In order to fix western societies and gender/family relations you have to reach this first foundational conclusion: that adult women are more like children of any gender than they are like adult men. Given that's the case, the ire of our blame shifts towards men, who are derelict in their duty as they would be if they listened to children asking for voting rights and spending the family money on cookies and then trying to compromise with them as if they're responsible adults. the men of today in the west were raised by women - made into their image to be adult sized children - in the past boys were always raised by men - they should be now but are not. Western women are turned off by western men (I can see why to be honest), because they were raised incompetently by women - women cannot even raise men they themselves respect. a proper childhood for a boy would be challenge, competition, hardship, harsh realities of life, a brotherhood of older male mentors, an apprenticeship OF SOME FORM above all else (cast aside feel-good education systems and anti-meritocracy bullshit). Women will never not be adult sized children. Men however should stop listening to their whining and discipline them like you would a child - they get put in the time out box, you don't pander to them. Imagine if you tried to guide your child's education and growing up and they started trying to police what you say 'you can't say that about me it's demeaning to children!' 'how dare you say children are biologically different than adults!' 'age is just a social construct' 'stop contradicting me, that's age-ist!' - you'd be in a mirror scenario to how women are being treated by men - and it's destroying society.
>>55767403
I have huge respect for women, but they are like children in fundamental ways that men are not - their role should be reduced and they would be far happier. A huge problem is that girls get education through the state and corporate pop culture - so they are molded to act in a way where they lend their vote and their earnings working as a HR person fucking up a business to those parties who had the biggest influence on her. I believe nature intended for women to have a life partner from teenage or before (with no sexual element just mentoring and partnership) - girls are very impressionable at a young age and this is being wasted by indoctrinating them in government schools, they should be insulated from feminism so that they can enjoy being a championing partner of their husband and create the best possible family when children arrive and she gets a lifetime of adoration as the mother figure of a whole new genealogy & grandkids - the sacrificing successful mother is the most adored unit of the extended family/family friend network. Instead that future of hers has been sold off to a corporation who wants her sitting in an office working for HR often not providing any economic benefit just being a limpet that is difficult to fire due to sexual quota/discrimination laws, then spending all her money on advertised products of that corporation. We cannot let this happen to more women - they won't solve it themselves it requires men to mentor girls.
>>55767403
>>55767562
I don't really have anything to add because you're totally right and said stuff really well. I just wanted to say I agree with you and you should write more.
>>55768042
this
Experience ruins women whereas it improves men.
http://www.rooshv.com/men-and-women-are-affected-differently-by-life-experience
A more radical but thought provoking proscription:
http://www.returnofkings.com/73131/women-must-have-their-behavior-and-decisions-controlled-by-men
The only way to save the white race birthrates might be for all western men to give up on the generations of western women above 20. In the past women would be well into motherhood by that age. The very reason why girls and men are such a taboo coupling is because the undoing of this natural mentoring dynamic allowed the state and the corporate economy to hack women and remold them as powerful agents of societal control captured for life. My own viewpoint is probably completely warped by the biased western upbringing I had so I'm averse to children/teens being in romantic relationships with men over 20 even if it's a lifetime partnership, but I don't know if that's just what I've been programmed to think - from what I've read about history it keeps striking me that it was only recently this became taboo. I mean Charlie Chaplin impregnated 16 year olds. The trouble is I think women can only meet their true potential if they start learning to be a life partner around their teens - instead of schooling. Feminism would never allow that for obvious reasons. They outlawed girls dating men partly because it was an anti-competition practice to bring girls into line with the program. Girls are still pure while western women are already corrupted by the time they are 18-20 they don't even want to be aware of how badly they stack up in competition despite all that 'education' and 'empowerment'.
The last bastion of pure western women would be from christian families - where it is common to marry in your teens anyway - but this institution is dying and has dwindling potential to change mass psychology on it's own.
>>55769785
Roosh is a depraved PUA loser. Why are you poisoning your mind with his writing?
