Obamacare is a Bachelor Tax that Will Fail

by Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech on November 18, 2013

Obamacare has a fatal flaw.  It requires the group that needs the least amount of health insurance on average to pay the most money compared to any other group for it.  That group is young men, particularly young single men, and young men have no reason to purchase health insurance under the Obamacare system.  For most young (single) men, the only health insurance they need is catastrophic insurance, but such a health insurance plan is considered “substandard” under Obamacare.  Health insurance plans under Obamacare have to include things that young (single) men will never use like maternity coverage.  Even though there are fines for not buying health insurance under Obamacare, young (single) men have less reason to purchase health insurance under Obamacare than they did before Obamacare.

Because young (single) men have no reason to support to Obamacare system, posters like these have been created in a desperate attempt to get young (single) men to buy into Obamacare:

brosurance

This poster was created by Colorado Consumer Health Initiative, and it’s a complete lie for at least two reasons.  First,  Obamacare can’t be called “brosurance” because it will never benefit “bros” or young (single) men.  It will only benefit women, and women will always have priority over men under the Obamacare health system.  Obamacare should be called gynosurance not brosurance.  Second, health insurance under Obamacare will cost a young (single) man a great deal more than beer money because he is subsidizing everyone else’s health care.  It’s actually better described as a “bro-tax”, “bro-fine”.

A more recognized name for a “bro-tax” is a bachelor tax.  Obamacare is probably the first actual bachelor tax in the United States.  It’s not a coincidence that the first bachelor tax in the U.S. was related to health care.  Men used to subsidize women’s health insurance via family health insurance plans.  Specifically, men subsidized the health insurance of their wives and daughters.  As marriage rates have dropped so has the marital health insurance subsidy has evaporated.  In other words, Obamacare is the first (unintentional) salvo against the marriage strike, MGTOW/MOO (men going their own way/men opting out).

While Obamacare was caused by the marriage strike & MGTOW/MOO, it will also fail because of the marriage strike & MGTOW/MOO.  A young single man has no reason to subsidize the health insurance of women he doesn’t know.  (Many young single men couldn’t even if they wanted to because unemployment is high among young men.)  Men who have decided to never get married or go their own way/opt out will never subsidize the health insurance of women they don’t know.  The government will never be able to force marriage striking men and MGTOW/MOOs to pay into Obamacare or a similar scheme.  If the fine for not buying into Obamacare is cheap, then it’s cheaper to pay the fine and women’s health insurance isn’t subsidized enough.  If the fine is expensive, then it’s cheaper to go to jail.  A man in jail will never pay health insurance.  Instead his health insurance will become an additional cost for the government making the problem the problem even worse.

Obamacare is guaranteed to fail since the government has no way to force men to buy into the system.  Any replacement for Obamacare that attempts to have men subsidize women’s health insurance will fail for the same reason.

{ 72 comments… read them below or add one }

meistergedanken November 18, 2013 at 12:50

“Obamacare has a fatal flaw. It requires the group that needs the least amount of health insurance on average to pay the most money compared to any other group for it.”

That’s not a bug, it’s a feature. But you already knew that.

” If the fine is expensive, then it’s cheaper to go to jail.”

That won’t happen; some [more] debt will just be tacked onto the hapless fellow. Wages will be garnished, landlords will be contacted for renters and liens placed against homeowners. Some government agency will insure that the “correct” amount each month will be diverted to the IRS. It’ll be debt slavery forever! And you won’t be able to ex-pat because your passport will be seized. Then WE’LL be the ones sneaking across the Mexican border.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 80 Thumb down 0
johnsavage November 18, 2013 at 13:04

What amazes me most about Obama is his focus on expensive entitlement programs and immigration reforms that will hurt the already suffering American worker, especially the young males burdened by education debts and under/unemployment, rather than focusing on JOBS.

Where are the JOBS to pay for all of this bleeding heart legislation??

Who cares about your legacy, Obama?! You are supposed to be the President of the ENTIRE United States, not just those of your party or of the special interests that ‘brung ya to the dance’…

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 1
slwerner November 18, 2013 at 13:14

“If the fine is expensive, then it’s cheaper to go to jail.”

I’d have to agree with meistergedanken that this isn’t likely to happen – although I believe there is a different explanation for this.

As long as ObamaCare operates in a (pseudo-)free market, if the fines get expensive enough, young men will be incentivized to buy some sort of health insurance, but insurance which meets minimum ACA guidelines can and will continue to be delivered by private insurers at rates substantially below what the wealth-transfer-by-design government program can – based on actual actuarial data, which, as you’ve noted, will show young single men the least “needy” of demographic groups.

Increased fines for not carrying health care insurance will likely push young men who would otherwise forgo such insurance to consider their least costly options, creating a burgeoning market for providers smart enough to tap into the emergent need for something cheaper than paying not only for their own needs, but also heavily subsidizing the rates of the women through the ObamaCare “exchanges”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Mike November 18, 2013 at 13:14

I completely agree that as the system stands it is doomed for failure. But, I do not think that this failure will be the precursor to the failure of the Obamacare scam.

I believe that as this systems continues to become insolvent the powers that be will use its failure as their catalyst to single payer.

I honestly believe that the goal of the Obamacare lackeys is to drive us to a nationalized healthcare system. Because, if that is established they will evenly spread the cost around to every individual with zero regard for the individual’s cost on the system.

That is single men in their twenties, to thirties will see the biggest scam. They will be paying the same amount (if not more), for individuals who benefit 10 fold from the construct.

Although no one wants to stand in front of television cameras and call this an injustice to men. And the few who try will be painted as demagogues.

But if these claims are baseless, then let me ask this. Why is it completely accepted common practice for a young woman to pay less for automobile insurance than her male counterpart?

Everyone is fine with that cost adjustment. The insurance companies have gauged driving patterns and statistically women get in less accidents than men, hence they pay less.

So if a man is seeing a doctor considerably less than a woman why is that same adjustment not made? My opinion is because this is an example of sex warfare at its finest.

It is completely okay to have a woman pay less for a service, but ask them to may more because of sound business models and that is unacceptable.

Men have long been duped into the belief that women deserve more, and that it is our burden to carry that weight for them.

Now in the hunter-gatherer tradition of our species I call bullshit. Responsibility and risk, while not always equal depending on the task, have always evened themselves out to the inherent risk of our species.

But now we live in a day and age where the risks associated with being a man is tolerable by society’s design, but the risk of being a woman must be taken on by the collective.

Would Obamacare cover me if I wanted to get a mammogram? I highly doubt it, even though breast cancer can happen in man. But, on the same hand I would almost guarantee it would provide testosterone supplements to woman who wanted them.

The healthcare system has been based around the idea of what women want women get. Of course it has, they are their biggest customers.

While the whole time the financial and systematic burden will be placed onto men to off-set the cost. This is a trend that will continue to mount an assault on us as a gender. Unfortunately, we have no voice, teeth, or dog in this fight.

We fought off the predators, we carried our father’s shields, we constructed democracy and we’ve always stood on the wall. The protection of our species has been our charge, and we succeeded. Unfortunately, from the fruits of our labor spawned this social utopia that gives us the Kardashians, bejeweled under-garments, and honey boo-boo. This social utopia is built on our backs, but hey we’re supposed to feel sorry about it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 50 Thumb down 1
keyster November 18, 2013 at 13:18

I’m not too worried because if Democrats don’t agree en masse to repeal it first within the next few months, it will fail in a most spectacular fashion by 2015.

