isn’t even serious about the issue.

So yes, many religious claims are very worthy to be learned and understood.

Just believing it, or believing what politicians say what it says would be a mistake for that means you’re missing the point. Simply ignoring religions as bullshit, will also be another mistake for you’re missing many important points for success.

Incoming search terms:

  • jim thio
Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress

Loading...