Saturday, March 17, 2012

Need some Help: US Criminal Background Check?

I recently received a hint that a moderately well-known PUA has a rather long pre-PUA criminal record. I was given that PUAs name of birth as well, and was also told that in the USA someone's criminal record is public information.

I did try to look up said PUA's crime record, but unfortunately Google returns pages upon pages full of commercial providers, who all seem to tap into the same pool of government information. But how do I access this information directly, without going through a middle man?

Some of those commercial websites give you a "preview", and if they are true, then said PUA (no, not Gunwitch) does indeed have attempted and/or committed some serious crimes. I would like to access those files, and I would of course share anything I find with all of you.

Any help is much appreciated! Feel free to comment below, or send me an email via this contact form.

Thank you very much!


  1. I hasn't occurred to you to go to the local police station or department of corrections in your city and ask?

  2. It hasn't occurred to you that I might not live in the US?

  3. Why not ask on PuaHate?

    Sure, you'll get 10 troll responses, but someone will give you a valid response. They've dug up criminal records on PUAs before and do it all the time.

    1. Thanks for the suggestion. I did that and I hope I'll be able to sort something out.

  4. Lol @ Aaron's reply. Americans, you think you're the centre of the world.

  5. Non-Americans think that Americans think they're the center of the world.

  6. No not true. Most Americans do think they're the center of the world and are often extremly arrogant and ignorant when they visit other countries. Its hard, but most countries dont like the american mentality.

    1. I certainly don't want to provide a forum for bashing Americans, and I certainly don't want to generalize. So let's get this out of the way first: I have met some very friendly, hospitable, and also extremely smart Americans. However, American tourists generally do seem to have a very bad reputation all over the world, and the insensitivity (speaking extremely loudly, for instance) of some has to be seen to be believed. It's not Anti-Americanism per se (even though this might also play a role in some circles), but the way they act that makes people resent them.

      The big problem is that the general American public is uneducated and knows little about how the world, or even their society is run. They never learnt to speak a foreign language, yet they think it's fine to mock someone for their "horrible English accent" (go on and try to learn Korean then). Even worse is that they don't seem to know the difference between actual knowledge and propaganda. Just look at how many idiots take FOX News seriously.

      There was some talk about Roosh in the comments recently, and I think he serves as a perfect example of what's wrong with America. For instance, he uses the term "hipsters", which is a categorization for everyone who tries to dress well. Then he goes to, say, Denmark, sees only "hipsters" in his own narrow world view, and acts like the typical American loudmouth. Result: He doesn't get laid. But what does he do? He writes a book with the title "Don't Bang Denmark" instead of realizing that he was dealing with women in a very wealthy and educated country. The average American certainly can't hold a candle to the average Dane. And then there's some scruffy dude from the US who tries his same spiel, and doesn't want to concede that the women just aren't interested in what little he has to offer. "Fuck me, I am American" just doesn't work when the women speak better English than he does, even though it's their second language. It's ironic and sad at the same time.

    2. Hipsters is not a categorization for people who try to dress well, in the general sense, but in the way that they try to distance themselves from the fashion in which mainstream dresses themselves.
      That being said, dressing in that fashion may have different implications in Denmark.

    3. The big difference is that you only speak of "hipsters" if you don't know about sub-cultures. It is a one-size fits all label that only reveals your lack of understanding of the dress-codes of certain scenes.

  7. Aaron, you are so anti-American it is not even funny ;) Its not big deal as it is pretty much the default mindset of the European and so much a part of the cultural atmosphere in Europe that most Europeans will somehow work anti-American statements into their conversation without even really being aware of it. Every culture needs its bogeyman. It takes a special level of cultural sophistication and self-awareness for the typical European to free himself from this kind of silly anti-Americanism.

    Do you really not grasp the silliness and chauvinism of comments like the average Dane is superior to the average American? What has always seemed remarkable about European anti-Americanism to me is that it is so obviously a form of rank nationalism of the kind Europe is supposed to have rejected after the 40s. It is a desperate attempt to cling to a feeling of national superiority, as in those types of comments *yes, individual Americans are nice, but the average Dane, German, etc is superior, donchaknow......*

    Your comments about tourists are particularly funny, because recent polls have ranked Americans tourists as amongst the best behaved and most polite groups. And of course, do you REALLY think Americans are ruder than Brits, French, etc? One really has to be blind to believe that!

    Alas, I used to believe in the myth of European cultural superiority at least, even if it was obvious America had technological superiority. I so much wanted to believe there was a cultural haven where the average man was on a higher level than America - sadly, as with most myths, that did not survive contact with actual average Europeans on my travels.

