Reality's comments

« First    « Previous    Comments 4325 - 4364 of 4,364    Last »

  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 21, 11:50pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

This is bricklaying, not building a house. Most houses in the US are not built of bricks. Building a house using standard wood boards or engineered boards is much cheaper than building a brick house. For large apartment buildings, steel framing is much less expensive and safer than a giant brick building.

Plumbing, electrical work and internal finishing are also more expensive than framing.

The brick laying approach might be useful for building a brick wall/fence around the yard where those are allowed by zoning code.

BTW, the original Levitt-town took 1.5 days to build a house, on average. That was circa 1950. Much less code requirement back then. In fact, most towns and cities started to have zoning code in the 1960's, precisely to prevent the Levitt-town approach result in too many houses in their town/city.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 22, 7:10am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Muslims should not be allowed to immigrate to the US, for the simple reason that a real Muslim would not be able to take the Oath of Citizenship (which is a naturalization requirement to become a citizen of the US) without committing apostasy (holding US Constitution above Sharia Law). So the very act of taking the oath is either perjury or apostasy for a Muslim. We shouldn't force them into one or the other, so all Muslim immigration should be suspended indefinitely.

Also, immigrants choosing advocating totalitarian ideologies as their careers should be deported. We don't need uprooted transplant "intellectuals" fitting so poorly into our society that they'd resort to violent totalitarian political doctrines. We don't want monsters like Karl Marx (German immigrant to Britain), Hitler (Austrian immigrant to Germany) or Stalin (Georgian immigrant to Russia), or even men like Eugene Debs (2nd generation immigrant born to immigrant parents), or the two idiots running Jacobin Magazine (both young 1st generation immigrants). Unless both your parents are US citizens at the time of your birth, or at least one of your parent is and the other parent is not the same religious/ethnic origin (i.e. already integrated in the previous generation when born; the dad didn't import a bride from his ancestral country), you don't get to seek a career in political radicalism. That would discourage the likes of the Boston Marathon bombing brothers and Linda the cockroach. We already ban Communist party members and Nazi party members from immigrating for the same reason: discouraging radicalism among transplants. Newcomers should be encouraged to integrate and become productive members of society after arriving in the US instead of bringing the worst of their ancestral countries and spreading it in some sort of ill-conceived self-identity crisis.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 22, 7:38am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

BayArea says
Why does the left protect and defend Islam but denounces Christianity?

Is it because Muslims are a minority in the USA?


Its because the left are feckless pussies who worship violent dictatorship and dream of being abducted and raped in an episode of Stockholm Syndrome. The Left fight in order to lose.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 22, 10:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

It's quite amazing that cultists in the 17th century had more common sense and were able to save themselves by ditching communism and embracing capitalistic free market . . . whereas Jonestown 250+ years later ended in mass suicide instead of pulling off another Thanksgiving "miracle" ("miracle" in the same sense as the post-WWII West German "economic miracle" under Ludwig Erhard)
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 22, 10:12pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

This is what happens when you allow a monopoly to take over the maintenance of roads.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 27, 12:01pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

15-20 years ago, Gen-X were in their late 20's to mid 30's and ready to buy their first homes; Baby-boomers freshly minted by the dot-com boom (those who cashed out before crashing, or simply had high salaries before stock options) were eager to buy vacation homes / 2nd homes.

Today, the usual age group for 1st-home in their late 20's to mid 30's, the Millennials, can't even think of affording their 1st homes while paying mandatory health insurance and college loans. So it's not even a topic.

Besides, while young people who rented houses (like 15-20 years ago) thought about issues like when to buy (i.e. over-priced vs. buy-now-or-priced-out-forever), people who live in their parents' basement don't have to think about renting vs. buying at all.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 29, 4:32pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The foreign-born population ranking is mistaken. Germany and Russia are not even close to the top in terms of foreign-born percentage, not even the US! Countries like Kuwait, Qatar, UAE have more foreign-born population than native-born population (i.e. more than 50% are foreign-born). The reason is money/opportunity. Its just like NYC and SF have much higher percentage of transplants than Boondock does. The city of Detroit had more than 80% transplants from other parts of the US when the carmakers built the city in the 1910's and 1920's.

This brings into focus the real counter-point to the video: the real legit reason for allowing immigration is not our charity, but should be to our own benefit! primary in two ways:

1. People from poorer foreign countries tend to work harder after they arrive (before the age of welfare), harder than the coddled native borns. That's to the benefit of Americans.

