Jump to content

caze

Members
  • Posts

    5,154
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by caze

  1. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZZqql2UwAANVGp?format=jpg&name=900x900
  2. I don't think the country ever recovered from that tan suit. RIP america.
  3. yeah, he can't practice medicine, that's what I meant. technically anyone with a phd is a doctor, I only call actual practicing doctors 'doctors' though. his profile pic has him wearing scrubs, guy is clearly a nut.
  4. he's not even a doctor, failed his residency, presumably because he was too busy sitting on trump's twitter feed. wouldn't want to be getting operated on by that guy at the same time Trump is doing a tweet. he was also accused of domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking and harassment by a former partner and an ex wife.
  5. shame, apparently there was a decent chance of it clearing up if only the window allowed them to wait for ten minutes, but it didn't.
  6. lol, how did you come to this conclusion? most of Trump's economic advisors are either wall street hacks or various forms of regular conservatives, any of them with any kind of ideology other than greed are pro-deficit, pro-tariff, anti-free trade weirdos, pretty much the exact opposite of the Chicago school. there's more to the Chicago school than 'taxes bad', an idea which was always popular with conservatives anyway. I know, I mentioned this in my last reply to zeff above, and it's in the definition from Smith I quoted (if something has a cost associated with it - whether it's direct payments for training, or just increased wages for paying more experienced/better qualified ppl, then it can be seen as an investment).
  7. I didn't defend any 'type' of terminology at all, I pointed out the actual definition of this specific phrase, which has nothing at all to do with slavery. Adam Smith was an abolitionist ffs. There's nothing dehumanising about it in the slightest, it's a term of art referring to the value people and their skills contribute to businesses, and the related costs in maintaining and developing those skills (training, education, etc.). Such value and costs would exist no matter the political or economic system, it's a purely analytical framework that would apply under pretty much any circumstances.
  8. You clearly didn't, you obviously have very poor reading comprehension. I was talking about the origin of the phrase and it's actual meaning, not what he said. Maybe if I shout you'll understand: I WAS NOT DEFENDING WHAT HE SAID, I WAS CALLING HIM DUMB.
  9. Read what I wrote again dumbass, he's using the term wrong, I'm not justifying what he said. The phrase is not rooted in slavery just because this guy is an idiot.
  10. The concept of human capital was defined by Adam Smith: The stock of human capital is traits and abilities of people, not the individuals themselves, this is a well established concept in economics. Hassett obviously wasn't paying attention when they covered this in university. It's got literally nothing to do with slavery.
  11. He clearly doesn't know what the phrase means. And no, it isn't a phrase rooted in slavery: It doesn't refer to people, it refers to their skills and knowledge, etc.
  12. https://soundcloud.com/melissa/bullion-in-canterbury
  13. they actually shot the film using a load of practical effects, but the studio forced them to cut it all and replace it with the horrible CGI it ended up with. smdh
  14. jesus. his first two albums are great, not kept up with him after that
  15. most people who will vote for Biden won't have to hold their nose, and this allegation doesn't seem to be hurting his polling much. he's still got a comfortable lead over trump.
  16. The DNC didn't want Biden either, he got very little practical, political and financial support, he won the primary because democratic voters preferred him to the other candidates.
  17. She doesn't seem credible, given her changing story, and the only thing to back it up is not very convincing hearsay, others she said would back her up saying her story is wrong, her weird recent history of political support, support for Biden, bigging up his record on sexual assault, then switching to Bernie not long before bringing these allegations. There's also her weird Putin fetish. It's certainly possible it happened, but without any actual evidence there's no good reason to believe her.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.