Tab Content
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:58 PM
    You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Occam's Banana again. For someone not inclined to dig into the details of critical race theory and similar nonsense, the key takeaway is that these theories consist of strategic lies told for the purpose of advancing a political goal, which is to say that, in essence, this is nothing new: run-of-the-mill propaganda. What is new, however, or at least unusual, is that this propaganda expressly attacks reason and empirical reality, whereas the typical propaganda attempts to clothe itself in those things to improve its credibility. Which school of ethics is dominant in a society can be determined in one of two ways: by argument or by force. By rejecting reason and empirical reality, critical race theory et al effectively rule out the first option. That said, between socialists (which is all that these people are at bottom) and anti-socialists, there's probably not much of a chance of persuasion anyway, even if both sides are willing to have an honest debate. Further, the average "woke" dolphin-kin-entity on the street has approximately zero understanding of the theory, likely does not reject reason and empirical reality in any meaningful way, and is just regurgitating slogans, while putting fingers in its dolphin-sound-receiving-portholes when presented with counter-arguments: i.e. just as with the rank-and-file of any kind of mass movement. So, disturbing as it is in principle, I'm not so sure that the anti-reason and anti-reality aspect of "wokeness" really matters much in practice. The practical problem, I'd say, is simply that this is a large socialist movement, regardless of whether it speaks in a post-modern voice or an old-fashioned Marxist voice.
    93 replies | 5350 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:26 PM
    That's not really a fair comparison. The problem with communism is internal to the theory; it wouldn't work even if it existed. There's no problem with laissez faire itself; the problem is that it's difficult to bring it into existence under current political conditions. Laissez faire is an iphone before Apple was founded; Communism is a hammer made of cotton candy.
    12 replies | 601 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:21 PM
    How conservatives should respond: "a private school can do what it wants with dress codes, and there shouldn't be public schools anyway." How conservatives in fact respond: "they're censoring us, we want free speech." It's just like the social media issue.
    11 replies | 323 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:07 PM
    I don't remember seeing much talk about this over the years. We have a bit of a crime wave at the moment, so it seems apropos. Vote and comment. I vote yes, FYI, it's justified for certain crimes.
    9 replies | 263 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:59 PM
    You'd think this would be headline news, but I guess neither party has an interest in publicizing it, the GOP because they don't want to tarnish Trump's image in the eyes of their anti-gay constituents, the Dems because they don't want to improve Trump's image in the eyes of their pro-gay constituents.
    7 replies | 323 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:44 PM
    I used to think that the GOP would go back to pretending to care about small government if a Dem were in the WH, as during the Obama years, and so open up some maneuvering room for libertarians: now, not so much. This shift toward populism and nationalism is likely to be permanent, or at least very long lasting. I suppose there's a chance if Trump is somehow totally discredited in the eyes of his base, since he's the face of this new GOP, but I really can't imagine how that could happen. As he said in the beginning, he could literally walk down the street shooting people and they'd still love him, and that may actually be an understatement. They're certainly not going to dump him over an election loss.
    16 replies | 306 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:29 PM
    AE is ignored because it implies that much of what the politicians do, and the voters want them to do, is destructive. It's the same as with climate science that contradicts the popular narrative. AE doesn't purport to provided predictions as to the timing or magnitude of effects, and that doesn't make it useless in practice. If we know that a certain state intervention will have a certain effect, and we think that effect is bad, that is reason enough to not pursue that policy: despite our ignorance of precisely when that effect will arrive or precisely how large it will be. AE demonstrates that monetary inflation by the state retards productivity, for example, and that is extremely useful information, despite AE being unable to predict the effects of that policy in detail (when, if ever, will it result in what kind of recession, etc).
    12 replies | 601 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 04:59 PM
    Gold's going up; it will eventually go down. You don't want to ride it back down, you want to sell at some point - but when? Gold does not produce an income stream and so it cannot be valued like equities or debt. When shares are trading at a P/E of 37, we can say they're overvalued by historical norms; when long bonds have a yield to maturity of 77 basis points nominally, which is deeply negative in real terms, we can say that bonds are overvalued. But how will we know when gold is overvalued, i.e. when it's time to sell? We have to understand what factors cause the gold price to rise and watch for any change in those conditions. Two key bullish factors are(a) real yields on debt being very low, and (b) real potential yields on equities being very low. The first point is well known, the second less so. I would define "real potential yield" for equities as earnings per share divided by the current share price minus the rate of inflation. This represents the maximum amount of money that a company can return to its shareholders through dividends and/or share buybacks. As far as actually tracking this figure, take the inverse of widely available index-level P/E ratios and subtract the inflation rate. For example, the P/E ratio of the NASDAQ 100 is 37.62. The inverse of that 2.65%, which is the nominal potential yield. Subtract the latest CPI inflation rate (2.47%) and you have the real potential yield: 0.18%.
    0 replies | 88 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:52 PM
    Hadn't thought about it before, but that's a very good idea. Forgiving debt and simultaneously eliminating all government loans/grants is the only practical solution at this point, and it might as well be the schools that have been profiting from these unjust subsidies that bear the cost.
    14 replies | 341 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 09:41 PM
    I hope so, but do you really believe that?
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 09:24 PM
    About a third think it'll be decided by extra-legal means.. I think that most people voting for that option, to the extent they're hoping for it, don't know a thing about it. War is fun until you're in it: then, considerably less so.