2. Drain the brains of countries like Russia, China and India, so they don't out-compete us in the long run. This happened previously with Germans in the 19th century. US saved England in both WWI and WWII; Eisenhower was obviously of German ancestry.

What should be abolished is the welfare system. Stopping welfare has the additional advantage of forcing immigrants to integrate into American way of life and American value, instead of isolating themselves and building their 7th century sandcastles at taxpayer expense.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 29, 4:41pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Rin says
give welfare to those citizens whose jobs are permanently automated forever.


Does that mean stevedores should receive welfare after the invention of cranes? How about farmers after the invention of steam tractor? Of course then the steam engine mechanics after the invention of diesel engine for tractors? Then Combines and GPS-directed self-driving Combines?

Only the old and truly disabled should be receiving charity . . . and private charity (i.e. run by competitive channels) can deal with frauds much more efficiently than government bureaucrats can. Of course private charities are more likely to help citizens instead of snackbar just coming off the boat. Foreign-funded charities should be banned, as they are usually arms of foreign governments.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 29, 4:54pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Rin says
Not this time around, those were the agricultural to industrial to service economy shifts.

This time, however, there will be no future economy for anyone to move into, once AI eliminates all jobs. The problem with today is that the workforce has so many inefficiencies, that we can maintain a long term contracting (non-full time) workforce for at least another generation. Afterwards, however, it'll all be gone.


When AI eliminates all human jobs, AI will eliminate all humans or turn human beings into pets (and the pound usually puts a limit on how many days the strays are kept); that's a decision for them to make.

So far, the evidence is that human beings are still the most versatile tool on the planet. However, they have a built-in preference for leisure. So removing the incentive to find new jobs or work will quickly reduce people to idleness, as all the socialist experiments found out (from Mayflower to Soviet Union).
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Nov 30, 7:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Those are Slaves... I mean, guest workers who have their passports taken and regularly beaten and abused. Kuwaitis flipped out when the government mandated a single day off for "Domestic (Slave) Laborers".



They were not abducted from their native countries, but volunteered to go to countries like Kuwait. H1B visa recipients are not exactly free labor either, but they still come.



Also, Germany, Russia, France, UK, Brazil, etc. are Real Regular to Large sized countries, not little Sultanates like Kuwait or Qatar with a long history of living off slave labor and producing nothing but repacking exports between east and west with a markup



The real difference is money / monetary system. Huge numbers of Brazilians and Canadians immigrated to the US in the past few decades, for the same reason that huge numbers in the middle of the US migrated to NYC and SF, both of which are closer to the source of the global monetary system. $2 a day was a huge amount of money at the time of Wyatt Earp, who bought his house for $20 a century and half ago. The same house would be worth at least $200k today, due to monetary inflation. Monetary inflation benefits those who get the new money first (spending the money before inflation propagates through the economy), at the expense of the people who get it later (having to spend against the inflated prices). That's why people flock to regions privileged with new money creation. US happens to be the primary source of new money creation for the entire world, as our primary export is the dollar itself.


Which is why, despite tepid GDP growth since 2000, we have unjustifiably high, 1910s levels of Foreign Born. It's also why housing costs have exploded.


Tepid GDP growth is part of the cause not the result of high number of immigrants. Whenever the US hits recession, one of the solutions is (temporarily) increasing immigration: recession is the result of pricing error/adjustment, jobs not taking place because the buyers want lower price, ergo immigrants providing that source of lower priced labor, so that necessary work can be done while people adjust to new prices. Housing cost is not high in the interior of the US. The coastal rent is high due to government subsidies and zoning control, combined with the monetary system shifting population from the interior to the coastal cities. There is a lot of vacancy and abandoned housing in the middle of the country. Real estate price high is not necessarily a result of housing demand at all, but speculation demand: lower interest results in higher asset price. Foreigners buying up US real estate and other assets at the peak of the market then sell them a few years later in a crash actually benefit Americans, and is the most harmless way of dollar recycling: just like Japanese did in the early 1990's, and Mercedes did buying Chrysler. Those repricing cycles enabled Americans to receive tons of Japanese cars, electronics and German cars for free!
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 10, 6:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Taxing the shit out of food, clothing and heating/cooling so that the poor people die in droves will be even more effective in creating lebensraum for the rich assholes! Oh, wait, that's exactly what they are saying!
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 10, 6:07pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The problem started when the founding fathers modeled the republic after the Roman Republic instead of the Venetian Republic.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 10, 6:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

komputodo says
Sunnyvale94087 says
I had a nice home-cook ribeye last night. I'm loving my sous vide wand. This cow came straight from the store and cooked for 70 minutes at 137 degrees. What's amazing is that you can get the same result with frozen if you give it 120 minutes.

When I saw the image, I knew it was prepared sous vide because of the even color of the meat...You seared it after or before? Have you ever tried it with a cheap chuck roast for 24 hrs?


Ok, when does it become a pot roast?
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 10, 6:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
If $9.00 per gallon works for Norway, it can work for us.
With the tax we collect, we can give a free Tesla to everyone. :) :)


Norway has vast hydroelectricity per capita, whereas the US has very little per capita. Even if we invest massively in nuclear power, using the resulting electricity to make hydrocarbon fuel via Fischer-Troppish process might still be more cost-effective than Tesla's. If people can't afford to buy Tesla's themselves, taxing them and giving half the money to bureaucrats is not going to leave enough money to buy Tesla's for everyone.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 10, 7:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
We have lots of solar per capita. Let's use that.


Norway has 31 GW hydropower installed, for a population of about 5 million people. That's 6000 watts per person 24hrs a day (it makes sense for them to export oil instead of transmitting electricity across the North Sea and Baltic Sea, therefore the high tax on fuel to make people use electricity locally)

California has one of the highest solar capacity installations among the 50 states; yet it's only 470watts per person, and solar capacity only translates to about 1/6 (equivalent to 4hrs of peak capacity a day) on average for actual generation (due to nights and clouds/precipitation/temperature), i.e. less than 100 watts per person electricity generated. Storing in batteries would cost another half.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 10, 9:45pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Solar panels on a roof can generate all the electricity a house would need, and save you money. Each PV panel can now generate 360 watts of electricity. I don't know where you get the 100 watts potential per capita from. Estimates also show 100 square miles in the American desert can generate 100% of the electricity used by America.


I didn't say anything about "potential"; "potential" is meaningless because there are higher priorities in life than covering an entire desert with solar panels. It's just like: killing everyone else on this planet and using their bodies for fuel can "potentially" heat and cool your house and my house for longer than our life time, but that's not likely to happen! Attempting that would drastically shorten your own life time!

The numbers I quoted were installed capacities, e.g. Norway's 31GW hydropower is installed capacity, not "potential." We can only power cars with real installed capacity, not "potential" like the human fat from 7 billion dead bodies.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 11, 5:55am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HEYYOU says
As the permafrost thaws across the fast-warming Arctic, it releases carbon dioxide, the top planet-warming greenhouse gas, from the soil into the air. Sometimes, that thaw spurs the growth of lakes in the soft, sunken ground, and these deep-thawing bodies of water tend to unleash the harder-hitting methane gas.


As temperature rises, CO2 solubility in water decreases, therefore the oceans (covering 70% of the earth's surface) release CO2 into the atmosphere. That's the real reason why there is a correlation between temperature and atmospherical CO2 level: warming leading to (and causing) atmospherical CO2 level rise, not the other way around. Warming and cooling are overwhelmingly due to changes in solar activity. So the solution to coping with climate change is increasing humanity's ability to deal with climate change, not raising taxes or sacrificing your first-born at a cult altar.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 11, 6:12am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Decadence and eventual collapse came much sooner for the Roman Republic than for the Venetian Republic.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 12, 3:29pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Culture and civilization are what men invented in order to seduce women without having to fight every other man in order to commandeer reproductive resources.

Women are primarily concerned with their own status within the surrounding sisterhood. If a woman is having difficulty integrating into the surrounding sisterhood, she will pursue the weirdest shit in order to stand out from the crowd so as to avoid being at the bottom of a sisterhood. That's why whatever type of car is common among "socker moms" is hated by most women. Women self-hate (which is a biological necessity for them to submit to men, so there can be reproduction. The proud, confident and truly self-sufficient woman is a genetic dead end, so the genes are eliminated from the gene pool; women are literally evolved to be neurotic and dependent, just like they are evolved to have tits and be pretty when young!).

IMHO, refugees admitted into the US should be shipped off to overseas US territories (e.g. Puerto Rico, Saipan, etc.) and exempted from minimum wage laws as well as welfare (i.e. not eligible for welfare), so they can have incentive to integrate, as well as replacing the declining population/labor force of the territories.

Foreign-born women (and men, but especially women) wouldn't be obsessing with their identity shit if they have to work instead of sitting at home nursing their "uniqueness" or "greivences." It's just like, the "Palestinian refugees" wouldn't be there more than half a century after the wars if not for all the hand-outs keeping them there and turning them into terrorists. It's the same reason why "foreign aid" to African countries destroy local farming and prop up dictators, and welfare in the domestic ghettos create gansterism / thug culture.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 31, 4:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

E-man says
In light of that, another luxury automaker influenced by Tesla’s ongoing success is Bentley.


