Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login

The New Wonderful Peter Yang's variety blog - by The wonderful Peter Yang

 
genuineptr.com paypermails.com magicptr.comrichgoptr.comroyalptr.commailcash24.com dollarptr.com genesismails.com https://www.musicxray.com/fan_match_allocations
http://www.mysurvey.net.au/index.cfm?action=Main.referAFriend
http://wdyt.com.au/ https://www.constant-content.com/
20
Vote
   


Many 1st world country are seen a continue decrease in birth rate. Australia included. In Australia and western culture, in particular, men have the tendency of been discourage from marriage, because it is a increase common believe amount young men today that girls like jerks that are irresponsible and has a criminal record for violent crime such as armed robbery.

However, such urban legion is not completely without base. Social science research found there are six main type of men, that women go for. Romantic guys, bad boys, father figure, nice guy, rich guy and funny guys. In addition young women in their 20s frequently have fantasy of fairy tale romance, (For example, there was a show on TV a while a go call "I want to Marry Harry" where the show got a British monarch look alike, to post as prince in a dating show and all the girls are like "this is going to be my fairy tale ending") And more women are attracted to men with violent tendency, (e.g. having a criminal record for arm robbery can be a big turn on for some women.) This also result in an increase of abuse towards women, in a society. In western society 48% of women been in an emotional or physical abusive relationship and 10% men dated 80% women. Meaning more women are attracted to the same small group of men and amount this small group, those whom are violent and would abuse women, take up a high percentage.

It is not a surprising result, if you think about it, a bad boy, is a bad person, therefore they are more likely to be abusive. A man with violent tendency, of course he would be abusive. In addition it is found fairy tale romantic relationship, are usually also very abusive. Desire of fairy tale romance, is a situation unique to western society, as girls since a young age was been persuade to believe in the argument of fairy tale romance = happily ever after, through fairy tales such as Snow white and Cinderella that always end with the sentence saying "And they live happily ever after", but never say why. Causing a great deal of young women, to be obsessed with fairy tale romance. And men whom might want to take advantage of them, might use this to their advantage to manipulate these women.

Why many women are attracted to violent men, has to do with the fact, (1) By acting violent, to others, it make a men seem more dominate, then he really is (2) True dominate male = alpha male and women are attracted to the alpha male. (3) In a peaceful society, there are few reason for a men to need to act hostile or violent towards another, because there are few threats (can't say the same about the international community, there are stuff such as ISIS and Communist China, which we need to be hostile against, for the sack of our security.) (4) with the exception of profession such as police officer, soldier or athletic, there are few opportunity for a man to prove his dominance. (5) Women love with the emotional side of their head, it is important to understand there are no ration to the emotional side of a person's brain, as it is base on feelings. For example, if you never steal a car, but if you hear a person saying you stolen a car continue for three day, then when you go to a lie detector test and you say you never stolen a car, the test would show you are telling a lie. This is because, despite the fact know you didn't stole a car, due to the logical side of your brain, the continue repetition, make the emotional side of your head feel as if you stolen a car, therefore you get a lie result, in a lie detector test. (6) No sensible guy in their right mind, would go around getting into fights, just to prove their dominance (unless, you are talking about e.g. the both of them are boxers and they decide to have a boxing match in the ring, because those are different.)

Despite the fact most violent men, are not dominate male, in fact they usually get their ass kick, in a real fight. And we all know, real dominate male, don't always look dominate e.g. most cops and special forces soldiers don't look tough. The fact these people act violent, still make them seem tough, therefore make them seem like the alpha male. And because women love with the emotional side of their head, the fact these men, act violent make them seem dominate and no reasonable men is going to get himself into a fight or a criminal record for a violent crime, just to get girls to like him. Acting hostile and violent to others, is enough to allow these fraud alpha male, to get a lot of emotional girls, in a society, where everybody else, aren't doing anything to prove their dominance. (unless he is stupid enough to actually fight a person, which in that case they are toast, speaking from personal experience, most violent people are so stupid when it come to fighting, you KO them with one punch.)

