Truth in advertising?


Imagine if Delta released an ad like this today? 45 years ago it offered military personnel cheap tickets. In an era where sex, drugs and rock’n’roll ruled, such a risqué advert (torn asunder all the promiscuous women are seemingly white) was one can only guess “in step with the times” back then.  Then again the same Delta Airlines has just cut off its association with law abiding NRA members for simply flying to see the inlaws. CM noticed that National Geographic has just issued a formal apology for its racist and bigoted articles from 100 years ago. The editor wrote, “For Decades, Our Coverage Was Racist. To Rise Above Our Past, We Must Acknowledge It.” One would imagine that all the editor did was raise an issue that a majority of its readers never thought about and hold present journalists and photographers to some sort of ‘Day One, Year Zero’ doctrine.

What is it with this “shaming” culture we live in today where corporates must make collective apologies for things that were done before people were born to people who are most likely dead on matters they had zero control over? Just spare the sanctimonious lectures and thought control. I can’t remember the last time I heard a wolf whistle but some want this made a ‘hate crime’. Not condoning it but a wolf whistle is generally viewed as a compliment not a slur. Just like those Hollywood actresses wearing three postage stamps held together by dental floss chanting #METOO all the while they kept quiet about mass sexual harassment because their careers were more important than principle. Spare us the hypocrisy.

Surely people’s sensitivities can’t be such that this should be a jailable offence? Even Qantas staff have been handed newspeak dictionaries on what they can and can’t say to customers to avoid the 0.00001% risk of offending someone. Where do we draw the line? Seems like the line is being drawn further to the point of endorsing a whole industry built on victim culture.

Instead of acknowledging humans have flaws, celebrating differences and accepting it we are being cornered into smaller and smaller ‘legal’ boxes of what is deemed ‘with the times’ and straying outside that risks an innocent person being labeled a bigot, racist, sexist or homophobe. Worse, more laws (like Canada’s M-103 or Australia’s 18-C) risk jail or massive fines for anyone that makes a factual statement. The worst part about it is that lives have been ruined based on trumped up charges willingly egged on by groups like the heavily biased Australian Human Rights Commission, a group that encourages people to lodge complaints but gladly tweets justices it self-serves on its own side  no impartiality

We can all look at the above advert from Delta 45 years later and see it doesn’t really fly (no pun intended) but most of us do not need some sort of state sanctioned manual to ensure we all are indoctrinated to know it is bad form with a law laced on top. Yet this is exactly the type of thing we are seeing day in and day out.

The 90th Oscars – viewership down 16%


The Oscars. Who actually takes the time to watch it? The irony is that these supposed social justice warriors think they pack significant political clout. On the one hand actresses still dress as scantily as possible while protesting sexual harassment and women’s rights while on the other stick it to the NRA when so many action or suspense movies glorify gun fights and blood shed. Trump bashing is a regular feature these days and the jokes are plain boring and the audience, what’s left of it, have tuned out.

They can’t have it both ways. In any event viewers voted with their eyes sending ratings down 16%. Perhaps The Oscars could take a lessson from 90 years ago and stick to silent movies!

From a Nielsen:

The 8 p.m.-11 p.m. portion of ABC’s telecast averaged an 18.9 household rating and 32 share in Nielsen’s metered market overnight ratings, which cover about 70% of U.S. TV households. That’s down about 16% from the 22.5/37 rating generated by the 2017 Oscars.

Hypocrisy and Hollywood go hand in hand. One wonders whether Leo DiCaprio flew his eyebrow groomer half way around the world on a private jet when climate change is the biggest problem we face  today.

After decades of digital disruption Hollywood still pushes the idea that they are important enough for us to make an appointment for when Netflix and Fox allow us to watch whatever, whenever On demand in our own living rooms. Times have changed and Hollywood needs to get with them and keep their mouths shut when it comes to thinking they’re remotely living in the real world.

If the status quo is so good why would we vote out the incumbents?