Bentley is the same company as Porsche: both are owned by VW, as is Audi. All those variants are just platform sharing. As for following / copying Tesla, VW has at least one thing down pat: making shoddy cars.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 31, 4:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
The negative articles on Tesla and Musk that have recently swamped the media are sheer nonsense, most likely funded by those who would be hurt by the end of fossil fuels. Even the SEC probe seems to have an agenda in my opinion. No matter how much Big Oil tries to suffocate electric cars, they cannot and will not succeed. They may have US corrupt politicians in their pockets, but they do not have all the countries determined to end fossil fuels in their pockets.
Lets face it.....New technology that is more efficient, economical, and does more good will always end up replacing old technology that is not needed anymore. Those who are not open to welcoming new technologies are welcome to live like cave men on an island. Who knows, they may even discover fire.


Since nobody is talking about building more hydroelectric plants or nuclear power plants, most incremental electricity generation will come from natural gas . . . as will make-up generation for when solar panels don't generate electricity at night. Tesla as a company makes two categories of products that will help maintaining a price floor for natural gas, which are what new wells are producing nowadays as they dig deeper into the ground.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 31, 4:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Rin says
Still, cellphone .... make that mobile computing, is a viable long term market, which isn't disappearing though it may evolve into clothes, eye wear, upholstery, etc, instead of a handheld device.

In contrast, a car is still just that, a mode of transportation. Ppl needs transportation tools, to get from point A to B, not an expensive toy.

And there's a huge difference between $1K and $50K for the average consumer.


Correct. Ultimately (perhaps within a decade or less), electric cars will be much cheaper than ICE cars. It's just like flat panel displays cost much more than CRT's back in the 1990's, but I predicted early on that flat panels will ultimately cost much less than the CR's (which eventually reached a price point of about $1000 for a 21" model, a price point below which no manufacturer could make a profit making new units; the glass tube and Invar mask cost real money). As for Tesla, it will either be bankrupt or make self-driving logistic/killer robots for the military.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 31, 4:23pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Car on auto pilot. Hot chick in the back seat. Dark windows. What more can you want?
Look at all the money that can be saved by not renting at Motel 666.


And the leveling of home prices. A commute of 1-2 hrs each way from Sillycon Valley to Inland Empire would be nothing when one can eat, work out, and sleep in the car during the commute. How then would one justify paying $1mil for a shoebox apartment in the sillycon valley when 1/3 that price can get a house in the location an hour or two away with a yard, to be mowed by a self-driving robot lawn mower.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 31, 9:40pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

1. All nuclear power plants currently exist on this planet are primarily for weapons production, not for power generation; the primary goal is attainment of plutonium (Pu), which doesn't exist in nature, but has much lower threshold for Criticality (minimum mass / diameter of the sphere required to capture neutrons in order to sustain nuclear fissile chain reaction; i.e. the ability to go boom and generate a mushroom cloud, or as the detonator to set off a thermonuclear device for an even bigger mushroom cloud) than U-235. Pu doesn't exist in nature (due to its much shorter half-life than Uranium), so has to be produced by bombarding U-238 with neutrons in breeder plants. That's the primary function of all nuclear power plants in the world. If power generation were the real goal, the power plants would be using Thorium as fuel, not Uranium. Thorium plants would be much safer, but wouldn't produce Pu in usable form. It's quite possible that the existence of massive nuclear arsenals is the reason why there haven't been any major direct confrontations among/between the top powers in the last 70+ years.

2. Saudis and other oil exporters use the money they earn to buy US treasury instruments and park their earnings in investment vehicles conjured up by NY banks. They are part and parcel of the global dollar recycling process. When someone like Qaddafi became too full of himself, he and his entire ill-gotten gain were harvested . . . just like pigs and cattle are slaughtered after they convert grass and slop (nutrients inedible to human) into meat (edible to human). Oil is a vehicle by which the US taxes the rest of the world to finance our military dominance (Saudis and other oil exporters are tax-farmers). If countries like Germany, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China and India could all become energy-independent by putting up some solar panels and windmills, how could they be induced to help pay for US military (or exporting consumer goods to the US, so US companies can specialize on military weapons)? If/when that happens, how would anyone be able to convince the American public to finance the very expensive military entirely on our own tax burdens alone?