There’s also a baked in marriage penalty anyway:

One bizarre feature of the Senate-passed health care bill is its pervasive bias against marriage. Under the bill, couples would face massive financial penalties if they marry or remain married. Conversely, couples who cohabit without marriage are given highly preferential financial treatment. If the Senate bill becomes law, saying “I do” would cost some couples over $10,000 per year.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/01/the-new-federal-wedding-tax-how-obamacare-would-dramatically-penalize-marriage

To the extent there was a plethora of young men signed on to the individual pool in the first place (the individual pool is about 8% of the insured or more than 15 million policy holders), they were paying about $150 a month for a “sub-standard” policy which is illegal (but now won’t be enforced for a year by executive decree).

A 27 year old BRO will now be paying about $380 a month for the same high deductible plan, only now it includes: FREE! maternity/pre-natal care, gynocological examinations (PAP smears, etc.), breast cancer screening, contraceptives, abortion, vision/dental care for pre-school children and mental health care.

From each according to his ability, to each according to her need.
C’mon guys, man-up and do the right thing!

And just wait ’til the Employer Mandate kicks in (again). A revolt of epic proportions will ensue.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 1
geographybeefinalisthimself November 18, 2013 at 13:23

It seems as though the Upton bill sponsored by the Republicans in the House brought on 39 Democratic co-sponsors. (This is the bill that would allow “substandard” but popular health plans that have just been cancelled to continue to be sold, even to people who have not previously had them, and indefinitely.) Although Harry Reid will not let the Senate vote on it, HE will look bad, and even for those 39 Democratic co-sponsors, any one of their constituents can point out, if you can oppose this part of Obamacare now, you could have opposed Obamacare in its entirety three years ago and prevented this abomination from seeing the light of day.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
oddsock November 18, 2013 at 13:44

Probably a silly question but, what about the poor dude living just above the poverty line because of Alimomy payments? Now I might be a little bit on the extreme here but from what I can tell the guy could now possibly go to jail on two or maybe even three counts. Non payment of alimony non payment of child support and now non payment of health insurance with each one making the other impossible to pay.

AND men are still getting feckin married ? What the feck is wrong with you people ? Seriously, are you all feckin bat shit loop the feckin loop head bangers or something? And they trust you with guns? With that sort of judgement and reasoning I wouldn’t trust most of you with a second hand feckin wheel barrow.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 5
keyster November 18, 2013 at 13:44

Who cares about your legacy, Obama?! You are supposed to be the President of the ENTIRE United States, not just those of your party or of the special interests that ‘brung ya to the dance’…

His priorty is wealth re-distribution. It’s in almost every speech he’s made in one form or another. His adoring fan base hears nothing but unicorn farts whenever he says something. Lucky for America his governing ability and executive management skills are worse than his ideas.

American businesses are not making capital investments. They’re holding on to cash if they’re not buying back their own stock. Obama’s executive regulation authority and the uncertianty of Obamacare’s effects are holding back growth. And why risk it when the Fed is pumping $85 Billion dollars a month into bad debt buy-backs? – so far up to $4 Trillion and counting.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 1
chinesefootsoldier November 18, 2013 at 14:15

That’s not a flaw… the only way a lefty knows how to “help” the Havenots is by shafting the Haves.

It’s not going away though. That’s how it is with social programs, once its in there, people think they’re entitled to it. In a way, that sense of undeserved entitlement is precisely what the leftist strategists are counting on.

So the opposite is going to happen. It’ll only be a matter of time before naive, idealistic tards start moaning about how a government program isn’t offering the best/competent care. Cue appeals to emotion, generic moral outrage etc and politicians will cave in to expanding it until it becomes a bloated, ineffective system crumbling under its own weight. It’s what happens when an immature populace thinks the world is run with good intentions and activism.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
keyster November 18, 2013 at 15:17

Probably a silly question but, what about the poor dude living just above the poverty line because of Alimomy payments?

Since child support is not deductible he’s fecked. If he makes more than $22K a year he’s not eligible for Medicaid either. If he gets sick and has to go to the emergency room (because they must treat him by law), he can try and plead poverty and/or change his name to “Jose Martinez” and say he’s from Mexico, up here visiting family.

You can’t be thrown in jail for not paying the Obamacare tax penalty (which will be $690 by 2018). They can only extract it from a refund due. So what a smart BRO will do is adjust his W-4 withholding just enough to not have a refund, but yet not too much to warrant an under-payment of tax penalty. We call this an “IRS loop-hole” here in the colonies.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1
W.F. Price November 18, 2013 at 15:26

Probably a silly question but, what about the poor dude living just above the poverty line because of Alimomy payments? Now I might be a little bit on the extreme here but from what I can tell the guy could now possibly go to jail on two or maybe even three counts. Non payment of alimony non payment of child support and now non payment of health insurance with each one making the other impossible to pay.

AND men are still getting feckin married ? What the feck is wrong with you people ? Seriously, are you all feckin bat shit loop the feckin loop head bangers or something? And they trust you with guns? With that sort of judgement and reasoning I wouldn’t trust most of you with a second hand feckin wheel barrow.

-oddsock

You go into “the system” as a poor or working class man who owes support, and you lose what little freedom and self-respect you may have had. Basically, you have to balance out your “obligations” with subsidies that would be unnecessary if the govt. hadn’t put you in that position in the first place (e.g. subsidized food, healthcare, rent, etc.). It’s enormously inefficient, but it’s great for the vast bureaucracy, I guess. Or someone. BTW, the subsidies for non-custodial fathers are an order of magnitude lower than for singlemoms.

As for getting married, it’s a tax status today — nothing more. If you have nothing to take, marriage is not risky as far as liabilities, however, being married means less subsidies per individual from the govt., so if both parties are poor there’s no point. However, for non-custodial fathers, it’s a fair deal, because the new spouse is not liable for your legal obligations to the ex, and this allows for more household income flexibility.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 4
Jeremy November 18, 2013 at 15:33

Any system that does not allow for the full agency of all humans has a fatal flaw. This is why tiny-to-zero government, as abhorrent as that is to our rampant population of statists in this world, is the only way to go. Unfortunately, tiny-to-zero government requires human beings to be aware and engaged in their own survival, which is something that the sheep herds of today are terrified of.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 1
patriarch November 18, 2013 at 15:41

If health care is going to be cheaper for un-married couples than married couples, who does that benefit? Well, it ruins one reason for homosexuals to want to get married… It also benefits peoples less inclined to get married. Blacks as opposed to whites… That is probably it right there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 3
W.F. Price November 18, 2013 at 15:48

If health care is going to be cheaper for un-married couples than married couples, who does that benefit? Well, it ruins one reason for homosexuals to want to get married… It also benefits peoples less inclined to get married. Blacks as opposed to whites… That is probably it right there.

-patriarch

Homosexuals are never going to get married much. The entire gay marriage push was a huge distraction and waste of time — it was just a political cudgel used by progressives to bash their opposition as bigots for holding onto healthy, normative opinions about what defines marriage.

As for the racial angle, blacks figured this out years ago. Hispanics and working-class whites are already on board with it, and even young middle-class whites are starting to do the same in increasing numbers.

Remember that civil marriage is becoming meaningless from a traditional marriage standpoint. Real marriage is about behavior, not some license printed at the county courthouse.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1
oddsock November 18, 2013 at 16:10

MR Price, Keyster et al.

Hmmm quite interesting.

