Category: Evil Capitalists

Dark times are a coming..

Today, on September 11, 2016, 15 years after the worst attack on US soil, while my thoughts are with those that lost their lives and those that loved their loved ones, both on that day and in the struggle after, I want to actually deal with something I see coming that bears ill for all of us: the PC movement’s attack on freedom in general, and internet freedom in particular. Now I am sure most good people will say that there should be nothing wrong with being polite and respectful to others, especially when hiding behind the anonymity provided by the internet, and that anyone unable to do so or resisting that effort must be bad or have ill intent, but whenever I hear the PC movement run their mouths about the ills of a free internet (or opposition of the PC movement in general) all I hear or see is exactly this: those in power will silence the opposition and their political enemies.

The world is heading towards dark times as Western values are being abandoned by the most corrupt and least capable political class ever (both oh, do they think they are awesome shit). The political elite calls the masses stupid or evil because they will not let the globalists do what they want. Especially since what the globalists are doing is horrible for the common people. Oh sure, they tell us that they are doing this to help the less well off and fight injustice, but these people give absolute proof to the saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Don’t take my words for this. Look at what the world looks like after 8 years of the people that tell us anyone that doesn’t share their social and ideological values and ideas of social justice being provided by them, actually is today. In short, things are worse, and it is by design. More instability, the rich got more powerful and richer – and it is no coincidence ,that the biggest promoters of social justice also are the ones that have profited the most from the misery it has caused – and the rest of us are robbed of more of our freedoms and wealth.

Unlike the old fascists and communists that actually killed of their =political enemies, the new crop of collectivists now content themselves with destroying the lives and well being of those that dare stand up against the disservice they are doing us all. I leave you with one of the most telling quotes I have ever read:

“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

This is known as “bad luck.”

― Robert A. Heinlein

That was the plan from the start

For those that don’t get it, the people that foisted the Obamacare monstrosity on us see this as a feature, not a problem:

When Aetna Inc. announced that it would withdraw from three-quarters of the states where it offers Affordable Care Act exchange plans, the move wasn’t entirely unexpected: The company had signaled its woes early this month.

But the decision by one of the nation’s largest health insurers AET, -0.20% to withdraw from 11 of 15 state exchanges follows similar moves by UnitedHealth Group Inc. UNH, -0.38%, the largest U.S. health insurer, and Humana Inc. HUM, +0.00% , another large health insurer.

The string of bad news marks a tidal shift for the ACA. Where insurers, including Aetna, had once planned on exchange expansions next year, many are instead curtailing their coverage.

Aetna’s pared-down 2017 exchange participation “raises further questions about the long-term viability of the ACA marketplaces,” said Susquehanna analyst Chris Rigg.

Aetna explained the decision as a way to “limit our financial exposure moving forward,” after pretax losses of $200 million in the second quarter and losses totaling $430 million on individual products since January 2014. The company did not specify what portion of the losses was attributable to individual public plan offerings.

The company criticized the ACA’s “inadequate” risk-adjustment mechanism, which is meant to limit insurers’ losses as they start covering sicker individuals. It’s a common criticism from health insurers, which have long said that the risk-pool program isn’t working the way it’s supposed to, though others say big insurance companies should instead change their model to keep costs down.

You know what? Even though I have investments in Aetna funds, I can’t say I feel sorry for them. They were stupid enough to buy the lies the crooked democrats told them, and this is on them. There is no way to make a system that allows people to not join and pay until they have a serious condition – and the penalty never comes to the level of pain one faces buying this shit because of the over regulation of this product – work financially. Why the fuck would someone young not opt for the penalty and only sign up whenever the shit hits the fan later in life, huh? And Aetna should have remembered this, but they bought the nonsense and figured they would somehow make it work. Idiot the lot of them.

Anyway, the fact of the matter is that all this hand wringing, now that Obamacare is doing exactly what those of us had pointed out it was designed to do when we saw it being put together, is bullshit. Obamacare was designed from the start to destroy the American healthcare system. All that talk about cost reduction or containment, helping people out, and especially making things better while allowing those of us that were happy to keep what we had, was just that: talk. The plan the left has been running with is single payer healthcare controlled by an all powerful government from the start, and this monstrosity was put together to facilitate that while fucking over the people that would otherwise never accept the single payer idea until the system had fallen apart.

