Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[hack]

When you transpose that general assumption to this specific market I think its a very steep uphill climb, but if you're going to link study outcomes to either having a job or not having a job, I think you probably would need to start with a percentage of the research that is done by tenured professors against the percentage done by non tenured.

[Wild Hoss]

And that's the rub. The GOP race, in particular, illustrates the polarization taking place. Given that Hillary is the presumptive candidate for the Dems (and few people are bigger insiders) I'm not sure the same can be said for that side.

The people are more involved in politics than ever before thanks to modern communications...and so the buffer between politicians and their constituents is almost non-existent now. Feedback and pressure is instantaneous, and this grandstanding and demagoguery rules the day.

Long ago one might have thought that more citizen involvement to be a good thing, but IMO its pushing us toward disaster. You cannot have Kennedy and Danforth work out a deal, greased with a little pork, any longer. We used to think that was terrible...now it looks like a dream.

[iam416]

Hack

I'm not trying to equivocate self-interest. Your ppints are fair. That said, I do think there is enough there to raise flags for me. But I'm one cynical fucker and academics don't evade my cynicism.

Hoss:

Man, I really like that point.

[hack]

I'm all for cynicism. We've talked about academia very recently. But the allegation defies common sense. I mean, the SEC 2015 whistleblower report was published this week. 4000 whistles blown in the annual reporting period. In the field of securities. And you're saying the only whistleblowers in this particular area just happen to be the ones paid for by oil companies?

[hack]

Hoss I too think that's a very insightful comment. I might add though, that maybe it's just the wrong kind of citizen involvement. I think it's the difference between transparency and scrutiny. There used to be transparency. At the federal level, as an idiot intern cub reporter 17 years I had far better access to information in DC than reporters do now. I think in the absence of genuine and functional transparency, we get a angry and ineffective kind of scrutiny.

[Da Geezer]

Hoss: amen to Talent. Good point. Remember that our founders created a constitutional republic, not a democracy. They viewed a democracy as a real danger.

I think it's a pretty big stretch to equate personal biases and how they might spill over into research outcomes with full-on fakery. You'd have to assume a low level of ethics across the board. That kind of end-justified-the-means behavior isn't even that consistent on Wall Street, where every incentive exists to be that way.

I assume full on fakery, and I absolutely believe the global warming crowd is letting the end justify the means. They know best, and, dammit, they are going to transfer wealth to the third world. My daughter is a Vegan. I ate vegan for 5 months in Scottsdale. And now the WSJ reports, about 10 days or so ago, that there are now 90 million cows, and there were 89 million bison when the Pilgrims landed.(arguing against global warming) Of course I'm skeptical, but I simply commented " that's because bison farts don't stink" I got lots of response too. I actually can see the government making a person eat vegan, 1. because it is good for you and the government is paying for your health insurance and 2. Because cow farts contribute to global warming.

Hack, No answer on the one trillion dollars per year. No answer no warming since 2000. No answer on whether China or India will keep their word. And when I say nefarious corporation, I mean I think Wall Street has far too much power. That is why they are going big for Hillary, and that too is a fact.

We have two parties. The Evil Party and the Stupid Party. If they happen to pass anything on a bipartisan basis, be assured it will be both evil and stupid.

[hack]

If we're going to discuss this we need to start with facts as a baseline. I think valid comparisons would need to be made as well, and not invalid ones. I mean, when we had all those cows and bison, were there cars? Coal-fired power plants? Why would we waste time on obviously ridiculous comparisons?

[Da Geezer]

and that is the point. You manipulate your baseline and I manipulate mine. That is why it is BS to rely on data that is constantly changing.

[hack]

What am I manipulating?

[Da Geezer]

You criticize me for being inconsistent, but you pointed out that in the Middle East, Saudi is the basic problem. Now, you didn't say Qatar. But I believe Qatar funds Wahabis also. Qatar buys Al Gore's TV station for $ 500 million and Gore gets $ 100 million. So the Qataris pay Gore who is a prominent spokesman for global warming (making the mistake of predicting the future). The Arabian Peninsula is the low cost producer of oil. Does any of this seem strange to you?

And we don't need a baseline to determine whether you are willing to spend one trillion dollars per year, every year, in order to not let the planet's temperature rise 1 degree C.by 2100. Worth it or not?

[Da Geezer]

You just said that you need a baseline. I was using 2000 as a baseline. You will pick a baseline that favors your position, I'll pick one that favors mine. The best you can claim is about 200 years of data. The earth is roughly 3 billion years old. so:

200/3,000,000,000 = .0000000667 or .00000667%

and you want to bet one trillion, that is $ 1,000,000,000,000 per year on that sample size?

That is why global warming is all about control and wealth transfer and not about warming. 1 degree C by 2100 really?

[hack]

What? I said we should start with facts as a baseline. I said nothing about 2000 or any other year.

Not gonna waste my time here. Michigan is playing Xavier. If you want to resume this we can do so later, but it's got to be a facts-based discussion. And no false comparisons your college professors would have docked you for. I imagine you know better.

[Da Geezer]

let's just agree to disagree. OK

Next we can move on to constitutional nullification and the sanctuary cities.

Or taxing tenure so we have less of it.

[Wild Hoss]

Hoss: amen to Talent. Good point. Remember that our founders created a constitutional republic, not a democracy. They viewed a democracy as a real danger.

Smart bunch, that was. Every day that passes reinforces that belief.



Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

[Wild Hoss]

Hoss I too think that's a very insightful comment. I might add though, that maybe it's just the wrong kind of citizen involvement. I think it's the difference between transparency and scrutiny. There used to be transparency. At the federal level, as an idiot intern cub reporter 17 years I had far better access to information in DC than reporters do now. I think in the absence of genuine and functional transparency, we get a angry and ineffective kind of scrutiny.

Definitely. My rushed post is just a thumbnail sketch of a multifaceted issue, but the changing role of the press is a big part of the problem imo. Smart, experienced and rational people are in short supply all around.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk