Welfare Parasites Can Support More Children than Billionaires: Big pink elephants 1 - How Governments Plan to Pimp Out Your Daughters and Enslave Your Sons to Voters.

Home > Other > Welfare Parasites Can Support More Children than Billionaires: Big pink elephants 1 - How Governments Plan to Pimp Out Your Daughters and Enslave Your Sons to Voters. > Page 8
Welfare Parasites Can Support More Children than Billionaires: Big pink elephants 1 - How Governments Plan to Pimp Out Your Daughters and Enslave Your Sons to Voters. Page 8

by Donnell Pablo

have.

  The fact that rich people have fewer children than poor people have A LOT to do with welfare and child support. Without welfare, the poor won't have grandchildren. Those smart enough will not have children at all till they're rich. Poverty will be gone, unless keep subsidized by government.

  Without huge child support payment set up by the state rather than by the woman being impregnated, cost of producing children will drop among rich males and the rich will produce more children.

  Feminazis Disempower Hot Babes

  Feminazis always claim they empower women. They’re right. They do empower women, namely the ugly ones. They empower themselves like everyone else.

  What is power? Simple. Power is capability to get what you want. Powerful people get what they want. What they want matter. The more powerful you are, the more your consent matter.

  What do feminazi said?

  Anything less would leave a huge loophole for traffickers, she says. “The consent of the victim should be irrelevant.”' - https://departments.bloomu.edu/crimjust/pages/articles/sex_tourism.htm

  What feminazis effectively said is that consent of hot babes do not matter.

  This is what you would do when someone say something is good for you.

  Does it take power from my hand?

  Actually this is how most business people think. Does it take money from my hand? If so good, if not bad. Well, power, namely capability to get what you want, is the real money.

  Easy?

  Women Do Not Care How Much You Love Them, so Don’t Bother

  What I mean by women here means many women. Obviously different women behave differently. There are 3 billions + women in the world. Most of us will aim for at most 20. So if it’s accurate for 20 women that would be good enough. My estimate is, it’s accurate for 2.9 out of 3, but I may be off a little bit.

  What I mean by women here are obviously pretty women. The pretty are the only kind of women whose opinion matter under free market.

  What I mean by want here are practical want.

  For example, if we go to the market buying a meat, the meat seller wants many things. The meat seller wants vacation, a wife, children, a house, a slave (that means you), a government as slave managers, and everything else typical humans want.

  However, we do not know nor do we ever need to know what other things meat sellers want. All we care is we know what do we need to offer the meat seller to get meat from him. That means money. So, if someone goes to the market and tell his kids, “VB, you want something from this guy, what does he wants?” The answer is simple: money.

  The same way, when I said what women want, I mean what we outcome we should offer them so we get laid, fertilize her eggs, and populate her womb with our children.

  I couldn’t remember how much effort I spent when I were young to show a girl I like how much I love her.

  She doesn’t care and went with another high school boy with expensive cars instead.

  Hot girls, know their market value. They simply don’t care.

  “I guess I was just letting my hair down and a little curious. It was more about quantity over quality, though - I wasn’t really interested in things like love and romance, I just wanted to try it with a lot of guys. So when I was spotted by a scout, I kind of entered the industry with that same curious, playful feeling. I don’t think I ever felt reluctant about it all - I don’t really remember! Ha ha!” - https://www.japantoday.com/category/entertainment/view/yumi-kazama-15-years-in-the-japanese-adult-video-industry-and-still-going-strong#sthash.xNeg7kPi.dpuf

  That’s straight from a beautiful girl mouth.

  Another telltale sign that girls don’t care about love is to look at paternity fraud rate. In US, 30% of children have different biological parents than the father. Societies actually love this kind of fraud that they’re actually helping it.

  In western civilization, there is no hard pressure to get married. The one that love a girl the most is usually the sucker willing to marry her. Yet, 30% of the girl chooses to mate with someone else’s bigger cock.

