RE:societal ills

[Guest guest]

>From: " angesc2001 " <AngInfoHound@...>

>Funny, because this is EXACTLY my theory!!! I've shared it with

>intelligent people who INVARIABLY shoot it down. But it's true if you

>ask me. The real estate market only shot up AFTER " women's liberation " .

That's because they make us think the social engineering is GOOD. Who could

dislike women's rights? Yet, that is the right to be treated more like a

man. That is to take value away from the wife and mother aspect of the

female. Sure, they can still try to be good mothers while carting off baby

to daycare, and now the hard working husband can also pitch in because she

works now too. After all, it makes them better fathers. Even if they try

to be good mothers, it is different. Daycare providers don't love your

children.

Part of the problem is, women were always as good as men and could do most

of the things men could. They had nothing to prove. That's why they can

work with us. The question was always whether they should be taking away

jobs from men who had families to support. The answer became yes, if they

wanted to change society, so that men and women did substantially the same

thing.

I never understood the driving force behind the migration to the workforce.

I'm sure there was a reason, I'm not sure why it happened. My wife said

" women get jobs so they'll be able to support themselves if they marry a

jerk. " Well, maybe that's it as I haven't found a better reason.

Maybe they just all suddenly decided money was the most important thing, and

their family, children included would have a lot more if they worked hard

like their husbands. Historically, women did the best they could for their

families, and someone convinced them joining the work force was what was

best for the family.

>(Women's lib was a big joke too. Before I was relegated to being a

>wife & mother, but now I can pick my poison. But ecomonics dictate

>that I MUST drink the poison.)

My econ professor in college said, " the classic definition of inflation is

too much money chasing too few goods. " I don't hear that definition any

more. But, what it means, is if you increase the money supply in the home

for everyone, your price of goods will go up.

Skipper

> >

>

> >

> > >I don't say any of these to be critical or harsh. I am in category 1

> > > & 2. But due to #1 I've recently left category #3 and joined the

> > >crackpot category. It ain't easy explaining to people how an entire

> > >society can be so damn corrupt without their implicit knowledge...a

> > >few short months ago I would have thought I was an extremeist crackpot

> > >too!

> >

> > If you look, it's easy to see there's a very unpleasant big picture

>going

> > on. The social engineeriing which hasn't been good for anyone is

>easy to

> > see. The only thing difficult to see is who' or whats really behind it.

>

>

>Yes, if you're looking for the specific perpetrators. But really,

>it's not that hard...it's the giant corporations who quietly run the

>government, the country, and frankly, the world. Scary. And I'm a

>crackpot.

>

>

>

>

>

>Iodine