Almost everywhere we look, we’re told by the political class how good our lot is. Our blessed Aussie PM told us, “It has never been a better time to be an Australian.” Boosted asset prices, low unemployment and tepid inflation gives the illusion of real wealth for everyone. As an electorate, if all of that were true, why wouldn’t we be going out of our way to make sure the status quo gets voted back in with similar if not greater majorities? As it stands, more and more incumbent parties are hanging on by their finger nails, being forced to create alliances to stay in power rather than stick to the principles their parties were founded on. The irony is that these grand coalitions are formed on the tenets of ignorant ‘un-populism.’

The latest election cycle shows us that a growing number of people aren’t buying mediocrity. They’re sick of incumbent politicians ignoring them. The current crop of leaders seem to think that being less worse than the opposition is a virtue to be proud of. Yet poverty levels continue to rise and wealth is not trickling down to the masses. Even rising state entitlements have a finite life and the electorate knows it. Being married to the government is not seen as a desirable strategy long term. Deficits keep rising and look increasingly hard to pay down.

Searching through the St Louis Fed database, civilian employment under Obama managed to grow 2.5% on pre-crash levels. So the US loaded up on $9 trillion in short term debt to create 4 million net new jobs. That works out at $2.25 million per worker. Hardly an achievement. Yet despite that economic growth has dithered at the lowest post recession rates ever. As much as we might want to celebrate record low unemployment these are not proud statistics. The quality of jobs keeps going down. $8.4 trillion of this federal debt load needs to be refinanced inside 4 years. $12.3 trillion inside 10 years. While politicians can call the average voter stupid, the daily struggles of the average punter shows how out of touch the law makers are. This was the grand mistake made by Clinton. While she hung out with her elite mates at $1,000 plate dinners in Democrat strongholds in LA, NY and Chicago expecting a coronation, Trump hit the little people and had crowds flocking to see him.

While Trump’s trade tariffs seem daft on the face of it, it was done for the forgotten people who voted for him. He is not concerned about the consequences. That’s the point. So much of his platform appears abhorrent but he is the only politician in danger of being raked over coals for keeping his promises. That’s why he was elected. The status quo had failed to deliver over decades. 80% of the population didn’t benefit from the asset bubble post GFC. The 1% took 42% of those gains. The average Joe and Joanne see this. While they might not fully comprehend it they know enough to see their situation is not much better.

Take a look at Trudeau’s India debacle. Apart from the embarrassing wardrobe saga, the bigger problems came when he blamed the Indians for letting a known terrorist attend a state dinner. The Indians, unsurprisingly, were most unhappy at the accusation. Many look to Trudeau as the posterchild of the left, pushing peoplekind. Telling Canadians that he will convert returning ISIS fighters with haiku poetry, podcasts and comparing them to Italian migrants at the end of WW2 is utterly preposterous to his constituents. Telling his veterans they’re asking for too much flies in the face of love of one’s country. No wonder his popularity continues to dive. His speech to the UN – where he rattled off how Canada was ticking all the UN diversity boxes – was only a quarter full. Not even his own liberal mates rallied to show unity in numbers. It was telling that virtue signalling is all about appearing to do good rather than doing it.  Yet the day before Trudeau presented, Trump spoke of America First and the audience was packed. They might have hated every word that dripped from his tongue but they didn’t miss it for the world. It is hard talk. Not carefully prepared politically correct nonsense.

Take the recent European elections. Germany gave Merkel the worst ever performance of the CDU post WW2. The SPD was even worse. The anti-immigrant AfD stormed to 16%. Is it any wonder that when Merkel’s misguided altruism  showed up on Election Day even she finally conceded we have a problem with “no go zones”. Some may wish to look at the Merkel miracle of growth and low unemployment but the public service in Germany has exploded from 9% pre 2008 crash to 16% today. Not private sector growth but public sector.

The Italian election showed over 60% of the vote went to eurosceptic parties. While volatility has always been a feature of Italian politics, this results showed the discontent underbelly of Italy which has seen poverty jump 50% to one third of the population since Lehman collapsed. While M5S said it wouldn’t form a coalition, all bets are off if it tied up with League. There are plenty of overlaps on the party platforms but the M5S would have to insist on the PM role. The EU would go into a tailspin on such news.

Austria voted in a wunderkind who put the right wing anti immigrant FPO in charge of immigration. Holland saw Wilders claw more seats. Nationalist Marine LePen in France doubled the number of seats ever attained by the Front National. Even Macron is changing his spots looking to introduce national service and take a harder line against migrant crime.

