Free Market Forever

January 15, 2012

Learn! Don’t Blame

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , — admin @ 10:33 pm

If people are evil to you, then you’re not fair enough.

If people fool you, then you’re not smart enough.

If hot babes don’t want you, then you’re not rich enough.

So be fair. Be smart and be rich.

If you are fair, and people are still evil to you, well, they’re screwed.

If  you’re smart and people fool you, then they’re screwed.

If you’re rich and the girl still don’t like you, then send a message to her every year reminding her of how rich you are. Make her sorry. Find other girls of course, mean while. Who knows you ended up getting a few.

January 13, 2012

Marines that Pee on Talibans end Talibanism than Those Killing Talibans

Spirits are the true self. Our bodies are just tools used by the spirits, the genes, the memes, the religions, to propagate itself.

Kill a taliban, and more bodies will born to replace used bodies.

Pee on Talibans. Spread porn. Hire afganistan hot babes as sex workers, and any Taliban will be over in no time.

That’s why people hate porn so much. Porn exterminate them faster than gun. They’d rather get shot than letting porn spread. What ever they hate, do it, and bigots will be exterminated quickly.

Incoming search terms:

  • harem fuck
  • powered by phpBB marines
  • afghan babes naked
  • babes harem
  • hot afghan babes
  • kızlar haremi
  • undressed women

November 18, 2011

Does God love jews more than other people?

Do you love your wife or hordes of new girlfriends?

Your wife has a special covenant with you. However, girlfriends serve you well anyway with less string attached.

Also, nowadays, who care about complicated convenants. Everyone sort of just do it.

I think it looks pretty obvious to everyone else that Israel’s God must have been having other relationships.

I mean, where was God during Titus’s siege, islamic invasions, inquisitions, genocides, recessions, and Hezbollah rocket rains?

Well looks like God is busy wooing others.

Many (2 billions) said He even had a Son outside wedlock. He ended up rising another horde (1.5 billions) to fight of the rumor.

I understand that Israel still think that she is special and all. I’ve seen it all the time. Well, He got to start somewhere. I bet He’s been planning all these from the beginning though.

Every time God seems to be away Israel keeps blaming herself that may be she didn’t ‘t serve God right, or this or that. God may have encouraged that kind of thinking obviously.

However, maybe she should stop and think for a while. Maybe it’s not really her. It’s just Him.

God will be God after all.

Next time God is back really late, I can assure you He’s not coming back from hard work, war, or anything life threatening. He will  simply have a lot of explaining to do.

That’s all I am sayin. And ugh, just in case, bring a lawyer.

Incoming search terms:

  • does god love jews more than others?

November 1, 2011

Why I am doing all these?

Why free market forever? Why the site? Why all the writing?

Have you ever seen kids begging on the street and then some other kids bigger than them collect money from those little kids. That’s what I see every day I go out in my country. No body care about those kids.

Yet when one those poor teen (say after legal age) or her mom would prostitute her self or be second/3rd wife to rich males that can and want to afford her, every body screams exploitation.

Also, I am not blaming anyone. I am not blaming those people for being hypocrite. Evolution theory already predict that they will be like that. I understand.

All those people do not know what they’re doing. Those who know don’t speak and silently become dictators and politicians making sure that those who speak don’t know. Those who do know and speak wouldn’t be believed anyway.

And that’s the whole point of being an effective hypocrite. Humans are not just hypocrite, they are very good and effective at it.

Successful hypocrites are those who somehow can maintain far different images than reality. In zero sum games like pursuance of power and sexual selection, we expect lies, effective successful lies, to prevail over truth.

By the way, the explanation to those apathy toward begging kids is simple and scientific. We don’t care about kids begging on the street because we indeed don’t care. Evolution theory predicts that humans do not care a lot about those that are non relative, too dissimilar or non reciprocal.

For altruism trait to reproduce it must somehow improve reproductive success. Caring for kids begging on the street doesn’t. It works for all species. Not just human.

Caring about women choosing to be prostitutes or 6th wife does improve a man’s reproductive success if you can count that as caring.

Humans, as chimps and gorillas, also do not care about their kind. However, males in power, such as voters, do not want women to pick other males that indeed have better more attractive offers.

That would effectively force women to aim lower, hence improving the bigot’s reproductive success. So most males primates want to prohibit many consensual choice. One great way to do that is to punish women that pick better offers.

So they get more followers to support their agenda, they need to come up with something else to mask their intent. None of those are scientific of course.

From religion, to women’s dignity, etc. All are well, non scientific. How do you proof or disproof that getting paid for sex raise or lower dignity?

It’s not science. It never is. We’re lying. We’re not interested to explain truth. We don’t use science to lie big to public. It’s tougher.

That’s what humans are. Humans are irrational and come up with irrational nonsense to justify what they want to do deep inside. They’re hypocrites, very effective ones.

We hold this truth with plenty of evidences that humans are different. Because we are not equally healthy, smart, productive, diligent, attractive, and aggressive we have different rules. Different rules serve different people. So each of us want the world to be governed differently.

Some of those rules have strong zero sum aspect. All we care is getting as many people as possible to believe what we believe and support what we support. We don’t care about truth.

So we lied. So we encouraged faith, so others would believe it anyway despite lack of or instead of evidences.

And neither religions or atheism are there to blame. Ask any religious engineers and I am sure he knows how basic physics work. Ask any atheists why they oppose prostitution/polygamy and most likely he doesn’t use science either. I bet he’ll use vague non scientific words like “dignity” or “respect for women”. Actually that’s the easiest way to see when someone is lying. He used vague words.

The problem is indeed in the structure of the game itself.

When we cooperate, like in understanding bricks, mortars, and light bulb, we are honest. When we are in zero sum game, like when we decide who should be in power or which guys and girls hotties can pick, we are liars. That’s the most profitable course. Of course that’s what everyone does irrelevant of whether they are religious or atheists.

Well at first my reaction is indeed hatred.

I am a mensa member. I won an international science competition. Schools are boring to me. Yet I was forced to take classes I don’t like due to evil political process.

I saw parents of low IQ kids bitching about how governments should do more to regulate education. Any billionaires in silicon valley knows that the problem is not government lack of involvement. The problem is some kids are just dumber. Why no body can see the obvious?

Finally, I had low IQ ex boyfriend and some future ex husband wanting to kill me for reasons I didn’t understand. Obviously I did nothing “wrong” against them.

Yes I had and may still have a lot of hatred and I wanted to just exterminate all those bigots. That’s what any males would do. It’s in my genes.

However the more I learn, the more I realized that it’s not as easily avoidable as anyone would have thought. It’s as if everyone in a sense already do “the right thing”. That I am the one that’s odd out.

Everyone is like that. That’s what being human means. We’re not angels. We’re human. That’s what human do. Being hypocrite, lie to each other, and then kill each other. The greatest human is Tao and the greatest Tao is not far from just normal human. Those normal humans are the variants of our species most successfully reproduced in the past.

Think about it. Say humans are killing your tribe. You can say, don’t kill, killing sucks. The problem is, if killing is only sucks for you, why should killer stop killing? The “right thing” is of course to kill back, to bullshit back, to prosecute back and so on. It’s the natural thing. Any rational or experienced players in such situation will all do the same thing.

And that’s where we are now. We are killing each other, bullshitting each other. It’s not just sucks for us, it sucks for the other side too. Just ask any kids that got bombed by airplanes or get slaughtered by suicide bombing. Obviously stopping killing and bullshitting each other would be profitable.

However, we will not get out of this (karmic?) cycle of mayhem until we understand what’s really going on.

That’s how I got passionate of helping as many people as possible to understand evolutionary psychology. Making it mainstream. So we can see what’s the problem and come up with better solutions for all of us. Why not put all those questions used to be answered by fairy tales, religions, ideologies, and other nonsense and use science to see what’s really going on.

A long time ago, Adam Smith convince the world that that humans are selfish. By properly understanding it we slowly manage to improve humans’ gross domestic product 300 times.

For God so love the world he send Adam Smith so that any country whose people believe in free market doesn’t have to be poor but can enjoy great wealth.

Well, we are selfish, but slightly different than pure selfish. We’re also bigotic, loving, caring, xenophobic, greedy, envious, vengeful, grateful, etc. Properly understood of what we would do and why we do it there is a lot more to achieve.

The world without war, and poverty is very easy to achieve. Altruism is not the answer for poverty for the same reason morality is not the main answer for prosperity. We’re still selfish bastard just like our ancestors and yet we are all far better off thanks to capitalism and globalization. Altruism is never a good answer because humans are selfish or govern by genes who are. Still, we will be prosperous without having to stray far from our nature. Think about it.

Now, don’t be selfish. Buy the e-book.

 

Incoming search terms:

  • harem slaves
  • naked women group
  • naked harem slaves
  • hareM GIRLS
  • harem slave girl
  • naked harem girls
  • naked harem slave girls
  • naked slave girls at the market
  • naked female slaves
  • slavegirl market
  • teen prostitutes
  • naked groups of women
  • photos naked harem girls
  • harem modern day photos
  • pictures of naked slaves
  • powered by phpBB pictures of women
  • harem slave pics
  • slave harem pictures
  • slave girl market pictures
  • harem slave girl/pics
  • slave naked women in harem
  • naked slaves pictures
  • naked slavegirls market picts
  • teenage slave girl pictures
  • teens kids fuck
  • naked slave women
  • naked slave teens nature
  • slave market
  • naked women groups
  • naked women photos groups
  • Oriental Legal age teenager
  • slave girls naked
  • slave girl powered
  • photos of naked female slaves
  • pictures of naked female slaves
  • real slavegirls markets free pics
  • powered by phpBB nature girl
  • pictures of naked harem slaves
  • naked slave girls market pictures
  • naked haremgirls

October 19, 2011

What would it take for an atheist to be a believer?

I once went to Benny Hinn. I saw people are rising from the chairs and the deaf hear.

For a while I was moved.

I then asked whether I can have more details on those who are cured so I can verify whether they really are cured or not.

They said I should ask the administrator.

I didn’t dig further because I was busy.

However, I see that 20-20 did some analysis and show that most of those “cured” people remain sick. What we have is just either fraud or blatant ignorance. Which explains religion.

In fact, here is the punch line. If those people are indeed cured by Benny Hinn, I bet we have tons of testimonies, statistic, etc. of all those people cured.

The same would go for religions. If God is really there and care about us, I bet we would have had far stronger proof. I bet Raelians will have shown us iPhone 25. These lack of evidence is indeed a strong evidence for atheism. If God exist and He cared that we believe him, we would never have needed faith.

Now to answer the question, just look at Benny Hinn again. If we have more documented testimonies that he’s not a fraud, then I think I would believe.

If during near death experience people can read numbers that they could not possibly have read, then I would believe.

Still religion can correctly predict and guide people’s life to the better (for themselves/often at the expense of others). It’s how we evolve. What works, rather than what’s true, is what reproduce and what’s common. So yea, religions are worth studying. Something is there. Most likely not God as we know it.

I want to believe. Please give me something worth believing.

September 12, 2011

Why does western culture detest polygamy while being permissive toward adultery and extramarital affairs?

That’s basically the essence of western sexual morality. Anyone can bang your wife but you (marital rape is illegal), and any kid deserve your money, except yours. Okay that’s a joke. But if you interpret lack of reward as punishment, and anything punished as prohibited, and consider marriage as a form of prostitution, it won’t be too far of to accept.

It’s not that bad considering the alternatives though. It all comes from what I call, inevitability of power.