You may remember that I have mentioned there was a drive to lower the USA general standard of living and bring it in line with much of the UK and Europe ? Well, from what I am reading it seems the plans are well under way. The aim appears to be to introduce a similar NHS style health care or perhaps something like they have in Europe. Obama care is just a red herring a false falg if you like, designed to fail. Whats the term ? Problem, reaction, solution?

Mr Price, yes I understand what you are saying regarding marriage for those with nothing to lose, except maybe their sanity. That is very much the same here in the UK, There was a time, maybe it still does? When the CSA tried to take into account a mans new partners income and increase his payments because of this ” extra income”. This effectively and very quickly destroyed any new partnerships. The double whammy was the ex wife or GF would not be penalised for having a live in boyfriend or new husband plus, if she was on benefits any CS she recieved would not be deducted. All this basically set up ever more destroyed families realtionships with a merry go round of partners mostly men staying maybe 2 or 3 nights a week to avoid complications. It was a total cock up but then again, perhaps a well thought out plan? It destroyed old and new partnerships and marriages alike.

Now we have plenty of fathers that have become so beaten down and in a hopless position they simply cannot or just refuse to work, especially the younger guys, most only able to find minimum wage jobs. By the time he has paid rent and other bills along with CSA deductions he is very much a slave working for nothing other than paying everyone else. Imagine working a 40 hour week in a shit job being treated like shit and only having enough to pay for bus fare and a bit of daily junk food after your pay deductions. A really grim situation. The moment a guy works overtime or gets a better paying job they increase the CSA deductions. Usually it is his ex wife or gf that informs on him for no other reason than spite. So they just say feck it and drift into the sub cultures found all around the UK.

There is a method to this madness. Looks like the USA is just following suit and in my estimation, about 5 or 10 years behind. Combine this with ever increasing mass immigration from all the poor countries like what happened here in the UK or Europe and you have one hell of a powder keg waiting to go up. I don’t know how the PTB are keeping the lid on things here in the UK and Europe, I really don’t.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
W.F. Price November 18, 2013 at 16:22

Mr Price, yes I understand what you are saying regarding marriage for those with nothing to lose, except maybe their sanity. That is very much the same here in the UK, There was a time, maybe it still does? When the CSA tried to take into account a mans new partners income and increase his payments because of this ” extra income”. This effectively and very quickly destroyed any new partnerships. The double whammy was the ex wife or GF would not be penalised for having a live in boyfriend or new husband plus, if she was on benefits any CS she recieved would not be deducted. All this basically set up ever more destroyed families realtionships with a merry go round of partners mostly men staying maybe 2 or 3 nights a week to avoid complications. It was a total cock up but then again, perhaps a well thought out plan? It destroyed old and new partnerships and marriages alike.

-oddsock

I think circumstances can be taken into account in some states, but generally only when there’s a very egregious difference as in, for example, a divorced man living with a very rich woman while the mother of his children is on welfare. For obvious reasons, this is very rare, and even then they cannot take the rich woman’s money, but only order the man to pay more.

If women were liable for their husbands’ exes, babymommas, children, etc., single and divorced women would run out of available men in a week, and they would raise such a fuss about it that such a policy would be reversed in short order.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Grant November 18, 2013 at 16:54

“Homosexuals are never going to get married much. The entire gay marriage push was a huge distraction and waste of time — it was just a political cudgel used by progressives to bash their opposition as bigots for holding onto healthy, normative opinions about what defines marriage.”

That being the case (and I agree), why have conservatives wasted so much time and political capital fighting a losing battle? Nearly everyone I know under the age of 30 supports gay marriage. There is no doubt in my mind that it will be legal in all fifty states within our lifetimes. All the conservatives have done is delay it for one more generation at most, while opening the door for liberals to paint them as idiots and bigots. Why play into their game?

And thanks for the article PMAFT. I have been saying for a while now that Obamacare is a bachelor tax. More men need to be calling it for what it is.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
oddsock November 18, 2013 at 16:58

Mr Price

Hmmm.

Well consider this. As you are probably aware we have quite a wide ranging welfare system here in the UK.

In addition to the heavy tax we pay and value added tax now ( VAT ) running at 20% on almost everything plus the NI ( National Insurance ) we pay the contributions or deductions from men outweighs the contributions made by women considerably. This NI is effectively a man tax. I have no idea of the formulae but it basically goes, the more you earn the more you pay. I can easily pay in excess of £150 per week NI. Now this is supposed to go towards funding a state pension Men 65 women 60 although they have just raised the womans retirement age to maybe 61/62, no idea when it starts, and fund things like the NHS and unemployment benefit etc. Therefore, the NHS is anything but free health care and I suggest most Americans are not aware of this.

Anyway. Ponder this. There is still a wide gap between men and womens life expectancy with shedfuls of men not even reaching the 65 year mark to start to draw down a state pension but many women do. Plus, the NHS is used by far by women. It is often infuriating when I can’t even get a doctors appointment as they are all taken and when I do manage to fit one in usually during work hours the surgery is full of women and baby mommas and usually on benefits and their arse ( or back )

Putting aside all this cultural marxism bolocks for a moment. Now consider this.

We also have such things as housing benefit ( rent paid) if you are on benefits so obviously all the single mums get it. Recent government anouncements said that people (MEN) up to the age of 28 ? May not claim housing benefit, this will obviously exclude single mums. Last time it was aged 25 and before that 21. This now gives you the situation in which a young guy may be entitled to about £40 unemployment benefit but can’t pay rent or anything else so he either becomes a minimum wage SLAVE or becomes homeless. There is now a rapid rise in young homeless men. You see even with a full time minimum wage job paying rent is impossible. The war and tax on men here in the UK far outstrips anything you have experienced ( Yet) working Men are nothing more than serfs to fund a womens life

For the record this is why I see my arse with right wing nut jobs that think its fine to treat men like shite. Like I said they are nothing but misandry apologists that need a taste of their own medicine, UK style.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
Anon66 November 18, 2013 at 17:29

Young men will refuse to buy insurance and will instead pay the penalty. However, the penalty is scheduled to rise over time. When the penalty rises high enough young men will simply be incentivized not to work. The welfare roles will increase and the gray economy will grow. We will become like most third world countries where incompetent and corrupt bureaucrats prevent economic activities that could actually raise its citizens out of poverty.

As bad as the US has been, people do not realize that the US government has been far less corrupt than almost everywhere else in the world. With an ever expanding group of diverse immigrants those days are ending quickly. Obama may be technically a US citizen, but he is certainly the first non-American president is outlook. He and those who vote for his like are bringing the corruption of the rest of the world to the US. It is only going to get worse until there is a collapse and who knows what happens then.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
greyghost November 18, 2013 at 18:05

I just saw this about an hour ago and fits in well with this article.
There is a huge hopeless culture of men with nothing to lose and no hope. I remember an article here that told of at least 25 million or so men pushed out of the hope.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aX5_Q7DGIM

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
oddsock November 18, 2013 at 18:16

Anon 66

“As bad as the US has been, people do not realize that the US government has been far less corrupt than almost everywhere else in the world.”

Judas Priest !

Keysters recent major faux paus on the USA constitution left me quite gob smacked but this from Anon 66 has left me wondering if the Spearhead has slipped into the twilight zone.

“The US government has been far less corrupt than almost everywhere else in the world.” WTF ?

What the feck have you boys been smokin ? Is it something in the water ? Chemicals from the Fracking ? Chemtrails even ?

