@hydroacetylene's banner p

hydroacetylene


				

				

				
6 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 04 20:00:27 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 128

hydroacetylene


				
				
				

				
6 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 04 20:00:27 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 128

Verified Email

No one is suggesting that walking into a business will get you a position as VP of random bullshit, responsible for spending time on the golf course.

It’s that zoomers won’t show up in person to apply for even low level jobs, and you have to grind it out a bit at a low level job to get a better one. That’s the point of your grandpa’s stories about ‘I got a job as a janitor with a firm handshake and diligence led to me getting promoted to the mailroom and then a clerk and whadooyaknow, I would up retiring a vice President’. And part of the reason this doesn’t work anymore is the unwillingness to give it a whirl.

I’m not doubting that- poor treatment of women probably varies on the exact same axes as everything else, which means church attending middle class white men are fantastically unlikely to mistreat their wives and poor black men are likely enough that being dependent on one is foolhardy. And sure, Mormons and tradCaths have some social technology that makes it even less likely.

Just that this is a pitch which is hard for an entire society to make because it kind of depends on being a socially conservative minority subculture with strong endogamy norms.

Are there women on this forum?

Yes. We even have women mods, iirc. Gaashk and 2rafa at least are women and mostly not progressive, by motte standards or otherwise.

Is it any wonder that people got afraid to date except on an app where she’s explicitly expressed interest by swiping right?

Except everyone hates that. It doesn’t get any dates, it doesn’t get anyone anything, and most women prefer some sexual harassment to no interest at all(because they won’t show interest first).

A warship almost certainly had the ability to sink their crappy wooden boat before they could surrender.

Mormons in the 2010's had a TFR of almost 3.5, and tradCaths today have a claimed TFR(yes, the internal data is not very good) of 3.6. Both of those groups use technology and the internet.

It's not a drive for status. It's a terror of being dependent on men. Mormons, tradCaths, Amish, etc have gotten around this by convincing their women and girls that their men will treat them well, it's the ones outside, out in the world, that you should scared of. Obviously that's harder to do on a society wide scale.

It seems far more plausible that Red Lobster unleashed unlimited shrimp as a last stand to stay open, hoping it would be a loss-leader that would enable them to pay off whatever debt they had to go into to run it, and that they were in dire straights to even consider it. If unlimited shrimp was the only problem they would have simply revoked the deal and moved on.

We can know that the "justice" they'll face in their homeland (or Yemen) will probably be unjust,

Why is executing pirates unjust?

I've definitely seen girls playing foursquare spontaneously among themselves, and I think I've seen them playing soccer.

Whither the way of the Boomer; or, Where Hydro rants about the Gosh-durned millenials

The dominant trend of the new generations is to replace the boomer's functioning social technology with actual technology that doesn't work and then justify it with orgiastic doomerist neuroticism.

Downstream in the thread- literally the first topic this week- there's discussions of modern dating and the social technology around it. The point I made was that the loss of meeting people in real life didn't happen because of the sexual revolution, because for 40-50 years after the sexual revolution people met in real life. The loss of meeting people in real life happened because of the apps. And of course the apps displaced meeting people in person, and it kinda seems like everyone who actually wants to have a relationship and not just a hookup would rather meet people in person. But the justification for nobody meeting in person anymore was #metoo when people defended the apps, and 'well it would be kind of awkward' sometimes. Usually the latter explanation is male, and when you drill into it with 'the worst she can say is no, why don't you give it a whirl' the explanation is 'because then I won't be able to speak to anyone she knows ever again'. Sorry, rejections just aren't that awkward. And of course #metoo is in its usual formulation also delusionally neurotic.

But I want to talk about jobs. It's time for a nice change of pace. Back in the day, to get a blue collar job you walked in, physically, to a blue collar workplace and asked for one. It's true; ask the old men and they will tell you. And you can in fact still do this; I reckon any one of you can find a job within biking distance of your house if not walking distance by asking around enough, in maybe an afternoon's effort- granted, probably a job as, like, a dishwasher, but the boomers don't regale you with stories of walking into a job as CEO of the company. No, they found jobs as janitors and cashiers and, yes, dishwashers and they got their positions as lawyers and accountants through classified ads. The point is, the zoomers have the same opportunities as boomers to go find employment, at least if you use a big enough scale(Detroit has fewer opportunities than in 1955). No, not as computer programmers, but well-remunerated white collar work has never worked like that. My grandfather(RIP) used to tell the story of how when he first started college he could find a job in an afternoon for his spending money, and can anyone do that anymore? I did it in the 2010's. And it seems to be that the now-hiring signs adorning many stores and restaurants are there with this expectation, elsewise why would they exist? It's just that zoomers won't apply, as any restaurant manager will tell you. Instead there's online applications of the sort that are notoriously shitty when as anyone who's gotten that sort of low-level job recently can tell you, HR just filters it out for not having ten years experience and a masters degree in washing dishes when the store manager would've happily hired you after a handshake. I listen to restaurant managers complain about it all the time, usually in rather different language. It's not hard to draw the connection to millennial dating woes above; if you're too scared to ask a girl out due to paranoid imaginings you're probably also too scared to just go talk to the manager and ask for a job.