    But I think it is cute and amusing that Europeans have this kind of background anti-Americanism that is so crude and unsophisticated. It shows that Europe still has some life left - its desperate desire to see itself as superior is not quite as dead we have been led to believe it was after WW2, and I am flattered that we loom large enough to play the role of the European bogeyman. Most Americans do not think about Europeans at all, and when they do, it is with affection.

    1. Anonymous,

      it's your interpretation that makes you view my statements as anti-American. However, let's look at some facts:

      - the US knows a phenomenon called "working poor" (i.e. people getting exploited for wages they can't live off), Denmark, on the other hand, has the highest minimum wage in the European Union
      - there is virtually no social security in the US, unlike in most European countries
      - health care is only for the rich, and you've set up a system that frequently makes people go bankrupt because their health care provider refuses to pay for the bills
      - In the US, obesity is widespread (around 2/3 if I want to believe official figures)
      - around 50 million of people in the US receive food stamps (what about paying them proper wages instead? Can't have that because it would harm the industry.))
      - income inequality is among the highest in the Western world and comparable to third world despot countries like Nigeria and Rwanda
      - public transport is virtually nonexistent (but, hey, it's all good because that's due to back-door agreements in the early 20th century which ensured that cities would be laid out to maximize petrol consumption)
      - yes, the US has some really great academic institutions, but it's also highly segregated (look up "Ivy League" and "legacies"), and it comes at the price of also having thousands of mediocre universities that do little more than ripping off their students
      - life expectancy is one of the lowest in the Western world

      Now let's pick some random quotes from Wikipedia:
      - "The infant mortality rate of 6.06 per thousand places the United States 176th out of 222 countries, higher than all of Western Europe"
      - "Health care coverage in the United States is a combination of public and private efforts, and is not universal as in all other developed countries."
      - "Among developed nations, the United States has above-average levels of violent crime and particularly high levels of gun violence and homicide."
      - "The United States has the highest documented incarceration rate and total prison population in the world." (It's all good. The US has stopped social housing programmes, and just built more prisons. Just check the numbers, and you'll see that prisons are the US version of "housing for the poor".)
      - But the US are in good company otherwise: "In 2010, the country had the fifth highest number of executions in the world, following China, Iran, North Korea, and Yemen"
      - "The U.S. teenage pregnancy rate, 79.8 per 1,000 women, is the highest among OECD nations." (Good news for PUAs, isn't it?)
      - "While the abortion rate is falling, the abortion ratio of 241 per 1,000 live births and abortion rate of 15 per 1,000 women aged 15–44 remain higher than those of most Western nations."
      - "Americans are the heaviest television viewers in the world, and the average viewing time continues to rise, reaching five hours a day in 2006."

      ...and I haven't even been talking about the constant warmongering of your government, the conspiracies of the CIA, and the US' "diplomatic" efforts, or the brainwashing that makes the "poor" believe in the Horatio Alger myth, and the rich shamelessly revel in their Rand-inspired John Galt phantasies.

      As I said, I have met some really great people in the US, but the ominous "average" did leave a bad taste in my mouth.

    2. Come on, Aaron, you are both intelligent and sophisticated enough to realize that an intelligent proponent of the opposite position can come up with a scathing listing of supposed European inadequacies - many of the points you list as positive attributes, for instance, can easily be seen as massive and debilitating aspects of European inferiority by someone coming at it from the opposite perspective - do you really not realize that? All you seem to have done is condemn America from the left-wing perspective. You seem delightfully and naively incapable of imagining that people can have different perspectives than you - it is a typical instance of left-wing naivete in general, a narrowness of outlook that simply assumesthat no one can possibly judge by a different set of standards than the let-wing ones.

      One of the first principles of being a nuanced, sophisticated person is to not think other people are necessarily inferior to you because they do not share your political values. All you have shown is that Americans have different values and are willing to make different trade offs than Europeans - that you believe this makes them automatically inferior to Europeans shows a narrowness of outlook, a paucity of imagination, and a lack of perspective that is puzzlingly naive for someone who studies philosophy and has as good a head you seem to, Aaron.

    3. Dude, this is not about the misguided left-right paradigm, or about democratic-republican. I am talking about facts, like staggering income inequality, and everything that comes with it. But if it helps you to sleep at night that any criticism is just "leftish" or smacks of "socialism"...

    4. Aaron, you are simmering so deeply in a particular cultural soup that you do not even see how it colors your entire world view ;) To consider *staggering income inequality* as necessarily a bad thing IS a left wing perspective. It is possible to be completely untroubled by income inequality per se - you no doubt know that the poverty index is entirely relative. If poor people in America have TVs, cars, and are fat, it makes on wonder how much precisely one should pity them, however much more the top earners are worth.....

