IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New cmon, you know if they passed a tax bill that took everything above $250k a year
and gave a free pass to folks making under $75k a year that same crew would be libsplaining what a bad idea it would be because republicans suggested it. Why dont they get to work inventing something useful instead of politiking
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New Is there really no way you can stop yourself from spouting such egregious bullshit? Just wondering.
New no more than scientists who are not economists can gather as a group and spout crap
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New First you'd best face the dilemma of just what "Econ" IS, bunkie
..since the test of science propositions is, ultimately: whether the theory Can Predict [appropriate things.] Econ is often poorer than a coin-flip in that test, ergo.. ...
So if you are joining that tribe which suggests that "science" is false/useless.. (or merely useless to politicos spouting nonsense) then Say So.

If you aren't in that tribe:
H.T.F. do you know how many members of the Econ-club are also members of the U.C.S., -??- since the org likely is cordial enough to allow them in
(given the always-bizarre environment of the dis-US on such credential matters.)

Your thesis thus Sucks, trebly.
A) Because you do not indicate if it's *Your* "science" ... or *Our* Science which you are denigrating, all hyperbolically.
B) Either science tribe you aver: your deduction about the composition/competence of the assertions in the article is incompetent for your being (proudly == extra demerits) uninformed.
.
.
C) That's also called, "making things up" which puts you in Drumpf- and both "the-market-will-correct' AND "trickle-down" cha. cha. cha. Territories, to boot.

oTpy



PS: I think that you do not understand what Feynman meant, and for what audience.
Expand Edited by Ashton Nov. 22, 2017, 05:57:03 PM EST
Expand Edited by Ashton Nov. 22, 2017, 06:37:56 PM EST
New Econ is a lot of things mostly wrong
the branch of science that particular group of scientists belong to is the study that everything a repo deems useful must ergo be wrong in fact, and postulate theories as to why.
Nothing wrong with that, the pope had a crew of them back in the day that constantly ensured that Michaelangelo needed to tow the party line. Just pointing out that I do not care for that branch of the sciences.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New Yeah, we'll trust your folksy alt-right homilies over all the economic scientists in the world.
Also, you toe a line, not "tow" it.

Yet another example of where you Dunning-Kruger-out yourself. One would've thought you'd learn fro-- Oh, duh, of course.
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi

(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
New you can toe a line but ole mike had to tow it
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
New OTT
Over the top: you are trolling so hard even the amusement value is gone.
You are wrong. Get over it.
"Religion, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable."
~ AMBROSE BIERCE
(1842-1914)
New Suppose, for the sake of argument, your premise is right
If it's true that economists disagree* with everything Republicans say, why do you conclude that's the fault of the economists?


* Ignoring for the moment that lack of consensus among economists is a long-standing cliche.
--

Drew
New Re: Suppose, for the sake of argument, your premise is not right
If it's true that economists disagree* with everything Republicans say
why are you arguing that?
from the original post of Ashton's link
The Union of Concerned Scientists puts rigorous, independent science to work to solve our planet's most pressing problems. Joining with people across the country, we combine technical analysis and effective advocacy to create innovative, practical solutions for a healthy, safe, and sustainable future.
don't even see the word economists in there
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Expand Edited by boxley Nov. 24, 2017, 11:37:23 AM EST
New I was replying to you, not Ashton
Econ is a lot of things mostly wrong
the branch of science that particular group of scientists belong to is the study that everything a repo deems useful must ergo be wrong in fact, and postulate theories as to why.

That was pretty clearly (for you) talking about what economists do.
--

Drew
New that is two distict and separate assertions
1. Econ is a lot of things mostly wrong

2.the branch of science THAT particular group of scientists belong to is the study that everything a repo deems useful must ergo be wrong in fact, and postulate theories as to why.

bolded uppercase that refers to the Union of Concerned Scientists
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Expand Edited by boxley Nov. 24, 2017, 01:36:19 PM EST
New Now you've Boxed-self-in to explaining the word "useful"
Hmmm Göbbels was (a) useful tool for --> the Ends of the perhaps Prime-sociopath of the last century..
you sure that was a good word upon which to hang some irascible/incoherent musing?

Since via-simple-inspection LOTS of things "Repos deem 'useful'" involve deception, infinite forms of dissembling and in-the-end: are SAID: only so as to increase personal-net-worth while utterly ignoring/aka disdaining the harm they cause [ergo Intentionally, as-in-premeditated Lying] to the masses who comprise the actual and entire dis-US: such as, Today It IS.

cf. ..and that man simply Used me! when he _____ etc. etc. Yup, great word-associations there.
Go ahead, Man-splain away ... maybe in Esperanto?
or as we say en Español: ¡Que lastima!



You are entitled to Any Old opinions, flat-out.
You aren't entitled to employ your-own-'facts' or alt-definitions of common words, I wot.
New retooling the tax code is useful
doubling the personal excemtion would be very useful. So would extending the SS tax to any income without an upper limit but I suppose 1/2 is better than none.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
     Union of Concerned Scientists re the latest tax-rapine, as it affects--you know--"a Critique of - (Ashton) - (14)
         cmon, you know if they passed a tax bill that took everything above $250k a year - (boxley) - (13)
             Is there really no way you can stop yourself from spouting such egregious bullshit? Just wondering. -NT - (CRConrad) - (12)
                 no more than scientists who are not economists can gather as a group and spout crap -NT - (boxley) - (11)
                     First you'd best face the dilemma of just what "Econ" IS, bunkie - (Ashton) - (10)
                         Econ is a lot of things mostly wrong - (boxley) - (9)
                             Yeah, we'll trust your folksy alt-right homilies over all the economic scientists in the world. - (CRConrad) - (2)
                                 you can toe a line but ole mike had to tow it -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                     OTT - (hnick)
                             Suppose, for the sake of argument, your premise is right - (drook) - (5)
                                 Re: Suppose, for the sake of argument, your premise is not right - (boxley) - (4)
                                     I was replying to you, not Ashton - (drook) - (3)
                                         that is two distict and separate assertions - (boxley) - (2)
                                             Now you've Boxed-self-in to explaining the word "useful" - (Ashton) - (1)
                                                 retooling the tax code is useful - (boxley)

Even if you don't understand anything, you'll get to see the dots...
80 ms