I am on page 700 something on Schlesinger's A Thousand Days. There is a quote there, which i think is very practical and directly relevant to today's America's political situation, and it's about a tax cut. When Kennedy thought that a tax cut was politically feasible and he was on the verge of implementing it at the supportive advice of his economic team, J.K. Galbraith (a renowned diplomat and respected economist) mentioned how putting money directly into people's pockets would only expand consumer supply line, but would not in effect provide any advantages on the infrastructures or other public facilities. He says that consumer goods would rise as a result of tax cut, but nobody would want to spend money where the garden looks filthy, the air is unbreathable, or the roads filled with holes. Contrary to the few sentences in which Galbraith was quoted, i find his ideas tremendously sound. I have thought about why the Republican party in America persistently seek a tax cut as a way to stimulate the economy and it strikes me somewhat surprising, though not unexpected, that its not so much as providing stimulus for the businesses as a means to ensure the efficiency of top-to-bottom economy, but expanding consumer supply line. If we have a tax cut, we will have more money to buy TV's, cars, phones, and other privileges. But the infrastructures would remain unscathed. None of the tax cut money would be put to good use for long-term benefits. It is all short-term and individually centered.

A woman in Facebook wrote how socialism is a system that collectively shares misery. I tried to highlight the flaw in endorsing capitalism blindly. Clearly, she was not interested in healthy discussion as she hastily wrote that everyone can have their own opinion as to what federal government should support or not, in terms of where and how the money should be distributed based on the prevailing economic system. This is absurd. All i am trying to imply is that we should not be too obedient to a particular system without first answering some questions that best reflect all classes of society.

I went to a wedding today with my friend. It's a friend of my father's wedding. it was the usual lavished party that average wealthy indonesian created to celebrate their happiness. It was normal, it was usual, as such it was dull. The wedding was too repetitious and each time i go to a new one, it was always the expectation that there;d be a new sight; a different decoration, an assortment of undistinguished food; or maybe a bunch of closer and immediately recognizable guests. In any case, weddings been too repetitious, and no longer emanates the celebratory flavor of a couple's union.

Tonight's wedding is all about food. It's my all-you-can-eat-without-feeling-guilty night. It's a free pass to be a fat man for one night. Haha, i hope they make a condom one day protecting those food from squeezing their poison. Well, its easier to just lock our pie hole than be hassled with the trouble of inventing a new instrument.

Alright, the girls! Yes, it got me thinking, why do these girls keep making themselves look like a band of chinese opera dancers. But really, when you go to a wedding, you expect to see women to be elegantly dressed, but casually behaved. Not so much as if its a elite debutante resplendent with an elaborate costumes. It's crazy. I saw a woman in the wedding, a real knock out. Would have punch me down if i had stared at her for more than 5 seconds. Yes, the knock out is the tall, slender, and with light lace of make up. I like her face, so firm yet indulging. Mature and deceiving. I dont know, i always have a weakness with women of this appearance. They are alluring to all men, but they are not to be kept, but recycled. You brought them home, lock them in your room, and thrashed her in few hours. Yes, i sound like a misogynist. But funny where i got this thought, it was always about why a deceptive women, masked by their mesmerizing look, always have a way to kill a man's heart without shedding a drop of blood, or a pint of conscience?

Indecent blatancy

There is no decency in being courteous these days. People simply dont hesitate when to hurt you, or speak their true feelings (as they claim to be the virtue). I'm sick of these shit. Why do people have to be so proud in claiming that being blunt and blatant about their true emotions reveal their superior principle? There is no principle if one can't convey it with decency. There is no politeness if one can't do it patiently.

My sister and i had a fight because during a show in a cinema, i asked her to leave the cinema before the movie ends. I found the show too boring, and tendentious. So many scenes repeated without any vital value related to the plot or the characters. After about 90 minutes, i had just about enough. My sister insist on finishing it, unable to relinquish the so much time spent on the whole movie, she thought the ending had better be damn good. Not me, if the whole movie doesn't entertain for the past hour or so, there is no reason the ending wouldn't be likewise. But hell, after attempting another approach to leave the room, she bolted out on me 'get out by yourself if you want' she answered. Fuck. It was just my 2nd try asking her to leave and why the fuck did she has to freak out like as if i'm fuckin embarrassing her in front of the whole audience? The truth of the matter is i bought the ticket, i took the time and the effort to purchase the tickets 3-4 hours earlier, i drove her to the cinema, and i even fucking pay for the popcorn, french fries, and drinks. All she had to do was sit down, enjoy, and a little thanks to me. But HELLO!!! The next decent thing that spewed out of her fucking mouth is 'get out by yourself'. You know what they say 'no good deeds comes unpunished'. That's right, there is no point in being decent, in being blatant, in being blunt, if the only thing that you care about is the freedom not to control your temper.