~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
monsieurhire2
[–]2comment 11 points12 points13 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link
Men invested in the economy are certainly interested in making women consumers and producers. Work itself is often an excercise in consumption, in transport, work clothes, daycare, fastfood, etc. It does not equate to happiness, however, as legions of burned out middle aged men can attest.
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Also, women are easier to sell stuff to than men are. Because their self worth is so tied up in their appearance they spend a lot of money on it.
[–]FullMetalAsshole 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Its this 100%. He keeps mentioning womens lack of standing in government as a symptom of socially imposed genderism but all I hear is "50% of the market hasn't been fully utilized! Think of the profits!"
[–]WAFC 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Yep, just mindless GDP worship. One of the comments has an excellent point about all the things which don't contribute to GDP, but arguably make a country worth living in.
And what is the response of women, when told, "you should be free to be wage slaves like the men"? Applause.
And another comment has the gall to proclaim women "smarter" than men.
Ha. Ha. Ha.
[–]charlesbukowksi 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
their real worth is tied with it too
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Yeah, I guess they aren't as dumb as we think they are, right? haha
[–]charlesbukowksi 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
emotionally stable? no. rational? no. self-sufficient? no. shrewd? yes.
[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
You didn't read the article closely enough, and missed the point.
[–]WAFC 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
No, that was definitely his main point. It was couched in progressive buzz words and feminist spew, but the core of the message was, "Women, get out there and make me (and the other men in my position) more money than we already have! It's for your freedom!"
[–]trpMilo 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link
He has to pay lip service to feminism and high tax rates etc. As one of the wealthiest men alive, with more wealth than probably the bottom 25% of Americans, he should be a target of scrutiny by liberals, but instead he pays homage to social justice and everybody loves him. See also George Soros
[–]fuck_u_superego 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link
could you explain why he HAS to do this ? what does he gain by this?
specially concerning feminism. thanks
edit:thanks for the response guys. appreciate it.
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
It makes him look good and takes the eyes away from any harmful things he allows to the working class like outsourcing and automation. The guy is definitely Red Pill because he knows how people work and has made an empire out of it.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
"Has" is an oversimplification of "gains more than he loses by obfuscating while also avoiding large amounts of bad publicity by opining otherwise".
Even if Buffet were to hold "RedPill" ideas - and I have no idea whether he does or not - it is much easier for a public figure to maintain the status quo rather than suffer the potential effects of a media firestorm. This is doubly true when the subject in question (in this case social functions) is tangential to one's primary goal (in his case, business).
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
You didn't read the article closely enough and missed the point.
[–]trpMilo 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
No goddamnit I didn't. Are you copy/pasting that reply to every comment on your link? I understand what you're saying, that Buffett as a capitalist has incentive to increase the pool of labor. What I'm saying doesn't contradict this, and simply gives him more incentive to profess his feminism, whether or not he actually believes any of this is good for society in the whole.
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
They don't believe in anything other than what enhances their own power. It's all rhetoric and argument. If he wanted a different outcome, he'd use a different argument.
[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
Smart man, don't be mistaken, he knows how it is and what he is doing. Obviously..., he made billions from knowing what's coming.
Why have women at home with children when they can strengthen the work force and cut the salary almost in half?
I am a little surprised with the fact that he clearly doesn't care what will happen with the country in the long run. He is hiding his sociopathy and narcissism well.
Start with the fact that our country's progress since 1776 has been mind-blowing, like nothing the world has ever seen.
Yeah, and it was all done by men while women took care of households and catered children. I like how nobody is even trying to fight his weak arguments because he is "the" W. Buffet.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Constructs like countries are just fictional abstractions to these people. They care about what they can extract from people until they can't anymore, then they change course. We're basically cattle to them, and they're wolves.
[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link
We're basically cattle to them, and they're wolves.
adequate analogy
What we here and rest of them men need to learn is that proper alpha, Putin, Buffet etc., are not friends to men, not other alphas and certainly not betas. That's why you can see politicians almost selling their souls to women. Why? Vote power. There is more of them, less of them dies, you can't win anymore without women. That's why shit will go bad in incoming decades.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
They're not selling their souls to women; they're engaging in social engineering that weakens most men and puts them the male oligarchs in advantageous positions versus those men, thus making the oligarch more appealing to women, who they still control through government and corporate employment. The women then basically compete with the men to be their slaves, and the women have the advantageous of being able to use their vaginas to get ahead. These men are basically gender traitors.
[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
They're not selling their souls to women
obviously, I meant "what looks like", not sure why I didn't write it... ;)
These men are basically gender traitors.
Not in their minds. Like I said, a proper alpha male is certainly not a friend to a man. Your cattle-wolf analogy is spot on.
[–]haxorroxor 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
He sees what's coming ahead - more women are graduating from college, which means greater % of female participation in the labor force. A service-sector dominated economy in the U.S. is well suited for women.
I am not sure if this is really how it will pan out (no one knows the exact future) because many of these women will leave/take time off to raise families, and the college degrees that women are getting might be useless ones that leave them burdened with debt.
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
He sees what's coming ahead.
Lol.
What we're living in now, is the middle of a trend that began in the 1910's, and picked up steam in the 1950's and 1960's. Ever notice all the television shows having women that worked corporate jobs and how that lifestyle was glamorized?
This guys is basically espousing the so-called feminist doctrine everybody derides, chapter and verse, as if he believes it himself. You might even say he's a feminist.
[–]watersign 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link
I personally dont have a problem with women being in high power roles..as long as they are competent. The funny thing is though, with the exception of Sheryl Sandberg, you never hear succesful women talking about feminism and all this GIRRRLLL power bullshit. How come Blythe Masters (Head of commodities at JPMorgan) isn't telling people to lean in?
P.S Warren Buffet is a genius when it comes to PR..this guy is the biggest tax cheat that ever existed in the history of modern capitalism but he keeps his old grandpa image to keep people listening to him. notice how the occupy wall street crowd wanted to kill every wall st bank/banker, but no mention of Berkshire?? His reputation management is phenomenal.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Indeed. Old Gramps Buffet is the master. I suspect it's partly because he has the Establishment by the balls, having bailed out so many of their crooked banks in sweet-heart deals. He now gets special dispensation that nobody else does because too many people try to front-run him.
[–]watersign 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
He IS the establishment. Do an overylay of Berkshire class A stocks with the S&P500 and Dow Jones industrial average on chart and see for yourself.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Oh, believe me, I know.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I don't have a problem with women in high power roles, in theory. In practice, you get mass disenfrachisement of men, shrinking population, lots of unmarried men and women, children raised by the state. It's something straight out of Orwell. It would be different if it were considered socially acceptable for men to raise children, but its not, so many are told to go and compete with women who are told they can have it all. It would be one thing if the woman is a fucking genius who can make a unique, irreplaceable contribution to human culture, and is being held back by "the system," but historically, most people who have made unique contributions have been allowed to do so, albeit with some resistance, which is ultimately conquered by common sense.
[–]watersign 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Very few women are capable of being in high power roles though. This is why feminism is a complete croc of dogshit...most women have no idea how much hard work and sacrifice it takes to get to the next level.
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link
Wow. Can't believe nobody understood what the hell I was talking about. Here, I'll spoon-feed it to you:
"For most of our history, women -- whatever their abilities -- have been relegated to the sidelines. Only in recent years have we begun to correct that problem. "
Only if you call raising children the sidelines, and discount all the cultural contributions by female aristocrats, Warren.
"After all, who wants to double the number of competitors for top positions?"
Why, the owner and managerial classes, Warren! Doubling the labor pool drives down wages and increases tax revenue for sweet-heart crony capitalist deals.
"The moment I emerged from my mother's womb, however, my possibilities dwarfed those of my siblings, for I was a boy! And my brainy, personable, and good-looking siblings were not. My parents would love us equally, and our teachers would give us similar grades. But at every turn my sisters would be told -- more through signals than words -- that success for them would be "marrying well." I was meanwhile hearing that the world's opportunities were there for me to seize."
This is how the human race continues; humans form families and have children, Warren.
"Too many women continue to impose limitations on themselves, talking themselves out of achieving their potential. Here, too, I have had some firsthand experience."
Among the scores of brilliant and interesting women I've known is the late Katharine Graham, long the controlling shareholder and CEO of the Washington Post Co."
What works for the aristocracy doesn't scale for the masses. A rich woman can afford to have a career. Most other women wind up as wage-slaves.
Anyway, as I've said before, feminism, in all likelihood was perpetuated by wealthy male oligarchs. Who wins if the male masses of men are emasculated? Wealthy men, who can then make whores out of as many women as their libido can handle. So, the next time you guys start bitching about obscure Marxist, feminist professors, remember that the true face of your enemy is the one that keeps paying them to peddle their misandrist theories.
[–]heist_of_saint_graft 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I agree with every single word you wrote. The Ponzi scheme that is consumer capitalism would've collapsed back in the 1970s were it not for the sudden change of heart that the Elites had: "Actually, we very much want women in the workforce!" (Translation: we need to drive down the price of labor, increase the tax base, and put money in the hands of "empowered women" who do the majority of trinket-buying and conspicuous consumption.)
(That said, you can put down your condescension and the spoon, Jack. If you're not going to put your analysis in the main post, don't whinge when others have a different take on it than yours.)
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thanks! Getting a lot of hate for this post.
[–]Ahabh 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Agreed, and well said.
Well said, I completely agree.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Nice big smoking gun, Warren.
[–]JesusJuked 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Well if The Sage of Omaha said it, or at least this guy said he said it, then it must be true!
[–]someboringdude 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Hes only kissing the feminist's asses so he can put them to work. Its genius the more women that leave the family life and get to work is more women that he can sell his products to.
[–]selfishgene32 -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I am a keen observer of WB , People imply more than what warren buffet says...like WB is bullish on stocks (doesn't mean that he buys all stock). Similarly he is bullish on women (doesn't mean that he is bullish on Paris Hilten of the world.) If you look at women in his business life ...Rose Blumpkin , Karl Loomis and Meryl Whitman. They are all no nonsense women.
You missed the point.
[–]Mitchell78 -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Waren Buffet is a mangina.
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Getting warmer, but not quite.
© TheRedArchive 2024. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]2comment 11 points12 points13 points (8 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 15 points16 points17 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]FullMetalAsshole 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WAFC 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]charlesbukowksi 5 points6 points7 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]charlesbukowksi 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]WAFC 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]trpMilo 6 points7 points8 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–]fuck_u_superego 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]trpMilo 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -5 points-4 points-3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Endorsed Contributor30303030303030 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]haxorroxor 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]watersign 2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]watersign 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]watersign 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]heist_of_saint_graft 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ahabh 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Ahabh 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]JesusJuked 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]someboringdude 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]selfishgene32 -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Mitchell78 -2 points-1 points0 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link