Wednesday, 23 May 2018

Theranos And The Silicon Valley Bubble

The Silicon Valley Bubble

Theranos, a new startup tech company with a 'female' CEO which was going to revolutionize the lab testing industry.  Elizabeth Holmes, the company's founder and CEO was hailed as the next steve jobs, she even wore full black turtlenecks everywhere.

She was on the cover of every magazine, had done hundreds of interviews and with random 'women in tech' prizes, she was a superstar, a darling child of Silicon Valley.

Investors lined up at the door, begging for her to take their money, but soon they would all be at the doors of Theranos demanding their money back.

John Carreyrou, Author of 'Bad Blood', exposed Theranos for what it really was and showed the world the deceptions of Elizabeth Holmes.

The claim was, Theranos could do a full blood test for a large range of requirements and do it for a fraction of the cost with just a drop of blood, which had never been done before. Usually you need lots of blood and usually, a nurse has to draw it from you and you can't do it by yourself. Theranos presented a futuristic method of blood testing, like something from Star Trek.

Usually, you have to peer review new medical technologies, but none of that was done by Theranos. Some people wrote in the medical journals about the secrecy and presented doubts about all the hush-hush of the company.

The unethical behaviours became apparent when she fired her CFO, for speaking out about disingenuous demo-testings being done.

Soon, people realized that none of the claims of Holmes was accurate and some claims were just outright lies.

The company was very secretive, investors couldn't even be allowed to see what the company was actually doing in the labs.

Now, she is being investigated for massive fraud.

People wanted to believe that finally they got one, they finally have a self-made young female billionaire. All the media jumped on the feminist bandwagons and thousands of articles of praise was written. In 2015, Forbes named Holmes as the youngest self-made female billionaire. She won an award at the 2015 Glamour Women Of The Year. All the tech conferences had her on to speak and threw a few awards at her.

What's happened with Theranos was classic Silicon Valley madness. Impressed with claims, charts, financial data, a 'dropout CEO' and a very prestigious Board, Silicon Valley hoped on the party bus.

The next year Forbes revised her net value to zero dollars.

That 'Thot' Girl

Thot girl?
"Ugh!... these thots are everywhere!"

A comment you'd probably have heard if you have ever seen a girl-gamer streaming on Twitch.

Personally, I was one of those guys that would look at a girl streamer and if there ever was any cleavage, and there always was cleavage (and lot's of it), then I would instantly be like "SLUT!" (in my head, and sometimes in the comments) , I'm not proud of that.  To be fair I was sixteen. I didn't know any better.

There's a Dave Chappelle joke, where he says and I'm paraphrasing, "girl's if you don't want us to call you a ho, then don't wear the uniform".

The thing is, our natural response to gamer girls who wear intentionally revealing clothes that show a lot of skin is to call her slut or ho. But, that's because our basic instincts tell us to judge.

Making judgements is how we categorise people into trustworthy and not trustworthy. It's kinda important if you want to know who to rely on. One of the ways we do this is by assuming things about a person from their looks and the first impression. It's sorta like a shoot-first-and-ask-later instinct.

Judgement comes first, then we impart some form of 'justice', which in many cases is a sort of revenge. Justice and revenge interlink in an odd way. That's when the name calling starts.

It's not ok. I have since realised that most of how we behave is 'sinful', like in the bible. Judging people is wrong, we don't have a right to do that. You must change yourself and set a good example for others by being better than a primitive, selfish, reactionary, lonely, miserable, hate-filled, angry and scared animal.

We can do better.
"More harm is done when we sin ourselves than if we ever pass a judgement"

"Half the aggressive tweets using the words slut and whore analysed by social thinktank Demos came from women and girls, research indicates." Read More   ....Just a side note ; )

Sunday, 20 May 2018


It's the same everywhere
"Social Works!
.....until the people run out of money"

The entire criticism of Socialism is predicated on the idea of mismanagement.

Do you trust a bunch of random people to run the country who get off on having power over you?

Oh, it won't be random? Would we actually 'elect' our representatives?

Let's have a test, name the current President.
Now, name your mayor.
See if you can name at least 10 congressmen.

Most people won't even be able to answer beyond the first question.

We know who really runs the country. The corporate special interests.

The politicians in the west have created "Capitalist-Socialism" by creating a large welfare state, all paid for by the fruits of capitalism, cheap products from China and India, and a whole lot of money printing.

At first glance, 'Successful Long-term Socialism' seems to have been a success in Scandinavian countries, but the truth is very different from the picture the media and academics will give you.