>>55769920
I don't advocate being like him - but he has had to mine deep into the female psychology and so it's a good reference. It's sad for a man to live like he does, it's almost a tragic tale about western women at their lowest point and the nihilism of what it's inspired in men in response. It's insightful though
Men of experience understand that women are like children in many aspects, and if you leave a child to it's own devices it either dies or becomes a feral beast driven only by instinct and emotion.
Since men love women, they once made rules to protect women from themselves, and from those who would cause them harm. Women can be lovely creatures when provided an environment that fosters the best aspects of their nature.
Sadly, this was perverted and destroyed by men who got too comfortable before most of us were born. This is why women (and by extension, men) are so lost and miserable now. Women THINK they know what they need to be happy… but so does a child.
Ask a kid what they need to be happy. Rarely will you get a realistic answer like "enough to eat", "a safe home", "loving parents", or "a warm bed". No, you will usually get a response such as "Ice cream for dinner every night!". Were you to give that to the child, she would quickly grow obese and diabetic, and have poor teeth.
Feminism is ice cream for dinner every night.
>>55767403
Ok, so assuming you are not a troll, what tests should anyone wanting an adulthood classification go through to retain full rights and privileges?
What are the different classifications you think there are, or should be?
What legal rights and privileges would be afforded various people?
>>55767403
The big problem is men think with their dicks and are willing to give up anything for pussy.
So you have millions of men letting women do whatever just so they can get laid. And that gets women into power.
>>55771279
>men think with their dicks
>>55770645
you could more easily solve the situation without bringing in the state or laws. socially ostracizing completely any woman who becomes a single mother for example would do it without the need for laws
just 50+ years ago this was still happening. if young women got pregnant without a father they'd often have to move cities completely, never see anyone they knew ever again, and grow up in a commune of nuns who'd be scornful of her. Now you can get government payments for being a single mother and still continue your school education, just put the child in a daycare that's paid for you and you don't even have to disrupt your education.
I believe laws are put in place to paper up the discrepancies for how reality is and how it is pretended to be according to some foundational delusion in society - the truth is that you are only afforded the rights and freedoms that those important in your life will let you have - it is an anarchistic institution, and you will face ostracism if you try to con people into helping you way more than you help them - somebody sitting 100's of miles away in D.C. doesn't make reality change so that you have any extra rights. If we returned to women being brought up so that they can actually provide value to men and their future family then none of these laws about adult rights/classifications would be necessary. Men would be as respected and 'privileged' as would be the devastation if a father economically underpinning and providing for a family would be if he went on strike and there was no welfare system, just charity and the church. women would be respected and have the 'privileges' that would be in proportion to the cost of her being derelict in her duty as a mother/matriarch. It would work itself out without laws or a state
>>55771633
All that post does is reinforce my point. He just told her what she wanted to hear in order for him to get laid.
>>55768042
This too
Are there any nonwestern female dominated societies out there that aren't left wing shit holes?
>>55771808
why would she want to hear that she's part of the problem?
How is this news? Everybody knows women are overgrown (and rather boring) children
>>55767403
FUCK OFF MUDSLIME
>>55767403
>>55770401
>Feminism is ice cream for dinner every night.
My fucking sides are in orbit!
>>55772168
Holy shit.
Recognizing the inferiority of cunts =/= muslim
You're like the Kikes and Mudslimes who spend hours shilling against each other.
WE HATE BOTH.
Now go back to tumblr.
Really like your writing, OP.
>>55767403
I was also going to post a rant on here about women because I've noticed almost all the ass kissing and defending Muslims I see from white people on social media overwhelmingly comes from women, especially young women. Young white women seem to be a lost cause, almost all of them are completely enamored with all forms of progressive stupidity. They seem to get better once they become wives and start families. I notice plenty of older women who oppose third world immigration and other progressive views but even among older women very few take any far right positions.
They evolved to be the nurturers of society so their desire for empathy compassion and acceptance overrides any form of rational and critical thinking. Everyone is an individual though so this doesn't apply to every single woman but womankind as a whole it does.
