Yang exploits the welfare cliff

He knows this. By trapping people in the nanny state, the parasite owns the host.
Predicted Chapter 2, Enjoy the Decline. Old copy, sorry.
UBI is a trap baited with your own flesh.

Asian collectivism is state slavery.

This is their doom, genetically, the West is individualistic, this is why we outcompeted them for millennia.


As long as we choose to resist and be free.

Look into the corrupt shell companies claiming property ownership in the West. Reject them.

HBD has proven in studies that chromosomes dictate culture. Do not permit collectivists to live here.

No, no exceptions. No such thing as a good Trojan horse. Still an invader.

The illusion of Star Trek infinite resources is just that. The State cannot pay for your luxury.

The producers always pay, it’s utterly dysgenic.

Paying the out-group or low IQ to breed is genocidal. 100IQ license for both parents to have any state support of your childbearing. Have kids below that, but don’t expect taxpayers to fund people who aren’t even average.

That money belongs to the germline who earned it to have their own children.

Taking it directly prevents births and family foundation – c

d – transfer of wealth from earners to state breeders/sponsored voters

You can’t talk about welfare unless

you talk about the welfare or benefits ‘cliff’. It’s also known as the ‘trap’.


There are plenty of dry economic agreements (how rare!) that this oppresses the poor.
Nobody mentions it. The right want cheap maids they call nannies to feel morally superior and the left, same, but keeping reliable voters on tap and away from economic freedom.


It also affects women more, but feminists don’t discuss it because they’re middle-class bitches. They’ll happily hire the foreign nanny than support the one who needs the job and can’t afford to go anywhere else. Immigrants are by default, privileged, because they can be global and professionally mobile. It’s like when working class people see a middle-class woman say how she chose to work after giving birth, expecting a pat on the back. Oh, a choice? Freedom? Must be nice.

That’s why women refuse raises, not Imposter Syndrome!

It’s nothing to do with Britain, it happens in any welfare system not structured to allow the transition back out again.

It operates like a Venus flytrap or Chinese fingertrap.

This has nothing to do with flogging the corpse of Maggy Thatcher (sick and sexist) but nothing to do with the 80s either, it’s a new structural issue.

Nobody wants to address it.

Greens and Lib Dems will talk about the rights of terrorists and bondage classes for kids, but not this.

Scientist no-platformed for neurobiology/welfare link work


He’s so close to pinpointing amygdala change as the origin of his personality type you can almost taste it.

“Moreover, this relationship is causal, since follow-up interviews show that claimants voluntarily increase contraceptive use if the generosity of benefits is reduced and vice versa. In the jargon of economics, these data allow claimants to be conceptualised as rational agents who adjust contraceptive use in order to maximise benefit take.”

Isn’t that fraud?

I understood their decision but am still perplexed by the attitude of the no-platforming activists, not only because they ended up providing extra publicity for my book but also because there are no downsides to discussing scientific research. If it is good science then the discussion will benefit society by helping it get adopted quicker and if it is bad science then the discussion will benefit society help it get debunked quicker.

They don’t care about science. There is only social justice.

Someone fax him a copy of SJWs Always Lie?

Video: What is Socialism?

This is rather good.

However, as applied to Europe it ignores the lumbering elephant in the room of mass immigration. I wonder how he’d apply it then. Native parasites are bad enough, but is a foreign parasite an invader?

Surely if it’s between someone whose ancestors paid into the system e.g. NHS contributions, income tax, versus someone off the boat, and both are claiming family/child welfare, but the latter has multiple wives and kids they can’t support (the intended limiting factor of polygamy), they deserve different treatment?

I saw it coming and I still don't care, funny really

Also, blaming the young for not getting along is stupid. The generation currently in charge (Boomers/GenX) created this economic mess, we’re the interns. What are we to do? Buy a house? – wait…. can’t. Rent? -wait…. can’t. Get an education? – wait…. worthless. Get an apprenticeship? – wait…. rare as a unicorn that urinates German beer. Get a lowly job and work your way up? -wait…. immigrants took those.

Well, WTF are we meant to do?

Wait until the Boomers die off. That’s the game plan of practically all the young people I know. Wait it out.

Paper: The population cycle drives human history


No, it’s an actual paper.

The biggest problem with this population stuff is an emphasis of maths (quantity) over quality (HBD). The premise is false. Again, the premise is false:

…Humans are not much different from animals. If one promotes the reproduction of farm horses, one receives farm horses and no racehorses. As outlined before, the power of a people depends upon its percentage of intelligent and efficient ones.