Most western countries are broke, they all have deficits and they all are running on borrowed time.

They are broke and have been broke for a while now, but by a careful sleight of hand of the Central Banks and Global Monetary Policies, they have been able to keep their countries on a permanent morphine drip.

But the cancer is growing, and it's not obvious how to stop it anymore.

Concepts like sound money, personal financial responsibility, and a culture of trust and charity have all been forgotten and it is showing no signs of return.

Until we get our act straight, we will keep voting for more handouts that require more money printing, which inevitably make the rich richer and poor poorer, and it will ultimately do us in.

Friday, 18 May 2018

We should let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer

Should the rich get more money?
You'd think that if the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, that would be a bad thing, right?

Well, yes. But, there is one situation when the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer is actually good.

In an ideal world, with sound money and with no central banking, the middle class would be in charge. However, that is not the world we live in.

We live in a world that runs on so-called 'Capitalism'.

Firstly,  we don't live in a 'Free Market World', we live in a centrally planned world. You cannot have a free market economy with a central bank in the country. Period. And all countries have central banks.

So, in this 'Planned Economy World', governments have figured out how to a) Please the lobbyists b) Please their constituency c) Keep up the facade of freedom.

By central banking, governments can keep spending money they don't have whilst keeping up the facade of freedom & free markets.

Under the pretence of boosting the economy, governments allow the central banks to print money and then use that money to buy government bonds and financial assets. They literally create wealth out of thin air and buy stuff with it.

Now, we have all heard of inflation. Inflation happens when money is printed. There is no other way to consistently get inflation year after year other than money printing. Inflation is a tax on your wealth, the amount of all the stuff you could buy with your wallet reduces after every night.

So, you'd think that governments should not create inflation by printing money as it would hurt poor people the most. As they have to suffer an invisible tax on their wealth.

True, but what if there was a way to boost the economy by printing money without having inflation descend onto society indiscriminately.

Politicians can avoid the matter of the effects of money printing and debt very effectively and for many many years even.

The effects of inflation and the rising prices of general items can be controlled if you contain inflation to only financial assets. These would be, government bonds, real estate, financial products, stock buybacks etc.

In other words, governments believe that you can boost the economy by inflating the prices of certain assets and not everything else.

That is partly true.

In order to boost the economy by printing money, the government allows the central banks to print money and buy financial assets, this is also called Quantitative Easing, a nice sounding word but it just means creating inflation.

However, all that inflation is contained in financial assets and does not flow down to the people, as in the working class. So, the general price levels stay roughly the same, poor people's wealth stays the same, at least in theory.

Only the rich can afford to have financial assets, so they get richer and richer.

And it does work, the economy does start looking better, but only temporarily.

You see, "Inflation always catches up" 

And when it does, the poor suffer.

But, they would suffer even more and much faster if you allow the money to fall like a thundershower down on the economy.

So any major programs that give money directly to the people will only make them poorer, in the long run, Public Works and Infrastructure Development is great, but governments would need to keep doing it forever. It does not provide the permanent solutions that are needed. Not to mention the prices of things keep skyrocketing as people have more money to spend.

The only real solution is to allow the economy to restructure. We need to take a little bit of pain in the short term so that we can have long-term growth.

To be clear, money printing is bad, and even in many ways evil. In the long run, it is a transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. It should never be done. Period.

But if you are going to do it, only in this situation, let the rich get richer, else the poor will be poorer.

Wednesday, 16 May 2018

The death of the boy scouts

Boy, Scouting. XD

When a society becomes blind to the needs of the children, particularly the boys, they are headed for trouble.

All this because of a cultural shift away from family, the father, the boy, masculinity and the man.

I hope people are taking a good look at this because future historians will look back and wonder, what the 'fook' were we doing? And why? This isn't a feminist win. The most feminized countries have the highest numbers of boy suicides.

Boys are boys, they need space alone with other boys. Sometimes girls aren't welcome in all spaces.

Men, women & 'others', they all want to take over everything.

It's not a gendered issue, the death of the boy scouts signifies the death of good and victory of evil.

Dr Jordan B. Peterson says that it's like we're living in a 13year old girls dream. I mean, can this be any truer.

Saturday, 12 May 2018

Investing In Fang Stocks?


If you like gambling, then looking at FANG futures just might be for you.

Remember, trading is trading and investing is investing, and when people mix up the two, they lose money.

At such high valuations, after such a Goldilocks period, at the end of the business cycle, why on earth would you consider these 4 stocks?