Dating Bad boys frequently is due to a believe that dating bad boys are exciting and in combination of the fact women love with the emotional side of their head, means many women make the bad judgement of dating bad boys.

The combination of the three above, played a major role in why abuse towards women in western society are rocket high.

However, it also play a major reason, why men are not getting married. There is an increase number of decent young men these days, that believe women can't possibly be attracted to them, because they don't e.g. have a criminal record for armed robbery and there is no way, they are going to get one of those.

Despite nice guys, are on the list of type of guys that girls go for. More young men today, believe, just like how some women would settle for a rich man she don't love, for the money. They believe a girl would settle for a nice guy, she don't love, because the type of security and stability it can provide. But it isn't possible that she would love him for real, because been a nice guy is opposite to having a criminal record that make a guy seem more dominate then he really is. As a result, decent guys, are tuning out of marriage. Thus more and more women are asking on women magazine and talk show saying "where have all the good men gone?"

But all of these, are resulting in a big issue, for our society and that is Gen Y aren't getting married. Because the majority of their men are actively tuning out of it and more and more rather grow old and die along, then to get married. And because Gen Y guys are boycotting marriage, it is playing an increase active role, in helping to encourage the aging population. Statistically found, for majority of women age 25~30, the most important thing, is getting married and starting a family. For guys on the other hand, marriage is not even on their consideration and for most men, staying single seem to be the logical and safe thing to do.

This is further intensified, by more and more men are feeling women are just emotional nut jobs and can related to the angry and insanity of wives and girl friends, from shows such as Everybody Loves Raymond. And unlike on TV, real life men, aren't going to put up with this crap. If he is a nice guy, he ain't going to hit you. But he is going to walk away. But the problem is that women today, too frequently felt they can lush out against people in their close circle, in such way, especially towards their husbands, sometime even their sons. When women lush out in such way against their boy friends, the worse that happen is he dump her for another girl, if she lush out in such manner against their husband, they just walk away.

But when a woman lush out in such way against their son. It result in a situation where, these boys learned to hate women, from their experience with their mothers, growing up, having to deal with their mother's emotional and irrational outbursts. And when they grew up, they would hate women. (Which mean, at most they would do is get a girl into bed and dump her after the sex. You want more from him? You are dreaming, girls)
(PS: These men's experience with their mothers, would also lead them to increasingly learn to agree with some of those old school ideology, that the modern world consider as sexist e.g. "women are stupid and incompetent" "women should not be given the right to vote or get into politic,", "Always listen to a men, never listen to a women.", "when there is a conflict between men and women, the women is always wrong."
)

Despite this increasing nature of male and female relationship amount young people today, parenthood do appears to be more appealing to young men then marriage. While, few wanted to get married, those who are willing to consider parent hood, is, in fact higher, if marriage can be taken out of the equation. An idea that might help boost birth rate in Australia, might in fact be, legalizing sperm banks the vise verse and allow Australia soil surrogacy. We could also use eggs and sperms from foreign countries. However, before allowing eggs or sperm to be allowed to be released, to a person that want to have kids, child welfare worker, should first look at whether the person is fit to be a parent and gain approval by child welfare, looking at whether a person's ability to raise a child psychically, psychologically and financially. Also, considering the fact, 48% of women in the western society, get into abusive relationship, by choosing to get involve with violent men, bad boys and fairy tale romance that would bash her up and we don't want children to have to grew up in such abusive household we might need to allow child welfare worker, to test women's psychology status on such arena also, to ensure. We do need to be certain about the potential mother's psychic, to make sure, she won't go around making those bad choices in man, after giving birth to a child. In addition, the person that is allow to make sperm or egg deposit, should be limited to those whom have no criminal record, as we want to breed those people's gene pool out, not to increase it, the same goes for people to received sperm or eggs, not people with criminal record is allowed, nor if their partner have a criminal record.

Also, people that can receive sperm or eggs, should be over 30 years old. (Not a good idea, to let people too young, go through with this)
20
Vote
   


It is very important for us to crack down on the gambling industry.