I call bullshit, but it has been made up shit for going on 7 years now

Surprisingly, job reports are out, drastically bucking the trend of the last few months in a major way. This seems to be a trend whenever elections are about to happen and the democrats are worried about the economic numbers, and, as I suspected, it happens because the numbers are rigged.

I could say “I told you so” but even that feels hollow after the destruction wrought by these idiots

Frankly, I am left wondering if the people that write articles like this one actually are this dense and don’t get that what Obama promised was exactly what he delivered on. Only a fucking idiot fell for that “Hope and Change” shit, and those of us that pointed out what we would get was many people hoping they would get to keep some change – an expression of getting fleeced/robbed by the vote buying crooks that due to their lack of ability to produce anything of value make a living from ripping those that do off – from these crooks, are only surprised that the idiots that fell for it still don’t realize why it was obvious to us that this is exactly how things would play out. We got an unvetted, inept, and idiotic narcissist marxist islamist that talked a mean talk but whose only track record was “community organizing” as our POTUS because the assholes in the media that are bought and paid for by the DNC managed to bamboozle enough mental lightweights to tip the voting in favor of the party of “Free shit”.

The left sold Obama as the second coming. After 8 years of Boosh and all that pent up anger people were convinced they needed a change. That anger existed primarily because Boosh not only managed to prevent Al Gore from using an army of lawyers and every dirty trick in the book to steal the 2000 election, but then ended up dealing with the War on Terror, which everyone knew would have just been politicized by the left to push more stupid shit. Just look at how Bill Clinton whined that it happened under Boosh and not him, depriving him of that political opportunity to grand stand, or how Obama has handled the aftermath of the war fought by Boosh. In hindsight, Iraq having been a bad miscalculation, with the expensive and bloody victory pissed away by the next administration, along with Afghanistan which was the only moral war unit Obama was in charge when only the wars started by Obama would be moral, one can say we should have avoided that conflict. But the truth is that the left wanted to make sure America lost for daring to fight back instead of accepting the role of the bad perp the left believes it is, and they did everything they could to made that happen. Boosh was called a warmongering madman, and the usual credentialed elitist scumbags all pretended the reason everything was fucked up was because he actually decided to make a weak stand to a murderous ideology hell bent on enslaving the globe and to a plethora of leftist thugs across the globe.

In marched Obama, whom his PR team told us would not only fix everything and make America loved again, but stop the rising of the oceans, and usher in peace on earth. Now, 8 years later the United States, and the world in general, are all in absolute disarray. Things – across the board – are far worse. Where to start? The list of items to back up this claim is just so long, with so many egregious and downright horrendous failures and abuses, that it boggles the mind. The one thing I can say is that even I couldn’t imagine these people would be this inept and destructive as they have proven to be, showing this much disdain for the American people they are supposed to be representing, while tearing everything down, leaving chaos and pain in their wake.Be it economic policy, foreign policy, or simple things as upholding the law, they not only failed, and failed bad, but did so in ways that set new standards for how low things could go. Basically we had a bunch of amateur checker players that bought into the delusion spread by the media that they were capable geniuses trying to outsmart others that compared to them would have to be ranked as chess champions. And the constant lying, man. Bear with me.

The islamists which had been taking an ass whooping under simpleminded Boosh, despite attempts from the left to aid and abet the enemy during the Boosh years, are now not only spreading their cause and winning, but Obama and his people can’t even admit that even if we don’t want to be at war witht hem, they sure as hell are at war with us. I don’t have to elaborate. Look at the news. Not a week goes by without some scumbag murdering people in the name of that evil cult. This cancer has only gotten stronger. And taken as a whole, I admit that the only strategy I see from this administration is actions that helped make that the case. Obama has started more wars, excuse me, kinetic actions, not one of them resulting in anything but abysmal failure for us and an escalation of the problems, but we keep getting told by idiots that Boosh was the warmongering asshole. You do remember Libya and Syria, right? Hillary and her buddies sure do. They made big money, left a US ambassador out there to be murdered – an act of war – because they were worried about an election, then lied about what happened to advance an agenda. I would not be surprised to find out ISIS was a child of the Obama admin that basically turned on its master.