So, basically different people favor different ideologies. Different cultures are controlled by different people and hence tend to have different values. Interests of the people that are in control decide the prevailing morality in a society.

So, basically different people favor different ideologies. Different cultures are controlled by different people and hence tend to have different values. Interests of the people that are in control decide the prevailing morality in a society.

Marriage as government favored sexual relationship

Marriage can be very intuitively defined as government favored sexual relationship.

Think about it. Marriage terms vary from places to places from time to time, but there is one thing in common for all marriage. Marriage is always the most politically correct sexual relationship.

What makes something politically correct?

Something is politically correct when people think it’s “right”. People often think something is right because God or somebody approve it. However, that theory simply doesn’t fit the data or is hard to test. A better theory is that people think something is right if those in power approve it.

So what makes something politically correct? Simple. The interest of those who are in power.

Egalitarian nature of western civilization

Western civilization is unique among all other civilization for a trait that most would find surprising. In western civilization, men tend to be equal. Don’t know how that works. The ancient chinese or persian would actually bow down to emperors. The ancient greeks doesn’t.

Perhaps constant welfare and dividing languages give western men bigger bargaining position toward their leaders. Some said invention of long bows giving peasants and merchants bigger power.

GINI index is always high in Asia no matter what the economic system is. GINI index tend to be lower in western civilization, again no matter what the economic system is. Asians are used to hierarchy. White guys don’t. Well, Persian, Indians, and arabs are white too.

In western civilization and only in western civilization or their “westernized counterpart” lower status males tend to have higher bargaining position. I said westernized counter part because most of us, including the chinese, are effectively part of western civilization now due to westernization of everything.

Think about it

1. Socialism

2. Democracy

3. Monogamy

All tend to redistribute something to the mass. Socialism redistributes wealth. Democracy redistributes power. Monogamy redistributes women. Guess what, all are product of western civilization.

I am not saying it’s good or bad. Obviously hierarchy and disparity of result has very important function to motivate people to perform. I am just explaining things.

In Asia we don’t have equality. You lose you die. You win, you win big. Most asians won’t bother questioning why the emperors can have 1000 concubines. They can get their whole family slaughtered. Most asians won’t bother asking why an emperor have right to slaughter families?

The closest equality we have in China is probably during the Sung dynasty where even the emperor would be punished if they break the law. After that, none.

There is only one civilization where the lowest common men have enough balls to question and challenge the alpha males. Western civilization (or “westernized” civilization).

Legalizing your winning strategies while prohibiting your main competitors’ winning strategies

So what does that have anything to do with polygamy and extra marital sex?

Simple.

Natural resources tend to get divided proportional with political power. One man one vote soon leads to one man one wife.

Got that?

In arab, monogamy doesn’t make sense. The king and tyrants are in power. Obviously they all want more. The king simply chooses to be assertive enough and call such relationship marriage.

In western civilization, any king that grabs too many women will be very unpopular. When there are contests for the thrones, those kings, or presidential candidates, would lost a lot of vote if people figure out they support polygamy.

I suppose the king in arab will be unpopular too if they grab too many women. But who care? The lesser cocks are powerless anyway. Also some arab kings, like Dubai kings, are wise enough to govern their country well that their people are quite happy.

Moreover, rich arab countries can always import women from neighboring countries. So, pressure to prohibit polygamy is simply far less than in western civilization.

Western men cannot easily import women from neighboring countries. That’s because western women, just like the males, can vote too and do not want competition from cheaper competitors oversea. That’s how we hear so much bad publicity about women trafficking even though most trafficked women actually prefer richer western males.

Now what about adultery and extra marital sex?

That’s the thing. As any socialists would soon learn, there is no such thing as equality of outcome. Humans are different. Some will get more and some will get less.

So in western civilization, just like in any civilization, you can get many women despite prohibition of polygamy.

It’s just like how you can be very rich in a socialist society. Not in theory, not legally, not openly, but you can.

