Journal Journal: Unsurprising surprise of the century 46
Problem is, you've cheated the 9th & 10th Amendments (in a century-long tradition of such) to get there.
Down with you, botox-face.
When Congress threw ethanol producers a gigantic bone by expanding the Renewable Fuel Standard through the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 by annually increasing the amount of ethanol that fuel refiners are required to blend into the nation's gasoline supply, they blithely made the crucial assumption that Americans' gasoline consumption would continue to increase indefinitely. Thanks to heightened fuel efficiency and slackened driving habits, however, Americans' demand for gasoline has actually decreased, meaning that refiners would have to blend gasoline with ethanol well above the E10 level that is considered safe for most of the older cars and trucks on the road today in order to comply properly.
The GOP can just take all its pious capitalistic talk and cram it someplace useful. Ethanol is to the GOP what all these crappy green energy and global warming scams are to Democrats.
What a pile of crap.
The charges are devastating, and there is plenty to back them up. And again, let's be abundantly clear: The Financial Times is accusing Thomas Piketty of dishonesty, of making up his arguments, of actively trying to mislead readers and actively trying to mischaracterize inequality trends. This mischaracterization leads to policy prescriptions on Piketty's part that are both entirely unrealistic in their design and implementation, and, more importantly, are wholly unsupported by the actual data on inequality . The main thrust of Thomas Piketty's book is entirely undermined, and his arguments and conclusions are annihilated. It is hard to imagine a more comprehensive refutation.
. .
The second thing we ought to note is that neither Giles, nor Giugliano, nor the Financial Times would have discovered that Piketty's books is fundamentally flawed if they listened to Paul Krugman, who famously said on his blog that "if you think you've found an obvious hole, empirical or logical, in Piketty, you're very probably wrong. He's done his homework!" Yes, that was a real statement by Paul Krugman, and yes, it ought to haunt him for the rest of his lifeâ"and beyond. We now know that it is more accurate to say that Piketty fudged his homework. I doubt that Krugman knew that Piketty's conclusions were pretty much made up out of thin air-if he did, there is truly something rotten in the state of economics-but the point is that Krugman tried his damnedest to ensure that no one would take a critical eye to Piketty's data and conclusions.
And this is the same parade of no-talent rodeo clowns that embrace anthropogenic global warming (or whatever the term of the week is), abortion, ObamaCare, and pretty much every other intellectual cock-up going today. May God require of these idiots their idiocy.
Of course, the direct implication here is also very clear, if very sad: the rich who can afford college, will end up becoming even richer thanks to the better-paying jobs their degree affords them, while everyone else will either drown under the weight of student loans, or simply be relegated to far less-paying jobs during their career. And while the Fed can be confused about this conclusion, not even the Fed is confused that it itself is the reason for this record and increasing disparity between rich and poor.
So the next time you curse someone for making college so expensive you need hundreds of thousands in debt to pay for it, or are cursing the fate that made you into a 40+ year old debt slave, aim those curses where they belong: Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke and now, obviously, Janet Yellen. Because for all the "confusion" about America's record wealth divide that French socialists have to reprise the role of Karl Marx in the process selling blockbuster books to a new generation of pre-communists, the fundamental reason for the greatest class divide in history is a very simple three letter word: the Fed.
I'm guessing that the Progressive gravy train crashes spectacularly.
Clearly, Putin and Russia are just two more puppet pieces on the globalist chessboard, pitted against other puppets in the West in a grand theater designed to distract and divide the masses through chaos. As Kissinger points out, in crisis there is opportunity.
What is the goal? Theyâ(TM)ve already told us, openly, on numerous occasions.
The first great prizes of the New World Order are a global currency and centralized economic control. The elites are not satisfied with quiet dominance of individual economies. They want complete political homogenization and the end of all sovereignty. Period. With a global currency in place, the steps towards global government become quick and small.
My observation: people don't scale. Stuff just keeps falling apart, for all the efforts to build The Bigger, Shinier Things.
Really? What circus or rodeo have you been to where the clown is directing the show, leading every event, collecting tickets, and regulating event safety?
Because that is just one of the glaring contradictions in your philosophy. You are trying to state that the clown - whose job it is to distract the audience from the job at hand - is somehow the one directing all the jobs. Clowns never have power, yet your clown for some reason has all the power?
Here it is, shocking in its brevity:
Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!
Just because bad pizza happens doesn't mean we should volunteer to deliver.
My gut feeling is that the country will survive Judas Prez, and all of the awful ideas he represents. Whether we analyze and reject this concentration of power is another question.
But it has now become equally puzzling why he has not become more sure-footed in foreign affairs. He is one of the brightest men ever to occupy the office, and yet his learning curve has been among the flattest. Talking to players on the world stage--most of whom still want him to succeed--one finds them genuinely rattled, worried about a lack of national will and operational competence.
Look: we put an ass in the oval office. I have been and will continue to play the "I flipping told you so" card more or less indefinitely. Anyone who ever supported this used car salesman can just fall off the planet.
He is not, nor has he ever been "one of the brightest men ever to occupy the office". W is far smarter. If you even want to bother arguing the point, first produce BHO's transcripts.
We start here, where d_r said, emphasis mine:
Yet you don't seem to care for the Muslims much (as evidenced by, amongst other things, your repeated reminders for us of the scary middle name of the POTUS).
To which I reply:
This is a bald-faced lie, but I know you well enough now to account this as a straightforward troll. I defy you to show a single instance on the entire Internet where I personally have drawn a single derogatory conclusion based upon any portion of the President's name. A single one.
To which the response is:
In what way is it a lie? You just - again - told the Muslims that you believe they are wrong. You use the president's middle initial for what reason?
Now, I understand that the game here is for the liar to make an outrageous claim (previous examples included saying that I had called for violent removal of the President, or that I had plagiarized a website) and then continue to pick away until I lose patience with the idiocy on his end. A few rebuttals:
I guess the only real regret I can muster is having ever read d_r in any serious light.
Factorials were someone's attempt to make math LOOK exciting.