Whether the real statistics of migrant crime are wholly accurate or not is beside the point. It is increasingly seen as an election issue and more EU countries have had enough. They feel their lot is getting worse and view forking out billions in aid for people to settle here is pennies out of their pocket. If the stats are as the government sugar coats them to be in terms of the prevailing prosperity surely the citizens would overwhelmingly back them. Sadly the opposite is true meaning politicians aren’t selling their “compassion” effectively. Too many examples of gagging the police and muzzling the press have surfaced.

That is the thing. If the economy was rosy and bullish and more people felt secure there is a likelihood they would look at the immigration debate in a more positive light. All they see now is millions flocking to Europe as poverty is on the rise and the economy is on the back foot at ground zero. European EU-28 GDP hasn’t grown since Q4 2015. Despite a quadrupling of ECB assets net jobs created post GFC numbers 4 million, labour force participation remains below the peak. However we should not forget that Romania and Bulgaria joined in Jan 2007 and Croatia in 2013 which would add (at a 50% employment ratio) c.20mn meaning that employment in the EU on a like for like basis as a whole is down 16mn jobs ceteris paribus. Even if only Croatia was included then net jobs creation in EU-28 would be a paltry 2mn, or a smidgen above 1%. Anemic.

Yet the political class still doesn’t seem to be learning, especially the EU. Poland and Hungary have formed a pact to reject proposed quotas on migrants. The EU has failed to address the most important question. The wishes of the migrants themselves. It is one thing for the EU to appeal to voters as saving asylum seekers from war torn lands (when 80% are economic migrants by the EU’s own numbers), it is another to forcibly send them to countries that flat out don’t want them. Ask for a show of hands of asylum seekers looking to stay in Germany or head off to Hungary to settle and the likelihood is 100:0. Trying to make Hungarians or Poles feel guilty for being incompassionate is a price they’re clearly willing to pay with losing EU membership. Would we take kindly to a neighbor telling us how to arrange our furniture in the living room or sign a petition to prevent us building extensions even though it is not even in their way? Of course not. Still wagging fingers in disapproval is only likely to steel their resolve.

Flip to the Southern Hemisphere and Australian politics is also exposing the sordid state of the swamp. 5 PMs in 10 years. Now the Deputy PM has had to resign to the back bench and in a last ditched effort to claim some sort of moral high ground with the staffer he was having an affair with. He claimed he would still look after her even though a paternity test might show the kid wasn’t his. What a grub and a slap in the face for his partner to imply she may have been promiscuous. Once again the popularity of the incumbent parties in Australia continues to sink to all time lows. The Labor Party looks to have the next election in the bag but even then the popularity of the opposition leader is woefully tiny.

While the world seems to be in this state of blissful tranquility on the outside, we needn’t probe too deep before seeing how bad things continue to be on the inside. The little people may not have any financial fire power but at the ballot box they have an equal opportunity to stuff those that aren’t listening. Once again Italy shows us it wants change. Call it populism if you must but it is truly a reflection of just how bad things really are and how little ammunition to deal with any future crises remains. The little people are raising their voices. Best heed their words. It is the same reason why as zero chance as Trump looks in 2020, don’t bet against another 4 years in the White House. If the Dems hope that celebrities that talk of #METOO and gun control (all the while they attend Oscars semi-naked and collect their millions doing action films full of explosions and automatic weapons fire) will sway them to a return to the swamp they’re sorely mistaken.



It is no surprise that The Guardian has published a review like this. It is yet another reason why it still begs for donations at the end of every article. Instead of thinking the content might be the problem the paper still thinks it’s readers “just haven’t come around yet”.  It’s consistent with leftist thinking.

Buckmaster writes,

Designed to appeal to US audiences first and foremost, and subsequently exploiting Australia’s inferiority complex, Crocodile Dundee confirmed false preconceptions Americans had (and perhaps still have) about Australia and Australians. These movies constructed a conservative fantasy, where white hetero males do all the hard work and are justly rewarded, and where everybody else, including “the sheilas”, “the Aborigines” and “the gays”, understand their place in the pecking order – which is somewhere below people like Dundee.”

Doesn’t the $700mn that the Crocodile Dundee franchise earned speak volumes of is popularity? Was it a surprise to see Tourism Australia make Paul Hogan (Crocodile Dundee) it’s pin up boy to tell Yanks he’ll “put another shrimp on the barbie”? The Guardian should take note.  Is it that many people see beyond all of these stereotypes because of the comedy within it? Why would people pay to watch a comedy film if it must walk on egg shells over every potential grievance? Maybe it would please Buckmaster if signs lit up telling audiences when they should applaud and boo? That way we could be indoctrinated inside the theatre. Perhaps filmmakers should pool all revenues at the box office and divide them evenly so those that didn’t do very well get equal pay?

Will The Guardian protest in ways that force the film content approval boards to edit out any “insensitive comments” against minorities? Jerry Seinfeld used to make fun of our differences all the time. One episode saw Jerry asking a mailman who happened to be of Chinese origin whether he knew where a Chinese restaurant was. “Do you think because I’m Chinese that I know where the Chinese restaurant is?” “No I thought you’d know because you’re a mailman” Two perspectives hidden in the comedy. If Jerry Seinfeld wasn’t funny he wouldn’t have been paid millions per episode. The viewers spoke and the network listened.

The problem with the left is that they can’t laugh at themselves let alone life. Most good humour is achieved by making fun of people. Ricky Gervais made a whole comedy series ‘The Office’ which poked fun of the horrible boss most of us had encountered while tackling all the issues around race, gender, sexual orientation, office romances, hierarchies and the politics inside the workplace. It was so funny because the viewer could laugh at the truth behind the storyline as they could rattle off names of their own colleagues who were just like the characters.

But no, humour must be surgically removed by the state. Rules must be put in place to protect people that aren’t necessarily asking for it.  Were Aborigines outraged after the first Crocodile Dundee? No. Should they and other minorities that supposedly had their feelings hurt retroactively seek compensation from Paul Hogan? Should he be dragged in front of the Australian Human Rights Commission?

What Buckmaster overlooks is the hypocrisy of Hollywood. As the #METOO scandal broke, celebrities might have worn black but so short of material were most of the dress makers one would be hard pressed to see it as a legitimate protest against sexual harassment. That’s ok though as their acceptance speeches spoke of gender pay gaps and all the other champagne socialist causes. That’s the difference. Because they support the leftist causes that’s alright even though half of those in the room are perfect examples of ignoring causes until it affects them. Surprise surprise to see the ratings of Hollywood award ceremonies  plummet. Ringing any bells Mr Buckmaster?

So to  Buckmaster’s  hope that the next Croc Dundee film removes the very things that made the franchise such a hit. Why not just let the box office tell the story of what people are prepared to pay for? People can make up their own minds on what they’re offended by. They don’t need the state to control language and thought. Look at all the howls of protest from the left about Tommy Robinson being a hateful racist bigot. Then look to why he has two #1 best selling books on Amazon? Could it be more people actually agree with him but keep quiet to avoid endless tirades from the left? Then they wonder why Trump won. In a sense the president is a Crocodile Dundee. He portrays himself as a silverback who grabs crotches and throws caution to the wind at political correctness.


Oprah – fantastic delivery to those lost in fantasy


One can’t fault Oprah for delivery. Her Cecil B. De Mille award speech justifies her position as the highest paid performer in Hollywood. She’s eloquent! Despite her speech to an audience full of hypocrites who applauded every aspect of the victim culture that has not held 99% of them back. She is unsurprisingly lighting up liberal social media feeds. Hail the identity politics!

Oprah is the poster child of how America rewards talent no matter what background one comes from. She earns $140mn a year. While she can talk of the importance of the civil rights of the 1960s from a lino floor watching Sidney Poitier win the same award, the America today (and decades ago) hasn’t  held her back. She should be celebrating and acknowledging that change not rattling off how unjust the world still is. Sure it isn’t perfect but the injustices of the 1960s are virtually non existent by comparison. Show me a perfect society and we’d all move there.

After all a black president served two terms in America. Had he not won those elections would civil rights in America been immeasurably worse off since 2009?  Would parents of African-American descent have told their children to hold tight to their injustices had he lost? Or did they tell them to chuck them away when he won? Why wouldn’t Oprah cheer that? Afterall the virtue signallers in the audience would smile, cry and swoon on anything she said so out of touch with the world they are

While the washout from the Weinstein saga has yet to finally flood them out, here was Hollywood trying to sell themselves as paragons of virtue. Champagne socialism is alive and kicking.

It was so ironic that immediately after the Oprah speech Natalie Portman introduced the “all male nominees for best director” which only amplified how full of it Hollywood is. Could it be that most directors are male? The Golden Globes said that Barbara Streisand was the only female winner of a best director award in 1984. Could it be that Spielberg or Ron Howard pulls movie financing  more adeptly than others regardless of gender? Previous track record -> future sales expectations -> higher financing -> better cast -> more sales etc. it’s based on economics not gender.

Then Jennifer Chastain jumped in with the 23% gender pay gap quip in a room where they all get paid millions. Leading actors get paid more depending on movie, budget and a whole host of issues. I doubt Meryl Streep has suffered a 23% pay gap to her male actors in any of her movies since Sophie’s Choice or Kramer vs Kramer. Geena Davis added to the pay gap nonsense in her introduction. Yawn.

Yes, Oprah grew up in Jim Crow times. Indeed she witnessed first hand those injustices. Once again isn’t a night of virtue signaling better served by focusing on positives than nothing but negatives. Of course not. It’s terrible being a multi millionaire.

Frances McDormand talked of the time for a female president. Barbara Streisand banged on about gender inequality. By her own admission she won an award 33 years ago.

So the Golden Globes was all the same rubbish. 100s of Hollywood celebrities thinking their words carry any meaning or weight. Every social justice case was put to full effect. If they actually believed their own nonsense they’d do their utmost to repeal the very civil rights thy fight so vigorously to defend.

Crime in Japan – Breakdown of the Nuclear Family


CM – Crime in Japan – Breakdown of the Nuclear Family

Following on from pensioner crime in Japan, this eye-opening report on the breakdown of traditional families points to a future unlike what many may not fathom. The link above contains the full report with a short summary can be found below.

Did you know that 25% of all marriages in Japan are couples that marry due to unplanned pregnancies? In Okinawa that rate is 42.4% Did you also know that 25% of all households with children in Japan are single-parent? The perception of the dutiful wife getting up at 4am to make breakfast for her samurai salaryman husband are virtually non-existent and half of divorces happen in age groups 55 years old and above. 25% of divorces occur in the 65yo+ cohort. The government changed the law in 2007 entitling wives to up to half of their ex-husband’s pension. Still the trend was rising sharply even before its introduction. Mrs Watanabe has had enough of her salaryman and wants out.

Domestic violence (DV) is seeing a very sharp upturn in Japan. Between 2010 and 2014, victims of DV have soared 60.6% against women and 650.1% against men. Most cases (over 60%) of DV were marital related. Recognizing the growing problem, The police have even developed a new category of DV which defines a divorced couple who are living under the same roof. Economic conditions for some families has become so tight that the stress of living with someone they do not want to be with now gets its own category, scoring over 6,000 cases alone in 2014.

Between 2010 and 2014, total reported stalking cases surged 36.6% to 24,837. 50% of stalking incidents recorded were related to partners (including former partners).

The Ministry for Health, Labor & Welfare (MHLW) has 208 child consultation centres which fielded over 88,000 cases in 2014, a 20.5%YoY increase or 22x the level of 20 years ago. Despite a 2.4x jump in social workers inside these child consultation centres over the last two decades they can’t keep up with the demand. The Japan National Police Agency (JNPA) statistics show a sharp jump in arrests for child abuse, 80% being due to physical violence causing injury. In 2013, 36 abused children died with 16 of them under 1 year old. Police note that child abuse is being driven by the breakdown in traditional family, unemployment and poverty, stats which we showed earlier to be rising steadily.

Crime in Japan is a problem that will not simply disappear with the evolving mix of aging demographics, poverty, unemployment, underemployment and economic stagnation. We note that the previous jump in Japanese crime started in 1997 and ran to a peak in 2003. Unemployment was a factor. In the crime boom of 2010-2016, we note that the unemployment rate has fallen but it masks disturbing trends in lower paid part-time work which is putting families under financial stress.