And the failures don’t stop with the disastrous handling of the war that the islamist have brought to the crumbling western world. From Russia – remember the rest button from Staples Hillary used as a prop to fix thingsto China, to Europe, our enemies all are in a better position to screw us over, while our allies all have reason to be weary of the US because of backstabbery on a Machiavellian level perpetrated by this administration. They managed to be outplayed by Putin and countless others from multiple players in China to Iran, always focusing on the political ramifications at the voting booth instead of the political ramification on the global scale. Iran will build a nuke and likely start a nuclear war in the Middle East in the next decade, and I bet the left blames the next president for that – especially if it is not a democrat – while North Korea has continued to be more and more aggressive (yes, Boosh dropped the ball there). And man did the Obama admin set a new record for using the agents of government against political enemies both at home and abroad. For example, this administration used tax payer money to pursue a personal vendetta against Nethanyahu whom they wanted to fuck over because he called them on their ineptitude and lies, not just about Iran, but in general. At home they fucked over anyone that dared point out they were basically going to let Iran build a nuke. And there are countless other stories like that, many not even told by a media that went into overdrive playing damage control for these buffoons. Yet, we still have to hear that Boosh was the inept politician and cowboy, while I just saw a misleading commercial about how awesome Hillary was as the SEC-STATE of the most inept administration in my lifetime was, despite the reality, and that we should now make her president!

Domestically this administration set new records for abuses and down right criminal activity. Nixon is spinning in his grave because the scumbags in this administration actually used every agency of the government, from the IRS, to the DOJ, to the EPA, and so on, to target enemies of the Obama administration. And they got away with it because of a complicit media populated by DNC operatives with bylines. Heck, the FBI just let Hilary walk on a slam dunk case that would have been a one-and-done under the very espionage act that the Obama administration used more than all previous administrations combined, to punish anyone that dared to whistle blow on the breadth and dept of criminality in what Americans were promised would be the most ethical and transparent administration evah! (Another bullshit slogan that turned out to be the exact opposite of the lies).

Our economy is in shambles. After these crooks ripped us of to the tune of trillions, be it through their shovel-ready prokulous projects or the money pissed away buying votes from those that vote for a living, all while cock-blocking every and all real job creating opportunities. The rich have gotten richer than ever, the pool of people sucking at the government’s teats has set new records, we now have the lowest percentage of worker participation since the thirties, if not in the history of the country, the middle class has been ass raped, our healthcare system is in disarray and unraveling after Obamacare finally got to do its thing and Obama threatens to veto those that want to stop the train wreck, the economic future looks bleak, and their solution is to make life worse for us so their rich buddies that stand to make a ton of money from these schemes and scams or hippies that worship Gaia, can all signal their social justice virtuousness. And Obama’s plan for the future, that fundamental change to America he promised, comes in the form of an invasion from the rejects of South America.

I can go on and on, but you get my drift. Those of us that know better know how bad things are and why. Those that don’t want to admit they bet on the wrong horse or are so ideologically blinded that nothing will convince them otherwise, will find fault with me pointing their hypocrisy out. The fact is that Obama has managed to make Carter look like a decent president, and until Obama, Carter was hands down the worst president of my lifetime. Obama’s PR team and his narcissistic nature wrote a lot of checks that he simply couldn’t cash. These people have no problem telling lies and abusing power. Remember that when you wonder how someone like Trump could end up the presidential candidate opposing the only other person in politics that I think is even more inept, corrupt, and dangerous than Obama.

Obamacare providers got screwed, and are too big to fail..

So at the time when the collectivists held all 3 branches of our government , and were telling us they had to pass Obamacare for us to see what it was about, many of us, when asked, pointed out that the vilified insurance industry went along with this nonsense because they bought the campaign of lies that these crooks were selling. Somehow those that had to know better accepted the contention that Obamacare would actually result in cost reductions, and thus by extension, bigger profits for them. Who cares if it was blatantly obvious that what this democrat shit sandwich would really do was incentivize primarily the people most likely to drive costs through the roof, while those that didn’t need it, despite the penalties, would stay away? well the morons in the health insurance industry should have cared, but they, like so many others, were basically fooled by a false narrative.

