or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Better off now than 8 years ago?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Better off now than 8 years ago? - Page 4

post #121 of 188
Man you leave this thread for about a day and it becomes a three ring circus!

Sigh! Jazzy, SSLarson, or whoever because the way you post not the content you sound like someone who's been here before. If the signatures the same that pretty well ties it up.

I sighted Krugman. That wasn't my own interpretation!
Quote:
No, I am not a Nobel Prize winning economist. Are you?

Next you'll be telling me Al Gore is an expert on "global warming".

Jimmac is taking the analysis of one economist and disregarding the analysis of many other so-called "economic experts", as has been pointed out by Taskiss and involuntary_serf.

Also the economist ( Stock Broker ) that trumpy uses has a philosophy that it dimametrically opposed to Krugman"s. I attended a lecture at work where Mr. Krugman was speaking and I think he's got the best handle on the situation. The ideas that the conservatives use haven't been working out too well.

Also his credentials are better than the guy trumpy subscribes to.


And trumpy!

Quote:
Well I have something to share. The speculation is alway that the same people keep coming back and posting under new handles when the reality is.. new people are actually posting under the old handles.

See...Trumptman is a nom de plume. I'll now share with you the real story of Trumptman as far as I know it.

Well, Trumptman had grown so rich, he wanted to retire. He sent me a PM and he told me his secret. 'I am not Trumptman', he said. 'My name is Ryan; I inherited the handle from the previous Trumptman, just as you will inherit it from me. The man I inherited it from is not the real Trumptman either. His name was Cummerbund. The real Trumptman has been retired 5 years and living like a king in Patagonia.'

So as usual, you have it not only wrong, but completely backwards. No one disappeared, merely became Trumptman when they realized their own handles would never have the same notorious reputation.

There you have it. Now can we move on to topics again, and yes, I'll most likely kill you all in the morning so, sleep well.

I don't know what kind of drugs you've been doing but I want some!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #122 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taskiss View Post

Posts that degenerate into "appeals to authority" might as well not exist - the "authorities" in economics such as Krugman and Barro are already engaged in public argument and I don't see how parroting them here accomplishes anything other than giving a false sense of superiority. After all, once a particular direction is chosen, then you have no idea what the results of the other directions would have been.

As far as what some would do - well, doing "nothing" is a legitimate course of action. If folks would wait for something to break before making an effort to fix it, I believe it would go a long way towards recovering fiscal balance.

Prop up people, not businesses. Extend and increase unemployment benefits. Carrying the banking industry or the auto industry more than they've been carried will just perpetuate failed industries and prevent them from being replaced.

A "better" solution can't occur when folks continue to prop up the basically "old way" of doing things.

I've already noted the necessity of sighting authority or didn't you read why? Here you have to support your argument ( just like you would in a debate class in school ) with facts or the knowlege of someone who is a recognized authority. The fact of the matter is we don't have any way of knowing that we're not talking to a 16 year old the basement using daddy's computer. Get it?

Taking things at face value here doesn't amount to much.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #123 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

Friedrich Hayek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek) was a Nobel prize winning economist and he'd have something very different to say than Paul Krugman.

In fact, Hayek's Nobel prize was for "pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and for their penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena." which strikes me as much more relevant to the current crisis than what Mr. Krugman received his Nobel prize for which was ""for his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity."

Well one thing that is different between him and Krugman is that Krugman's still alive!

While the basic rules still apply the world's very different place with different variables ( the nature of credit for one ) than when Mr. Hayek did most of his work.

While there are some similarities to the depression and these times some ( like my econo professor friend at work has said " Uncharted territory " ).

And yes Mr. Krugman's a liberal! He doesn't like George Bush or Pat Buchanan at all. Which is a plus in my book.

You see the conservatives have had their time in the sun. They've had most of the control of both arms of government for a long time. And well here we are. So they've basically had their time at bat.

Time for something different before these tired, failed old policies send us nose first into the ground.

The american people realize that. That's why they voted the way they did. Now if Obama fails in the same manner then he'll face the same fate. But we're not even close to a time where we can say he's a failure. For that you'll just have to wait. At least a year or so before you can say " There's no positive effect ".
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #124 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

The people of Fargo, North Dakota acted.

The people of New Orleans, Louisiana reacted.

Witness the different results.

Ah, yes. Classic class warfare. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that your statement is code for "Blacks fucked up and Whites did it right."

But I could be wrong.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #125 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

I think you mean 'multiple personality disorders' at work.

Does anyone really think that a random someone is just surfin the web, comes across an Apple Computer Forum, finds the semi-hidden Political sub-forum, and registers just so they can spout exactly the same nonsense as the last alais of this batshit crazy winger did.

I recon trumpy gives his tenants $5 off a months rent, if they come and support him every night.

Quote:
I think you mean 'multiple personality disorders' at work.


Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #126 of 188
I tried reading all the posts in this thread. But I couldn't. It's just way too frickin stupid!
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #127 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

I tried reading all the posts in this thread. But I couldn't. It's just way too frickin stupid!

Quote:
I tried reading all the posts in this thread.



They say you'll want to stick hot pokers in your eyes if you do!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #128 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Well one thing that is different between him and Krugman is that Krugman's still alive!

I don't see how that's relevant. Can you refute Hayek's reasoning rather than just saying "Krugman's still alive"?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

While the basic rules still apply the world's very different place with different variables ( the nature of credit for one ) than when Mr. Hayek did most of his work.

How? How exactly is the "nature of credit" different? How exactly is it that his reasoning and economic principles do not apply now?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

While there are some similarities to the depression and these times some ( like my econo professor friend at work has said " Uncharted territory " ).

The similarities are striking and the differences are frightening. The same kind of responses that were used then (and deepened, worsened and lengthened the depression) are being used now. But there are fundamental differences that make things much more precarious. The lack of a gold standard to restrain the Fed from printing all the money it wants. The level of public debt. The level of personal debt. The level of socialism already existing in the country.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

You see the conservatives have had their time in the sun. They've had most of the control of both arms of government for a long time.

I didn't see any conservatives in control in recent years. You must have a different definition of "conservative" than I do.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

So they've basically had their time at bat.

I've watched you repeat this basic line ad nauseam as if it's some magical charm that makes your reasoning valid and truthful. Simply saying something like "they've had their chance" doesn't do anything to make what Obama is doing right. Nothing. Not at all. Not one bit. Period. Obama's policies must stand on their own merits. They don;t become right because "the other guys had their time at bat". That's simply ridiculous and fallacious reasoning.
post #129 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

I don't see how that's relevant. Can you refute Hayek's reasoning rather than just saying "Krugman's still alive"?




How? How exactly is the "nature of credit" different? How exactly is it that his reasoning and economic principles do not apply now?




The similarities are striking and the differences are frightening. The same kind of responses that were used then (and deepened, worsened and lengthened the depression) are being used now. But there are fundamental differences that make things much more precarious. The lack of a gold standard to restrain the Fed from printing all the money it wants. The level of public debt. The level of personal debt. The level of socialism already existing in the country.




I didn't see any conservatives in control in recent years. You must have a different definition of "conservative" than I do.




I've watched you repeat this basic line ad nauseam as if it's some magical charm that makes your reasoning valid and truthful. Simply saying something like "they've had their chance" doesn't do anything to make what Obama is doing right. Nothing. Not at all. Not one bit. Period. Obama's policies must stand on their own merits. They don;t become right because "the other guys had their time at bat". That's simply ridiculous and fallacious reasoning.

No. I'm, sorry but facts are facts and all the wishful thinking in the world won't change that.

There's nothing " simply ridiculous and fallacious " about it.

They had as much control as one party can have and look! Things are more fucked up than ever! That speaks volumes!

And your attempt to misquote me!
Quote:
Simply saying something like "they've had their chance" doesn't do anything to make what Obama is doing right.


Here is the part you left out :
Quote:
Now if Obama fails in the same manner then he'll face the same fate. But we're not even close to a time where we can say he's a failure. For that you'll just have to wait. At least a year or so before you can say " There's no positive effect

But you seemed to ignore that part and keep the parts that fit your argument. Pathetic!

Sorry but when you do that you don't earn any points around here! Or respect.

Quote:
How exactly is the "nature of credit different?

Are you really saying that the nature of how people barrow money, credit cards, and the like are the way things were in the early to middle 20th century?

Really are you saying that? Are you saying that spending patterns are the same because that would undo trumptman's whole " Boomer " premise!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #130 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

While the basic rules still apply the world's very different place with different variables ( the nature of credit for one ) than when Mr. Hayek did most of his work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Are you really saying that the nature of how people barrow[sic] money, credit cards, and the like are the way things were in the early to middle 20th century?

How exactly is the "nature of credit" different?
How exactly does this difference invalidate Hayek's economic reasoning, principles and prescriptions?
How exactly don't Hayek's economic principles, theories and prescriptions apply today?

Please be specific. Thanks.
post #131 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by involuntary_serf View Post

How exactly is the "nature of credit" different?
How exactly does this difference invalidate Hayek's economic reasoning, principles and prescriptions?
How exactly don't Hayek's economic principles, theories and prescriptions apply today?

Please be specific. Thanks.

Ok I won't spend alot of time on this ( I mean Jazzy got away with not spending alot of time on my question didn't he? ). But for starters just to outline some of the things about people's behaivour that have been discovered since Hayek's theories have been proposed

http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell...k_critique.pdf

Also why don't you show me how they relate to today? I mean the first credit card didn't exist before 1949.

Then of course there's this : http://economics.sbs.ohio-state.edu/...7056/07056.pdf

I know this doesn't completely answer your questions but anything I list will be viewed as just opinion. It doesn't take an economist to see that things in the business world have changed radically since even the 70's.

Krugmans ideas are new and liberal. You should know that when you copy/pasted about him from Wikipedia.

