Sex in the Post Parasitic Economy | Isn't it strange? In the good old pre COVID days nobody actually questioned how the western economy worked. For all intents and purposes most Westerners assumed their prosperity and that of their nations was based on their own hard work and guile. However, It took the incredible and traumatising lockdowns for the average person to understand they were living their lives based on some very dangerous assumptions. To the surprise of many it turns out most consumer goods were in fact manufactured somewhere else. To the surprise of many it turns out a lot of jobs weren't that necessary to begin with. Of course, this was absolutely no surprise to the economists and also to the amateurs like myself. We had known for a long time that a lot of the jobs existing in the western economy were just part of what I like to call a parasitic economy. What is the parasitic economy? The parasitic economy is the economy based on unnecessary jobs who produce little to no Actual value. Most of these jobs Are what we call The service economy. They consist from low to medium skilled work that is being provided to consumers who are actually producing value for the society and the economy. As we realised During the lockdown, many of these jobs were not only unnecessary, but also produced no value whatsoever. To the surprise of very few of the people who pay attention to how economy works, turns out that Karl Marx was right about this one thing: the value of work is directly related to the plus value being produced. This has led to abnormal situations like the West has been living in since 1972. Every economist knows 1972 was the last time the US and Western Europe actually had a peak standard of living. Since then, the western economy, the purchase power of wages and the general standard of living in the West have been in a persistent and accelerated decline. This is because the plus value has disappeared slowly but certainly from the western economy. The manufacturing jobs, the spine of any productive society, the most important part and the largest producer of plus value in any economy, have slowly disappeared, being outsourced to poorer countries or automated away. Since the service jobs require someone else to provide plus value to the economy, the reduction in the jobs that produce plus value has meant that a higher and higher percentage of the national income had to be used in order to provide for the parasitic jobs. Together with a serious increase in the welfare expenditures of the western states, both with regards to the increase life expectancy of pensioners which had not been correlated with an increased in pension contribution, together with a larger and larger welfare state, have led to the unbelievable situation where in most western economies the 20% top of taxpayers have to carry the burden of the entire economy. The pension bomb or social bomb is a long known danger lurking like an Architeuthis in the bowels of the West. The truth of the matter is that the grey vote of the boomers is far too important in the pretend democracy the West is coming to the end of, and therefore nobody has ever had the courage to address this very serious problem. Namely the fact that the current pension contribution of the average person was calculated in the 1950s when people on average lived about seven years after they retired. While nowadays, people live an average of 25 to 35 years after they retired, while still paying pensions calculated on the assumption that they will only live 7 years. This means that for the rest of the lives of the retired for which they have not paid into their pension pot, the entire society has had to chipped in for several decades. If you ever ask yourself why is it that younger people can no longer afford to buy starter homes to start families or to accumulate any wealth is because despite the fact that the society as a whole has been forced by the grey vote to provide for their continued luxurious standard of living, that is not enough. Therefore the Boomers, because they are the people we are talking about, have been forced to supplement their income by selling their goods accumulated in times of prosperity at very low prices in order to maintain their standard of living. This means that for the past at least four decades, we have witnessed a continuous process of wealth transfer from the young to the old. The same type of process has happened with regards to the welfare. The introduction of welfare as a lifestyle, or lifelong welfare for certain parts of the population, whose main contribution to the society became continuous consumption and production of children, has increased this wealth transfer this time from the entire rest of the society who pays taxes to the welfare recipients. The producer and retailers of consumer goods, use advertising and pop culture to create a delusion of wealthy life standard that everybody had to obey. And then it expected all of the people who paid their formation taxes to pay for the welfare part of the society to attain the same unrealistic standard of living at the cost of everything else the taxpayer became more and more fleece leading to the insane situation where people who worked and paid taxes had a lower standard of living than people who lived on welfare for life. And on top of these very dangerous classes of people whose existence and standard of living and increased expectations had to be catered to by the taxpayers we have the parasitic jobs. A lot of people do not understand just how little benefit to society and the economy their jobs provide. As mentioned before it was during the lockdowns that so many people understood how much money they were wasting on services provided by these parasitic jobs. Bizarre as it might seem, neither the people's standard of living nor the society as a whole suffer a tremendous amount of loss without baristas, nail workers and even more importantly various shop cashiers. The very important conclusion here did not escape the large companies. Namely the fact that so many of their employees were, for all intents and purposes pretty damn useless. It became very very clear to many of these companies that at the end of the day they did not need that much stuff. That for example you can actually replace most of the cashiers in a shop with selfcheckouts without losing customers but significantly reducing the company's costs of employment. Of course the customers weren't happy about it but at the same time, done on a large enough scale, this would have ended up in a significant reduction in the number of people who despite being employed are actually a burden on the real net taxpayers. But this was just a rather minor aspect of this contraction in the jobs market. As it turns out a lot of companies realised just how many of their employees were not producing value. For example that you do not need an entire secretarial pool when you have voice to speech software. Couple that with self scheduling applications, and you have put out of work 90% of the secretaries Of course most of these parasitic jobs are being held by women. Truth of the matter is, that outside of mainly female fields like education healthcare and childcare, the number of women who actually do produce plus value in the economy is rather low. Add to this the increased costs of employing a woman for the employer on the state like maternity benefits plus the unrecorded goodwill gestures like allowing mothers to constantly live work early take more days off in order to care for the children, and the result becomes that it is not in fact good for the bottom line or for the society to have women work outside of the home. As it turns out the fact that we means wages are also taxed does not remotely compensate for the losses society incurs by the simple presence of the women in the working force. These losses are as follows: 1 a significant reduction in the number of children 2 a significant increase in family unrest and unhappiness leading to more divorces 3 a significant increase in various forms of welfare 4 A significant increase in parasitic jobs 5 an overall significant reduction in the happiness and the standard of living of the Society of a whole. Whatever profit was aimed to achieve by employing women namely the possibility of taxing twice more incomes and selling more things at the same time, has been completely erased by the damage is caused to a society where half of the population are working women. Of course the consequence is that with the freefall in the value of western currency and in the standard of living created by the end of the neocolonialist economic paradigm, all of these coupled with increased technological aides and the realisation by the corporations and society thanks to the lockdowns that the parasitic jobs provide nothing of value, the result is, as predicted by the sci-fi writer Norman Spinrad in the 1987 novel Little Heroes, the creation of a permanent floating layer of unemployed and unemployable people living on the border of poverty whose very purpose is to still be consumers while receiving nothing or very little from the society. Since most of these jobs are being done by women and they will be there for the first affected by this permanent contraction of the job market, the result will be an immediate and unavoidable return to more patriarchal family values. We have already witnessed during The lockdowns, a dissolution of family units created on shoddy basis. Amusingly enough while the families without children and cohabitation relationships outside of marriage dissolved at a tremendous rate, the number of marriages increased during an immediately after the lockdowns. Furthermore, we are seeing a return of the paradigm of the man as provider in the context of relationships and marriage. Suddenly, a man's financial capacity and prospects have become tremendously important factors in women's choice of mate. However since we have witnessed in these past 60 years a tremendous dissolution of the institution of marriage it would appear that today's women based on their own political affiliation and intellectual capacity are split in the middle with regards to how they wish to employ the "man as a provider" paradigm. The ones more traditional and coming from a traditional right wing and quite importantly European, Asian and Indian descent have been orienting towards marriage. We have seen an increase in the perceived value in the media of women's traditional occupations like housekeepin, cleaning and raising children. At the same time women coming from the left side of the political spectrum, from broken families and women with an education beyond high school appear to be more inclined to regard the paradigm of the "man as provider" in the context of a new quasi matrimonial prostitution paradigm. At the same time we are noting a significant increase in promiscuous behaviour from both men and women in the West. While this is normally a behaviour associated with increased instability in any society For women of lower class and value, the fact homosexuality has been liberated and mainstreamed to such a degree has led to a similar sort of behaviour from homosexual males. The result being that both women and men appear to be competing for the possibility of a quasimarital prostitution paradigm as in the search for a rich man willing to provide for them in exchange for sex. Unfortunately this is a very worrying situation in terms of the future of society who will always need children and the commitment and extended work ethics of parents in order to develop and evolve. This is the reason why, for example, the West has fallen behind in terms of inventions, discoveries and innovations, because the basic impulse of making a better world for one's children has been destroyed by divorce, homosexuality, and promiscuity. This is also together with the yet improperly unaccounted for effects of the covid experimental MRNA vaccine the reason why we are seeing such a tremendous loss in mentality across the West. While the alarm bells have not yet begun to officially sound, truth of the matter is that natality numbers for 2023 were solidly starting around 30% less than they were for 2019. We are therefore looking at decaying societies threatened by: A social bomb of increasingly ageing people who have not paid or saved sufficiently for their survival post pension and will expect the state to pick up the slack 1. A demographic collapse due to not having enough children B and then economic collapse due to the aforementioned two. 2. Add to this the unavoidable danger of the bottom 30 to 40 percent of the population who have been a welfare burden for the plus value producing layers of society for half a century now, coupled with what will probably be by 2030 a complete end to no skill jobs, and the result is about to become quite simply a dystopic one: not enough working people to support everyone else and not enough food for anybody. Add to this disastrous situation the current war that has led to a complete split between the West and the global South as desired by the aforementioned global South and the result is going to be unavoidably the exile, isolation and eventual complete extinction of the Western countries unless they found a way to fit into the new eastern southern paradigm BRICS with the new customs that come with it including and not limited to a serious control on the roles of women in society and adjusting to living in again in societies who value traditions and faith. we're SCREWED |
If you enjoy our work, please share it on your medium of choice.
While we are a free site and make no money from traffic, more visitors mean a larger the number of people who get to see an alternative view.
Thank you