These are the two main pillars of post-WWII world order, supplemented by a third leg of periodic brandishing/exercising US military muscle against relatively trivial opponents, both to convince the world that the US-dominated system works and to get field test/training for the equipment and personnel.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Dec 31, 9:57pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

It's amazing the propaganda ministry has forgotten Sandra Day O'Connor, who had been a better law school student (ranked 3rd in her class at Stanford Law School), better justice, better at staying awake at public functions, had been appointed to Supreme Court more than a decade earlier, and had the human decency of retiring before getting too old!
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 1, 8:17am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
A portion of the oil money Arabs derive goes to fund terrorism. Probably a hundred times that amount is spent by the rest of the world to fight those same terrorists.
The US does not derive money directly or indirectly by taxing the rest of the world for oil. If anything, the US spends a lot more to defend countries that should be spending more for their own defense. Their defense does not come from some kind of a tax imposed on them by the US.


The money spent on fighting "terrorism" and defending allies is money that has to be spent anyway or has already been spent in order to have a dominant military in the world. In the post-WWII world (or even today), having the US being the dominant power of the world (instead of letting the Soviet Union, for example) was/is a necessary "evil." Active combat against minor opponents in limited conflicts was a necessity to field-test weapon systems as well as personnel training.

Countries under the protective umbrella have been paying for the protection by having to export to the US to earn dollar in order to buy oil. The ME oil exporters functions as a tax-collector for the dollar-denominated world: by recycling the dollar that exporters like Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc. etc. earn back into the US. The need to buy oil in dollars is what gives the dollar value overseas, just like domestically it is the need to pay taxes in dollars that give the dollar value. Debt denominated in dollars is a consequence of those primary needs making dollar into the most acceptable commodity (i.e. currency). Otherwise, oil exporters and creditors would demand payment/debt denominated in gold (which incidentally has been the ruin of quite a few countries as that would undermine the global dollar system and US dominance of the world).
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 1, 8:25am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Not sure what you really mean here.
19% of the total electricity generated by the US comes from nuclear power plants.
80% in the case of France.
Germany and Japan both have lots of nuclear power plants, but no nukes.


Most of the world's nuclear arsenals have Plutonium instead of U-235 as either the fission warheads or the fissile detonator for fusion warheads. Plutonium doesn't exist in nature, but has to be produced in nuclear reactor / "power plants." Both Germany and Japan have huge stockpiles of Plutonium, which enables each country to become nuclear power within a few weeks when there is political will (e.g. removal of US protective umbrella). Both stockpiles are cornerstones of their national security.

The under-counting of the true cost of nuclear power plants (in their existing operational design using Uranium since 1941) is deliberate, not an accident. Power generation alone of course wouldn't warrant the high cost or the risk. Thorium plants would be less costly and much safer, but wouldn't produce material for nuclear weapons.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 1, 8:39am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
If I understand you correctly, you are saying high oil prices, and more terrorism would be beneficial to us?


It's not a binary answer, and answer depends on what you mean by "us."

Too high of an oil price would choke off the world economy.

Most "terrorism" around the world only serves to provide an excuse to build another military base in a new area. Some of those bases are of important strategic value if there ever is to be a major conflict. Others are of questionable value. Besides, how do you train hunters and improve weapons/tactics if they are not allowed to hunt or if there is nothing to shoot/practice, ever?
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 1, 8:42am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Both Germany and Japan have huge stockpiles of Plutonium, which enables each country to become nuclear power within a few weeks when there is political will


I remember reading that some time ago. Japan has a mountain of plutonium and is only 2 months away from nuclear weapons because they have all the technology and materials necessary for a nuke. I don't think that was the real purpose for Japan and Germany to have nuclear power plants.


Thorium plants (instead of the existing Uranium plants) would cost much less money and be much safer if they don't care about the plutonium stockpile as a desired outcome. If they really don't care about the plutonium stockpile, they could dump the existing plutonium into a deep sea trench like the Mariana's, instead of storing them very precariously in temperature-controlled liquid on land in their crowded countries.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 6, 4:58am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I agree that Probability/Statistics is more important to real life (and the forming of a viable/realistic perspective on real life; i.e. rejecting much of the laughable SJW fallacies) than Calculus is.

More importantly, the real problem with the teaching of calculus is in the way calculus is typically taught: rote memorization of derivative formulae and integration formulae, instead of understanding the philosophical underpinning behind calculus. For example, how many students after taking calculus (even acing it) would recognize the philosophical problem/fallacy with the foundational assumption in Economics:

Supply == Demand ??