I mean you should have listed his works while you were at it :

Quote:
Awards
1991, American Economic Association, John Bates Clark Medal.[39] Since it is awarded to only one person, once every two years, The Economist describes the Clark Medal as 'slightly harder to get than a Nobel prize'.[29]
1995, Adam Smith Award of the National Association for Business Economics
2000, H.C. Recktenwald Prize in Economics, awarded by University of Erlangen-Nuremberg in Germany.
2002, Editor and Publisher, Columnist of the Year.[62]
2004, Fundación PrÃ*ncipe de Asturias (Spain), Prince of Asturias Awards in Social Sciences.[40]
2004, Doctor of Humane Letters honoris causa, Haverford College[1]
2008, Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, formally The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel - for his contributions to New Trade Theory.[63] He became the twelfth John Bates Clark Medal winner to be awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize.

[edit] Published work

[edit] Academic books (authored or coauthored)
The Spatial Economy - Cities, Regions and International Trade (July 1999), with Masahisa Fujita and Anthony Venables. MIT Press, ISBN 0262062046
The Self Organizing Economy (February 1996), ISBN 1557866988
EMU and the Regions (December 1995), with Guillermo de la Dehesa. ISBN 1567080383
Development, Geography, and Economic Theory (Ohlin Lectures) (September 1995), ISBN 0262112035
Foreign Direct Investment in the United States (3rd Edition) (February 1995), with Edward M. Graham. ISBN 0881322040
World Savings Shortage (September 1994), ISBN 0881321613
What Do We Need to Know About the International Monetary System? (Essays in International Finance, No 190 July 1993) ISBN 0881650978
Currencies and Crises (June 1992), ISBN 0262111659
Geography and Trade (Gaston Eyskens Lecture Series) (August 1991), ISBN 0262111594
The Risks Facing the World Economy (July 1991), with Guillermo de la Dehesa and Charles Taylor. ISBN 1567080731
Has the Adjustment Process Worked? (Policy Analyses in International Economics, 34) (June 1991), ISBN 0881321168
Rethinking International Trade (April 1990), ISBN 0262111489
Trade Policy and Market Structure (March 1989), with Elhanan Helpman. ISBN 0262081822
Exchange-Rate Instability (Lionel Robbins Lectures) (November 1988), ISBN 0262111403
Adjustment in the World Economy (August 1987) ISBN 1567080235
Market Structure and Foreign Trade: Increasing Returns, Imperfect Competition, and the International Economy (May 1985), with Elhanan Helpman. ISBN 0262081504

[edit] Academic books (edited or coedited)
Currency Crises (National Bureau of Economic Research Conference Report) (September 2000), ISBN 0226454622
Trade with Japan : Has the Door Opened Wider? (National Bureau of Economic Research Project Report) (March 1995), ISBN 0226454592
Empirical Studies of Strategic Trade Policy (National Bureau of Economic Research Project Report) (April, 1994), co-edited with Alasdair Smith. ISBN 0226454606
Exchange Rate Targets and Currency Bands (October 1991), co-edited with Marcus Miller. ISBN 0521415330
Strategic Trade Policy and the New International Economics (January 1986), ISBN 0262111128

[edit] Economics textbooks
Economics: European Edition (Spring 2007), with Robin Wells and Kathryn Graddy. ISBN 0716799561
Macroeconomics (February 2006), with Robin Wells. ISBN 0716767635
Economics (December 2005), with Robin Wells. ISBN 1572591501
Microeconomics (March 2004), with Robin Wells. ISBN 0716759977
International Economics: Theory and Policy, with Maurice Obstfeld. 7th Edition (2006), ISBN 0321293835; 1st Edition (1998), ISBN 0673521869

[edit] Books for a general audience
The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008 (December 2008) ISBN 0393071014
The Conscience of a Liberal (October 2007) ISBN 0393060691
The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century (September 2003) ISBN 0393058506
A book of his New York Times columns, many deal with the economic policies of the Bush administration or the economy in general.
Fuzzy Math: The Essential Guide to the Bush Tax Plan (May 4, 2001) ISBN 0393050629
The Return of Depression Economics (May 1999) ISBN 039304839X
Considers the long economic stagnation of Japan through the 1990s, the Asian financial crisis, and problems in Latin America.
The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008 (December 2008) ISBN 0393071014
The Accidental Theorist and Other Dispatches from the Dismal Science (May 1998) ISBN 0393046389
Essay collection, primarily from Krugman's writing for Slate.
Pop Internationalism (March 1996) ISBN 0262112108
Essay collection, covering largely the same ground as Peddling Prosperity.
Peddling Prosperity: Economic Sense and Nonsense in an Age of Diminished Expectations (April 1995) ISBN 0393312925
History of economic thought from the first rumblings of revolt against Keynesian economics to the present, for the layman.
The Age of Diminished Expectations: U.S. Economic Policy in the 1990s (1990) ISBN 026211156X
A "briefing book" on the major policy issues around the economy.
Revised and Updated, January 1994, ISBN 0262610922
Third Edition, August 1997, ISBN 0262112248

[edit] Selected academic articles
(1996) 'Are currency crises self-fulfilling?' NBER Macroeconomics Annual 11, pp. 345–78.
(1991) 'Increasing returns and economic geography'. Journal of Political Economy 99, pp. 483–99.
(1991) 'Target zones and exchange rate dynamics'. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106 (3), pp. 669–82.
(1991) 'History versus expectations'. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106 (2), pp. 651–67.
(1981) 'Intra-industry specialization and the gains from trade'. Journal of Political Economy 89, pp. 959–73.
(1980) 'Scale economies, product differentiation, and the pattern of trade'. American Economic Review 70, pp. 950–59.
(1979) 'A model of balance-of-payments crises'. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking 11, pp. 311–25.
(1979) 'Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade'. Journal of International Economics 9, pp. 469–79.

