Congrats 'Mericuh, we're officially an Oligarchy!

[chenGOD]

thanks for the feedback.

 

but this thread was all over the place anyways? and did i swear by occams razor and keeping noise to a minimum? i did shave myself this morning. and i uselessly tried to get this thread back on track a page earlier. didn't work, so now it's playtime. especially if the thread is already going nowhere.

 

bonus question: what was the discussion at hand anyways?

 

There wasn't one.

I almost agree with eugene here - although of course i don't have his flair for dickishness.

But really, if that NYT article on Piketty is too long to read, then there is almost no point in having a discussion about the original princeton article posted to start this thread (which is actually very good, and shows something different to what Bill Domhoff talks about (though he is an important part of this conversation)).

If someone were really interested, they would have asked me what i meant when I posted the tldr version:

"r > g and likely to stay that way." It's not a tough concept to get one's head around, and one can see more of Piketty's argument here:

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/files/2013/12/Inequality-Capitalism-in-the-Long-Run-Thomas-Piketty-Paris-School-of-Economics-Helsinki-November-29th-2013.pdf

I can't wait until I can read his book - I am looking forward to it very much!

[delet...]

@ AdieuErsatzEnnui and b born droid some adresses one, some the other, some both.

Lord this is tedious, rather than attacking the ideas you are attacking the man with your pointless cryptospeak. Actually projecting your misunderstandings and very narrow concept of how free thought should work. To paraphrase godel's assessment of your dismissal of me, "what does it even mean?" he asks. I think it's just ambiguous rambling that if someone squints through their 'preconceptions' at, you hope that they will then assign meaning to.

I have also found that many people never allow themselves to consider or discuss the negative, because perhaps they think that doing so would jinx reality. These people generally are not that well informed and so provide less coherent debate and solutions. Note have having to address this matter has reduced the possible effort to discuss the OP.

In my family growing up, when discussing politics and the like, which we did frequently, we discussed and debated possible future realities, no matter how grim the outcomes. It was a fun and positive intellectual exercise. This upbringing hasn't made me personally any less of a positive and content individual and it's contemptible to think that those with a more fragile mental constitution would choose to remedy what they in error consider to be negative (i certainly don't think that i'm a negative influence on the debate), by 'projecting' a negative straitjacket onto that individual's way of addressing and considering problems. We aren't all built the same. Live and let live my friends.

If you still don't gettit and need to torture me further, here is my last ditch attempt to convince you that my way of thinking is intractably placed inside me and means no harm. My dad is jewish, have you ever watched seinfeld? Great. I can't stand that show as they mostly just whine rather than interestingly critique around a topic from various angles, but in a black and white minecraft blocks kind of way maybe you now understand a touch. Now leave me along them and stop trying to do me a favour. heh. [-;

----
@ limpman
As for occupy, sure it got some people of this generation into alternative political thinking, but it's arrogant for this generation to think that it's efforts to effect change amount to more than those of the generations of misfits and subversives that came before them. Despite a decades long campaign, which includes that few months long flash mob called occupy the power elite continue to gain momentum for their agenda to take us into neofuedalism. We haven't been winning, we've been losing for a long time now.

This of course doesn't mean that we should give up, far from it. And it doesn't mean that i don't see how we couldn't have a bright future. (Well except for this global population overrun, accelerating global warming) The way out i think, the end game for the motherfuckers, is when we can locally print and manufacture, when commerce becomes local again, fuck globalisation. Couple that with regionalism for governments and finance and we will free again, should we desire it.

 

/i'm not proofreading that, so for any errors in syntax i'm sorry for making you suffer them. For anything you misunderstand, that's your fault, don't project. heeh. If i've offended someone i'm sorry, i don't mean anyone here any harm. Love is the greatest asset that we all have. And it's something that i gladly project out towards you all. [-;

[chenGOD]

We just had an armed stand-off with our federal government over them trying to confiscate some cows. If that isn't a sign of commitment by the citizenry I don't what else it would take to convince everyone.

That's an overly simplistic view of the Bundy incident. I assume you're familiar with the tragedy of the commons?

 

The guns worked though didn't they.

Is that something to be proud of? It feels like a regression to me - back to the ol' hobbesian brutal world. So keep that in mind next time you get jacked in the face by some gurning ozzie yokel who wants your wallet.

 

I would have thought on this forum, that the view would be to reasoned debate and intellectual pursuit of resolution of conflict.

[delet...]

Well we don't have a massive desperate and disenfranchised underclass (although we're working on it) made up of disconnected minorities. There are other first world countries with 'lax' gun laws that seem to get on fine and without the gun crime. Anyway, i said my comment in a jocular way, most of the firepower there was in the hands of the Dept of Land Management and their allies.

 

---

 

Interesting development in the motivation behind the government suddenly taking an interest in Clive Bundy when since '91 they didn't give a much of a real toss about him not paying to graze his cattle on that land.

 

[delet...]

Stormcloudsgathering has a rebuttal of sorts to the above video. It's only really a rebuttal to the definite proof of a harry reid connection but not over the BLM effort to push Bundy off the land that his cattle was grazing. That still seems to be because they were going to relocate some rare tortoise there from an area where they are going to build a solar power plant. So that idea is still in play. I found the redacted document on Bing caching. heh.

 

 

He does carry on a bit, Maybe he is defending reid. lol. He has made a lot of nice primer (not in depth) vids in the past, nevertheless.

[chenGOD]

yeah how dare the senator of the state of nevada try and do a business deal that will benefit the state's economy, at the same time trying to recoup lost revenue from a rancher who's been using the land for free for the last 20 years.

It's fucking absurd - it's almost like he's looking out for the general welfare of the state as opposed to making sure one rancher is able to maintain his liberty to use common grounds exclusively.