Today, the Mexican Peso is worth roughly 5 cents. I thought that the collapse of the Mexican Peso was the reason that millions of Mexicans immigrated to the United States over the last few decades. In order to research this further, I pulled up the historical exchange rates for the Mexican Peso.
To my astonishment, one Mexican Peso was worth about 40 US Dollars in 1980. It declined steadly until 1981, and then there was a massive spike downward in 1982 when one Peso was worth 17 US Dollars. The next big decline occurred in 1983 when one Peso was worth 8 US Dollars. I don't know what caused these massive spikes downward but there was a major earthquake in 1985 that killed 10,000 people in Mexico City and caused between 3 billion to 4 billion USD in damages. At the beginning of 1986, one Peso was worth 1.64 USD.
The next biggest decline I researched was the 1993 peso crisis. At the beginning of 1994, one Peso was worth only .32 USD.
Sunday, July 10, 2016
Saturday, July 2, 2016
Buff up food supplies. FEMA simulates 395% increase in food prices.
Link directly to ZeroHedge here. The article speaks for itself, but it might be a good time to stock up on store-able food, canned food, water, and other supplies. While it is recommended to save up 6 months of food per person, maybe you might want to store up a little more. Maybe at least a years worth.
Depending on where you get it, a one year supply of food can cost up to $2200 per person. Regardless of how much you think you need, just go get it and make a habit of stocking up. After all, you don't want to be this girl that trashed a convenience store just because her EBT card wasn't working.
Depending on where you get it, a one year supply of food can cost up to $2200 per person. Regardless of how much you think you need, just go get it and make a habit of stocking up. After all, you don't want to be this girl that trashed a convenience store just because her EBT card wasn't working.
Friday, June 10, 2016
What makes a country a first/second/third world nation?
First/second/third world nations are terms that I've heard while growing up but I've never seen a list or criteria that separates the categories. Only since I looked up a list on Wikipedia was I able to find a list of countries by first, second, or third world status.
Off the top of my head, traits of a first world nation would include electricity, infrastructure, stable currency, and developed residential/commercial/industrial zones. First world countries would include the United States, Canada, England, Germany, Japan, Australia, Singapore, and Switzerland.
Third world nations would be the opposite of that. These nations would be impoverished and lack electricity, infrastructure, and developed zones. Examples of these countries would include most countries in Africa and several of the bombed and devastated countries in the Middle East.
Second world nations would be somewhere in between the two. It is hard to think of second world countries so I linked a list from Wikipedia here. This includes China, Russia, Laos, Cuba, and Vietnam.
According to Wikipedia, first/second/third world nations were terms that originated from the Cold War. First World countries were just countries that were aligned or similar to the United States. The Second World countries were the communist countries and the Third World was just everything else. Even Wikipedia admits that there is no exact definition of the terms or the list of countries.
Even when I was growing up, teachers in the school system stated that developed and developing nations was a more accurate term. Lists are available on Wikipedia and they are pretty much what you would expect. Back then, I sensed that the term developing nations was a way to be politically correct (not hurt people's feelings) because a lot of "developing nations" don't really seem to be developing.
A much more methodological approach to ranking countries might be the Human Development Index. The index itself takes into consideration life expectancy, education, and income per capita. I'm not sure how it is calculated but America ranks 8th in the world with a score of .915. It looks like Norway is at the top with a score of .944. When checking this figure, I feel somewhat different when America is criticized for being ranked lower by "whatever standard" compared to other countries. Even though our rank is lower, we scored very high.
Off the top of my head, traits of a first world nation would include electricity, infrastructure, stable currency, and developed residential/commercial/industrial zones. First world countries would include the United States, Canada, England, Germany, Japan, Australia, Singapore, and Switzerland.
Third world nations would be the opposite of that. These nations would be impoverished and lack electricity, infrastructure, and developed zones. Examples of these countries would include most countries in Africa and several of the bombed and devastated countries in the Middle East.
Second world nations would be somewhere in between the two. It is hard to think of second world countries so I linked a list from Wikipedia here. This includes China, Russia, Laos, Cuba, and Vietnam.