As anyone that understood human nature could point out, in a country where medical professionals can’t turn away anyone that needs urgent care, why would someone very unlikely to need anything but urgent care, buy damned health insurance? And why would they expect that someone that was previously unable to get insurance due to something that was going to cost a fortune not sign up for free shit? Fast forward 6 years. Obamacare now has clearly shown us that nothing that was promised would actually come to pass, and that we all would pay more for crappier service. The health insurance industry has been forced to jack rates continuously to cover their massive shortfalls, and now, we have these companies looking for a tax payer subsidy to cover the ass rape they have experienced thanks to a bad law:

Insurers helped cheerlead the creation of Obamacare, with plenty of encouragement – and pressure – from Democrats and the Obama administration. As long as the Affordable Care Act included an individual mandate that forced Americans to buy its product, insurers offered political cover for the government takeover of the individual-plan marketplaces. With the prospect of tens of millions of new customers forced into the market for comprehensive health-insurance plans, whether they needed that coverage or not, underwriters saw potential for a massive windfall of profits.

Six years later, those dreams have failed to materialize. Now some insurers want taxpayers to provide them the profits to which they feel entitled — not through superior products and services, but through lawsuits.

Earlier this month, Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina joined a growing list of insurers suing the Department of Health and Human Services for more subsidies from the risk-corridor program. Congress set up the program to indemnify insurers who took losses in the first three years of Obamacare with funds generated from taxes on “excess profits” from some insurers. The point of the program was to allow insurers to use the first few years to grasp the utilization cycle and to scale premiums accordingly.

As with most of the ACA’s plans, this soon went awry. Utilization rates went off the charts, in large part because younger and healthier consumers balked at buying comprehensive coverage with deductibles so high as to guarantee that they would see no benefit from them. The predicted large windfall from “excess profit” taxes never materialized, but the losses requiring indemnification went far beyond expectations.

In response, HHS started shifting funds appropriated by Congress to the risk-corridor program, which would have resulted in an almost-unlimited bailout of the insurers. Senator Marco Rubio led a fight in Congress to bar use of any appropriated funds for risk-corridor subsidies, which the White House was forced to accept as part of a budget deal. As a result, HHS can only divvy up the revenues from taxes received through the ACA, and that leaves insurers holding the bag.

They now are suing HHS to recoup the promised subsidies, but HHS has its hands tied, and courts are highly unlikely to have authority to force Congress to appropriate more funds. In fact, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services formally responded by telling insurers that they have no requirement to offer payment until the fall of 2017, at the end of the risk-corridor program.

I say fuck them both. HHS is a criminal entity as far as I am concerned, far worse than anything else out there in the real world. But these insurance companies should feel the pain. After all, they were stupid enough to buy into another massive campaign of lies from the marxists and their promises to insulate these companies if the not only went along but cheerlead for the marxists, from the consequences of bad economic policy that then also ignored human nature (what else that caused us all some huge pain recently does this sound exactly like, huh?). Wishful thinking is not enough, as this clearly points out:

That response highlights the existential issue for both insurers and Obamacare. The volatility and risk was supposed to have receded by now. After three full years of utilization and risk-pool management, ACA advocates insisted that the markets would stabilize, and premiums would come under control. Instead, premiums look set for another round of big hikes for the fourth year of the program.

Get used to this people. There are no free lunches. Someone pays, and while the collectivists, but especially one of the politicians, would like you to be dumb enough to believe their promise it will be someone else, the fact is that you will always pay in one form or another, unless you are one of them, that is. Greedy assholes in the insurance industries bought the bullshit the left sold when they should have known better, and now they are up the creek without a paddle and looking for someone else to pay. Hence the following news:

Consumers seeking to comply with the individual mandate will see premiums increase on some plans from large insurers by as much as 30 percent in Oregon, 32 percent in New Mexico, 38 percent in Pennsylvania, and 65 percent in Georgia.

Yup, we will all pay. Perverse incentives will produce perverse results, but hey, collectivists will tell you the right people pushing the right way will finally make that happen.

What detail was missing from this story?

The LA Times ran a story titled “Looting and unrest continue roiling Venezuela as shortages persist and protesters demand food, where it provided details like this:

Venezuela, where anger over food shortages is still mounting, continued to be roiled this week by angry protests and break-ins of grocery stores and businesses that have left five dead, at least 30 injured and 200 arrested, according to various news reports.

The latest fatality came from the southwest city of Merida, where 17-year-old Jean Paul Omana died Wednesday after being shot Tuesday during a disturbance amid looting.

Widespread violence has been reported there, as well as an attack by protesters on the headquarters of President Nicolas Maduro’s United Socialist Party of Venezuela, or PSUV.

As consumers grow increasingly frustrated with ongoing food scarcities and lengthening lines outside stores, protests are turning more violent. A Social media reported protests on Wednesday in the Los Teques, Los Altos Mirandinos and Santa Teresa del Tuy suburbs of Caracas, the capital.

A common thread among protesters demanding the government provide food is that they are suffering from hunger and in some cases heat exposure from spending hours in line. Mired in economic crisis, Venezuela must import the bulk of its food items, but supplies have run short because of the government’s cash shortage, triggered by falling oil prices.

So, we are told that there are food shortages, caused because the government has to import most things in Venezuela these days, and they are unable to do this because of falling oil prices! Note what’s missing in all this detail? How about explaining why Venezuela, a country that once was a leading manufacturer in South America now ends up having to import practically everything, and why the government has to do this, and not the economy as a common course? I know, it’s obvious to those of us that know what evil scourge has been destroying Venezuela, but the usual idiots that lap up the left’s bullshit, are not going to connect the dots without someone telling them what the problem is.

And the problem is not that the US is fomenting an imperialist revolution and interfering with the affairs of state in Venezuela, after all, the Obama administration has gone out of its way to coddle tyrannical leftists and murderers all over the globe, but the very fact that Venezuela is now reaping the rewards of collectivism running its course. Things are now getting to the point where the government has to deploy troops to quell the unrest. I am sure Maduro and Chavez’s daughter don’t have these problems. After all, unlike under the evil capitalist system where the rich have power, in a collectivist system, <a href=”http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3640941/Super-rich-quaff-champagne-Venezuela-country-club-middle-classes-scavenge-food-rubbish-dumps-DOGS-starving.html” target={_new”>only those with power are going to be rich or have the access to what being rich buys you.

And this is the way Obama’s promise to fundamentally transform America will also play out: have no doubt about it. Collectivism is an evil failure. An excuse used by people that will prey on the basest and vilest of man’s instincts – greed and envy – to justify theft. Unfortunately for the dupes that go along, the masters soon realize the pie is limited and will never grown under the system they espouse, so they end up stealing most of it, leaving the people all in abject misery.

This crap has played itself out over and over, with the results always being the same: catastrophe. In most places the decent into hell has been swift and the results immediately apparent. Because of the immense wealth in the western world, wealth created by the very system the collectivists wish to destroy, the western nations that started down the collectivist road are taking longer getting here, but they will get there. The current crop of credentialed elites are so inept that they can’t help but break it all.

Pro-collectivist media can’t avoid making exuses

It came as no surprise to me that after a decade plus of favorable pro-collectivist media coverage of shit-holes that took hard left turns we found out Venezuela was following in the footsteps of illustrious collectivist success stories like Cuba, North Korea, or Zimbabwe. What is less known is that the other South American country that had also taken a hard left turn and was touted as a great success story, Brazil, is also heading in the same direction now that blatant corruption and mismanagement practices have come to the world’s attention.

As is always the case with progressive governments, the pretense that the shit they do is to help the less fortunate is just that: pretense. What they are really doing is creating a system that will allow the political aristocracy and those few lucky enough to be connected to them, to rob the people blind. The new masters tend to be worse than the old ones, and while they can temporarily hide the rot, eventually economic and human nature reality asserts itself. Big and powerful government, especially one that has successfully disarmed the masses and then pretends their wealth transfer schemes are to help the less fortunate, sooner than later results in abused people. Yeah, I know that this piece specifically was written about the Arab world, but the article does speak of other corruption failures in general. The problem with people that advocate for collectivism is the fact that they seem to miss that corruption is the norm, and having little or none of it, is actually an outlier. And the bigger an autocratic government that abrogates the duty of creating economic justice becomes, both in terms of actual size and the amount of money it now forces through its hands, the more corruption you will get.

For example, take China, which is still run by an authoritarian government that decided not to stick to the letter of marxist dogma. While the Wiki article tries its best to show how fucked up China is because of this corruption, it, because of the bias of the Wiki organization in general, does a lot to apologize and conceal that the problem there is the authoritarian and collectivist system that creates the framework that allows this corruption. When your government is all powerful and has its hands in everything, you can bet it will result in abuse and corruption by the very elite put in charge. Pick your country, check out how authoritative and big their government is, then look at how much wealth redistribution power said government has, and you will find corruption.