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 13
il duce November 18, 2013 at 20:27

If bill Clinton was the first black president, Barack Obama is surely the first female president

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 18, 2013 at 21:16

W. F. Price
Obamacare should be called gynosurance not brosurance…..

The feminine form of brosurance is hosurance, obviously.

Gotta love it.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 18, 2013 at 21:38

oddsock
“The US government has been far less corrupt than almost everywhere else in the world.” WTF ?

This is obviously true though I think a case could be made that the US’s endless warmaking is also public sector corruption which would change the picture considerably.

Anyway, don’t take my word for it: Corruption Perceptions Index 2012.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
evilwhitemalempire November 18, 2013 at 22:10

“I honestly believe that the goal of the Obamacare lackeys is to drive us to a nationalized healthcare system.”
————————–
Over at Mantits, whenever the subject of healthcare comes up, all they talk about is how much they want a single payer system.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
TFH November 18, 2013 at 22:42

Il Duce,

If bill Clinton was the first black president, Barack Obama is surely the first female president

Yes. He is certainly the first President who is physically weaker than his spouse. The First Linebacker does indeed make it appear that the President is a woman.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
BC Dad November 19, 2013 at 03:32

@johnsavage November 18, 2013 at 13:04
“What amazes me most about Obama is his focus on expensive entitlement programs and immigration reforms that will hurt the already suffering American worker, especially the young males burdened by education debts and under/unemployment, rather than focusing on JOBS.”

This kind of thinking needs to change. Any time politicians and bureaucracy are focused on solving problems, including unemployment, whether the right way or the left way, we are all burdened with the costs and problems the solution entails. The more problems government ‘solves,’ the greater the burdens on men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Ziad K Abdelnour November 19, 2013 at 04:32

It is clear to me today that Americans want health care; but they don’t particularly want health insurance.

Health insurance companies, however, convinced the government that they are instrumental to the delivery of health care, so the government is compelling people to buy that.

The Administration’s argument is that too many people prefer to be “free riders” — that is, they prefer not to pay for their own insurance while health care reaches an emergency status and is paid for in full by government services (such as emergency rooms)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Eincrou November 19, 2013 at 05:14

@ Charles Martel

You may wish to double check who is responsible for that “hosurance” quote.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
oddsock November 19, 2013 at 05:43

Charles

A new report from Reuters has discovered widespread accounting fraud at the Pentagon, describing a budget of more than $8 trillion disappearing into a mess of corrupted data, erroneous reports, and unauditable ledgers

http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/18/5117816/pentagon-guilty-of-billion-dollar-accounting-fraud-reveals-reuters

Now I am not great with Maths but 8 Trillion Dollars ? Lets not talk basic graft and bribes within a government here. Lets talk corruption at a level of total anual GDP of entire countries and probably continents. That would be far more realistic.

“The US government has been far less corrupt than almost everywhere else in the world”

Obviously true you say ? Really ?

Corruption Perceptions Index my arse !

I blame the chemicals from all that Fracking getting into your water.

Oooh oooh, Maybe it was those damned feckin cultural marxists again ?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Vektor November 19, 2013 at 06:46

If increasing the fines is not enough to coerce young men to pay into the system, they will just make it a law like auto insurance….if they can.

I hope it collapses. Right now it’s a damage control/propaganda campaign. Who has the best propaganda?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 19, 2013 at 08:01

Eincrou
You may wish to double check who is responsible for that “hosurance” quote.

OK. Just Googled it, didn’t see anything definitive. The Daily Caller? I give up, who is it?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 19, 2013 at 08:20

oddsock
A new report from Reuters has discovered widespread accounting fraud at the Pentagon, describing a budget of more than $8 trillion disappearing into a mess of corrupted data, erroneous reports, and unauditable ledgers

But…I thought you liked big government?

This is not corruption as much as it is typical Fedrah Gubmint incompetence and stupidity. Though there are probably a few pallets of benjamins in somebody’s basement most of that $8 trillion is not stolen but just not properly accounted for. My opinion is that what it’s being spent on is pointless and immoral but that’s a different issue.

Of course, nothing like this ever happens in the UK.

But wait, those UK “lost billions” are actual money, taxpayer assets sold off cheap to favored insiders and private sector products purchased at double the market price.

What is it about the US that’s so fascinating for you, besides the excellent beer?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 19, 2013 at 08:36

Charles

“What is it about the US that’s so fascinating for you, besides the excellent beer?”

Seeing as you ask, the level of naivety. Its truely breathtaking but, often quite amusing. Look at your last few comments.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5
Charles Martel November 19, 2013 at 08:39

oddsock
A new report from Reuters has discovered widespread accounting fraud at the Pentagon, describing a budget of more than $8 trillion disappearing into a mess of corrupted data, erroneous reports, and unauditable ledgers

And I guess I should point out that that’s not a lost $8 trillion, that’s a reported $8 trillion dollar budget.

Given that the Pentagon’s actual annual budget is about $600 billion, that $8 trillion number is complete bullshit. Someone at Reuters doesn’t know their billions from their trillions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 19, 2013 at 08:47

oddsock
Seeing as you ask, the level of naivety.

Level 8, do you think? 9 maybe?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Eincrou November 19, 2013 at 08:58

@ Charles Martel

Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech is the author of this article, not W. F. Price.

This is a vanishingly minor issue, but I think PMAFT deserves to be properly attributed for his clever line about hosurance.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rotten November 19, 2013 at 08:59

Could there be a silver lining benefit to batchelor men here? I am unfamiliar with many of the workings of Obamacare, but here me out.

Post Obamacare, one way to run a profitable pool will be to stack that pool with as many cost free men, and as few expensive women as possible. It will be illegal to discriminate openly, but highly profitable for insurance companies to find other ways to pack a pool with a profitable group of individuals.

What might these ways be? Could insurance companies be incentivized to seek out and/or places or activities that attract men but where few women are found?

Is there a way to create a pool by, not discriminating against anybody as proscribed by law, but specifically targeting auto parts customers, anime freaks, spearhead readers, HALO matches, or any other male dominated field where women are few? The company would profit big time.

The target market for advertising of most products is women, which is a reason why television is so feminized, but is this Obamacare creating a target market where the decisions of men have a big premium towards the bottom line?

If a materialist consumer culture were to evolve targeting men, that plus would be huge.

Of course, these devolopments are a consequence of an unfair batchelor tax, and I am assuming the existence of a functioning insurance market, one which Obamacare seeks to destroy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 19, 2013 at 09:03

Eincrou
This is a vanishingly minor issue, but I think PMAFT deserves to be properly attributed for his clever line about hosurance.

We’re getting wrapped around the axle here. It’s a great article and I missed that it’s PMAFT’s, but PMAFT does not use the word “hosurance,” he uses “gynosurance.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Anonymous November 19, 2013 at 09:25

Minarchy

BC DadNovember 19, 2013 at 03:32
@johnsavage November 18, 2013 at 13:04
“What amazes me most about Obama is his focus on expensive entitlement programs and immigration reforms that will hurt the already suffering American worker, especially the young males burdened by education debts and under/unemployment, rather than focusing on JOBS.”
This kind of thinking needs to change. Any time politicians and bureaucracy are focused on solving problems, including unemployment, whether the right way or the left way, we are all burdened with the costs and problems the solution entails. The more problems government ‘solves,’ the greater the burdens on men.
BC Dad, Sir –

Respectfully, you have misunderstood the intended implications of my statement.

I am an advocate of small, limited government; a minarchist, so to speak.

The government sets the rules for the economy. It always has, since the advent of centralized agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution and the beginnings of what we call ‘civilization.’ In the past, government rules have resulted in un-natural market mechanisms that have resulted in what are essentially government-created monopolies and oligopolies in nearly every industry across the economy, whether intended (like the Federal Reserve, education, etc.) or not (airlines, communications, energy, automobiles, etc.).

When I ask the government to concentrate on JOBS, I am asking the government TO OPEN UP THE ECONOMY to more natural, free market competition to address the stagnation, high prices, limited choices and lack of competition created by unnatural monopolistic and oligopolistic controls of our industries. Where ever a monopoly or oligopoly exists, there is ample room for competition, as small firms are more innovative and flexible than are large firms and better address the long tail needs of our markets as they diversify into greater choices for the individual. Small firms also employ significant numbers of people and could solve the problems of under/unemployment plaguing our nation’s people.

Industries like healthcare, insurance, banking, education, manufacturing and even party politics and the government can stand to be opened up to competition to further promote the needs of a freedom loving and libertarian minded people.

For instance, in my industry, I have all of the capital I need to start a small business. However, government regulations at every level from the county through the state through the federal government make it prohibitively expensive to do so. Furthermore, considering affirmative action and expensive entitlement programs that essentially tax the ability of the business to compete, I am provided with enough DISINCENTIVES that I would not wish to open up said business even if the regulatory and licensing environments were different.

When I am asking the government to open up the economy, I am asking it to DOWNSIZE so that American liberty is restored and the individual once again has economic and social mobility, and thus an ability to create jobs for himself and others, as in the days of yore. I am asking the government to admit to mistakes in creating an oversized Leviathan that has grown at every stage of our institutional evolution.

From the right, the government has grown with every war: the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Cold War, the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, the expansion of the police state, VAWA, the DMV, etc. From the left, we have the New Deal, the New Society, Feminism, Gay Marriage, Affirmative Action, etc. The Leviathan just keeps growing and growing, sucking out all of the air in the room and taking our vitality and cherished individual liberties with it.

As for immigration, I would under circumstances of resource abundance, say that we should open up the borders. However, I cannot imagine that the U.S. is going to have the resources to provide for an estimated 450 million people at the middle of this century. In a time or region of limited resources, I am one who advocates lifeboat ethics and understands that there is only room for so many and that SOME MAY SUFFER as a result. Balance here is the key. If we allow too many in, we risk capsizing our lifeboat, destabilizing our society in the process, setting the stage for insurrections, violence and revolutions that may not (likely will not) lead to a healthier nation and economy.

I am asking THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF TO MAKE THE SACRIFICE, rather than forcing it upon the people. If we were to downsize the government across the board and the onerous regulatory environment it has created, there would be more than enough resources for Americans to re-employ themselves and solve so many of the problems plaguing our Dilbertian, ossified society where Tall Poppies are no longer allowed to grow.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
johnsavage November 19, 2013 at 09:37

Minarchy

BC DadNovember 19, 2013 at 03:32 wrote in response to my comment:

@johnsavage November 18, 2013 at 13:04
“What amazes me most about Obama is his focus on expensive entitlement programs and immigration reforms that will hurt the already suffering American worker, especially the young males burdened by education debts and under/unemployment, rather than focusing on JOBS.”

This kind of thinking needs to change. Any time politicians and bureaucracy are focused on solving problems, including unemployment, whether the right way or the left way, we are all burdened with the costs and problems the solution entails. The more problems government ‘solves,’ the greater the burdens on men.

BC Dad, Sir –

Respectfully, you have misunderstood the intended implications of my statement.

I am an advocate of small, limited government; a minarchist, so to speak.

The government sets the rules for the economy. It always has, since the advent of centralized agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution and the beginnings of what we call ‘civilization.’ In the past, government rules have resulted in un-natural market mechanisms that have resulted in what are essentially government-created monopolies and oligopolies in nearly every industry across the economy, whether intended (like the Federal Reserve, education, etc.) or not (airlines, communications, energy, automobiles, etc.).

When I ask the government to concentrate on JOBS, I am asking the government TO OPEN UP THE ECONOMY to more natural, free market competition to address the stagnation, high prices, limited choices and lack of competition created by unnatural monopolistic and oligopolistic controls of our industries. Where ever a monopoly or oligopoly exists, there is ample room for competition, as small firms are more innovative and flexible than are large firms and better address the long tail needs of our markets as they diversify into greater choices for the individual. Small firms also employ significant numbers of people and could solve the problems of under/unemployment plaguing our nation’s people.

Industries like healthcare, insurance, banking, education, manufacturing and even party politics and the government can stand to be opened up to competition to further promote the needs of a freedom loving and libertarian minded people.

For instance, in my industry, I have all of the capital I need to start a small business. However, government regulations at every level from the county through the state through the federal government make it prohibitively expensive to do so. Furthermore, considering affirmative action and expensive entitlement programs that essentially tax the ability of the business to compete, I am provided with enough DISINCENTIVES that I would not wish to open up said business even if the regulatory and licensing environments were different.

When I am asking the government to open up the economy, I am asking it to DOWNSIZE so that American liberty is restored and the individual once again has economic and social mobility, and thus an ability to create jobs for himself and others, as in the days of yore. I am asking the government to admit to mistakes in creating an oversized Leviathan that has grown at every stage of our institutional evolution.

From the right, the government has grown with every war: the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Cold War, the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, the expansion of the police state, VAWA, the DMV, etc. From the left, we have the New Deal, the New Society, Feminism, Gay Marriage, Affirmative Action, etc. The Leviathan just keeps growing and growing, sucking out all of the air in the room and taking our vitality and cherished individual liberties with it.

As for immigration, I would under circumstances of resource abundance, say that we should open up the borders. However, I cannot imagine that the U.S. is going to have the resources to provide for an estimated 450 million people at the middle of this century. In a time or region of limited resources, I am one who advocates lifeboat ethics and understands that there is only room for so many and that SOME MAY SUFFER as a result. Balance here is the key. If we allow too many in, we risk capsizing our lifeboat, destabilizing our society in the process, setting the stage for insurrections, violence and revolutions that may not (likely will not) lead to a healthier nation and economy.

I am asking THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF TO MAKE THE SACRIFICE, rather than forcing it upon the people. If we were to downsize the government across the board and the onerous regulatory environment it has created, there would be more than enough resources for Americans to re-employ themselves and solve so many of the problems plaguing our Dilbertian, ossified society where Tall Poppies are no longer allowed to grow.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 19, 2013 at 09:49

Charles

Here you go, something I am sure will interest you possibly even amuse you. It should certainly be of significant interest to other men especially the younger ones.

Recently I was watching Led Zeppelin at the The Kennedy Awards. A really good show and must see for anyone into Classic Rock. Obviously Obama was doing the speech and award part, nothing I can do about that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOy5TCB9JMw

After watching this I sampled a few other videos when I came across the one of Sir Paul McCartney performing at the White House. For those of you that don’t know, Paul McCartney is one of the former Beatles. A famous 60/70′s band.

Ok, still with me ? To be frank, I am no great fan of his or the Beatles but a particular part of the show really struck me as fascinating and again NO, I am not having a pop at Americans, you will see what I mean after you watch it.

Now during the show Sir Paul heaps praise on Obama and offers all his support, ok pretty standard behaviour and I am sure it will make many of you want to puke. I care neither way. That has nothing to do with why I am posting this.

