Biblical basis of socialism and work ethic

ECC 5

“10 Whoever loves money never has enough;
    whoever loves wealth is never satisfied with their income.
    This too is meaningless.

11 As goods increase,
    so do those who consume them.
And what benefit are they to the owners
    except to feast their eyes on them?

12 The sleep of a laborer is sweet,
    whether they eat little or much,
but as for the rich, their abundance
    permits them no sleep.

13 I have seen a grievous evil under the sun:

wealth hoarded to the harm of its owners,
14     or wealth lost through some misfortune,
so that when they have children
    there is nothing left for them to inherit.
15 Everyone comes naked from their mother’s womb,
    and as everyone comes, so they depart.
They take nothing from their toil
    that they can carry in their hands.

16 This too is a grievous evil:

As everyone comes, so they depart,
    and what do they gain,
    since they toil for the wind?
17 All their days they eat in darkness,
    with great frustration, affliction and anger.

18 This is what I have observed to be good: that it is appropriate for a person to eat, to drink and to find satisfaction in their toilsome labor under the sun during the few days of life God has given them—for this is their lot. 19 Moreover, when God gives someone wealth and possessions, and the ability to enjoy them, to accept their lot and be happy in their toil—this is a gift of God. 20 They seldom reflect on the days of their life, because God keeps them occupied with gladness of heart.”

Dark.

Bonus: a check against the cult of natalism.

Ecc 6:3

A man may have a hundred children and live many years; yet no matter how long he lives, if he cannot enjoy his prosperity and does not receive proper burial, I say that a stillborn child is better off than he.

7

Everyone’s toil is for their mouth,
    yet their appetite is never satisfied.

The coming Communist cash grab

Orwell wouldn’t have thought of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexplained_wealth_order

Notice the focus?

Liquid assets, especially jewels, difficult to trace themselves.

If you don’t have the paperwork for those family jewels, guess what?

They don’t DARE look into real estate purchases by foreigners.

50 million mansion versus 120k necklace?

Stunning and brave.

Rich v. Poor America

The inequality thing isn’t wrong.

The causes attributed are.

Class is a major HBD factor.

TALK ABOUT IT.

For example, show me a rich Silicon Valley douchebag who didn’t have a rich parent. Who didn’t go to a good school and various special camps. Is it really merit and American spirit if they moved up just one class from the middle? Based on investments and decisions their parents made?

Richist

Source: Sassy Socialist Memes

It’s fun to watch them chant about killing the rich then ask them how many are Jews?

Why is that relevant?

How could that not be relevant if you wanna murder and eat them?

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/226826

“Jewish Americans make up 2% of the population. 44% of these Jewish Americans are in the top 1%,” the poster reads.

While Jews do on average earn more than the national average, the percentage of Jews found among the top 1% of earners is far less than 44% of the Jewish population- The 44% figure, which cites a 2009 study by the Pew Research Center, is in fact a misquote of the Pew report, which only shows that 46% of Jews earn more than $100,000 a year.

It’s impressive that they lie in the same paragraph.

The term “Jewish Privilege” has been employed both by white supremacists and anti-Israel elements on the far-left, including +972 Magazine.

They do know.

Stock up on kosher salt.

See bottom of post for details.

SMS are already encrypted.

They don’t understand how employment contracts work either.

Self-employment is MORE capitalist.

ONE OF US

ONE OF US

ONE OF US

NRX

NRX

NRX

Maybe I misjudged them.

Maybe they’re not all bad.

FYI

http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-Features/The-worlds-50-Richest-Jews-1-10

https://www.timesofisrael.com/10-jews-in-forbes-top-50-billionaires/

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/wealthiest-getting-wealthier-lobbying-lot/

So who are these billionaires and how’d they get so much more money? Forbes listed 1,645 billionaires in 2014, one-third of whom started their lives wealthy. Ninety percent are male and 85 percent are over age 50. According to Oxfam, the top 80 billionaires have seen their collective wealth grow by $600 billion between 2010 and 2014.

So the old white male they complain about isn’t White or Christian?

http://www.jta.org/2015/03/02/news-opinion/the-telegraph/forbes-billionaires-list-features-new-and-old-jewish-faces

As in previous years, Jews are disproportionately represented on the roster of the world’s wealthiest, with 10 Jews among the top 50.

http://politicsinn.com/48-percent-of-u-s-billionaires-are-jewish/

Religion is not discussed here: http://www.economist.com/node/21543178

http://takimag.com/article/jewish_wealth_by_the_numbers_steve_sailer/print#axzz4rekiJdXg

Taxes are death

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-mariotti/the-nazi-tax-on-jewish-we_b_9385630.html

Men make more money from marriage than women

http://www.mademan.com/want-to-get-rich-get-married/

I bet that red pill hurts when you take it up the ….