According to Wikipedia, first/second/third world nations were terms that originated from the Cold War. First World countries were just countries that were aligned or similar to the United States. The Second World countries were the communist countries and the Third World was just everything else. Even Wikipedia admits that there is no exact definition of the terms or the list of countries.
Even when I was growing up, teachers in the school system stated that developed and developing nations was a more accurate term. Lists are available on Wikipedia and they are pretty much what you would expect. Back then, I sensed that the term developing nations was a way to be politically correct (not hurt people's feelings) because a lot of "developing nations" don't really seem to be developing.
A much more methodological approach to ranking countries might be the Human Development Index. The index itself takes into consideration life expectancy, education, and income per capita. I'm not sure how it is calculated but America ranks 8th in the world with a score of .915. It looks like Norway is at the top with a score of .944. When checking this figure, I feel somewhat different when America is criticized for being ranked lower by "whatever standard" compared to other countries. Even though our rank is lower, we scored very high.
Saturday, May 28, 2016
The Life Cycle of Used Video Games
By the end of 2014, I was looking for extra ways to pull in some money and see if I could turn it into an operation. In the past, I've found money and offers just lying around, but nothing was ever a permanent thing. I had a few Nintendo 64 games lying around and I had no intention of buying another Nintendo 64 so I decided to just list them for sale on Amazon.
The thing was though, I was really attached to my old games. As a kid, I spent countless hours playing Pokémon Stadium 2 and The Legend of Zelda Majora's Mask. Still, I'd rather have the cash so I decided to list the games on Amazon at overpriced levels. At the time, both games had a low price on Amazon of about $20 to $25. I decided to list the games at $50.
In 2015, to my surprise, both games sold and I got my asking price of $50. I was surprised because the low price, at the time the games sold was only about $30 to $40. It was a rare instance where demand actually met my price.
After selling these two games, I decided to list whatever game I had at overpriced levels to see if demand would catch up to my value. Quite recently, I sold the original red version of Pokémon for $50. This was very shocking considering the game is 20 years old and only cost $25 brand new in 1996. I like to joke that Pokémon beat out the Dow Jones Industrial Average but apparently I did beat out the DJIA by getting $50 for it.
After I sold Pokémon, I was surprised to find out that I could sell the Nintendo 64 expansion pak for $20 and the Nintendo 64. Even more silly was that two days ago, I sold the instruction booklet for Pokémon Stadium 2 for $20.
After selling a few products online, I had to ponder if buying and selling used video games might provide a good business idea. Over the last few years, I've noticed that the price of video games follows a particular cycle.
When a Triple A title comes out, it usually sells for $45 to $50 (home console) or $25 to $30 (handheld). For some reason, these prices don't really change. I remember new PlayStation games from 1998 went for $50 and today new PlayStation 3 games go for $50. For the first week, there will be some people that buy a new game and then return it because they don't like it. The game is used but it will still sell for $40 to $45 because the game was just released.
After a few months, or a year after the release date, the price may drop down to $25 to $35. Everyone who really wanted the game on release date or close to release date probably already played or owned it. More casual gamers or people less interested in the title will pick up the game when the price drops.
The next big price cut comes along when a new generation of home consoles gets released. When this happens, the price of the game can drop down to $10 to $20. This is one of the best times for gamers to catch up on all the different titles they thought were cool years earlier but didn't want to purchase because they were to expensive.
After 5, 6, 7, 8 and more years after the release date, all the copies will be used copies. Depending on the title, you can probably pick up the game for as cheap as $5.
After this point in time, a number of factors can change what the price will do. One thing I've noticed about the video game market is that games will not be published forever. Typically, when a gaming console doesn't get sold or supported anymore, the games for that system will no longer be made. Digital versions of the game could still be available via services like the PlayStation and Nintendo Store however physical copies will no longer be made. It is here where there is a niche market for people who like physical copies.
People who want to experience and play these great games from their childhoods may want a physical copy and will pay a premium to get it.
Since I've seen this cycle play out for the last 10 years, I've been making a habit to drive over to GameStop and pick up all the cool games I never bought from 2006 and 2007. I picked up a copy of Assassin's Creed Brotherhood for $3. After that point, it is just a matter of playing the waiting game to see what the lowest price on Amazon is in the next 5 years and seeing what someone will pay for it.
The thing was though, I was really attached to my old games. As a kid, I spent countless hours playing Pokémon Stadium 2 and The Legend of Zelda Majora's Mask. Still, I'd rather have the cash so I decided to list the games on Amazon at overpriced levels. At the time, both games had a low price on Amazon of about $20 to $25. I decided to list the games at $50.
In 2015, to my surprise, both games sold and I got my asking price of $50. I was surprised because the low price, at the time the games sold was only about $30 to $40. It was a rare instance where demand actually met my price.
After selling these two games, I decided to list whatever game I had at overpriced levels to see if demand would catch up to my value. Quite recently, I sold the original red version of Pokémon for $50. This was very shocking considering the game is 20 years old and only cost $25 brand new in 1996. I like to joke that Pokémon beat out the Dow Jones Industrial Average but apparently I did beat out the DJIA by getting $50 for it.
After I sold Pokémon, I was surprised to find out that I could sell the Nintendo 64 expansion pak for $20 and the Nintendo 64. Even more silly was that two days ago, I sold the instruction booklet for Pokémon Stadium 2 for $20.
After selling a few products online, I had to ponder if buying and selling used video games might provide a good business idea. Over the last few years, I've noticed that the price of video games follows a particular cycle.
When a Triple A title comes out, it usually sells for $45 to $50 (home console) or $25 to $30 (handheld). For some reason, these prices don't really change. I remember new PlayStation games from 1998 went for $50 and today new PlayStation 3 games go for $50. For the first week, there will be some people that buy a new game and then return it because they don't like it. The game is used but it will still sell for $40 to $45 because the game was just released.
After a few months, or a year after the release date, the price may drop down to $25 to $35. Everyone who really wanted the game on release date or close to release date probably already played or owned it. More casual gamers or people less interested in the title will pick up the game when the price drops.
The next big price cut comes along when a new generation of home consoles gets released. When this happens, the price of the game can drop down to $10 to $20. This is one of the best times for gamers to catch up on all the different titles they thought were cool years earlier but didn't want to purchase because they were to expensive.
After 5, 6, 7, 8 and more years after the release date, all the copies will be used copies. Depending on the title, you can probably pick up the game for as cheap as $5.
After this point in time, a number of factors can change what the price will do. One thing I've noticed about the video game market is that games will not be published forever. Typically, when a gaming console doesn't get sold or supported anymore, the games for that system will no longer be made. Digital versions of the game could still be available via services like the PlayStation and Nintendo Store however physical copies will no longer be made. It is here where there is a niche market for people who like physical copies.
People who want to experience and play these great games from their childhoods may want a physical copy and will pay a premium to get it.
Since I've seen this cycle play out for the last 10 years, I've been making a habit to drive over to GameStop and pick up all the cool games I never bought from 2006 and 2007. I picked up a copy of Assassin's Creed Brotherhood for $3. After that point, it is just a matter of playing the waiting game to see what the lowest price on Amazon is in the next 5 years and seeing what someone will pay for it.
Thursday, May 26, 2016
What would it be like to go to war? Actually we are in three.
I frequently consume news and media that say that the world is falling apart and that doomsday is always around the corner. Different opinions state that as a country's economic condition continue to worsen, the leaders in charge will try to go to war for any reason just to distract the public.
For a moment, I had to think about what it would be like if America would be drawn into war... but then I realized that America is already in a war. Actually, we are in multiple wars. Then I wondered, how many wars were we involved in?
As far as I understood things, America was in war with Afghanistan ever since 2001. Then we went to war with Iraq in 2003 for some reason. After that, some country named Yemen was involved and the country Pakistan gets thrown around for whatever reason. How many wars were we currently fighting?
A quick search of Wikipedia gave the answer. It was 3.
Currently, we are involved in the War in North-West Pakistan. I have no idea what the reason is.
The War in Afghanistan actually ended in 2014 which is great but then another War in Afghanistan started in 2015. The Iraq War ended in 2011. I guess it ended because we killed Osama. But I think that just led into the War on ISIL in 2014.
To the average civilian, war is just so normal it is a way of life. It is normal because we aren't the ones that are fighting it. When I was younger, I always thought of war being the same as WWII or the Vietnam War. The war would always be on tv, myself and my peers would be drafted, supplies would be scarce so everyone had to make do with less and contribute to the war effort. At least, that was my perception of what war would be like.
The biggest reason why most civilians don't think about war is that there is no draft. Without being personally affected or knowing a loved one that is actually fighting, the only way we actually know what is happening is through the news. And of course, there is every other thing on Netflix, Instagram, Facebook, and Reddit that is competing for the average Joe's attention.
As far as I know, there is no resolution to the conflicts happening in the Middle East. I don't even know why and for what reason we are fighting there. Back in 2001, we entered these wars just to get revenge on terrorists. Other opinions state that the 2001 attacks were an inside job and that the federal government just wanted an excuse to strip the average citizen of his rights, privacy, and wealth. Some people believe that we have to bully the other countries and protect the petrodollar. If that we the case, I wish our leaders would just admit that.
I just wish they would bring our guys back home. I'd like it if we stopped spending money trying to fix the rest of the world's problems and just focus on defense. A foreign isolationist policy would probably be the best thing for America.
For a moment, I had to think about what it would be like if America would be drawn into war... but then I realized that America is already in a war. Actually, we are in multiple wars. Then I wondered, how many wars were we involved in?
As far as I understood things, America was in war with Afghanistan ever since 2001. Then we went to war with Iraq in 2003 for some reason. After that, some country named Yemen was involved and the country Pakistan gets thrown around for whatever reason. How many wars were we currently fighting?
A quick search of Wikipedia gave the answer. It was 3.
Currently, we are involved in the War in North-West Pakistan. I have no idea what the reason is.
The War in Afghanistan actually ended in 2014 which is great but then another War in Afghanistan started in 2015. The Iraq War ended in 2011. I guess it ended because we killed Osama. But I think that just led into the War on ISIL in 2014.
To the average civilian, war is just so normal it is a way of life. It is normal because we aren't the ones that are fighting it. When I was younger, I always thought of war being the same as WWII or the Vietnam War. The war would always be on tv, myself and my peers would be drafted, supplies would be scarce so everyone had to make do with less and contribute to the war effort. At least, that was my perception of what war would be like.
The biggest reason why most civilians don't think about war is that there is no draft. Without being personally affected or knowing a loved one that is actually fighting, the only way we actually know what is happening is through the news. And of course, there is every other thing on Netflix, Instagram, Facebook, and Reddit that is competing for the average Joe's attention.
As far as I know, there is no resolution to the conflicts happening in the Middle East. I don't even know why and for what reason we are fighting there. Back in 2001, we entered these wars just to get revenge on terrorists. Other opinions state that the 2001 attacks were an inside job and that the federal government just wanted an excuse to strip the average citizen of his rights, privacy, and wealth. Some people believe that we have to bully the other countries and protect the petrodollar. If that we the case, I wish our leaders would just admit that.
I just wish they would bring our guys back home. I'd like it if we stopped spending money trying to fix the rest of the world's problems and just focus on defense. A foreign isolationist policy would probably be the best thing for America.
Saturday, May 7, 2016
Girls and Chocolate Fondue
Game is one topic I won't ever really write about. I can't imagine I could contribute anything that hasn't been said already by someone else. The last time I even took a woman out for dinner was sometime in 2014. However I do remember that when I was seeing a woman, we spent a lot of time eating different things at different restaurants. Admittedly, it gets really boring really fast. However, I did have a good idea once.
A friend of mine used to work at a place called the Melting Pot which was known for hot pots and chocolate fondue. While I'd never go there myself, it was worth my while if I had a girl of the Asian persuasion there.
A few years back, was involved with this girl named Julia and I really wanted to do something to encourage cooperation and engagement. Chocolate fondue seemed like a good opportunity to do this because you and the girl can feed each other chocolate dipped berries and marshmallows using the skewers. This can also lead to some funny moments if either person drops the food or misses the other person's mouth. The best opportunity for cooperation can occur when you and the girl can feed each other pieces of fruit at the same time. As an extra bonus, the place I went to served chocolate fondue with the Yin and Yang option. Half of the pot will be regular chocolate while the other half will be white chocolate. To do something to her on the subconscious level, I dipped most of the fruit I fed to her in the white chocolate.
This engagement didn't take very long. When I entered the place with her, I was only interested in getting the desert. After about 45 minutes, I got the bill and it only came out to be about $17.
If this option isn't readily available, the next best option I could think of is a sushi place. The same could be done using the chopsticks.
A friend of mine used to work at a place called the Melting Pot which was known for hot pots and chocolate fondue. While I'd never go there myself, it was worth my while if I had a girl of the Asian persuasion there.
A few years back, was involved with this girl named Julia and I really wanted to do something to encourage cooperation and engagement. Chocolate fondue seemed like a good opportunity to do this because you and the girl can feed each other chocolate dipped berries and marshmallows using the skewers. This can also lead to some funny moments if either person drops the food or misses the other person's mouth. The best opportunity for cooperation can occur when you and the girl can feed each other pieces of fruit at the same time. As an extra bonus, the place I went to served chocolate fondue with the Yin and Yang option. Half of the pot will be regular chocolate while the other half will be white chocolate. To do something to her on the subconscious level, I dipped most of the fruit I fed to her in the white chocolate.
This engagement didn't take very long. When I entered the place with her, I was only interested in getting the desert. After about 45 minutes, I got the bill and it only came out to be about $17.
If this option isn't readily available, the next best option I could think of is a sushi place. The same could be done using the chopsticks.
Sunday, April 3, 2016
Forced Labor Camps
In terms of conspiracy theories, the term alone "forced labor camps" is enough of a buzzword to place an opinion in the conspiracy theory category. Forced labor camps coming to America is absolutely absurd. However, if you think about it for a moment, we already have forced labor camps here in America.
I forget which historical figure said it, but the first step towards knowledge is to call things by their proper name. In a forced labor camp, a man is held there against his will, performs labor under some sort of authority, and receives no compensation for his labor. Forced labor camps are prisons.
We've had prisons for as long as I can remember and currently about one percent of the United States population is incarcerated. Of course, many people in prisons deserve being there. We have murderers, rapists, and thieves in prisons. However, our prisons hold a lot of people that are not murderers, rapists, and thieves.
A lot of the prison population is there because of the war on drugs. Simply using or selling illegal drugs will expose a man to mandatory minimum sentences of several years. During these years, these prisoners will be subjected to forced labor.
However, when we think about forced labor camps, we may think about the holocaust or the internment of Japanese citizens after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Should America bring forced labor camps in the way that most people think about such camps, these labor camps probably would not be introduced as a separate entity. People will adapt to anything gradually and what the forces in charge would do is to slowly increase the number of reasons to put a man in prison.
When you think about it, going to prison for years for smoking certain herbs is the opposite of freedom. However, this is reality and we all accept this as normal. This isn't the way it should be but we don't live in shouldland.
When the forces in charge want to imprison more of the population, men will go to prison for traffic violations, minor debts, political incorrectness, and hurting other peoples feelings. And when a man can not clearly determine or know what will or will not get him arrested, we will all be living in 1984.
I forget which historical figure said it, but the first step towards knowledge is to call things by their proper name. In a forced labor camp, a man is held there against his will, performs labor under some sort of authority, and receives no compensation for his labor. Forced labor camps are prisons.
We've had prisons for as long as I can remember and currently about one percent of the United States population is incarcerated. Of course, many people in prisons deserve being there. We have murderers, rapists, and thieves in prisons. However, our prisons hold a lot of people that are not murderers, rapists, and thieves.
A lot of the prison population is there because of the war on drugs. Simply using or selling illegal drugs will expose a man to mandatory minimum sentences of several years. During these years, these prisoners will be subjected to forced labor.
However, when we think about forced labor camps, we may think about the holocaust or the internment of Japanese citizens after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Should America bring forced labor camps in the way that most people think about such camps, these labor camps probably would not be introduced as a separate entity. People will adapt to anything gradually and what the forces in charge would do is to slowly increase the number of reasons to put a man in prison.
When you think about it, going to prison for years for smoking certain herbs is the opposite of freedom. However, this is reality and we all accept this as normal. This isn't the way it should be but we don't live in shouldland.
When the forces in charge want to imprison more of the population, men will go to prison for traffic violations, minor debts, political incorrectness, and hurting other peoples feelings. And when a man can not clearly determine or know what will or will not get him arrested, we will all be living in 1984.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)