I remember 2016 like it was yesterday,
Things went from bad to worse in those 10 years.
Some of the concepts (e.g., looksmaxxing, etc.) were ultra-niche back then.
Today, the media is actively promoting men smashing their bones, putting height inserts in their shoes (despite many of them already being tall).
Plastic surgeries are on the rise…
And all that while Andrew-$Tate$ clones are still pushing some vague ways to ascend financially that only work for those who “really want it”….
I am not surprised by that direction because my experience in the field clearly showed me that the negative inertia was way too strong.
90% + the women (e.g., the actress from my book A Desert in the Sky) that I met over the years are still single.
The younger among them are now 30, whereas the older ones are over 40.
What does that tell you?
First, their criteria are retarded and clearly unachievable in practicality.
Second, the disease isn’t healing. It’s spreading. And so do the symptoms and the reactions of the male crowd.
The painful truth is that all male advice today is still as useless as it was back then.
The wisdom of the manospheric cunters will NEVER cure the problem.
The issue will only get bigger and bigger until the societal organism collapses from all those cancer cells.
I will repeat something I’ve said a million times.
<< You can’t fix a SYSTEMATIC problem with an individual solution. >>
Yet, currently, the two promoted options are:
- get mega rich (usually through some weird borderline con methods such as Bitcoin that work for 1% of the population)
- looksmax
Ironically, those are a little too close to the “if you are homeless, buy a house” ideology.
Technically, they work in and of themselves, but are highly limited due to 3rd factors and aren’t solving the problem on a group level.
You can get richer, but not as much as those idiots want you to believe.
You have a much higher chance of being in a car crash than getting Tate’s level of money due to factors outside of your control.
And more importantly, money is only valuable because few people have it. Therefore, the system itself cannot exist when everyone is rich.
You are also limited by time. Being rich at 60 isn’t the same as being rich at 30…Most people would take broke and young over old and wealthy for a reason.
Looksmaxxing (especially the extreme methods) is also not a systematic problem solver.
If some fat guy with a solid foundation loses weight, that’s gonna move the needle, but nowadays even normal-looking guys (think slim dudes with a surfer build) are into extreme physical mods.
What does that tell you?
That you need a second job and maybe even a third job, metaphorically speaking, to date a plain girl #looksinflation.
If the average guy struggles, you don’t have a middle class.
And if you don’t have a middle class, you don’t have stability. And if you don’t have stability, you don’t have a healthy society.
You have a rat cage.
A Solution That Will Actually Work
I will give a solution that could work a lot better.
Some people are not gonna like it, but I am 100% certain it could be scary effective.
Religion or some form of spirituality, you guess?
On paper, that’s very effective, but moral restructuring requires many decades to produce the desired results and could be stopped for political and religious reasons at any point.
I think that this romantic chokehold requires something a lot more practical, namely:
HIGH BACHELOR TAXES
And that’s coming from a guy who completely realizes that taxes are legalized theft done by the state/legal mafia.
Weird, right?
But nasty times call for nasty measures.
Bachelor taxes are not new. They were present in the Soviet Union. And while no one really wants to live under that regime (aside from some who romanticize it a bit too much), sometimes we have to compromise.
Why taxes?
Because, regardless of who you are, money is a reality for you.
Whether you live in a van like a “free person” or you are a city rat paying 5k to inhabit a corridor masquerading as an apartment, you still have to buy stuff and pay your taxes one way or another.
If every person that’s officially single after 25 has to pay a bachelor tax that’s big enough to “hurt” and yet small enough to be payable (e.g., 5k a year), you will be surprised how many couples will be formed.
Obviously, there should be filters excluding people from that tax (e.g., unemployment or health issues), but the average healthy individual should be under it.
5k a year adds up to a lot. If you remain single from 25 to 30, that’s 25k. If you remain single until 35 ( which is pretty common nowadays), that’s 50k.
This means that if two people get together and become exempt from that tax, they will collectively be saving 100k from 25 to 35.
That’s a pretty strong incentive to NOT be single.