FANG: Facebook, Apple, Netflix, Google

These 4 stocks are single-handedly pushing up the S&P and keeping the American stock market average steady.

Something interesting was happening for the last two years, every time the market slumped below the 200day moving average, people bought the FANGs and bought the dip, almost like 'autopilot'.

What we don't see, is very important to mention, you need to read between the lines and dig deeper to see what is really going on in the market.

Most intelligent investors are out of the market and are being cautious and staying in liquid cash. Most of the rise in stock prices is because of buybacks and central bank buying.

Not to mention all those ETFs that are having them in their portfolio, as not investing in them is like missing out and they need the returns to show to their customers.

Portfolio managers routinely do this, go against their better judgement, even if it means making the whole portfolio riskier, they tend not to move too far from the index. Half the portfolio is usually a basic index anyway, so any slump in the market results in all the ETFs going down together.

Blaming it on the index is easier, and it avoids having to take any responsibility.

In may 2017, FANG stocks hit 50% of the NASDAQ 100. This is madness. That's 4 companies becoming half the whole index.

Charlie Munger wasn't kidding when he said,
"The stock market is like a mob at a football game".

Thursday, 10 May 2018

A recession? Don't worry we'll just print some degrees!

Is a college degree worth it?

I was reading an article, and it said that the government was planning to have universities give out more degrees to students in order to boost the economy.

Just like they would announce a tax cut or more stimulus.

President Obama wanted to have the united states to have the most number of graduates in order to bring about economic prosperity.

Umm... maybe the increase in sales of gowns and beer would boost the economy. I don't know, maybe that's his plan.

I do not see how throwing a piece of paper with words and symbols printed on them to students is going to solve what's really wrong with the economy.

Farmers with PH.Ds in physics still can only grow so many potatoes. After a while, the number of degrees a farmer has becomes inversely proportional to the number of potatoes he can dig up.

Having a degree means nothing if the skills you learned can't produce anything sufficient.

"A college degree is the new high school diploma. An education should be available to all regardless of anyone’s economic situation" - Bernie Sanders, a cool grandpa & Senator

I agree with the second part of that, but not the first.

The failure to raise the educational level of a country as a whole is a recipe for economic decline.

Reading, Writing, Speaking.... If you can get people to do that properly, then we can have a real and lasting economic prosperity.

A clip from Peter Schiff's Youtube Channel (Disclaimer: I do not own this Video)

Tuesday, 8 May 2018

Synchronized global growth is a BIG FAT LIE!

Synchronized global growth is a BIG FAT LIE

We keep hearing, this phrase 'Synchronized global growth' all over the financial news these days.

"Synchronized global growth is a BIG FAT LIE!"

There is no 'growth', just a race to the bottom by central banks around the world.

Everybody and their mama are printing money like the daily newspaper.

All that money printing is going into asset purchases and stock buybacks.

On average, the markets are all positive but most equities all around the world are down. It gives a false impression of a recovery from the 2007-08 crash.

Averages mean nothing for a country if only a handful of companies are doing well while others are shutting their doors or are beginning to go out of business.

People are losing their jobs and companies are running on low-interest debt. Earnings are irrelevant if they are stimulated by low-interest rates. Earnings need to be organic, not artificially boosted by central banks all over the world.

Let me give an example, let's say I have an ice cream van, I sell Icecream, I can sell ice cream to customers at a price and use the profits to run my business. However, if the customers are all laid off, they are not going to buy any expensive ice cream. So, now I must reduce my prices in order to sell ice cream, but if I do that then my profit margin will reduce and may even be zero, I might even start making losses. In order to keep making a profit at a lower selling price, I can temporarily take out a loan and keep selling at a price my customers can afford.

Now, if I get a loan at a very low interest then I can borrow indefinitely as I only have to pay a very low-interest payment back to my lender.

Well, the governments around the world, mostly in the west, have such low interest rates, that companies can borrow a lot of money and pay it back slowly, in fact, they have borrowed so much money that any small rise in interest rates can make it very hard for companies to repay the interest, let alone the principal.

So, in our example we have done the same, we have been making a profit and earning a lot of money by borrowing at very low-interest rates, I don't really have to care about paying back the principal amount as the interest payment is very low.

And, I keep making lots of profit.

However, if the interest rates were to go up, even a tiny bit, I will start making losses from selling ice cream, in fact, each ice cream I  sell will make me another loss.

All that profit I was making selling ice cream was not organic, it was only artificially allowed by low-interest debt.