The continuing rise of female influence in matters of political and social discourse has been a huge mistake and allowing it to happen was the first chink in the armor of our society. All it leads to is the weakening and dumbing down of our society allowing progressive cultural views to flourish.
The women I get familiar with are hard working, warm hearted, decent individuals.
They aren't men, they're women. But they're pretty decent by and large.
I think you've been hanging around with the wrong dames, OP (or more likely; lack there-of).
Tip o' the cap, and doff o' the beard, to you, sir.
>>55772168
pure white and live in a 95%+ white city
Islam has just preserved better some of the family practices from the past but it's not the only way to implement them. the only original parts in Islam are all terrible
>>55771773
>socially ostracizing completely any woman who becomes a single mother
We could do this easily by reforming WIC, public housing preference for single mothers, and child support.
>the truth is that you are only afforded the rights and freedoms that those important in your life will let you have
My family, those "important in my life" wanted me to stay in college for some liberal arts degree, send them money every month, and settle down with a wife and kids.
Instead I went ahead and went for a trade apprenticeship, traveled the country, buffered that with technical certifications, and now make my income through a combination of self employment and contracts. Also, only fuck prostitutes. So some familial decentralization is good, no?
>If we returned to X being brought up so that they can actually provide value to Y and their future nothing would be necessary
You can say that about anyone in relation to anything, I agree with you, but how do we fight back 3 generations of progressivism, marxism, critical theory, multiculturalism, globalism, and PC culture- which drives feminism, demasculated males, the college scam, disconnection from nature (the truth about our animal instincts, the necessity of borders, gender, race etc)?
>and there was no welfare system, just charity and the church. women would be respected and have the 'privileges' that would be in proportion to the cost of her being derelict..as mother
While it is typical for females like this to rely on welfare, alimony and child support to do so, they can still get jobs, which fucks this entire paradigm completely.
Do you propose barring females from employment? This has its own set of negative consequences and legal hobgoblins to take into account, and would *truly* turn females into an infantilized cohort.
>>55770305
He's a businessman who found his niche. His followers are the pathetic ones not him.
Comment on my thread
>>55772694
>>55771808
That was the point. Men think with their dicks, chicks don't really think at all.
>>55772767
definitely, but I've been reading a lot of history lately and realised there are far less great men. women stack up more favorably compared with the average modern western male - but his potential has been cut short. there are many men today who have regressed to childhood or have no character. I guess what I'm saying is that the peak of what men should be achieving is far greater than what most women can achieve even with huge support - women absolutely can be decent hard working citizens. children can also work tough jobs - I saw young unhappy children working selling things to tourists on the street in cambodia and they were proficient and professional at it too and knew their way around their role. I wouldn't however imagine seeing a child successfully unite a nation and help it reform in a time of crisis, or similarly on a smaller scale say for a business, I also have doubts about women being able to fulfill that role. I haven't seen women or children create a whole new paradigm of industry or ideas that lead to great change (Industrial revolution, Internet, Scientific method) nor would I expect to. If men continue to be reduced I see it as unlikely many men could do this either though. Also I believe those women you talked about could be far happier in life if they didn't have to devote themselves to a career. Given how much technology we have now it would be possible to both be a mother and work for charity/ an NGO at the same time perhaps, in a noncommittal role. There are many ways to get more out of life I'm not proposing they be subjugated
>>55772075
guilt is a huge part of the feminist narrative
>>55772642
> Young white women seem to be a lost cause, almost all of them are completely enamored with all forms of progressive stupidity.
It's because everyone is nice to them. They think the whole world is naturally nice, and they believe that's all you have to do to get other people to be nice to you: be nice. It's all smiles and sunshine.
But of course people are only nice to them because they want to fuck them.
>>55770401
>Feminism is ice cream for dinner every night.
>>55774371
>people are only nice to them because they want to fuck them.
Men use women for sex. Women use men for everything else.
