Disqus - Latest Comments for GeorgeC

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: OUR THING:

GeorgeC — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:06:08 -0000

The difference between private market production and distribution and public non-market “production and distribution” comes down to the difference between profit and expansion for the former, and consumption and dissipation for the latter for another very important reason: namely their respective effects on the real money supply.
If the monetary creation conclusions of quantum economics are correct, that all newly created quanta units of new monetary value, not previously available, are nothing more than new congealed units of incremental profit not present in the economy before, then the upshot of the relevant blog entry, is obvious. When you add QE’s opposing counterpart – that the main, or only cause(s) of monetary destruction leading to inflationary loss of monetary value (a/k/a leakages from Keynes’s much-vaunted multiplier leading to its dissipation through inflation) are the unreciprocated consumption and waste of market production, and the one-way transfers of money and wealth that never create a profit (namely, theft, charity with nothing expected in return, unpaid loans and defaults, present and prospective, bankruptcies, declared or disguised, taxes and government waste and corruption, e.g., through the expenditure of fiat money units created out of whole cloth where no direct creation of corresponding market wealth is sought, argued for, achieved or attempted in order to give value to that new money value) the conclusion, suggested by the Blog Entry is obvious within the Anglo-Saxon tradition of free market liberties. The unavoidable, anti-laissez faire answer is that where, as now, due to public sector push back, the private sector is overly cautious about creating new profit, or actively impeded or prevented, or sees foreign jurisdictions as more amenable to the goal, then the government should step in to use incremental units of fiat money to pursue the missing profits (i.e., new money value) in competition with the private sector, for the benefit of the poorer classes whose efforts are enlisted in the effort (with the ownership of the new capital created by those efforts going to the poorer classes). That is, if the private capitalists can’t be trusted to create new capital and profits (the new inflation-proof money needed by the economy) then in competition with the spooked private sector, the public sector should expand private employment to full employment levels to compete with the private sector in the production and distribution, at the most fallow levels, of new profits and money value. It would have the additional, serendipitous benefit of preventing the public sector from employing the new fiat money they create and borrow in monetary destruction through waste and corruption with no market objective.
If he Public Sector recognized the two lessons of Quantum Economics, and learned to stop worrying and love profit, there would be less inflation, the poorer classes would not be pushed further into poverty, hopelessness and inactive dependency by inflation, on fixed-dollar stipends being paid by a bankrupt entity trillions of dollars in debt to foreign countries, which debt is only projected to increase, and the implicit anti-minority racism of the left can finally be ameliorated a little bit. And the need for taxes, eventually, will finally disappear as the miracle of capitalism, private capital ownership by all classes of society more equally distributed, and real expansion at all levels of the money supply can be intentionally pursued, while knowingly avoiding the counterproductive practices of government which destroy money value. And in addition, these benefits will all come with a little competitive push back against the oligopolists and crony capitalists, which will be an excellent counterpoint to the fallen nature of the greedy private sector. Who knows what benefits will come from increased competition, but such benefits always come, when the obvious harms to be expected from monopoly and oligopoly is intentionally opposed. Such an anti-laissez faire course will finally make government self-supporting. And we will be able to re-apply these lessons, at will, to create all the inflation-proof money we will ever want, while those currently trapped in permanent depression will finally be given a viable pathway to self-sustaining capitalistic prosperity, with full ownership of the fruits of their productivity being actively assisted by government. It is a good way to break the power of the statists and leftists while creating a lot of new Republicans at the minority level too. A Win-Win-Win-Win all the way around.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: THE FRACTIOUS FRACTION:

GeorgeC — Tue, 27 Mar 2012 09:03:00 -0000

Plants grow better and faster (and the animals that rely on plant life for nourishment) in warmer climate. Who knew? And all this time I thought there was more vegetative life in winter.