  There are many other obvious tell-tale sign. Fifty percent of all marriages end in divorce. Most divorces are initiated by the women. Again, this shows that women have very little emotional incentive to stick with guys that love her. Once she is guaranteed money anyway through life time alimony, it’s time to hit other target with her remaining shelf life.

  When 1 or 2 percent of women population behaves differently than what a theory would describe, those people are exception. When more than 50% of women behave differently, then the theory is simply wrong. The idea that girls care about love is just bullshit. It’s simply not predictive enough and too costly when fail.

  So why do so many people think that love matters?

  Because that’s what’s politically correct. Romantic love gives justification for voters to prohibit many kind of relationship. When a relationship is not based on “love,” whatever that means, people are able to prevent that kind of relationship. This is then useful to get rid competitors with more desirable offers.

  There was a time, when I was driving with my girlfriend to a hotel. I was chased by her ex boyfriend driving another car. I was like, what the fuck? We drove to a nearby police station. I thought, fuck this. It’s black and white case. We did nothing wrong. That guy is a stalker. Guess what that asshole said? He loved her.

  I was like, “So what?” Obviously there are tons of poorer dumber males that prefer my gf way more than I do due to their lack of option. There is no way my girlfriend doesn’t understand that because I told her repeatedly that I do not love her. I just don’t. I don’t know what love is. I want her for fucking and breeding and that’s pretty much 90% of her use.

  Obviously most males, including me, are in love with Maria Ozawa.

  So what? It doesn’t matter because women don’t care how much a male love her. Women only care how great the man is and how much money she’ll get. Why isn’t this obvious for everyone?

  The cops then came up with a bizarre theory that someone above decides our mate. Actually it’s more of supply and demand relationship where each of us tries to get the mates with the highest mate value. However, I was told to shut up.

  Before, I did not want to marry my girlfriend. Part of me then says that I have to drive out all this idiot kinds out of the gene pool through any mean. Surely those who got this thing against free fair competition are too difficult to be let live under the same sky.

  I got news that the prettier more well-endowed girl I like want to divorce her husband. Awesome. Finally I get a piece of cunt I yearned for so long. Yet she may not be allowed to do so. There is no such thing as no fault divorce in Indonesia. Her husband justification? He loved her.

  I could have sworn that if I hear the world love one more time, I’ll commit genocide.

  Actually, this book is my Mein Kampf, except that I have nothing against jews. I have a lot of hatred against this irrational bullshit called love and those using it to justify condemning innocents, like me.

  When government intervention in mating selection is gone, all that cannot compete will be exterminated through victimless process called competition. It’s the same process that replaces pagers with smart phones and blue collar workers with machine. It’s totally victimless.

  You think it happens only on related male? What about if you pay for sex? Many will prevent that too. They’ll cry out that it should be illegal. What’s their justification? Because it’s not based on love.

  The concept is so vague; it can be used to justify prohibiting anything. Someone pays the girl cash, boom, illegal, because it’s not love. You got the girl, boom, illegal, because it’s not love. You’re not paying anything, boom, illegal because it’s not love. You help her math problem, boom, illegal because it’s not love. I don’t know what the fuck love is, but it’s an awesome justification to eradicate rational people.

  Western romantic love has certain traits:

  1.Monogamous


  2.Life long

  3.Girls will stick to mate no matter how fuck up life is

  4.Boys will stick to mate no matter how old and ugly the girl is.

  If you think about it, all those favor the mediocre. Monogamy means women can only pick single. Girls sticking with a mate through hardship favor poorer males in financial hardship. Lifelong commitment causes friction in sexual selection because people switch less often. This favors those with less to offer.

  Because those with less to offer are majority, it’s normal then that it’s politically correct, in democratic countries.

  Instead of showing love, why not buy expensive car and show how rich you are. That works far more effectively at least for me. Avoid marriage though. Most women are gold digger. Things get tricky if you did. In western civilization, never get married.

  Rules are Made To Max Out the Interests of the Rulers

  What truly happens is it’s not for our interests. It’s for the interests of whoever makes the laws.

