Pretty much, most social programs are targeted at women while the biggest entrepreneurs and independent businesses are owned by men.
That used to not be an issue under the previous patriarchal paradigm but the 'gibs me more' culture of feminism has upset the balance and now we are staring over a pit with the Western economies.
I mean, it really depends how you measure all of this. Most of the careers women go into are arguably net negatives on society as a whole. Take public school for example. The whole system is paid for by taxpayers so even if female teachers pay taxes and don't get any "benefits", their whole salary is funded by tax payers. Does public education add value to society? I would argue that public school is a net negative to society as a whole and we'd be better off if women home-schooled instead of having public education.
Social workers? Net negative. Psychology? Net negative. Not for profit charities? Net negative.
The way the wealth is distributed, only the wealthiest people are on average going to be net positive. Especially if we all paid the same tax rate. As is, middle class people pay higher rates than the wealthy, making their contribution look more positive.
I'm think it's well known that men are net taxpayers and women's gibs cost more than women pay into the system.
Pretty much, most social programs are targeted at women while the biggest entrepreneurs and independent businesses are owned by men.
That used to not be an issue under the previous patriarchal paradigm but the 'gibs me more' culture of feminism has upset the balance and now we are staring over a pit with the Western economies.
I mean, it really depends how you measure all of this. Most of the careers women go into are arguably net negatives on society as a whole. Take public school for example. The whole system is paid for by taxpayers so even if female teachers pay taxes and don't get any "benefits", their whole salary is funded by tax payers. Does public education add value to society? I would argue that public school is a net negative to society as a whole and we'd be better off if women home-schooled instead of having public education.
Social workers? Net negative. Psychology? Net negative. Not for profit charities? Net negative.
Women being under the authority of any man that isn't her father or husband is always a bad thing
Dude you're not trynna tell me you (THE IMP??) didn't already know this...
This is like late 2014 "maybe feminism isn't that great after all" OG Zoe Post days stuff in my journey.
Welcome to the party I guess; better late than never :p
Maybe he’s trying to avoid saying anything that might get him banned.
(:
Is it not trivial to get a different name tho?
The way I write would be too recognizable.
He did know. He's pretending he just "discovered" this to repost it.
I would never.
(I'm fishing for sources, actually. It's a nice statistic, but I need the origin)
He is nothing if not incredibly lazy.
Obviously its true. In any relationship men pay more than women.
But there is a balance between men and women through the generations.
More dangerous is replacing native populations with illegal invaders. There are no evolutionary forces to stop a genocide.
It's not just men, it's also broken down by race. Some races are, on average, a net drain.
Here's one example: https://media.patriots.win/post/cuBKWeY0Kd9X.png
without clicking, only whites and asians are net positive tax payers
Correct, homie.
The way the wealth is distributed, only the wealthiest people are on average going to be net positive. Especially if we all paid the same tax rate. As is, middle class people pay higher rates than the wealthy, making their contribution look more positive.