You see, polygamy is like winning openly. It’s like saying, see I am ubber alles, all of you are lesser than I am, and well I am banging all the bitches that you yearn for, and there is nothing you can do about it. Well you can sort of do that, but you can’t expect all those who don’t get any because of you to be saying, “Hell yeah.”

Marriage is socially approved sexual relationship. Relationships where Justin Bieber, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet gets all the chicks are not the kind of relationship most males would say, “Hell yea”. It’s not going to be marriage. It can be done, but it won’t be an openly socially approved sexual relationship. Not in a democratic western civilization.

You can do that. But in western civilization, you can’t do that openly. There is no way you can get many women with approval of the majority of men around you. If you want to do it, be quite.

Because polygamy is illegal, despite natural, the only way to do the equivalent of polygamy is outside marriage. So there is a bigger pressure for sex outside marriage to be legal in western civilization. Too many people wanting it.

Outside western civilization, and before invention of DNA tests. Marriage has one very important role in society. Marriage is the ONLY way to know fatherhood. That assurance is established brutally. Women that get caught cheating will get stoned to death.

Some would think it’s excessive. But when things are done so commonly, there is usually some upside, at least for those who are in power. When men are sure that their whole wealth will go to their son, they are more diligent, hardworking, and risk taking. They value honor more than immediate profit because at the end honor and trustworthiness can bring money which will go to kids.

If adultery were legal, there will be less intensive to work hard and accumulate wealth. There will be too much intensive to seduce someone else’s wife instead. Obviously such culture are less likely to spread. Imagine hordes of Vikings and Mongols attacking your city and all the men are like Justin Bieber?

Society needs brick layers, engineers, sword wielders. Most men won’t bother becoming that if they can’t be sure that wealth and status they earn by laying bricks or swinging sword can’t go to their own child.

After 1000 years, most societies tend to be patriarchal with stiff penalty against adultery. Including western civilization.

However, we need to remember that in western civilization, main use of marriage is not to test fatherhood. At least not now. Main use of western civilizations’ common marriage is to ration females in equal share for everyone.

Marriage has a secondary use besides deciding fatherhood. Marriage is there to ration mates to those who are in power. In western civilization this second use is far more significant.

In western civilization you are already obligated to support everybody’s kid anyway whether it’s your kid or not, due to socialism. Also recently, we have DNA tests to decide fatherhood, greatly lessening the traditional importance of marriage. If I want to be sure that my kids are mine, I no longer need to get married. I just test my kids’ DNA.

Also adultery gives the poor males a chance “to win too”. Think about it. If you’re a milk man, how do you win if you have to compete with Bill Gates and Warren Buffet? What I mean by winning here, means attracting higher quantity and quality of women.

If prostitution is legal, definitely you can’t win. If adultery is illegal, it’s hard to win too. Even if you can attract those women, who would feed your kids?

So it’s natural than that many poorer males in western civilization vote for

  1. Prohibition of prostitution
  2. Forcing richer males to pay even for kids that’s not his
  3. Higher welfare program so that the rich are forced to feed all their kids

In western civilization, the mass are the one who are in power and morality tends to move toward that direction.

Not all poor people like that of course. Also I am not saying this to portray the poor as evil. However, I am simply trying to point out what typical conflict of interests between the poor and the rich. We simply have different interests and hence we have different opinions on what moral value to support.

It’s the same reason why many oppose death penalty. They are robbers or robber’s family that sympathize with robbers. In ancient England, when the rich are in power, people can get death penalty for pick pocketing. When the poor in power, it’s often the home owners that defend their property that go to jail rather than the robbers.

Adultery follow similar pattern. There is absolutely no punishment for adultery in western civilization. In fact, adultery is actually rewarded by the court system. Males often have to support kids that’ not his own in case of adultery even though DNA tests show that the kids are not his.