A new study released by the Pew Research center is suggesting that increasing number of men are getting a larger economic boost then their partners when they get married. This has changed over the last decade as women, as a sex, have increased their education level and, subsequently, their earnings. Basically: you’re much more likely to marry a rich girl than you used to be. Maybe it’s not as expensive to fall in love as we thought.

Are we gonna complain? Are we calling you all sorts of things, like parasites? No. Because that’s a cheap dig at the opposite sex and the economy is down, a family has to stick together against the world. Yet still, I get the feeling the usual suspects are going to try and claim victim here (still, despite making bank) and insult women for supporting themselves (aka responsible adulting) and contributing to the home (as men have been asking us to do now two incomes are required to live). We literally cannot win, some people will always complain whatever we do.

Naturally, this shoots their hypergamy idea (not the academic real kind but the stupid idea women only marry to gain male status) and kicks it into its own grave, so don’t expect most of the manosphere to accept the mathematical truths coming out, like the female IQ increase over men (when they take literally the same test). Hypergamy died in the last century. With love matches.

Paper: Non-whites are better off in Britain than White Britons

https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/migration-and-social-mobility-life-chances-britain%E2%80%99s-minority-ethnic-communities

The schools and academia seem to be the cause of this racist rot. Natives are being dispossessed, in a browner country this would rightfully cause outcry from liberals.

Unemployment in certain races is written off as a victim of circumstance rather than a possible lifestyle choice.

  • Exploring differences between religious groups reveals that, controlling for their backgrounds and other characteristics, Jews and Hindus are more likely to end up in a higher social class than their Christian counterparts; Muslims and Sikhs have lower chances.

Christophobia? (now a minority in schools in their own country, scored down on assessments for being ‘too white’)

Sikhophobia?

Jewish Privilege?

Hindu Privilege?

… Brown Guilt?

BTW The economy is screwed.  Some of these findings are not based on merit (IQ).

The 1.54% Boomer Riche

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/aug/27/number-of-millionaires-in-uk-rises-by-200000

One in 65 UK adults now a millionaire, latest figures show

snort lol laugh haha hmph derision yeah duh really uhuh mhmm princess bride

I wonder which generation this could be (mainly).

The number of millionaires in the UK has shot up by 41% over the past five years, with one in 65 adults now classed as having a seven-figure fortune thanks to booming house prices and stock market gains.

The stock market thing is usually a fluke, real estate is the prime moneymaker.

There are now 715,000 millionaires living in Britain compared with 508,000 in 2010, data from Barclays UK shows. Nearly half (48%) of all new millionaires since 2010 live outside London and the south-east.

The bank’s prosperity index found that Reading, Cambridge and Birmingham are the most affluent cities outside of London, and the east of England is the third most prosperous area.

Surging property prices and big returns in equity markets in recent years have combined with higher wages and employment rates to create more millionaires as the UK economy gets back on track.

It isn’t back on track but OK.

The research shows that every UK region is now more affluent than it was five years ago, with measures including household wealth, gross domestic product (GDP), exam results, charitable donations and entrepreneurship taken into account.

QE does that.
They mean NGOs, not charities. A lot of embezzlement.

According to the Office for National Statistics, the richest 10% of households own 44% of household wealth.

And which age group are they? Pray tell.

Akshaya Bhargava, chief executive of Barclays Wealth and Investment Management, said: “The UK is becoming more prosperous, with every region having grown in affluence since 2010. It is also encouraging to see that regions and cities are starting to close the gap with London in terms of prosperity, with the north-east, for example, seeing business growth rates behind only London.”

London and the south-east remain the most prosperous regions, and the capital boasts the most millionaires, up 48% in the past five years to 191,000 – more than the combined millionaire population of Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and northern England.

The east of England comes in third behind these two, as rising house prices push more wealthy Britons outside of London, with 23,000 more millionaires calling the eastern region their home.

Reading is listed second for prosperity in the UK, according to the index, with average earnings of £30,562. Growing numbers of entrepreneurs in the UK is also seen as a factor in increasing wealth, with Cambridge emerging as a startup hub and ranking third.

The north-east and Newcastle fall low on the prosperity index. But the study showed the highest rate of growth in millionaires was in the north-east and Wales, both up 50% since 2010. The study said northern regions “may be on the cusp of change, with the north-east leading the way”.