How many students would recognize that equality assumption is essentially restating one of the Zeno's Paradoxes, Arrow Paradox : at any given instant in time, an arrow is stationary at a specific location, not moving; since it's not moving, how can it ever reach its target. Newton and Leibnitz eventually solved the paradox by recognizing the concept of Derivative (in this case, Velocity is a derivative of the arrow's Displacement), i.e. time can not be sliced into points but only small segments, even in the smallest infinitesimal segment of time, the arrow is still moving. Likewise, there is no point in time Supply = Demand exactly, but only movement of price over time as Supply and Demand leads each other due to external happenings in real life. When supply leads demand to the upside (regarding goods and services), consumers feel abundance (as those who previously couldn't afford it now can); when demand leads supply to the upside, consumers feel poverty (as those who could afford it marginally now can't). So government bidding up demand as in Keynesianism is essentially a mathematical fraud fooling minds that don't understand the basic philosophical underpinning of Calculus. Such a mind can't grasp how motion or dynamics take place in the real world.

If anything, the most important (philosophical) lesson in Calculus is that "a slice of time" is not a point but a segment . . . just like in Quantum Physics, the lesson is that distance and time slices/segments have a lower size limit (Planck Length and Planck time). These are important reality checks on human minds that tend to pursue logical extremes and silliness (such as the Zeno Paradox and "supply == demand" fallacy above).
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 6, 7:08pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

marcus says
I would agree of course that there is no point in time when it's literally true that supply = demand, or for that matter that an exact numerical value of either can even be known. I can see that one of Zeno's paradox's might be used in a very round about and indirect way to get students thinking about how there is no mathematical identity, supply = demand, and that if and when people informally talk about supply equaling demand, they are simply addressing a conceptual balance between the two in a mature economic situation as it pertains to price.


The analogy was with one specific Zeno Paradox, as I pointed out in the previous post: the Arrow Paradox. The so-called "mature economic situation" can never exist just like a singular point in time (Zeno's "instant in time when the arrow is stationary in a specific spot"): for example, if a stock is held at 2500 by law, there wouldn't be trade in the stock at all: there wouldn't be enough profit in buying and selling the stock to cover commission expense. All transactions involve two sides having different views on the value: one side believing the (future) value being lower than the agreed price (seller), the other side believing the (future) value being higher than the agree price (buyer); the difference between the two parties' opinions has to be big enough to cover the transaction cost for there to be a transaction at all. The price being in motion is a fundamental necessary condition for price to exist at all.



marcus says
But how the leap is made from that, to this ?

Reality says
So government bidding up demand as in Keynesianism is essentially a mathematical fraud fooling minds that don't understand the basic philosophical underpinning of Calculus.


Keynes advocated temporary manipulative stimulation of the economy as a way of dealing with a situations we have seen when supply exceeding demand was not a stimulus to economic activity. Because we know the following to be false (or at least only true in a relative sense):

Reality says
When supply leads demand to the upside (regarding goods and services), consumers feel abundance (as those who previously couldn't afford it now can)


That is, we know that in times of economic recession or depression, that sometimes supply > demand without consumers feeling abundance.


Over-supply (at previous price) leading to massive price drop and liquidation would of course make consumers feel better off through being able to purchase the surplus at liquidation prices. It was the government intervention policies (under Hoover, Hitler and Roosevelt) preventing liquidation from taking place that was gumming up the economic engine (preventing transaction from taking place), and making almost everyone feel poor. The dumping of milk into the ocean took place before Keynes wrote his book. Keynes wrote the book justifying government policies that were already taking place in Nazi Germany as well as in the US: essentially fascist economic intervention policies to guard the well being of existing manufacturers and bankers at the expense of consumers and upcoming more efficient manufacturers . . . by preventing a price adjustment from take place and preventing big creditors eating the crows of their own malinvestment. Keynes came up with his silly theory by exploiting the stasis-mindset behind "supply == demand" falsely proposing that price could be maintained by artificially goosing demand without the consumer public experiencing something similar to disaster taking place (i.e. the broken window fallacy on a massive scale).



marcus says
Even with a ridiculously oversimplified simple economic situation, without money lending, and without all the elaborate money games that our banking system has evolved, and with say a money supply tied to gold, even with all of this, you would still get inequality and the hoarding of wealth leading to times of excess supply created and demand not meeting it through falling prices. WE know from history that we would get more frequent and more extreme "booms and busts," if such a simple system could even support the highly dynamic and complex market based economy we have.