[edit] References
^ See inogoloronunciation of Paul Krugman.
^ Foreign Policy: Top 100 Public Intellectuals. May 2008. Accessed 10-13-08. Krugman ranks in their top 100 list.
^ Krugman Wins Nobel for economics, BBC News, 10-13-08, accessed 10-15-08.
^ Economics 2008, Nobelprize.org, accessed 10-15-08.
^ Paul Krugman, "Your questions answered", blog, January 10, 2003, retrieved December 19, 2007
^ Paul Krugman, "About my son", New York Times blog, December 19, 2007
^ Interview, U.S. Economist Krugman Wins Nobel Prize in Economics "PBS, Jim Lehrer News Hour", October 13, 2008, transcript retrieved October 14, 2008
^ a b Hirsh, Michael (4 March 1996). "A Nobel-Bound Economist Punctures the C[onventional] W[isdom]--and Not a Few Big-Name Washington Egos". Newsweek.
^ "2008 January - Paul Krugman - Op-Ed Columnist - New York Times Blog". Krugman.blogs.nytimes.com. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/. Retrieved on 2008-10-13.
^ Catherine Rampell (October 13, 2008). "Paul Krugman Wins Economics Nobel - Economix Blog - NYTimes.com". Economix.blogs.nytimes.com. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...mics-nobel/?em. Retrieved on 2008-10-13.
^ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...mics-nobel/?em
^ "Microsoft Word - sciback_cover_ek_2008_FINAL.doc" (PDF). http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/e...8/ecoadv08.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-10-13.
^ "Top 5% Authors, as of September 2008". Research Papers in Economics. 2008-09. http://ideas.repec.org/top/top.person.all.html. Retrieved on 2008-10-13.
^ Note: Krugman modeled a 'preference for diversity' by assuming a CES utility function like that in A. Dixit and J. Stiglitz (1977), 'Monopolistic competition and optimal product diversity', American Economic Review 67.
^ P. Krugman (1981), 'Trade, accumulation, and uneven development', Journal of Development Economics 8, pp. 149-61.
^ 'Bold strokes: a strong economic stylist wins the Nobel', The Economist, Oct. 16, 2008.
^ a b In Praise of Cheap Labor by Paul Krugman, Slate, March 21, 1997
^ Economics: the final frontier
^ Nobel Prize Committee 'Information for the Public', page 3.
^ 'Honoring Paul Krugman' Economix blog of the New York Times, by Edward Glaeser, Oct. 13, 2008.
^ Craig Burnside, Martin Eichenbaum, and Sergio Rebelo (2008), 'Currency crisis models', New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd ed.
^ Paul Krugman's Japan page
^ Krugman, Paul (December 1994). "The Myth of Asia's Miracle". Foreign Affairs (www.foreignaffairs.org). http://www.foreignaffairs.org/199411...s-miracle.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-26.
^ (Krugman 1996a, Introduction)
^ a b Confessore, Nicholas (December 2002). "Comparative Advantage". Washington Monthly. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/fea...onfessore.html. Retrieved on 2007-02-05.
^ Krugman, Paul (September 18, 2007). "Introducing This Blog". The New York Times. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/200...ing-this-blog/. Retrieved on 2007-09-19.
^ Washington Monthly profile from December 2002
^ ""The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century"". Powell's Books. http://www.powells.com/biblio/61-0393326055-0. Retrieved on 2007-11-22.
^ a b The Economist - The one-handed economist Paul Krugman and the controversial art of popularising economics, November 13, 2003
^ Krugman, Paul. "The Great Wealth Transfer." Rolling Stone. November 30, 2006
^ Oct 17 2007- Krugman On Healthcare, Tax Cuts, Social Security, the Mortgage Crisis and Alan Greenspan, in response to Alan Greenspan's Sept 24 appearance with Naomi Klein on Democracy Now!
^ November 22, 2007- Tomansky, Michael The Partisan
^ "How bad is the mortgage crisis going to get?". http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/14/news...ion=2008031705. Retrieved on 2008-03-17.
^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwqcLbZJ4HA
^ Krugman, Paul (2005-8-29). "Greenspan and the Bubble". New York Times (New York Times). http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/29/op...29krugman.html. Retrieved on 2008-12-07.
^ Nobelpristagaren i ekonomi 2008: Paul Krugman, speech by Paul Krugman (accessed December 26, 2008)
^ Reckonings; A Rent Affair, by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, June 7, 2000
^ Ricardo's difficult idea
^ a b Avinash Dixit, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 7, No. 2 (Spring, 1993), pp. 173-188, In Honor of Paul Krugman: Winner of the John Bates Clark Medal, Retrieved March 28, 2007.
^ a b Paul Krugman, 2004. Retrieved March 28, 2007.
^ The New York Times, "Columnist Biography: Paul Krugman". Retrieved April 15, 2007.
^ True Blue Americans, by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, May 7, 2002
^ Driving Under the Influence, by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, June 25, 2000
^ A Failed Mission, by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, February 4, 2003
^ Reckonings; Pursuing Happiness, by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, March 29, 2000
^ Reckonings; Blessed Are the Weak, by Paul Krugman, The New York Times, May 3, 2000
^ Incidents From My Career, by Paul Krugman, Princeton University Press, Retrieved 10 December 2008
^ Newsweek April 6, 2009: Obama's Nobel Headache by Evan Thomas
^ "Newsweek, The Great Debunker: A Nobel-bound Economist Punctures the CW - and Not a Few Big-Name Washington Egos". http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/Eco...ulkrugman.html.
^ Peter Ferrara, National Review, The Hysterical Opposition, August 22, 2001. Retrieved March 28, 2007.
^ Jack Shafer, Slate, Raines-ing in Andrew Sullivan
^ Thomas, Evan (2009-03-28). "Obama’s Nobel Headache". Newsweek. http://www.newsweek.com/id/191393/page/3. Retrieved on 2009-03-31.
^ The Economist, Face Value: Paul Krugman, one-handed economist
^ a b Dismal science, revisited. By Clive Cook. The Atlantic. Published 10 February 2009.
^ War and non-remembrance. By Paul Krugman. The New York Times. Published January 22, 2009.
^ Daniel B. Klein with Harika Anna Bartlett, "Left Out: A Critique of Paul Krugman Based on a Comprehensive Account of His New York Times Columns, 1997 through 2006", Econ Journal Watch 5:1, 109-133.
^ Krugman in Wonderland, William L. Anderson, Forbes Magazine, 10.13.08
^ The Privileges of Opinion, the Obligations of Fact
^ a b c Paul Krugman, "My Connection With Enron, One More Time", Retrieved March 28, 2007.
^ Paul Krugman, "Me and Enron". Retrieved March 28, 2007.
^ http://www.pkarchive.org/personal/EnronFAQ.html ref name="EnronFAQ">Paul Krugman, "My Connection With Enron, One More Time", Retrieved October 27, 2008.
^ Mother Jones: Paul Krugman., August 7, 2005. Retrieved March 28, 2007.
^ "Nobel Prize in Economics". Swedish Academy. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/e...aureates/2008/. Retrieved on 2008-10-13.