But back to what I wanted to point out: AP writing an article that tries hard to not tie the corruption now evident to the ideology or failures in Brazil. From the article:

Brazil’s Senate voted on Thursday to put leftist President Dilma Rousseff on trial in a historic decision brought on by a deep recession and a corruption scandal that will now confront her successor, Vice President Michel Temer.

With Rousseff to be suspended during the Senate trial for allegedly breaking budget rules, the centrist Temer will take the helm of a country that again finds itself mired in political and economic volatility after a recent decade of prosperity.

The 55-22 vote ends more than 13 years of rule by the left-wing Workers Party, which rose from Brazil’s labor movement and helped pull millions of people out of poverty before seeing many of its leaders tainted by corruption investigations.

My interpretation of this nonsense is that it almost sounds like AP is trying hard to tell readers we should give the corrupt officials a pass because they meant well. After all, they helped the poor people! I constantly see MSM stories saying how well off people in Brazil have it because of the wealth redistribution schemes of the leftists, but when I look the stuff that sticks with me is the rampant crime, the fact that economic promises are not materializing, and how despite the claims that the poor are better off, I see very few things that really show that to be the case. Especially when you look at the future. That’s not just me however, as this verya rticle points out:

In addition to the gaping deficit, equal to more than 10 percent of its annual economic output, Brazil is suffering from rising unemployment, plummeting investment and a projected economic contraction of more than 3 percent this year.

Basically the Brazilian success story was to borrow and print money, over spend, and put polities in practice that drastically hamper economic growth and result in rampant unemployment. Shit they are even looking at an economic contraction. Does this not sound kind of like the Obama economic plan to spend us out of a recession and even into prosperity? Don’t worry though, because the PA tells us people are on top of the crisis;

“Only major reforms can keep Brazil from moving from crisis to crisis,” says Eduardo Giannetti da Fonseca, an economist and author in São Paulo who has written extensively about the country’s socioeconomic problems.

While I am not very familiar with this individual, the fact that he is the one AP chose to quote tells me this guy is very likely to be the Brazilian Paul Krugman, whose usual retort when confronted with the failures of Keynesian wealth transfer schemes, advises that the the problem was not the fact that borrowing/printing more money/spending money you don’t have can’t buy your prosperity, but that government didn’t borrow/print/spend enough money. This shit doesn’t work. It never has, and never will, but the collectivist driven media still wants you to have faith in this crap. This AP article sure goes a long way to try and avoid making the point that these leftist SJW wealth redistribution policies failed Brazil despite the temporary bump they produced obvious.

Another tidbit from the article that I found interesting was the following:

Brazilian markets have for weeks rallied as investors welcomed the likely dismissal of a president they believe crippled the economy, but were largely unchanged on Wednesday.

Note that the AP avoids saying why investors felt Rousseff crippled the economy. One could come away thinking the only problem was the endemic corruption, but the fact is that this was just one of the symptoms of the real problem: the Keynesian economic practices leftists resort to in times of trouble to hide the problems caused by their wealth transfer schemes. Brazil is on the same path as Venezuela right now, only it might be slower to reach the end state because they didn’t choose to have a dictator hold all the power like the Venezuelan’s did. This shit don’t work people.

That idiotic pay gap thingy..

Want to see an article that should have stopped after the third paragraph? Well, here is a “Science Daily” article titled Young women in STEM fields earn up to one-third less than men which says exactly the opposite of the title’s claim. From the article:

One year after they graduate, women with Ph.D.s in science and engineering fields earn 31 percent less than do men, according to a new study using previously unavailable data.

The pay gap dropped to 11 percent when researchers took into account that women tended to graduate with degrees in fields that generally pay less than fields in which men got their degrees.

The rest of the pay gap disappeared when the researchers controlled for whether women were married and had children.

Seriously, you should have ended the article right here and the title correct title would have been that gender pay gap, at least according to this study, is a myth. But of course, since there is no money to be gotten by finding that this myth the SJW types in government fork over oodles of money for is bunk, they decide to contradict their own findings with politically motivated clap-trap.

“There’s a dramatic difference in how much early career men and women in the sciences are paid,” said Bruce Weinberg, co-author of the study and professor of economics at The Ohio State University.

“We can get a sense of some of the reasons behind the pay gap, but our study can’t speak to whether any of the gap is due to discrimination. Our results do suggest some lack of family-friendliness for women in these careers.”