Re: Ann Coulter Tweets: Please ‘Explain What Was Allegedly Offensive About DeNiro’s Joke’

GeorgeC — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 09:10:29 -0000

If Obama's father truly was a Non-American African Arab who doe not particularly look like his namesake "son" then I always had a problem believing Obama was half Black instead of Half Arab. But I read also that his true father may have been someone else who was protected by Mrs. Obama's last minute marriage that lasted a few months at least. Obama certainly is not African American. His wife certainly is but we do not elect the spouses. Condi should run and then we can have the first authentic African American woman as president but I do not think the racist Left will come to her defense. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

Re: Ann Coulter Tweets: Please ‘Explain What Was Allegedly Offensive About DeNiro’s Joke’

GeorgeC — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 08:59:58 -0000

I never heard anyone say or write that out loud. Who are you quoting. Please give a link if available. I think you just made that up out of your own fevered racist brain. No conservative would charge conservatives by transference with their own repressed racism. Which goes to prove my thesis that the only real anti-black racists in America are liberals who must cover up their secret shame with faux idiocy going the other way, or so they would claim.

Re: Ann Coulter Tweets: Please ‘Explain What Was Allegedly Offensive About DeNiro’s Joke’

GeorgeC — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 08:55:32 -0000

Don't know if it still applies, but in NYC Deniro was known for some years as only or predominantly dating black women, but not actually marrying them. Or maybe he did marry one or two. Who keeps track? How does that play into the mix? What Robert probably meant, but got confused, is that "I am not ready to date white women." Racist? You be the judge.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: ACTUALLY, IT'S A JIHAD...:

GeorgeC — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:55:08 -0000

What Holy Land does Qaddaffi think we are trying to recapture in Libya? I don't remember. Did Christ trod the streets of Benghazi and I forgot about it?

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: ACED OUT BASE:

GeorgeC — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 09:52:39 -0000

Terrorism is just a tactic that is available to all and exclusively to those who have no other option. When other more effective options are available, the true limitations of terrorism, due to its abhorrent nature, become truly apparent.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: THE RIGHT'S ROE:

GeorgeC — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 20:10:57 -0000

I am not sure anyone in 1789 America would have understood this disagreement, whether the right to bear arms meant the state's right to provide its local muster with rifles or whether one had an individual right to hang a musket over the fireplace, in the event the Militia might be called out, or if some drunk tried to break into your hen house. Or if the Iriqoois went on a raid. The frontier was not all that far away, nor the memory of a local Indian war or a hot Redcoat war. Militia leaders in those days could not reliably arm everybody, and guns were too valuable and scarce to be kept idle in some warehouse. Thus, the fact that a man would own his personal fowling piece was more or less taken for granted.

Our disagreement now over meaning is a recent phenomenon, now that the frontier has disappeared, or localized to our failed neighborhoods, one of which is where the recent plaintiff lived, and why he thought he needed a side arm. Here the Constitution need not be living and breathing, just the advance of civilization, which is far different fom what faced Madison.. In any event because of that I don't think original intent, which is totally indistinct to our current disagreements, is relevant. The only original intent was "Can a gun help you protect your family from marauding Indians, Redcoats, pirates or their equivalents?" If you can answer yes, then you have a right to arm yourself. Do you want to be the pirate or marauder, then no, you have no right to arm yourself to do that.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: IT WORKED JUST THE WAY MOST PREDICTED...:

GeorgeC — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 18:21:57 -0000

If you give someone a job who produces something, and whose income depends on delivering a valued product at a competitive (cheaper) price, ultimately you make him or her a Republican. Why would any Democrat want to do that? If you can make people line up for free government goodies at someone else's expense (such as the Rich) delivered by the Democrats, well, hey, you can make them lifelong Democrats. Really, its a no-brainer til the bill comes in the mail, delivered by the Chinese Navy carrying 31,000,000 troops on the war path for their missing female counterparts. Like Yogi said, it's 1938 deja vu all over again. Only worse. (Well, so far Japan and Germany together had better navies than China, but Britain was still a factor).

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: HAPPY CONSTITUTION DAY!: FROM THE ARCHIVES: DENY EVIL, DENY AMERICA:

GeorgeC — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 18:44:12 -0000

Rousseau was a clever writer and knew it, but started in public life with a problem. He wanted to enter a writing contest, to answer a philosophical question of whether the advances of the arts and sciences were morally beneficial. Reared as a Calvinist, which taught that man was irrevocably depraved, unless saved by Grace over which man had no control, Rousseau was driven to a scheme that he hoped would make him stand out and garnish the prize, and make his name in the bargain. (It did!) Basically it was to take the contrarian view, that he suspected no one else would, that these advances ruined man and not vice versa. Rousseau was clever enough to make it sound plausible. Thereafter, like most one trick ponies who have an initial success, he became a contrarian in everything, but I don't trust he was entirely serious in all his contrarian views. After awhile it was expected of him. So why believe him, that he was being honest, even about his own beliefs?