The first name of Obamas wife, the First Lady is Michelle, also the name of a classic Beatles song. So up gets Sir Paul McCartney onto the stage and anounces he is about to sing the very same song obviously aimed at Michelle sat in the audience right in front of him.

As Sir Paul is singing this to her just look at the expression on her face especially as Obama is also trying to sing the same song to her. Observe his body language and how she almost completely blanks him and at one point I think she even slightly sneers at him.

Watch it and see, tell me if I am wrong. IMHO a perfect example of true female nature manginas and perhaps a touch of Brifaults law.

The show is quite long so fast forward to the 1hr. 02 minute mark to view the segment I am talking about. Enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8rz9T3fSW8

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
keyster November 19, 2013 at 09:52

@oddsock

The issue with wasted money is not corruption, it’s incompetence. Not that corruption doesn’t exist, but when it does it pails in comparison to a bloated, inept beauracracy. There’s cronyism, quid pro quo, buying votes with pork, a million here and a million there, etc.

The real issue facing the US is Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare, which is now two-thirds of our total spending. Republicans want to reform it and Democrats want to expand it. They total something like $50 Trillion in unfunded liability within the next several decades. Even our military spending is mere mice nuts compared to entitlement spending.

Of course Feminist, Inc is clearly on the side of spending. But we can’t have a diminishing tax base, while we spend more on baby boomers. Ironically it’s feminist intrusion that slowed making more babies to support the bints in their old age.

Great book, a play on “Animal Farm”:

http://www.amazon.com/Animal-Colony-Cautionary-Today-Activity/dp/1439220735

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
keyster November 19, 2013 at 10:02

From the right, the government has grown with every war: the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Cold War, the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, the expansion of the police state, VAWA, the DMV, etc.

Civil War – Jefferson Davis (Dem)
WWI – Woodrow Wilson (Dem)
WWII – FDR (Dem)
the Cold War – Harry Truman (Dem)
VAWA – Joe Biden (Dem)

But yes, the government has expanded under Republican rule – but then so did our economy at the time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
johnsavage November 19, 2013 at 10:07

Sorry about the double post of walltext, folks. The system didn’t put up my first post, despite being logged in… or so I thought… so I reposted. (frustrated)

Apologies.

No more posts again until the system stops treating me like a security threat.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 19, 2013 at 10:31

Keyster

Yes, I understand all that I really really do. Ok, lets try another approach and please don’t be offended if I lay this out as simple as possible.

USA Dollar= World reserve currency = every fecker has to trade in it use it including stock piling it etc etc. Ever really wonder why the USA is creating or fighting so many wars ? Oil Opium and even the Military Industrial Complex are only small potatoes.

The FED; Given the above they can continue to print and print and print right up to the point the rest of the world says, ENOUGH or a major confrontation and attempt to break away from the Dollar as reserve currency. I don’t think this will happen until all this QE ( printing of Dollars) starts to flow back into the USA economy. At the moment the USA is simply exporting all its economic troubles globally. Third world countries are suffering the most from this, India Pakistan etc.

Perhaps of little interest to you but have you never wondered why the UK never adopted the Euro ? Think printing press power and control of the people and economy which includes the Banking sector City of London.

Meantime, the FED can print and print and print and print. Talking about costs of this or that are quite pointless when you have such a senario. As I have tried many times to get across to you, there is a much bigger plan that even dwarfs the many trillions of Dollars debt that America obviously can never repay. Why do you think the interest rates are near zero, really ? To help the economy the banks perhaps business ? Behave yourself. Those interest rates go up by as much as a percentage fraction and the whole house of cards comes down.

There will be either a major war or an economic reset, perhaps both and you can vote for who the feck you like mate, it won’t change a damned feckin thing. Trouble is mate, you are like so many other Americans. You still believe there is going to me some sort of a return to the glory days of yester year. Ain’t ever gonna happen, accept it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel November 19, 2013 at 10:50

oddsock
As Sir Paul is singing this to her just look at the expression on her face especially as Obama is also trying to sing the same song to her. Observe his body language and how she almost completely blanks him and at one point I think she even slightly sneers at him.

Good find but I think in this case the root cause is that her husband is gay. So not much respect there. Of course her hamster doesn’t allow her to contemplate what that says about her.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Dire Badger November 19, 2013 at 12:54

“At the moment the USA is simply exporting all its economic troubles globally.”

Actually, it would be more accurate to state that other countries have been IMPORTING US economic troubles globally. The world has been leaning heavily on the US economy since 1950, and non-free-market countries have been absolutely depending on economic boosts and favored trading status to drive their prosperity for decades. No offense, Oddsock, but if it hadn’t been for evil american free-market capitalism, your ‘kingdom’ and most of europe would strongly resemble latvia right now. America crashes economically, and there will be a bloodbath of unimaginable proportions worldwide as countries desperately scramble to find some way of replacing the lifeblood that has been streaming downhill to their banana republics and socialist oligarchies.

“Yes, I understand all that I really really do.”

No, you really really don’t. but please, keep building the ‘right wing nut job’ straw man that you fanatically beat up with every post. It’s funny watching you advocate becoming a lamprey and call it ‘freedom’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
keyster November 19, 2013 at 13:14

I don’t think this will happen until all this QE ( printing of Dollars) starts to flow back into the USA economy.

This money is not meant to flow back into the economy directly (that was the failed Stimulus). It’s meant to buy up bad debt (bonds) left over from the housing/mortgage industry collapse. It adds some liquidity to the markets (hence the indicies records), but even at these rates no one is borrowing. Encorpera knows not what Obamacare will bring…health care is one-sixth of our economy.

Perhaps of little interest to you but have you never wondered why the UK never adopted the Euro?

That was a very wise move. Thanks Tony, oh and Maggie too!

As I have tried many times to get across to you, there is a much bigger plan that even dwarfs the many trillions of Dollars debt that America obviously can never repay.

I know, but you never tell me what that plan actually is. Is it the NWO conspiracy? Americans could pay the debt which is why there is still a market for it (treasury bonds); and which is why Democrats obsess over raising “revenue”. Everyone can always afford to pay “their fair share”.

Those interest rates go up by as much as a percentage fraction and the whole house of cards comes down.

They can vary that much in a week. When they go up to the more historical 5%, there will be trouble. But even at close to zero people still want to buy US bonds – so it must be one of the safest investments in the world.

You still believe there is going to me some sort of a return to the glory days of yester year. Ain’t ever gonna happen, accept it.

No, not all. We’re just clinging to survival of the Republic at this point. There are those that have a western-european socialist vision for the US. Most don’t want that. Maybe it works in adorable little countries there, but it can’t sustain itself here.

At the moment the USA is simply exporting all its economic troubles globally. Third world countries are suffering the most from this, India Pakistan etc.

How is the USA exporting all its economic troubles globally?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
TFH November 19, 2013 at 14:49

I should point out that Nazi Germany was left-wing. Among other things, Adolf Hitler nationalized many parts of the German economy, including healthcare.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
keyster November 19, 2013 at 15:15
Johnycomelatley November 19, 2013 at 16:03

The one thing Obamacare reinforces is that women collectively have and always will be legal wards.

Not that it is a slight on the nature of women, it’s simply the nature of things.

Socializing health costs is simply a reaffirmation of this fact, somehow men will always have to pay, the only issue is the nature and mechanism of the institution that facilitates the transfer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Eincrou November 19, 2013 at 16:03

@ Charles Martel

I’m not sure what, “Getting wrapped around the axle,” means. Hopefully it is not a saying that belittles the practice of correcting clear errors.