Downthread also, there's discussion of 'why do women give up the tradlife when it delivers the things they say are important to them' to the answer of 'because they believe most men will horrifically abuse them as soon as they can get away with it, even though that belief isn't true'. Likewise, this is the same quality of orgiastic doomerist neuroticism. In the fifties, when a large majority of women were totally dependent on their husbands, my great-grandmother was considered singularly unlucky because her second husband beat on her and was an alcoholic. Obviously, these two sets of implied numbers don't match up.

In the breeding of hunting dogs, there is this quality of just going for it which is referred to as grit. It seems our society is sorely lacking in grit. Safetyism is a dominant component of our culture, and this gets used to justify throwing out social technology that just makes things work.

They’re sometimes bound to do so by treaty, but they frequently don’t IIRC. Nobody actually wants criminals hanging around their country, after all. I think there’s been cases of the US paying big bucks to convince various foreignstans to accept their own citizens back.

I think it’s because they don’t trust men to do what they say they’ll do. The feminist attack on Harrison butker- aimed at their own audience- wasn’t ‘you deserve a career’. It was an evidence free assertion that he beats his wife. A lot of the ‘why do women give up X to not be dependent on a man’ has an answer, and that answer is ‘they think a man will abuse them if they’re dependent, or otherwise not fulfill his side of the bargain because he thinks he can get away with it’. This belief may be neurotic and unfounded, but it’s hard to argue that it doesn’t exist and inform the behavior of a lot of very risk averse people.

I encourage you to go talk to the socially conservative housewives in whichever sect that practices female domesticity is easiest to access; they will tell you that their particular sect has figured out how to make men behave, but women out in the world have to go into the corporate world, poor things, because they can’t depend on their men.

Obesity isn't a trust issue, it's a selfish issue, where people would rather eat themselves into oblivion instead of finding a healthy balance and self restraint.

This isn’t true.

I can buy a large pizza and a 12 pack and settle into videogaming while pigging out. I can make an organic healthy meal for after returning from the gym. These imply the exact same level of concern for my fellow man- it’s simply a differentiation between long term consequences(for myself) vs short term pleasure(also for myself). Like sure, one indicates better character than the other. But it’s not about selfishness. It’s about- I think mostly time preference and discipline.

I was wrong about Japan, it appears, but Italy, Greece and Romania all have anomalously low female LFPR for the developed world with still southern-European TFR.

And as for Israel, secular Jews have a TFR that’s still higher than any majority population in the developed world, unless you count the American red tribe which is roughly at parity. Modern Orthodox Jews(who still work) have a TFR like America in the height of the baby boom. The ultraorthodox are the only ones who don’t work.

I mean, the US is also not going to collect 37% of income either.

Japan and Italy have very low female labor force participation rates. Israel has a high one.

Yes. Texas’s schools underspend the national average by a lot and the better districts tend to be on the low side of the average, except for highland-park level eyepoppingly wealthy areas. And even in those cases, the extra money usually goes to athletics.

This seems like it would have horrendous unintended consequences, in a way ‘the police beat morons who decide to glue themselves to the street and haul them off’ doesn’t. It also seems no more likely:

Turkey needs to increase its marriage rate. I’m not sure how specifically to do this; presumably, Turkey being a Muslim country, the transition from arranged marriages is relatively recent, but you still have to convince Turks to actually go back to the things they left behind.

Our schools actually spend way less than the national average, in a way that’s not particularly correlated with performance. High property tax revenue is probably not a contributing factor.

Except the actual regulations in question are often things like ‘allow duplexes and triplexes in single family zones’, which NEETS will not be living in except as a dependent, and they could easily live as dependents in single family homes as is the stereotype.

Few people want to build the Kowloon walled city.

Houston also has the loosest zoning rules anywhere in the country.

Correct, housing prices are artificially high because it’s illegal to build houses. That, in turn, is mostly because old white people use their political power to make it so.

Greg Abbott has a propaganda push about trying to reduce housing prices. Someone immersed in Texas politics- or heavily into the YIMBY scene- would probably be aware of it.

In practice a lot of the actual programs he’d point to are populist signaling, but Austin is the only major city with declining apartment rents while the city grows.