Despite the jump in wealthy Britons over the past five years, the research said growth in millionaires was expected to return to more normal levels over the long term, with a 9% increase in the UK expected by 2025, in line with GDP growth.

Almost like they brought in a new tax on BTL (buy to letters).

If we go back to before the Boomer panic of the Guardian, to  2011: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2011/feb/28/baby-boomers-secret-millionaires

The inadvertent burden baby boomers have bequeathed the young is sending Britain broke.

…Yet the accusation that boomers are protecting themselves at the expense of everyone else still stands, because relatively ordinary boomers will retire as millionaires, paid for by younger workers. Even the poorer over-50s need to recognise they are going to take out of society more than they put in….

PONNNNNNN-ZIIIIIIIIIIII.

ugh why no please stop god kill me now rdj tony stark

Among other resources;

http://www.nevermindthebuspass.com/wealth/baby-boomers-drive-rise-of-one-in-10-millionaire-households/

One British household in every 10 now has total assets exceeding £1m, according to a new book based on work at the London School of Economics published last week

Wealth in the UK crunched the findings from a comprehensive official survey that took place between 2008 and 2010, and found that 10% of households had total wealth of £967,200 or more….

…As lead author Professor John Hills explains: “It is not that there are millions of people with millions of pounds in the bank, but rather that London property prices and – for those lucky professionals who retain them – final salary pensions have quietly made technical millionaires out of many who would only consider themselves as solidly middle-class”….

i hope you fucking choke love heartbreak

…In addition, over-55s accounted for most of the 2.5m ‘millionaire households’, having benefited in particular from rising house prices. But there’s also a great wealth disparity among households in this age group….

Yet about 1 in 10 of those still managed to fail. Fail to save. Ever. Because magic money.

…The top 10pc in that age group own assets worth more than £1.46m, said Prof Hills, and the typical household had wealth of £431,000…..

…He also warns against the complacent temptation to regard the great surge in wealth at the top end as a “purely paper” phenomenon, arguing instead that it will have implications for social mobility for a long time to come…

translation: Gen Y are fucked.

http://www.if.org.uk/archives/2762/pensioner-millionaires-in-the-uk-identifying-the-numbers

The members of Britain’s baby boomer generation who are just starting to enter retirement have been called “the richest generation in history”. Yet, to a large extent, the British welfare state still treats age as a proxy for need, transferring large amounts of public money to all pensioners in the form of universal benefits, regardless of how wealthy they are.

Old goats for votes.

In order to help further the debate surrounding how Britain’s welfare state should be reformed as the population ages, IF undertook this study to discover how many members of the older generation live in households that have assets of more than £1 million, using data from the 2008/10 Household Wealth and Assets Survey.

The author estimates that in 2011, there were approximately 1.9 million over-60s living in households with asset wealth greater than £1 million, 1 million of whom were over-65 (above state pension age for both males and females). This finding should lead to increased debate about how the British welfare state treats pensioners who have large reserves of private asset wealth, and whether benefits should the distributed according to need rather than age.

Remember the Communist mantra?

no do not want go away displeased

…Pattern? What pattern?

In case you think I’m doom-mongering for Gen Y (Gen X got a mixed bag): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3108441/Generation-Y-left-pick-6trillion-tab-Report-warns-children-born-1980-2000-face-apocalyptic-levels-debt-Government-spending.html

It begins (from this June);

Younger people are being left with ‘apocalyptic’ levels of debt, a report warns today.

I know the feel, bro

So-called Generation Y, born between 1980 and 2000, will be forced to pick up the bill for decades of Government over-spending, it is claimed.

*throws K-selection confetti*

Analysis by the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) accused baby-boomers of making unfunded promises on pensions and benefits and then leaving their children to pick up the bill.

Surges of hormones make Hulk angry

Coupled with unaffordable housing, university debts, poor pensions and a ‘rapidly retreating state pension age’, Generation Y now faces ‘a quality of life below that of their parents’.

The CPS accused politicians of ‘fawning over the baby-boomers and older pensioners’ as they were more inclined to vote. The think-tank says the state’s liabilities – including ‘off the books’ spending commitments – is £6trillion, or £221,000 per household.

In the report, Tory peer Lord Holmes of Richmond said people in their twenties and early thirties faced ‘a struggle not experienced by previous generations’ as they had been left to pick up ‘the tab’.

He said: ‘Why should you suffer a standard of living lower than your parents?’.