You are, of course, correct that PMAFT said “gynosurance.” I should have double-checked what term he had used, as it had been several hours since I had read it.

It was an even more insignificant error than what started this conversation, but a clear error nonetheless. Muphry’s law.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 19, 2013 at 18:07

Wow the right wing whack jobs are out in force today.

Next you will be telling me the US Dollar is not a fiat currency.

On you go boys. You fearless warriors. LMFAO

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 10
Dire Badger November 20, 2013 at 00:27

of course it’s a fiat currency. you cannot manipulate and control a poisoned economy without fiat currency.

You know? Here in Utah we actually managed to pass a silver standard. It’s just a shame that big daddy fed outlawed it. I was THIS close to getting paid in bullion. I hear Emperor Bernanke was personally involved in the crackdown.

Oh wait, you limeys don’t know who Bernanke is and why King Obama asks his permission before making any policy changes in this country.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
BC Dad November 20, 2013 at 00:42

@johnsavage re ‘Respectfully, you have misunderstood the intended implications of my statement.’

I appreciate your concerns -they are indeed legitimate. However there are two overall considerations which might bear further reflection.

The first is the nature of the state and its relationship with business. For a perspective somewhat at odds with conventional historical analysis, I’d recommend reading David Graeber’s Debt: The First 5,000 Years. Those ‘unnatural’ relationships you justifiably complain of are in fact intrinsic to government. As Graeber points out, the historical evidence actually shows that there was no market, particularly not a capitalist market (yes there is a difference), prior to the advent of government. The relationship between business and government is complementary, not adversarial. There is and always has been a Faustian connection between the two, and it seems likely that the one cannot exist without the other.

Secondly, given that government ALWAYS gravitates toward more power and wealth for itself at the expense of people, is it realistic to suggest that the state is even capable of contemplating what you suggest, much less implementing it?

Ask yourself what would in fact really happen if by some miracle your solution was agreed to and subsequently implemented by government. What would happen? Would the problem be solved in any rational way that actually worked for you?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 20, 2013 at 03:35

Dire Badger

“Of course it’s a fiat currency. you cannot manipulate and control a poisoned economy without fiat currency.

You know? Here in Utah we actually managed to pass a silver standard. It’s just a shame that big daddy fed outlawed it. I was THIS close to getting paid in bullion. I hear Emperor Bernanke was personally involved in the crackdown.”

Oh wait, you limeys don’t know who Bernanke is and why King Obama asks his permission before making any policy changes in this country.”

Well, at least you show some understanding of economics and how politics work.

“Of course it’s a fiat currency”

Yes, obviously, sarcasm doesn’t travel well. I had to explain many many times to a few Americans on here that the USA Dollar is a fiat currency. I even posted step by step videos for them explaining it all, but still, nope, they would not have it.

A Silver Standard eh? Again you show far better knowledge of economics and whats coming down the pike than the other right wing flakes. Stacking Silver possibly Gold is the only protection against fiat collapse. Ironically, printing fiat is actually against your constitution, Funny how an Englishman would know that and most Americans don’t ? Here in the UK the government was “on the ball ” and placed a VAT of 20% on silver purchases but not Gold. And still, even with this 20% VAT and the sale price often being another 10 or 15% above spot people are still buying and stacking. It was obviously meant as a deterent to stop people stacking. I mean the smart people.

Regarding ” The Bernanke” and Obama seeking guidance and permission. Why are you so surprised? Its nothing new, all Presidents have had to do it. Just wait until they have to seek permission from Yellen ?

You write ever so well Dire Badger obviously a smart dude but on occasion you miss the mark by a country mile.

And yes, I really do know. lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
oddsock November 20, 2013 at 05:55

TFH

Seeing as you mentioned Nazi Germany, I thought this might interest you?

Black-Clad Einsatzgruppen Confiscate Guns in California

Einsatzgruppen are special paramilitary task forces, the most notorious of which were the death squads deployed by Germany’s National Socialist regime. The contemporary American soyuz is lousy with einsatzgruppen, some of which — such as the Pima County, Arizona SWAT team, which murdered Jose Guerena in his Tucson home – behave in a fashion almost indistinguishable from their German antecedents.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/black-clad-einsatzgruppen-confiscate-guns-in-california/

Isn’t this against your Constitution ? Or does the Patriot Act and NDAA over rule the Constitution ?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4
Charles Martel November 20, 2013 at 06:23

Eincrou
I’m not sure what, “Getting wrapped around the axle,” means. Hopefully it is not a saying that belittles the practice of correcting clear errors.

Definition is loose but here it means a series of miscommunications.

You took me out to the woodshed for a mistake I did not make. I’m still mystified as to what “clear error” you think you’re correcting.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 20, 2013 at 06:46

Dire Badger
No offense, Oddsock, but if it hadn’t been for evil american free-market capitalism, your ‘kingdom’ and most of europe would strongly resemble latvia right now. America crashes economically, and there will be a bloodbath of unimaginable proportions worldwide as countries desperately scramble to find some way of replacing the lifeblood that has been streaming downhill to their banana republics and socialist oligarchies.

Exactly. The US is vilified by people who have benefited from US generosity for many decades. China in particular was dragged out of the wreckage of the Cultural Revolution by the US’s willingness to open its markets to cheap Chinese goods.

The Chinese do not reciprocate this generosity. One of my suppliers, visiting me in the US, admired my SUV. They asked me what it cost. I told them. They told me it would cost US$50,000 more in China due to import tariffs. The Chinese engage in economic protectionism while they chide us for buying their products.

As far as fiat currency goes, fiat does not really mean what Oddsock thinks it means. All currencies are now fiat. There is no convertible currency anywhere. And for reference in the last 20 years the UK has slipped from fifth largest to ninth largest manufacturer in the world. The US is now number two, China number one. Sic transit gloria mundi.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
oddsock November 20, 2013 at 07:48

As I said. American naivety is breathtaking, but also fascinating to see in almost real time on the Spearhead.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5
keyster November 20, 2013 at 09:39

Wow the right wing whack jobs are out in force today.
Next you will be telling me the US Dollar is not a fiat currency.
On you go boys. You fearless warriors. LMFAO

The Leftist ridicule tactic, when cornered beyond his intellectual capacity to transcend ideological bias.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 20, 2013 at 10:00

keyster November 20, 2013 at 09:39
Wow the right wing whack jobs are out in force today.
Next you will be telling me the US Dollar is not a fiat currency.
On you go boys. You fearless warriors. LMFAO

The Leftist ridicule tactic, when cornered beyond his intellectual capacity to transcend ideological bias.

Ha ha, keep trying mate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5
oddsock November 20, 2013 at 10:39

Keyster

Just some info on war.

Democrat Harry Truman sent troops to Korea, with Republican Dwight Eisenhower finishing the conflict.

Democrats John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Vietnam, and Republican Richard Nixon kept them there until they lost

Republican Gerald Ford sent troops to Angola.

Democrat Jimmy Carter sent troops to Iran (on a small mission that failed).

Republican Ronald Reagan sent troops to Grenada and Nicaragua.

Republican George Bush Sr. Sent troops to Iraq and Panama.

Democrat Bill Clinton sent troops to Haiti, Somalia, and the former Yugoslavia.

Republican George Bush Jr. Sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.

So, it’s about equal.

The Left and Right of politics think feck all for the lives of men, pretty standard. Same applies to the supporters of both parties. Nothing but Blue pill Misandry apologists.

