Monthly Archives: September 2012
There’s been mention in the news this week about China commissioning its first ever aircraft carrier, the Liaoning. While this is a big deal, it’s more significant for what it displays than what it actually does.
China is currently a nation similar to the the early 3rd Reich and also Japanese empire of the same period. Both Japan and Germany vigorously updated their militaries in the 1930’s in order to complete the territorial expansion they had their minds set on.
This is where China is today. It would be funny if it wasn’t so sad to note how most of the worlds major nations think war is a thing of the past and no large conflicts will happen again. What the rest of the world fails to realize is that China, as Japan and Germany did in the 30’s, doesn’t give a shit what they think.
China’s a nation with an old school attitude. Their not very well in touch with their feelings you could say. China’s tift with Japan over the recent island dispute is nothing new and something they have had going on with probably half a dozen nations for centuries though it’s now that they can do something about it.
Make no doubt about it China intends to rule and control Asia and the Pacific.
Will they succeed? Most likely if the US keeps acting like a pussy and not standing up for principles anymore. Soon it won’t even be able to.
But what about right now. China is only one of only a few nations with an aircraft carrier and as everyone knows carriers are the top of the Naval foodchain. When missiles made battleships obsolete, it was the carriers that became the flagships and the US has more than any other nation with 11.
No problem then right? 11 to 1 the US wins. Not necessarily.
Carriers are great because of their ability to transport huge amounts of firepower around the globe. However that firepower, the aircraft, are range limited and have to get close enough to their targets before launching putting the carriers at risk of attack(something they haven’t dealt with since WWII).
The fact is that carriers are beneficial, and intimidating, but to be quite frank obsolete(at least as they are imagined in their traditional role).
The US will still rule the seas but not because of its carriers, but because of its subs.
Subs are the great equalizer in modern naval warfare and a single sub can send an aircraft carrier down quicker than a prom date.
While carriers project an image of intimidation and a force to be reckoned with, subs are discreet, cute, and largely unknown.
Subs these days come in two forms. Attack, which hunt ships and fire torpedoes and ballistic missile, which lurk in the deep waiting to fire large, potentially nuclear tipped, missiles at their targets.
Most nations with active subs have attack subs, while only a few(6) have missile subs, however both are equally important.
Let’s say that hypothetically China attacks America. Because the first thing they’d do is go after naval power, let’s assume they got all/most of our carriers. Maybe 4/5 still operational but out of range/realm.
As long as the sub fleet operates, they can negate any losses inflicted on the rest of the navy. US carriers are gone, say goodbye to half your fleet. US fleet ports are hit, say goodbye to half of Shanghai and
BeiPeking. I shit you not.
Problem is the United States sub fleet is somewhat at risk. Actually many nations sub fleets are at risk.
Countries such as Australia, UK, Netherlands, South Africa, and other sub operating nations often struggle to equip their subs with a full complement of sailors leaving the ships with less operational time.
In the US the personel problem isn’t so bad, but the lack of an enemy has caused the fleet to be an afterthought. Instead of hunting russian subs and having an important role as they did during the cold war they are given little attention.
With more than 50 subs the US has the most capable sub fleet in the world but it’s lack of an enemy/challenger means they are neglected as we spend our money instead on useless wonderships like the LCS program.
For now the US still dominates the seas, but it would be wise not to get into a dick measuring contest with China. Let them build as many carriers as they want, as long as we keep ourselves reminded of what’s really important. Ability or image, what will you put your money on?
I was directed to an article on online dating yesterday. It’s here if you want to see it.
This is what they came up with from their study about dating profiles. Men want to see full body pictures and are interested in a womans physique, while preferring that women keep the writing about themselves brief.
Women on the other hand focus on the soft warm features of a mans smile and his eyes, while wanting as much written as possible.
These people had to do a study to figure this out?
Alright then let’s break it down.
Online dating is a false front. It allows everyone to put their best effort on show and so everything you see must be taken with a grain of salt.
Except men already take everything with that salt and women don’t.That’s why the men have more basic standards at the start.
A guy checking out girls online know’s that a few pictures and paragraphs about how she loves shopping and being with her girls isn’t going to to present a full or accurate image.