  For example, government will say that we got to protect young people’s morality. Moral is bs that government uses to trick us into becoming their slave. What they said damage morality is actually truth. I don’t mind having my morality damaged. If societies are unfair it’s natural that humans become psychopaths.

  We got to take so many useless classes in school. Is it for our own good? No. If it were for our own good we would have picked our own curriculum. It’s to indoctrinate us to stupidly obey idiotic agenda made by government.

  We are told to get married. Is marriage maximize our happiness? If it were so, we would have created our own private contract and that private contract will be exactly the same with what government prescribes. The fact that so many alternatives to marriage is illegal and government write marriage rules shows that the contract is inefficient.

  Prostitution is no different. The issue is not the interests of the girl prostituting themselves. Basically women willing to sell themselves efficiently distort the market for women that can’t. It’s like teamsters and other worker unions. They just want to get rid competition they have no chance to compete with.

  Ugly women will literally be exterminated if women trafficking or prostitution is legal. Who would want to marry an ugly woman with all the porn and all the affordable sex prostitutes provide?

  Feminazis’ prohibition against prostitution is just their last attempt to cling to existence for something that’s unavoidable. It’s not a coincidence then that those opposing porn are usually ugly women or poorer males or anyone that couldn’t compete without some trade restriction. It’s also not a coincidence that feminazi wants women to pick occupation where beauty don’t matter, like engineering, or math, or whatever.

  What’s strange?

  Men do not Mind Moderate Gold Digger

  Andy, Bob, Charlie, Donny are welfare recipient, middle class, millionaire, and billionaire respectively. They’re all twins with the same cock size and all.

  Erin wants marriage.

  Who of the four would most eager to marry her?

  In Indonesian’s style romance, we have a way to measure mate value. It’s called damage costs. Damage cost is the amount of financial damage people are willing to absorb to mate with a certain girl. The prettier the girl, the higher the damage costs. The girls usually set up their own damage costs because it tends to benefit them.

  Within marriage, the damage cost is set by government rather than market mechanism. This, as usual, causes market distortion. As usual, governments, out of hatred against productive people, would set the damage costs to be proportional to a man’s wealth.

  So, we would expect Donny to be the guy that least likely wants to marry Erin. We would expect that Andy would be the guy that would want to marry Erin the most because marriage is the cheapest for Andy.

  What about if instead of asking for marriage Erin wants $2k per month?

  Who would want to pay the most?

  I wonder why they don’t teach this is elementary math. It would sure make math much more worthy of attention.

  If women demand cash, the richest males are the one most willing to pay.

  In fact, we can redefine the demand side of damage cost as a function of men’s wealth. Richer men are willing to pay more for sex than poorer men. So, women with equal beauty will actually worth more for richer men than poorer males.

  That means there are more productivity achieved through free trade if women demand cash instead of marriage.

  Why would a billionaire mind paying $2k per month anyway?

  It’s pretty obvious.

  So why so many people think that men do not want gold digger? Well, some gold diggers are indeed devastating. Tiger Wood’s ex-wife stole $1 billion from Tiger. Many men’s life has been destroyed by gold digging ex-wives.

  However, the problem here is not the women desire for money. The problem here is that all those male getting married. Marriage is designed to bankrupt rich smart males.

  Most women are gold diggers. Women that are not gold diggers are rare. Many men, perhaps out of stingy behavior, prefer women that are not gold diggers. Then they ended up marrying the girl rather than paying cash. What will usually happen is that the girls they marry, like most girls, are gold diggers that simply lost interests in him once she got control of the wealth.

  After all, in ancient time, women that do not dig gold will see their children starve and go extinct. Women that are common nowadays are not descendants for such women.

  At the end it costs those far more than if they simply tolerate the small costs of gold digging.

  However, why would men do that? Because that’s what’s politically correct. If women can simply sell themselves at her market value, the market value may be far higher than what most males willing to afford.

