Join Ricochet or renew and get 1 yearof National Review/Digital as a bonus!
End of ctruppi's followed conversation feed
As someone astutely pointed out earlier in this thread, this phenomena has pervaded every corner of life. A conservative friend recently moved to a town near Princeton and got himself elected to the local school board there. Apparently, the local citizens making up the board were all highly educated, limousine libs. This friend and his wife were basically ostracized from local circles because he had the temerity to not only bring up conservative solutions to some of the local problems facing the schools, but showed up at the next meeting with actual case study examples and other hard data to support his position. He was labeled a trouble maker and a kook and people whispered that he likes to piss off people (I know because my sister lives there and is a limousine lib).In all these areas - universities, media, local school boards, etc - we now have a high-priest class charged with protecting the faith and weeding out the heretics. Our culture can not survive in its present state as long as this keeps happening.
So according to Sandberg, all I have to do to become super wealthy is start a company and get women to run it. They'll do a much better job and it'll only cost me 80% for wages!
The fact that a "common" citizen of West Berlin inspired that remarkable, memorable passage makes it that much more powerful than had it been a focus-tested, poll-tested line. Our hearts go out to Inge's family and hope that there are others like he wherever there is a "Berlin Wall" in the world.
Use Joe Pesci's opening remarks from the trial in My Cousin Vinny. "Everything this guy just said is bulls***t". Then smile into the camera and say good night.
Coming in late due to business travel, but 2 comments:
-about the "testosterone induced male due to driving a certain car". I have had the opportunity to drive some nice cars in my time, and can tell you that there is a definite difference in attention you get from the ladies. So if you have a problem with this, you should talk to those of the fairer sex who give guys in nice cars "special attention" before bashing the men who drive them (and feel really cool doing so)
-I have a good friend who at the end of high school, did this exact thing to his secret love at a graduation party. They flirted from time to time, but he was just too darn shy to ever ask her out. At this party he got up the nerve, walked up to her and gave her a nice kiss just like this commercial. Her boyfriend was there but he actually laughed. I remember her having that same look as the girl in the ad. These two have now been married for 22 years , with 2 beautiful daughters and are one of the happiest couples ever.
I think Frank Soto is on to something. Marriage as it has historically been defined was created out of necessity for societies in early history. Arranged marriages to solidify clan and tribal relationships as well as dowries were commonplace and we would never accept them in modern societies. As human civilization evolved, marriage also evolved to take on new issues (property rights for example), but the basic institution and understanding of marriage remained unchanged.The safety and opportunity of modern society is very important to the changing relationship of men and women. But an underlying stat that can't be overlooked, and has had a huge sub-conscious effect on society and marriage is the rapid increase in life expectancy. 'Til death do you part' has one meaning when the likelihood of one of the participants dying before age 50 is very real. It takes on a whole new meaning when both participants fully expect to be kicking on the dance floor and bingo games until at least 80! The idea that 'I'm in a bad marriage and still have plenty of time to make a new life' even at 50 is something completely new in the human experience.
~Paules, as a native Italian, I can assure you that nothing has changed in that part of the world since one Julius Caeser invaded Gaul to enrich himself for power. Everything you write is absolutely true!As for China, they are a potential basket-case with nuclear weapons, an ageing population, a demographic crisis with too many males and a diminishing population. This is not a good recipe for stability. Right now they are practicing the economic equivalent of digging holes and refilling them with public works projects that have no economic viability besides keeping people employed. A huge percentage of Chinese "defense spending" is earmarked for internal policing. So maybe they're taking this Tocqueville guy seriously.The fat lady is not singing yet regarding Chinese current status, but she's definitely clearing her throat! Western governments all know about this house of cards but say nothing because the Chinese make cheap crap for us, buy our debt and natural resources (here's looking at you Australia). When the house collapses, I wonder how long it will take for people to admit that they knew this was going to happen all along.
John Walker: Unintended consequences can be so delicious.
Starting on January 1st, 2012, the Swiss canton of Neuchâtel where I live instituted a volume-based tax on garbage. The only garbage bags which will be picked up are specially marked ones which sell at a substantial premium: the 60 litre bags I use cost CHF 3.40 each (about 3.65 Yankee greenbacks). These bags collected in my region end up at an incinerator in the commune of Colombier, which produces heat for homes in the vicinity.
Well, as soon as the bag tax went into effect, the amount of garbage arriving at the incinerator dropped like a rock, and has not rebounded. The volume is insufficient to heat the homes they're contracted to supply, so the incinerator has had to import garbage from adjacent cantons to meet the demand.
An article about this in the newspaper contained a subhead, “Taxation Changes Behaviour”. Who knew? · 10 minutes ago
Yeah, macroecon 101, who knew?
The silver lining in all this is that the vast majority of those affected by this post probably voted for Obama. We need these types of negative impacts felt in a very real way by these people. I don't like to wish for anyone suffering regardless of political affiliation, but this would be a more powerful message than anything conseratives can come up with.
BTW, I recently was out with a good friend of mine who is very high level in finance/accounting for a VERY big fortune 50 company. He told me that they already have Plan A in place - try to live with Obamacare and see what the real costs are because no one knows how bad it will be (although everyone at this company agrees it will be some level of bad). If it's bad enough, they will go to Plan B - stop offering health care and pay the very predictable penalty. This is for 10's of thousands of employees. This friend assures me that all the big companies are taking a wait and see approach like this. Once the 1st company stops offering health care, the rest will follow.
Trust me, as someone with European roots, 10-15% unemployment, disfunctional gov't healthcare and a stagnant ecnomy can easily become the "normal". I know people in Italy with 4-year degrees who haven't worked a day in years. They live off the gov't dole, take better vacations than I do for a month each summer. Any candidate that would dare to even mention taking some of this away is summarily dismissed as crazy.
We are headed to this same place here. The MSM doesn't need to come up with any new narratives. They already hav one: Reagan spurred 30 years of greed and hatred that finally came crashing down with Bush. Sure 10% unemployment is bad, but not nearly as bad as those awful days. If you put the GOP back in charge, they will bring us back and all you 20-somethings who can't find a job, at least the dems keep the "free" unemployment/disability/food stamps/free birth control coming. People are lazy, selfish sheep and will easily buy this line, just like Europe.
This plan won't work unless there's a complete economic collapse. Even then, not too sure.
Rome lasted over 500 years after the fall of Carthage.
If the USA collapses 500 years after the fall of the USSR, that'd be a pretty good track record. · 13 hours ago
I'm stating that I think those who compare the USA today to Rome circa 400 AD are wrong. The paths both civilizations have taken - overthrow of a monarchy, conquering the natural land mass they inhabit, overseas expansion from wars and total primacy over their respective worlds, is similar enough that it now puts the USA in a time period where Rome threw off the shackles of republicanism because it became too difficult to govern in the new world they found themsleves in charge of. The USA will not totally collapse into trash bin of history, but will morph into a new type of governing body with a vastly more powerful executive and other institutions falling in line. Remember, Rome still had a functioning Senate throughout it's imperial history. Whether this lasts 100, 500 or 1000 years is anybody's guess. Wonder what VDH thinks!
Great post Dave. You've touched on what's been announced, which are bigger companies. I have a good friend who owns a small company (appx 25 employees). He's been able to weather the Obama ecnomy , but has decided that he doesn't have the fight in him for another 4 years and will be closing his company after the new year. He will make sure to tell his employees that he can't continue operating with Obama still in office.
How many of these small businesses are out there that don't make the headlines or newsfeeds? We're living an economy of death by a 1000 cuts.
That's when you invest in wheelbarrow companies. Everyone will need one to haul all those crispy new Benjamins to the store to buy a loaf of bread and some milk (thank God the contraceptives will still be free).
We are on a similar trajectory since the collapse of the Soviets. Like Rome, we have no Carthage, Greece or USSR as a common foe to rally behind, and living comfortably knowing we are masters of our world, we have turned inwards. Sure there are things that come up (Marius rose by defeating a barbarian horde pouring in over the alps and we invaded the middle east after 9/11), but these don't represent the type of national rivalries that move civilizations. They are more a nuisance that needs to be dealt with, that nobody likes.
The truth is, like Rome, we are quickly finding out that the nature of your civilization changes once you are top dog and everyone both loves you (and needs you) and hates you at the same time. Therefore, the nature of our leadershipand institutions to deal with this new reality will also change. But the fundamental power of the US is indisputable (new Chinese military spending notwithstading) and is something we are just learning to cope with.
It won't be a 1-1 hisorical symmetry with Rome (nothing is), but the USA of the 1st 220 years is gone.
Arahant: I think Mr. Muggeridge was off on the period of Rome we are in. I believe there is an American Civilization, an offshoot of Western Civilization as Rome was to Greece.
Rome continued to grow and spread its civilization, even after the Republic had fallen, and I think our civilization will continue, even though it may be the cynical, perverted version of our civilization that continues to spread.
Any other Ricochetti have an opinion on where we are? Many are the learned scholars upon this island in the sea of turmoil. Any historians or history buffs want to weigh in? · 12 hours ago
Edited 12 hours ago
I have always said this. We are not at the end of the Roman Empire, but at the end of the Roman Republic. Rome finished its conquest of the Meditteranean basin by defeating and conquering the Greeks at the battle of Corinth in 146 BC. Having secured the neighborhood, and without true rivals, they quickly turned inward until men like Sulla, then Marius and finally Julius Ceasar took turns trying to annoint themselves "First Man of Rome". (continued)
At this point (and I may catch a lot of flack here for this) I say do it. I'm in that tax bracket and I am willing to pay a little more to move that last obstacle out of the way and finally make Obama own this economy. What's he going to say in 2 years when we still have huge deficits, and ever-increasing debt and a still-stagnant economy. When it's finally proven to everyone that the revenues from the "rich" turned out to be a pittance that amounted to a pimple on the butt of an elephant, what will he say then? He's doing the same thing he did the past 4 years. He's betting that the economy will get better on its own due to the natural business cycle and trying to score big, lasting, populist political points on the way.
I'm willing to bet that he's wrong.
Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:
Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place. Join today!
Already a Member? Sign In