The biggest boom and bust cycle took place right after the installation of the 3rd central bank in US history, to finance upcoming WWI, then boom in the 1920's and bust after that. Previous boom an bust cycles were invariable caused by previous central banking and government banking and financial policies, dating all the way back to the South Seas Bubble and the French Mississippi Speculation Bubble at the time of John Law's invention of the first modern fiat money, as well as the boom-and-bust cycle that gave birth to Amerian Revolution. Individual investors can indeed make mistakes on their own, but the massive synchronized across-board mistakes have usually been the result of central-banking and other government banking and financial policies and their changes over time. Of course, the boom-bust cycles benefit the insiders who control those cycles: if you have a few million dollars you time your buying and selling houses/stocks to economic cycles; if you have hundreds of billions of dollars to invest, you generate your own cycles, either in a country or across the world, in order to create investment opportunities for your massive portfolio; otherwise, you wouldn't be able to enter or exit huge positions without the price moving at your expense.


But I'm not arguing that there aren't any imperfect or even corrupt elements to our banking and finance system, as it related to the federal reserve and fiat money. . If the fed temporarily increasing the money supply to stimulate the economy in difficult economic times is fraud, then how many times more fraudulent is it for the government to explode the deficit in good economic times (by doing tax cuts) for the purpose of what ?



To the extent that taxes will have to be raised at a later less prosperous time, it's part and parcel of the same government policies to exacerbate the swings, in order to help big position movers to enter and exit. However, I didn't see you advocating tax-cut during recession, so tax-cutting at all time is still better than tax-raising at all time . . . because tax is fundamentally a barrier to trade (within a society) and division of labor. The more you tax something, you get less of it.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 7, 4:49pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

"Free" means it's worthless, because thieves like Rahm Emanuel has stolen the resources in the name of giving out "free" goodies. If he is so keen on lowering the cost of attending college, how many strangers are Rahm Emanuel personally sponsoring to attend college? Zero! What Rham Emanuel and his ilk want is taking the money you could otherwise set aside for your own kids to attend the college of your choice, so that they can waste the money on their own mansions and their cronies holding worthless positions in public school administration.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 7, 5:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

cmdrdataleak says
Racial preferences in med school programs are sometimes justified on the basis that minorities want doctors who “look like them.”


Can I as a patient then demand to be seen by White or Asian doctors only? A patient doesn't even have to be a racist to make such a demand: the admission standards are producing a net result that the average black doctor is less competent than the bottom 8% or 6% of White and Asian doctors!
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 8, 5:47am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Hudson however is engaging in the same vocabulary of economic deception: the rent collected by landlords in a competitive market place (not talking about a landlord owning half the town situation) is not economic rent but service for his maintenance of the building as well as planning (including paying for the previous caretakers' and developers' labor, including management and planning as labor). The town/city collecting property tax (essentially at gun point) to pay monopolistic public school, PD, FD and "urban planning" has far more monopolistic market power. The State and Federal governments have even more monopolistic power than the local governments. In fact, every real monopoly has to be licensed / endorsed by the government. Monopolies like the government-licensed medical industry don't even call the economic rent they collect as "rent" or even "unearned income" but "earned income." How exactly is a city planner's pay (after getting his job by "connection" because his dad was the head of the planning division) "earned income" whereas an investor's gain from risking his own capital buying dilapidated house and restoring it to habitable condition "unearned income"? Yet, that's how the tax codes say. Seems to me "earned income" should be defined as market place gains (paid in by others in voluntary exchanges), whereas "unearned income" should be defined as all income from government (which makes coerced transfers).

The Marxist antipathy towards inheritance (a "tradition" they took from the French Revolution) betrays their sociopathic mind. Michael Hudson is a self-avowed Marxist economist, and his father was a Marxist/Communist/Trotsyist activist, most likely bought and paid for. I'm sure they picked high quality women for wives; if they really want everyone to be born the same, they can offer their wives and daughters on the block, so that every man's sperm has the same chance and every new child can have the same opportunity inside the wombs. The very fact that W could be president and Hilary could be a viable candidate (and the Roosevelts, Adams, and even fools like Gore) proves that inheritance goes far beyond monetary inheritance. If anything, monetary/resource inheritance, just like private property ownership, is a counter-balance to inherited political power; fundamentally, the inequality at birth comes from everyone of us caring for our own children . . . and more importantly, men/women/sexual-reproduction and evolution exist because each one of us wants our own offspring to be better off. Significant wealth usually takes more than one generation to build. What checks the king's power is not a sea of penniless peasants who have to worry about their next meal, but a crowd of barons. The centralization of power always starts with reducing baronial power, and that is what the communists really want: centralization of power and imagining themselves holding that power, not realizing that centralization of power would inevitably create a killing field around that power.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 8, 9:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Georgist "land" may have been significant a century and half ago at the time of Henry George, when people mostly farmed on family plots without massive nitrogen enrichment.