The lesson from this is we have 'synchronized global growth' only because of quantitative easing, as in, money printing and low-interest rates.

When the rates rise, and they will, we may have a

Friday, 4 May 2018

Let's talk about school shooters, without the gun debate!

Let's talk about school shooters, without the gun debate!

Every year more and more school shootings are taking place.

Every time it happens we keep scapegoating the real problems in society, we keep avoiding the main issues, we keep doing things that don't work. 

Maybe it's just easier to blame guns, anti-social behaviour, porn .... and the list goes on. Feminists pounce on the opportunity and blame men & boys and their 'toxic masculinity'. 

All of the media takes an outrage pill and start ranting and rambling. 

Lobby groups in DC start hovering over like vultures, waiting for a chance to swoop down and take a piece. Most of the kids in the 'March For Our Lives' don't even know what the 2nd Amendment is or what the debates surrounding gun-control are. They just know, that their teachers say guns are bad, so guns must be bad. They don't know any better.

One little girl at the march was interviewed on TV, she understood that guns could also be used for protecting people, but her teacher came and shut her up immediately. That's the kind of brainwashing that goes on.

But let's talk about mental health please, because that seems to be at the heart of the problem even though you don't see many debates on it. It's always about the Guns, never about the persons perpetrating it.

We never talk about the fact that most of these school shooters are either on or are coming off of psychiatric drugs.

“As a forensic psychologist, I have tested/evaluated 30 teenage and young adult murderers, and almost all of them had been in some kind of ‘treatment,’ usually short-term and psychoactive drug-oriented, before they killed.”David Kirschner, Ph.D., New York psychologist

(Disclaimer: I do not own the video)
".....36 school shootings and/or school-related acts of violence have been committed by those taking or withdrawing from psychiatric drugs....." read more

Why are we treating boys like they are 'defective girls' and 'treat' them with ADHD medication when they behave like boys are supposed to?

This is a shameful state of affairs when we medicate so many boys in the US just for being boys so that they're 'easier to manage'.

Their whole life boys get told that they are the cause of all that's evil in the world, we blame them when they rough-and-tumble play and punish them as they exhibited 'violent behaviours', we treat little boys like potential rapists, and have campaigns that apparently 'teach our boys not to rape' and finally to put an icing on the cake we medicate the hell out of them because they have too much energy and get distracted after sitting in class for 7 hours. THEN WE GO AHEAD AND BLAME GUNS.

Newsflash, America has always had guns, lots of them and we never had a problem with school shootings before. 

But America never had such an unprecedented hatred for men & boys and a general breakdown of the family.

Those are the things we need to talk about .... and we aren't doing it.... and maybe we never will.
"May God Have Mercy On Us"

Citations: The Boy Crisis , (1)

Tuesday, 1 May 2018

Climate change advocate or climate change fanatic?

Climate change advocate or climate change fanatic?

In the near future, rising sea levels are going to drown Miami Beach, Florida.

That may or may not be true, but what’s astounding is the fact that people believe that a few government diplomats in Paris signing a few things scribbled on a piece of paper is going to solve this.

If Miami is going under, then the mayor of Miami and the Governor of Florida need to get together and make a plan. Other cities have made tidal flood barriers and reduced new construction near beaches. Nothing in Paris is going to do anything about it.

Here is the real reason why Miami is sinking. The groundwater has been drained at an unimaginable rate, too many buildings and too soft soil. All across the world where there are similar conditions, the land sinks. When you construct on sand and soft soil, that's what you get.

Society changes and progresses when new ideas are tested. The good ideas work and the bad ideas fail. The free market of ideas need to be preserved and must remain free for society to ever benefit from the good ones.

I was convinced that caring about Global Warming should become a law, unquestioned and unchallenged. Such was my indoctrination.

Then a conservative author Mark Steyn, from Canada knocked some sense into me, he said, “Only a bad idea needs to be protected from any criticism”.

That shook me to my core, I started noticing the entire Mainstream media’s clear bias to this, now in my view, unproven and shaky ‘fact’.

Straight off the bat, let me say “GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL”.

But, Global Warming has always been ‘REAL’, it’s always been happening, all throughout the life of the planet. The only difference is that it’s slightly faster now.

The question now is what can we do to stop it? Is it stoppable? What if we all held our breath forever, would that be enough?

The last one is a real question. No scientist has been able to quantifiably say whether or not Global Warming will stop if we all stopped breathing. That’s because there are man-made factors and natural factors pushing global warming.