      Now I deliberately avoided making specific political points - either the negative things about Europe or the good things about America that you conspicuously omit - because this is not about values. Obviously you dont like American values, which is fine - many Americans find the European willingness to trade creativity and innovation for a timid security contemptible, which is fine also. Point is, objectivity requires one to maintain perspective even about people whose values we dislike. You may not like American values, and many Americans may find European values contemptible, but it is silly to let this cloud ones perceptions of ordinary people from either society.

      I just find European anti-Americanism crude, nationalistic, and lacking in sophistication. And oddly encouraging, as a sign of life ;)

    5. You are either a thick rich asshole or one of the brainwashed minions who think that one day they'll be rich too. Maybe you should acquaint yourself with an idea called "justice". I know it's quite a tome, but John Rawls, "A Theory of Justice" is an excellent foundation, and it describes a rather interesting thought problem. Read up on it, as it may literally blow your mind.

      So, you say that income inequality isn't necessarily bad. Really? Here's some food for thought for you: Unlike the ideas perpetrated in Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" there are no Galtian heroes that do everything themselves and only have the other members of society leech of them. The rich profit immensely from the poor. Just have a look at the so-called working poor who don't make enough money to pay their bills: They may just get a few dollars an hour, but their work produces much more value. (If you think that it's their problem, well, then do some research on the discrepancy between the pay McKinsey consultants receive and the rate their clients get charged. It's the same all over again.) If it's not the working poor in your own country who get exploited, it's a million strong army of workers in China who put together the high-tech products you consume. It's the same.

      You seem to live in some kind of la-la land where people chose their own values. But societies don't get designed by majority vote. (Rawls has more to say on that.) Or do you honestly think that you'd get an agreement on a proposal that puts 50 % in poverty, and is so bizarre that the top 400 people have more wealth than the bottom 50% combined. That's over 150 million. Good luck selling tickets for that kind of lottery!

      The "timid security" you ridicule ensures that our janitors and firemen can get medical treatment, too. After all, they contribute something tangible to society, and arguably more than some banksters who concoct schemes to trick some other people out of their money. You call "European socialism" timid, but wait until you find yourself in a hospital room with, say, some pancreatic cancer, you get the treatment, and later on your friendly neighborhood health care provider stalls and doesn't reimburse you. Meanwhile, you accrue millions in outstanding bills. Uplifting scenario, isn't it?

      Now grow a fucking brain.

    6. Oh Gawwwd, Ive read Rawls. Your blind partisanship is amusing. I am not going to get dragged into arguing over specifics. You seem blissfully unaware that there are arguments and philosophers on the other side, lol - you dwell in an intellectual cocoon, as I find most leftists do. You seem genuinely unaware that each one of your points has a rebuttal from the opposite perspective, so naively earnest and passionate are you in your one sided advocacy. At the very least, Aaron, reading up on the other side will make you less naively sure of your positions and provide you with a more sophisticated perspective. You will probably still disagree with the opposite side - which is perfectly ok - but you will be a bit less silly and cocksure about it. This kind of cocksureness is always an indication of an unsophisticated perspective.

      None of this is to the point, however.

      One can thing the way you do - believe that American society as a whole is based on terrible values - and still refuse to engage in the kind of crude anti-Americanism that many Europeans delight in.

      I have no objection to you despising the way American society is set up - yet to be personally anti-American and to believe silly things about Americans vis a vis Europeans (like the absurd idea that Swedes are so educated and rational that silly fads like low carb could never take hold there, or that American tourist are louder and worse behaved than notoriously ill behaved Brits or loutish Germans, etc, etc) is to reveal oneself as a crude nationalist.

      American society may represent things you despise, but the average American is not less educated, less well behaved, less intelligent, less intellectually sophisticated than the average European - but one must be free of crude nationalism to see this.

    7. It's funny how you people from the right start a discussion with ad hominems, and once all your petty arguments get thoroughly refuted, you fall back to ad hominems again. This is also exactly why you are afraid of talking about specifics.

      Of course you can find some Ayn Rand follower who thinks that everybody but a handful of "entrepreneurs" should starve, but it's certainly not the case that any opposition is necessarily good opposition. Likewise, just because you'll surely find some idiot who thinks that n/0 = doesn't make it true either.

    8. Don't worry, he's just an obstinate European. I almost pity his ignorance. This is great discussion however. You made valid points.

    9. That would be you Sleazy ;)
      Your only refutes, was random claims, quotes, and even SAYINGS about America. Which is laughably ignorant at best. Funny how you mention "you people" from the right start with ad hominems but you're blind to your own. That European ignorance is bliss huh? Hahah

    10. Now we are at the level of pure ad hominem attacks, without even the veneer of reasoned argument. Congratulations!

    11. Irony is definitely a lost concept to you. I'm stating it's not a good idea to start using ad hominem , then accuse other people of it. Very basic tactic.

    12. No ad hominem from me, Aaron, I am merely criticizing your attitude, not you. I was at pains to show that even if one accepts all your premises your attitude towards Americans is a faulty one for a smart person to have - that is why I avoided discussing specifics. But its no big deal either way - I just think chauvinism in any form, however much it tries to disguise itself, is crude and silly. And I find, sadly, that chauvinism is quite rampant in Europe amongst the educated classes, and that it tries to wear a veneer of gentility.

      But as Alek says, your talent in ripping apart PUAs is too precious to waste on pointless political arguments ;) I dont even like political discussions, because they are so pointless. Well, carry on the good work on this blog, which I can definitely agree with you about!

    13. @Anonymous: that was a nice read, thanks. It's good to see a troll of your level every now and then. Of course, dividing political viewpoints in either 'left' or 'right', and subsequently silently assuming that 'leftist' viewpoints are incorrect, will never bring anyone any closer to solutions of whatever kind.

      It's interesting you mentioned chauvinism, because my experiences with Americans are that they're either a) chauvinistic and overly sceptical of the rest of the world, or b) not so chauvinistic and agreeing with a lot of points mentioned by Sleazy.

      Other's experiences with the US however have led them to state that the US of A is rapidly becoming a 3rd world country itself...

    14. Yes, clearly me arguing that Europeans and Americans are roughly equal is MORE chauvinistic than Aaron arguing that Europeans are superior to Americans, lol.

      So THAT is what is meant when Europeans call Americans chauvinistic! I always wondered - now I know. It means a failure to perceive the superiority of Europeans. Good to know. Thanks for explaining to me the European definition of the term *chauvinism*, it clears up so many things.

      Its like the Game interpretation of the word *supplicate*, apparently. Not exactly the dictionary interpretation, but creative - I suppose it was unfair of me to suggest Europeans have a creativity deficit.

    15. Don't bother with jcz Anonymous, he's resembles a brainwashed idiot on the internet that assumes anyone who gives a dissenting opinion is a "troll". Pathetic.

  8. I am neither Scandinavian nor American but I have definitely had more than a few unpleasant encounters with Scandinavians while traveling, particularly while traveling in South-East Asia. Maybe something to be said about the particular demographic that visits there or maybe that being out of one's comfort zone brings out the worst in people?

    More generally though, I think you can't generalize that average X is superior/inferior to average Y. What can definitely be verified is a statement like average X is more educated than Y.

    Lastly, although I am not exactly aware of intricate cultural aspects of these countries but for example when I was in France, I got the sense that some French authorities really do try hard to impress Americans.

    One French student was telling me how their university pays special attention when choosing students for exchange with American universities but didn't care that much for other countries. Of course, it could have been his own biases, but there were more than a few instances where it did seem like quite a few people, even though on the face of it really love to criticize/make fun of Americans, but try hard to impress them in different ways.

    (I want to just add a small note that I am not pro-American in any way, in case anyone thought from the above post. Just an impartial observer)

    1. You bring up some good points. I also had the impression that the selection of exchange students for the US was much tougher than within Europe. Part of the reason was, at least at my home institution, that there were much less spots available than in their European programmes like ERASMUS. For some ERASMUS spots, you'd only have to say that you want to go, and they'd give you a scholarship and take care of all the administrative stuff.

      Also, despite my rant-ish reply above, I can only repeat myself that I try to be an impartial observer as well. Not all is great in Europe either, but some things just work a lot better.

  9. I went to school in US, but was born and raised in Central America. Now, I have to say that I see validity in both points on American tourists: both being sophisticated and obnoxious and loud.

    The sad reality is that even if the loud obnoxius college type american tourists are a minority of the tourism population in some countries, they leave such a bad impression that it taints the image of other more respectful tourists.

    This is especially the case in cities known to have active night scenes. Personally, in my experience most of the bad rap American tourists have is due to the younger crowds who travel for the sole purpose of getting drunk and partying. Older tourists seem to be more mindful of their environment and more interested in other aspects of travel and culture.

  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

  11. C'mon Aaron I know you're smarter than this. I've met plenty of ignorant, European asshole who have NO idea what being an American is really like. Hell, I can bring up a list of of problems and fucked up ways of European society (lack of dental care among MANY others haha). Yes America has the BEST universities, even the mediocre ones are far superior than most universities in other countries. A handful of Wikipedia quotes is hardly enough to deem a country as "bad" or inferior to another, whether you like it or not. If you lived here for at least a year maybe you'll see, but until then you just resemble a typical ignorant European. Almost jealous even, but if it helps you sleep at night to nitpick and put down a country that has the best education in the world. So be it.

    1. You are either ignorant or a liar.

      Free basic dental care in Europe is common, and in some countries anyone up to the age of 18 gets excellent service all paid for by the taxpayer. What's the situation like in the US?