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 09:19 PM
    The people who are certain that Trump will win will lose their minds if he loses. The people who are certain that Biden will win will lose their minds if he loses. ...point is, most of the country is about to totally lose their shit.
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 09:05 PM
    Anything from the lower courts or, indeed, from the high court itself, is waste and rubbish if they, the Congresswine want it to be. The Supreme Court of the United States can do what they please...until Congress says otherwise. I suppose my point is that the court doesn't actually matter. Congress and the POTUS decide all of these things.
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 09:00 PM
    The OP's right. It is Constitutional. There has been a sort of gentleman's agreement for centuries to not do it, but the Congress can set the number of Justices by simple legislation. Commissar Roosevelt threatened it, and the SCOTUS got real docile; it will be the same this time, I'd wager. None of these current Justices have the nuts of those in the 30s (indeed, several have no nuts at all). They will fold like a cheap suit.
    3 replies | 155 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 08:21 PM
    There's nothing more obnoxious than those who endorse this system and then claim, well, it's not *true* democracy. No, people, this is the real thing. The Deep State™ isn't miscounting votes, or otherwise misrepresenting the will of the people. The state as it exists is a product of voting. The world as it exists is, in fact, the product of the will of the people.
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 08:04 PM
    I, personally, couldn't care less how the votes are counted. I'd be just fine with a coin flip. But, you, I, all reasonable people, we will be forced to live in a country in which most people do care. And I'm really pretty worried about these people getting violent. Trump is the one who's less likely to concede; on the other hand, if Trump wins, Dems will riot even if Biden does concede.
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 08:00 PM
    Thomas Massie, Rand Paul...who else? Justin Amash was more or less forced out of the party.
    59 replies | 2145 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 07:58 PM
    No, I think that the state (at whatever level) has no role to play in sports at all. I think that the national association of whatever, a private enterprise, ought to be able to do just exactly as it pleases. ...hence the generally mocking tone of my comments. There's a tyrannical law which I guarantee neither our new Justice Barrett nor any of the others will even think about thinking about touching.
    18 replies | 308 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 07:36 PM
    It's even harder to find a good judge (male, female, reptile, vegetable) who can pass through a bad Congress; in fact, it's impossible.
    18 replies | 308 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 07:32 PM
    A bit OT, but when was the last time you saw on any TV network anything about federal spending, the deficit or debt, or the Fed's balance sheet? ...speaking of censorship. ...and of things which will actually affect the lives of people in the very near future, whoever wins.
    59 replies | 2145 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 07:26 PM
    Correct, guess I must've had other examples of blatant theft civil asset forfeiture on my mind for some reason
    18 replies | 308 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 07:19 PM
    Really?
    7 replies | 155 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 07:04 PM
    Suppose that the official results show Trump losing. Do you think there's any chance that Trump concedes, or do you think he'll claim it's fake news, etc, no matter what?
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 06:54 PM
    Agreed, I'd be shocked if it weren't contested for a considerable period of time. If Trump is winning election night, the Dems will never concede until every last mail in ballot is counted, and likewise vice versa. I had hoped that it would be a blow-out (for someone, don't really care), but that's probably not going to happen. It's going to be close again. ...not as close as last time, but close enough that partisans on both sides will be able to plausibly refuse to concede.
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 06:48 PM
    Vote and comment.
    25 replies | 509 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 06:26 PM
    Yes, dannno, I did make the thread, the point of which, again, is that, when one of the more enthusiastic Coney Barrett supporters in the Senate was invited on FOX to say how great and important the Coney Barrett appointment was, the best he could come up with was that she would ensure that the Congress would be able to regulate sports to make sure that dudes in drag wouldn't be allowed to cheat and ruin women's sports - that, in his view (not mine), was the big issue which deserved mention. Let me put it this way: Wickard v. Filburn SCOTUS says that a man growing crops on his own farm, for his own consumption, is "interstate commerce" subject to federal regulation. Kilo v. City of New London
    18 replies | 308 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 06:05 PM
    The point isn't that federal regulation of sports is bad (though it is). The point is that it's absurd that anyone thinks that this is an important issue, one way or the other.
    18 replies | 308 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 05:50 PM
    If I vote, it will certainly be for the LP, which is less a vote for the current candidates and more a vote for what I hope the LP might become.
    59 replies | 2145 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 05:47 PM
    Do you agree with Sen. Kennedy's Constitutional analysis? The Founders would smile on federal regulation of people running fast in circles? ...throwing around inflated rubber balls of various shapes? ...etc?
    18 replies | 308 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    10-27-2020, 05:23 PM
    She will fulfill the Founders' most earnest desire.. ..i.e. that the federal government regulate sports so as to prevent trannies from unfairly dominating the 100 yard dash. Take note of where you were yesterday so that you can tell your grandchildren..
    18 replies | 308 view(s)
More Activity

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
18,160
Posts Per Day
7.48
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
3
Most Recent Message
04-18-2018 10:10 PM
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 08:13 PM
Join Date
03-06-2014
Referrals
0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

09-09-2020


06-08-2020


03-21-2020


12-09-2019


12-06-2019


11-20-2019


10-12-2019


08-24-2019


08-13-2019


07-27-2019


07-22-2019

  • 11:42 PM - Hidden

07-03-2019


06-14-2019


02-02-2019

  • 04:02 AM - Hidden

05-21-2018


04-18-2018


04-08-2018


03-17-2018



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
No results to display...
Page 1 of 424 1231151101 ... LastLast

10-29-2020


10-28-2020


10-27-2020


10-24-2020


10-16-2020


10-15-2020



Page 1 of 424 1231151101 ... LastLast