According to the US law gambling is define as
"Gambling is accepting, recording, or registering bets, or carrying on a policy game or any other lottery, or playing any game of chance, for money or other thing of value"

I propose the following idea

Firstly we create an Accepting, recording or registering bets law (ARRBL), within it we state

1. No further gambling licence should be award to activity involving accepting, recording or registering bets.

2. All form of gambling without a gambling license is qualified as illegal gambling.

3. If qualified as illegal gambling, any person or organization has the right not to pay anything he own, within a bet. To violet such right of a person, in any form, could face a minimum of three years, maximum twenty years in prison. To violet such right of a person in any form, the person whom conducted the violation must paid the person he violet a financial compensation equal to the amount of gambling debt he own or the amount he is made to pay, against he right, depend on which one is higher and also must paid the financial compensation equal to the amount of interest he own. However, if it is to the court's pleasure, then, within the particular case, such right would not apply to a group or individual that violet the right,

(The idea is that, 1. We want to see a situation where the bookies have to pay their gambling debt, but the other guy don't. And 2. we don't such law been misused to for example, a son suing his mother, because he lost a bet to her, where he must do his homework before watching TV every night, if lost the bet.)

4. A person has the right to self wiped off any gambling debt, they own, without reason, if it is to their pleasure. To violet such right, could face a minimum of three years, maximum twenty years in prison and must paid such person financial compensation equal to the amount of gambling debt he own or the amount of gambling debt he is forced to paid, depending on, which one is higher and also must paid the financial compensation equal to the amount of interest he own. However, if it is to the court's pleasure, then, within the particular case, such right would not apply to a group or individual that violet the right,

(The idea is that, 1. We want to see a situation where the bookies have to pay their gambling debt, but the other guy don't. And 2. we don't such law been misused to for example, a son suing his mother, because he lost a bet to her, where he must do his homework before watching TV every night, if lost the bet.)

5. With the exception of legal gambling, all organizations and groups conducting activity of accepting, registering or recording of bets, must return any good or money they receive in the bet, to the person, to whom the organization or group gained the goods from within the bet, if such person request. Failure of compliance, could result in a minimum of three years and a maximum twenty years in prison, for individuals within the organization or group that are responsible for the failure of compliance, unless the court decided to make an exception, for this case.

(The idea is 1. e.g. if the gambling organization is just local small time crooks, but the person own the gambling debt is big time drug lord. Then, of course we should screw the big time drug lord, over the local small time crooks. It is better if you can screw both of them, but if you can only pick one, then screw the big time drug lord. Despite the fact most likely, if the big time drug lord can't get his money back by going to court, he probably get his money back by sending his goons to kill the small time crooks. But then, we can arrest the big time drug lord on murder charges, which is even better.)

6. Any form of behavior to make a person honor a bet, could result in a minimum three years and maximum ten years in prison. Unless, the court decide to make an exception for this case.

7. An accepting, recording, or registering bets tax (ARRBT) should apply to all legal gambling organization, on their activity of accepting, recording or registering bets. (and with every passing years, that tax should get higher and higher. Until more and more casino, goes out of business, as a result.)

Within the arena of "playing any game of chance, for money or other thing of value" I made the following proposal

1. Poker machine game, should have a set limitation of the amount of money a person can spend on a game, per day.

(Please share your thoughts on this topic)
30
Vote
   


How long can human live in the future?

September 16th 2014 05:15
In recent years, we are seen an increase in life expediency amount human. Mostly due to increase health status and better living. But an interesting fact is that according to some scientist, it is also to do with evolution. The increase in life expediency due to increase in health, mean we are still aging according to the current rate, but because increase in health, we get to live longer, by aging to a significant older status, before passing away.

But scientists has discover, human evolution have on the past 20000 years, also been on a path, where full adult human, age slower. We all know different species age at a different rate, turtle for example, can live up to hundred of years old, simply because their biological aging rate is slower.