      There is a saying about US universities I have heard a few times in academia, "The top 50 US universities may be among the best in the world, but they also have the 5000 worst in the world." There is a lot of truth to it.

      Your attempt to discredit a list of credible facts, which you can all verify independently, boils down to lame rhetorics. Wikipedia is merely the messenger. The facts are out there for everyone to judge. If you think there is something great about, say, having 50 million people living off food stamps, then please let me know.

      Now tell me about the "many" other problems Europe has! The fact that you are referring to "Europe" as if it is a monolithic block instead of a composition of fairly different countries seems to be lost on you, by the way. So maybe take this into account in your reply.

    2. Re. public transport: Visit LA and have a look around. Sure, if public transport is so amazing, then why are there so many cars in the streets!?

    3. So you don't even begin to mention corruption in your country? And you call Americans brainwashed. "Sure, if public transport is so amazing, then why are there so many cars in the streets!?" Wow. That was one of most stupid retorts I've ever heard. That's some abysmal logic there. There are CARS in EVERY developed country. There's over 300 million people in USA. You mean to tell me there are hardly any cars in Germany or England etc. Surely you're not that stupid. How am I lying, I HAVE met ignorant Europeans among many other things. If the dental care is so great in European countries, how come they're known to have jacked up teeth ( U.K. especially since the dentistry there is scarce) unlike America, which actually has more thoroughly trained dentists. Ignorance is bliss. You use a saying to give credence to a claim about AMERICA. That's beyond laughable and closer to tragic end of the spectrum. You're really making a bad case...

    4. Let me just quote what I wrote above: "Hahaha, a guy living in a country that is basically run by corporations wants to tell me anything about the corruption in my country? Thanks for making my day, I haven't laughed that hard in a while. Sure, corruption in my country, and presumably in most of Europe, is fairly widespread, but it nothing but pales compared to what's going on in the US. Just think of how your government and the Fed are infiltrated by former members of the "vampire squid" Goldman Sachs."

      Further, keep your distortions of my position to yourself. It is a fact that in pretty much every bigger European city you are fine without owning a car. But try that in the US outside SF, Boston, or NYC. Do you want to try again and make a better argument for your untenable position?

      Of course you'll find people with "jacked up teeth" in Europe as well, but they at least have the option to go to a dentist, and it would be much more affordable than in the US, too.

    5. Actually dental care is really affordable and common; which is why Americans aren't known for having jacked up teeth. I'm not distorting your positions, don't try to fall back on yet another invalid claim. "It is a fact that in pretty much every bigger European city you are fine without owning a car. But try that in the US outside SF, Boston, or NYC." More invalid drivel. Irony is a lost concept to you. Did you realize that what you said, literally falls back on itself since SF, Boston, NYC are some of USA's bigger cities. Just tragic

    6. Let's try that again: How feasible is it to live in, say, Los Angeles and get by without a car?

      Next time, cut your expletives and stay on topic. Unfortunately, you'll then also realize that you have nothing to say, and can't build a strong case for your position either.

    7. Don't get carried away I deal with facts. Which is something you seem devoid of. It's probably highly feasible since I lived for years in SMALL eastern cities without a car. So I could definitely get by in L.A without a car. That answers your question. From someone who actually LIVED in America, not from some foreign, assumptive, ignorant outsider looking in.

    8. Nice argument, going from the claim that because you can live in small cities without a car, you could also get by in LA without one. Dude, take a trip there, or just read up on "urban sprawl", and look up Los Angeles in Google Maps. I bet the sheer size of this city would make you feel a bit uncomfortable.

      Is there anything else you want to talk about, my American friend?

    9. Thanks, although I'm not trying argue. The problem with you is that you're getting your information from solely the internet, Wikipedia (which has been proven to not be a credible source) Google etc. I actually LIVED there. Well I also lived in New York without a car and did just fine. So no, I doubt L.A. would make me uncomfortable. But you're right, I should take a trip there. Sounds fun!

  12. Talk about the corruption that's going on in your country Aaron, since you're so aware. Seriously, and don't tell me there's no corruption because that's obvious bullshit. "non-existant public transportation" ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS? That's a huge lie and it's apparent you never lived in America. Just pure ignorance. And you're using Roosh, a fucking PUA as an example of the average American mentality. Such a bullshit generalization. What a complete joke, I hope most Europeans don't think like that, that would be pathetic; you're really giving them a bad reputation.

    1. Hahaha, a guy living in a country that is basically run by corporations wants to tell me anything about the corruption in my country? Thanks for making my day, I haven't laughed that hard in a while. Sure, corruption in my country, and presumably in most of Europe, is fairly widespread, but it nothing but pales compared to what's going on in the US. Just think of how your government and the Fed are infiltrated by former members of the "vampire squid" Goldman Sachs.