The simple question that no one is talking about is if we control the man-made factor contributing to Global Warming, reducing it all the way to ZERO, will it stop Global Warming then? And, the answer is NO.

The natural factors will still push us towards the GW limit and the Planet will have another Cycle of Climate Change as it always has had.

This is very important to understand because all our Climate Change policies are based on badly exaggerated assumptions.

But, that’s not the real problem. The REAL PROBLEM is that there is no discussion on the matter, none whatsoever.

The climate system of this planet is too complex and cannot be pushed into policy making because of a few slogans by Al Gore. Not without vigorous debate.

At this point, it’s fair to state why I don’t support any of the Climate Change Policies. That’s simple, they don’t work. Period. The Climate Change Policies simply don’t work. All these policies do is make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Let’s look at CARBON TAXES as an example.

The largest Oil & Gas Companies are pushing for Carbon Taxes, isn’t that interesting?
Any kind of tax is bourne not by the companies but by the end users, us, the people who use oil and gas. Our bills go way up, just look at Canada, the Trudeau government imposed a carbon tax and the people are going bankrupt just paying the bills.

All Carbon Taxes do is make the gas and oil more expensive, which means that people have to pay more. Not a single penny is lost by the corporations. In fact, they gain more revenue because of the structure of the Carbon Taxes and method of revenue collection of the Oil & Gas companies, in the long run, they actually profit from taxing themselves. Not to mention running their smaller competitors out of business.

"However, if this reduces greenhouse gasses then it should be alright…. right?"

Umm, well, it doesn’t reduce carbon emissions, it just reduces jobs. A cell phone still takes a couple hours to charge, and we still need to use the street lights for at least 10–12 hours a night.

We need to reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by about 50% by the year 2050. We simply don’t have the technology necessary to reduce emissions this much, this quickly. And even if we did, no scientists can definitively say if it would ‘stop’ global warming. I mean NASA forgot to include THE OCEAN in its climate models for decades, which gave incorrect predictions of the future, these were used by Al Gore and others for their ‘documentaries’.

“THE OCEAN ATE MY GLOBAL WARMING!” T-shirts were selling like hot cakes that year.

Just to be clear again, Global Warming is happening, there’s no doubt. Whether we can do anything about it, and how much can we do, is what we need to know.

How can we slow Global Warming?

No one has a definitive answer. There are plenty of assumptions and theories but no clear answer. This is very important because many believe as do I, that the better way to combat Climate Change is with innovations in Alternative Energy and better Recycling Techniques and Fuel Efficiency Goals, not by job-killing policies that cripple industries, stifle growth and innovation, and pretty much seal our fate because it does nothing to reduce carbon or any other kind of pollution.

What makes me mad is that such policies are being pushed on us by the Politicians backed by Global Corporations who will benefit from our naivety. So much of taxpayers’ money has gone to shell companies that re-route money back to big oil. These are very confusing times and people may be making the wrong decisions on how to combat this threat.

Don’t slap a carbon tax, just leave the capital in the hands of the companies and give them an emission goal they have to abide by. This will boost the need to get better more efficient machines and create jobs in the process. If every factory has an emission standard to abide by then it will incentivize the innovation of more fuel-efficient machines & tech.

Tesla is already revolutionizing the battery industry, although they are only achieving this by government backing and some very rich investors, it still gives us some hope.

Why are internet podcasts a thing?

Internet Podcasts

Why are internet podcasts a thing?

In the age of the internet, high-speed connectivity, HD-video streaming, we still listen to the radio, and if you’re a millennial then you're probably listening to internet podcasts, the radio of the internet.

Why not watch programs on an HHDDDD high pixel diamond glass cut silver…blah..blah 3D interface G-Glass touchscreen?

It’s probably because we, humans have been listening for hundreds of thousands of years, reading and writing for a couple thousand years, and seeing moving pictures for around a 100 years.

It is far more natural for us to learn by listening than by watching videos on youtube.

Don’t listen to people who say that this generation has a short attention span, 30 million people listen to a 3-hour long conversation between two people every month with the Joe Rogan Podcast.

"Joe Rogan gets 30 Million Podcast downloads per month"

But, if you look at BuzzFeed-type videos or Michale Bay Transformers-type movies, it’s all short and fast, bright lights and loud noises to keep us interested for an hour and a half. We keep yawning at these movies now, but we can’t seem to look away. Like a cat chasing a red-dot-light up the wall.

This gives off an impression that today’s kids all have a short attention span. That’s not the case, the environment is just off, and people are looking for some normalcy.

"This is why radio and radio-like programs will always be there"