WTF? Your first three paragraphs make it plenty clear that when you try to do an apple to apple comparison and control for type of degree and for choices related to family life, that there is no gap. It is fairly obvious to anyone that applies statistical methodology to any analysis of these claims that when you account for the types of careers women favor or life choices they make, that the entire gap argument vanishes. So then, why are we still getting a long winded article if it is obvious there really isn’t any nefarious reasons for this difference? Well here it is:

The importance of helpful family policies is supported by the fact that single and childless women tended to have less of a pay gap than those who were married and those who had children. About equal percentages of men and women were married or partnered. And more men than women in the study (24 versus 19 percent) had children. But it was the married women with children who saw the lower pay.

“Our results show a larger child-gap in salary among women Ph.D.s than among men,” Weinberg said.

Reading between the lines it is obvious that the study’s authors seem to feel that making the choice to focus on family and children shouldn’t impact women’s earning potential. Sure you can think this is quite noble since family units, and especially the children, are so important, but to me it is ludicrous. Lets start out by noting that these crusaders are currently only asking that employers pay women for less productivity than men. I wonder if they would demand the same for men that decide to stay at home and be the one dealing with the children. Somehow I don’t believe that is the priority of these SJW types, but it could well be that the end goal isn’t to make employers just pay more for less productive women, but to pay more for less productive people in general. The laws of economics and human nature be damned.

Look, like I told the crazy SJW type from the HR department of my company a few weeks ago during her rant about how unfair it was that the guys in the IT department made so much more money than she did, the reason is in the details. While she felt here women’s studies major and political history (WTF is this even) minor at an expensive school should earn her the same as the guys that got real engineering or computer science degrees at whatever institutions, employers who pay for the work obviously felt it was not worth the same. Similarly, if she took time of to spend it with her cats while these guys were totally career oriented, it wouldn’t be fair for either the employer or the guys that she ended up being paid more simply because of her plumbing.

Of course, she really didn’t like that reality and got all huffy at me and even insinuated I needed some PC reeducation, at which point I simply told her that I had no problem saying what I just said to her, even though she was in HR, because the value of the work I did was so important to my employer that I doubted they would make a fuss about it. After all, if they did, I could pack up and head somewhere else, because my particular skills, especially when combined with my work ethics and track record of producing results, were in very high demand.

My advice to people that feel they are not getting compensated enough was always to see how valuable the employer really felt about what they did and how quickly they could find somewhere else to work. In most cases, when you add value, they will pay you for that value. if not, someone else will. The gap comes when your productivity factors in, both because of your learned skills (degree and work experience) and the effort they get from you (are you there and working hard, or are you in need of taking time off too often).

This shit ain’t that complicated man. Of course, you factor in the government meddling, and everything goes out the window…

Study makes the wrong conclusion.

I was quite baffled when I saw the title for a study posted on science daily that reported that “Skepticism about climate change may be linked to concerns about economy” because while I am certain that in good economic times people are less resistant to government fleecing, I still have a hard time believing people would buy the AGW lies. from the article I see the following declaration:

Americans may be more likely to accept the scientific evidence of human-caused climate change and its potentially devastating effects if they believe the economy is strong and stable, according to new research published by the American Psychological Association.

I could not fathom any study that would produce these results, and immediately suspected some kind of bullshit. My first inclination was that they very likely had loaded questions designed to illicit responses that would allow them to make this ludicrous claim. After all, there is a historical precedent that most people are willing to tolerate a heavier hand from Uncle Sam, the one going straight into their pockets where they keep their money, when their own income and potential for income looks good. I can see a study rigged to use that mechanism to make this idiotic claim that resistance to this nonsense and the political agenda is economic, but I wanted details, so I decided to take a closer look at the article, and the answer was right there. This was a bunch of bullshit wrapped in pretty paper to sell another lie. let’s start with this:

In an experiment conducted online, 187 Americans ranging from 18 to 70 years old watched a newscast with skeptical commentary about a NASA documentary on climate change. Participants who more enthusiastically supported the capitalist system were more dubious about climate change, and they misremembered facts from the newscast about the severity of climate change. Conversely, participants who were more critical of the capitalist system and more interested in social change recalled the information about climate change as being even more severe than the facts that were presented.

So first off, let me point out that the “mischaracterization” made by this idiot author about how supporters of the capitalist system were more likely to “misremember facts” or “not grasp the severity of the problem”, was nothing but his biased attempt to discredit people that pointed out what they were shown was a pile of bullshit. The likely scenario is that these people, less ruled by fucking feelings, pointed out that this cult is based on a well orchestrated campaign of falsehoods, flawed models and systems, manipulation of the facts and data to create a desired results, a peer review circle jerk, the demonization of anyone not willing to let them get away with this shit, and that not a single one of the horribly exaggerated effects have come to pass, isn’t “misremembering” or “not seeing the gravity of the situation”, but pointing out why this thing is a scam. Cultists don’t like that.

I also am not surprised people that saw the inherent value of the capitalist system were less prone to bullshit than their collectivist counterparts, because it has always been obvious to me that collectivists tend to be ruled by emotion and emotional appeal. Show a bunch of collectivist twits a fictional piece like Al Gore’s idiotic movie, hilariously titled “An inconvenient truth” of all things, that proposes draconian collectivism to deal with the coming apocalypse, and one shouldn’t be surprised these twits gobble up that shit sandwich either.

Anyway, back to the point here. The study, as practically every one of these pro AGW propaganda pieces tends to do, made a totally wrong conclusion from what they saw. The conclusion they should have made was that people inclined to believe the unwashed masses have a right to use government force to steal from the productive to benefit themselves are far more likely to buy a pack of lies when it pushes their agenda, while those that don’t buy theft by government and totalitarianism as good, are far less likely to fall for that bullshit.

Next we get the following doozy:

In another experiment, with 57 college students, participants were divided into two groups: One read a statement that the federal government had very broad power to influence the economy and the availability of jobs; the other, a statement that the government’s power was limited. The participants then read a news article that recounted some errors that were inadvertently included in a scientific report on climate change. Participants who thought the economy had a strong influence on their lives were more skeptical about climate change and were less likely to remember facts from the news article about the severity of climate change.

In a third experiment, with 203 college students, one group listened to a podcast that reported the U.S. economy had recovered from the recession, another group heard the recession was continuing, and a control group didn’t hear any podcast. All of the participants then watched a NASA documentary about scientific evidence of climate change before completing a survey about their support for the current U.S. economic system. Participants who more strongly endorsed the legitimacy of the economic system were more likely to believe in the severity of climate change only when they thought the economy was strong and stable.

Let me start by pointing out that when you pick a bunch of college students that are not in engineering, math, physics, chemistry, medicine, accounting, or something that actually involves not just regurgitating bullshit liberal dogma, for their opinion on things scientific, you shouldn’t be surprised to see the stupidity the experimenters did. I am sorry, but “Studies” or “Poli Sci” majors are neither hard science types nor – yes it is my opinion – really learning anything of value outside an artificial world created by the grand collectivist machine. They are a plague on the universe. I should have probably at the point of the realization how unscientific this scientifc study was, just moved on to something less brain damaging than this idiocy, but I couldn’t pass the opportunity to showcase what we are dealing with here.

In the first example, where they used some college students that were likely some 7 year geniuses of the humanities fields, we should begin with the fact that nobody with any common sense would buy the idiocy that government, by its very nature, has any form of control on economic activity, other than to impede, degrade, or piss away tons of tax payer dollars on it. But it remains baffling to me that this experiment led to the conclusion that good economic metrics influence people to dismiss the AGW bullshit. Again, I see that the correlation here isn’t faith in good economic times over AGW dystopia as much as how much more inclined someone was to accept the AGW nonsense as gospel if they lacked a solid grasp of economics and the impact of government on that activity.

If anything, the third experiment shows that the AGW cult is bull. Believers are far more likely to endorse the agenda while they felt they had little to lose and a lot to gain from the wealth transfer agenda behind the AGW movement. But as happens in real life, as soon as things got good for them, they were far likely to want that wealth transfer. Seriously, if you take a look at the supporters of Bernie Sanders and then at the supporters of Donald Trump, the big difference is the fact that the Sanders camp is comprised of people that are in deep debt and are looking for someone to bail them out (lots of jobless humanities students with big loan debt), while the other camp lacks that crowd.

These experiments should have concluded that collectivist are far more likely to like collectivist agendas when they gain from them, and much less likely to do anything but pay lip service to them when they find out they will foot the bill. Also that non-collectivists will focus on the reality of economics and human nature over some apocalyptic fantasies collectivists hope will convince people to let them fuck us all over.