    2. "vampire squid" now that made me laugh haha. At least you don't deny your ignorance about the average American mentality. Especially after that atrocious Roosh example You've proven to be a typical ignorant, judgmental, invalid European. Now I'd love to see how you nitpick and justify that bullshit. I'm just wasting time, there's no getting through to this ignorant European. Hahaha. People will stick to there ways.

    3. So, you really have never read the words "vampire squid"? Apparently you don't think highly of following the public discourse. Google has about half a million results for the search term "'vampire squid' & Goldman", and it's used even by conservative newspapers like the Financial Times. So, who has just proved to be ignorant? :P

    4. Since when have I stated I never heard of "vampire squid". I said it was funny. Now you're just making assumptions. You're making a fine case for yourself....sicke....hahaha

    5. Well, how can an expression make you laugh if you have encountered it dozens of times in print or speech already? ;)

    6. I'm fairly aware. It was how you worded it. I think your ignorance gave it more spark ;) Seriously, this is going bad you for. Now you attempt(fail) to discredit my laughter? C'mon Sleazy, you're getting desperate.

    7. @Ryo

      Leftists live in an intellectual cocoon and vacuum. They only read leftist books, only read leftist statisticans, only read leftist economists, only read leftist columns etc etc.

      While I get a lot of joy ripping apart leftists and leaving them hanging in the air, challenging everything they thought... I don't think it's useful to do this here.

      You will not change Aaron's mind. At best, in 2 months of arguing you might crack his brainwashing that says "everyone who disagrees with me is ignorant and uneducated on this subject"

      And that opens the first seed to someone figuring out that leftism is a lie (when you see that non-leftists are quite educated and can offer much better stats, arguments and facts your leftist mentors never told you).

      But what's the use? Aaaron's a smart guy, which means he'll leave leftism by the time he's 40, which is the typical progression. All you'd do is speed up his journey by a potential few months?

      But at what cost? How is this related to PUAs, pickup and all this stuff? It's not.

      While I get that it's pleasing to argue leftists, I'd urge you to leave it as off-topic... Aaron's talent ripping apart puas is too precious to be spent arguing politics.

    8. Alek,

      there is no left, and no right. Have you heard of "divide et impera"? While the people bicker about trifles, they fill their coffers, and if there is any threat for the super-rich, they start some inane PR campaign. Just google "death tax", for instance.

      Try ripping me apart, buddy! Shall we start by picking a handful of neoliberal theories?

      Your comments about me "maturing" as I get older are amusing because I actually used to have staunch right-wing views. I grew up in one of the most conservative areas in Germany, and in a rather prosperous one, too (no, I am not part of the 1%). Only after I had run-ins with economics students and professors (no, not at some random university) who seemed to do little more than regurgitate unreflected dogmas, I grew suspicious.

      Furthermore, I had many encounters with PR and HR people, as well as employees of institutions that love to describe themselves as pillars of the system. But there is only so much bullshit you can take, and after the second time you hear an HR ditz of Goldman Sachs tell about their "culture of excellence", while you also hear that x, y, and z in your class got a job there due to connections, and despite abysmal grades, you start to wonder. (Now the truth is out, and it's widely known that Goldman is an utterly rotten company, just like (presumably) every other financial institution.)

      I have also spent some time studying the assumptions of some of the models that are supposed to describe parts of the economy, including the stock market (such as VaR), and was actually baffled at the extent of intellectual dishonesty or misguided assumptions. If you have been trained in a formal science, you can only shake your head in disbelief at times. Well, plenty of institutions went bust due to their own arrogance, like LTCM. You know, they were the best of the best of the best. Yet, they didn't realize that their models didn't adequate describe a complex reality.

    9. @Aaron.

      I'm not responding because anti-pua is more important than publically embarassing you, which I could for about 30 fallacies you made so far :)

      Let's keep to what we're united on. You will see most people have figured out that this discussion is not useful and have bowed out of it.

    10. Cop out if I ever heard one. Why should Aaron, or anyone for that matter be entirely restricted to writing about game?
      On a tangential note, the cultural and economical differences between states will relate to men's relationships with women.

    11. @AnonymousCoward

      There are millions of leftists in the world who are an exact clone (politically) to Aaron's political self... and there are millions of these debates on random forums online.

      There's only one Anti-Pua of Aaron's stature.

      There's no point to anyone arguing politics on here.

      Why should Aaron, or anyone for that matter be entirely restricted to writing about game?

      Nobody ever said anything about what aaron should write about, lol it's his blog :D

      The people talking about unity are saying that *we* the visitors should not be engaging Aaron in politics. Just bow out, and wait till there's something PUA-related to discuss.

    12. Alek,

      don't worry, I've got enough left to say about pickup. However, I do think that you resort to rather lame rhetorical maneuvers. Forgive me if I sound psychological, but I do believe that I have met your kind quite a few times in my life: obviously smart, encouraged by their parents to always voice their opinion, and to believe that you are always right. However, the problem with people like you is that you were never seriously challenged. You were never put in an environment that questioned your views. Instead, you received constant reinforcement, but not based on sound logic or argument, but as approval.

      I know that you are a busy guy, but if you once find the time to set apart half an hour or an hour, then feel free to drop me an email, and we'll discuss issues like rampant income inequality, or the failure of capitalism, or your absurd view on "socialism". To guys like you, it's great if the rich get tax breaks (that's of course not socialism), and even better if the "poor" get the shaft over and over again, even though the rich are living off them. There are only two reasonable options:

      If you indeed belong to the 1%, then you react hostile because deep down you know that there is no justification for your parasitic behavior, i.e. living of capital interest along. You may even feel insecure because you know that you yourself haven't really achieved anything but are merely living off the wealth of your family (I've met quite a few of those people). In feudalism, the aristocracy had an incestuous relationship with the church, and for good reason, since their claim that they have the "divine right of kings". The church then kept the people stupid, so that they just wouldn't ram a pitchfork into the stomach of their lazy overlord.

      If you don't belong to the 1% (or, say, top 5%), then your defense of right-wing views is inane, and merely due to greed, or hope of future pay-off. An excellent example I came across recently was the rental market in Zurich, Switzerland. It's a fairly wealthy city, yet the rents are absurdly high. However, there is little to no protest because the tenants believe that one day, they'll be rich, too, own some apartments, and then exploit the renters. It's the same bullshit that makes something like 50% of the people in the US believe that one day they'll be rich, too, and will then profit from the system. This is of course an impossibility. Not realizing their stupidity, they vote for people who only aim to strengthen the plutocracy even more.

      BTW, do you know this caricature: ?

  13. "mediocre ones are far superior than most universities in other countries"

    Hardly. The Ivies, Stanford, MIT and quite a few others even in Tier 2 are excellent institutions, but most other universities in the US are overpriced and provide a lower level of instruction compared to their counterparts overseas. This isn't solely the fault of the universities themselves of course, but public education in the US is on the whole, fucked up.

    1. Also, in Europe, free university education and decent institutions are rather common, whereas in the US they saddle you with six-figure loans which you may never be able to pay off. Further, whenever someone wants to praise the academic excellence of, say, MIT (which I will not in the least doubt), you also have to take into account what a mess the US public school system and most public universities are.

      When I went to school, you had 4 years of elementary school and 9 years of high school. This has been shortened to 8 years now in Germany. However, when I graduated, I have had two years of calculus, had learnt the basics of linear algebra, statistics and probability, and also two foreign languages. The other was Latin. In short, I received an excellent education, and all free of charge.

      On a side note, my high school teachers were educated to a rather high level in the subjects they were teaching us. You had the occasional PhD in, say, history, and we also had some people with industry experience. In fact, you can't even teach something like mathematics if you haven't studied it at university. In the US that's not necessarily the case, and I have been told horror stories of ditzes who told the kids that a division by zero results in zero.

    2. I'm not talking about the price range, I'm stating that they offer superior education. That's fact. You can delude yourselves to feel better about not studying in USA, but they have far superior universities. That is truth.

    3. Strawman alert! I wasn't talking about the price range either, but it is a fact that every Podunk U charges about as much as Harvard.

    4. I was replying to Anonymous, since he/she mentioned overpriced universities. Which I wasn't getting at the price. Not every university charges as much Harvard. Where do you get your facts from? Anti-American propaganda perhaps. That is obviously fallacious. It is a fact that USA has the most highly ranked and coveted universities.

    5. No, not every university charges as much as Harvard. Many much, much lower ranked charge even more, and now don't get me started on for-profit colleges.

  14. This comment has been removed by the author.

    1. Dude, "socialism" is quite easy to afford. I have no problem with the elites of the world having their nice houses and a couple luxury cars, but the level of income inequality in countries like the US or Rwanda is impossible to justify. If there was an actual political will, then the problems of the world like (absolute) poverty and hunger could easily be solved. The other day, for instance, I read that last year over ten tons of food were destroyed in Germany alone. Somehow I get the impression that this would feed a substantial amount of people.

      In terms of innovation, Europe certainly can compete. In some of the areas I am currently interested in, the leading research has indeed been done in Europe. In other areas it may well be different. It's an interconnected world after all, and in academia everybody stands on the shoulders of someone else anyway.

    2. EDIT: That's million tons of food. Sorry for the typo.

    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    4. Alek,

      let's not get too contentious here.

      FIrst, I don't want to question at all the tremendous role US-based research has had after WWII, but I would not belittle European research either. Just look at CERN.