There is the smell of fear in the workplace. In the period 2002 to 2013, labour disputes almost trebled. Bullying and harassment (which are obviously less palatable for companies to have floating in the public domain) as a percent of total disputes has ballooned from 5.8% to almost 20% over the same period.

Another dilemma in the data is the employment referrals by government unemployment agencies for middle or advanced aged staff (45yo+) which shows that around 25% of them end up with work in a fixed term capacity of more than 4 months.

Ironically active retraining of inmates to help them find new careers after release occurs in prison. Why isn’t more being spent on finding ways to redeploy those out of prison? The idea that any job will do is a recipe for failure and cannot be relied upon as a sustainable program. Most vocational training by Hello Work, the government unemployment insurance agency, is broad and non-specific. Any specific job training will be ‘paid for’ which ultimately is limited to an unemployed person’s financial status and confidence a job will be attainable at the end of it.

Await the witch hunts from #METOO


Perhaps the saddest side effects of the METOO campaign will be the witch hunts that ensue. Already we are seeing such a movement in Australia to out the sexual predators in our own entertainment ranks. We don’t need to labour the point that sexual (or physical for that matter) harassment or assault is abhorrent and true offenders should be dealt with according to the law.  Sadly with a witch hunt some of the claims will be unsubstantiated, knowingly consensual but cause otherwise innocent people to defend things that aren’t true. Im sorry but if you are accused by an ambulance chaser seeking a payout making up about things that never happened then careers could be ruined in the process even if the defendant wins. It’s dangerous ground.

I made the point the other day that people that have PTSD from such sexual crimes do not need campaigns, especially started by Hollywood stars who knew full well the predators in the midst but chose to put career, fame and fortune ahead of other’s misery. It demeans them. Each person who has suffered a serious traumatic event in their life  has to deal with demons in their own way. There is no set manual to coping. To think that ‘raising awareness’ for something that some people have spent a life time trying to suppress or at the very least contain do not need to have the spotlight. Shame is perhaps one of the strongest emotions for sufferers among anguish, anxiety, anger, despair, hopelessness and suicide so putting Me Too in neon lights does them no good at all. You’ll find that most PTSD sufferers have problems with elevated risk taking whether alcohol, sexual or drug addiction, extreme sports activities (motorcycling, skydiving, off piste skiing etc) and so on. Yet someone had the nerve to say “How f*cking dare I?” In all honesty she speaks volumes about the victimhood industry, that I, an innocent casualty  of a sick mind, am told to shove it in order that someone who suffered at the hands of a wolf whistler somehow deserves equal outrage.

There is no issue with people who wish to come out and tell stories of things that happened in the past. However people need to be allowed to come out with their issues at a time that suits them, Indeed different things affect different people in different ways but this Me Too (if you honestly read the majority of posts) looks little more than unbridled activism which sets out to achieve something yet gets diluted by the people making petty claims they personally dismissed 20 years ago who now get a free kick on a social media platform so they can receive oodles of attention, likes and soothing words about bravery. To many of those that sought attention through Me Too, there is a likelihood the stated issue never really bothered you more than a day or two. Think of how someone bothered for decades views a cry for attention?

I have made this comment till I am blue in the face – the real sufferers are the ones who want the least exposure and least attention drawn to them. It is hard enough to cope, We aren’t reaching out for hand holding or singing songs by a campfire. We are in need of understanding, not sympathy or empathy.

So to the witch hunts that are surely coming. I pity the poor (majority of) males who will be unfairly dragged before courts (or out of court settlements) to defend something that never happened. Do not mistake this with an absolute desire to punish real offenders that break laws. What this activism will do is dilute the cause. Just like we saw with the witch hunts encouraged by the Australian Human RIghts Commission, even innocent students can have their lives ruined by people claiming utter falsehoods. Why should we expect anything less in the quest of some disgruntled people to use Me Too to destroy the lives of people that they willingly consented to be in a position to come in sexual contact? That to me is a sickening way to turn a cause that was supposed to help the innocent turn into one that unfairly frames the truly not guilty. But, how f*cking dare I?