Yes all these hurt the rich. But again, unique in western civilization, the rich are NOT powerful. Hence the rich do not decide morality. Maybe that’ll change now that disparity of wealth is growing. Also globalization means that the rich has one very important right, namely the right to flee to China where hierarchies are more tolerated. However, that’s not happening fully yet.

Cultural comparison

Let’s compare this with Arab, for example. In arab, the rich is powerful. In fact, in oil rich countries like most arab countries, the way to get rich is to be in power. Those in power will decide

  1. No sex outside marriage. That is, no sex without approval of those who are in power
  2. Allowing polygamy. Only those who are in power or get approved by those who are in power can get laid. The powerful in Arab, like bin Laden, effectively become the pimps of all women. You can get women there only if alpha males approve. Now you wonder how they motivate men bash themselves to your building and why their religious leaders are so obsessed about sex.
  3. No porn. The less people want women the better.
  4. Yea obviously they are more likely to kill each other over who get laid. Like there is any culture that doesn’t.

In arab, men has more intensive to be in power. The arab leaders then wisely channel those men to fight some great Satan, such as US or Israel, which everyone somehow has to believe as faith.

In China, money rules everything and chinese civilization tend to be much smaller. So we have

  1. Toleration of prostitution. Until communist rules, prostitution is always legal.
  2. Even when prostitution is illegal, you can always get that somehow if you have money. However, you only have that in Chinese dominated regions. At least that’s how it works in my countries.
  3. Polygamy is not common. Why fight authority? Concubines are common.
  4. Corruption. Obviously if you’re rich but not powerful, you simply pay up. Very common in all Chinese influenced society.

August 31, 2011

Why I do not bother figuring out valid moral imperatives?

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , — admin @ 9:30 am

Moral is always vaguely defined. I sort of prefer definition that has scientific bite, namely those we can verify.

http://freemarketforever.com/201…

I like some definition with scientific bites, namely, something that’s disprovable. Arguing over things that’s not disprovable seems to go nowhere isn’t it?

I am not saying valid moral imperatives do not exist. I see that defining moral that way goes nowhere and useless to discuss.

However, defining moral as we observe pecking order in chicken shed some light on the true nature of morality.

I see that moral simply evolves and coevolves with us.

Another reason why I do not like to see valid moral imperatives is because most of the argument behind it is actually bullshit.

Moral comes out of profit. Here is a sample: http://freemarketforever.com/201…

When it comes for moral, people simply lie on the “why” I support this. Kind of expected. Why argue with liars? Why not understand what he truly want and why he lies and why he choose that lie? The latter make more sense to me.

How religious people decide morality?

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , — admin @ 9:08 am

morals and ethics are always vaguely defined. However Shawn’s definition quite fit in.

Moral, as well as ethics, are rules we make because we like them. So the
answer of how religious people decide what’s moral is simple. Do they
like it?

Monogamy, for example. Do you like it? Not if you’re stud. But if you’re single
and don’t get any, you will like it like hell and “somehow” it’ll become morality. Somehow you will think and try to convince everyone that it’s what God’s want.

In other word, it’s just like every one else. The difference is atheists can explain the benefit to people around them. The religion uses more absurd pretexts

Why we let the rich get richer?

I think you should read all the other answers first. Like Eric. This is for the cynical:

It’s the cynical answer. I know. The more ethical answer is because it’s “fair”. However, for how “fairness” somehow becomes reality requires a little “process”. Fairness, is not just moral. It’s practical, and profitable. It took times for us to realize it, but we finally did.

The basic idea of is that under capitalism, people get rich through productivity. So it doesn’t matter how they get rich, they are benefiting everyone else.

The problem with that idea is, while seems fair and noble, is not actually how things work.

In ancient time, emperors are rich and unproductive and the people “let them” even more than people let the rich get rich now.

Why?

Emperors are strong. Some people know enough politics and enough business skills to lead. If some peasants would protest, emperors would kill them along with their families.

