discussion comment
15 years ago
Hi shadowcat,
Sometimes it works both ways. I can pretty much guarantee those 2 strippers that I liked wouldn't lift a finger for me---before or after I helped 'em. The mindset is just different. Not complaining in that it wasn't a secret and I could have always said NO.
Did I hope it might melt 'em a little bit? Yes. Did I believe that would happen? No. I'd have been very taken off guard if there was any appreciation. That just wasn't their mindset. They did have some very nice qualities besides looking hot such as being protective of the ugly dancers and they do help other people.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"I once had a stripper, Jamie (now retired)offer to help me change a flat tire on my truck"
Seems like a very nice stripper. It is a pleasant surprise when a woman wants to help even when she definitely doesn't seem cut out for the task.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"You helped some bitches with their car? Would they help you if you were stranded?"
Yes. It made me feel good that I was able to help. No, they wouldn't help because they're incapable of helping when it comes to that type of work (or would be afraid). However, they wouldn't help even in an area where they're capable----not sure if that is just as applies to me or everyone. Probably just applies to me. The point isn't their gratitude or unwillingness to help if I was in need----the point is the mindset. They don't like me and yet they actually expected help---they didn't seem to have any doubt that I would help either. BTW, yeah I did like/appreciate them it is just difficult to see why they were able to 1) ask for help from someone they dislike and 2) be confident of receiving help.
Anyway, it was fun. :) Now, it I wasn't able to get their car running----that would be a let down.
discussion comment
15 years ago
I went to RolLexx earlier today to try and get my fix. Plenty of dancers. Mainly curvy. I sorta finally found what I was looking for. Before I forget, I was talking about stripclubs in Atlanta and this dancer seemed to know every club. She claimed that if you know where to go there are cheap nasty clubs with white dancers---she named a bunch and said I could find 'em on a certain list; she didn't know about TUSCL (another dancer did, but said it was just good for stripclub reviews). HOWEVER, I mentioned Platinum Plus in South Carolina and her eyes popped out of her head and she got a huge smile. She said that is a CLUB and that I needed to visit it.
OK, back on track a little. I found what I was looking for, but she had either warts on her asshole or a hemorrhoid tag. Completely killed all desire---too afraid of the warts. Anyway, this dancer had looks, skill, and personality. The last time when I definitely did see warts the dancer was extremely hot and the warts were extremely ugly. These warts if that is what it was didn't look too bad. Being picky reduces fun substantially. :(
discussion comment
15 years ago
"I happen to be younger"
I think you wont appreciate that until it is gone. :( Dancers liked me much better when I was young and broke.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Most of the young hotties that I know prefer older customers."
Unfortunately, I doubt that I'll ever make it to your favorite club.
I would be surprised if the dancers met my needs. I seem to judge white dancers much harsher as far as looks. I think it is genetic. Blacks and asians get a lot more leeway as to what gets me hot. Also, generally the tiny few white dancers that I really like it seems like they are just out of my budget----I need to be spending like a drunk sailor. IOWs, it probably is some special occasion or for whatever reason I have more money to spend.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Not in the SC environment, but it has been done. I've seen studies of women and men in various situations. It DOES matter what one wears."
Interesting point. :)
For an old guy I dress like a bum---always have and people (mainly friends, do comment). The other old customers generally are looking nice in their clothing even if it casual.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Maybe you need to come across more as looking to make a business transaction as opposed to looking for a someone sweet."
I didn't think that I was looking for sweet----I'm very liberal when it comes to personality in a dancer. The woman can even be nasty or boring or whatever---even a Bush Republican (she was white) was fine. It is the right look that I need. Skill is somewhat important, but the right look rules. IOWs, she really has to be super bad skill wise for me to be unhappy if she has the look.
One dancer sometime back did complain that I didn't show much interest in other dancers as I approached her. She saw that as a warning. We ended up having a fantastic evening. It didn't make any sense to her that I was focused on looks----one of those looks are irrelevant people. Why approach when there are plenty of dancers? is her mindset.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"On future visits wear a disguise and see if you are treated any different."