>>55767562
>I have huge respect for women
Why the fuck would you respect anyone that didn't earn it? I respect no group in particular. "I have huge respect for women" Who the fuck are you, Bernie Sanders? I have a neutral respect for all strangers, you know 'the golden rule' but.
Guess I'm done with my pissing.
>>55774604
I guess I meant women when they embrace the biological role itself, at the peak of her capacity to bring value to the world - a woman who sacrifices to start a family and stays with it. That's worthy of respect. I don't have any respect for women who don't do that (the majority today)
>>55774087
I boiled your post down to two points
>the peak of what men should be achieving is far greater than what most women can achieve even with huge support
Here's the rub- in terms of intellectual capacity, persons of the same IQ, putting in the same amount of time, tend to have the same performance output. The only difference is that the male usually would have some sort of edge due to career "drive" or "get up and go" or "competitiveness" whatever you want to call it, combined with greater muscle mass, which would be helpful for fulfilling certain tasks. The problem is that a small amount of men is bound for "greatness", and a small amount of men is bound for shit, which is why the engineering labs and prisons are both populated by men. That's just how the numbers game works.
>I wouldn't however imagine seeing X successfully do Y
I couldn't imagine most people- of either sex, any age, or any race, accomplishing something of greatness. However, from a pool of white or asian males, of higher than the mean IQs, of heightened testosterone, from the western/civilized world, of decent wealth and education, and meritocratic origins, we find a greater proportion of the world's movers and shakers than any other cohort. That said, women like Thatcher, Grace Hopper, Curie etc fulfill exactly what you laid out, but they are in the minority.
>men continue to be reduced I see it as unlikely many men could do this either though.
We need to do everything that supports male specialization:
Even if he's not the smartest, he can be the strongest.
Even if he's not the strongest, he can be the best. ship captain.
Even if he's not the best ship captain, he can be the best electrician.
And male competitiveness. The best football players will not be forced to play in a team with weaker ones and get flagged for not softening their blows. The smartest students will be allowed to take advanced courses. Those wanting to go into a trade can do so.
1/2
>>55775006
A fine stance.
>>55775009
>Two points
* I expanded since then. Disregard.
>>55774087
>Also I believe those women you talked about could be far happier in life if they didn't have to devote themselves to a career.
Here is the thing: How can you say someone prefers doing X, but instead does Y?
I understand various studies show females happier in male-led relationships, females happiest as mothers and wives, females happiest in traditional countries, high marriage happiness in arranged marriages, female happiness going down with each passing generation, female sense of fulfillment going down with each sexual partner, etc.
But with all that, the actions speak for themselves. How are you going to convince half the labor force to exit the labor force?
2/2
>>55770401
>Feminism is ice cream for dinner every night.
Women are supposed to be companions for men, but who wants an uneducated companion? It's a tough situation because women need to be guided.
>>55770401
Beautiful
>>55775006
>I guess I meant women when they embrace the biological role itself, at the peak of her capacity to bring value to the world - a woman who sacrifices to start a family and stays with it. That's worthy of respect. I don't have any respect for women who don't do that (the majority today)
I want you to expound on your concept of value.
Is it having children?
I doubt it, since some can't have children, and there is no guarantee of the child not being shit
Is it doing everything to have the best children?
What would this entail? What if in doing so, the female raises children in a traditional environment with a husband, but is unable to generate sufficient combined income? What if they resort to theft (legal or otherwise)?
Is it in raising a moral family?
Who is it to state what is moral and what is not?
Is it in economic production/benefit to society?
Well why would a female taking medical, engineering, law, or education courses have to stop doing that- which would provide a net financial and intangible gain to society, for a child, which until 18 is a net liability, and after 18 is very unlikely to be a great net asset?
Is it race?
Well can't perfection of race be started with social policies- like eugenics, mass deportations, and miscegenation laws, birthrates be damned?