I have posted about economic prosperity and national IQ. http://wp.me/p10lxG-1t5

These cannot be produced by school and education according to demand, but they must be born before, like racehorses. It is the erroneous belief of the politically correct that ill and weak descendants, if only they are well fed and educated, would be able to uphold the high level of Western civilization or even develop it further….

cool mocking shades yes peace

#mike drop#

…Myrdal (1940, 188ff.) wrote far‑sightedly: “The basic principle for population policy in a democratic country … is, that a very large number of births must be regarded as undesirable. … In a democratic society we cannot accept a way of things whereby the poor, ignorant, and inexperienced maintain the stock of population. … .The deepest dilemma of democratic population policy is that we do not desire … a reversal of industrialization and rationalization. … The general method of population policy can be described as a transfer of income from individuals and families without children to families with children. … In a democracy a population policy is a contradiction in itself. … It is not, like much other reform policy, the relatively simple question of inducing a majority to tax a minority for its own benefit. It is just the contrary: to ask a majority to tax itself severely in favor of a minority. For the majority of every population … consists of citizens who are either unmarried or have no child burdens at all, or only very light ones. [DS: We are already taxed AWAY from having children by high rent, utilities, clothes etc, why is it this way around, the anti-social way?]… For the overwhelming majority of every people, distributional reforms in the interest of the reproducing families mean economic sacrifice.” Until now, nowhere can such a policy or even a eugenic one be maintained in the necessary long run required for any chance of success….

Taxes are supposed to punish poor social grace, being childless by choice is anti-society, since you want everyone else to pay for your stuff in old age, why shouldn’t it tax you? At least for your pension and other costs? Or might people exempt themselves from future societal benefits if they chose to be childless? I might agree with that.

This says it all:

When the insight began, it did not immediately produce the expected consequences, and once the consequences eventuated, any effective policy is mentally handcuffed by egalitarian ideology.

And what about assistance for those with children who couldn’t have the foresight to wear a condom? Nobody ever thinks of cutting it because ‘think of the children’ but they fail to see those people chose to be reckless, yet keep their kids. Any other type of recklessness is punished.

If you’re old enough to consent, you’re able to take full legal responsibility for the child.

Over to John Stuart Mill;

“Every one has a right to live. We will suppose this granted. But no one has a right to bring children into life to be supported by other people. Whoever means to stand upon the first of these rights must renounce all pretension to the last.”

Africa seeks re-colonization and white oppressors for $$$$$


Interesting concept.

They do need us, even if it’s just foreign aid.

If you cut off the ability to claim welfare (as nations are beginning to do), they would leave.

From November, European jobseekers will only be able to claim Jobseekers Allowance and other key welfare benefits for a maximum period of 3 months. This follows tough changes that were announced earlier this year to introduce a minimum 3 month delay to claiming benefits and to cut off benefits after 6 months unless the individual has very clear job prospects.

They don’t want to work, or live in such prosperous societies. They want to get paid for doing nothing. This is why most Boat People are actually working-age men.

Those leading by example are saving a ton of money


Denmark’s strict immigration laws have saved the country billions in benefits, a government report has claimed. The Integration Ministry report has now led to calls among right-wing populists to clamp down further on immigrants to increase the savings.


Video: We are in stagflation

Your money is worth less, because of debt. Government, corporate and personal.
Prices are going up (RRP) but the intrinsic value (production) is the same or lesser (growth stagnation).

Local councils in England target the poor and vulnerable


Among the 2.31 million people who stand to lose all or a substantial share of their council tax support are the disabled, carers, and war widows, The Independent reports. Council tax benefit used to provide nearly £5 billion (US$8.4 billion) to 5.9 million people.

With a cut of nearly half a billion pounds to local authorities from the central government, visits from bailiffs and home evictions are on the rise as debts mount up. Those unable to pay are facing court summons, as poverty is effectively becoming criminalized.

Figures from local UK authorities, released following a series of Freedom of Information requests, reveal that 409,000 disabled people and 112,000 carers have seen their council tax increase. Meanwhile, 3,600 war widows have also been hit.

Perhaps you could dig into all that foreign aid money? Or would we prefer to support the living of corrupt NGO people who have no ties to creating this country and don’t have a vote based on the distant possibility they’ll cry “Racism!“?

Japan’s ruling on welfare benefits and the anti-immigration sentiment


Foreigners used to be able to claim benefits in Japan. This ruling overturns it.

Last Friday, the Supreme Court clearly ruled for the first time that they are not because foreigners are not considered Japanese citizens, overturning the Fukuoka High Court’s 2011 decision.

They used to cave unquestionably.

But poverty-stricken foreigners, it said, should nonetheless be given any assistance deemed necessary by the municipalities. Since then, municipalities have customarily interpreted this to mean that they can decide whether to dole out the benefits at their own discretion.

Unlike many other programs, the original 1950 law for welfare benefits has received no tweaks and continues to discriminate against foreigners by stating that legitimate recipients must be Japanese citizens.

Upon signing up for the 1982 refugee treaty, the government at the time insisted there was no need to rid the law of the nationality clause, arguing municipalities were already treating foreign applicants in the same way as Japanese in accordance with its 1954 notice.

Seto said he considers the Supreme Court ruling a virtual “warning” to foreigners in Japan.

“What it’s trying to say,” he said, “is that as a foreigner you shouldn’t consider working or living in Japan because if you were ever to get injured or sick, chances are you will be denied the welfare payments you need, depending on the mood of local officials you deal with,” he said.

Well, yeah. They don’t owe you shit.

It ends;

“Accepting foreigners as a labor force and then abandoning them once they’ve become useless will clearly look very bad for Japan in the international community,” Suzuki said.

Not for the bottom line, it won’t.

This is the beginning of a series of legal rulings to reverse multiculturalism. When Asia get good results, it will be asked why we aren’t imitating.