Evolution

[sidecarParticipant 35857]

743 roadmaster wrote:

No Amish ever set foot in a public school.

Or into a rocket bound for space.

I do know in my area most large churches have attached primary schools,

…for the children of single mothers, who are the largest demographic still going to church these days.

and a boarding school(think Harry Potter going off to school) for 9 to 12.

For when single mommy is tired of the kids hanging around the house interfering with her visits from churchy Chads.

The big thing that is going to kill that is if Trump and Co, get this voucher thing passed.

Vouchers are actually a very bad idea. They are just a back door way to turn private schools into publicly funded schools, and the problem with our education system today is public funding itself. They are being sold under the claim of “parental choice”, but parents really only ever actually get to choose when those parents are the ones paying. When the government pays, the government always chooses.

The correct solution is to cut off the government education funding entirely and also cut off the welfare for single mothers so there’s less demand for education going forward.

[Gravel PitParticipant]

sidecar wrote:

By that I mean take away their supply of Chads by making prostitution legal.

That will not get rid of their supply of Chads because 1) Chads are not a supply – they’re a scarcity by definition, and 2) Chads don’t pay, also by definition, so they wouldn’t pay for prostitutes.

Thanks for reading my ramblings yesterday. I had to chuckle at this one response from you.

Chad’s dont pay!

lol. I have to admit, that is a strong rebuttal and shot a hole in my theory! To a STRONG degree you’re right! Why would a Chad pay $75 for, even the best escort in a safe regulated industry, when he can have Stacy for free, a ripe Peach 20 year old?

The ONLY reason he would take the escort over Stacy is to spare having to listen to her idiotic vocal fry. Apart from that, it’s a better Peach and it’s free for the taking so Sidecar wins again.

[narwhalParticipant]

sidecar wrote:

Vouchers are actually a very bad idea. They are just a back door way to turn private schools into publicly funded schools, and the problem with our education system today is public funding itself. They are being sold under the claim of “parental choice”, but parents really only ever actually get to choose when those parents are the ones paying. When the government pays, the government always chooses.

I disagree. Well, I agree, but I also think it’s going to have a different effect as well. That is that Dad’s going to get a voucher in the mail for $1000 for the school of his choice, then he’s going to see that he actually paid $2500 in school tax. It’s going to bring to light how far the government fist is up his ass. I’m sure the government will do their best to hide costs, but when the private says you’re still $1500 short on tuition, the math won’t be difficult.

On the completely related idea that prostitution would somehow improve families, I can’t see how that is the case. It certainly doesn’t improve things on it’s own. It would only serve to further diminish the men who are interested in marriage, since they have another legal alternative to marriage in terms of getting sexual gratification. On the woman’s side of things, women will either respond by trying to out perform prostitutes (which probably will make them less attractive to marriage) or shun men who engage in prostitution, which limits their pool of men dramatically. Still less marriages.

Besides that, prostitution won’t keep a married woman from divorcing her husband, which is the real issue here. It likely would just be another bullet in her gun, another reason she can claim he let her down. Would it keep an unhappy man from divorcing his wife? Quite possibly, but that isn’t really the issue.

It was also kind of hinted that various forms of abstinence would improve marriage. To that I’d have to agree. If sexual satisfaction only came from within marriage, then marriage would be much more popular. It would likely reduce the divorce rate a bit too, since divorcee wouldn’t likely have an guarantees that they can remarry that easily. Right now, women know they’ll find sex again, not really an issue, and remarrying is just potentially icing on the cake. All that said, the cats out of the bag on this, and forced abstinence is something that flies in the face of freedom.

The only real answer is to cut off cash and prizes on divorce. No alimony, no child support, no unfair split of resources. Divorce needs to hurt. At the very least, allow the two to write their own marriage contract, signed and agreed before marriage. That would eventually end in a standard marriage contract that is actually fair and acceptable to the majority of people looking to get married.

Ok. Then do it.

[sidecarParticipant 35857]

Gravel Pit wrote:

The ONLY reason he would take the escort over Stacy is to spare having to listen to her idiotic vocal fry.

Naw. The moment Stacy gets annoying, Chad nexts her for Tammy. Because he can. Because he’s Chad.

And Stacy knows this, so to avoid losing Chad’s attentions, and thereby lose face in front of all the female “friends”, she controls her behavior around him. So Chad never has to put up with sh​it.

narwhal wrote:

Well, I agree, but I also think it’s going to have a different effect as well. That is that Dad’s going to get a voucher in the mail for $1000 for the school of his choice, then he’s going to see that he actually paid $2500 in school tax. It’s going to bring to light how far the government fist is up his ass. I’m sure the government will do their best to hide costs, but when the private says you’re still $1500 short on tuition, the math won’t be difficult.

But here’s the thing about that: Dad will ALWAYS be short $1500 on the tuition, because government funding only ever increases prices.

Say there’s a public school in your town with 1000 desks (and 1500 students), and a private school with 100 desks (and 100 students). The private school charges $1000 per term to attend. The public school parents demand to be able to send their kids to the private school too, so the government buys their votes with vouchers for $1000.