MGTOW/MOO is the only sane choice.

P.s. Your Leftist cultural marxist paranoia is getting the better of you mate, lol

Quick, look, there’s one behind you LMFAO

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4
shiva1008 November 20, 2013 at 13:06

Why do you guys try to engage with this piece of shit loser? If you met this vile demon in person, he’d have shit all over his pants. You’d immediately know that he’s the sort of person who has a lot less to lose than you do, and to stay far away. In fact I already know that. He can’t go for one thread without attacking decent people. The guy is ecstatic that anyone f***ing paid attention to him, negatively or positively. There’s nothing to be gained by conversing with such demons. It only encourages them.

@ piece of shit loser:

You fucking ignorant scumbag. Some of the things you are saying are correct, but it’s so steeped in ignorance and hatred (of even people who ostensibly share your cause) that it negates the good of any point that you were trying to make.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
shiva1008 November 20, 2013 at 13:19

> The Leftist ridicule tactic, when cornered beyond his intellectual capacity to transcend ideological bias.

There are two ways of dealing with such people, and neither is ideal. One is in the mode of goodness, and one is in the mode of passion. Most of you guys take the high road and refute his points with logic. But unfortunately logic is lost on such people – which is why Roosh and his followers adopt the strategy of simply attacking feminists without engaging them in debate. This is the strategy of fighting fire with fire, which is the only thing that works on such people, but unfortunately is confounded by the fact that you have to lower yourself to their level of ignorance to engage in it.

The problem is that when people aren’t interested in truth and are covered in ignorance, the necessary conditions for having a proper dialectical discovery of truth are compromised. This characterizes about 90% of debate that takes place in the modern age.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 20, 2013 at 15:32

Stunning, feckin amazing.

You right-wing nut jobs through cognitive dissonance delusions of grandeur projection paranoia and strawmen arguments really believe you are attacking a ” Leftist”. Get a feckin grip of yourselves.

Allow me to edumacate you plant pots ( again)

Regarding war and political party

Democrat Harry Truman sent troops to Korea, and Republican Dwight Eisenhower finished the conflict.

Democrats John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson sent troops to Vietnam, and Republican Richard Nixon kept them their until the defeat.

Republican Gerald Ford sent troops to Angola.

Democrat Jimmy Carter sent troops to Iran (on a small mission that failed).

Republican Ronald Reagan sent troops to Grenada and Nicaragua.

Republican George Bush Sr. Sent troops to Iraq and Panama.

Democrat Bill Clinton sent troops to Haiti, Somalia, and the former Yugoslavia.

Republican George Bush Jr. sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.

So, it’s about equal. BOTH parties and their supporters think feck all about young men being killed and you bunch of numpties are arguing over who kills men or shits on men the least and want the chance to have your turn. WTF ?

Political parties and supporters of the LEFT and Right of politics are nothing more than blue pill Misandry apologists desperate for a return to the ignorance of manginaville and serfdom for all men. Ain’t gonna happen. Accept it. You are trying to un ring a Bell.

A short video that best describes you political types, Left and Right

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cy4-snbDcIM

MGTOW/MOO is the sane mans choice. The ONLY choice.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6
Dire Badger November 22, 2013 at 08:35

@Chuck

“Sic transit gloria mundi.”
(rofl) good one.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Dire Badger November 22, 2013 at 08:43

What I want to know is, how the hell oddsock keeps confusing ‘conservative’ or ‘right wing’ with ‘republican’?

republicans haven’t been conservative for nearly 60 years. At best, they are neocon leftists. There was a brief spike with Ronald Reagan, but JFK was more conservative than Dubya and Nix combined, and he was a dem.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 22, 2013 at 13:49

Dire Badger

Shhh. It has nothing to do with that.

MGTOW/MOO red pill types like myself always attract the ire of traditional type men still fighting against truth about their own position. They are just not used to anyone hitting back let alone forcing them to face it.

Plus, remember, as you said, I am only a Limey that “really doesn’t know” so what did you expect ?

P.s As an Un knowing Limey. I still think Yellen will be far worse than ” The Bernanke” regarding the funding of many policies. She won’t give her permission to the president so easily or even worse, will heavily favour female/feminist FED funded programmes perhaps by the Billion ?

Te audire no possum. Musa sapientum fixa est in aure

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel November 23, 2013 at 22:32

Oddsock
Shhh. It has nothing to do with that.

There’s something so nasty, so passive-aggressive about the way you write “Shhh.” Hard to describe exactly just how unmasculine it is.

You don’t have much self-awareness.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Dire Badger November 26, 2013 at 16:37

Oddsock-

I trhink your problem is that you conflate ‘freedom’ and ‘self determination’.

Freedom is a null concept. No creature that has ever existed has ever possessed true freedom, although those who attempt to obtain it can only do so at the expense of others, who have to shoulder their share of responsibility. Freedom for one equates to slavery for another, and always has. That is the core tenet of feminism, obtaining ‘freedom’… meaning complete lack of responsibility, forcing others to shoulder your burden. You seem to espouse men taking the same lack of responsibility and attempt to obtain a consequence-free existence as a sign of strength and health, when in reality it is nothing more than a pale imitation of feminism.

However, Self-determination has always been a male principle. The power to choose which burdens we take up is the only ‘freedom’ we truly need. Men obtain happiness through finding an occupation which pleases us and devoting ourselves to it. If you find yourself thinking longingly of vacations and ‘getting away’ that does not mean you seek freedom, it simply means you are in the wrong occupation. Men do not gain happiness through retreat, they find it in achievement.

“Male disposability’ as you refer to it is nothing more than a willingness to risk the ultimate failure, death, in order to create achievement. this is something that we, as men, support far more than women ever have, and it is not evil, or wrong, it is simply the way we are. In truth, Males are not, and have never been, truly disposable… We have simply possessed the knowledge that great rewards accompany great risks, and the willingness to take those risks.

I will admit that there is something wrong with allowing females to control the risk variables… They do not understand that men are only willing to become disposable IF the rewards are worth the risk. The basic assumption that men should take those risks without thought of reward is the flaw, not the risk itself. Women are unwilling to take that risk for themselves, so they are categorically unable to understand the nuances of accepting risk that men live with every day…. Nuances such as honor, faith, and justice that men have created in order to greater balance the risk versus the rewards that are an uncompromising core of our own nature.

The fault is not in females for acting according to their natures, it is in other males that willingly blind themselves, who ignore the nuances of risk versus reward that men have painstakingly created throughout the ages in order to encourage justice and fairness, that allow female nature to override their good sense.

Women are incapable of acting against their nature. That is a male trait. We must turn our gaze to the true villains of this piece… the men that allow women to control their decisions, that choose not to ignore the occasional angry lesbian rants, that honestly believe that a misfortune that occurs to a single woman is an injustice against all women.

Feminism only exists on the sufferance and forebearance of men. It would vanish overnight if it were not upheld, enforced, and embraced by men.

The truth of a leader is that he is willing to listen to the opinions of his followers, and then make his own, informed decisions. In our case, the leaders are listening to their female followers and allowing those followers to make their decisions for them. This is modern socialism in a nutshell. Men have ALWAYS listened to their women’s opinions, and this is not wrong (it has kept us out of nuclear war) but in the end, up until this century, we were also willing to make the hard decisions ourselves… and in the future, we will make the hard decisions again, since feminism is nothing more than a contranatural blip on the human radar. I just hope I am alive to watch it fall.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: