Disqus - Latest Comments for trumpit

Re: West-ward, Ho!

trumpit — Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:19:29 -0000

Billionaires, like Soros, shouldn't exist; neither should piss poor stuggling writers. I tried to donate a dollar but then I became aware of the high transaction cost involved and I took back my donation. I don't want to give your money to the credit card company or another billionaire named Bezos. I'd rather put a stamp on a letter and send you a check if only I new where to send it.

Re: West-ward, Ho!

trumpit — Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:23:05 -0000

Are you calling Professor West a ho in the title to your piece? I think that's provocative and mean-spirited. Would you call a white professor a ho? Please explain yourself.

Re: West-ward, Ho!

trumpit — Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:40:54 -0000

Every time I write a check it costs the bank a few few cents. Stop acting like a troll, Micha! A rich banker like you ought to send Will rent money monthly for your being such a trollopy troll. Notice, I didn't call YOU a HO!

Re: The Moral of the Story?

trumpit — Thu, 04 Nov 2004 20:01:01 -0000

I apologize for my ignorance of U.S. history but just why did Lincoln save the Union? The death and devastation wrought by the civil war was mind-boggling. In some ways, we are still fighting it. How can we say it was worth it? Why is no one presently talking about dissolving the union? Czechoslovakia recently broke into the Czech Republic and Slovakia without fanfare. As a Californian, I have little culturally in common with Southerners, I despise their ignorant religiosity and I would be glad to give them their own country. I really have no use for them. Another idea: dissolve the Union entirely and just have a loose federation of states like the former Soviet Union. If it weren't for the cold weather, I'd make a beeline for Canada. Maybe, I'll treat myself to a new parka and move there anyway; Will seemed to enjoy his recent trip there. Will, think you'd like living there on a permanent basis? (Btw, I like your travelogues very much.)

Re: The Moral of the Story?

trumpit — Thu, 04 Nov 2004 20:18:31 -0000

I have just one more thing to say. Many people voted for that belligerent dummy Bush because they thought he would better protect us from terrorism. I feel far less safe. Would we not be safer if we were no longer the sole super power in the world. This is a strong argument (in my opinion) for dissolving the Union in one form or another. Wouldn't No. Korea and Iran and the Muslim fanatics have less to fear if the U.S. were broken into pieces? The U.N. can and should police the world and fight the terrorists. The U.S. as a country just has to go. I've convinced myself at least.

Re: Close: Good Enough for Horshoes, Hand Grenades, and Blog Fundraisers!

trumpit — Sat, 06 Nov 2004 08:00:38 -0000

Listen, Will, if at anytime you need a handout, you shouldn't feel guilty about groveling...er I mean asking for it. Don't worry, we'll sense when you're spending the donations on beer or your girlfriend. Besides, begging becomes you. But, have you designated yourself a charitable organization with the IRS yet?

Re: The Moral of the Story?

trumpit — Sat, 06 Nov 2004 19:53:45 -0000

Scotty Boy,

Your comment/insult wasn't clever at all. Religious people (from the NSEW) are basically fools and I don't want to be ruled by them. Are you one of them?

I brought up the idea of breaking up the country so that there might be some intelligent comments. I see that I'm not going to get any, at least not from you. Do you reside (that means live) in the Bible Belt and pray to Jesus. Did you get off on the Passion of the Christ? I thought so!

Re: The Moral of the Story?

trumpit — Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:32:37 -0000

I should say that people who are religious are foolish in that aspect of their lives. The more religion is an integral part of their lives the bigger a fool they are. Remember 9/11? The religious fanatics should be killed before they kill us. The biggest creepy fool of all lives in the Whitehouse and gives tax breaks to the wealthy and ease restrictions on polluters and coddles Halliburton. Some kind of old-time religion, huh? Immorality was an issue in the election and their names are Shrubya/Cheney/The Hammer.

Re: The Moral of the Story?

trumpit — Mon, 08 Nov 2004 11:11:18 -0000

What is your problem, Chuck? A man from Oklahoma, who believes in executing "abortionists", was just elected to the Senate of the U.S.. Are you blind to the ongoing war, IN THIS COUNTRY, between modern, scientific, civilized humanistic thought and religious fanaticism and barbarism. And, have you so easily forgotten the bombings of Women's health clinics and killings of doctors by homicidal Christian loonies. Don't you realize that religious intolerance is the historical trademark of Christianity and Islam? Bush's election ploy to push for altering the Constitution to make bigotry the law of the land doesn't bother you.? Chuck, take back your blatant slander of Nicholas; it's just not right!

Re: Warning: This Post Contains a Discussion of Public Reason, Which is Just a Theory

trumpit — Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:38:37 -0000

Poppycock! It feels good to say that. I'll have to say it more often. Allow me to enumerate a few of the ways:

1. The assumption that kids are best raised by their parents. I had to spend 10 years in psychotherapy to undo the head trips that my sorry folks did on me. I believe all decent schools should be in the business of teaching kids how to think and fend for themselves in a rough world. If people know how to think clearly then chances are they be able to distinguish fact from fantasy. I have no problem teaching kids that killing is usually wrong and that a cow was killed to make a McDonald's burger. It's the truth. Kid need to be taught sympathy and empathy. There are far too many cruel kids who grow up to be cruel and uncaring adults, politicians and business men and women.

2. We all have "false" gods that we follow. For example, the false god of materialism. Witness the mad post-Thanksgiving rush to buy all kinds of consumer goods, much of it manufactured in China and most of it crap. What kind of religion is that to prop up a communist dictatorship by buying their toasters? Scientific theories are beautiful things but don't shove YOUR science and how it should be applied down my throat. I don't want my water fluoridated if you get my drift. I don't want my stupid dentist telling me that a dental x-ray is like spending a minute catching some rays at the beach. I want my fruit and veggies free from some Monsato's latest and most profitable pesticide like DDT.

4. I don't want SOCIAL Darwinists to tell me that sweatshops and child labor is a better than a life of prostitution. BOTH are bad and wrong. And, that if a little girl's hand gets cut off then it is okay to shove her out the door without medical treatment or pay because she is no longer productive. All kids have a right to an education and freedom from from hunger.

5. I secretly want to emulate my idol the Unibomber. His anti-technology manifesto should be taught in kindergarten. A lot of good he is doing the world behind bars when he could be outside sending a bunch of ticking Christmas gifts to the smug folks in ivory towers and to the rest of the greedy turds in America who are living off the "fat of the land," as Will Robinson ...er Will Wilkinson says. If they have nothing to fear then won't they fear nothing?

Re: Warning: This Post Contains a Discussion of Public Reason, Which is Just a Theory

trumpit — Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:20:46 -0000

I have no problem whatsoever with creationism being taught side-by-side with evolution, so long as it is pointed out why creationism is wrong and why evolution is right. I don't even mind the bible being taught to 1st graders so long as the wisdom of the bible is taught and that the hooey God crap has no basis in fact. I say teach the bible to our impressionable kids. Teach them that it says that we must stone a woman to death for adultery but then point out that civilized people don't do that anymore because it is barbaric. Explain to them that now it is the husband that kills his wife who is put on trial for murder whether or not it is established that she screwed every guy in town. Then explain the OJ trial to them and how money talks and shit walks. Have a nice lesson on American jurisprudence and justice. Then have a dandy koolaid and chocolate chip cookie break. Don't you just love kids with their red or blue koolaid stained smiles! (Red for the red states and blue for the blue ones, naturally.)

Re: Warning: This Post Contains a Discussion of Public Reason, Which is Just a Theory

trumpit — Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:54:54 -0000

Micha, I have one word for you! DRAFT!!

Re: Warning: This Post Contains a Discussion of Public Reason, Which is Just a Theory

trumpit — Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:08:49 -0000

Eugenics anyone? We do it to dogs. My collie didn't arrive on Noah's arc, I'm afraid. She came out of intelligent design. (This is barnyard science at its best.) That's right, intelligent HUMAN design. Why or why can't we apply eugenics to ourselves. I know, the Nazis gave it a bad rap. But, do we have to remain a species that is for the most part is still brutish and ignorant when we can easily do something about it? I blame pseudo-moralistic, religious idiots for that, among others. Now that I'm through ranting for the moment, you can go back to sleep. Sorry to disturb ya'll, except for you Micha. For you, it's the DRAFT!!

Re: Warning: This Post Contains a Discussion of Public Reason, Which is Just a Theory

trumpit — Thu, 02 Dec 2004 19:22:47 -0000

I believe that infants should be taken away from their parents at birth to be raised by the bears or wolves in the forest. So what, I say, if the bears & wolves eat most of the babies. Humans reproduces WAY too much and there are an indecent number of us being toilet trained here on poor, 4.5 billion year old, planet earth. Also, abortions would happily decrease because you can feed, er I mean throw your baby to the wolves instead of aborting it. The plentiful new supply of food would result in a surge in the bear & wolf populations which would go a long way in making up for our ruthless extermination of those regal animals to make room for more toilet trained(?), rapatious humans like Micha. That the libertarian social model should fail to take into account feral children is a ghastly if not beastly thought!

Re: Hitler Was a Vegetarian, Pinochet Privatized Social Security, Satan Rides a Bicycle, and Other Irrelevancies

trumpit — Tue, 14 Dec 2004 15:51:30 -0000

That was funny, Rob!

Re: The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Nada to ADA on ‘Net?

trumpit — Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:08:18 -0000

I suppose we could make the "surfing experience" available to blind people by putting them in a swimming pool with a boogie board and create waves with an artificial wave machine. We can sprinkle sand around the perimeter of the pool to simulate the beach. To make the experience as real as possible we should add in a mechanical shark or a rubber ducky. Also, the blind should be given headphones with beach sounds of seagulls, happy beachcombers, gurgling sounds of drowning inexperienced swimmers, & whatever else makes for a realistic & pleasant day of sand & surf. For their own safety, I would resist giving in when my sightless patrons shout, "make the waves bigger!" You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere, you know. And, we mustn't forget to add the "smells of surfing" coming not only from the crisp salty air but also from beer kegs and cigarette smoke. Lately, I seem to get a lot of that when I go to the beach here in Santa Monica. Thanks, Tom, for the great idea! Now, if only I had a swimming pool at my house. I wouldn't even worry about being sued should one of the blind surfers accidentally drown or become a parapleigic (yes, ADA, I never intended to accomodate parapleigic surfers) from some freakish mishap. For, you can't get cash out of an octopurse (only murky ink) as all surfing lawyers know all too well!

--Trumpit

Re: Supreme Court Strikes Major Blow to Property Rights

trumpit — Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:12:12 -0000

The majority apparently was concerned with a bunch of stick-in-the-mud old fogey homeowners holding up COMMUNITY development/improvements. I say chase them out of their cruddy abodes with a blowtorch if necessary. How can someone with blog named 'Technology Liberation Front' be so in favor of blocking progress. Or are your views so narrow that only private interests can promote "progress" and government never should? But then you argue that special interests will rule the roost by exerting control over government to do its bidding. Since when don't you like that? In another comment you argue in favor of a monopolistic company like Microsoft over free and fair competitions. Your arguments are so full of paradoxes and contradictions and personal attacks on the jurists involved in the decisions that you make little sense. I don't blame you for quoting Justice O'Connor; I doubt you've ever had an original thought in your entire life.

Re: Moon Struck

trumpit — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 02:00:00 -0000

Man does not live by bread alone. Except perhaps in the base existence of the unfortunate, downtrodden, neurotic or the seriously infirmed such as the clinically brain dead who must be force-fed to keep them alive. I hated this post of yours, as I do so many. The fact that most people have to work to eat is an inglorious, artless, tasteless waste of one's life in many instances. Many people hate their servile jobs and as a consequence live unfulfilled, worthless lives. A trip to the moon is out of reach for all but the vain rich beside being out of sight soon after takeoff. A cheap LSD trip is not a safe alternative. Delving too deeply into crass libertarian theory is also a waste of one's scant, precious time on Earth, in my humble opinion.

Re: Does Fee-for-Service Explain Rising Health-Care Costs?

trumpit — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 02:00:00 -0000

"Medicaid and Medicare are outright promises by Uncle Sam to pay for most of the medical care received by large groups of people - namely, poor Americans and the growing number of Americans 65 years and older."

I can understand helping poor people with their medical expenses, but why automatically those over 65? The fact that there are "large groups" that are poor is the problem to address. Lyndon Johnson made great strides to address the plight of poor, held-back America with his Great Society programs. Unfortuntately, the egocentric rich didn't want to ante up, so they got pro-rich Republicans elected to dissolve the programs. As a result, the rich got richer and poor had babies which they were forced to have before Roe v. Wade, or government subsidized abortions.

If Mormon (not moron) doctors tithed 10% of their medical services to the poor then, perhaps, we wouldn't be in the health care mess that we are in, at least in Utah. Along with the hippocratic oath, the requirement to serve the poor at no, or small charge should be part of their duty and pledge. Some law firms do pro-bono work. That should be the norm. Let's get the government out of the health care/insurance business. Let the charitible forces of successful professionals and business people of good will throughout the country do the necessary things to help the poor and give them a leg up. We are our brother's keeper contrary to libertarian theory.

There is a subtle argument here for tackling the problem of people who have vast fortunes that they selfishly hoard and keep all to themselves to societies great detriment. That bad acquisitive nature of some is the antithesis of charitable good works. Let's squash them like the greedy bugs that they are! Let's make the world a better place to live for all not just those with the means to enjoy the finer things in life.

Re: Treason Against Reason

trumpit — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 02:00:00 -0000

Of course, I know that human exploitation and activity is roasting and toasting the planet. What else is new about greedy, small-brained humans plundering the planet we call home? The fish, out of the once blue sea, are being depleted and driven to extinction at an alarming rate, and the fish is mostly contaminated with mercury, pcbs, pesticide residue, and what have you. The great forests of the world, home to a vast array of species, are being clearcut and burned down for short term gain at an alaming rate. What took eons for nature to assemble will most likely be all gone in a hundred years. Treason against the planet is a most mild categorization of what your fellow earthlings are up too and guilty of. Krugman just doesn't get it. There is no hope for mankind and the rest of life on Earth is being taking on a rollercoaster ride into the depths of hell on earth from which there is no disembarking or returning. Thanks folks for being a contributing element (one of roughly 7 billion others) in the slash and burn mentality of homo sapiens. Treason is for children compared to mass murder and nuclear war that the fight over water and other resources will lead to in a thirsty, parched planet. Why do vampires suck blood? If you can answer that question, you are on the path to understanding why we as a species destined for the dustbin of failed evolutionary history, right along with the pea-size brained dinosaurs. Non-treasonous Dinosaurs deserved a better fate. Treasonous, murderous humans deserve the defiled, uninhabitable planet they alone are and were responsible for creating.

Re: Where does power lie in Iran?

trumpit — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 02:00:00 -0000

I'm sure Mousavi would be marginally different (better) than Ahmadinejad. Economists love the term "marginally" or "at the margin." Some advocate that gradual change is better than abrupt change in government or economic system such as what happened in the USSR. Usually abrupt regime change by war is the most disruptive and destructive, as what happened in Iraq with the 2nd gulf war. Civil wars are notoriously nasty and bloody. If the system is rotten to the core, then maybe abrupt change is the best way to go. But usually a new "rotten to the core" government replaces the old system. When the Shah of Iran's government collapsed, we got the Mullahs running the show. That may have been going from bad to worse, although at the time most Iranians were happy to oust the shah, who was viewed as a puppet of the U.S. The Iranians and Cubans can't seem to drop the "revolutionary" tags for their system, and must continually rev up revolutionary fervor. On the other hand, you don't see the Vietnamese living in the past. I would say that revolutionary movements that can't get past the original revolution are failed systems. Who thinks of the 4th of July as anything but a day off for barbeque or going to the beach?

Re: Sowell on Scarcity

trumpit — Thu, 11 May 2006 20:41:30 -0000

Does scarcity exist for Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Oprah or the Walton family? Do their greedy wants exceed their incredible means or needs? The Russian's have the right idea by putting a stinking capitalist anti-social oil pig in jail in Siberia where he belongs. When there's such massive wealth in so few hands, I can understand why this economic scarcity concept is so poorly understood by the general public and by so many supposedly smart economists. Of course there is not enough to go around when 1% owns most everything except for the air, and they're fouling that up, too. Once, I perused a book by Sowell and I thought it was full of right-wing platitudes. Frankly his ideas are weird and dumb. Scarcity exists to a large degree because of the maldistribution of wealth and too many newly-hatched babies born in to poverty. No wonder there's so much anger and discontent in the world. It goes way beyond a cranky and shrinking American middle class.

Re: Sowell on Scarcity

trumpit — Fri, 12 May 2006 12:46:25 -0000

The anti-social, criminal ones should be tarred and feathered and jailed. I personally would have the Enron gang killed to make an example out of them. As far as Oprah goes, who said the government should run it? Oprah can run it at a reduced salary, if she wants. Who need her anyway, she's just another arrogant talking head. Her shares in her company should be taken away from her and redistributed to the less fortunate or sold off to pay down the enormous national debt. No human being should be allowed to have that kind of wealth whether ill-gotten or not. Allowing that nonsense to continue is far more anti-social that spitting on the sidewalk or dropping your bubblegum on it. The same goes for Bush's evil tax breaks for the rich. A pox on the Whitehouse and his supporters!

Re: Unethical 'Ethicists'

trumpit — Mon, 15 May 2006 10:47:24 -0000

What is so voluntary about poverty striken individuals selling their kidneys or eyeballs out of sheer desperation? If the rich person donated his or her kidney or eye to the dying poor man, I'd be extremely impressed. Rich people rarely do that because they're not desperate or fools.

I think you set the record for the number of times the word 'qualms' has been used in a paragraph. Shouldn't one have qualms about such stark inequities in the world? I have major qualms about people who have no qualms about that. Now, I have to qualm myself down now or I'll qualm apart at the seems. In that case, all my vital organs will be up for grabs to all qualmers!

Re: Unethical 'Ethicists'

trumpit — Mon, 15 May 2006 12:24:11 -0000

Let's get down to brass tacks. When are you going to donate/sell your kidney? You only need one, you know. I didn't think so. Go back to your juggling.

Re: Unethical 'Ethicists'

trumpit — Mon, 15 May 2006 13:49:50 -0000

We could save just a many lives if generous, life-saving people like you were to rush out tommorrow to donate (okay, sell, if you must make a buck) your kidney to a very sick person in dire need of a healthy kidney. So you won't voluntarily contract to do that? Does it give you qualms? I guess you're not the life-saving, qualm-free person that I thought you were.