      Your views do deserve some correction, though. ;)

      First, it's not the case that the uber-wealthy have actually earned their money due to their own hard work. The machinations of, say, the East-Indian Tea Company which enriched the English aristocracy simply provided a blueprint that has been followed over and over. Where does all the money come from in the end?

      I know, I know, the usual argument goes something like, "I've never heard of a poor person creating jobs", but in the end they all do. Who pays for the wages of the people at Facebook? It's your little Joe and Jane Average who pay for virtual goods. Who makes Apple rich? Sure, they provide pretty good (albeit overpriced) products, but people buy it. That's where their money comes from.

      Social mobility is for the most part just an illusion, especially in the USA (in Germany and the UK, too; but much less in, say, Denmark). In the US, there was this bullshitty idea of a "classless society", which doesn't get spouted out much these days. Apparently, the tent cities have grown a bit too large even for politicians versed in Orwellian doublespeak.

      If you think the rich got obscenely rich due to "hard work", then maybe read up on history. Have you heard of the "Great Moderation", where the US enjoyed great prosperity and was held up as an ideal for the world to aspire to? So, apparently it works fairly well if you let the richest of the rich pay high taxes, and it didn't have a negative effect on innovation either. The tax cuts under Dubya Bush certainly did nothing for the man on the street (despite mainstream-economics nonsense like "trickling down effects"). The surplus money only goes into the casino and leads to one bubble after another.

      Further, there were pretty good checks-and-balances built into the financial system. Ever heard of Glass-Steagal? Only after it got repealed, things got really out of hand. That bankers can be parasitic is due to the legal framework they operate in, and if there was a political will to curtail the power of the bankers, they wouldn't have much. For instance, you could nationalize some banks and make sure that they actually support the underlying economy instead of leeching off it (uhh, that's again socialism...).

      The role Wall St has played in the current global economic crisis is far bigger than the one of any European bank. Deutsche Bank has played a minor role, and so has Société Générale, but it nothing but pales compared to Lehmann, Bear Stearns, BoA, or Goldman.

      Lastly, the "starving countries" are run by military despots who view the resources of the country as their private property (that's also why the Sheiks are so rich, since they view the oil as their private good; unlike in other nations). Developmental aid is nothing but a scheme to ensure cheap supply of natural resources. Maybe you should crack open books like Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine or Perkin's Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Those are not fantasy novels. In fact, guys like Tim Geithner publicly said that for every dollar the US spends in developmental aid, they get back at least 1.20.

      The West does not try to feed the Third World. Quite the opposite is true, and it is little more than colonialism in disguise.

      I think you are a really smart guy, Alek, but international politics seem to be an area where you have done little thinking yourself so far, and I can thus only encourage you to question the messages in the mainstream media. (No, trying to call alternative viewpoints "conspiracy theories" won't cut it.)

    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    7. I deleted my comments because they revealed a bit too much personal information. And most importantly because...

      ...We can debate and exchange statistics, papers, research and in 50 days, you'll still be socialist, and I'll still be right-wing. But it won't make us any closer or better at anti-pua :)

  15. "You do realize the problem is that those starving countries are run by socialists, right? Whenever they're sent food, their socialist overlords just use it to usurp power.

    They refuse to develop the ethic to actually produce their own food. And the more aid they're sent, the lazier they get, and the worse they get. Research it. It's not for a lack of will. "

    I assume your main target is North Korea here, since the other suspects (African countries) aren't socialist either in name or concept.

    The North Korean famine which started off in the 1990s was caused by stupid decisions made by their leadership compounded with natural disasters, which persists to this day. I think assuming people starving to death are being too lazy to farm is frankly quite absurd.

    1. As an obsessive fact checker I have to add that quite a few African countries have called themselves socialist.
      That's using the most narrow definition possible too. If a more broad common language definition were used, many more African countries could indeed be classified as socialist.


    2. The problem with the misguided left/right debate is that it distracts from the underlying deeper problem. The masses are so brainwashed that every schmuck who drives a car that is less than five years old and has his mortgage halfway paid off believes that any taxes that target the rich would target him, too. Talk about a mass-delusion! I find it more than ironic that there are entire countries in which political views that clearly disadvantage the majority find widespread backing (this applies to both the Democratic and the Republican party in the US, since their actual policies differ very little.)

    3. To clarify: I was not singling out the US. Quite possibly every country that only has two or three large political parties suffers from this problem.

  16. People, people, please !

    We Europeans are better than you Americans, and that's final.

    Come on, how clear does it have to be made ?

    Your best guy in pick-up is Glenn Quagmire. And he's not even real.
    At least we can put forward Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

    So there.

    But could we please concentrate on the common enemy please.
    The whole tread started out being about him likely biting the dust in the not so distant future.
    We shouldn't allow division among us. Or distraction from the holy cause which unites us.



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.