TAXES Work Better Than “Young Couple Incentives”
Some will say that people shouldn’t be “penalized” for staying single and instead should be incentivized more positively.
For instance, young couples in Hungary receive apartment discounts and other benefits.
That’s fine. But for better or worse (usually worse), humans respond to negative incentives (punishment).
For instance, people can eat healthy even before getting sick, but are less likely to do so due to the absence of pain.
And nothing stops us from introducing both the bachelor tax and the young couple perks for maximum motivation.
This Is Inhuman
Some people will see this measure as sadistic, while technically sponsoring much worse with their tax money.
Theoretically, the whole point of having a government is to introduce measures that improve the quality of life through the right regulations.
Also, nobody says that this measure should be permanent. Try it for 5 years and then end it, if it backfires (it won’t if done right).
The measure will have the following positive effects:
- reduce paralysis by analysis (people today, and especially women, suffer from the curse of having the illusion of too many choices)
- increase the birth rates
- resurrect marriages (law changes should be made there too)
- reduce the scary number of children born out of wedlock
- reduce “inceldom”
- kill the incentive to smash your bones with a hammer to look like a “Chad.”
- allow people to focus on other aspects of life, other than shallow dopamine hits acquired through hook-ups and pointless coffee dates.
“Let’s Save The Environment”
It’s ironic how the powers that be are terribly concerned with protecting “democracy” and our “green future”, by manufacturing a bunch of low-IQ rules that help no one.
But when it comes to the destruction of the family unit, they close their eyes and, if anything, stimulate the “free-for-all” dating market by allowing private companies (movie studios, dating apps, social media, etc.) to monetize romance without repercussions and moral sanctions.
Of course, it’s by design.
I can go into depth on their motivation, but it’s not the point of this post.
The truth of the matter is that with a few tweaks (one of which is the bachelor tax), the whole dating market will be “fixed” in less than 5 years.
(Remember that it took 20+ years for it to get this bad; it can’t be repaired in a year.)
What About Love
Another criticism would be the “absence of love”.
Here’s the truth.
The “free dating market” proved that it doesn’t produce that mythical and overrated thing known as love, the same thing that the powers that be use to manipulate you.
Love today has never been more misunderstood.
People think that it works like this:
Step 1: Hop on an app (upload a photo online, “so hard”)
Step 2: Go on a date and receive “love”.
No. Love takes actual work and sacrifice.
And that’s exactly why people quit way too early.
So, no.
I don’t think people need any more “freedom” to find their “love”.
You had your chance and failed. Sorry.
Gloomy Sunday Ahead
The reality is that NONE of this will happen, and the situation will continue to intensify over the next decade.
The inertia will not change.
“Winter is coming” -Kevin Samuels
“Winter is coming”.
Hi y’all, Always free, always outdoors, peer led, men only workouts. It has helped me find a constructive brotherhood. Google this: f3nation. email me at eaglewatch21 at gmail with any questions.
Horrible idea. Young single men who are already desperate and have to accept the absolute worst to even gain social visibility now are going to have to beg modern women to chain themselves to them? And still get cheated on? Still get c**ked?
Wtf.
The only people who pay into the tax system as a net benefit are men so essentially youre just further burdening them.
The main issue is feminism. When all men were accorded higher status than women, women liked men more.
There’s no going back.
The only greenshoots are artificial bombs, AI mostly destroying female jobs and AI models destroying the female attention economy.
But even then…
Man, i would kill to understand label language, its like im missing half of the life.
Culturally I’m an Indian, I totally agree with you about the concept of love and just affection through some profile, people don’t even think about the life with partner till they pass there younger years.
It’s sad to read this, but you are right about everything. I’m still young, I was a teenager in 2016 and, even if it was 10 years ago, It feels like it was yesterday. Nothing has changed, and probably nothing will. I’ve never thought about high bachelor taxes but I think it’s true, it would solve the problem. There is nothing we can do besides living our life the best way we can. But even the things our grandparents achieved like big ass houses, a wife, a good amount of money for retirement is something almost impossible nowdays. I know I can be naive but I dream one day we can be free
This high bachelor tax , does it involve men and women?