People are selfish. They do not max out their profit based on their income like in sunday school economy class. People maximize their profit based on their power.

Here is an easy way to see this. Deep inside, all species, including humans, just want to pass on their genes to the next. If we want to see how much power some men have, just look at the number of wives they have. Emperors have a lot. Capitalists do not. Capitalists, while rich, are not powerful, and hence don’t get “what they want” as much as emperors.

So issue is not merit. The issue is power. However, merit and power has a positive causality. To get power, you need people to agree. For people to agree you need to benefit them. That’s in a sense merit.

If we really do not like disparity of success, shouldn’t we complaint about disparity of power instead?

In fact, how power often override productively earned wealth is the very reason why people complain why the rich get richer. Complaining against the rich pays because the rich are weak and who knows we can rob them. Complaining against the powerful doesn’t.

So the question then become obvious. If the rich are weak anyway, why the mass, which are stronger, let them be rich? That seems to be the heart of the question. Forget about right and wrong. It’s not real. We’re selfish. Why do the mass let the rich be rich? Why not tax the rich to death and grab the money?

Actually they did. Ask jews, armenian, borgueis in China and tax payers in US.

But then the world stop doing that.

Let’s examine first how the world become the way it is.

300 years ago, a wise sage, Adam Smith, wrote wealth of nations. Now the best and brightest among us have choice. They can still make money productively or they can be dictators. Before the latter is the only choice. Before the only way to get truly rich is to be king. As the former start becoming lucrative, that’s what many smart people do.

Things don’t go as well as planned. Money is not equal with power. Well money is a form of power. There are far greater power than money. Namely political power.

Armenians and jews learn this the hard way. They earned money productively, cause resentment, and get killed.

However, the word seems to have a karma like behavior (though i still don’t think it’s as perfect as Buddha think it is).

Imagine the world where the productive get slaughtered. Would you bother being productive? Any society that fail to embrace free market are riddled with corruption, and political strife. Everyone is worst off.

We’re not dumb. We always come up with ways to move our self to equilibrium that’s “better”. What works in some is then tried in others. Through experience free market tend to produce good results. So the rest of the world follow and do it.

So the question of why we allow the rich to get richer is because it is toward our best interest to do so. Should we not, the best and brightest among us will become corrupt and dictators we will all pay the price.

Some may think that we shouldn’t because disparity of wealth is “bad”. Well, just look at emperors. Just look at disparity of wealth and power in socialist countries. Disparities always exist. Do we want that to happen because somebody is more productive or do we want that to happen because somebody has more gun?

Here is another way to look at it.

The smart can:
1. Be dictators
2. Be corrupt
3. Be productive

The mass can:
1. Support free market
2. Support socialism

For thousands of years we’re on 1,2 strategy. It’s natural then that we evolve into 3,2. It’s more lucrative.

Before, even though I am rich productively, I will still be affraid of being sent to some concentration camp by the powerful. Knowing that I try to be powerful, which is not very productive. It’s to the best interest of society then to guarantee my right to live and spend money as I please. As that get taken care of, I start becoming productive.

You see how the process works? You see how both businessmen and the mob benefited?

Now recently something even more interesting happen. It’s called globalization.

The best and brightest among us has the 4th option. They can live. They can move their factories to China to avoid minimum wage oppression, for example.

This put countries to be more like business. Each countries can only charge so much out of their productive members. Too much, and like customers they shop around.

Imagine the world before globalization.

I produced a light bulb. Someone else make better light bulbs. So I pay thugs to kill him. Now I sell more light bulbs. I generated more revenue and profit. If the extra money is bigger than the thugs’ cost, of course I do that.

In fact, that’s what happened in third world countries for years. Rather than spending resources productively, they spend resources bribing politicians to give them favors and quite often literally send thugs. Disparity of wealth happen anyway. Politicians get richer and richer.