The think-tank said overall liabilities had risen by hundreds of millions in the last five years alone – despite the country supposedly living in an age of austerity.

The CPS said the bill would be picked up by today’s young people, so-called Generation Y.

Their parents and the so-called baby boomer generation born after the war have been protected by politicians unwilling to upset older generations who are more likely to vote.

…In a devastating analysis, the report’s author, Michael Johnson, says: ‘Baby-boomers have become masters at perpetrating inter-generational injustice, by making vast unfunded promises to themselves, notably in respect of pensions.

 I love this suit and everything about this demeanour

Case study: Inventor innovation and tax rates

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/11676069/Want-more-inventors-Then-try-lowering-the-top-rate-of-tax.html

By definition, immigrants are highly mobile, and the smartest ones are probably going to have a choice of where they do their best work. They are probably always going to choose a modestly taxed country to base themselves in – after all, there isn’t much point of doing all the work of creating a new product if the government is going to confiscate half of the wealth it creates.

COMMON SENSE!

There is a little shirtiness in there too, for good measure.

Most analysis of the impact of high top rates of tax looks only at the amount of revenue collected, and the incentives to work more or less. But the greatest damage may well come from destroying innovation, and that is not going to be easily captured by that kind of data. …There will be a loss, however – and an even greater one once you take account of the British inventors who move abroad. At 45pc, we still have one of the highest top rates of personal tax in the world. If a lower rate made the UK a magnate for global inventors, then we’d all be better off very quickly – even if there was some short-term loss of revenue.

It’s a simple question: Who does your country value?
The hardworking producers who make your life easier or the envious socialists who want to tax capitalism so hard it becomes impossible, because if they fail, everyone else must?

But top tax rates will make a significant difference. The new paper for the NBER by Ufuk Akcigit, Salomé Baslandze and Stefanie Stantcheva took data from the World Intellectual Property Organization from the 1970s onwards, and looked at the impact of higher top marginal tax rates on the numbers of patents filed. [DS: good methodology] It placed particular emphasis on ‘superstar’ investors – that is, those with the greatest number of patents, and the most valuable ones. It found that higher taxes meant fewer patents and vice versa.

Paper record here: http://www.nber.org/papers/w21024
Remember, patents are filed with government. The policies of the government and treatment therein (red tape) will either encourage OR discourage, there is no neutral because the process is already difficult and expensive.

http://www.nber.org/digest/jun15/w21024.html Two papers on the subject, actually.

If inventors and scientists are important contributors to economic growth in their state or country, then their migration in response to tax progressivity is a potential cost of such a policy. These studies may provide broader insights if the mobility of highly productive inventors sheds light on how taxation affects the location decisions of other educated, talented, high-earning workers.

If you welcome the Boat People (criminals) and shun the high-tech job creators, frankly, your society deserves to die a long and painful death from terminal stupidity.

Under 35? No pension for you.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-2787888/how-state-pension-funded-cash-runs.html

…Cash reserves in the National Insurance Fund have plunged in the past few years and could come up short as soon as next year, forcing the Government to dip into money coming in from general taxation, according to the research.

Baby Boomers need their nudist sex cruises.

The Centre for Policy Studies report warns under-45 they face tax hikes and a later retirement age, and under-35s they can expect the state pension to be scrapped altogether….

Even better, give them a pitying look and smirk no matter what they say.
Oh no who could have foretold such a disaster…
I know exactly what I'm doing, says the INTJ

From the wonderfully titled “The End Should be Nigh“;

Timing aside, with the Fund gone, there would be no justification for HMRC to continue to collect the insurance premium that is NICs.

There is a little good news. A little.

Allow me to draw your attention, dear Reader, to Section 5.4 Fund Exhaustion

…Fund exhaustion, whenever it arises, would be of considerable symbolic significance. It would confirm that even with all the recent cost saving measures (such as sending the SPA into rapid retreat) the forthcoming single-tier State Pension is unsustainable. Either benefits are further watered-down, or Generation Y, [20] in particular, will face rising taxes. This is unreasonable; Generation Y is already faced with unaffordable housing, college debts to repay, fragmented careers and earnings stagnation, and far thinner occupational pensions (DC, not DB, bar the public sector) than their baby boomer parents.[21] It is perhaps no surprise then that the 25-34 years old age group (i.e. core Generation Y) are the least likely to live in households in the top total wealth band. Conversely, only 4% of individuals aged 55-64 years (i.e. baby boomers), and 4% aged 65 or older, live in households in the lowest total wealth band.

[20] = Under-35s.