Nowadays, "land" that are valuable, i.e. building plots in cities, are largely result of land-forming (part of development), plot development (connecting utility lines and road to it) and survey / title management. There have been 100+ years of tax-paying and title management/insurance that the value of those "land" are largely the result of those long chains of title management/defense and tax-payment (i.e. paying for local roads and utility lines, as well as maintenance of neighborhood). This point is illustrated by the fact that building plots with ambiguous titles are worth much much less than normal building plots with valid chain of title (many plots with ambiguous titles are not worth anything), and land in a shitty neighborhood is not worth much of anything.

Farm land in active tilling has also been largely the result of improvement, management and active nitrogenation in the past half century or longer. Otherwise, the land itself would have turned into dust bowl (unplantable) in the 1930's (after a few decades of intensive planting without proper land enrichment and reconditioning like what was started in the 1950's).

There might still be some "virgin land" somewhere, but they are largely not worth much of anything per acre. Land as close as 1hr drive of San Fran, NYC, DC or Boston (the 4 most expensive metros) is as cheap as $1000 - $10,000 per acre. That's negligible value compared to a house costing into millions.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 14, 6:29am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Value work experience, business experience and apprenticeship over education.

Remove government backing for education loans. Remove laws banning apprenticeship.

SJW's (and all leftist ideological catastrophies since French Revolution) are always the result of lack of exposure to the real commercial world due to too much time spent on worshipping an all-powerful and all-knowing teacher.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 14, 6:30am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

If the Model T were made today, it would be classified as an SUV.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 14, 7:00am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

There are laws banning unpaid apprenticeship and unpaid internships. Those laws are designed to boost the formal education institutions where the same newbies to the industry would not only be getting their practice unpaid but also have to pay a large tuition. A beginning worker in any particular field is guaranteed to be not productive enough to warrant the raised minimum wage, so such laws in effect ban a new person from getting in the door in any particular industry before spending tons of money or taking on debt to get formal education.
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 14, 7:47am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HeadSet says
One reason for not allowing unpaid apprentices may be to stop abuse by a shop owner of having free labor while pretending to train. That is, bringing on an electrician apprentice but just has the fellow do clean up and gofer duties.


How is getting a formal education in "electrician" at the community college while spinning pizzas to pay for it any better? At least the shop clean-up and gofer duties would be related to electrician field work whereas spinning pizzas is not; the pizza spinning path gets even worse now that spinning pizza can not hope to pay for a formal education, even at community college, so the student would have to take on debt slavery (non dischargeable debt) while being brainwashed in SJW theology.

Furthermore, there are hundreds of different electrician shops within easy driving distance for the would-be apprentice to choose from; if he thinks he is doing too much menial work while not learning enough, he can go to a different shop.

At the beginning of an apprenticeship, the apprentice is of course required to do medial work as a way of paying for his training (in lieu of tuition), because he is not qualified to do electrical work, as asserted by the state laws!
  Reality   ignore (5)   2019 Jan 14, 4:59pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says

It's all because useless people are paid too much...



Corporate profit is high due to lack of competition. Guess why lack of competition? Because small businesses are prevented from competing by recruiting interns/apprentices or hiring inexpensive workers. The big corporations remain standing can thereby have both a monopoly on customers and monopsony on workers . . . thereby having high profit! The more regulations, the higher the profit for the big monopolists. For example, medicine and banking are the most regulated industries, and they have the highest corporate profits. When minimum wage for restaurant workers go up, the bigger chains' profits go up as smaller restaurants go out of business.

That reality should be obviously: most small businesses are not corporations. To have a corporation at all, the owners have to at least have the money and lawyers to set up a corporate structure. Most registered corporations are subdivisions of large corporations set up to take specific business risks . . . quite different from typical small businesses, where owners have to co-sign any business loan any way, so the incentive to incorporate is much lower.

The left-wing regulatory welfare state is big businesses' best friend! It kills competition from small business by regulations and taxation, and bureaucrats are risk-averse when spending pubic money so follow "nobody gets fired by buying IBM" so they channel public money (from taxation) to big businesses. Your chart shows the effect of big government.



The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions