multiculturalism in Europe failed

German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared that in Germany, multiculturalism (Critical Theory) has "utterly failed." Both Australia's ex-prime minister John Howard and Spain's ex-prime minister Jose Maria Aznar reached the same conclusion about multiculturalism in their countries. British Prime Minister David Cameron has warned that multiculturalism is fostering extremist ideology and directly contributing to homegrown Islamic terrorism. UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage said the United Kingdom's push for multiculturalism has not united Britons but pushed them apart. It has allowed for Islam to emerge despite Britain's Judeo-Christian culture. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said the roots of violent Islamism are not "superficial but deep" and can be found "in the extremist minority that now, in every European city, preach hatred of the West and our way of life." The bottom line is that much of the Muslim world is at war with Western civilization. There's no question that the West has the military might to thwart radical Islam's agenda. The question up for grabs is whether we have the intelligence to recognize the attack and the will to defend ourselves from annihilation. Multiculturalism is Islamists' foot in the door. At the heart of multiculturalism is an attack on Western and Christian values. Much of that attack has its roots on college campuses among the intellectual elite who see their mission as indoctrinating our youth. In past columns, I've documented professorial hate-America teaching, such as a UCLA economics professor's telling his class, "The United States of America, backed by facts, is the greediest and most selfish country in the world." A history professor told her class: "Capitalism isn't a lie on purpose. It's just a lie." She also said: "(Capitalists) are swine. ... They're bastard people." Students sit through lectures listening to professorial rants about topics such as globalism and Western exploitation of the Middle East and Third World peoples. Some public school boards have banned songs and music containing references to Santa Claus, Jesus or other religious Christmas symbols. The New York City school system permits displays of Jewish menorahs and the Muslim star and crescent, but not the Christian Nativity scene. One school district banned a teacher from using excerpts from historical documents in his classroom because they contained references to God and Christianity. The historical documents in question were the Declaration of Independence and "The Rights of the Colonists," by Samuel Adams. The U.S. is a nation of many races, ethnicities, religions and cultures. Since our inception, people from all over the world have immigrated here to become Americans. They have learned English and American history and celebrated American traditions and values. They have become Americans while also respecting and adapting some of the traditions of the countries they left behind. By contrast, many of today's immigrants demand that classes be taught -- and official documents be printed -- in their native language. Other immigrants demand the use of Shariah, practices that permit honor killing and female genital mutilation. Multiculturalists argue that different cultural values are morally equivalent. That's nonsense. Western culture and values are superior. For those who'd accuse me of Eurocentrism, I'd ask: Is forcible female genital mutilation, as practiced in nearly 30 sub-Saharan African and Middle Eastern countries, a morally equivalent cultural value? Slavery is practiced in Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad and Sudan; is it morally equivalent? In most of the Middle East, there are numerous limits placed on women, such as prohibitions on driving, employment and education. Under Islamic law, in some countries, female adulterers face death by stoning, and thieves face the punishment of having their hand severed. In some countries, homosexuality is a crime punishable by death. Are these cultural values morally equivalent, superior or inferior to Western values? Multiculturalism has not yet done the damage in the U.S. that it has in western European countries -- such as England, France and Germany -- but it's on its way. By the way, one need not be a Westerner to hold Western values. Mainly, you just have to accept the supremacy of the individual above all else.

Tractor pulls scared all the people away

These farmers don't even use recent tractors in tractor pulls, they use tractors from the 1950s through 1970 especially for tractor pulls around here. (I was going to call them rednecks, but they don't have Confederate flags LOL :-p)   Farm tractors cost 90,000 to $140,000 the most outdated get to be in the tractor pull.  Otherwise, recent John Deere 7410 tractors from the 1990s in the corn fields. These recent John Deere and New Holland last 20 years minimum. Maybe all the millionaires own the John Deere 9RT tractors so the tractor fanbase died off. My tractor pull videos weren't popular, only 40 views on the mediocre talent around here.  There isn't anything that screams watch me at County fairs in this county.
 
 
 Nobody wants to add a John Deere tractor on Pinterest I mean.

The remaining fanbase is all about speculation of (old school) mid-20th century technology.

Stock side
4500 nono turbo
5500 non turbo
5700 stock truck
7000 non turbo
6200 stock truck
9500 non turbo
8000 Stock diesel truck
10,500 non turbo (super trophy class)
9500 turbo
11,500 Turbo
12,500 trubo (Super trophy Class)
14,000 Turbo

Hot side
5700 light hot farm
5200 econo mod
6200 limited light super stock
6200 improved stock truck
6000 light mods
5500 econo mod
6200 light hot farm
6200 light mod
6500 light super stock
6500 light open (Glenwood City only)
6200 Street Mod Truck
6500 limited mod
6200 pro stock truck
7500 open mod
7500 light open (Glenwood Only)
8000 open diesel trucks
9500 limited pro stock
10,500 pro farm
9300 super farm
11,000 improved stock
10,000 pro stock
11,000 pro farm
11,500 improved stock

Most advanced tractor in the county right now  Sad isn't it?

Barnes and Noble deserves going bankrupt

 

Barnes and Noble says that American companies bringing anime to Region 1 are imports and charge 300% over the online price for Sailor Moon.  Barnes and Noble is unbelievably retarded. I'll get a pre-paid credit card and do it myself and save 300%. The overhead for paper books is 50% added cost and there is a shit load of paper farms in this country. I used to watch this between the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. Now Sailor Moon is more popular then Dragon Ball Z for some stupid reason.  Read University students watch it.
 