It gets better.

..In extremis, perhaps we should gradually put an end Corporation Tax altogether, replacing it with consumer taxes?…

crying laughter lmao

Let’s see The Guardian Media Group and its readers evade those, with their lifestyle of conspicuous consumption.
In short, fuck Baby Boomers.  I cannot stress this enough.
If you’re new and think that’s too far or unfair, see Best Post. In short, I refuse to work my arse off until I drop dead so they can spend half their extended lifespan fucking around and spreading STDs on every continent.

They can’t pull the wool over our eyes for much longer.

They’ll starve anyway, idiots failed to not abort have enough children, expecting they could sponge off other people’s – creating a ‘tragedy of the commons’ because everyone had the same ‘bright’ idea and children ARE the original pension plan, after all. They work for you when you cannot. We’ll vote to drop their “entitlements” when we realise en masse how they screwed us on every conceivable front.

Data drive: IQ, immigrants and economy prosperity

Data dump incoming… you’re welcome in advance.

bow tony stark iron man expo
As we all know, intelligent people contribute more to the economy.

We also know IQ differences remain in immigrants, closer to their country of origin (race).

We also also know the wealth or poverty of a nation is a major, HUGE factor of national (racial) IQ. (PDF link here).

We also^3 know that the better a state’s overall IQ, the higher voter turnout; (clue: civic duty)

Voter turnout as a percentage of the voter-eligible population and average IQ correlate at a statistically significant .65 (p<.000001) at the state level. Average IQ alone thus ‘explains’ 42% of a state’s voter turnout. That is a strong relationship for the social sciences. Put in another way, it suggests that for every one point increase a state’s average IQ, voter turnout should increase by nearly 4%.

We know we must avoid the sociologist’s fallacy scrambling for socialisation-causation from correlation (kudos: very detailed site).

We know high mutant (mutation/genetic) loads can impact brain development, function and cause various diseases (even relatively harmless ones like epilepsy) e.g. “Most pathogenic mtDNA mutations act recessively and only cause disease when present at high mutant loads (typically >90%) in tissues such as muscle and brain.” The Mating Mind refers to the evolution of intelligence as a way to spot mutation load and develop an aversion to it (“our mate preferences have been shaped more to avoid mating with high-mutation load individuals”).
e.g. explainer of the genes (and ‘load’ effect) again;

Various researchers have suggested that g may be simply an index of a general fitness factor – an indirect measure of the mutational load of an organism.  The idea is that, while we all carry hundreds of deleterious mutations, some of us carry more than others, or ones with more severe effects.  These effects in combination can degrade the biological systems of development and physiology in a general way, rendering them less robust and less able to generate our Platonic, ideal phenotype.  In this model, it is not the idea that specific mutations have specific effects on specific traits that matters so much – it is that the overall load cumulatively reduces fitness through effects at the systems level.  This means that the mutations affecting intelligence in one person may be totally different from those affecting it in another – there will be no genes “for intelligence”.

social metaphor: Imagine you’re on a group project and you have to babysit the village idiot while working. Now imagine the group is the economy and that’s your drag effect on productivity and prosperity.

boom boom boom blackadder

For the evolution-deniers, it (intelligence) also seems to predict beauty too (as measured by visually-appealing symmetry) so yes it would be sexually selected for, pack up and go home. And a beautiful brain, which is much more important genetically.

“Those with higher intelligence are presumed to have a lower mutation load”  source source2

Add to what we know about IQ, immigrants and the economy… (well, you do now).

Fact: The Flynn effect doesn’t apply to this century (which social policy changed the demographics in the First World)?

Gee, I wonder what this shows in light of the Flynn thing.

h/t post inspired by: http://thefutureprimaeval.net/the-weak-galt-hypothesis/
and to a lesser extent by this: http://www.xenosystems.net/cold-water/
there’s ya data

Sex and IQ bonus round (aka most women aren’t smart enough for the economy to need them working): http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/06/29/invisible-women/

The IQ loss in the West is actually under-estimated and going by current demographics (UK for example, is now majority-minority children at primary school level because we pay them like breeding sows) this will get much, much worse for the economy. The biggest mistake the Left ever made was expecting they could switch out the White Working Class (WWC) with foreign replacements like cogs and they’d be able to work as hard. So our economy is still going to go to shit due to our low fertility rates (thanks feminism) but it will be compounded by rent-seeking, “racial tensions” and probably Civil War at some point when the benefits stop (the London Riot times a thousand, and that was over nothing).

mean girls regina george that's really interesting sarcasm