The theory already have evidence, including fact, early human aged at a rate same as ape, who have a life expediency of 40 years old. This is also evidence by the fact, people living in 3rd world country, whom do not have the same health advantage as us, are also seen increase in life span, despite it is not as much as we, whom live in 1st world countries. According to United Nations, the average life expediency for people in 1st world country born during the 1950s are 66 years old, 41 years old for second world countries and 36 years old for 3rd world countries. For people born in 2010, 1st world country's average life span is 77, 2nd world countries are 67 and third world countries are 55. On average all human world wide are increasing life span for 3.5 years per ten years, disregards to wealth or poverty. Some scientist believe, the combine of increase health status and slow down in aging rate due to genetic, could eventually push the average life expectancy of humans to 500 years old, within the next 1000 years. At this rate, it should not be surprise to expect the average life expectancy of people born in 2110 first world country would be 112 and those whom born in 3rd world country would be 90. And baby born in 2510 first world country could live up to 252 and 3rd world countries, live up to 230. With people aging slower, some scientist don't hesitate to say, it is possible, that in 500 years, you could have people well into their fifties or sixties and still look young and beautiful. This is not too surprising, if adult human's aging rate is slowing down to a status, that allow them to live up to 252 years old in 1st world countries and 230 years old in 3rd world countries. Then, assuming a maturity age of 17, adult human in 500 years later, would be aging at a rate 3.92~5.6 time slower then currently (let's average it up and say 4.76 time slower then current rate), which mean the biological age of a 50 years old, would still be equal to a modern 23 years old and if she is 60, their biological age would still be equal to a modern 26 years old and a 70 years old person's biological age is still equal to a 28 years old today (yet, if she is a female, most likely, she still would have gone through metaphors at her 50s, considering aging slower, doesn't mean women get more eggs and is most likely already a grand mother, assuming an average marriage age of 25. Ha ha, a grandma whom are whom look like she is still 28)

500 years in the future, this is what a 74 years old grandmother with five grand kids, might look like.


20
Vote
   


With the continue increase of military strength of China. The Chinese Communist Party have become an increasing threat to the entire Asia Pacific region. Ever since the first day of their formation the Chinese Communist Party, dream of world domination. In the aftermath of WW2, Mao the CCP, used the sudden retreat of Japanese forces, to capture Manchuria and Mongolia, with the backing of Russia. The Republic force that rule China in the time, hold the Communist off, using the Great Wall of China, as a defense line. But then China's president made a strategic error, of under estimating the Communist, failing to realize, they have the backing of Soviet Union and failed to take into account, post WW2 China's is broke. The result is that, Chan Kai shek ordering for troops to enter Manchuria to try wipe out the Communist and failed, which result in the loosing of all of China and retreat to Taiwan.

After that the Communist still has the desire to expand, their first intention have been the island of Taiwan. Which prove to be impossible. Firstly, because the Taiwan navy and air force prove to be significant. Then because Starling decided to back North Korea first. By the time, Starling turned around to back Mao, Taiwan already have huge amount of backing from the US. Enough to deal with a Starling backed CCP.

Within the past 50 years, CCP's military have increasingly grew stronger and as a result, they have gradually moved beyond just trying to intimidate Taiwan, to intimidate the entire Asia Pacific region. In recent years, they are starting to intimidate, Japan, India, Philippine, Vietnam and Indonesia, looking for various excuse to justified the idea that those land belong to CCP rule. While some of them are disputed territory, most, are without a doubt, land that CCP has no rightful claim. And a lot of Australian don't know about it, but they have also started to intimidate Australia, also.

Within the past 50 years, CCP continue to use the threat of war, to try pressure the US not to sell advance weapon to Taiwan and try get the US to pressure Taiwan to limited their own weapon development, not to go beyond a certain extend, with the threat of war. In recent years, that has gone beyond Taiwan. Last year, when Japan agree to provide submarine technology to Australia. CCP immediately protested. There was military stand off between Japanese vs CCP navy and military stand off between CCP vs a Japanese, Taiwan and US backed Philippine navy. Military engagement already took place between Vietnam and CPP navy, consider nobody wanted to back Vietnam. Vietnam was able to win, the Vietnam war, because of their ability to make use their land base geography, to their advantage in gorilla warfare, but their military technology is still inferior. In navel warfare, Vietnam couldn't do the same thing they did on land, meaning they must rely on their military technology and considering the fact their military technology is weaker, Vietnam is continue to loose against China, because no foreign power wanted to back Vietnam. Military stand off also occurred between India and CCP. For a third world country, India's army is highly modernize and is able to stand against CCP, without foreign backing.

What we are seen is an increase situation where CCP, is an increase threat to the entire Asia Pacific region. Europe, might have a lot of powerful countries, but after all they are half a planet away and China is not an immediate threat, US, is currently greatly engaged in the Middle East. In Australia we frequently say that "Don't worry, if the Chinese invade, the US would come." but there is also a saying "It is better to be able to rely on yourself, then to rely on others." What if for some reason, the US didn't come or is not able to come or if the US loose their juice as the most powerful country in the world?

The security of our own region, still must rely on the nations of our own region. Not the US or Europeans whom are half a planet away.

Currently, the five most powerful free country, within the Asia Pacific region in ascending order is (1) Japan (2) South Korea (3) Taiwan (4) Singapore (5) Australia. In the long run, these five countries are the best bet for our region's security, if there are no foreign backing. There are three things that determine a nation's military capability. (1) The strength of its existing military (2) Its commander (3) The home front.

After WW2, Japan was no longer allow to have a military, only self defense force and there is a great deal of limitation of what sort of weapon this self defense force is able to have, even what sort of combat unit, are they allow to have. This till date, haven't end and it is important for us to find a way to remove, this restriction on Japan, so Japanese self defense force can officially become Japanese military and have unrestricted development in home base military technology.

Taiwan's home base military technology development, also find them self been restricted, due to international pressure, this is mostly due to the fact US don't want to see a war between Taiwan vs China, so China continue use threat of invasion, so the US would pressure Taiwan not to build up any military strength, but fully rely on US protection. Although the Taiwanese usually ignore the US and develop new generation of missile, warships and fighters, sometime, they still need to fall to international pressure and cancel some of their projects.

Australia, might have a strong military, but all of our weapon are foreign purchase, even including the bullets we use. Because our manufacturing industry, is too small, to sustain the demand of our defense force.

Although there are other country within our region and nation such as India and Pakistan have a strong military, it is important to remember, those country are 3rd world country with a 3rd world economy, so don't have the economy to sustain a long term war and their industrial strength is limited, meaning their home front is far too weak, to fight a nation like China, in the long run and that doesn't seem to be an issue that can be change in the long run. And consider the current military strength of China, it is unlikely for China to be destroy and defeated, in a short war.

Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Australia, Mongolia and New Zealand are currently the only 1st world country within our region. Excluding Mongolia, which I know nothing about. Only Taiwan, japan, Korea and Singapore are industrialized, with a strong industrial base. And only five have a military powerful enough to stand up against China. (New Zealand doesn't even have an air force). It is increasingly important for these five countries to strengthen their military strength, economy and industrial strength, for the security for not only for ourselves, but our entire region (and security of our region against China, is a security for our nation) It is also important to remember, Singapore is a very small country, it is even smaller then Sydney, and if even one Chinese missile is able to hit Singapore, would have bad consequence for a small city state like Singapore. It is also important to note, what China lack in technology and money, they make up via men power. There are thirteen billion of them.

For the security of our region, it is (1) most important, to allow Japan unrestricted military development. (2) US must stop pressuring Taiwan to stop development of advance weapon, due to fear of war between Taiwan and China (3) Australia must industrialized and Taiwan, Japan, Korea and Singapore must help us, if we need it. (4) After industrialized Australia must continue to strengthen our home base military technology and other Asia Pacific power including, Taiwan, Japan, Korea and Singapore must help us, so we can self develop weapons that is a match against China, like they do. (5) continue to strengthen Taiwan Japan, Korea and Singapore's economic and industrial strength. This would provide us with strong home fronts, if war is to take place. In term of military, (1) we must purchase more advance US weapon that can be of a match against China. However, we must remember, US is a foreign country and we must be able to sustain our own military in a war, on the long run and we will not be able to sustain US weapon in the long run, consider supply for those weapons must be from the US (which mean if supply line from the US is broken, then we are toast, unless we can defeat the Chinese, before we need more supplies and that is highly unlikely) therefore (2) We must develop our own weapons and stock pile home made weapon, which we can supply directly from our home front.