  Here, Donny wants to marry Erin the least. If all sex is within marriage, Donny, the toughest competitor, is out of the picture. Hence, Andy, Bob, and Charlie have huge incentive to ensure that all relationship is within marriage. That kicks Donny out of the picture. Under democracy, majority wins.

  Profit Rather Than Truth, Shapes People’s Beliefs

  Rather than thinking whether your beliefs are true or false, think of whether their beliefs are profitable or not FOR THEM. Humans max out profit, not truth.

  Imagine if people believe that hot women mating with Jim Thio is sacred while hot women mating with someone else is sin.

  Now, I don't care it's true or not. I will promote those beliefs. Those who disagree will be killed for being kafir, apostate, goyim, heathen, heretic, you name it. See. It doesn't have to be true. The belief is useful for me so I promote it. The belief is also good for others because they don't get killed by me.

  For similar reason, Christians believe that sex with a single male that don't get women yet after a life time long term legally binding relationship as holy. Sex with Brad Pitt is sin. Why? Who knows.

  I bet all guys that are not as handsome as Brad Pitt would agree and do something against unbelievers.

  Religion is like magic. Basically it allows the magician to do things that others think is impossible. Hence, religions allow us to achieve things with less resistance from those we screw. It's like Judo. There is no use to try to win through ways everybody knows. You need magic.

  I guess that's why Jesus said that we should learn the kingdom of God first and all will be added. Jesus is a success life coach folks. I am not recommending you to read what he said for salvation, but his advice can and do help people reach financial salvation properly understood with reasonable common sense.

  Look at Jacob putting pattern in front of sheep to encourage the same pattern to show up on those sheep. Most scientists say it's idiotic. It wouldn't work. Sheep’s Patterns are decided by DNA, not what people see.

  Or is it? C'mon. Jacob is an actual shepherd. Businessmen know what they're doing. Those patterns alter sheep sexual selection. When the stronger female sheep are dotted, those stronger sheep offspring will d
efeat the other male sheep and mate with more ewes. Soon, all sheep are dotted.

  Jacob deliberately set the term with Laban for 7 years because he knew that it'll take a few generations for this to work. Isn't that awesome? A shepherd deciding the direction of evolution just by controlling what the sheep see.

  Why science don't see it? Politically incorrect. Altering sexual selection is politically incorrect. We all believe that stars decide our mating partner somehow. But that is one of the true powers of religion over science. The power to alter sexual selection by controlling what we see. It's science blind spot.

  After all, just like christians use bible to fit their need, liberal too select science to fit their agenda. They're both wrong and hence have blind spots that the other can manipulate.

  Thousands of years ago, a shepherd know. Till today, most scientists do not.

  I think the essence is people are confident in their belief because they don't pay huge price for those beliefs even if it's wrong and get huge benefit when others believe the same thing. In a sense, humans coevolve with beliefs and promote beliefs that work on their favor. Diligent people would believe that capitalism rocks, even though it may not be stable. Lazy people would believe that socialism rock irrelevant of starvation caused by it.

  I do not pay huge price to believe that the gravity is constant. So that's the model I used to build my house.

  The small insignificant cost of believing the wrong thing is often far more out weighted by

  1.Cost of knowing the truth. More accurate model requires more complex model and more thinking. Something that most people do not like.

  2.Desire to change others' behavior in your favor. If everyone believes that Bob is God's chosen, then everybody would support Bob, and Bob will truly be emperor, as if God truly have chosen him. Obviously Bob will go the extra mile promoting it, and the people will have a strong intensive to believe it. You don't need to be religious to see that faith does, in a sense, move mountain. It's a process called Nash equilibrium.

  3.Sometimes it's easier to convince others if you too believe what you are trying to convince. It's like a corporation lying to the public and all their employees believing otherwise. Eventually people will find out that some of those employees will speak up and everybody knows you're lying. The same way our self is like a corporation. Quite often believing our own lies and acts consistently greatly help to convince others. So yes, self-deception is often useful in lying or at least convincing.

‹ Prev