I bought this for $50, The bootleg version is is worth the fake regret it later discussions online. DVD with 2 MBit video have functioned for over a decade. Good thing I already have all the Sailor Moons except for Sailor Moon Crystal 2014 series.

Millionaires buy businesses, not stock

Warren Buffett is perhaps the greatest investor of all time, and he has a simple solution that could help an individual turn $40 into $10 million.
A few years ago, Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) (NYSE: BRK-B) CEO and Chairman Warren Buffett spoke about one of his favorite companies, Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO), and how after dividends, stock splits, and patient reinvestment, someone who bought just $40 worth of the company's stock when it went public in 1919 would now have more than $5 million.

Source: Coca-Cola.

Yet in April 2012, when the board of directors proposed a stock split of the beloved soft-drink manufacturer, that figure was updated and the company noted that original $40 would now be worth $9.8 million. A little back-of-the-envelope math of the total return of Coke since May 2012 would mean that $9.8 million is now worth about $10.8 million.

The power of patience
I know that $40 in 1919 is very different from $40 today. However, even after factoring for inflation, it turns out to be $540 in today's money. Put differently, would you rather have an Xbox One, or almost $11 million?
But the thing is, it isn't even as though an investment in Coca-Cola was a no-brainer at that point, or in the near century since then. Sugar prices were rising. World War I had just ended a year prior. The Great Depression happened a few years later. World War II resulted in sugar rationing. And there have been countless other things over the past 100 years that would cause someone to question whether their money should be in stocks, much less one of a consumer-goods company like Coca-Cola.

The dangers of timing
Yet as Buffett has noted continually, it's terribly dangerous to attempt to time the market:

"With a wonderful business, you can figure out what will happen; you can't figure out when it will happen. You don't want to focus on when, you want to focus on what. If you're right about what, you don't have to worry about when"

So often investors are told they must attempt to time the market, and begin investing when the market is on the rise, and sell when the market is falling.
This type of technical analysis of watching stock movements and buying based on how the prices fluctuate over 200-day moving averages or other seemingly arbitrary fluctuations often receives a lot of media attention, but it has been proved to simply be no better than random chance.

Investing for the long term
Individuals need to see that investing is not like placing a wager on the 49ers to cover the spread against the Panthers, but instead it's buying a tangible piece of a business.
It is absolutely important to understand the relative price you are paying for that business, but what isn't important is attempting to understand whether you're buying in at the "right time," as that is so often just an arbitrary imagination.
In Buffett's own words, "if you're right about the business, you'll make a lot of money," so don't bother about attempting to buy stocks based on how their stock charts have looked over the past 200 days. Instead always remember that "it's far better to buy a wonderful company at a fair price."
If you're interested in creating your own version of this story, it's essential to find investments that stand the test of time. To help out in your search, for a limited time we're sharing a company that meets the stringent criteria our analysts require when seeking out incredible long term investing opportunities. Oddly enough, this particular company's product has one of Warren Buffett's most cherished investments directly in it's crosshairs! Our analysts are calling it "Warren Buffett's Worst Nightmare", and 152,298 investors have recently capitalized on similar research we've released. Make sure to access your free copy today by clicking here now.

American women prefer Little Dogs over little babies

The fewer babies Americans give birth to, the more small dogs they seem to buy.

Birth rates in the US have fallen from nearly 70 per 1,000 women in 2007, to under 63 last year—a 10% tumble. American women birthed almost 400,000 fewer little humans in 2013 than they did six years before. The drop-off has come exclusively among 15- to 29-year-olds. This chart, taken from a recent report by the US Department of Health (pdf), does a pretty decent job of showing how much of the growing disinterest in having babies is due to younger women:

1

Meanwhile, the ownership of small dogs—that is, pets weighing no more than 20 pounds (9 kilograms)—is doing just the opposite. Americans have been buying more and more small dogs each year since 1999. The population of little canines more than doubled in the US over that period, and is only projected to continue upwards, according to data from market research firm Euromonitor.

“You do not have to go to many pet shows to realize that the numbers of small and tiny dogs are on the increase,” a report by Pets International opened in 2010 (pdf).

And rightly so. The number of small dogs has grown so fast that they are now the most popular kind nationwide.

It could just be a coincidence that Americans are birthing fewer babies at the same time as they’re buying a lot more little dogs. But there’s pretty good reason to believe it isn’t, Damian Shore, an analyst at market-research firm Euromonitor, told Quartz. “There’s definitely some replacement happening there,” he said.

1

One telling sign that the two are not entirely unrelated is that the same age groups that are forgoing motherhood are leading the small dog charge. “Women are not only having fewer children, but are also getting married later. There are more single and unmarried women in their late 20s and early 30s, which also happens to be the demographic that buys the most small dogs,” Shore said.

There’s also evidence people are treating their dogs a bit more like little humans these days. Premium dog food, the most expensive kind, has grown by 170% over the past 15 years, and now accounts for 57% of of the overall dog food market.

There are now tools to monitor your dog’s fitness, ice cream trucks exclusively for canines, and vacations designed exclusively for dog-having people. “The animals in our homes are family. They’re like children,” David Grimm, the author of the book Citizen Canine, told Wired this week.

Of course, small dog ownership isn’t rising just because people want kid substitutes. Fashion trends aside, small dogs are also emblematic of a national migration to cities, where big dogs are harder to keep. Nearly 80% of Americans live in urban areas. “Smaller homes and apartments are also helping drive the growing popularity of smaller dogs,” Shore said.

But the national trend towards later motherhood is certainly playing its part. And those who treat their pooches and pugs like babies may be on to something. A study last year found that dogs form bonds of dependency with their owners not unlike the ones babies form with their parents.