>>55775230
>I understand various studies show females happier in male-led relationships, females happiest as mothers and wives, females happiest in traditional countries,
>high marriage happiness in arranged marriages, female happiness going down with each passing generation, female sense of fulfillment going down with each sexual partner, etc.
>But with all that, the actions speak for themselves.
>How are you going to convince half the labor force to exit the labor force?
Liberals need a government funded study to confirm that they wipe their own asses. (Yes, some of them still do.)
I'm weird because I believe my own lying eyes.
And so far, those eyes have told me that
-women are miserable when they have to make decisions (want to make decisions is a different story, but rare)
-women are miserable when they don't get to have children
-women are miserable when they don't get married
-women who are miserable will do their best to make men miserable
-women want to be owned by the best man they can get
Women are silly creatures, in that they will mimic popular opinion to their detriment.
Giving them equal rights, without equal obligations, was the mistake.
>>55767403
>>55767562
REMINDER TO BEAT YOUR CUNT ON THE REGULAR TO REMIND HER WHERE SHE STANDS
everything you say is 100% the result of modern technology. Men invented too many machines to take the place of their own strengths resulting in a feminized society. Feminism only happened becuase of industrial revolution and was a non issue in agricultural based society
take away electricity , computers and the internet and there will cease to be feminism because men will have to be men and women will be helpless
the internet and the screen make most modern men act just like women/children
>CTRL+F "Evidence"
>0 results
hmmmmmmm
>>55768042
this three
>>55776375
Enlighten us then, oh wise one. Please use the word "evidence" specifically while doing it.
>>55775918
>I want you to expound on your concept of value.
>Is it having children?
Yes.
>Is it doing everything to have the best children?
Yes.
>Is it in raising a moral family?
Yes.
>Is it in economic production/benefit to society?
Yes. In that having healthy male children benefits economic production,
and having healthy female children ensures the next generation being the same.
>Is it race?
Fuck race.
The only human group that could have a functioning matriarchy is sub-saharan Africans.
When you can pick dinner from trees year round, you only look out for number one.
All races who have advanced beyond grazing developed patriarchies, for a reason.
>>55775009
>>55775230
All good points.
It's about innate Male competitiveness vs Female nurturing. even the greatest women you can see had some aspect to their greatness that was nurturing and championing great men. Margaret Thatcher fended off unions and anti-competitive demographics from trying to saddle and undermine the capitalist success stories that were the true power of our economy. Inherent in her role was championing and nurturing existing male leaders who needed support. Ayn Rand launched a whole philosophy with her books and was a great writer but you can see she wrote about her infatuation with great Male heroes, she saw her father's business be destroyed twice under communism, she was driven by nurturing and championing the prototypical great male into receiving the rewards of his efforts and making meritocratic competition a virtue. If a woman had invented the Jet engine or Newton's laws I'd take back what I said and I'd have to be wrong about their psychology.
The only possible solution would be to take this moment in history to teach an instructive lesson to the young girls of today and show them the paths laid out in front of them - with data to show declining female happiness when abandoning partnership for careerism and how the chances of an ideal family dwindles early in a woman's life from 30's onwards. Anyone over 18 is probably a lost cause, with exceptions here and there. The impossibility of this situation is of course that women have colonized the education system. Women predominantly teach in preschool up to highschool so many boys and girls will have their mentoring guided by women and resist everything outlined here. Perhaps this change cannot even take place in the western world now? Perhaps society needs to be remade again in some uninhabited area of the globe where western men can flee to until the superior results obtained in happiness, prosperity and family for both genders undermines the traditional narrative.
>>55776084
>REMINDER TO BEAT YOUR CUNT ON THE REGULAR TO REMIND HER WHERE SHE STANDS
When you evolve beyond sticks and petrol huffing, we'll drop a nuke on you.
If there are still functioning nukes in 150 years.
>>55775502
Here's the thing: most people being in college are taking degrees that will increase their wealth of knowledge, or earn a ROI.
>In the minority
Degrees that make you an asset to society, netted for the cost of your education: STEM, Medicine, Econometrics, Actuarial, Accounting, CompSci, possibly Finance, possibly Law, possibly Economics.
>In the majority
Degrees that
>Barely meet the opportunity cost for tuition and the years spent at schooling
Such as Liberal Arts, History, Education, Psychology etc, to an extent PoliSci
and degrees that
>make one a liability, ensuring that one can not hope to generate enough income to even cover the cost of the degree before even starting to accumulate wealth. In the meantime, one has to draw from the welfare state.
Philosophy, Women's Studies, African American Studies, Child Psychology, Art, Drama, Sports Management
Most of the people in college are in these latter groups, and could have been served better not going to college at all, going for a vocational program, and learning poetry, history, philosophy, and politics on their own time, like the true intellectuals from previous generations.
You can be educated, and not be college educated.
>>55776630
but this would need to take place on a huge scale. Many many western men would need to abandon the female run system.
>>55776783
the only way is to abandon technology and industry and never turn back to it. like the Amish.
With technology replacing the man , masculinity becomes an optional fashion statement and feminism inevitably takes over
>>55767403
This is the woman I experienced today...
>>55776870
>With technology replacing the man , masculinity becomes an optional fashion statement and feminism inevitably takes over
Only when we allow it.
In every fucked up situation, a man's response is to fix what he can and salvage the rest;
a girl's response is to spread her legs for a man who will solve the problem.
>>55776659
baited hard
>>55776479
The burden of proof lies on you making the absurd claim without backing it up.
>>55776084
You should no more beat women than you should beat your children. Corporal punishment is always a reactive response to poor guidance beforehand - by parenting correctly children avoid fates where bad parents would end up spanking or hitting them at all. It is the same with women in that a more healthy guidance of female partners would prevent any situation where a bad husband would beat their spouse. you shouldn't just be able to beat your wife or children without repercussion
>>55777180
>burden of proof
Chicks demand to be treated as equals, and then demand special consideration for their over wrought sensitivity.
You can't be equal and be a special, delicate flower at the same time.
>>55767403
It is no longer news that women have the power to destroy everything they touch? Perhaps almost on the same level as Jews who are destroying our civilization today or blacks that rape, kill and steal, by pure primitive and aggressive instinct. Give important positions and titles in the hands of women is the same as stick a knife in the back of the body that holds our society, and thats because they were not meant to lead, but to obey. Therefore it is normal that doom and chaos take over a country that gives credits to women, promoting even more social movements and other unnatural rights.
>>55775502>>55776746
Forgot to mention, out of the two sexes, males tend to be in college for the first category, while females for the latter 2 categories.
>>55776034
All of that, in general might be true, but once again, how do you convince half the labor force that they would be better off in a domestic role?
If you bring up "obligations", career women will say that they fulfill their societal obligations through employment, ergo able to exercise their rights. What obligations should be put on women that in your mind can make things more equitable?
>>55776630
Good points.
>Perhaps society needs to be remade again in some uninhabited area of the globe
There's space colonization.
We can also hope for the possible balkanization of the US, or we can buy up portions of Wyoming and Alaska and start Free State Project 2.0 supported by private subsidies to any stable "American" (white) married couple that applies.
Technically, we could turn all of Wyoming into a restrictive covenant can work despite federal court rulings against them.
>An owner or set of owners would basically have to take control of the whole territory,
>in the name of a "private club",
>and leases of lands and homes would be used to expand the club
>one leased plot of land= one share into the services offered
>leases would would resemble ownership as they would be for 99+years, to circumvent private individual ownership in neighborhoods, barred by anti-restrictive covenant laws and rulings
>drug tests and more would be required once every 2 years as part of the contract
>mining rights would be bought by the club, and its earnings would be distributed equally among the populace
>>55777348
please link me to the survey you got this from.
ISHIGGY your whole argument isn't from personal experience.
>>55777562
>convince
There's your problem.
>What obligations should be put on women that in your mind can make things more equitable?
None, other than what nature gave them.