It’s only natural. In a sense, it’s not too unfair. If the people are ignorance and resort to force, it’s natural that someone that’s not ignorance, namely the corrupt politicians, collect the money instead.

Political influence on biz created some form of niche that politicians simply fill, like businessmen.

Now under globalization, if I send thugs to beat up competing stores, I will still have to compete with chinese. No win solution. It doesn’t pay to pay thugs anymore.

Now those who used to be thugs and corrupt politicians obviously do not like globalization. That’s why they keep fighting for a while, become terrorists or something. But again, karma will work again. People are fed up with them. They’re getting killed. And good system, like free trades flourish again.

So the answer of why we let the rich, rich, is because they/someone else will be rich anyway even if we don’t let them. It’s just that they’ll be rich through ways not favorable to us.

Hei what about another option. I can lie. I can trick people that the government is fair and then screw the productive. Or I can trick the people that free market doesn’t work. Again, this gets difficult due to proliferation of internet. Truth prefails over falsehood thanks to abundant information.

Now, perhaps, just perhaps. The people still want to be a socialist. Well some socialism could work. Libertarian would argue it’s wrong, but I am a cynic. I care only about profits, not right and wrong.

As we see in Denmark it sort of work. However, that’s because people in Denmark is smarter. It takes skill to rob from the rich and give to ones’ self. Also it can only go so far because if they charge too much, the productive can always go somewhere else.

Most countries are not that smart. They do not know political science. Hell, they believe in religions. They do not understand that humans maximize profit. They think people are moral. They do not see that humans’ interests create morality. They think it’s God.

If I were a businessmen in that country, I would just bribe the religious leaders. Why bother being nice to the people if the people will blindly obey whatever nonsense the religious leaders spit out rather than seeing by themselves what’s good for them and whether they’re getting what they want.

This is of course what religious leaders want. That’s why, in countries like Indonesia we have pogroms against those who think differently. That’s why we have censorship that keep people in the dark. And that’s why Indonesians are not as rich as the rest of the world.

In a sense, that’s like karma too. The more ignorant the people, the poorer they will be. The more they tolerate or accept terrorism, the more terrorists will there be, raising biz costs.

After evolution and experience, the most lucrative system even for the poor is capitalism. Due to information age, everybody knows that. That’s why capitalism prefail everywhere. That’s why we let the rich getting richer. Because it’s most profitable for us, and because now we know it. Because human race has tried everything else and doesn’t perform as well as this.

Incoming search terms:

  • asian harem
  • real harem
  • are jews getting richer
  • Being rich in your relationship with God is a richer way to live - forever
  • globalisation allows the rich to become richer

Religion can be good :)

I want people to be more religious.

However rather than following all these “bad” religions. I want them to instead believe, that I, Jim Thio, is a prophet, and God wants everyone to pay me $1k every year.

Saying those 2 sentences will turn them into “believers.”

Then I want believers to have faith. So I don’t have to proof anything.

Then I want them to be vigilant against all heresy, namely those who do not believe the religion I have given them.

Trying to convert “believers” into non “believers” is a crime (once I got enough believers). I mean religion is not just personal conviction. I am losing $1k/year for each of those apostate here.

Then I want people not to ever have sex outside marriage. Here, marriage is defined to be a relationship between beautiful women and Jim Thio or somebody Jim Thio approved, usually after some political concession.

For some reason, I prefer to define marriage for the mass rather than letting the consenting parties decide. That should effectively make me the pimp all of hot babes.

I’ve heard how some competing religions pull this out to motivate people to die for them. I guess, if it work once, why shouldn’t it work again right?

Also I want them to stone those who have sex outside “marriage” as defined by Jim Thio.

For those who don’t get it:
Obviously this is a joke. Well not that I wouldn’t want that if I can. Who wouldn’t. But isn’t this how religions operate? The moral is actually to be more cynical toward religion. However, sigh…. This should get the point across more.

Incoming search terms:

  • googlehotbabes
« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

Powered by WordPress

Loading...