Re: Unethical 'Ethicists'

trumpit — Mon, 15 May 2006 23:20:23 -0000

I purchased a million dollar office building once and the first thing I did as the new owner was to unstop a toilet (the previous owner kindly handed me a plunger). You're comparing that unpleasantness to giving away a major body part. So I don't get your analogy at all. One shouldn't be in the unlucky position of having to sell a body part to survive. Just to say, "let the free market solve the problem," creates the offensive problem of desperate people mutilating themselves. Also, under your scenario of a purely free market, a poor person wouldn't be able to afford a kidney if she needed one short of a largess. That "disparate treatment" between rich and poor is also more offensive to me than scrubbing a toilet. I do agree with the concept though of Bill Gates having to pay society a billion dollars for a kidney transplant because saving his life should be worth that much to him. I really don't agree with him paying the market price for anything, most certainly not for his life. But then again if I were king, Billy would long ago have been relieved of his billions. He can't be richer than the king, now can he?

Re: Challenging a Depressing Myth

trumpit — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:53:21 -0000

At least most historians agree than WWII was the event that lifted the U.S. out the Great Depression. To me, the idea that war is GOOD for an economy is rather amazing. Death and destruction never had it so good. The reason, of course, was that the U.S. mainland didn't suffer the devastation that the rest of the participants in the world war did. Nuclear missiles have changed all that. A worthless country like North Korea can devastate a big and rich country like the U.S. almost instantly by launching its missiles at every important city. In return we can annihilate them. Big deal. The words 'nuclear blackmail' comes to mind.

Re: Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite (and Mr. Smith, and Ms. Jones, and Mr. Williams, and…..)

trumpit — Sun, 18 Jun 2006 21:42:22 -0000

I suggest we all take up a collection for Poor Paul because clearly he's been cheated of his rightful due. So do the right thing now! Send him a check for $1 and don't forget to include the compound interest for the past 40 years. If you use a 100% interest rate, he'll own everthing on the planet. This post of yours is one of the most intellectually and morally shallow that I seen in quite a while. Just how to do you come up with such fatuous drivel? I would just like to know how one goes about calculating the quantity of pleasure or misery that Sir Paul has produced in the world.

Suppose I told you that my mother committed suicide after listening to a McCartney song because she knew her love for him would never be reciprocated. She smashed the Abbey Road album then slit her throat with the vinyl shard. It was a horrible way to go. Mom, I still miss you! I tell you that Eleanor Rigby was an evil witch as well! Paul's satanic lyrics were well know to us true Beatle fanatics. I can't tell you how many times I play the White album backwards. The Devil I say! The damage caused by rap music is mild by comparison. Paul, donate your fortune to Scientology immediately. The mass reprogramming must take place, starting with Dr. Boudreaux! His brain has to be made a clean slate if it isn't already. This can easily be accomplished by making him listen to "I Want to Hold Your Hand," a thousand times in a row while having him actually hold Paul's real hand for hours on end. The anti-Beatle aversion therapy will produce the desired results: a man who realizes that both guys holding each other's hand and the Beatles are just plain wrong! Four squashable roaches is what those mop tops were! Paul owes us all big time! The amount due all of us is incalculable!

Re: Testing the Logic of Minimum-Wage Legislation

trumpit — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 16:30:00 -0000

I would happily rescind all minimum wage laws if a maximum wage law were instituted. Let's say that nobody can keep more than a million dollars of their yearly income. If you want to keep government out of the equation, then you have to donate the excess money you made to a bona fide charity, or return the excess to the employees in the form of higher wages and benefits. What kind of person would be unhappy to earn "only" a million dollars in a given year? I'd be happy to supply the answer if you're stumped.

Re: Testing the Logic of Minimum-Wage Legislation

trumpit — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 18:29:28 -0000

"Trumpit - Unfortunately that would be worse. I would like to make a million in a year too, but if I am making a million but if my labor is worth a million, what incentive do I have to perform any better anywhere else? There is no incentive so you would end up seeing people hit the top and disappear because there is nothing further they can do in the labor market that would be any more beneficial. A maximum wage law would be a horrendous idea."

Colson, I think your logic is completely backwards. If a person makes too much money in a given year, they have no incentive to work in the future and make further contributions to society. I.e., if someone makes $1,000,000 this year and want to be richer, he or she has an incentive to work next year to make another million. Why wouldn't people enjoy the congratulations, & adulations to be received by giving the excess away to worthy causes? Be happy and take your $1,000,000 to the bank! Society doesn't benefit from having super rich spoiled brats like Paris Hilton and the late JFK, Jr. who inherited their wealth and didn't earn it in any normal sense of the word. Not having a reasonable maximium salary is a terrible idea!

Re: Testing the Logic of Minimum-Wage Legislation

trumpit — Wed, 21 Jun 2006 20:37:20 -0000

Why do you feel sorry for the person who "only" makes $1,000,000 per year, yet feel no remorse for the poor slob who is paid $1.00 or less an hour without any other benefits? Have you no heart, no soul, no compassion whatsoever? Now I understand why libertarianism is made up of mostly adolescent males or those guys who never outgrew adolescence. Perhaps an MRI of your brains will reveal the missing, underdeveloped or damaged area. Fetal stem cells may help someday.

Re: Why China Stagnated

trumpit — Fri, 30 Jun 2006 21:47:57 -0000

One could ask the same question about India and host of other countries. I think you show your slanted (pun unintended) point of view when you refer to a lack of industrialization as "stagnation." The original 13 colonies were primarily agricultural. I agree with Jefferson that they should have stayed that way.

Your vision of an ideal world and mine differ by a kilometer. Why hasn't this country adopted the metric system like the rest of the world. Your point is well-taken about our narrow thinking such that we have nothing to learn from other countries. We also elect Presidents like Bush who think that way.

From the Chinese we still have a lot to learn. Anyone who has benefited from Tradition Chinese Medicine knows what I'm talking about. Chinese herbal remedies are a low cost way of successfully treating a host of maladies and afflictions. Why wasn't that included as part of Bush's expensive prescription drug plan? Corporate greed on the part of the pharmaceutical companies and cultural ignorance on the part of the American people are the obvious answers.

Re: Why China Stagnated

trumpit — Sat, 01 Jul 2006 08:33:31 -0000

Han Meng:

I suppose Vioxx was scientifically proven to your satifaction. Chinese herbal remedies date back 2,000 years and haven't remained stagnant either. They tend to have few side-effects as well. You would do yourself a service to investigate further. A closed mind isn't a good thing.

Re: Nature's Embrace?

trumpit — Sun, 09 Jul 2006 17:55:44 -0000

The murder rate is exploding; the traffic congestion is abominable; the air is unbreathable; rents are too high; junk food oozes with artificial, toxic ingredients; people all hate each other; etc., etc.

The quality of life in L.A., where I live, is going into the toilet, Don. I've lived here all my life, but now I'll have to seek out a happier, healther place to live out my humble life. And it's all your fault, Don! Your belief in unbridled human freedom and capitalistic greed is squelching and suffocating my simple life. This is now an ugly city with ugly people, I'm trapped and I want out!

Don idealizes the contaminated, unliveble, alienated, industrial world just as that lady from Vermont idealizes the beauty and tranquility of nature. She finally woke up to smell the roses. Spending ones life in front of TV/computer screen playing video games is sick, Swimmy. Now I think I'll go for a walk in the cement jungle and think pleasant thoughts. My only freedom resides in my head because the real, unnatural, human-destroyed world is to bleak to face. I might as well be held prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Wake up and smell the roses, Don.

Re: Hanushek and other podcast info

trumpit — Thu, 27 Jul 2006 15:23:05 -0000

Rather than attempt a Soduko puzzle, which bore me, I prefer to read the NY Times obituary section. Today's list included 89 year-old C. Frederick Mosteller. He started Harvard's statistics department in 1957.

As mentioned in the obituary, Prof. Mosteller worked with Moynihan on studies looking at the impact of home life on childen's performance in school. They argued that raising families out of poverty would have a greater educational impact than pouring money directly into schools.

So, do you agree with the concept of transferring funds from the "overbloated" educational budget or from some other source to directly aid poor families? I don't think that Bush's tax cuts for the rich did the trick.

Also mentioned in the same tribute-filled obituary, in the 1980's, Dr. Mosteller was instrumental in persuading Tennessee to conduct a controlled study on the effect of classroom size. The study showed convincingly that smaller classes significantly helped children from poorer minority families.

Who is this "educational policy expert," Rick Hanushek? And why does he contradict the real information I gleened from today's Obits?

Re: Wise Words on Global Warming

trumpit — Fri, 08 Dec 2006 10:22:26 -0000

One must address the root of the problem: there are too few billionaires in the world. It's a well know fact that billionaires have trouble spending their vast wealth. Imagine the health problems if they were to convert their billions into paper money and set fire to it. You have to admit, the smoke cloud would at least cause eye irritation to those in the proximity of the bonfire. Whether the polar caps would melt any more as a result, is a debatable point. You are not really rich until you can smoke your money.

Back to my main point. If the ratio of billionaires to the rest of us were 1:1 then the rest of us would be forced to graze on selenium grass causing blind staggers and eventual death due to a lethal dose of selenium. Since 50% of the population would die, the driving population, as well as CO2 emissions, would drop precipitously. All efforts must be made to add to the ranks of billionaires.

You may be wondering just how these new billionaires will come into existence. Well, yes, some will have made their money by seriously ravaging the small remaining unravaged-by-humans portions of the earth's surface, such as what is left of the Amazon rainforest. I tell you not to worry about it! Where the rainforest once was, we can plant more selenium grass to feed, and kill off, the rest of the non-billioniares.

Re: Adam Smith on the China tragedy

trumpit — Thu, 15 May 2008 16:35:44 -0000

My eyes glazed over about halfway down the excerpt. I can't read insufferable stuff like that, and the fine print wasn't helpful either. Can someone paraphrase the point(s) he was trying to make? People die and suffer injustices and who really gives a damn? Just why should we become overwrought? How's that going to help the victims? Send cash.

Why did he pick on poor China? Why not the Dickensian slums of his own country, or the death of miners in the coal mines that surely he knew about? And verbosity is not a virtue these days. Even Thomas Sowell (ick), or Krugman can make a point or two in fewer and more concise sentences. If I write anymore, I'll be guilty of the same pomposity as Smith.

Re: Adam Smith on the China tragedy

trumpit — Fri, 16 May 2008 07:41:14 -0000

In the 11th century, the demands for charcoal of the Song Dynasty (960-1279) Chinese iron industry led to widespread deforestation.[6] With the advent of coal replacing charcoal in the iron smelting process, thousands of acres of prime timberland were spared in China.[6] China remained the world's largest producer and consumer of coal until the 18th century. - Wikipedia

The Chinese created their own environmental disasters even in the 11th century causing "widespread deforestation." Sadly, Smith didn't have Wikipedia handy, or else he would have realized that humans for the most part create their own misery, with greed Capitalism being the main engine for environmental destruction worldwide. The foolish Chinese government gave in to the greed system to rapidly enrich a small group at the expense of the nation's land, water, and air, fouling it wherever Capitalism encroaches. If there was any wisdom in old Smithy, then why hasn't it been successfully applied to make the world a better place to live in. Bushshit and Reaganomics is the out growth of laissez-faire, and look at the heinous inequity that it has caused. The Fed has to constantly labor to fend off economic collapse both domestically and internationally. Greed hurts and the greedy are to blame. Rest in peace, old dotty Smithy; I'm sorry you weren't more up on 11th century Chinese "coal" history or perhaps you would have recognized your folly . Your present-day followers are too greedy and blind to see your numerous shortcomings. We are living the nightmare that those misguided, misinterpreted beliefs have fostered. Global Warming should be your epitaph.

Re: The Price of Everything at Amazon

trumpit — Thu, 22 May 2008 20:29:48 -0000

Wouldn't a better, more ethical system be one based on ability to pay? Why does the price of milk have to be the same for me as for Bill Gates? I don't mean to suggest that the price has to be $1,000 per gallon of milk for Mr. Gates (which is nothing for him) and 1 cent or free for the homeless guy on the street. Off the top of my head, say we have three prices: $0.50 for the "poor", $1.00 for the "middle class" and $2.00 for the "rich" Perhaps the weighted average of all purchases would be close to the market price. As I said, something strikes me as morally wrong about a one price fits all system. Now is your chance to insult me, call me names and tell my why I'm wrong (as usual).

Re: Lentil stew for everyone!

trumpit — Fri, 23 May 2008 17:36:16 -0000

The McCain campaign also used the looming Memorial Day weekend, a traditional news black spot, to release his wife's 2006 tax return, which showed she made six million dollars.

-NY Times May 23, 2008

It's nice to make that kind of money while sitting on one's fat ass. Lentil stew is the topic of the day, lol. Tax the rich! The system rewards people who don't work. FIX IT!

Re: Lentil stew for everyone!

trumpit — Sat, 24 May 2008 08:15:06 -0000

William, you are a peasant who WORKED for fifty years. Enjoy the fruits of your LABOR for however much time you have remaining on earth. Cindy McBush inherited a shitload of money and looks in the mirror several times a day to adjust her cowlick. Revoltingly, that will be her main job, too, if her husband, John McBush, should get elected president. You stick it, old man.

Re: Lentil stew for everyone!

trumpit — Sat, 24 May 2008 08:33:40 -0000

Re: House Subcommittee on Televised Posturing

trumpit — Tue, 27 May 2008 07:52:59 -0000

According to a news report, Iran gave $5 billion to Syria to buy advanced weaponry from Russia to be used against Israel in the event of war. If I were a benevolent dictator, I would outlaw the use of gasoline & and other petroleum products. Demand in the U.S. would drop to zero and the price of a barrel of oil would plummet like a lead balloon. Not so easily would Iran be able to sponsor terrorism throughout the Middle East. Domestic oil companies would have to be outlawed as well. They would have to take their evil operations abroad. The goose that lays the golden oil egg must be cooked. The means by which you poor slobs get to work is of no interest to me.

Re: Sweatshops

trumpit — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:57:53 -0000

It's really sickening that a young man with a smiling face and a crew cut can continue to espouse a moribund theory about child labor. Those kids lives are being wasted; they should be in school getting an education; democracy depends on an educated populace. How does it make sense that products produced using child labor are allowed to be sold in this country when we wouldn't allow the same products to be manufactured here under the same illegal, immoral child abusive circumstances? Also, the ridiculous idea that third world countries must make the same mistakes (or worse) as industrialized countries made to become advanced and wealthy is rejected. We should learn from the past and not repeat the horrors of the past. You'll just have to forgo your new Nikes if you can't afford to pay a fair, clean trade price for them. Work a 2nd job if you must; no slacking off; you lazy poor slobs with addled Hayekian fascist brains.

Re: Ideas Matter

trumpit — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 08:42:01 -0000

"For example, my parents taught me, among other things, to resist being envious of other persons' successes."

I find it strange that your mother was concerned about your potential for enviousness. I've found that people who rush to warn others against some normal human emotion are probably looking in the mirror and giving themselves needed advice. Were you more prone to envy as a youth than any other kid? And I find it equally strange that you've have to rekindle her admonition over the last 50 years every time a feeling of envy welled up inside you. Better to remember her for something more uplifting and less moralistic. Since your mother's lesson on the evils of envy stuck with you until now, I'm mildly surprised that you are such a cheerleader for an economic system that is driven to a large extent by greed and envy. What would your mother say? That it's wrong to be resentful and envious of the envious who drive your favorite economic system? If you can't beat them, join them? Have you ever know anyone who only talked about money and material things? They may be a success by pustulate American cultural standards, but they're always a tiresome and tasteless bunch that make for poor company. It used to be the case that the U.S. was the envy of the whole world (so I've been lead to believe). Would you or your mother have come down hard on them for their envy? When an inner city black youth said he wanted to be like Michael Jordan, should he have been smacked down for being unrealistic and envious? When a poor kid dreams of going to Harvard or Yale some day, shouldn't she be let down gently rather than given false encouragement about her chances? The biggest and most imfamous piece of nonsense that kids are mistakenly lead to believe is that the economic system rewards hard work above all else. It doesn't do any such thing. Just ask Cindy McCain and her $6,000,000 annual paycheck for looking in the mirror vainly several times a day. Farm subsidies are a minuscule problem compared to the Cindy McBushes of the world. Until you realize that fact, you are swim upstream trying to convince me about any other economic fact of life.

Re: Silly Proposal

trumpit — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 22:23:08 -0000

If someone or group develops a battery that has the potential of putting the oil companies out of business, what makes you think that the oil companies or OPEC and their mafia henchmen will just stand by and allow this to happen? If the owner of the patent doesn't sell it to an evil oil company he'll find a horse's head in his bed in the morning. Besides Exxon/Mobil bitting the dust, you are looking at the national economies of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, Nigeria, and Russia to name the most prominent ones falling by the waste side. And the Russian mafia or the KGB knows a thing or two about making you an offer you can't refuse.

Re: Situational Ethics

trumpit — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:54:01 -0000

"Pigeons are essentially rats with wings..."

Most rats that I know are of the two-legged variety. "Rata de dos patas" rhymes in Spanish - I heard it in a Paquita del Barrio song.

Re: Situational Ethics

trumpit — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:54:40 -0000

"Pigeons are essentially rats with wings..."

Most rats that I know are of the two-legged variety. "Rata de dos patas" rhymes in Spanish - I heard it in a Paquita del Barrio song.

Re: Situational Ethics

trumpit — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:52:04 -0000

Btw, it's not even close to say that a pigeon is just a rat with wings. A rat is quite intelligent and can learn all sort of things. It's smarter than a mouse...smaller than a house, bigger than a louse. A pigeon is more like a grouse...

Re: Regime Uncertainty

trumpit — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 14:04:28 -0000

I blame the rich, of course. That dick who headed Lehman Brothers walked away with $500,000,000 from 2000-2005 while his company went bankrupt hurting shareholders, employees, etc.

We must tax the rich to pay for this mess and to keep a lid on their nefarious activities. They most certainly fund and support right-wing, pro-greed, reward-failure economists like you guys. SHAME! Greed Capitalism is an evironment destroying, species extinguishing, immoral activitivy that props of 3rd world fascist dictators like that turd in Teheran. What would I replace Greed Capitalism with? A BIG FAT confiscatory tax on those who collect interest for a living, and live the good life on the backs of others. I would take back all their ill-gotten goodies and put them to work filing bankrupcy documents for the government. They caused it; they must pay for it. Sounds fair, doesn't it?

Re: Regime Uncertainty

trumpit — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:06:32 -0000

My preference is to bankrupt the Forbes 400+ rather than bankrupt the remaining 300,000,000 U.S. citizens or the U.S. government. Why do you prefer the latter? Inviolable property rights? Hahaha.

Re: Regime Uncertainty

trumpit — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:26:34 -0000

I think the right-wingers' grand plan is to bankrupt the U.S. government. That would kill Social Security, Medicare, etc., which they've hated from their inception. But then how would the Pentagon get funding? It remindes me of that old bumper stick that said something to the effect: Will the day ever come when the Pentagon has to hold a bake sale, and our schools will get adequate funding? Right, the Pentagon will hold bake sales to get the 4 or 5 hundred billion that they are currently receiving each year. Are the Rethuglicans for real? Why are they not discredited all the time and everywhere? Can I also blame mainstream economists, who must not understand hardworking Main St. very well, for pushing or failing to condemn Bush's tax cuts at a time of 2+ wars. Where was the outcry? Where was the outrage? Disturbing, but true recollection on my part. I was there; I witnessed the disaster in the making.

Re: Regime Uncertainty

trumpit — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:43:27 -0000

I like Troll House cookies with MnM's. You can send me your recipe to my Email. I'll chew you up with every bite. You can vote for McBush and his trollopy-looking wife, Cinderella McBush, if you like. I'll cancel your vote, I'm please to say in a totally trolling way.

Re: Regime Uncertainty

trumpit — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:59:03 -0000

I'm well aware of the obnoxious practice of calling someone you don't understand or that you disagree with a troll. In a fit of anger, I've called someone a troll. Grow up boys and girls! It saves you the mental effort of having to seriously question your own dubious values and views. Keep it up, and you will be banished to censorshipland, under the bridge, with your fellow trolls.

Re: Regime Uncertainty

trumpit — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:10:04 -0000

After your 401-k crashes to worthlessness, you may rethink your support of the Forbes 400, Methinks. When the Social Security checks stop arriving in the mail or by direct deposit is when we, as a nation, will be ripe for another Civil War. Yes, it will be a class/culture war. I hope it doesn't go nuclear. Oh what a great idea for a suspense novel: a nuclear civil war. If only I knew how to write.

Re: Regime Uncertainty

trumpit — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:05:38 -0000

Your ageist remarks aren't worthy of a response from me, but they appalled me so... Because old people are weaker and infirmed in some cases, you feel it is okay to take away there SS check? You simply want to kill most of them off, do you. Are you an SS Nazi type? You sterotype old people in a truely artificial and hateful way; I bet most of them can kick your scrawy ass, cane or no cane. If millions of people, old or otherwise, think they are going to die from starvation or by being out on the street, you are just asking for another 1917-type revolution. The 2nd amendment means that they can go ballistic with powerful guns galore. Many old people know how to shoot a gun straight. Watch out for flying bullets! You might be a necessary target to take down.

Re: Krugman's prize

trumpit — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:51:40 -0000

This is totally disrespectful blather on the day that Krugman wins the big one. Couldn't you wait until tomorrow to trash, and bash him. Show a little common decency on a day of celebration for him and his friends, family, and fans.

Re: Rewriting history

trumpit — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:46:23 -0000

Lehman Bros. ex-CEO Fuld, and many others on Wall St., were quite happy with the Bush-Cheney era deregulations that they lobbied viogorously for that left them, the foxes, in charge of the chicken coop. (This was obvious from his 2003 tax cuts at a time of multiple wars on terrorists and Iraqis.) Fuld walked away w/ approx. $500,000,000 from 2000-2005. His company is in the impounded dog house now. The shameless bums were begging for a bailout while simultaneously drafting checks for bonuses and golden parachutes. Who got left holding the bag? Shareholders, bondholders, employees, the taxpayers, etc. Fuld, Cheney, and Bush, etc. are all laughing their heads off all the way to the bank. Let's loot America! It's so much fun. Red, white, and blue, I love and pay lip service to you. Who cares about history's judgment? We'll all be dead by then, Bush is famously said to have told Carl Bernstein.

No minimum wage, you say, according to some worn out economic theory, yet pay the Forturne 500 CEO's $100,000,000 per annum on average in meritorious "compensation" until the whole stinking mess, comes crashing down like a house of cards, requiring the working stiffs of this country, who take home a "paycheck" in deflated U.S. dollars and are compelled by the low price to buy "Made in Communist China" cheap junk, and tainted produce, such as milk, candy, & dog food, to bailout the whole disgusting mess.

The extension of the Republican conceived and implemented nightmare must be halted. McBush must not win. People who committed white-collar crimes must do hard time. Throw away the keys and the eliminate the country club prisons. I believe in deterrence. Don't you?

Re: Rewriting history

trumpit — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:28:52 -0000

The 2-party system has been a fact of life for most of U.S. history. but I don't buy the belief that both parties are equally bad. The Republican party is downright evil in my humble opinion. Johnson's war on poverty was working until the Republican's dismantled it. Cowboy Reagan, was truly a joke, who could have destroyed the country and world in a nuclear holocaust. Lucky sane Gorby came along in the nick time. You saw the hard time that Pres. Clinton was given every step of the way even though he started acting much like a Republican with welfare "reform" etc. The impeachment process was a totally unpatriotic partisan process, in case you forgot, putting the country through an unnecessary ordeal. Perhaps with a recession/depression in our midst, Obama will have a honeymoon to enact legislation to reverse some of Bush's pro-rich garbage. Let's hope so for the country's sake.

Re: Rewriting history

trumpit — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 01:03:59 -0000

"The poor virtuous Democrats trying only to do Good for the Country, while the Evil Republicans kept standing in the way, & undoing all the Good."

I mostly agree with that, although I'd remove the word poor. There are plenty of rich Democrats. Both parties are unduly influence by lobbyists. Ironically, McCain tried to do something about that with McCain-Feingold, which of course the Republicans are dismantling piece by piece by the stooges that they packed onto the Supreme Ct.

Re: Rewriting history

trumpit — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 01:14:13 -0000

"Yes, what an ordeal that impeachment process was! I barely slept! Yes, I totally forgot how traumatic that was."

Maybe, the government could have spent more time dealing with the terrorist threats, that Condie Rice and Bush all but ignored when they came to power, instead of dealing with a blow job cover-up. Maybe, 9/11 could have been prevented. Just maybe. I guess you got your jollies watching Bill Clinton squirm. I'm glad you got off, so some perverse good came from the show trial.

Re: Rewriting history

trumpit — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 02:17:39 -0000

"I'd enjoy Bush's impeachment, too, if your Democrats weren't a bunch of useless power-worshipers."

I'll drink to that! (I'd prefer the word "spineless" to "worthless" though.) I'm not quite so cynical as you are.

Re: Rewriting history

trumpit — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 02:42:12 -0000

I believe that life is tenuous, and the world my come to end as we know it, even if Obama wins in November. Suppose the Iranians fully outfit their long-range missles with nuclear warheads, and in an act of madness, Hitler style, decide to wipe out Israel. I'll stop predicting right there because that scenario will interfere in the worst way with blossoming flowers, singing birds, sunny days, and smiling children. Can we hope that doesn't happen and that Obama has a successful presidency should he happen to win? Why wouldn't you want him to succeed? Do your politican view trump your good will, and patriotism as an American? Please don't booby trap and sabotage a Obama presidency. I don't think you are a terrorist or an assasin. We've had enough of those in recent history. Also, a little hope helps one get through the rough times. Hope is better than despair. Life's hard enough without going to pieces. I have to go to bed, so good night.

Re: Rewriting history

trumpit — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:26:05 -0000

I hope you fail in everything you attempt, vidyohs. Failure is your middle name, anyway.

Re: Covering All Possibilities, From A to B

trumpit — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:21:25 -0000

That may be your worst analogy ever. Here in L.A., we have a health dept. rating placed on the windows of restaurants that goes from A to C to a "you don't want to eat here" low number. I like the rating system and the health dept. I don't want to get sick and die from the food I eat. I feel the same way about self-policing of Wall St. Why can't the greedy pigs on Wall St. all die from food poisoning? That would be nice.

Re: Covering All Possibilities, From A to B

trumpit — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:15:05 -0000

By the way, it is not just mean, idle, wishful thinking, that a group of CEO's die from food poisoning. They could all be eating at the same fancy restaurant, discussing how they can get an even fatter "compensation" package, ordering the same tainted filet mignon, and all get sick and subsequently die. The bad meat may have orginated from factory farming practices that the government can't properly police or that Agri-business has successfully lobbied against. Canada had a recent recall/incident of deadly beef killing people. Or the meat may have been poisoned by improper food handling at the gourmet, 5-star restaurant that the Wall St. titans were lunching at. In any case, the best health care that money can buy, may not be able to save them. I'm sorry if I wouldn't feel sorry for them. They can have a lovely burial with all the finest headstones, a buffet for the mourners, etc.

Re: Two Can Play This Game

trumpit — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:03:55 -0000

I think most are blaming underregulated, greed-driven capitalism. Lawrence Sumners said that he doesn't like to attribute negative consequence of capitalism to greed. "Greed is good!" to quote Ivan Boesky. Sumners must never have met failure Richard "$500,000,000" Fuld or criminal Boesky. I believe I would have done a better job than fuld for a mere $100,000 per year. His company went broke, so I'm probably right. He gets to keep all the money he "earned" according to the law. The law is an ass. The rich and powerful must be dispossessed and defeated. The meek, moderate and thrifty shall inherit the earth and treat it & others fairly and with respect. The alternative is more smoking of hundred dollar bills while others starve. What a sick and dysfunctional world you promote. I object!

Re: A T-Shirt or something, please

trumpit — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:22:47 -0000

Bush was all about his friends making (more)millions, and following the orders of his higher ups, including Cheney, to lower their taxes, privatize social security and the war in Iraq, putting a save-marriage-from-the-homos amendment in the Constitution, and leaving a reverse Teddy Roosevelt legacy of turning over the environmentally sensitive national lands to developers to make a quick profit. The faster you can make your millions and retire to Tuscany, or to southern France to sip wine the better. Because all can agree with Lord Keynes that in the long run we're all dead.

Re: Wintertime Temperatures Cold at the North Pole

trumpit — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:20:36 -0000

"The pigs in Washington are creatures of socialist enculturation, no more, no less."

After 8 years of what many consider a fascist regime in Washington, his/her comment is outrageous and absurd.

I find Vidyohs to be the dumbest, most obnoxious commenter. He or she is a broken record calling everybody in government and whom he doesn't understand or agree with "a socialist pig" or worse. That's a variation on 'capitalist pig' which is the usual dipiction of those that clamour at the trough via lobbyists or through outrageous executive pay feeding bins.

Vidyohs is over the top in insults/ad hominems, and he casts a pall over the comments section here at the Cafe. I would cast him/her adrift, if I could, by cutting the tether to this blog. Get your own boorish blog of utter opacity, indeed!

Re: On Peter Morici On the Trade Deficit

trumpit — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:41:52 -0000

"instead it reflects too much irresponsible spending by the same agency - Uncle Sam"

Can you name one instance of irresponsible spending by Uncle Sam? My elderly mother still uses that trick on me by saying I waste my money on junk. She, on the other hand, will go to her grave a rich lady. She might have done some good with her money during her lifetime, rather than sock it away for a thousand rainy days. She even might have given me some money to buy more junk. Junk makes me happy.

Re: No Saviors

trumpit — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 13:58:46 -0000

I wished Obama a successful presidency, and I was torn asunder by a couple of your commenters. I didn't understand the hostility, just as I agree with you that idol worship stinks. I had a political science professor, around the time Reagan was elected prez the 1st time, who explained Hitlerism by saying that people wanted a big father to look after them. Then, he spoke glowingly about how the coming Reagan administration was going to be a new era of great things - a shining beacon on the hill, I guess. That's why I wanted Hillary for president. We might as well have a Big Mother in the Whitehouse for a change. That was just a joke.

Re: Paulson's failure

trumpit — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 19:15:25 -0000

I'm sick of the rich and powerful getting handouts, bailouts, and welfare from Uncle Sam. Any 2nd grader who's learned long division can tell you that 1 trillion dollars divided among 300,000,000 people (the current U.S. census figure) is $3,333.00. Since the top 100,000,000 people don't need the money, my check alone should come to $5,000. My hardworking neighbors who have 3 kids should receive a check for $25,000 forthwith. GM should be liquidated and auctioned off lot, stock, and barrel. I haven't forgotten what GM pulled in Poletown to destroy a working class community. Goodbye, good luck and good riddance. I'll turn off the lights for you, and show you the door. Don't let it hit you in the ass on the way out.

Re: Paulson's failure

trumpit — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 21:21:56 -0000

Yes, I remember that the Rethuglicans "overhauled" the bankrupcy laws to make it virtual impossible to ever get a fresh start in life, and get out from under a mountain of debt, until you're good and dead. That was done at the behest of the credit card companies. They wanted their pound of flesh. So this is some ironic injustice that the companies that were making the biggest loans now want (and are getting) a bailout to save them from bankruptcy. I say it again: Let them fail. At least by being a corporation, their personal assests aren't at risk, just the shareholders' investment. The poor schmuck with a mountain of credit card debt has no place to go anymore; at least bring back the poor house.

Re: Markets to Americans Are Like Water to a Fish

trumpit — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 08:07:05 -0000

I agree that it would be nice if "redistribution" were unnecessary. But I see no sign that the Walton family's $100,000,000,000+++ fortune is shrinking by voluntary charitable contributions on their part. On the contrary, their fortune will likely continue to grow, perhaps exponentially as it has done in the past, even during the current bad economic times.

It is as plain as the nose on your face that the redistributionists have failed in spades! Scrooge McDuck must therefore be throttled, turned upside down, and shaken ever more vigorously until all the change comes flying out of his pockets. This should be the "change" that Obama promised us. Happy Thanksgiving to all, except to those that cater and pander to the rich; a pumpkin pie a la mode tossed in their face is what they deserve today.

Re: No New New Deal

trumpit — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:08:10 -0000

Bob Higgs equates environmentalists with communists, real or imagined, during the long cold war with the Soviets. You can hear the pathetic academic yourself on Youtube. The proper equivalence is that Higgs is an environmental McCarthyite of the present day.

You've continenced enough death and destruction through worldwide environmental damage by filthy, unconscionable multinational corporations, Dr. Higgs. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

Re: No New New Deal

trumpit — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:15:08 -0000

"Countenanced" is the correct spelling.

Re: Humility

trumpit — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:49:28 -0000

"we find that both increases in taxes and increases in government spending have a strong negative effect on private investment spending."

As usual, this is meaningless, at least to me. Increase in taxes on whom, the rich or the poor? Does government spending include government investment? If "private investment spending" is already very low, then what is the relevance of a "strong negative effect" on it? Are the authors using .and. in the logic sense when they state that both taxes and government spending are being increased? If you're going to bash Keynes, then you have to do a better job than that.

Re: Humility

trumpit — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 07:54:16 -0000

Does the fact that if you tax people more who have excess income to invest, that they will invest less of that excess income because they have less money to invest require a study?

Re: Beware Reliance

trumpit — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:38:58 -0000

"In a free society prosperity is achieved by persons who take initiative for themselves – persons who do not sit around, brandishing excuses, waiting for their needs to be "addressed" by Great Leaders."

It's not funny that you conveniently forget the vast quantity of wealth that is tranferred by inheritence. This creates dynasties of people who sit around, brandishing their millions and billions, owning more and more, all for them and feces in your face if you dare say to them "enough is enough already!" Their needs are meet by their multiplicity of Mercedes, Ferraris, Gucci handbags, and Harry Winston diamonds & rubies, not to mention the many chic addresses on their dozen or so mansions, chalets, and estates located in every European capital, Honolulu, and Aspen. Great leaders need to take the initiative by doing away with the idol rich and life of Riley. Put them to work shoveling coal in the snow at part of the new works programs soon to be proposed by President-elect Obama. They can keep their Gucci boots on as far as I'm concerned. By all means give them a gold-plated shovel for Christmas as part of the bail/bale out.

Re: Beware Reliance

trumpit — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:08:28 -0000

"She noted that clients started 'going downhill' after qualifying for SSI and receiving payments."

It's nice to know that blind people are skiing at Aspen, Colorado ski resorts. I didn't know that seeing-eye dogs were allowed on the lifts. I learn something new everyday. Truthfully though, there ought to be a way to push a blind person down the hill without breaking every bone in his body. They deserve the outdoor thrill of skiing just like the Kennedys' or bushes' do. An entrepreneur should come up with something to make a wet dream a reality. Sonny Bono and a member of the Kennedy Clan skied into a tree, killing themselves in the process. They had the advantage of good eyesight if not good foresight. Skiing can be dangerous, so watch those slippery slopes, folks!

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 19:33:33 -0000

Okay, so no one asked, but you didn't bring up the fact that you have solid job security by virtue of tenure, which no doubt is due to your membership in a teacher's union. Even President Bush, thankfully, doesn't have a lock on his job like you do. The ability to fire someone is a power not to be abused because it goes to the very core of one's ability to survive in an indifferent world. Perhaps academia and your students would be better off if unions and tenure didn't exist for professors, but I doubt it. Why wouldn't Dr. Boudreaux seek out a lucrative position as a scummy CEO of a evil corporation or work on Wall St. advising the same overpaid bunch of scoundrels looking to make a fast buck without having to work hard? In spite of his being a nice guy, he might succumb to the temptation of promises of high pay if he had no job security. He might not even have any time left to pen this blog and write frequent letters to the editors railing against the evils of unions, tenure, the minimum wage, etc. and singing the virtues of ease of firing at-will employees at Christmas time due to poor toy sales. Crippled Tiny Tim may even have to go to bed hungry and without a new crutch if his dad gets canned by old, mean Mr. Scrooge. Who will pay for Tim's funeral? Who'll be allowed the day off so they can attend it? Who will bring flowers and shed a tear?

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 05:04:18 -0000

You live a sheltered life behind a dim computer screen, cpurick. You are obviously a male, because females normally have a deeper understanding of life and what getting laid off means to putting food on the table for their family. Are you really "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap incognito? If you are, have yourself a merry little x-mas NOT. You pathetic, egotistical downsizer, loser you!

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 05:06:22 -0000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_J._Dunlap

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 06:32:21 -0000

You live a sheltered life behind a dim computer screen, LowcountryJoe. You are obviously a juvenile male, around 15 years old, because females normally have a deeper understanding of life and what getting laid off means to putting food on the table for their family. Are you really "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap incognito? If you are, have yourself a merry little x-mas NOT. You pathetic, egotistical downsizer, loser you!

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 06:52:59 -0000

Apparently cpurick and LowcountryJoe have little understanding of the abuse that takes place in the workplace that can lead lead to abusive firing of employees in retaliation. They need to be quickly disabused of that dangerous and idiotic notion. I'll do my best to enlighten and inform them.

"Unlawful harassment is a form of discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other federal authority."

"Harassment that results in a tangible employment action occurs when a management official’s harassing conduct results in some significant change in an employee’s employment status (e.g., hiring, firing, promotion, failure to promote, demotion, formal discipline, such as suspension, undesirable reassignment, or a significant change in benefits, a compensation decision, or a work assignment). Only individuals with supervisory or managerial responsibility can commit this type of harassment."

http://www.fcc.gov/owd/understanding-harassment.html

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 07:38:21 -0000

"...its economic life drained by non-productive and overpaid workers."

That's a normative opinion of yours that requires facts to back it up. Maybe, you are overpaid as well. Let ME decide. Yes, you are, so you're laid off as of now.

My understanding is that the health insurance provided to union workers is one of the problems that GM faces. A single-payer healthcare plan enacted during Obama's first term will go a long way to address this part of the problem.

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 07:53:17 -0000

You live a sheltered life behind a dim computer screen, cpurick. You are obviously a brainwashed, juvenile male, around 15 years old, because females normally have a deeper understanding of life and what getting laid off means to putting food on the table for their family. Are you really "Chainsaw" Al Dunlap incognito? If you are, have yourself a merry little x-mas NOT. You pathetic, egotistical downsizer, loser you!

Re: On Layoffs

trumpit — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 21:30:15 -0000

http://news.aol.com/article/laid-off-workers-occupy-chicago-factory/269873

And when they won't go quietly...

Whip them into submission?

Platitudes is what you so-called libertarians spout, not an original bone in your body. It's Monday, so it's back to work for the lot of you - chaining yourself to your desk. Or else you too may be looking for work on Tuesday. Slaves everyone of you! And you spent your lives making someone else rich. Haha!

Re: Another charming excerpt

trumpit — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:38:08 -0000

Greed is part of human nature; ask any economist, she'll confirm it. The salaries of public officials should be quintupled at the very least. The public wants elected officials to act in her interest over that of special interests, so the public should do the bribing by paying a low "sports figure" salary to these guys and gals who are our governmental leaders. They will still seem poor compared to what the creatures on Wall St. are making. That is where we should be focusing much of our attention, toward cleaning up the greedy mess in the CEO boardrooms and penthouses. That is far more sleazy and costly to society than is selling a senate seat. Lobbying, of course, should be made illegal right away, too.

Re: Another charming excerpt

trumpit — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 13:30:15 -0000

If you want a better class of politician then your going to have to pay her more. Most of you guys and gals think that CEO's deserve their outrageous pay. That it's an arm-lengths transaction strickly on the up and up. So why do you object to high pay for politicians? Don't you want the creme de la creme for your senator or congresswoman? Would you seek out a brain surgeon who was making minimum wage? Do you object to uneducated jocks making millions of dollars as professional football players. Do you begrudge recording artists raking in millions of dollars from record sales and endorsements? Why don't you want politicians to be well paid. They're working for YOU. Your hatred for politicians is unfounded and unwarranted. You guys and gals only like well paid private sector people, and hate the pols. Then you deserve the crappy, venal representives that you've been getting. Stop your complaining!

Re: Another charming excerpt

trumpit — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:01:30 -0000

"Maybe we should elect businessmen who have demonstrated their competence at successfully running a business."

That happens to be the reality that we live with now, and I object to it and the concept. Why is Mitt Romney qualified to be president because he was born rich? Why does that ego-tripper want to be president? The answer is contained within the question. The senate is a millionaires club, and I find that very distasteful. Ordinary, educated people without vast fortunes deserve to be able to run for office. This strikes me a good case for campaign finance reform. We must end the oligarchy. If you're successful in business what are your motive for becoming a politician? EGO! POWER! And if your sucessful business ventures no longer require you to be at the helm, then your company should be nationalized and sold off to people who will take a concerned interest in it. That would be better for growing the economy. I think I've made a cogent case to EAT THE RICH. Their money is funkily fungible. And so are they: funky, and fungible.

Re: Another charming excerpt

trumpit — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 13:42:38 -0000

First of all Romney was given a multi-million dollar head start; it helps a lot to have seed money. Second, what one truly earns is a matter of opinion. If I put a dollar in the bank and receive a nickel in return, did I earn it in any real sense? If I buy a house and it double in value over a 5-year period, in what sense did I earn the capital gain? If I buy the winning lottery ticket and become an instant millionaire, did I earn it because I lucked out? Really, I'd like to read your philosophy paper on what it means for Romney to have "earned his money." You can e-mail it to me a trumpit@aol.com to save on the paper and ink. I'm sure he put in long hours just like the minimum wage workers who labor under hot lights and steam. They make my tacos for me, so I'm partial them.

Re: Another charming excerpt

trumpit — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 18:52:09 -0000

You don't think very well, Methinks. Romney INHERITED a large fortune and didn't earn it. A lot of people EARN their money by getting a minimum wage salary. Tax the rich dude and lay off the poor people. Why don't you get it? Because you're a greedy dude, who comes on this blog and pretends to be a female. Woman are not generally violent and anger like you are. Who are you kidding? FAKER! I want to see the DNA results. Go on the Springer show and pull your pants down!

Re: Another charming excerpt

trumpit — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 18:55:17 -0000

Because someone risks losing an assets doesn't mean they deserve or earned a damn thing? I risk my life every time I cross the street. Should someone pay me for it?

Re: Another charming excerpt

trumpit — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:01:40 -0000

Methinks,

How do you treat your employees as LIFO or FIFO. To you, they are just an inventory item. You are Mr. Scrooge and Mr. Grinch all rolled into one. That's right, MISTER. You don't fool me one bit. I feel sorry for your employees; always in fear of losing their job if they don't jump as high as tell them to. I hope you get whats coming to you: a walloping tax increase by Obama, to pay to heal the sick society that people like you create.

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Sun, 14 Dec 2008 12:57:22 -0000

It seems a bit antediluvian, feudalistic, and even sociopathic to be talking about tax evasion as a good thing in this new Depression age created by the greed of the mega-rich and their political lackeys. "Bailout" is the operative word of this new economic era of failed predatory, monopolistic corporations that are too big and powerful to be allowed to fail. A trillion dollars sucked out of the coffers of the American working stiffs and their children and grandchildren is the topic du jour. Trickle-down advocates like that dude in a unworthy suit and tie should be forced to get a real job at McDonalds and get his hands dirty in a clean and decent sense. His degrees are not worth the paper they are written on. His facts and data are contrived to prove his theory of pandering to the rich. He reminds me of Adolf Eichmann. Okay so that's a poor comparison, but Why did an evil Nazi's name pop into my head just now?

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 07:06:48 -0000

Joseph Stiglitz on the evils of tax haven and bank secrecy, and civil society:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvpRn5pvglY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_a5FIhtZvw
</p>

No, you're the uncivil idiot, Nick. Tax havens are evil and if you support them, you are an evil like fascist Bush. You probably are anyway.

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 09:47:24 -0000

You are a lazy stooge for the wealthy class Sam Grove. You need to get a job and pay your taxes. Obvious you have too much time on your hands to had to make every insulting comment that pops into your empty head. Your political thinking is as shallow and fetid as a puddle in a gutter.

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 09:52:33 -0000

Btw, I hate the name Sam. Why don't you change it while your looking for the minimum wage job that you qualify for.

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 09:57:53 -0000

Btw, it's not so easy to change your name as you think. The government frown on it because people change their name to avoid their debts, evade taxes, hide from the police, assume other identity to swindle them, etc. But in your case, with a dull, boring, old-fashioned name like Sam, the judge will understand why you want to get out from under an oppressive name like that. Change it to Gertrude or Adolf and you'll be fine. Now off to Mcdonalds for that job interview!

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:19:49 -0000

It's the policies of Bush and Cheney that are making most people poor or poorer that should be mocked. Everything you and I buy for Christmas was likely made in China or somewhere other than the U.S. So the only jobs left for the uneducated class are at McDonalds or some other kind of low paying job. I do feel sorry for them. Happy Holidays!

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:27:16 -0000

Joseph Stiglitz on the evils of tax havens and bank secrecy, and the corruption of civil society:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvpRn5pvglY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_a5FIhtZvw
</p>

You won't get far trying to dissect my contentions, Ken. The truth is out there; take your brainwashed blinders off. I once was conservative like you tools are; but I opened my eyes finally to what was going on. It depends on how old you are, Ken, on whether there is any hope for you. I seriously doubt it from the blather that you spew so incessantly. Take no comfort in the fact that you have company around here. You are known by the company you keep.

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:39:52 -0000

Stiglitz is the most cited economist in the world, as of June 2008. - Wikipedia

Re: A Haven of Sanity

trumpit — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:54:29 -0000

How's that zimmer frame army shaping up, commander? Got all your oldies armed yet so they can storm the tax havens?-Metried2thinkbutithurt2much.

I expected nothing less than an ageist comment from you. U2 will grow old one day if you are lucky and the world isn't blown up in a nuclear war. You may even zimmer around in a turbojet walker. All the money that you hoarded over the years won't be enough to save you from turning into dust to be blown over a warming planet. All the taxes that you evaded will be a distant memory except in the thick police file that made up your worthless and forgettable life.

Re: Video challenge

trumpit — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:29:21 -0000

OPEC Agrees to Another Cut in Production to drive up the price.

Must we be held hostage by the most tyranical countries in the world? Oil must be made obsolete. We must bite the hand that feeds us oil and controls us and drains our financial resources by cartelized fiat. Death to billionaire sheiks and their billionaire accomplises that only know how to take out of the system for unbridled greed. How will the change come about? - by violent, SPONTANEOUS, upheaval or by peaceful drastic means. Is it up to youtube or you too?

Re: Video challenge

trumpit — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 08:45:14 -0000

Yes, I'm too feeble-minded, Marcus. Takes one to know one. Thanks for adding something gracious and charming to the discussion. Strange that your bosses keep you from watching youtube at work, yet they let you pollute the internet in other more vicious ways. I'll have to have a talk with them about their policies and you. Where do you work and loaf? I have to put a halt to feebleminedness wherever it rears its ugly head.

Re: Keynesianism?

trumpit — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 23:30:09 -0000

I don't believe in Keynesian theory either. The government is in massive debt already. Let's arrange to pay that off first. Let's kindly ask Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, & the Walton family to turn over all their loot to salvage a government and country in dire economic staits. It really is obnoxious that Gates and Buffet want to spend millions in Africa when there is so much need right here in America where they made their billions. Charity begins at home. What if in the unlikely event they refuse to do their patriot duty to their country? They should gently be parted from their money, so no one gets hurt. Once upon a time my sister had her bank account emptied by the IRS without her explicit consent because they said she owed them back taxes. She was outraged and appalled, but wasn't imprisioned or physically harmed. Life goes on. It Gates and Buffett are such talented and smart people as most people think, they'll have little trouble making another billion in no time. Let see if they can do it. More power to them if they can. Keynsianism seems like a risky proposition to me and of questionable morality because posterity will likely be saddled with even more debt. Relieving billionaires of their billions is quite moral because they should never have been allowed to accumulate such ridiculous wealth in the first place. If the rich don't want to play Santa Claus for Xmas, then it is up to the people to play Robbin Hood.

Re: Tranquilizing the Stimulators

trumpit — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:05:11 -0000

"Lunch" can be free if the conditions are right. If I own the pasture, the cows and the farm, I can have my workers (slaves) milk the cow and give me a glass of milk. My employees get paid in milk, so they don't starve. What the hell did I do to get the milk other than own the source. So we can clearly see that private property and ownership leads to a "free lunch." This, of course, is prime reason the private property must be restricted and restrained, so the rich don't get too rich and get everything for free at others' expense.

Another example: When I graduated from college, I told my mother I needed to move back home until I found a job. She told me that I needed to pay her some rent, basically changing the line/lie from "no free lunch" to "no free rent." But I said, "You don't pay rent either." "But I OWN the property!" she snorted. She owned, outright, a triplex that made money for her. You can see how this idea of OWNERSHIP creates a pigish sense of entitlement to free lunches and free rent to such an extent that my own mother felt justified in socking it to me. This is the sick world that you libertarians love and promote. Free lunch for me, and slavery for you. What an immoral joke!

Re: Tranquilizing the Stimulators

trumpit — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:38:27 -0000

You are a nasty person, Martian Broke who has too much free time to waste insulting people. YOU work in a coal mine, you deadbeat. Who will pay for your black lung to go with your black personality? No one, I hope.

Re: Tranquilizing the Stimulators

trumpit — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 10:07:21 -0000

If there were a job for everyone who wanted one, there wouldn't be this talk about a stimulus. They're all "deadbeats" in Martian Broke's mind. I wonder what the unemployed and recently laid off would call Martian. From another planet?

Re: Who's the Partisan Hack?

trumpit — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:30:18 -0000

"Any so-called stimulus program is a ruse."

Prof. Wagner

"Ethics-free Republican hacks" may be an exaggeration and an unfair characterization. I'll take Don's word for it with regard to Dr. Wagner. But to call the proposed stimulus program a "ruse" is to suggest malfeasance and a lack of ethics on the part of the promoters of the coming federal government spending package. That's an exaggeration and an unfair characterization, too. A ruse is what the Bush administration did to justify the U.S. attack on and occupation of Iraq. It is better for an academic to stick to her guns and her facts rather than engage in character assasination and to question people's motives. That goes for Profs. Delong and Wagner, as well.

Re: Not one. Not two. Not 1.6. 1.57

trumpit — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 07:50:37 -0000

The government doesn't have to fund a stimulus. The billionaires can do it, if they were so inclined, and if they got off their collective duffs. But instead, Bill Gates goes off to bridge tournaments and meets with the caddies and kiddies to deface the currency by signing one dollar bills as souvenirs for the brats to frame and put on their wall to forever be in awe of monopolist Gates. Assuming the teenagers don't spend the dollar, about $50 was taken out of circulation by Mr. Gates' pompous generosity. This is no way to conquer an economic collapse, only to boost an already overblown ego.

Re: Winning the debate

trumpit — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 06:57:55 -0000

Major reductions in CO2 are not worth my money; I'd rather spend my money on a winter vacation in the Bahamas.

I believe in self-sacrifice when the self isn't me, or the rich, is so typical of libertarians. What condition we leave the world in for posterity is the world they will get. The onus is on us, the people who are spewing massive quantities of pollutants into the atmosphere, to show that future generations won't pay too high a price. What we pay now to reduce or eliminate the problem is only half the question. Yes, our quality of life may be reduced to clean up the mess that previous generations have left for us. So, do you think it is right to continue the same path of selfishness? The word selfishness keeps coming up as a key component of libertarian theory. That's why I think the theory is misguided from an ethical point of view.

Re: Winning the debate

trumpit — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:11:24 -0000

There are some foul Libertarians who pollute the internet and this blog as well as the environment. How can we reduce their noxious emissions? By confronting their egotism, arrogance, bad ethics, and ignorance at every turn. Only the light of day will defeat them, if not, their shadow of darkness will blanket and doom us.

Re: Winning the debate

trumpit — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:40:08 -0000

"Libertarians don't nominate others to the sacrificial slaughter house."

Your self-serving beliefs in doing nothing to protect the planet will cause repeated Katrinas, dustbowls, famines, (skin) cancers, deaths, etc., etc. That's tantamount to being an accomplice to murder in my book. But you don't mind, so long as you can drive your gas-guzzling Humvee, Arnold.

Re: Winning the debate

trumpit — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:48:53 -0000

Let's not fail to mention the melting polar ice caps. They, and the polar bears and penguins, deserve an uproarious shout-out.

Re: Winning the debate

trumpit — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:57:57 -0000

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/world/

europe/15naess.html?ref=obituaries

Deep ecology's central tenet is the belief that all living beings have their own value and therefore, as Mr. Naess once put it, “need protection against the destruction of billions of humans.”

Re: Today's Economy in Perspective

trumpit — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 07:52:00 -0000

You really know how to lie with statistics, Michael Smith. I bet you listen to Rush Limbaugh, too. After 8 horrid years of Bush and Greenspan, you have a lot of gall.

Re: Today's Economy in Perspective

trumpit — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:00:20 -0000

Steve Chapman puts things in historical perspective. That a laugh. He uses ONE statistic, an emploment number comparison, now and then, to predict our rosy economic future. More gall and inanity from the Right.

Re: Today's Economy in Perspective

trumpit — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 16:58:26 -0000

"The top 1% of income earners pay 39% of all income taxes, up from 37% when Bush took office."

Statistics are curious things and must be handled with care. How do you know that 39% is a lot? Perhaps they ought to be paying 100% of the income taxes and get a tax increase to boot. It depends on how much they are making and how much they already own. And what about the top 2%, 3%, etc.? Maybe they should all be paying a lot more. How do you know what's enough and fair? The people should decide by voting, but they don't really run the government, the rich and corporate America does. Most of their income doesn't require them to lift a finger, except for the middle finger for you and me. Under Bush, you can rest assured they had it real good. They got a big tax break in the midst of multiple wars at home and around the world. All the rest of us got was a collapsing economy at home and abroad. Soyonara, Adios, Arrividerci, Au Revoir, Scram, Out of Here, Bad Mr. Bush, and company.

Re: Today's Economy in Perspective

trumpit — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 21:07:36 -0000

Mezzanine,

I also think the rich should be waterboarded at Guantanamo to teach them some humility. I think you could benefit from the same treatment.

Re: An Inauguration Day Thought

trumpit — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:17:38 -0000

Look up Joseph Schumpeter on Wikipedia if you want to know where we are headed. It ain't smaller government, folks. It's just a matter of who the big government works for. Under Bush it was the rich and his friends, and look what happened to the rest of us. Government needs to be big budgeted to tackle all the problems that the free market creates from pollution to concentration of wealth. And let's not forget the Pentagon's war machine. The death and destruction of war is supposed to be a public good. Ask the children of Gaza how they feel about that.

Re: The Declaration of Dependence

trumpit — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:52:48 -0000

I have no problem with small government if that is what the people want. I just want the rich to pay for it no matter what size it is. To think that the rich are protected by the police who don't make a particularly good salary and risk their lives every day is absurd. To think that their enormous quantity of property is protected by a miltary whose members make a junky salary and may lose a limb or worse is outrageous. I want Social Security revamped so that the rich pay for it all and make it solvent into the foreseeable future. I don't want to make the rich poor just less rich. There's enough fat on Oprah's billionaire thighs to see her through both a famine and a Russian winter. She can cough up her last meal and give it to the needy without doing herself any visible harm. Her self-respect may grow as her over-stuffed wallet shrinks. In honor of Oprah's chubby hips and our dipping into her over-sized fortune, we can call my economic recovery plan Lipo-hippo-dippo-robo-cop-a-lot-2-pay-for-what-not. It can become our national jingle to replace the Pledge of Allegiance.

Re: The Declaration of Dependence

trumpit — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:02:09 -0000

I forgot to properly add "HARPO" to the ditty, in honor of Oprah's production company. Please add that to the new and improved pledge.

Re: Credit Is Too Tight, Except When It's Too Loose

trumpit — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:57:57 -0000

I don't understand how the Chinese government can do XY&Z with regard to the credit market. The billions or trillions in U.S. dollars from the trade imbalance is held (mostly) in private hands is it not? Are the banks in China government controlled? I also don't understand how they can keep their currency artifically low, thus subsiding their industries. Can an intelligent person explain what's going on to me?

Re: Credit Is Too Tight, Except When It's Too Loose

trumpit — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:23:22 -0000

"Strumpit (sorry), communist governments print money (and kill people) at will, so they pretty much can buy whatever they want, at the artificial cost of paying for it in their currency."

I said I wanted an intelligent explanation not a dumbass punk one. And you Libertarian want "free trade" with a bunch of killers on unfair terms. As long as sweatshop is involved in the manufacture of the goods, you guys love it, so you can wear cheap tennis shoes. Get a decent paying job, so you can afford Italian lofers. Oh, you can't find one? Move to China and work in sweatshop then. McDonald's doesnt' hire nasty political hacks and rabblerousers. Their BigMacs are handled with clean hands (health dept. standards). And you don't qualify from picking your nose while playing on your big brother's computer.

Re: Credit Is Too Tight, Except When It's Too Loose

trumpit — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:42:32 -0000

Btw, I just bought a new stainless steel refrigerator manufactured in Mexico. We have to support NAFTA and our neighbors to the south. A refrigerator made in Canada would be too costly to manufacture, on par with the U.S. If I thought it was made in sweatshop, with people losing their fingers and other bad things, I would rather have paid more for a U.S. or Canadian made fridge. I could have paid to fix my old fridge but at my age and after getting 30+ years out of my old refrigerator, I thought I'd treat myself to a new one. I did see a refrigerator that was 'assembled' in the U.S., made from parts from parts unknown. We no longer make stuff in this country, we just join the pieces together. That's the new economy for you.

Re: Credit Is Too Tight, Except When It's Too Loose

trumpit — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:48:40 -0000

My old refrigerator was probably made in the U.S. from unionized labor. We, in this country, used to make really good stuff. Those were our glory days.

Re: Credit Is Too Tight, Except When It's Too Loose

trumpit — Fri, 23 Jan 2009 20:57:09 -0000

Italian loafers for a bunch of loafers. How apt. Lol.

Re: Credit Is Too Tight, Except When It's Too Loose

trumpit — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:01:46 -0000

I don't think the Chinese government is stupid. Why would they shoot themselves in the foot? By creating a situation where their goods for export are artificially cheap they drive the competition out of business and they end up with a monopoly. Then they can charge more than if competition existed. If this is not the reason they manipulate their currency, then please tell me what it is? They don't love us, they love our money.

Re: Business as usual

trumpit — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:43:05 -0000

Most agree that Paulson is unintelligent, so why is he so rich and why was he appointed by Bush to be Sec. of the Treasury? I object to his riches and I want him to object to it too by giving most of his fortune to the Rainforest Action Network. He can do some good, and redeem himself, by making contributions to the "lungs of the planet" instead of sitting on toilets made of gold. The values of rich people are frequently dubious. They'd rather spend their wealth on status symbols like Ferraris and Rolexes. The fact that the Amazon jungle is being clearcut and turned into a pile of crap is of no concern to them. I have a big problem with that kind of selfish indifference. Rome burned while Nero fiddled. What the rich are doing to this planet is no different.

Re: Business as usual

trumpit — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:45:21 -0000

"Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, a 32-year veteran of investment firm Goldman Sachs, had an estimated net worth of more than $700 million when he joined the Bush administration in 2006.

To obey conflict of interest rules, Paulson agreed to sell more than 3.2 million shares of stock in Goldman Sachs that were valued at more than $480 million in the summer of 2006."

Re: Business as usual

trumpit — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:13:06 -0000

What's a "Henry Paulson"? Is he related to the late comedian Pat Paulson? And what's a "Goldman Sachs"? Do they really have Sacks of gold men there? Just askin' is all.

Re: Business as usual

trumpit — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:19:03 -0000

What Red Ink? Wall Street Paid Hefty Bonuses - NY Times

The stealing continues unabated on Wall St.

in the midst of a depression.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/29/business/29bonus.html?hp

Business as usual.

Re: Business as usual

trumpit — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:27:14 -0000

"... you really have no business telling other people to give money to any cause."

"... you have no place telling others that whatever they spend money on is less important than the rainforest."

You can say that if you want until you are blue in the face, but it doesn't make it true or sensible. I could tell you that you have no business or place in telling me what to say, but I don't feel the need, because I slough off your muzzling admonitions like so much dandruff.

Re: "Buy American" Means Bye-Bye Prosperity

trumpit — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 12:04:06 -0000

"Buy American" Means Bye-Bye Prosperity.

This can't be a true statement because the negation would be "Don't buy American" Means Happy Days Are Here Again. I think you need to rework your title to make it meaningful and logical.

Rich people can afford to buy whatever they like including American made goods in preference to cheaper similar foreign made products if they are so inclined. So I guess that is another strike against being well off; the affluent are not stuck buying the cheap knockoffs made in sweatshops that are sold in most every American store and outlet. I will let your logic lead you the proper conclusion of whether or not that is a good thing for enhanced prosperity. That may require you to take a business ethics class as well as a class in logic. If there is something wrong with buying American, this idea needs to be flushed out some more or flushed down the toilet.

Re: "Buy American" Means Bye-Bye Prosperity

trumpit — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 13:24:29 -0000

"Buy American" Means Bye-Bye Prosperity

Without getting into a lenghty discussion of elementary logic, Prof. Boudreaux's title is obviously false. Because that would mean that the taco I bought at the local taco stand would contribute to the 2nd coming of the Great Depression. I suppose that if I were rich enough I could have some tacos flown in from Mexico City. That would be incredibly wasteful in terms of resources, but vain rich people do do that kind of profligate bullshit regularly. I've heard from my local pizza parlor owner that he once FedExed a pizza to Americans living in So. Korea where good Italian food is hard to come by. I know Dr. Boudreaux is a clever man, so I'm sure he chose the exaggerated title to be tongue-in-cheek to stimulate discussion and debate. He's good at that too.

Re: What's in a name

trumpit — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 10:26:58 -0000

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

Say it and wild animals would not seem so ferocious.

Little did Keynes know that reciting this word would calm the "animal spirits" that he spoke about. I guess Nancy Pelosi is the new Mary Poppins. I bet she doesn't realize that either. A spoon full of sugar makes the medicine go down...

Re: Is Y=C+I+nX+G Meaningful?

trumpit — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 09:26:12 -0000

The polar ice caps are melting at an alarming rate. If you edit out the word "alarming" please replace it with "catastophic." The heavily over-populated coastal cities are in danger of flooding in the near future that will make what happened in New Orleans seem like a cakewalk by comparison. My father used to explain the reason he was too cheap to buy air conditioning for his car was by calling an 107 degree day in the shade "pleasantly warm" as sweat poured from his brow. Who was my dad kidding, and who are you?

Re: Kindle 2

trumpit — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 10:24:59 -0000

Why was this not made part of Obama's stimulus package? I object to the oversight. A Kindle in every backpack is the 21st century take on "a chicken in every pot." I want one so badly that I can taste it. Tastes sort of like chicken, but leaves no bones or feathers in its wake.

Re: Stimulating Video

trumpit — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:06:39 -0000

I know my comment is anecdotal, but so is that entire Goebbels propaganda piece by the Cato Institute. (I'd like to see its donors list.) I signed up for an econ class taught by one of the signatories to that Cato open letter trashing the stimulus. She stated, on day one, that there is no overpopulation of homo sapiens on Earth because the entire human population could easily fit into the state of California. I wanted to ask her how many she would like to fit into her own house, or bed. Maybe she'd like to take on the 14 kids that that crazy women who just gave birth to 8 more now has. Along with too many babies, maybe there are too many Phd's handed out as well. People who don't believe in economic stimuli should have their asses tossed out on to the street from the economic downturn and lose their home by foreclosure by the bank. Everyone one of those clowns that signed that petition has a secure job and will easily weather the current economic storm. But, they are in direct competition with Ringling Bros. circus and its freak show.

Re: Stimulating Video

trumpit — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:35:51 -0000

If you don't believe in the power of economic stimuli, just ask Mitt Romeny what he thinks. His daddy gave him a big one, and look what turned it into. Wow!

Re: Creepy

trumpit — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:33:32 -0000

Instead of weeding out the bad stuff in the bill, the Republicans just want tax cuts for the wealthy - more trickle down. The 36 Senators that oppose the bill just operate on auto-pilot. They are looking out for the interests of the "majority of the majority," as one Republican leader put it. They would vote "no" no matter what was in a Democrat bill. They get no credit for being evil Dr. No.

Re: The seen and the unseen

trumpit — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:00:06 -0000

Do you believe in magic?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBVOYkhNb1o&feature=related

Re: Whoa

trumpit — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:58:03 -0000

Obama needs to get real and trash this faux bipartisanship baloney. I think he should appoint Angela Davis as his commerce secretary. She's black, female, lesbian, communist, intelligent, an outspoken activist, and she was on the FBI's most wanted list in the distant past to boot. She makes Gregg look like a feckless cream puff in comparison. Commerce is serious business, if you pardon my bad pun, and requires a serious person for the spot. Obama's numerous bad picks for important positions scare me; it reminds me of W. Here we go again.

Re: Morriss on Madoff and the S.E.C.

trumpit — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 23:34:39 -0000

My mother told me about an eight year old boy in Iran that was caught stealing a piece of bread because he was hungry. The punishment was to restrain him on the ground with his thieving arm extended so a car could run over it leading to the amputation of his "bad" limb. My mother has the bad habit of relating sad stories like this over dinner in a nice restaurant which spoils the meal for me. But a bad man like Madoff should suffer the same treatment with both his arms being run over by a Brink's truck loaded down with the billions that he stole in gold bullion. Then he should be hung from his toes until he bleeds to death just like he bled dry his numerous victims. A pleasant story like that would be like a digestif only improving on a good meal.

Re: Morriss on Madoff and the S.E.C.

trumpit — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 06:58:24 -0000

"Madoff himself has performed this service. Leaving him properly impoverished but free seems just compensation to me."

You are obviously not one of his victims to say a ridiculous thing like that, or have any empathy whatsoever. You're scary. If someone hold up a convenience store with a toy gun and gets away with $50 dollars they end up in the hoosegow for years, right where they belongs. Madoff devastated far more people and deserves far worse. He should be made an example of to deter other potential Wall St. thugs.

Re: Pop Quiz

trumpit — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 06:53:14 -0000

Safety is always our first concern is the question. If you're talking about the CEO's fat compensation plan and expense account then of course safety is priority #1.

Are they talking about handing out condoms with the company's logo on it? All condoms that I'm aware of have a known failure rate. A condom with a 100% guaranty of preventing fertilization or std's is probably an undesirable, frustrating product. I heard a story once about a husband who cut a hole in the condom to get his wife pregnant against her wishes. This led to a failed marriage and an unwanted child. Is the scissor company in any way responsible for this unhappy outcome?

What hazardous product are they selling? Lawnmowers is the classic example, I believe. I hate lawnmovers, blowers and the inconsiderate people that use them. The mowers are noisy and the blowers produce air pollution and are all-around disgusting. I hope they lose a limb, or choke in the process of using them. Let's factor gardeners out of the safety equation for good. They don't count for much.

Are they talking about worker or consumer safety. Less worker safety is common in 3rd world countries as are the poor working conditions. Some jobs are hazardous by their very nature such as being a soldier in Iraq. One would think that the risks of the job would entail higher pay, but that frequently is not the case. Take for example people who work in a convenience store for low wages during the graveyard shift. They are sometimes shot during a robbery. The are expendable and easily replaceable in this country. So forget them; they are irrelevant, and are excluded from the safty equation.

Safety as a product feature is important in airplanes and cars, for example. But ponder the effectiveness of seatbelts on a 747 when it crashes in an accident. Admit it, the seatbelt is worse than useless. I never buckle it. If I know I'm going to die, I want to get out of my seat and confront the pilot. I want to give him a piece of my mind, both literally and figuratively.

Re: Unalloyed Arrogance

trumpit — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 08:57:11 -0000

"income earners" that was the best laugh of the week so far. How about income receivers? Many rich people don't have to lift a finger to collect their loot other than to sign checks. They even give the check writing power to another so their golf game at the country club won't be interrupted so rudely. The true printing presses that churn out the dough do not reside at the U.S. Mint, they reside with the owners of capital. Where is savior Marx when we need him? He'd make a mockery of all this Keynesian stimulus nonsense. He'd demand that we seize the true printing presses in this country, and stop kiting checks. So what if he wore a beard and looked grubby. He probably didn't bathe all that much, but how should I know? I'm really tired of all the bullshit suit and tie corporate theft. Whoever invented the tie should really have been strung up by it. On the other hand, the inventor of deodorant deserved a 24-carat gold medal.

Re: Limnulus

trumpit — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:01:45 -0000

From Laugh-in: sock-it-to-us

Fizzle-out-on-us if you think this is going to look promising but fade too soon.

May-the-stimulus-be-with-us from Starwars

Get-funky-hippity-hop-rappulus

What would Linus Pauling have recommended for an economy with the flu? ascobic-acid-is-a-must-4-us.

Re: The Dow keeps speaking

trumpit — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:31:06 -0000

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_Street_Crash_of_1929

The stock market spoke in 1929 also. I'd call this crash the Slot Machine Crash of 2009. The way a slot machine works is based on behavioral psychological principles. If you lost your money after every pull of the one-arm bandit, the machine would lose its reinforcing effect, the gambler would quickly get discouraged and move on to some other, more pleasant, activity. So for every 3 dollars you put in the machine it will kick back 1 dollar on average, but the end result still is that you lose all your money. The fact that you win some of the time is considered the fun part, along with breathing all that cancer-causing 2nd-hand smoke. We are witnessing a newish phenomenon, the Las Vegasizing of the economy. Well maybe it's not so new, Marx argued that sooner or later the jig would be up for the capitalist greed-theft system. Has that time finally arrived?

It also never ceases to amaze me that human nature is such that a scapegoat always seems to figure into any type of bad situation. It is something to be weary of at least. Hitler blamed the Jews for everything bad that ever happened to Germany. I met a girl from Poland once who was taking a class in Jewish history of all things. I told here that some 3,000,000 Polish Jews were exterminated during World War II. She said, "Yeah, and people still don't like them very much." Man's inhumanity to his fellow man is one of the reason corrupt corney captialism must be defeated along with right-wing fascists that run amok in this Rush Limbaugh loving sick country.

Re: Competition Would Be the Best Regulator

trumpit — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 09:38:38 -0000

My friend from Ecuador told me that the U.S. dollar is the principle currency in use in his country. There may be several countries that have so mismanaged their own economy and finances that their indigenous currency is either unstable or regularly devalued making it undesirable compared to the dollar. What does it take for a currency to be rock solid? Wouldn't it be ironic if the dollar becomes a wallpaper or toilet paper currency and the Canadian dollar become the currency of choice? Moving to Canada is looking better everyday. With global warming accelerating faster than inflation, Toronto may become the new Cote d'Azur in a few years. If they have topless beaches, the attraction may even be greater. Move me there oh Great One!

Re: Who Pitches In?

trumpit — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:28:20 -0000

The good news: I just won $100,000,000 in the California lottery. The bad new: I have a brain tumor that is driving me crazy, literally. My doctor gave me 3 months to live if I do nothing and perhaps 1 year if I undergo chemotherapy and painful radiation treatments. Fortunely, with $100,000,000 in the bank, I can afford the best treatments available, unless I choose to go to Tijuana for uncoventional ozone therapy. But demetia is setting in so I better decide quickly what to do. Do you have any advise for me? I need advise on what to do with the $100,000,000 plus accruing interest as I have no heirs to speak of to give it to. I have two dogs but they are 15 years old and probably don't have much time left to enjoy all that loot. I don't believe in charity so that's out. I don't believe in handouts, governmental or individual, so that's out. I don't want the government to get it by default either. I guess I'll have to find a way to spend it quickly. Is there a $100,000,000 exquisite blue emerald-cut diamond out there for sale? I can enjoy looking at that for a few months. Good idea. But then I intend to smash it with a hammer just before I'm about to die. I'm like that you know; If I'm not here to enjoy my diamond, then I don't want anybody else to. Tough shit, turtles. I made mine, no go make yours. No f**king humongous diamond for you! No way, no how...

Re: Entrepreneurial economics

trumpit — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 01:02:55 -0000

I've occasionally wondered by how much the consumer would benefit if we could eliminate middlemen, advertising costs, CEO joke salaries and bonuses, etc. The fact is that we can't completely eliminate these things, but they should be minimized as much as possible to ... hmm, maximize PROFITS. Notice that I didn't say reduce prices for the consumer. Reducing prices to my liking would entail lowering profits, I'm afraid. This is supposed to happen through competition ... Is competition supposed to be FUN? Please elaborate, if you think so. Anyway, if only we could take the 1st derivative of the cost equation, set it equal to zero and solve. Minimizing is such FUN! If we could just set CEO salaries equal to zero, it would simplify the equation by one variable making it easier to solve (not really with computers doing the mindless number crunching).

I buy a lot of stuff on Amazon because it is convenient, even though the prices aren't the lowest out there. I wonder why their prices aren't lower? Amazon his greatly reduced the overhead costs of a running a retail outfit. They don't have the pay the huge rents charged by the local mall; instead they pay the much low costs of warehousing merchandise. Amazon's advertising is also minimalistic - no large and expensive newspaper ads that I've ever seen. So the conclusion I've reached is that Amazon's founder and CEO Jeff Bezos is a monoplistic billionaire that is raping the consumer. Right, I don't have to buy from him, and I'll help put him out of business. I can also type in "rape" into the search field on Amazons intro web page and get a slew of books and movies that have the word in the title or description. Not one of those books or movies will call Bezo the rapist that he is. So I'll have to do it anonymously on this website. Oh, I know that I don't have to, but it's so much FUN!

Re: Entrepreneurial economics

trumpit — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:29:15 -0000

"What do you call someone who chooses to be repeatedly 'raped'?"

I call myself a victim as are the rest of the people who buy on Amazon or use a Microsoft Windows operating system. It is difficult, or impossible, to avoid being victimized by monopolies. You, too, have been raped repeatedly, even today, even as I type. The sick part is that you enjoy taking it up the you know what. Who's the passive, lie-there-and-take-it crazy one?

Re: Wisdom from Michael Lewis

trumpit — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:24:20 -0000

Do all the churchgoing, communist-fearing, salt of the earth, blue-state folks realize that capitalism is one big casino? "Everyone" knows that casinos are rigged in favor of the house, not the victimizable, willing players. Do the conservative, provincial folks that support blue laws and prohibition and condemn alcohol as an evil demon drink understand the evils of capitalism as it is rigged in the U.S. against them in favor of a tiny, "special" rich minority? No, they are just like the people who buy lottery tickets and play slots in Vegas - a bunch of ignorant losers. It's time for you to shift the blame on this blog to the People (the peasants) who are digging their own graves. Have fun blaming the politicians for everything. The problem is US.

Re: Wisdom from Michael Lewis

trumpit — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:01:53 -0000

I meant red-state folks. My mistake. Sorry.

Re: Wisdom from Michael Lewis

trumpit — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:14:51 -0000

"... has claimed publicly that the money was, to them, a matter of indifference, as Goldman had hedged itself against a possible collapse of AIG -- by making BETS against AIG."

"which is to say that there was really no responsible place to lay off these BETS."

Be sure to tell your students that the economy is really one big hedge fund. Which is a euphemism for casino. You said so yourself.

Re: Did Roubini Get It Right?

trumpit — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 09:18:29 -0000

I've always accepted the premise that Nassim Nicholas Taleb and Alan Greenspan and others are loudmouthed and inscrutable charlatans respectively. It's the ones who are deified and are in positions of tremendous power like Greenspan that do the most harm, of course. The pop star, groupie attitude of most people really appalls me. Most people thoroughly appall me. Greenspan is ugly to boot so I really didn't understand the mass appeal. Hitler was ugly as well, so I guess physical beauty has nothing to do with the magnetism. The fact that there was no hue and cry on this blog regarding Bush's tax cuts mean that you guys appall me as well. There is enough appalling behaviour and lack of insight to sicken and disgust the most impassive, apathetic among us. I, for one, am throughly inconsolable, inchoate, and inconsequential. I'm darn mad, too!

Re: Did Roubini Get It Right?

trumpit — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 07:04:35 -0000

There is nothing wrong with the (Bush's) tax cuts. - Crass Crusader

Your own admission taints and discredits you more than I ever could. Your pro-rich policies sicken and appall me, too. I'm sure that you will smugly appreciate that a fair share of the "stimulus" money is being spent on the rich won't don't need no damn stimulus: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/education/22s...>

What do you look like so I can mass produce voodoo dolls in your likeness?

Re: Behind the Marble Facade, It's Thuggery

trumpit — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:39:22 -0000

What you call thuggery another may call buggery. I couldn't resist that line. But seriously, you, as an economist should be making economic arguments against a particular piece of "protectionist" legislation. If Chinese-made pants are made with slave/prison labor then we need to be protected from such evil. Sorry, but you need to be run out of town on the same rail that bought the rotten goods in the first place if you want to benefit as a consumer or importer from such immorally produced goods. Free-for-alls in (prison) stripped pajamas are for kids' slumber parties not for dapper professors of economics dressed in the finest italian-made suits. I seriously believe that you are deficient in moral training to make good judgments about the ethics involved in protectionist legislation. This blog need to be expanded to include ethicists and political scientists to cover all the bases. It's tiresome for me to be correcting you all the time. I feel mugged most every time I read the stuff written here. I want my time, money and sunk costs back for having my sensibilities inflamed! Legislation may be required to recoup my losses.

Re: Every Sensible Person Understands the Reason for Rules; Too Few People Understand that Rules are Not Synonymous with Government Dictates

trumpit — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 08:12:37 -0000

"When asked the question, 'Does anyone know what captialism is.' One boy answered carefully, 'Thats rich people taking from poor people, isn't it?'

I emphasized that captialism and trade are nothing more than tools used by voluntary humans and not in any way evil or compulsory."

You are wrong and that little boy has mucho insight into the essence of capitalism. Capitalism is the rich stealing from the poor, and it is both compulsory and evil as configured in these (Bush's) United States. You are doubly naive and ignorant like a Rick Sanchez on illegal steroids. You are like those door-to-door proselytizer selling fertilizer - the kind that doesn't make stuff grow, but stinks to high heaven.

It's not nice to try to brainwash kids and make what's happening to the U.S. and world economy seem like a lesson from Pilgrim's Progress or ordained from on high. The entire economy is "at risk," or should I say, "at Rick's!"

Re: Generosity from the White House

trumpit — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 07:47:20 -0000

Just like cigarettes, the combustion engine should be outlawed. Cigarettes cause cancer in the user and in people in the vicinity of the prick, inconsiderate smokers. The combustion engine spews environmental pollutants into the air, and is killing the planet for life as we know and cherish it. We should refuse to do business as usual with any country that continues to use the combustion engine just as we should refuse to do business with a Nazi Germany that kills millions of people out of racism or other evil motivation. That would put the auto industry out of business worldwide until a viable alternative, like fully electric cars, are available. The natural, if abrupt, death of the U.S. auto industry would be a great start in the right direction. Why would anybody or any governmental body try to interfere with what is a good and positive thing in the long run. It's sheer foolishness. Walk, swim, skateboard, rollerskate, or ride horseback to work until we get the mass transit or electric cars of the future NOW that we need. Or alternately stop having babies in excess of the planets carrying capacity. Seven billion and counting humans is an obsenity and should be outlawed right along with the combustion engine. I'm combusting with anger as I type. My raising blood pressure and pulse is a result of human stupidty and folly. Your bullshit freedom to do as you please without concern for your fellow man or the well-being of the planet is pure selfishness, greed, and insanity. I demand a lobotomy for the whole bunch of you Hayekian turds! Never mind, you already think like you've had one.

Re: Successful Explanation of the Importance of Failure

trumpit — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 09:53:48 -0000

Fortunes are made and fortunes are lost is true, but the conservative (fascist) state seeks to maintain the wealthy's prerogatives at the expense of the poor and struggling, and ultimately the stagnant, plundering rich engender the likely collapse of what they seek to save all for themselves.

I heard Joe Stiglitz on the radio yesterday discussing the folly, and greed at the heart of the changes to the bankruptcy laws that the Rethuglicans rammed through congress at the behest of the credit card companies and others. He emphasised that the attempts to squeeze the last penny out of the poor and indebted was a contributing factor in the recent economic and financial collapse. Stigliz says it is imperative that those onerous bankrupcy changes be undone asap.

Re: Language

trumpit — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 18:24:10 -0000

Somebody whose name I won't repeat acted like they were on drugs by letting loose with vulgar insults calling everybody and their mother the F-word. He even called Keynes a different f-word that was coarse, bigoted and inappropriate, too. (I don't think he's for gay marriage.) Someone like that is a schoolyard bully and should have his mouth washed out with soap, and be led by the ear to the principal's office for swats on his rear end. In general, I have a laissez-faire attitude when it comes to free speech. I just object to hate speech and pure insulting language without any content. That Mesa guy (oops) has got to get a life and cool it with the abusive language.

Re: Language

trumpit — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 19:06:15 -0000

Thirteen killed by an angry gunman in a place where new immigrants were learning English. Ten killed by another gunman in a nursing home in Alabama. Four policemen killed by a parolee after being stopped by the police. The "modern" gun, a term used by some gun-toting libertarian commenter on this blog is being used to perpetrate massacres and mayhem on what seems like a daily and weekly basis. What do libertarians propose? Arm grandma who is suffering from dementia with an Uzi in her convalesent home? The Supreme Ct. recently told us what the drafters of the Constitution really meant at a time when a militia was armed with muskets. All I see is the deadly and bloody aftermath of Scalia and Thomas' interpretation some 230 years later, now carried out with "modern" weapons of horrendous killing capacity. I really hate hunters and gun-loving dudes like that late NRA ass, Chuck Heston. I hope that my sincere expression of disgust isn't construed as hate speech.

Re: Successful Explanation of the Importance of Failure

trumpit — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 16:25:59 -0000

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102656683

You can listen to Stiglitz yourself talk about the "$1 Trillion Agreement Reached At G-20 In London". It's on NPRs Talk of the Nation dated 4/2/09. In response to a callers question, Stiglitz talks a bit about bankruptcy and bankruptcy laws as it pertains to the current economic crisis.

Re: EconTalk Book Club—The Theory of Moral Sentiments

trumpit — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 08:58:37 -0000

Thank you for your efforts and services to educate the public and me. You are a charitable (foolish?) educator. I will be benefiting greatly from all the free stuff you are giving away. I always feel guilty when I get stuff for free. I feel like I'm taking advantage of somebody. I guess I'm a capitalist at heart. Pay as you go just feels like the proper moral sentiment. I once picked up an orange that had fallen from a neighbors tree and rolled into the gutter. I was hungry and wanted to savior a sweet tree-ripened piece of fruit. But to whom did that orange rightfully belong? I asked myself. So, I did the right thing and threw the orange back into my neighbors yard to rot along with the rest of the fallen fruit. I went the rest of the day without eating and with a case of mild scurvy for even letting the theiving thought of taking another's property without just compensation cross my mind. Only later did I realize that I could have asked my neighbor for the fruit. But how audacious of me to do so though. It would be sort of like that orphan in Oliver, who has the effrontery to ask for more porridge. I didn't want to be chased around the block for a mere orange. So as not to be Mickey/Minnie the Moocher, please tell me where to make a $10 dollar donation after partaking of all the free intellectually goodies that you have provided me with. Somehow, I don't think it will be the Young Communist League USA.

Re: Protectionism and Stimulus

trumpit — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 23:47:10 -0000

I'm not going to read all the comments with a fine-tooth comb, but to believe passionately that tenure is a bad thing then to accept a position that requires you to be tenured is plainly hypocritical. That's is why you are attacked on it over and over again. You can attempt to rationalize your hypocrisy away, but who do you think you are kidding? Of course you can argue that tenure is only a mildly bad thing, but then where do we go with that. Perhaps the minimum wage is only "mildly bad" but from your constant diatribes on the matter, I don't think you believe that for one second. So it seems you pick and choose what's good in general by deciding what is good for you at the moment like accepting a tenured position to improve your lot in life with the least discomfiture for yourself without serious regard to your principles. If what I said is even partially true, then not only are you a hypocrite but you are opportunistic and thus lack integrity as well. (A struggling prostitute with waning looks has more if she believes in what she's doing.) That is worse than being a hypocrite according to my late father. One must endeavour to learn from one's elders was another of his frequent pronouncements. Okay dad, I'll try harder in the future.

Re: Protectionism and Stimulus

trumpit — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 07:25:50 -0000

Tenure, along with medical/dental coverage, automatic cost of living increases, delineated pay/pension benefits etc. are usually contractual benefits given teachers for being obligatory members of the teachers' union. We all know how Dr. Beaudreaux feels about unions. I don't agree with forced membership in anything. The worst part of the contract from the public's point of view is tenure. Most students know a horrible teacher or two that can't be gotten rid of because of tenure. That hurts kids/students and is a bad thing from their perspective for starters. Students don't have the same option obviously; if their grades drop below a certain level they are ousted from school for poor performance.

Re: Higgs on the Economy, Economics, and Economists

trumpit — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 09:18:50 -0000

Anyone who wants to know what Gibbs thinks about the environment and environmentalists need only look up his talks on Youtube. He thinks all environmetalists (that's an environmentalist who likes heavy metal rock) are the equivalent of commies, which is an ad-hominem bogus argument if there ever was one. He would lay waste to this planet, if he could, and maybe he can with your help, in the name of corporate profits. His vision of the world of the future would be a futherance of the destructive nightmare that monopolistic corporatism has already wrought to life on this planet. He only sees positive externalities for corporate greed, and negative externalites for upstanding people who devote their lives and energies to saving a millions-of-years-old rainforest, like the Amazon, from imminent destruction or from a species that evolved there over the same time frame from extinction. The Dodo is not extinct for gibbs is one.

Gibbs makes rational, compassionate people's blood boil because he is so brainwashed in favor of the monied interests that his idea of freedom is actually death and destruction for the continuance of life in any quality state, except for those capitalist plunderers who have mansions on lucky hole 7 of their country club's golf course. Without golf courses where would the golf ball/cart industry be? Gibbs might muse amusedly. I took a U.S. economic history course and there were no reference to the "great" economic historian Higgs, as you mislabel him. Greatness like beauty is in the mind of the beholder, I guess. Now get your "collective" minds out of the gutter, which may be impossible if Higg's ideas turn the whole planet into one.

Re: The First Rule of Good Business: Don't Kill Your Customers

trumpit — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:27:44 -0000

If cigarettes, marijuana and alcohol should be legal, and guns should be legal, it should be legal to shoot smokers who dare to smoke anywhere near my breathing space, likewise for pot smokers who dare to light up anywhere near my breathing space, and drunk drivers who have the audacity to drive drunk putting my life at risk. What good is a gun if you can't use it to protect your own lungs and life. Sorry for the longwinded sentence at the onset, but I'm too tired to fix it. Maybe you think I should be shot for writing it. Is that because you disagree with my "moral sentiments" or because you are a stickler for well-formed sentences? It took me 6 or 7 tries to pass the required college English class in order to graduate. I believe mindless tv and the lack of reading as a child were very destructive to me as I grew up and I tried to get a decent college education.

Why did I need English, my mother tongue, and I resented having to prove I was literate (which I wasn't); that's how I felt about it then. English classes should be optional even for English majors. Take French, Spanish, or Italian and study their language and literature in the original tongue. English is an unnecessary encumbrance to overcome by all means necessary, even by lethal armed force. Shakespeare is the work of the devil, and like Huck Finn, should be banned in public school. Let the kids smoke the evil weed during American Lit. class instead. Sam Coleridge wrote the fab poem Kubla Khan while high on opium. Why shouldn't we encourage writers and lyricists to use drugs to help them become more creative? That goes double for econ students. Economists on Drugs sounds like the title of Russ's next book, or was that the secondary title of his last? We really don't speak English anyway; we speak "American," and we do it without a proper English accent. I, for one, prefer it that way. Those Brits sound so damn affected to me; shoot them, too!

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:19:00 -0000

Putting money in your mattress or in a lock box for any significant length of time is foolish as anyone who understands the time value of money knows. Because prices usually rise over time, your stagnant money becomes less valuable. I see nothing wrong with spending what someone pays into the social security system being used to pay someone who is receiving benefits. That logically can't be a bad thing if the alternative is sticking it in a box and burying it. You have a PhD in the subject matter at hand, so please stop with the sophistry.

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:40:02 -0000

"It is simply what exists when government grants no special privileges based upon the nationalities of producers or their geographic location."

What "simply exists" ? The stuff that people freely or unfreely trade had to come from somewhere at a prior point in time. I learned in biology class that people used to believe in spontaneous generation, until Louis Pasteur definitively debunked the notion. Piaget show that children at certain stage of development believe that if you crumble a potato chip, you get more potato chips. It is an extension of the concept that God created the heavens and the earth in 6 days then rested on the 7th to believe that goods that are traded simply exist. Stop with the sophistry, please. You know better.

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:51:01 -0000

Oh, perhaps you were meant that the amorphous thing called "free trade" simply exists as if by magic. I don't believe that either. Complex phenomena don't "simply" do any one thing. That is why people study and debate them endlessly in an attempt to better understand them.

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 10:06:47 -0000

By the way, if no political borders were to exist, which "ostensibly" you advocate then no tax haven could exist, which you also advocate. We'd be one world, which we actually are. How do you reconcile your internal contradictions? They'd keep me awake at night.

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 17:57:51 -0000

A few years back, I drove 3 hours to get to Tijuana to buy some Kaluha, and other alcoholic beverages and some prescription drugs at a cheap price compared with what I pay in the U.S. I had to wait an hour or two in the heat to get back across the border, having to be submitted to U.S. customs. The customs agent confiscated most of my alcohol and demanded to see precriptions for the drugs I was buying. Never again will I engage in "free trade" buy going into Mexico. Forget it. The alcohol industry in the U.S. is a monopoly and they intend to keep it that way even for someone who plans to buy a few bottles for personal use. The practice of medicine is a monopoly controlled by the need for a prescription to medicate myself. I have to pay an M.D. hundreds of dollars to get the prescription, too. Outrageous! Why are the drugs so much cheaper in Mexico and why can't I buy them? Because the pharmaceutical companies are more monopolies that won't give the consumer a break. Until the monopolistic corporate swine are destroyed there can be no real free trade. Down with them and the false pretense of free trade that you and your cohorts espouse.

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:06:50 -0000

"Everyone knows that BMWs don't spontaneously appear in one's driveway."

That's a barefaced lie if ever there was one. Practically every ceo on wall st. has one of those or even more likely a Lexus. They do appear spontaneously. You are simply misguided and wrong.

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:48:46 -0000

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090420/ap_on_re_us/pharmawater_factories

Speaking of drugs, you may be getting them for free after all - in your drinking water of all places, courtesy of big pharma. Maybe I was too hasty to dismiss Mexican Kaluha. It may be cleaner and safer than what you are getting out of your tap.

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:49:29 -0000

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090420/ap_on_

re_us/pharmawater_factories

Re: Policy, Trade, and the Long-Run

trumpit — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:23:42 -0000

Carlos Slim Helú may be the 2nd or 3rd richest person in the world and is Mexico's richest. He owns all the phone companies there. Every time a dirt poor Mexican makes a phone call, Mr. Slim skims some pesos off for himself. When will the insanity end? Never if the libertarians get their way. They love billionaires; we should all be one. Get out there and start your own phone company, you lazy bums!

Re: Rizzo vs. DeLong

trumpit — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 10:33:17 -0000

"What is it that you all have against hard working honest people who just want a fair wage?"

I will try to answer your question from a libertarian perspective.

As far as a "fair" wage is concerned, there is no such thing. Fair is what is econmically efficient and is that wage that is determined by the intersection point of the supply and demand curve for labor. Wether it is 1 cent per hour or $1,000,000 per second is none of your god damn business either.

As far as what constitutes "hard" working, that too is to be determined by the labor market, and by the bargained-for contract. If I can extract 23 hr. of hard labor out of your sorry ass per day, I'm free to do so. What is this crap about an 8 hr. work day, and a 40 hr. work week? Are you a socialist? We should use the prison model of labor. You don't work, you don't eat and you get solitary confinement for dessert. Child labor must be resurectied because we all know that "the devil’s hands are idle playthings." I may have that quote backwards, but from proper Christian training, you know what I mean.

As far as honest workers goes, that only applies to the little people. Honesty doesn't apply to bank robbers and bankers, which are one and the same thing anyway. Before you can be hired, you must submit to a polygraph and a mugshot. If you have fingernails, they must clean. If you don't have fingernails, you can't possibly be hired because that means you were tortured for good cause at Guantanamo. Your honest nature will be further enhanced by having all your phone calls tapped and your emails read. You privacy belongs to your employer, if you don't like it then you can lump it. He or she pays your salary that allows you to eat - you ingrate. We have installed cameras at every Domino's pizza to prevent another instance of boogers being added as a topping to our "everything on it" pizza. You are uncouth; you know it; we know it, and we are watching your every move to detect insubordination. We are keeping a file on you and when you die, your ashes will be placed in your file, or added to a pizza as our newest topping, at OUR discretion.

Re: But Think of the Lost Jobs!

trumpit — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:37:12 -0000

I submit to you that crony, monopolistic capitalism kills far more people than polio ever did. Mankind is still searching for the magic bullet to put an end to it. The cure in this case would only put out of business the likes of the egotistical Donald Trump and his diabolical plans to destroy more virgin Scottish natural and wild habitat in order to build another unneeded golf course and luxurty hotel as another playground for the super rich. Polio, like the rich, is a scourge worthy of crippling defeat and Trump should be trumped out of commission and sent back to his crappy casinos in Atlantic City. Why are the worst type of people so often so rich. Capitalism has the bad habit of rewarding the worst people for doing wrong things repeatedly. That is another reason I oppose it with my body and soul.

Re: Audacious Theater

trumpit — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 11:35:00 -0000

I'd like to know what program he's planning on cutting $100,000,000 out of. Wouldn't you? If it's the budget of the econ department at GMU then I'd say hurray. I imagine that quite a few of your students get federal grants to study there. The government is giving money to students to learn that the government is totally evil and must be thwarted by offshore tax havens or whatever you thing will do it in. Were federal funds used to build GMU? Frankly, you should be fired in spite of your tenured position at the university. Teaching your students to bite the hand that feeds them is the height of insolence, ingratitude, hyperbole, denigration, etc., etc. And you'd tell your own child that he'd have no decency if he became a politician beyond the dogcatcher level. I hope your children pay you only superficial heed in matters of economics and politics. I don't believe in disrespecting one's parents except in extreme cases of indoctrination or physical abuse. You fit the bill in spades. What about education tyranny of being a indecent professor with belligerent ideas about dissolving our democracy and installing a pro-rich, hayekian, corporitist, anarchistic free-for-all, social darwinian, puppet state? Yes, you should be fired and chased across the Virginia border all the way to Squeezepenny, Texas.

Re: Audacious Theater

trumpit — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:12:17 -0000

I agree that Dr. Beaudreux should cut the inflammatory anti-politician and anti-government rhetoric. It's gotten to be over the top. No one should take him seriously, let alone respond to him. He's free to continue to post here as long as he maintains a modicum of decorum and avoids libelous, defamatory remarks. His slanderous remarks about politicians and our democracy are likely protected because he is attacking public figures and institutions. He took law classes, so he should know something about that. But I'm not so sure because he took econ classes along the way, as well, and he took the wrong lessons from them obviously

Re: Audacious Theater

trumpit — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:58:04 -0000

Ted,

If I were a poor student who was getting 1,000's of dollars in federal and state aid to attend school, and the teacher started to rant about the government as the root of all evil, I'd be quite disturbed by that.

Re: What Earth Day Means to Me

trumpit — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:07:51 -0000

I'm sure that you are all dying to know what earth day means to me, so I'll just say a word or two to be succinct and conservational, apropos of a proper Earth Day ethic.

Basically, I think the Earth should be returned to its natural state, a state before humans came along to destroy the planet in the name of selfishness and greed. The idea of Natural Law that so many libertarians find appealing can only truly be applied to a natural world, a world that homo sapiens have obliterated for their own selfish purposes. The wild animals, like bears and wolves, that once flourished in Europe and North America have mostly been driven to extinction or can only be found as specimens in a zoo. If a cougar comes down from the hills to seek food or water, it is usually shot dead before it can eat fido or fluffy. No acknowlegement is ever made to the fact that they were here first and that the land, in fact, belongs to them. It has been stolen from them and converted into legal document called a trust deed and authenticated by a notary public. The fact that land is considered private property is immoral prima facie, just ask the Native Americans if you need further evidence.

How can we even begin to contemplate an Earth Day without letting the Earth do its own thing with out mankind's constant interference. The earth, the actual dirt, is the substrate upon which every non-marine living thing depends: trees, birds, buffalo, beaver, and Grizzly bear. This mean that we cannot ethically cover the Earth/earth with homes, mansions, roads, cars, skyscrapers, golf courses, etc. Humans must get their smelly feet out of the way, not just deodorize them as Beaudreaux pettily postulates and pustulates. One option is for human to stop having babies, then in due time the horrific human footprint over this green/blue planet that once was teaming with life in every nook and cranny can, once again, bloosom and bloom as it once did before anthropoids came on to the earthly stage to create and destroy on an unheard of scale. Why did humans appear on the scene of life when they did? Like most things in a probablistic universe driven by Darwinian evolution, a gamma ray probably struck a DNA molecule at the wrong momment and the mutated gene developed into the scourge of life that we know as homo sapiens. 2 B CONTINUED after a brief bathroom break and chocolaty snack...

Re: Gordon Tullock

trumpit — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 03:21:30 -0000

I heard Prof. Turlock explain why he never voted. He said that his vote had almost a zero probability of affecting the outcome of an election and that he would have to "enjoy" voting to make it worth his while, and he didn't. I'm paraphrasing, but that is what I gleaned from his opinion on the matter. The problem with that position is that if many people refused to vote, then others will decide the fate of those that choose not to vote. I think Kant understood that outcomes of close elections can be affected if people stay home on election day to play tittley winks. This "dilemma" can be resolved in favor of voting by fining people $100 for not voting, unless they have a legitimate excuse like serious illness that incapcitates them.

Re: Final Exam

trumpit — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 08:56:57 -0000

"Yet his total lifetime earnings were less than even a very lazy, untalented American might earn in a single year."

Are you, perhaps, referring to lazy, untalented Cindy McCain who owns more luxury homes than she can remember or count and makes something like $10,000,000 per annum for looking at herself admiringly in the mirror when she wakes up in the morning? Yes, I'm sure you must have been thinking of her when you said that.

Re: Another Opportunity for 'Progressives' to Put Their Money Where Their Mouths Are

trumpit — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:12:59 -0000

Funny how the rich can borrow at the cheapest rates, while the poor have to borrow at usury rates. I would say that this ridiculous state of affairs requires some kind of government intervention, I believe. A good economist would see the irony and try to suggest a solution. A bad economist should have their degrees and tenured positions revoked and be outsourced to a 3rd world trained economist who will work for much less, work harder, and better. I want the education monopoly (thug throat throttling, and extortion) to end now.

Re: Why Is Medical Care Unnecessarily Expensive?

trumpit — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 08:55:04 -0000

I'm opposed to one-size fits all health care, too. It will entrench the medical/pharmaceutical establishment even more than the almost complete monopoly that they already enjoy. If I wake up one morning and decide that I want to perform abortions for a living, I should be able to take courses to get a certificate in that specialty. The same goes for hip replacement surgery, that my friend's mother recently went in for. You can do virtual hip/knee surgery for free online to get a feel for it in 5 minutes. The development of anesthesia, antisepsis, and antibiotics are what makes modern surgery possible with relatively low risk. The mythical attributes that someone with the title MD is imbued with is way overblown in our society. In China, at least in COMMUNIST China of old, doctors were paid no more than school teachers and revered just as much.

When I'm feeling ill my first recouse is my local Chinatown where I seek out my reliable Chinese doctor/herbalist to treat what ails me for $10 for the consultation and prescription plus the oost of the herbs. I recently successfully treated an infected tooth this way.

I disagree with what the Rethuglicans did concerning free pills for the aged. Maybe Grandma doesn't want to take a handful of pills every morning and night. Why encourage this depressing way of life that hasn't shown efficacy in prolonging or improving the quality of life? It has made Big Parma very happy, however. As Doctor Beaudreaux suggests, maybe grandpa needs to walk and exercise some more and take a handful of vitamins instead. Let's have free vitamins and herbs for all; that might work better to improves people's health and lives. How about free fruits and vegetables while we are at it to stop me from grabbing thoughtlessly an unhealthy burger at McDonalds. Let's not forget free dental care; I just shelled out $3,500 for a gold bridge. I'd like the rich who have all the gold they can use to pay for it. I would also like free clothes; mine are getting tattered.

I want a fuel efficient car because my old one pollutes too much, but it's not in my budget right now. Perhaps Uncle Sam will give me helping hand and a free ride to Vegas and a handful of black $100 casino chips so I can blow them at the crap table. I like to play blackjack, too, and drink free Tom Collins until I'm sloshed. I alway tip the cute cocktail waitress because she expects it, and I'm drunk anyway.

I'll provide my laundry list of wants and needs for free to whoever is listening and responsive, because I like free stuff as long as long as it ain't cheap stuff. I have high standards to uphold when it comes to my health and enjoyment of life. I believe in living long and prospering as one Vulcan once said. Whoever helps me in this valued endeavour get the nod from me at the voting booth. I always vote my self interest because libertarians and Randians told me it was the right thing to do.

Re: Verite from Veronique

trumpit — Fri, 01 May 2009 07:27:44 -0000

Per capita income in the U.S. is $45,000? You mean AVERAGE per capita income, of course. What is the per capita income of the top 1% of the population? Mexico is the 12th richest country in world in terms of GDP, at least until swine flu struck. Does that figure tell you that 40% of the population is below the asset based poverty level? That women is lying because all French people innately believe that they possess the world's most superior culture and language and wouldn't trade one croissant with the U.S. for all the burgers in McDonalds. They even police their language to keep words from American pop/poop culture out of their lexicon. I think that woman is really a bad Hollywood actor from central casting with a fake French accent. She overdoes the oui oui stuff. I could just wee wee all over that piece.

Re: Cardboard Characters

trumpit — Mon, 04 May 2009 14:48:57 -0000

There are serious economic issues here, but of course Dr. B. misses them entirely. He's always looking for a broken window, or a hole being dug to China, so he can slam somebody for economic ignorance and for waste precious time and money through political misdoings. He should look in the mirror before it cracks due to poor manufacture; he'd never blame it on his own looks. It's called ego preservation.

If the road to a wealthy society demands specialization or specialized workers' skills then what happens when those skills are no longer in demand perhaps by a sudden change in consumer demand or because of some technological development that renders those skills essentially worthless? YOU want to have your cake and eat it. YOU want US to specialize to make the division of labor work to make capitalists rich, and perhaps incidently give the worker a livelihood, but you don't give a flying f**k what happens when WE are no longer needed as cogs in the economic perpetual- motion machine or required as an input factor by a cruel capitalist-driven society that believes in Social Darwinism as its anti-humanistic religion. Where is YOUR compassion? Have you been genetically altered to make you hopelessly cruel. I think your empathy got lost in a river of broken glass, shovels and mud on the way to China through a black rabbit hole that admits no light or reason. Shed a little light on the ironies and paradoxes of your supply and demand graphs that have no soul and shed no tears, will you? Have a heart and a soul, for one day in your life. Why don't you let a little love into your heart?

Re: Not a Killer Question from the Protectionist

trumpit — Mon, 04 May 2009 15:47:29 -0000

My insightful (not inciteful)comment was deleted unfairly, I believe. Can you only stand the sound of your own voice? In that case, I won't sign up for your Econ. 101 class or recommend you to my friends. You may be out of a job if no one signs up for your class. The unemployment line awaits you..., too. Perhaps you can work as a censor somewhere. No training is required, evidently.

Russ Roberts recently pointed out that the wealth of our society is due in no small part to the Division of Labour which requires that workers/companies be Specialized. A workers whose specialty is no longer required is IN TROUBLE because of the time and money require to get RESPECIALIZED. That assumes that person is retrainable and that the older worker stands a chance against an energetic, and eager younger worker. You can foolishly, heartlessly believe in letting the chips fall where they may, but I don't believe Main St. is a Vegas casino, except when it comes to the thieves on Wall St.

Those of you who are living off your parents' inheritances, or have a cushy job don't seem to understand the harsh facts of life. That's too bad. No one should listen to your slanted views; they should be extirpated by a conscientious redactor.

Re: Not a Killer Question from the Protectionist

trumpit — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:00:52 -0000

Tom,

If this were my blog, I would delete your nasty comment because it added nothing but vituperation to the discussion. You are plainly a troll. That is the lowest, most demeaning job out there. No training or specialization is required to be a troll, only obnoxiousness. Can you add some VALUE to the discussion? If not, society will discard you in favor of someone who can.

Re: Not a Killer Question from the Protectionist

trumpit — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:18:33 -0000

"Why should the taxpayers of Australia be forced to spend $150,000 on my services when they can get them for a mere $10,000? With such high prices, how can they feed their families?"

This is not fair to the POOR taxpayer either. I don't like to screw the RICH taxpayer needlessly either. I would only screw them when necessary, like to pay for Bush's war in Iraq which a lot of rich republicans voted for, and made hay out of.

Re: Not a Killer Question from the Protectionist

trumpit — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:27:56 -0000

How can the poor Bangladeshi Phd in economics feed his family when teaching positions in the U.S. are being protected from fair competition? There ought to be a law to stop that nonsense once and for all. He or she spent 10 years in college getting an education only to have to work at 7-11 selling beer during the graveyard shift. There ought to be a law.

Re: Not a Killer Question from the Protectionist

trumpit — Mon, 04 May 2009 16:58:48 -0000

MWG,

I would tax all rich taxpayers equally, whether they be Rep. or Dem. even if morally the Rep. should be taxed at a higher rate. I don't think that the Constitution would permit deferentiating on the basis of party afiliation. I never really like that expression about justice being blind. Should it be deaf as well?

Re: Speaking truth to power

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:03:22 -0000

http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc-resp-business.html

Friedman said it better 39 years ago. Many business ethics class start out with that essay then spend the better part of the semester trying to come up with a more humanistic definition of "social responsibility of business." In this decaying world of ours, I think it is still time well-spent because some people can only see a world of sex and dollars signs.

The male of the species is more guilty of this than the female.

Re: Speaking truth to power

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:08:39 -0000

http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc-resp-business.html

This link is correct one.

Re: Speaking truth to power

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 10:53:15 -0000

Hedge fund billionaires have more "skin in the game" than folks like Muirgeo will ever acknowledge.

That is an almost oxymoronic thing to say. Of course they have skin in the game. That is how they are able to siphon off such vast sums each year for fun and profit. It's sick and you should know better. Obama is trying, in a minuscule way to put a damper on it. I think he'll fail because money talks and he's only half black. He wants to start by shutting down offshore tax havens. I think he'll fail at that, too. Yes, I think we are doomed. But I'm an optimist in thinking that if things get bad enough a new society will emerge from the ashes. If the Great Depression hadn't been so rudely interrupted by WWII we might have seen the necessary changes take place then. Unfortunately Keynes and FDR wanted to save capitalism, and Hitler had different ideas entirely.

Re: Dynamic

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 11:19:42 -0000

"President-elect Barack Obama projected Saturday that his yet-to-be-written economic stimulus plan would create nearly 3.7 million jobs by the end of next year, mainly in construction, leisure services and manufacturing."

I guess the stimulus is starting to work sooner than anticipated. Maybe the fact that the stimulus is GOING to take effect has already provide the optimism and stimulus need to get the economy on a role again. Obama said that doing nothing wasn't an option. Will he be proven right? If he is, what will that imply about reems of ruthless rebuttals to the stimulus. If Obama is proven wrong and things get worse, then what? Perhaps WWIII will really get things stimulated, or perhaps not. There are too many factors to consider, ceteris paribus, to make a sound prediction of the future.

Re: Dynamic

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 11:25:33 -0000

Wal-Mart pays $2M to avoid charges in death probe -Yahoo headline.

How can a company payoff the victims to avoid criminal charges? This is blatant bribery and is 3rd worldish. Where are we headed as a country? Down the Youtubes.

Re: Dynamic

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 11:29:39 -0000

Wal-mart is always hiring, because of the voluminous turnover in staff. That should make every economist happy. Nothing worse than stagnation in the workforce. I read than in an econ book once.

Re: Dynamic

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 11:43:08 -0000

Lee Kelly,

Krugman is full of BS, because he says falling prices are a bad thing. I'm on a fixed income now and falling prices are a good thing as far as I'm concerned. I only care about myself as everyone should. If prices start to rise even more, especially on staples like food and rent, I'm going to be more pissed off than you can imagine. I'll know it when it happens and my meager standard of living gets even worse. I will report back to you, unless I starve to death or freeze to death for not having paid my gas bill.

Re: Revised Book Club Schedule

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 12:07:38 -0000

I will get around to listening to them. And if the pod casts can be Kindlized that would be even better. The device has (rudimentary) sound capabilities, I've read. I mean kindlized in the sense of being able to hear/read them on a Kindle, not that your efforts should be turned into kindle wood, and burnt for warmth or out of evil bookburningness.

I see an entrepreneurial opportunity here to turn podcasts and other (electronic)media type things into a moneymaking business. Why should Russ's efforts be strictly not for profit? No, they shouldn't. I've given someone the germ, or pod, of an idea. Raise the necessary capital to get the project underway; that's the American way. I would do it myself, if I could. I'll have to think some more about that, to tell you the truth.

Re: Dynamic

trumpit — Wed, 06 May 2009 12:37:11 -0000

Food stamps probably contribute to global warming. Meals On Wheels probably do too. Have you checked the prices of walkers lately? A z-frame outfitted army will be very costly to get off the ground. I would be proud to be a Gray Panther when the time comes.

Re: Dog bites man

trumpit — Thu, 07 May 2009 11:01:07 -0000

I think the cuts made were token cuts to appease libertarians and other right-wingers. Throw the dog a bone kind of thing. Deficit spending is sometimes the way to go during a depression according to some Keynesian thinkers. Indeed, it might be contradictory and counter-productive to reduce government spending, wasteful or otherwise, and at the same time pass a stimulus package funded by more borrowing. Politics is a matter of appearances as much as anything else, and to cut nothing from the budget would gift fuel to the Right. Mustn't do that; that would be a free lunch to munch for conservatives to make political hay out of.

Re: Was Adam Smith a liberal?

trumpit — Mon, 11 May 2009 08:09:51 -0000

"I like to call myself a classical liberal, someone who is in favor of personal responsibility, limited government and voluntary collective action."

It is too late to ask Smith directly how he feels about those things, but it's not to late to ask me. I am also a classical liberal. But there is no force at present other than government that can, theoretically squash the omnipotent rich. Government is effectively a tool of the rich.

I believe you failed to learn the lesson of your own profession, economics. By about the third week of class an econ 101 student is made to understand the theory of how an all-you-can-eat buffet can make a profit. The answer is satiation. The feedback mechanism that tells you that you are full is broken in the rich; they want more and more until we are all made poorer by it. The buffet cannot exist as a viable entity with the gluttonous rich running rampant.

Imagine a bulimic lunching in a Swedish buffet. After stuffing themselves to the point that they can vomit easily, they then return to take more heaping portions of food to fill themselves up again. A bulimic never can eat too much and eventually the cupboard will be bare. If you live in a household with a bulimic you will soon regret it because you will find little that you eat because everything edible has been consumed by a ravenous mentally ill person.

When I go to McDonalds, I eat one hamburger, not one billion. Your students understand that, why don't you?

Re: Query

trumpit — Tue, 12 May 2009 13:55:22 -0000

It's obvious to me why you are posing these old questions again now, because of the need to clear your conscience. If the Chinese workers are in fact slaves or resemble slaves then venerable American businesses that pay their workers well or at least better than the Chinese sweatshops do, can't compete with slave-like labour and deserve to be "protected" or "bailed out," from their competitors and your self-worth won't allow that to be the case. You demand to prove that the Chinese are more industrious, more efficient, more productive. You just know that the Chinese workers are betterer at growing shoes, purses, and electronics, and the American worker by contrast wants life on easy street and is lazy and coddled by unions and welfare programs in comparison. You are wrong of course and your inner self knows it or you wouldn't be bring up this trite tripe right now. Perhaps the Chinese workers are automatonic Borgs that have sold thier soul to the company store in order to make ends meets and avoid homelessness and starvation. They shouldn't be comforted by the fact that have a lot in common with most workers here and around the globe, or that some workers work under even worse conditions or for even less pay.

Re: Government Is Anti-Trustworthy

trumpit — Thu, 14 May 2009 15:19:45 -0000

Not only do I want a cheap computer, I want one that is fast, longlasting, not prone to breaking down, has the latest technological innovations, etc. This is probably best achieved by having legitimate competition based on innovative chip design. You don't believe there is such a thing called anti-competitive practices. When will you come out from under a rock?

Re: Government Is Anti-Trustworthy

trumpit — Thu, 14 May 2009 17:12:16 -0000

Intel has 80% of the chip market while AMD has about 20%. Why is this the case? Is AMD losing market share to the point that it will soon be forced out of the market? What might be causing this to happpen? What will it mean for consumers if AMD is no longer in business. If the economic profession is good for anything, it should be able to provide answers to these and similiar question. Why do I always feel shortchanged by most economists?

I can only suggest an answer and it has to do with numbers or if you prefer statistics. Any economic discussion without real world numbers is suspect, in my opinion. Theory can only go so far. Very rarely do I see numbers used to bolster an argument around here. That's is why what most of you say rings hollow to me. I suggest you take some brush up math, econometric classs for starter to put numbers squarely into your arguments. That may help you to regain your lost respect and self-esteem. Can you imagine a bank teller who can't count. An economist who doesn't use numerical arguments is no better than a political scientist or an English major with bad grammar. You say that Indian sweatshop workers are happy to have moved off the farm and they are blissfully on their way to stardom in Bollywood. Can I have some numerical proof they don't really waste their life away doing menial sewing for pennies an hour? Give me the facts (and the numbers), Mam. Just the facts. (Otherwise, I'll keep assuming your dogmatic and just plain wrong.)

Re: Government Is Anti-Trustworthy

trumpit — Thu, 14 May 2009 22:19:53 -0000

Math equation for the day:

Crusader = Troll

Re: The Administration's Sixth Sense

trumpit — Thu, 14 May 2009 22:47:40 -0000

It's actually a felony for someone to cash a dead persons check by forging their name or by some other way. Mail that check back, Russ; you have a pulse. It may even be against the law for a zombie to try to cash his own deceased self's check. I have a book on zombie law written by a real zombie to fact check that point of law. I think most law books are written by zombie lawyers anyway. In fact, I think President Obama should appoint a liberal zombie to counteract the right-wing zombies that currently sit on the Supreme Ct. They were responsible for our first zombie president ever, and the rest of us getting the shaft. You know who that gruesome ghoul was, without needing so much as a hint.

Re: Government Is Anti-Trustworthy

trumpit — Thu, 14 May 2009 23:23:34 -0000

Gil,

You seem to know what you are talking about. My slow computer with an AMD chip and Microsoft's Vista operating system sucks as far as I'm concerned. I don't know how to apportion the blame for my decidedly "softcore" computer. I suspect it's Microsoft's fault but I don't know how to establish that fact.

I played "Doom" a few times on my computer, but I decided I didn't want all that virtual guts and gore spilling on my computer screen. I guess it was fun in a totally mindless way. Like I need a high-speed computer to waste my life. I wonder how many people really need a fast computer, or a fast sports car. Funny, it's considered freedom to have a right to all sorts of nonsense. It probably more like slavery if you give it a moments thought.

Re: Yet More Deficient Thinking

trumpit — Sun, 17 May 2009 08:46:02 -0000

"If Mr. Olive spends $500 on a bottle of Chateau Latour ..."

Like Mr. Olive, who is a teacher, not a high-roller on Wall St., does that regularly. Your obtuse and extreme hypthetical betrays that your sympathies lie with the hoity-toity, not with the humble day laborer. You are no Cesar Chavez.

Maybe what Mr. Olive likes is imported Spanish olives, or maybe he prefers California ones. I hope he prefers California olives, frankly, because I live in California and I would like him to support our state's olive industry. I think I understand the subtlety, and blindness of your economic argument though. If the olive industry dries up in California, the farmers will have to grow a crop more to people's liking or even pave over the fields to build more houses.

But the end result isn't necessarily neutral or beneficial. Where there was once agricultural land there will now be more ugly tract homes to blight the landscape and make some crass developer rich. How low people will sink, dig, or pave over to make a fast buck is what is truly disgusting about this. Yet you see the world through rose-colored glasses as if nothing that humans "freely" choose to do is bad. You are wrong, and people, collectively through government, must put a stop to the rich developers and Wall St. bankers until we are all made dirt poor by it, even it all the dirt is asphalted over. Chasing money above all else IS bad, and until you guys that want to sip champagne while other do your bidding get the message, there is no hope for the planet or for your failed theories about how the world works.

Re: Yet More Deficient Thinking

trumpit — Sun, 17 May 2009 10:16:48 -0000

You failed to dissect my arguement in any meaningful or substantial way, LOwJOe. You are another panderer to the rich and powerful. Fortunately, you will be outvoted from now on, and you become increasing irrelevent to any reasonable, and fruitful discourse. In other words, you are a failure and a troll, just like many others around here.

Re: Bad Prediction, Bad Graphics

trumpit — Sun, 17 May 2009 10:26:27 -0000

Thank you for taking my advise to use your mathematical skills to make cogent and useful arguments. I think you are on the path of improvement and enlightenment.

My late father once read "The Hite Report" which was a bestseller on the latest findings on female sexuality. He told me that he had a math phobia from a young age, and that he was unable to understand the graphs and charts in the book, so he simply skipped them. Good math skills are useful and fun. Be happy you have them, and can use them profitably in your chosen profession.

Re: Economizing on Resource Use, Including the Use of Labor, Is Key to Prosperity

trumpit — Wed, 20 May 2009 19:03:02 -0000

I suppose Martyn figured that the workers who became unemployed as a result of Indians doing the work instead could always enter the priesthood like he did. It may have been the case that more Indians were employed to do the same work as the Britishers formerly did, but that they were paid far less. Martyn doesn't express an opinion on that, I guess. Martyn may have liked the idea high unemployment because it gave him a chance to moralize about the evils of idleness, and the godliness of austere, ascetic living. As a self-interested man of the cloth he would need a flock of parishioners to minister to - the needier the better to have their souls saved. Just wait until his congregation dumped Cristianity for Hinduism. Martyn would have to get retrained as a swami or risk being one of the unemployed, idle loafers that he likely condemned to hell.

I find it kind of tragic that you have to dig the bottom of the barrel to find obsure "economists" that say something that excites you, basically a reaffirmation of your way of thinking. Are you trying to start a Martyn fan club? You may have more luck forming a My Favorite Martian retro 60's geeky fan club. I would gladly join that club.

Re: A Tax By Any Other Name….

trumpit — Sun, 31 May 2009 23:22:36 -0000

I blame Milton Friedman for all the red tape. He said that corporate social responsibility was a myth; that companies were in business to make money, period. This sorry implication of this amoral stance was that a business could, no must, pollute a stream to make an extra penny if there was no LAW against it. Unfortunately, people believed uncle milty, and they thrust it upon government to make businesses do the right thing. It was no longer the company's fault for selling tainted meat, it was the government inspectors' fault. I've left out the ugly, slow, faulty legal system -- rigged in more ways than one in favor of the well-to-do -- whereby everybody sues everybody else on an ongoing basis. Even here, thanks to that MF, people expect government to sue and fine the corporation for misdeeds such as anti-competitive practices. Like they are really going to police themselves when it's not profitable to do so. That's the paradox that he conveniently overlooked: no government and no social responsibility of business. Plainly, that will never work out. When did I fully realize that Dr. MF was a loser? When he commandeered a youthful choir to sing an inane song about the fact that business are in business to make money. You can watch it for yourself on Youtube. Wow, how enlightening! What an weird little man he was; and a hero, and cult figure to the equally strange and misguided.

Re: Why Greater Differences in Incomes?

trumpit — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 10:27:03 -0000

I'm nostalgic for the "duck and cover" drills of the 50's. I think that bomb shelters should be the focus of the remaining stimulus funds. Then we can prove once and for all if paying someone to dig a hole, stimulates the economy.

The coming nuclear wars with Kim Junk-ill and the mullah rag tops in Iran will just be the beginning. So, I seriously believe that mirror underground cities should be built on a crash program to save civilization after the great cities of the world are pulverized by nuclear-tipped missiles in a few minutes. The great equalizing effect of WWIII will dwarf anything that has come before. When there is nothing left to buy, Gates' and Buffets' billions will mean nothing. Like Mr. Beaudreaux said in another strange post, the billionaires will be indistinguishable from the rest of us. That goes for their corpses or ashes as well.

Don't you just love my morbid posts? Sorry, but I think the end it inevitable and not long off.

Re: The more the better, right?

trumpit — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:36:27 -0000

I believe that price tag would really be extravagant if Obama were assasinated. This country is full of angry, armed-to-the-teeth, hoosier right-wingers that hate Obama and want him dead before he supports more abortions, more gay marriages, overturns "Don't ask don't tell," and turns this country into the United Socialist States of America or the USS of A. John Wilkes Booth assasinated Lincoln during a play at Ford's theater. There are copycat killers waitng in the wings.

The recent killing of a prominent abortion doctor by a "pro-lifer" fanatic is par for the course in this wacked out country of losers. I only hope someone tasted his food before he took a bite to check for poison.

Re: Feynman on social science

trumpit — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:37:13 -0000

Medicines containing derivatives of salicylic acid, structurally similar to aspirin, have been in medical use since ancient times. Salicylate-rich willow bark extract became recognized for its specific effects on fever, pain and inflammation in the mid-eighteenth century. By the nineteenth century pharmacists were experimenting with and prescribing a variety of chemicals related to salicylic acid, the active component of willow extract. - Wikipedia

Thank nature for producing the Willow tree. The birds and the bees uses the tree for lodging and sustenance The bark was used as we use aspirin today for a variety of ailments such as headaches. Swallowing an electrode or diode will only make you sick.

It is natural for Feynman or anyone to think that what they do is paramount. He didn't strike me as overly arrogant, so it's okay for him to think that what he does has more relevance and is more "real" or tangible than what the other fellow does. Millions of people believe in absurd religious beliefs and kill one another over it. Why do physicists work for the evilest people and most theocratic regimes in the world to make the most destructive nuclear weapons? A physicist without a soul is a piece of garbage. And that is coming from someone who quivers when people mention the human "soul" and deny it to other living things. Moral philosophy is light years ahead of the amoral physicist or evil 3rd world dictator. Physics is not the end all and be all of enlightenment. People cope with gravity without even knowing it exists. Physicists know that it exists and how it works but don't know what's "behind" it. Religions seek to explain the world but tell incredible stories to do so. Science should defeat mythology, but has failed to do so in the minds of the masses. That is why we are on the brink of WWIII. The world is a nightmare for which there is no awakening from or escaping. It's here to stay until it's no longer here. You can quote me on that.

Re: Socialism

trumpit — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 16:21:11 -0000

I don't know if calling someone a liberal is a winning tactic anymore as it was when George Bush the 1st ran against Dukakis. But rest assured that the right-wing propaganda machines are working hard for the next smear campaign. Nixon was the epitomy of using labels to insinuate innuendos about someone to destroy them unfairly. The American people are a gullible bunch of gun-totting hoosiers. They love a good smear that sticks like glue on the hapless.

Re: Still probably right but for the wrong reasons

trumpit — Sun, 07 Jun 2009 21:28:18 -0000

I don't think the rest of stimulus package should be spent as planned. The money will be needed to pay for the coming nuclear wars with North Korea and Iran. Mark my words. As long as we are not nuked ourselves, and put out of commission, most every able body person will be employed for the war effort. The same cannot be said for Seoul, South Korea, that will be made a sea of fire by the North Korean military. North Korea will be obliterated of course. Japan may suffer severe damage and loss of life as well. Israel will probably use the 2nd Korean war as a cover for a massive attack on Iran. I predict all this will happen and trigger a 2nd Great Depression as bad or worse than the 1st one. Evil, or if you prefer, evil people in power simply cannot be stopped, as history has demonstrated time and time again.

Re: Perils of Protectionism

trumpit — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 07:51:06 -0000

Mr. Golisano, a billionaire business executive, had spent heavily to help Mr. Smith and other Democrats win control of the Senate in the November election, and was angry to hear they were now planning to raise taxes on the wealthy. He expected an audience befitting a major financial patron. -New York Times

Free markets? Free trade? I have evidence to the contrary.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/nyregion/10albany.html?hp

Re: Perils of Protectionism

trumpit — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:57:57 -0000

"Free trade is simply the absence of trade restrictions - the absence of officious interference with those engaged in consensual capitalist acts."

I found the wording here to be offensive to my refined sensibilities. Usually you hear about governmental/church interference with those engaged in consensual sexual acts. The doctor co-opted the phase to make it seem like that billionaire's from Rochester privacy is being invaded upon. The truth is the rich capitalists are invading upon our freedoms by the nanosecond. We are collectively made much worse off by their interference with the operation of government and by their dominance of the economic playing fields. That point must be made as a counterpoise to the good doctor.

Re: Source of Desirable Jobs

trumpit — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 21:56:39 -0000

I read somewhere that the major U.S. export to China was trash. I'm glad our trash has a place to go other than into an overflowing, reeking, landfill. Man's desire to turn water into gold has evidently been accomplished by the Chinese in a manner of speaking. They turn U.S. trash into new goods for export. Then the efficient recyling process starts all over again with another infusion of trash into their smoking, polluting factories. They export their smog gratis when it drifts across the Pacific to the California coast. We absord their "free" pollution into our lungs and bodies at incomputable cost. The science of economics used to describe the cost and benefits of free trade is still in flux. And those economists who can only see the benefits of free trade and not the costs, hidden or apparent, are flummoxed and boxed inside the confines of their preconceived ideas and prejudices. An economics redux is needed to prevent more acid reflux on the part of the gullible vox populi. Meanwhile, the influx of trash and trashy foreign made products will continue unabated because money, sex. and 4x4's are all that matters to some of us. The crux of free trade is that it will surely end in a hex placed on humanity and a pall, and unremitting miasma of dreck upon our beloved Gaia.

Re: Source of Desirable Jobs

trumpit — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 22:15:57 -0000

This (follow the link) is what the Indonesians think that their national parks should best be used for: turning them all into capitalist Hong Kongs. Milton Friedman would be proud of them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/14/world/asia/14borneo.html?hp