A guy realizes it’s impossible to find a perfect woman. Men are more realistic that perfect doesn’t exist. They go into these situations with low expectations and high standards.
Men want attractive women(there’s a surprise), so they want full body pictures. None of this here’s my face or I’m laying down in all my pictures so you can’t see my swinish body.
As for the profile content, men know it’s foolish to let a few standardized paragraphs be the basis of what someones like(which is why they don’t write as much about themselves). While men may be more judgemental in the looks department, when it comes to personality(which is what were always told really counts anyway right?) they are willing to explore things much further and would rather rely on experiences to form that picture than someones self-analysis.
Now on to the women.
The complete opposite of men. They expect to find their Prince Charming©, and why not they’ve been promised him their whole life.
Unfortunately this leads to wholly unrealistic expectations. He’s gotta have good pictures, be actively social, have a career, a good family relationship, blah blah blah. There’s nothing new here, we all know the typical entitled American women now expects the world be given to her on a silver platter and men just can’t win. This is non-fat right?
They over-rationalize and think too much about empty conjectures. Women think that if a man isn’t good on paper/online then how could he possibly be good in person. Nevermind that she neglected to write about her $20,000 debt, or ex boyfriend she continually goes back to even though she says she knows better but she just cant help it it happens.
The old saying that women don’t shit or fart must be true, because they surely believe their shit don’t stink.
Online dating is a losing proposition for men. Each and every girl online gets more attention that he will. He’s likely to end up without choices if he sticks to online dating, while she’s gonna have the pick of the litter.
However, for the average beta that works out just fine. They don’t need options and are just glad doing everything they can for their little princess. It doesn’t matter how emasculating and belittling she is, he just didn’t try hard enough to make her happy and he know’s better next time, he can change like a transformer if it keeps her around to validate his pathetic excuse for calling himself a man.
I had a strange dream last night. I remember seeing the Senators running for their freedom a few days as congress was let out. I’m a little unsure if congress going on a break is a good thing or a bad thing.
While it does mean there’s less they can screw up if they’re not on the hill, there’s also less they can fix. Though realistically with all the problems this country faces when’s the last time they fixed anything anyway.
So in the dream I had I wondered how long did it take to form the constitution? Surely drafting the United States Constitution is a whole heck of a lot more important than creating a budget, which of course is something that hasn’t been done in 3.5 years.
So I looked it up and apparently the constitution was written in less than 100 days.
Impressive. 100 days to form the nations backbone legislation that has lasted 225 years so far and Harry Reid can’t pass a budget once in over 1,000 days.
That impressiveness led me to create this meme.
Obviously everyone went back to school recently(other than the kids in Chicago that is).
I learned that my nephew can’t take any peanut products to school in his lunch because apparently there’s a kid who’s allergic to peanuts there.
Naturally this means no Pb & J sandwiches, so much a staple of lunch I still eat them sometimes. There’s probably a few other things that will be excluded from some kids lunches because of this but it’s mostly the sandwich that’s taking the hit.
How soft are we as a nation that several hundred kids have to accomadate 1 little pissant because he can’t be around peanuts?
Now this is America and no one should be shunned for anything, but no one else should have to be penalized to clear the way for 1 person either.
Not knowing anything about this I looked it up. 1% of the population has peanut allergies. Damn 1%ers hogging all the peanut allergies.
And apparently there is not yet a known cure for peanut allergies. That being the case avoidance is really the only way to deal with the issue.
How then is it legitimately accepted that we have to make ridiculous precautions for 1 kid. If your kid has a known serious reaction to peanuts, to the point that even being in the same building as one is a concern, then why does the kid even leave the house, cause clearly it’s not a world safe for that child.
That’s where we’ll be in a generation or two if we continue this way. We’ll spend our whole lives in robotic lazyboys. Eating, sleeping, it will all be done in the chair. We’ll remain safe in the confines of our hermetically sealed homes.
Just because Johnny’s, wait no kids are named John anymore. Just because Hunter’s mom thinks he has a peanut allergy doesn’t mean he does.