Of course, if he had been clever enough to check the history of the Plymouth Colony, and Jamestown, too, he would have seen that they first trusted to create the perfect Colony he dreamed of, where every worker was required to contribute his production to the common warehouse, from which every need could then be filled. After half of them died of starvation, they reapplied the traditional rule that everyone keeps, and trades, the fruits of his own production, which is the basic rule of Capitalism. As always this worked, and you know the rest.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: THE AUTHOR DOESN'T MENTION WHAT SPECIES HE THINKS THEY'VE BECOME:

GeorgeC — Mon, 05 Jul 2010 17:57:37 -0000

The author, a typical racist, obviously thinks, and implies, that Tibetans ARE a separate species. Is the Chinese view so different? The Chinese probably believe, to their credit, that they have not evolved one iota in 10,000 years. But the barbarians, to the extent they are not Chinese, have evolved in retrograde. Now OJ, if you can recognize that an African can evolve into a Tibetan, then certainly you can see how a Brontosaurus can evolve into a bird. It's starting to come clear to me.

Re: http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2010/07/running_afoul_of_the_kinsley_r.html

GeorgeC — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 15:24:16 -0000

Who could have predicted? To future historians Afghanistan could well become known as the sure killing field of all socialist military ambitions.

Re: http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2010/06/youd_think_theyd_find_tpaw_and.html

GeorgeC — Wed, 30 Jun 2010 22:22:48 -0000

Polls won't matter in November if the enthusiasm of the 49% against swamps the blase attitude of the 45% who approve. In off year elections turn out is a big factor.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: THE HECK WITH YOUR PALTRY REALITY, I HAVE MY BEAUTIFUL THEORY!:

GeorgeC — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:50:43 -0000

Galbraith long ago said "You can't push on a string." The only thing that will pull on that string and create new, hard, inflation proof money is the creation of profit since money is nothing more than congealed profit. The more profit there is, the more money there is. If we are serious about jettisoning laissez faire for good, it is time for governments to stop doing the things, involving one way transfers of value that destroy the value of existing money, namely taxing, consumption, higher wages for less productive work, subsidies for no work and production and charity and entitlements, and start doing the one thing that creates new money value, creating a profit. Once governments start motivating the poor to use capital to create profits by the poor and for the poor, with capital ownership of their enterprises thrown in on top, our economies will heal, maldistributions of money and wealth will be ameliorated, the economy will grow at the maximum rate possible, capital and monetary export will end and we can return to our inherited position as international money magnet. And with the Government committed to making profits for the poor, we can outlaw the need for taxes forever. With profits as the real goal, we can finally see there is no need for taxes anyway, since they create more harm than good, and they distract us from what we are supposed to do. The only answer available is obvious. Why don't we do it.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: JUST ANOTHER BUREAUCRACY:

GeorgeC — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:24:02 -0000

Note that it's Obama's Peeps who read Rolling Stone -- the very young vote that even now he's gearing up to mobilize for Election Day. The last thing Obama wants to see is a story where his real character is on full display, as a disengaged and unprepared ditherer, in an article that his base is going to devour for all the right reasons ("those damned war-mongers!") while being pounded with the wrong, but true message. Someone genius it seems has played a giant "Brer Rabbit" on Obama which no one so far has seemed to identify. (Too bad really if it gets McCrystal fired, but that won't help the UR either). But after playing foul with the military for the last 60 years or more, what actually did the Left expect? This can't play out well for Obama, whichever way he spins it. No wonder he is furious.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: JUST A TRADING BLOCK:

GeorgeC — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 21:30:14 -0000

It's time not to get involved in foreign disentaglements.

Re: http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2010/06/how_stands_the_city_1.html

GeorgeC — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 21:03:53 -0000

The Greeks when faced with the disloyalty of their elites did not always seek out to kill them. They had, and used the sanction of exile. Would that we had it now. The first to go would be that abominable Jane Fonda who back in the 'sixties, I remember, projected her belief that people soon would stop rallying around the American Flag because, as everyone knows, flags cause war and once we do away with flags, peace will reign or some rot like that. I thought then that here is a girl headed right into the teeth of exile, most likely voluntary or mutual. Where did I go wrong?

As I told my Brother, born this Flag Day, God bless the Flag.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: GETTING LONELY ON THE UNICORN RIDE:

GeorgeC — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:27:56 -0000

When the puppet strings get cut, Obama's going to flop like a Toy Story doll when the lights go on.

Oh. Maybe they already have.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: AND JUST LIKE IRAQ'S OIL..:

GeorgeC — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:11:15 -0000

Big Secret? EVERYWHERE has untapped resources. Very few know how to tap them, or find them, or to realize they are resources, other than the educated elits of the West and those smart enough to learn from the West. Somebody should write a book and explain why that is.

Re: http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2010/06/the_new_new_new_nixon.html

GeorgeC — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 18:34:54 -0000

Dowd quotes Jonathan Alter as saying ". . . That disdainful attitude toward 24-hour cable culture is slowing his political reflexes. We’re seeing that in the oil spill. I don’t think it’s personal with him. It’s not that he despises reporters as human beings, like Nixon. . . ." The comparison of the Press's view and treatment of Nixon, with their fealty to Obama is the worst comparison since Hitler compared FDR's death to the death of Frederick the Great's opponent in some war which Freddy Boy went on to win. But I guess that's why its ironic.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: THE HOMAGE VICE PAYS TO VIRTUE:

GeorgeC — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:45:22 -0000

The only important thing to note is that after two months our Demosthenes-in-chief, still on the search, does not yet know whose ass to kick. Come December, his wisdom, despite all efforts, will be no more further advanced.

But ask him whose ass on the Basketball court he should kick, I am sure he could figure it out in a Chicago minute.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: MALTHUS MY FOOT:

GeorgeC — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:33:59 -0000

A China native I work with says that the big difference from the air between China and the US is that the US landscape is green with foliage and all of China is brown with dirt. Her explanation was that during the Mouse era (her way of saying Mao) the Mouse order all the trees to be cut down so there would be an iron foundry in everyone's back yard. This tack was ultimately corrected, but so far they have not bothered to replant the trees. When I asked her what they were going to do with 35 million men with no hope of ever finding Chinese wives, her first comment was an amazed "How do you know about that?" Her second was that every woman would have to have 3 or 6 husbands (and be pregnant all the time?) I made clear that I was appalled but I don't think she was.

Re: http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2010/06/will_the_next_one_even_be_a_pa.html

GeorgeC — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:23:12 -0000

The problem with Quantum Economics, as anyone who has wrestled with the conundrum of Schrodinger's Damned Cat is that experiments show that a single electron moving at close to the speed of light can be in two different places at the same time, or an infinite number of places at the same time, until its location is collapsed or fixed by being recorded by a third party observer within the Universe. But we know that reality goes on along a fixed path without being constantly observed by someone in the Universe. The mind rebels at the contradiction. Everyone knows therefore that our feeble brains are missing something. Houdini would say it is some sleight of hand by our overly-amused God. If we could just pull the curtain back.

But I agree. The hash that is Quantum Economics just can't be the right answer. (Mayber the instruments are skewed or too imprecise).

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: LIKE BEING GOVERNED BY KLAATU:

GeorgeC — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 14:15:09 -0000

That just proves he married the mother he never had.

Re: BrothersJudd Blog: LIKE BEING GOVERNED BY KLAATU:

GeorgeC — Sat, 12 Jun 2010 13:57:06 -0000

What's your proof, OJ, that a Black Woman holds the First Black President in open contempt? The UR, without doing anything, carries a 91% approval rating with his "fellow" Blacks who, like most, perceive the "Son of the Sheik" to be Black. I don't see Michelle falling into the 9%. Like many wives, she might have grave private reservations about her husband but when push comes to shove, in White America, she will side with him. Sports night out with the Boys will not get her to leave him unless he screws up major, in her lights. That could happen but as to this question, "Only the Shadow Knows." But I do agree, if Michelle dumps him, he'd have less ties to the US than he does now, but then it depends entirely in the future if a Dem is in the White House if he stays domestic or not.