The demise of Men?

Post Reply New Topic

Yeah they're falling right now but they're about to enslave America once the unemployment levels are high enough and the housing prices are low enough for them to set up shop. That's when government will scramble to sell off more of it's assets like in Europe to foreigners thus putting low income residents and the middle class in a bit of a pickle called enslavement. How does it feel now America? you lived high off your horse for decades, and now it's time to pay the piper.

Question is, how many, and are they having as many children as those who aren't?

Last edited by edgewaters on 19 Jul 2012, 6:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Seven

More accurately, about 1 percent...

thats a pretty bold statement, what do you base that on??

one doesnt need to be a millionaire to thrive.

No, but they need to feel like one. And pretty soon a 5 or 6 family will not feel like them usual selves or be "thriving" when theyre
stressed out and developing mental health issues and taking effexor when they're moved out of their homes into
inner city condos and the already mentally ill are downgraded into public shelters. Thriving. Growth. Progress. All lies to
cover up the growth of the personal portfolios of hedge fund managers like George Soros and other investors in GSK or JNJ

They don't need to feel like a millionaire to thrive. They need to make smart decisions. Most who don't thrive made some poor decisions along the line. Depending on the decision, it can screw up your life for many years. That would include having more children than you can afford to raise.

If the penalty of failure (failed relationships) is high enough, then it is wise to avoid them and find substitutes (porn and video games). That is in the individual's best interest.

Relationships are failing across the board every day. There is a relationship cooling, housing cooling and a technology boom, slumping auto market, but the private sector is doing A-OK. Because they've got all their cards in place and just ready for Obama or whoever is in charge, Lagarde to come along and flick it with their finger so it all comes crashing down perfectly. Drug stocks will soar, PS3's, TV's, Sanyo, Sony, whoever's making the newest and latest TV that's as clear as the outside world will be invading your place with their RFID technology so you can internet on your TV while you play your video game. You can check your facebook and talk to people you don't have any real connections with, and that are slowly disintegrating, while you're being trained for WWIII by playing Call of Duty. "I have a duty to America to kill these zombies!! !" says the man with the quarter pounder beside him. But hey, it's not his fault. He gets it. Who wants to spend money on b*****s anymore? They have jobs - we don't.

The guys will be so bent out of shape on seroquel and generic weed pills - all they'll need is some energy drinks to keep them from eating too many new zesty or jalepeno doritos with donair sauce baked into the chip. Of course we're ultimately just eating our feelings.

Just imagine this though. DeBeers is doing alright, they're driving up to their McMansions every day and meeting with each other over fine wine and salmon. See? I'm so out of touch with the rich I can't even imagine what they'd be eating. But their lives are pretty easy - and all they had to do was consolidate a bunch of companies and enslave the working class and indoctrinate those with money into believing that buying a diamond says I love you / this is forever. Ha! Nothing is forever, and nothing says I love you more than a hunk of stone I guess nowadays. Whatever happened to lovin a playa with a bus pass (taken from dre's the chronicle)

Or they adapt to their chosen fate and live on little income and pay little into society (ie, taxes). When you realize that you don't have any real duty to society or humanity it becomes easier.

We do have a duty to society. There are other people on the other side of the world. And it would be nice if people with iPhones downgraded to an actual phone that does the same thing but without internet, and gave their savings to the food bank. That's just one example of giving more than you receive. People need to pick up their trash. It's just a sense of discipline. You help your neighbor move or you help your neighbor with something, because they live close to you. If they like pizza - split a pizza with them. It's just there's so many simple things. People get frustrated when they have to take TIME out of their day to cater to someone else. But they're not CATERING, they're merely just offering a small portion of their time to improve someone elses standard of living. My day is automatically improved when someone stops to hold the door for me, or if I had to use the food bank I know I'd like to see some cookies in my bag. But when someone PRETENDS to care, but donating a couple cans they themselves don't like, then what's the point? Or if they leave their chip bag on the ground "JUST THIS ONCE" then it defeats the purpose of caring about society's appearance as a whole, and that's called contagion. It's that sense of entitlement that has ruined western culture, and women are partly to blame for this as well. Maybe not the women of the 1930's but women from the 80's and onward when marriage began "cooling"

Last edited by WhiteWidow on 19 Jul 2012, 11:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I disagree. The giving is one way. From those who can produce to those who won't/can't without the receivers doing anything for those donating to them. It's one thing to say we're all in this together. It's quite another when one side thinks it is completely acceptable to leech off the other without reciprocating.

Note:
**Those cheap phones are still made in Chinese sweatshops.
**Cheap clothes are made in various impoverished parts of Eastern nations.
**You do what you like with your money, people do what they like with theirs. You promote freedom, right? With that comes choice.
**Not all the money given to any charity or organization goes to the people. There's a lot of financial backing required to fund their cause. In fact, very little of the money or resources actually goes to intended causes.
**The imbalance of wealth between people of one nation is not the direct fault of the people from another nation. That blame and responsibility almost always lies on the 2 higher authorities of those nations. So the American people or any other people owe nothing more to foreign nations than what they already contribute via imports and trading.

The Food Bank isn't sponsored by anyone except chairty and I think the government. CIBC or WALMART sponsors runs, so of course they decide where the money goes. The FOOD BANK is sponsored by YOU. The DEMAND is the problem. People think they need seven tank tops and four pairs of shorts and seven pairs of shoes. And multiply that by how many people in western culture and you have a big demand coming from our side of the world and being assembled in places like Bangladesh. If the demand wasn't so rampant, we'd have to switch to other industries for demand like FRESH AND HEALTHY FOOD if people with money began spending their money on things that mattered like donating to the food bank, or buying locally fresh prepared food then there would be a larger agrarian demand and more pressure on the food banks to provide healthier quality food to citizens. If you honestly think that the food bank takes all the money and puts it into over head you're sadly mistaken. They have so many volunteers it's unfathomable.

When people say "we're all in this together!" they don't mean "I WANT TO PAY MORE TAXES" they mean "I wish people would take responsibility for themselves so the rest of us and the rest of the world doesn't have to suffer or face depopulation due to dwindling resources, because the people in the western culture feel entitled to electricity in their homes even when it's unecessary, or two or three cars when they only need one so the price of fuel continues to rise. Or a second vacation home. And then when the boom turns into bust, like always, people run around like chickens with their head cut off and the people with their actual head cut off, finally die off because there isn't enough wealth to supplement them, since it's all been tied up in assets and been siphoned off to other individuals who don't need more wealth. And their wealth is being stored away in swiss and cayman bank accounts for impending doom and cheap stocks because they think they're winning but it's just a vicious cycle of fear from both ends.

Yet many people in non-western countries feel entitled to have many children. The people in those countries are a large part of the problem too. They wouldn't need as much wealth if there were fewer people. I have no sympathy for people who choose to live in an area that cannot sufficiently grow food for the people living there and yet have large families. It isn't the USA's job to feed the world.