In addition, if possible we should try persuade New Zealand to also industrialized and start building up their military strength.

The combine strength of Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Australia, would be more of a match against China, even without US support, providing if all five countries are industrialized, have strong home grown military technology and economy on the home front and have powerful existing military with a mix of home made advance weapon and if possible, also US advance weapon. It might not be enough to conquer China, but it would be enough for us to rule the sea and sky and bomb China, and crippled China to the extend that they would not able to threaten us. At least for another forty years. (Which goes without saying, a military solution, can not be a longer term solution) Although a military solution can only be a short term solution to the China problem, we need to be able survive China's intimidation in the short run, if we are to survive the long run. Not to mention the fact, a lot could change in 40 years. Just look at history, during WW2 Germany and Japan were the bad guys, only 30 years later, they became the good guys.
20
Vote
   


We Will Degrade and Destroy ISIL

September 14th 2014 05:55
20
Vote
   


20
Vote
   


Who should play the next James Bond?

September 13th 2014 05:15
We got so many actors playing James Bond already. Personally I don't really like the Daniel Crag version. Anyway, the following list is my idea of who is the best to play the next Bond.





1. Daniel Redcliffe who played Harry Potter as James Bond. Firstly he is really British. Secondly, till date all the bonds, we have are middle age, it be cool to have a young James Bond in his twenties, for a change. Plus Daniel give out a vibe, that feel different from the other actors, gave out. It be an interesting new take.

As for Bond girl, well, without a doubt, she need to be in her 20s. Consider Daniel Redcliff is currently 25. Anyway, these are my top picks.



Choice number 1, Emma Watson. If the two of them didn't hook up in Harry Potter, I definitely want to see the two of them hook up here. Emma Watson, definitely my first choice as Bond girl



Kiera Knightly is definitely my second choice for Bond girl.


Selena Gomez would be my 3rd choice for Bong girl to pair up with Daniel Redcliffe





2. Jamie Foxx, can give Bond a slick and elegant feel, something you expect from a lady man and in addition we never have a black Bond, so far. Be interesting to have a black guy as Bond.

As for Bond girl, the list below is my idea.



Natalie Portman is definitely my first choice as Bond girl, to pair up with Jamie Foxx.

And here is the thing is Jamie Fox goes really well, with a lot of female actress that has blond hair, if he is to play Bond. Off the top of my head, one of these blond actress, as second choice. (Providing she is over 30 of course. Jamie Foxx is 46 years old. The idea of him hooking up with a 20 something years old is...wierd)

Helen Hunt


Jennifer Aniston


Gwyneth Platrow


Claire Danes



yvonne strahovski




3. Sean Connery, is the original James Bond, it is nice to have him return to his role as Bond again, but this time, as an elderly already retired 007, came back from retirement, after his grandson 009 Michael Bond, gone missing in action.

It would definitely be hard to find a Bond girl for an old Sean Connery, after all, the idea of a 84 years old guy, hooking up with a young girl is just disgusting. But old Bond could have a bit of a fling with a few old flames, from his golden years. (Just please, no old people having sex scenes.)



Meryl Streep was beautiful when she was young. And now she is 65 years old, totally age appropriate to pair up with Sean Connery.



Diane Keaton, is 68 years old, definitely age appropriate with Sean Connery and if you look at her photo when she was young. She definitely was a handsome woman, back in her days.

So, who do you think should play the next Bond?
29
Vote
   


Goku VS Superman | DEATH BATTLE!

September 11th 2014 06:40
20
Vote
   


e
20
Vote
   


More Posts
35 Posts
58 Posts
73 Posts
1656 Posts dating from February 2008
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:

The wonderful Peter Yang's Blogs

2832 Vote(s)
3 Comment(s)
74 Post(s)
17595 Vote(s)
25 Comment(s)
255 Post(s)
21713 Vote(s)
5 Comment(s)
387 Post(s)
44750 Vote(s)
18 Comment(s)
766 Post(s)
Copyright © 2012 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]