Going Green? Are You Serious?

If you live in the U.S., you may have noticed one of the bigger fads going around lately that I directly attribute to the “we deserved 9/11” nonsense being propagated by the feminine men in this country. It’s something like “Save the environment! Go green! Healthy! Endangered Animals! Hybrids!”. What a bunch of bullshit. I could go off on any number of these hippie topics, but I don’t have the time. Instead, let’s explore one that pisses me off the most: Conserving oil.

I mean, why should we conserve oil? Last I checked, oil is an nonrenewable natural resource, which means it will run out at some point. This will most likely happen between 2036 and 2050. We can’t change this. This leaves us with only one relevant question:

1. Do we want the oil to run out as quickly as possible, or as slowly as possible?

If mathematics has taught me anything, it’s taught me that looking at the extreme cases will provide you with an incredible amount of insight about a problem. This problem is no different. Let’s look at the two scenarios:

Oil runs out as slowly as possible

Let’s say American conservation efforts are successful at prolonging the lifespan of oil. Which countries does this help the most? Undoubtedly it’s developing countries that need this oil to modernize their countries and make their economies globally competitive. China is doing everything they can, including making deals with literally any corrupt/murderous oil rich country, in a desperate search for oil to fuel this desire. Remember, for every drop of oil you don’t use, China will use. This is so obvious to me that it needs to be repeated. But I never repeat myself, I’ll just underline it. Sweet ass.

If oil lasts longer, cost pressures on oil sold in the global market will be minimized. This will allow the Chinese to grow into a world superpower, maybe THE world superpower, in the most uninhibited way possible. As everyone who doesn’t already know will see during the Olympic Games this summer, this isn’t a good thing.

Oil runs out as quickly as possible

Pussies in this country might have you believe that using an excess amount of gasoline or home heating fuel is bad for your country. After all, this will bring up prices (unless they’re fixed somehow) and will reduce the total amount of oil left on the planet, which can only be bad. Didn’t you get the memo? We have to conserve everything natural!!!

But they are wrong. If we use as much oil as possible, we reduce the global oil supply. Would this cause a global recession? Maybe. But isn’t that almost inevitable? And the U.S. would be much better equipped to handle oil running out before it was projected to than other countries would be. Well, at least better equipped than China would be. They’d be fucked. Remember, somebody is going to use the oil and it might as well be us.

I think it would be in our best interest if oil ran out when we were at our strongest. Keeping oil around allows developing nations to get stronger, so we would like the oil to run out as quickly as possible. And don’t even hit me with that “it’s better for the world as a whole” nonsense either.

And what would we do when there was no oil left, you say? Necessity is the mother of invention. And under those circumstances, if you don’t think a Manhattan Project for the energy crisis could be completed by the world’s greatest minds, you’re kidding yourself.

Side note, if you want to know why the U.S. is more dependent on foreign oil than ever, look at the following graph. Domestic oil production peaked in 1970 and has been falling ever since:

Hm, now that I’m thinking about it, maybe I gave China a little too much credit. Maybe they’re just another fatally flawed superpower-wannabe. On the other hand, I’d rather not risk China taking over. Especially since Thai, Korean, and Vietnamese girls are hotter than Chinese girls. In any case, conserving oil is at best delaying the inevitable. Let’s just use it all and get to the point already.

Food Prices Rising, Fat People Terrified

With all the news focused on politics (a White couple worth over $100M calling a Black man “out of touch” with less fortunate Americans is beyond ironic), you may have missed the Global outrage over rising food prices. I mean, there are riots breaking out all around the world, pushing many poorer countries into dangerously unstable situations that threaten Global security. Maybe that should be a bigger story here in the U.S., call me crazy.

Anyway, like most people who read the news, you might be wondering: “How does this affect me?” Well, I’m glad you asked. This is such a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make advances against the Fat People that I’m actually giddy with excitement. Here’s exactly what should happen:

• Impose a Stoplight Tax on all foods deemed to be ‘Terrifically Unhealthy’

What’s a Stoplight Tax? It works like this: every year you get a checkup with a personal care physician. From looking at you, he will be able to tell with 99% certainty if you fall into the Green, Yellow, or Red “health zones”. If you’re in the Green zone, you get an ID card or something, and when you show it you don’t have to pay the tax for Terrifically Unhealthy foods. If you’re in the Yellow zone (moderately unhealthy, definitely unattractive), you have to pay a 50% tax on those foods. And the Red zone (disgustingly obese, ~40% of US population): you have to pay a 500% tax on the aforementioned foods.

It goes without saying that in the event you don’t have your ID card with you or you never got one to begin with, the guy at the checkout counter will take your picture and assign you a zone. These pictures will be placed on the internet where everyone will vote for their favorite Red Zoners.

This revolutionary tax will reduce unhealthy food consumption to the point where we will have an excess of unhealthy foods. Then, we can ship them overseas to the rioting poor people, but only if they agree to let us put military bases there, give us access to their natural resources, and sign pro-US trade agreements. Those governments will have no choice. Wait, I think we’re doing this already.

Eventually, the Red Zoners will have to move into the Yellow Zone or move to Canada where they won’t impose Stoplight Taxes. They’ll just have high food prices for everyone and free heathcare for all Red Zoners. Combining that with the fat-friendly climate, Canada is a fantasy land for Red Zoners. Maybe they’ll even dress one of the bigger ones in a hockey goalie uniform and have them lay in front of the goal to completely block all incoming shots. Why has this not been done already?

Using Money/Status/Power to get Women

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

When I think about feminists and their revolution, I think about what their goals are. I assume these to be:

• The removal of the ‘glass ceiling’ (ability to climb the corporate ladder)
• Ugly girls getting treated like pretty girls do (looks don’t matter in life)
• Being self-sufficient (women don’t need men financially, emotionally, or physically)
• Sexual equality (women should be able to sleep with whoever they want, whenever)

What do these goals really mean? Let’s break them down:

• I’d turn into a man if I could
• I hate his girlfriend
• I’d turn into a man if I could
• I hate his girlfriend

Who, exactly, says women are complicated? It’s that single guy in his late 30’s who spent his post-college years working 65 hours a week, and he doesn’t get why girls aren’t impressed with his ‘power job’. And, of course, it should go without mentioning that the only metric he judges women by is their looks. More specifically, their “20-feet-away-looks” because that’s the distance other people will judge his trophy and (due to the life he constructed) how they will judge him and his status. (Note: girls that look better/worse at certain distances is another topic entirely that I will handle at a later time. My on-and-off relationship with glasses makes me an expert in this field.).

So, to sum it up: this type of man successfully climbed the corporate ladder, thinks his looks don’t matter, is completely self-sufficient, and bangs mudturtles, but doesn’t understand why his coveted hottie falls for those guys who aren’t as ‘successful and established’ as he is. If you’ll notice, he’s successfully acquired what many feminists want, but it’s completely failed him and left him unhappy except for the moments of post-coital bliss after banging said mudturtles (we’ve all been there, let’s be honest).

The moral: Feminists are trying to go down the same road of cold, unemotional objectivity that has failed so many men. Money, status, and power will not make you happier and they are never associated with love or freedom. Excuse me, I have to get off my high horse now.

Anyway, what was the point here? Oh yeah, when I see that guy with hundreds of dollars worth of clothes on, drinking by himself, then I see that other guy wearing a t-shirt, looking off mindlessly into the distance while some sex bomb is doing everything she can to keep his attention, I don’t ever want to be that guy in the suit.