But there are still only 100 desks at the private school. But since there’s now all this free voucher money floating around, tuition just went up to $2100. That’s $1000 for the market established fee plus $1000 free voucher money plus an additional $100 to pay someone to handle all the voucher paperwork. And it’s also $100,000 less for the public school.

Eventually all that free voucher money floating around will convince others to get into the education racket to get a slice of that fat money cake, and more “schools” will be created, but they will mostly be fly by nights. So there will be complaints about education quality, and so the government will impose all sorts of rules and regulations and standards on “private” schools before they qualify to receive vouchers. This turns them into de-facto public schools. And requires even more money fron the taxpayer to manage the whole clusterfu​ck.

So you’re right back where you started, only now the quality of education has gone down, government control of education has increased, and the taxpayer is screwed more than ever.

This is what happened everywhere vouchers have been implemented. Everywhere. Imaging the chaos if it’s implemented on a national scale.

On the completely related idea that prostitution would somehow improve families,

I never made that claim (at least not in this thread). I just pointed out that legalized prostitution would have no effect on the Chad phenomenon.

However there is a certain logic to it given that marriage is nothing more than government sanctioned prostitution. And scammy prostitution at that. The largest opponents of legal prostitution are women and wives, because they can’t take the honest competition from whores.

Still less marriages.

I fail to see how that’s a problem, since marriage offers absolutely no benefit to men whatsoever.

It was also kind of hinted that various forms of abstinence would improve marriage.

The only thing that will fix marriage is getting the government out of it. Eliminate the family courts. Eliminate alimony. Eliminate child support. Turn it back into what it used to be, an entirely private non-binding understanding between two people, instead of the cash cow it is for women at the expense of men.

There would be less marriages that way, but there would also be a fu​ckload fewer divorces.

[Gravel PitParticipant]

sidecar wrote:

The largest opponents of legal prostitution are women and wives, because they can’t take the honest competition from whores.

Exactly. And in my opinion, Legal Prostitution would increase the marriage rate, increase the birthrate and lower the divorce rate GUARANTEED.

This is basic Business Law, competition, scarcity, supply and demand.

narwhal wrote:

Besides that, prostitution won’t keep a married woman from divorcing her husband, which is the real issue here.

Saving marriage is not the sole issue; creating more marriage is, creating a healthy environment that encourages male female relationships that lead to births and cohabitation should be the goal of any government who declines mass surrogacy or mass immigration.

The fact is Narwhal. Women want sex and they are going to get it. Currently they have ZERO obstacles to grabbing it from any male, any time. So why would they want to have an LTR or get married?

Picture women on a SLUT WALK. Hundreds of them. They walk by the tables set up which give them FREE lemonade. There tons of these tables set up by different entities and it’s always FREE, tasty and Ice-Cold Lemonade.

One table is all the Dating Apps– instant free Lemonade!

another table sponsored by Sex in the City — instant guilt-free decades, or Lemonade!

another table sponsored by big-Pharma “The Pill” brand — safe-carouselling and Free Lemonade!

and so on! Women are always refreshed instantly and anywhere on the trail!

We’re talking about putting big pressure on that model, which is like putting a 90% Tax Tariff on Lemons, thus obliterating those tables or at least making them re-think giving it away for free.

Making Prostitution legal creates competition for women who want sex, the supply of available Men decreases which means overall SMV for Males GOES UP! It’s simply math. You dry up their supply of cawks

I’ve said it before, those Dating Apps are Prostitution already BUT FOR WOMEN ONLY. The ratio on those apps, 85 men per 15 women is revealing…

Our government is crippled. The whole process of elected nincumpoops instead of SMART PEOPLE, and the endless scandals and paid off politicians… its hopeless to ever fix the problem which is quite simple really. This is Sexual Sociology, not rocket science.

[Gravel PitParticipant]

Men want sex. Women are using that instinct against us, along with a plethora of other legal, cultural, medical and technological advantages. If you offer men safe sex via Prostitution, women have to actually WORK to get a Man’s Sex. They are now competing for male attention. Dont worry about Male Prostitutes, men will not sign up for that and women wont pay…. the oldest profession is WOMEN doing it.

The result will be Women being FORCED back into more traditional behaviors in order to access males. You should like this since its Tradcon style.

[Shadow1275Participant 1178]

Quell wrote:

Sit back, relax and enjoy whatever time you have left.
Very interesting time we are living in.

Evolution takes forever, what this actually means is the West will eventually collapse and the weak will either be forced to improve or die. All the feminists will immediately go on their knees and suck their way back to survival. Eventually strong men will take over again and carve out a civilization, which will grow gynocentric and die. The only difference is who will take over during the collapse. The way things are going now many european countries will cease to exist and will become Muslim/African. When Western Rome was on its dying breaths, they invited the ostrogoths and other germanic tribes into their country to fight for their army. When they finally collapsed and order was restored, they were no longer Western Romans in Italy, they were Ostrogoths.

If you live in Europe get out while you can, unless you enjoy forced circumcision and carpet bowing. I might move to Japan after the collapse, at least they will still be Japanese.

He who is Brave is Free - Seneca

[Author]

Posts