I'm not an expert on the economy and have stated that. I'm guessing you aren't either. That's why we have to turn to an authority on these matters.

The guy's had quite a impressive career so he must be doing something right.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #132 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Ok I won't spend alot of time on this ( I mean Jazzy got away with not spending alot of time on my question didn't he? ).

Huh? Because you think someone else didn't spend enough time answering your question to them, you using that as an excuse to not spend time answering my question to you?

Brilliant. Now I know what I'm dealing with.


[QUOTE=jimmac;1399672]
http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell...k_critique.pdf

Then of course there's this : http://economics.sbs.ohio-state.edu/...7056/07056.pdf

We're going to play the link-slapping game? OK.

http://www.aier.org/ejw/archive/doc_...ent&format=raw

http://www.classicalprinciples.com/0...uesKrugman.pdf


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Also why don't you show me how they relate to today?

Because you are the one claiming Hayek doesn't apply today but Krugman (Keynes) does. I'm politely asking you to support this claim.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I mean the first credit card didn't exist before 1949.

First, that doesn't fundamentally change the "nature" of credit, simply the availability of it. But, just the same, how does this new innovation/change in the credit markets invalidate basic Hayekian and Austrian theory?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

but anything I list will be viewed as just opinion.

Not if you present logic and reasoning and support for that logic and reasoning.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

It doesn't take an economist to see that things in the business world have changed radically since even the 70's.

Yes, but the fundamentals of how the economy works haven't changed. And even if they have, you haven't demonstrated how these changes invalidate basic Hayekian and Austrian theory.

My whole point was that you are running around saying "Krugman...Nobel prize economist!"..."Krugman...Nobel prize economist!"..."Krugman...Nobel prize economist!"..."Krugman...Nobel prize economist!" repeating it is as if there are no other viable counter views (from Nobel prize economists). When there are and they are worthy of examination.

Your dismissal and rejection of Hayek (another Nobel Prize-winning economist who undoubtedly would provide a very different diagnosis and prescribe a very different course of action than Krugman) is simply hand-waving at this point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'm not an expert on the economy

Quite clearly. But it isn't hard to become reasonably informed and educated on the fundamentals.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'm guessing you aren't either.

Whatever makes you feel good.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

That's why we have to turn to an authority on these matters.

Turning to "experts" is one thing. However, there are two things that one must keep in mind. First is if they have biases that bring into question their objectivity. This is clearly the case with Krugman. Second, logic and reason is within reach of all of us (not just the "experts") so we can each question and examine the claims made by so-called "experts" for their validity instead of blindly accepting them because they sound right and happen to comport with how one wants things to be.
post #133 of 188
jimmac,

Here is an accomplished and respected economist who clearly has a different take on things than Krugman.

Dr. Walter E. Williams

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #134 of 188
Jassguru seens to be two parts Jubulem and one part dmz.

involuntary_serf seems to be all parts sslarson.

Also, Economics is a social science, meaning that it was not, is not, will never be, a hard science, you know like chemistry or physics.

Heck, Economics isn't even at the level of the various fields of engineering (also known as the applied sciences).

As the most recent events have shown it was all about making more money through new financial vehicles. Bundling and then passing it off to the next schmuck.

Greed.

Go figure.

But back on topic, I am worse off than I was 8 years ago.

Then I live in a rundown trailer park and worked at Wal-Mart for minimum wage with no benefits.

Now I live in a cardboard refrigerator box under the I-20E overpass which is within walking distance to said Wal-Mart Super Center. It's amazing what you can get from the trash bins that Wal-Mart throws out each night.

So basically, I'm unemployed and homeless.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #135 of 188
Just think about how much better off you'll be when the Social Security System is bankrupt!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #136 of 188
Am I personally better off now that I was 8 years ago? I don't know if you're talking strictly in monetary terms. As a whole, I would have to say without hesitation: yes.

A little background:

I was laid of from my previous job in December of 2008. I was fortunate enough to be able to find another (and better) job at the end of January (2009), but in the mean-time we were not able to make our house payments, were obviously not living within our means at the time, and are now facing foreclosure.

We have had our home up for sale since the beginning of the year, and have received an offer on it, but the lender has been utterly incompetent (whether deliberately or unintentionally I am not sure) as we have tried to play by their rules and submit all the mountains of paperwork to attempt to complete a short-sale. We submitted 150 pages of documents on 3 separate occaisions, attempting on numerous other occaisions to find out if the lender had received them and how the process was going.

Yesterday we received a letter from the lender informing us that our case had been closed because several attempts to contact us to obtain missing information had been unsuccessful. We had not received any letter, phone call, or e-mail regarding any missing information until yesterday's letter. When we called to find out what was going on, they told us we would need to recompile everything all over again and resubmit the information.

To say that I am frustrated with the whole mess would be an understatement. We will keep trying for the short sale, but I am fully expecting the end result to be foreclosure in spite of our efforts.

In the mean time, we've moved into a condo, and while it is smaller, it's home. And we've finally realized how important it is to not live on the edge of our income, but to try to live well within our means.

Do I blame the government for my getting laid off? No, I do not. I should have been financially prepared for hardship. If I hadn't gotten laid off, all it would have taken is an expensive medical emergency or some other significant event to throw everything off. We were living right on the edge, and all it took was a little push to send us over.

Do I blame my former employer for laying me off? No, I do not. It was a decision made to keep the company in business. The company goes under, then a lot more people are out of a job. I understand how business works, and I don't take it personally. Again, I should have had some savings built up, should have been living within my means.

Do I expect the government to bail me out? No, I do not. Nor do I want the government to do so. It is unconstitutional. And it is wrong. We made a mistake in not being more financially responsible, we should take full responsibility for the consequences of that mistake. Nobody took advantage of us. Nobody forced us to sign on the dotted line. We knew that we were pushing the limits of our income, but we went ahead, thinking that I would get a raise or that our situation would improve somehow. In retrospect, it was a bad decision, and we should take responsibility for the consequences of it. If that means our credit is ruined for the next 5-7 years and we can't get any loans during that time, so be it.

Even in light of all that, there is absolutely no denying that I am better off than I was 8 years ago. Career-wise I have striven to learn as much as I can in whatever job I have and grow beyond that. In spite of being laid off and desperately looking for employment, I persisted, and was fortunate enough to land a great, stable job with a company that is growing. I have a beautiful wife and son who bring a great deal of joy to my life. I didn't have them 8 years ago. I live in a clean, modest home that is small, but adequate. I have adequate, working (for now) transportation. I live near family and friends.

I understand this is all purely anecdotal, but I guess what I'm trying to illustrate here is that I am not indifferent to the plight of those who are losing their jobs and homes as a result of the economy. These past several months have been some of the most difficult, stressful, painful months of our lives.

They have also been some of the most enlightening, rewarding, and empowering.

Are we (personally) better off than we were 8 years ago? Without a doubt.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #137 of 188
Great post!

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #138 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Great post!

yet I'm inclined to believe it about as much as this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSjazzguru

I am a newcomer to this forum. Never been here before.

Im wondering if it comes from the same place as your infamous 'problem with the missus' thread.
post #139 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

involuntary_serf seems to be all parts sslarson.

Im reckoning he is the new floorjack. He's been gone a while, and "involuntary_serf" sounds like something he would chose to make it known he was trolling. Of course, he's also been known to rip jimmacs posts into little shreds and comment on every sentence.

I must say, that given the drivel in the threads lately, that playing 'guess who' is more exciting than hearing the wingers drone on.

Analysing the formulation of sentences and grammar is more interesting than the content.
post #140 of 188
Anyway, I am better off these days thanks to segovius.

Thankfully, by the time i had worked out what he was trying to tell me, I still had enough time to prepare for now. Sadly, I wish I had got it a bit quicker.
post #141 of 188
And we're supposed to just believe that Jazzguru and Involuntary_Serf just happened to come to Apple Insider, create accounts, proceed to only post in Political Outsider as "centrists", and they're NOT someone we've seen around here before.

Uh huh.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #142 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

And we're supposed to just believe that Jazzguru and Involuntary_Serf just happened to come to Apple Insider, create accounts, proceed to only post in Political Outsider as "centrists", and they're NOT someone we've seen around here before.

Uh huh.

I think it would be better - and all over if they just came out and told us the truth, and then the more mature amongst us can get on with the task of 'discussing the issues'.

I very much doubt that includes me.
post #143 of 188
Come on Jazzguru and Involuntary_Serf! Tell us the truth. We need to get to the bottom of these issues. We need to know who you really are!

"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #144 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

yet I'm inclined to believe it about as much as this.



Im wondering if it comes from the same place as your infamous 'problem with the missus' thread.

You claim I fabricated that whole post? You believe I've been posting under several different aliases? Prove it. The burden of proof is not on me, it's on you.

Obviously, these wild speculations as to my "true identity" are a diversion--a futile attempt to discredit me rather than address the substance of my posts.

But alas, I suspect that getting you to acknowledge that I am right about anything would be as difficult as getting George W. Bush to pronounce the word "nuclear" correctly.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #145 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

And we're supposed to just believe that Jazzguru and Involuntary_Serf just happened to come to Apple Insider, create accounts, proceed to only post in Political Outsider as "centrists", and they're NOT someone we've seen around here before.

Uh huh.

Where do you get this idea that I ever claimed to be a centrist? I said I was not a member of either major political party.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #146 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

You claim I fabricated that whole post? You believe I've been posting under several different aliases? Prove it. The burden of proof is not on me, it's on you.

Obviously, these wild speculations as to my "true identity" are a diversion--a futile attempt to discredit me rather than address the substance of my posts.

But alas, I suspect that getting you to acknowledge that I am right about anything would be as difficult as getting George W. Bush to pronounce the word "nuclear" correctly.

You would be suprised what I actually agree with you on, but until you come clean - and show your intent to have an honest discussion, rather than bullshit us all, im more inclined just to take the piss a bit.

And thats why PO is dead on its face - because we all have had years to work out that what you call "debates", and what is called "issues", was just the right wing dutifully carrying out what their puppetmasters were telling them to do...

"Dictate terms and use any method of deceit to control and win the argument"

And thats why trumpy spazzed out, when he knew that years of his deceit had failed him in his ultimate goal to elect a senile old man, just so he could be a few dollars richer at the end of the term. And that was the end of PO.
post #147 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

You claim I fabricated that whole post? You believe I've been posting under several different aliases? Prove it. The burden of proof is not on me, it's on you.

Obviously, these wild speculations as to my "true identity" are a diversion--a futile attempt to discredit me rather than address the substance of my posts.

It's a bit like Obama's birth certificate.

If he had nothing to hide, why wouldn't he just tell us who he is and end this damaging speculation?

Hey ho. His unequivocal statement "I am new to this forum" is good enough for me, however. sslarsson does not post here anymore, so it's probably OK for me to say that he was a self-ordained, self-important floating stool of the kind that would make a urologist gag, and only a lame, no-balls dickhole would leave the forum after being found out for an angry right wing ideologue spaz only to come back under a new name and deny it when directly asked. So it can't be jazzguru. We must take him at his word, I fear.
post #148 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

You would be suprised what I actually agree with you on, but until you come clean - and show your intent to have an honest discussion, rather than bullshit us all, im more inclined just to take the piss a bit.

And thats why PO is dead on its face - because we all have had years to work out that what you call "debates", and what is called "issues", was just the right wing dutifully carrying out what their puppetmasters were telling them to do...

"Dictate terms and use any method of deceit to control and win the argument"

And thats why trumpy spazzed out, when he knew that years of his deceit had failed him in his ultimate goal to elect a senile old man, just so he could be a few dollars richer at the end of the term. And that was the end of PO.

Is this how you treat all newcomers to PO? Or just the ones you don't agree with? It's quite rude.

Can you please clarify your allegations against me and then include proof to back them up?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #149 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hassan i Sabbah View Post

It's a bit like Obama's birth certificate.

If he had nothing to hide, why wouldn't he just tell us who he is and end this damaging speculation?

Hey ho. His unequivocal statement "I am new to this forum" is good enough for me, however. sslarsson does not post here anymore, so it's probably OK for me to say that he was a self-ordained, self-important floating stool of the kind that would make a urologist gag, and only a lame, no-balls dickhole would leave the forum after being found out for an intellectually vapid right wing spaz only to come back under a name and deny it when directly asked. We must take him at his word, I fear.

You know, trumptman said earlier that he had bought the username off of Nick, so technically, that means Nick is an ex-member too...
post #150 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Is this how you treat all newcomers to PO? Or just the ones you don't agree with? It's quite rude.

Can you please clarify your allegations against me and then include proof to back them up?


Why should I?

kind of interesting you changed your sig too...
post #151 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

Why should I?

kind of interesting you changed your sig too...

That's what I thought.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #152 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

You know, trumptman said earlier that he had bought the username off of Nick, so technically, that means Nick is an ex-member too...

Oh, I've already been there. And how. When he 'left' the board and 'deleted' his posts after his 'thought experiment' and his weird spam attack.

I like Prince.
post #153 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

That's what I thought.

Now we know why you convienently asked for all you old posts to be deleted.

A quick question, why bother to expect honest discussion when you're pulling cheap stunts right from the off?

post #154 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

Now we know why you convienently asked for all you old posts to be deleted.

A quick question, why bother to expect honest discussion when you're pulling cheap stunts right from the off?


I haven't had any of my posts deleted.

Please detail the alleged "cheap stunts".

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #155 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I haven't had any of my posts deleted.

Please detail the alleged "cheap stunts".

The longer you maintain this bull, the longer we will get nowhere.

I dont hold out any hope of PO ever returning to the glory it once had, so I will keep up this stance forever indefinately. So if you want debate and discussion, I suggest you go elsewhere,

however if your mainly interested in running in the special olympics, then it will be fun for you to stick around. You do realise you're arguing with the forums self confirmed fruitcake dont you?

I like Prince too, especially the track 'tambourine'
post #156 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

The longer you maintain this bull, the longer we will get nowhere.

I dont hold out any hope of PO ever returning to the glory it once had, so I will keep up this stance forever indefinately. So if you want debate and discussion, I suggest you go elsewhere,

however if your mainly interested in running in the special olympics, then it will be fun for you to stick around. You do realise you're arguing with the forums self confirmed fruitcake dont you?

I like Prince too, especially the track 'tambourine'

Really? What else do the voices say?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #157 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Really? What else do the voices say?

mostly they're just noises of chickens and goats, with the occasional bleet of the sheep. Its quite hard to discern the message really, but it really helps me to come to AI, listening to the wingers really puts some meaningful clarity to their random musings.

Daisy did tell me though that she would break up with me if I disclosed our relationship with anyone. \
post #158 of 188
[QUOTE=involuntary_serf;1399705]Huh? Because you think someone else didn't spend enough time answering your question to them, you using that as an excuse to not spend time answering my question to you?

Brilliant. Now I know what I'm dealing with.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

http://ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu/~cottrell...k_critique.pdf

Then of course there's this : http://economics.sbs.ohio-state.edu/...7056/07056.pdf

We're going to play the link-slapping game? OK.

http://www.aier.org/ejw/archive/doc_...ent&format=raw

http://www.classicalprinciples.com/0...uesKrugman.pdf




Because you are the one claiming Hayek doesn't apply today but Krugman (Keynes) does. I'm politely asking you to support this claim.




First, that doesn't fundamentally change the "nature" of credit, simply the availability of it. But, just the same, how does this new innovation/change in the credit markets invalidate basic Hayekian and Austrian theory?




Not if you present logic and reasoning and support for that logic and reasoning.




Yes, but the fundamentals of how the economy works haven't changed. And even if they have, you haven't demonstrated how these changes invalidate basic Hayekian and Austrian theory.

My whole point was that you are running around saying "Krugman...Nobel prize economist!"..."Krugman...Nobel prize economist!"..."Krugman...Nobel prize economist!"..."Krugman...Nobel prize economist!" repeating it is as if there are no other viable counter views (from Nobel prize economists). When there are and they are worthy of examination.

Your dismissal and rejection of Hayek (another Nobel Prize-winning economist who undoubtedly would provide a very different diagnosis and prescribe a very different course of action than Krugman) is simply hand-waving at this point.




Quite clearly. But it isn't hard to become reasonably informed and educated on the fundamentals.




Whatever makes you feel good.




Turning to "experts" is one thing. However, there are two things that one must keep in mind. First is if they have biases that bring into question their objectivity. This is clearly the case with Krugman. Second, logic and reason is within reach of all of us (not just the "experts") so we can each question and examine the claims made by so-called "experts" for their validity instead of blindly accepting them because they sound right and happen to comport with how one wants things to be.

Quote:
Because you think someone else didn't spend enough time answering your question to them, you using that as an excuse to not spend time answering my question to you?

Brilliant. Now I know what I'm dealing with.

Really? I haven't seen you doing much!

Quote:
Whatever makes you feel good.

That says I'm right about who I'm dealing with also.

Oh! As trumpy would say : " Having trouble with the quote function? "
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #159 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

jimmac,

Here is an accomplished and respected economist who clearly has a different take on things than Krugman.

Dr. Walter E. Williams

I like this link on the page. It really kind of says it all!

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/ind...1-fc38ed4f85e3

Quote:
Update: More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

Outpouring of Skeptical Scientists Continues as 59 Scientists Added to Senate Report
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #160 of 188
Quote:
Originally Posted by nordkapp View Post

Im reckoning he is the new floorjack. He's been gone a while, and "involuntary_serf" sounds like something he would chose to make it known he was trolling. Of course, he's also been known to rip jimmacs posts into little shreds and comment on every sentence.

I must say, that given the drivel in the threads lately, that playing 'guess who' is more exciting than hearing the wingers drone on.

Analysing the formulation of sentences and grammar is more interesting than the content.

Really. You'd think they could figure out that having something to hide doesn't lend credibililty to their argument. But as you say that probably doesn't matter either as they're probably just here for a lark or for sour grapes because they lost the election.

And yes I love saying that over and over! They lost the election big time!
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Better off now than 8 years ago?