I wouldn't mind doing that, if I could get away with it. :) There a tiny few who I believe are reacting more to my looks, than age. The reason I think it is age is because I see the same dancers avoiding the other old customers----generally (mainly excluding me) the old customers have the money. These old customers from what I've see are more than willing to spend and sometimes just for talk. So why avoid customers generally eager to spend and easy to please?
discussion comment
15 years ago
Hi ShotDisc,
It would be much better for me, if I could do that. I've missed out on some very fun ladies. When a hot young spinner treats me like that, it is pure heaven. There have been spinners as good personality wise, but it seems to the exception. It is a pleasant surprise and I think wow, I'm gonna be broke tonight.
Basically, it seems to be a real performance issue. Hot young spinner and I'm 16 again and instantly---might be the only part of my body that is healthy. Wonderful curvy women who may even look hot by my standards just equals nothing-----the excitement is the same as I'd feel with a man, iows, nothing.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"So Jablake, as you a Socialist?"
Unfortunately yes I am, that is to me the lesser of 2 evils (Bush Republicans v. Socialists). I would like a small government that does almost nothing with a free market----not saying this would create more wealth or even more happiness for all. More wealth or more overall happiness isn't what drives me. What I really like is to be pretty much left alone and free to associate with my people----the highest good wasn't more wealth or better health or even hotter women. It was to be ignored/left alone/segregated/etc. That probably seems strange to most people. For a long time, that ideal was mine---right here in the U.S.A. lots of freedom. I wasn't and my people (generally) weren't pro-U.S.A. We were basically defeated and you accept that---doesn't mean you have to like it. So despite the occupation, there was a lot of freedom and the police were our police----the police protected and served my people and me.
Anyway, the game changes for better and for worse.
The class warfare arises due to 3 issues. First, wealthy people trying via force of government to have me spend like I have lots of money---they don't appreciate how much wealthier they are-that is fine if they leave me alone (they won't). That is the key and generally they don't understand. Second, the government is corrupt. So, if there is going to be massive corruption, then, imo, that corruption should be serving the poor and the wage slaves. Third, if socialism is going to be accepted in parts then morally I want to see it more inclusive. If the government wishes to extend paid health care to the elderly, then I wish to see---for moral reasons---it extended to everyone. Food stamps for the poor-----then I want it more inclusice. Etc. Yes I am a socialist; unfortunately. There just doesn't seem like any other real hope----conservatives don't seem conservative in the least, imo.
discussion comment
15 years ago
I don't need STFU. If you asked me who the regulators of the insurance industry are I wouldn't be able to tell you and I wouldn't look it up. It is a government regulated market. People relied on the fact that AIG and the other insurers and banks and brokerages were heavily regulated. That is the point you keep missing---probably intentionally. :)
Now you're denying their was an implicit guarantee? Absurd. Besides just because there is a guarantee doesn't mean the government will honor it. You remember the silver backed currency and gold back government bonds that the government dishonored? Government isn't and hasn't been exactly honest in case you haven't figured that out----heaven forbid that I point out the obvious that government was to blame.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Maybe you find rejection attractive (I say that not jokingly.)"
EXCELLENT POINT. I even considered that.
However, sometimes the hotties are sweet and come right to me just as if they were fatties. Usually, in that case my wallet is empty after buying lots of dances and I'm very happy. :) Yesterday, the hotties wouldn't even come over and they ignored the other old farts as well. It seemed like you had to be a young man and then wow! Looked like fun. :)
When hotties do approach then I definitely don't look for dances; too busy having a good time with those who asked for a dance.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Yes, they were regulated. The articles refer to the regulators *allowing* reduced capital requirements or allowing this or allowing that. Also, the perception is important and you seem to discount that totally. It is like the *implicit* government guarantee of Freddie and Fannie. You believe people would be taking these bets if the didn't see how regulated the business and exchanges and everything is in this country? Maybe or maybe on a much smaller scale. When a normal business person thinks AIG they rightfully believe the government will come to the rescue if things go bad----which increases acceptance and risk taking (the risk taking is probably inadvertent for the buyers because they think it is safe insurance thanks to government).
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Are you now saying it was the government's fault for not regulating?"
BTW, this is very backward thinking, imo. The backward thinking is it assumes that if only there was more regulation and more government then the problem would be solved or lessened. For example, if cocaine results in deaths, then government control will reduce the number of deaths. Fine and dandy, but a whole slew of new problems arise thanks to government. It is a government game. That doesn't mean the world would be perfect if you had a free market.