Just remove the artificial benefits.
>>55777180
There are at least 3 competing perspectives in this thread, and dozens of different claims and opinions made on all sides.
Pick something you have issue with, contest it, or be gone.
>>55777502
Women usually follow what their families and specifically fathers or husbands believe. I would entrust a senator from a conservative state and conservative family to do a good job.
I think we would see better progress by making IQ and basic information tests for voters and politicians, administered by private third parties like the CIA does for their intel agents.
Next all people running for office or trying to vote should have some property stake in the city, county, state or country, even if it's a legal farce like a title to a particle of land for $0.01 recorded in a database, but ideally income-generating property like a business.
After that, we can start to undo racial integration and mass immigration. Gender is important, but not the prime concern for our breakdown.
>>55777761
>link me to the survey
Liberal detected.
Don't you mean "spoon feed me the tax funded, government conducted,
non-decisive study that concluded that we need more studies"?
Here you go.
http://www.amazon.com/Tantus-Feeldoe-Slim-Vibrator-Blue/dp/B000PHJBCG/ref=sr_1_1?s=hpc&ie=UTF8&qid=1447568120&sr=1-1&keywords=feeldoe
>>55778044
>Gender is important, but not the prime concern for our breakdown.
When a welfare recipient and a welfare contributor are considered 'equal' in voting for free shit, there is a prime concern.
Those who earn less will always vote to be given more.
>>55777934
>convince
There's your problem.
"I decree that no female above the age of 18 is allowed to make an income from a private employer, bar permission from her father, her husband, or appointed guardian, bar legal orphans and emancipated individuals"
Now enforce it. Stop me from hiring females. Force a shift in the labor force of males, who want to be tradesmen, custodians, san men, boilermakers, mechanics, engineers, and chemists to fill up the roles of child psychologists, kindergarten teachers, nurses, nurses' aides, and hairdressers.
>None, other than what nature gave them.
Just remove the artificial benefits.
If you remove the ability of the government to enforce people's "rights" on their behalf, you're going to have gang anarchy, which is going to be a worse civilization than the one you're complaining about now.
>>55778308
>Those who earn less will always vote to be given more.
I agree, but this also includes a good amount of professional athletes, who would likely vote poorly,
and it would include poor white farmers, who due to bad seasons and the nature of their work, would fail to make consistent returns, or get out of debt, even though they provide an integral service to people.
A combination of a race/solvency/knowledge requirement would be best, but any one would work fine.
>>55778592
see
>>55776165
you can't,
feminized jobs like the ones you describe will exist as long as industrial technological society exists
industrial urban society has to be dismantled and a return to the land is the only option
>>55777562
true - I'm very doubtful of any project inside a western nation though because I imagine at some point they'll be treated like in the Waco siege, success will be met with crackdown even if you do everything right.
I do have a degree in Physics so I've thought a lot about what the obvious solution would be - a low cost and robust stable sea-going platform. An engineering design where even in the strongest wave motion and storm, even if that was to last for a week on end, whatever lies on top of the lower suspension system is rock steady with zero swaying side to side. And of course it needs to be done far cheaper than any oil platform. Security is possible for the first time thanks to recent technology, swarm robotics would need to be used to make a security drone fleet with weapons where the more platforms are added the stronger the 'immune system' of swarm drones are to fight off viruses (pirates & small governments). I don't see any other way - international waters would be the last redoubt for resisting global states, short of tunnels and underground drilling (where you don't even have solar power for farming or generation) or in space which is far too expensive.
>>55778592
>Now enforce it. Stop me from hiring females.
That's easy.
All I have to do is stop giving you money for hiring females.
If you actually owned a business, and didn't receive money that was forcibly taken away from other men as a bonus for hiring chicks, you would stop hiring most chicks within a month.
We don't need new laws to fix shit, we need less laws.
>>55769785
My grandma married at the age of 15. So society would consider my grandpa to be a pedophile which is ridiculous as he loved her till the day he died (88 years old). He was 22 when they met.