Interesting idea.
AMAZING THANK FOR YOUR. KNOWELEDGE , Reading You since 2018, Great as allways ,Me too remember 2016 now it just seem another generation dominate the media, this guys just has acepted real crazy thing, for me it’s just time to leave internet, now i perspnally really feel from another generation, now Even My fathers has tiktok and they pass at least 3 hours per day just scrolling.
I don’t think it’s a good idea to force women into relationship with any kind of financial punishment. For a first glance it seems a good idea, males without opportunity finally get a relationship. But what kind of relationship? I think most of those relationships a pure hell for a man (not much better for the women), no peace, no sex, only expectations and living as a tolerated person (some days only). When he finally broke, or a women get bored enough just find another “victim” keeping her income as high as possible, or even accept the lower income living alone.
I think in previous generations was only better with reproduction rate. Most of marriages was a disaster, the man end up in a grave before 50-60 and both of them finally free from the other. Of course there were acceptable and even good marriages, as today too, but the statistics can’t describe the overall quality of all previous generation’s marriages, only divorce rate when it became financially and socially acceptable.
I don’t care about birth rates, just live our life as best we can do. Do you think our grandparents give a shit of the future society? They care (the better ones) about their children at best. Be best of yourself, balance your life, grab opportunities, take some risks in a rational extent (not ruining yourself).
Totally agree with your take. Most marriages I know from those idealized older generations ended up with the couple just tolerating themselves the bare minimum at best. In the worst case, one of them would absolutely hate and psychologicaly torment the other 24/7 (with or without good reasons. For example, a lot of men from those times would often cheat on their wives behind their backs in all kind of ways, so the resentment was not completely unfounded).
So yeah, something like a bachelor or childless tax might improve the ongoing birth rate problem (which is not a small issue, and I can imagine countries like China enforcing such a thing), but men (and women too) would be as or even more unhappy than now.
I’ve talked about all of this before, and you specifically mention Bachelor (but you mean Bachelorette too) tax, but you mean single person tax. The issue is that if you could pull that off legally, you’d be better off attacking the only thing lacking, which is the feminism part of society and turn back to once again restricting women. But that also won’t happen, because the powers that be benefit too much from it AND incompetent people never give up freebies or handouts. As you conclude, the only change will happen once the cost of living further crushes everyone, and it is already happening. One thing you don’t mention is that these population levels and freebies, welfare, feminism, DEI etc WERE ALWAYS unsustainable, and that’s why it’s such a lie and so chaotic now. Being a well above average guy I almost welcome it, because to be quite honest the only people that have a shot are the 6s,7s,8s who can actually do and make thing works but were crowded out by all the 5s and lower for all of these years. That and the fact that once money fails for fake women jobs, they’ll finally just want to do what they always should have done (not work, have kids and generally just STFU).
Its important that you dont go on endless dates because you only need sex. Brothels and such are needed. Then you should have forms of incentive that are unlocked only after a very long lasting relationship, like a monetary or housing benefit. Unfortunately the truth is, I still dont see a better world in that regard, unless social/dating apps are Completely, Utterly and Definitively Banned.
Here’s a better solution: women can’t go to college until they’ve had at least 1 child or are over age 30. They can’t go to grad school until they’re 40 or have had at least 3 kids. Problem solved.
You’re a moron! A total moron stop writing articles you dumb cunt! Bachelor tax? Thank God you aren’t in any position of power or the economy would have collapsed a long time ago! It’s feminism! Empowered women don’t wanna get married or have babies you shittard! Your articles suck kill yourself idiot!
What about of the losers like you that never get a girl you will be obligate to pay tax forever, if a stupid exagerated overcost tax like that exist now day and yes it’s exist at list in USA, in USA single person pay more tax even marriage without childrens pay more tax and no, even this will not obligate a woman to take a loser like you.You best just dadicated to write about muscle and gym rat frustations bruh