BTW, they were REGULATED markets that is shown by the fact that there were government regulators. These regulators can give innocent investors the very wrong impression of safety. The insurance markets are highly regulated so people believe government is protecting them when in fact the "protection" is on a whimsy or is flimsy----a government mess yet again.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Hi Dougster,
No doubt there were regulators on top of regulators in this country. It wasn't a free market just as the stripclub market isn't a free market. I'm saying it is governments' fault for being in the market period. The government creates perverse incentives. The "implicit" guarantees in the mortgage market are a perfect example. The past government bailouts are a perfect example. Also, let's be clear even if the vile government got out that doesn't mean all problems would disappear. And, the government screwing around also creates wealth. A perfect example is the money from "thin air." I could be wrong, but I doubt there were would be nearly the wealth if government merely had honor its gold and silver backed money and obligations. The government fraud i.e. dishonoring its "full faith and credit" and its "explicit guarantees" also did a lot of harm in creating all manner of perverse incentives----its a government game. Look at many of the frauds and good old government is right there as cheerleader at the very least.
discussion comment
15 years ago
I picked up tidbits on the propaganda channels. I also read a few articles via google. Here is a sample link of a story that I skimmed: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/business/25gret.html.
Here is a snippet from the article: "Regulators let the market grow unchecked. In the end, far too much of this insurance was written at way too cheap a cost. Now, with Wall Street and the economy in tatters, the fear that already-hobbled financial companies may have to pay off huge amounts on C.D.S. arrangements hangs like a cloud over the markets. C.D.S.’s have already figured prominently in taxpayer bailouts. The $150 billion rescue of the American International Group, for example, came about because of swaps the insurer had written on mortgage securities."
"Regulators let the market grow unchecked." What!!!!???? Regulators in this allegedly free market? LOL! Yep, more stench from government.
And, when the mortgages are go bad in your world people keep paying their credit card bills? No, it was the government's mortgage mess which there was more than ample warning about----however, the smart course of action may have been for the government to do nothing. That is right the government, imo, may have taken the correct course of action.
discussion comment
15 years ago
I didn't try. I don't believe every bit of nonsense that government tries to spread as the truth. Are you talking about the supposedly unregulated hedge funds?
It is the government's fault.
What religion? I want to see socialism on a massive scale.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Someone is bitter to the point of insanity..."
You do honest work for honest pay and then get screwed the way that I did, then you *might* feel the same. I don't know, perhaps you're a tougher or more optimistic person regardless of how you're wronged.
I may be wrong, but I think you'd be just as bitter---maybe moreso. Also, I think you'd regret your years of hard work and saving and trying to get ahead---you'd see the government as garbage. A garbage that can't be defeated so it is best to see it all controlling and working to equalize wealth----let the corruption work toward the general welfare instead of serving the wealthy. :)
discussion comment
15 years ago
"Socialism also cures affluency"
A definite benefit, imo.
discussion comment
15 years ago
"...says every poor person I know."
Yes, I don't know any poor people that liked President Bush. However, most poor people that I know unfortunately haven't embraced socialism as the solution. Too many wrongly, imo, believe in America.
President Obama seems too moderate. But, just real universal health care would be a good start. Nationalize the banks would be fabulous. All attorneys would work on a government salary---with private practice a first degree felony. :) Yes, the more government employees making equal wages the better.
discussion comment
15 years ago
Detroit needs to try an apply sexual harassment laws against the stripclubs----I don't think an employee is allowed to consent to sexual harassment e.g. extra pay for extra services. These poor strippers are just as victimized as the secretary who trades sexual favors for benefits.
discussion comment
15 years ago
A wealthy stripper club typically has no qualms about government limiting the number of stripclubs. The higher prices mean little to him. As far as he is concerned the government is just so wonderful because it ain't jerking with his fun.
Well, if I have a choice to have expensive clubs that are that way thanks to government or zero clubs, then zero is much better, imo. Let the wealthy asshole who didn't care about the government shutting down dive stripclubs lose the ones he likes. Maybe then the wealthy asshole will grow a brain. Typically wealthy asshole is all in favor of government until it bites him it the butt, which means the government needs to be biting him in the butt!!! :)
discussion comment
15 years ago
"We had MILLIONS stolen. I said well my 'pocket change' was like MILLIONS to me so I don't see a dime's worth of difference."
I'm wrong. I do see a dime's worth of difference. Government stealing "pocket change" from the poor man is much worse, imo.