>>55778592
>"I decree that no female above the age of 18 is allowed to make an income from a private employer, bar permission from her father, her husband, or appointed guardian, bar legal orphans and emancipated individuals"
Another liberal 'law'.
Try this instead: 'I decree that no business will receive a handout from the federal government,
>consisting of money taken by armed force from my competitor, to hire people who cannot
>complete that job in a profitable manor.
If it wasn't for government handouts, there would be less than 0.1% of women and niggers employed.
Tell me another story about how much you'd love to live in a world
where people were all held to the same standards.
>>55778144
Yeah, who needs facts and shit right?
I'm amazed, you single-handedly figured out the 'true nature' of women while in the comfort of your mom's basement.
Bravo.
>>55778831
I've heard Theil and others propose this. The main problems with whatever solution is found are
>Proper incentives for the right people/purposes
>Continued enforcement toward the end goal
Factions could always arise, and those not wanting to reproduce or wanting to do drugs etc can just say "kick me out. I dare you."
There is also the matter of factions who think they took on more burdens than others, and should have more rights or privileges (our family had 10 children). So governance would be an issue.
Logistically, a sea colony would need to find something to export in exchange for money to buy resources, and need decent hurricane buffers.
>>55778852
I'm self-employed, I was just making a point.
Females tend to have better sustain as cashiers and customer service reps, whereas males have better sustain in warehouse stocking and custodial duties. It would be a financial loss for a SBO to change all the waitresses to waiters, bartendresses to bartenders, and to an extent bar females from nursing. Clients/customers like the female face, and it increases their propensity to spend.
>We don't need new laws to fix shit, we need less laws.
I agree. The OEO needs to be nuked.
>>55778831
you also need to be able to mass produce them and expand the area of platforms indefinitely. Maintenance cannot be a costly factor so it would be favorable to just make them low cost enough to replace seamlessly each module at the end of it's lifespan and reprocessed. Sea water and the air is highly corrosive so materials are difficult for choosing something requiring low maintenance - it requires very low surface area contact with the sea itself. I would start a company to work on this, there's a large potential market as there are reports saying 55% of Americans would leave if offered something better. People would adore your product if you could insulate them from Government and pay a large price if it was moored off the coast of an important economic city already at saturation and high cost of living. Again if it wasn't for swarm robotics I don't think you could fulfill the security aspects cheaply enough, the challenge would be working with/against western States. It would be the ultimate technological disruption, of Governments themselves
>>55779241
>who needs facts
determined by people you pay, with money you took from other people to pay their salary, to tell you
that you're right?
Fuck reality.
The only truth anyone needs is the truth you pay for. With other people's money.
>>55779241
>ad hominem
Opinion Discarded
>>55779600
>Females tend to have better sustain as cashiers and customer service reps, whereas males have better sustain in warehouse stocking and custodial duties.
That's awfully raciss of you, anon.
Men and women and chinks and niggers are all the same.
Didn't your entirely non-prejudiced government tell you that this year?
Did you even bother to buy your thought license yet?
>>55779624
youre solution looks awesome honestly, and makes me feel less inclined to the extreme technophobia I've been going through recently (see my previous comments). I'd love to work for your company if it ever gets off the ground lel. I'm finishing a masters in electrical engineering
>>55780122
I know, had a phase of technophobia too even some ideas about how to insulate people from some of the shocking technological upheavals coming and provide an insured form of existence. We're entering a phase kind of like the emergence of viruses in biology, the human body would not function if things interior to the cell were exposed as any cheap replicated virus can destroy it - analogous to either a weaponized drone in a public space or flying through your window or to a number of technologies coming. What needs to happen is the cellularization of a huge number of important elements in society to vet the input in a completely decentralized way, like how a cell wall will read in protein strands one by one at a receptor, then allow certain requested strands into it.
Nice, got a few years experience in Machine learning and more in programming so it's either that or start a company in swarm robotics. Question is whether to stick in the UK or do it in the states.