Get full scientific proof your kids a 1%er. Then keep it at home. It’s a lot easier to inconvenience your 1 kid than hundreds of others.
What happened to the saying, “your rights end where mine begin”?
Again this is America and nobody should be shunned for anything, but if anyone has to make concessions it should be the person who has the issue that is being dealt with.
I’m not averse to the suffering of allergies. Though I think most people overblow what are simply intolerances to some particular thing.
I for have a reaction to dairy products. I’m not allergic or lactoseintolerant, I simply have increased symptoms of hayfever when I consistently eat dairy. However if I stop or minimize the amount of dairy i have the symptoms vanish.
Every suburban mom’s tendency to coddle their children and overreact to every single thing is falt out ruining this nations ability to support itself.
Check out this bro here. That’s somebodies grandpa 60-70 years ago. Do you think he’s worried about some measly little peanut causing a rash of his arm?
It’s Thursday, which is one of the three days I get a newspaper delivery. As I wrote about before I like my newspapers for their convenience factor.
Right there on the cover was this story;
I’m not surprised Obama leads in Michigan. With it’s heavy doses of union labor, minorities, and do-gooder liberals this state is a democrats wet-dream.
However it brings up a question I regularly ask myself. Why when there is a larger, fundamental, everyone is going to be equally screwed problem facing this country do people insist on remaining single issue voters.
With “official” unemployment over 8%, real unemployment closer to 15%, national debt over $16 trillion(not counting unfunded liabilities), inflation causing the price of everything to increase, and Americans simply making less money than they did before, not to mention the numerous international issues that face the country, why do people insist on voting on such trivial issues like gay marriage, or “womens rights”(aka free birth control), and who’s going to pass out the most welfare with the least amount of requirements?
How happy will those gays be in their marriage after they lose their jobs? How happy will women be that they can choose their own contraceptive choices for free when they’re standing in line at the soup kitchen? How much welfare can we really count on when the entire nations productive force is skewered?
This country is facing the worst economic situation it has ever seen. The circumstances of the present state are so bad that the Great Depression will look like a childrens game compared to what will happen.
The United States of America is facing burdens too large and pursuing policies too reckless to avoid anything but that scenario from happening and when it does we’re all screwed. The hole that this nation will have to dig itself out of will not be done quickly and with the ever growing mentality that it’s the governments responsibility to fix it and take care of everyone we may never get out.
Instead we get statements like this from the article above;
“Obama inherited a very bad situation from President (George W.) Bush,” said Sarah Craft, 20, of Wixom, who’s excited to cast her first presidential vote for Obama. “I think he’s turning it around and we need to give him a second chance.”
Jordan Kemmerlin, 25, is supporting Obama because she believes he’s improving the economy and better understands women her age. “I think Mitt Romney is for the wealthy,” said the Coloma resident, who juggles full-time work with two young children. “He hasn’t had to go through what the middle class goes through. I don’t think he understands what the middle class stands for.”
Obama inherited a bad situation from Bush? Really, then why does he not only keep doing the same things economically, but actively pushing them harder? And why give him a second chance, if it means that the country won’t a second chance?
Oh, he better understands women your age? If I had to guess, those two kids aren’t the fruits of a solid or even shaky marriage, but rather some hasty decisions made late one night. Does he really understand you, or just simply know how you can be bought?
Maybe free contraceptives is a good idea. Not cause their expensive and people can’t afford them, but simply to try and keep the numbers down. An offer of free sterilization might just nip this problem in the bud.
If liberals had a economic plan of some solvency, it wouldn’t matter, but they don’t so instead the narrative that is picked up and pointed out by them is one of single issues.
Rather than deal with the arm that’s been ripped off by a bear these people choose instead to focus on the slivers in their other hand.
Fools. Half the damn country is fools and it makes me angry and upset.
Economics in One Lesson, no that’s not what this post is going to be. That is however what it is about.
Ladies and Gentlemen you too can learn Economics in One Lesson, just like I did.
Whether you know nothing about economics, know a little, or are ashamedly confused by it you can learn it all in a matter of days.
How? What is this wonderful cure?
A book, called Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt.
There are three things that make this book the greatest gift to understanding economics
The first thin is it’s written in terms the average person can actually understand. There are no terms that only a econ. professor would know, everything is written for the average person to be able to understand and there’s a reason for that. Economics is actually quite simple, well it should be anyway.
To do that only real world examples are provided, no guesswork, no possibles, no maybes. Everything in the book reflects reality and not a simulated model of mathematics done by some out of touch of ‘know-better’ with a fancy job title.
Secondly the book is only about 200 pages of text. There are specifically 23 chapters dealing with a specific economics topic such as price control, union wages, inflation, etc. Even better, most chapters aren’t even ten pages in length and can be read in a matter of minutes.
But the best the thing of all, the very essence of the book is that the logic used to prove each and every point in the book is time proven.
Henry Hazlitt originally had the book published in 1946. It was later updated in the 1960’s and the most recent edition is from 1978 and is still printed today.
The beauty and tragedy of this book is that it is so perfect and yet the advice completely unheeded.
The message that Mr. Hazlitt had in 1978 shows that we still suffer from the exact same problems today.
The book is so brilliantly simple. No expansive models or samples of controlled data. No wishful thinking is used. It’s pure, simple, economics down to the very core. It’s not numbers and figures for, it’s principals. What makes everything work.
Yet here we are 34 years after the most recent updates still debating the merit of these same ideas. That we should start trade wars with China, increase the wages of workers just to give them more money, print trillions of more dollars(Quantitive Easing) just to put more money in the system, control prices to protect consumers, and subsidize whole industries to “save” consumers money.
Each and every economic idea that is thrown around today, typically and most commonly by leftists is completely and irrefutably destroyed by Mr. Hazlitts half century old efforts. Principles and facts don’t change over time and that is what this book is. Simply the facts of economics is one easy to read book.
Easy as this book is to read, the logic and simplicity would still probably go over the head’s of most “professional” economists.
It’s a real shame that this book isn’t required reading. Go to your local libraries database right now and locate this book today. If they don’t have it, go buy it, it will be a keeper.
I spotted this ad in the back of yesterdays newspaper.
1.02% is a red hot rate?
I remember being in high school and depositing a CD at the bank from money my Grandma gave me. I got a rate of probably close to 4%.
That was maybe 10 years ago. I had no need for the money back then so a CD was the best and easiest option.
What would be the point of even bothering with it today if all you get is one measly percent?
Maybe there isn’t much difference between 10 bucks on a thousand and 40, especially with inflation running rampant, but should it matter?
People can’t be reasonable and expect to earn a something from their savings and banks can’t operate at an effective rate to loan and make money.
No fan of banks am I, but they still need to operate at a certain level to make money and 1% interest just ain’t cutting it. When banks have displayed a recent history of financial foolishness is keeping their hands tied with interest rates really a good idea?
How complacent have things gotten that we’re calling a 1% rate Red Hot?
I’m just getting a little sick of this as things deteriorate even further.
Let me get this straight. Somebody of no significance makes a film critical of Mohammed or Islam and the Muslim world goes crazy for blood, but we’re supposed to tolerate them?
We’re supposed to let it go while they rally in the streets burning flags, schools, and embassies in more and more countries everyday?
I’m a person inclined to say live and let live, everyone can do their own thing. But I’m also a person inclined to say screw you when I’m handed a bunch of crap and told it’s roses.
Liberal talking heads along with Hillary Clinton and Jay Carney are all saying it’s not a problem and not to blame the people who are in fact doing these things.
These people attack America and we are told that it’s nothing. That any reaction on our part is an overreaction.
Screw you and the horse you rode in on.
When will this country get its balls back.
I’m not calling for all out war, far from it in fact. What I would like to see though is someone from the political elite of this country exhibit enough cojones to make an unsanitized statement on the matter.
At this point in time I don’t even care if what someone says is offensive or crass so long as they actually mean it and stand for something other than being a sackless pussy.
A nation should not have to apologize for its citizens exhibiting their rights if they happen to offend the sensibility of a bunch of loons half way around the world who wouldn’t know sensibility if it came in the mail.