OT Fascinating piece on current crisis and why present plans fall short

[keno]

http://american.com/archive/2009/our-epistemological-depression

keno

[Birddog]

Great read, thanks Keno.

Birddog

[avalonracing]

Yes, we don't have enough unbiased websites. :rolleyes:

[Ray]

Yes, we don't have enough unbiased websites. :rolleyes:
My browser can't seem to open it - it MUST be a right-wing site. :cool:

-Ray

[jim in pc]

Well, for one, this has been so thoroughly debunked that you simply have to question the guy's motivation: "government policies specifically intended to encourage home ownership among African-Americans and Hispanics that had the unintended but quite anticipatable [sic] effect of extending mortgages to those who lacked the ability to repay them."

And yeah, "dialectical failure" has nice ring to it, if you never heard of Shumpeter, but then restating the notion of creative destruction and giving it a new name as if he invented the concept just makes the guy look outright stupid.

This is basically Taibbi's Rolling Stone article with less facts, less cussing, and more portmanteau words, and it stops way short of the obvious conclusion, because he's not willing to accept the root cause is the failure of his own ideology. It reads like a high school paper, he cribbed a few notes from around the web and polished into something readable without any real understanding of what's going on and without anything to add.

Nothing has happened in the financial crisis and the government's response that can't be explained by regulatory capture - an intended consequence of deregulation.

I think this is much more effective framework for thinking about the crisis:

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2009/03/parasitic-predation.html

[Climb01742]

what do newt gingrich, paul wolfowitz and john bolton have in common?

a bad batting average with reality.

[93legendti]

what do newt gingrich, paul wolfowitz and john bolton have in common?

a bad batting average with reality.
Amb. Bolton was responsible for having the UN rescind its infamous "Zionism equals racism" proclamation.

If these 3 do not deal with reality, then give me fantasy.

Do they pay their taxes?

[swt]

Hey look! Another day another ultra right wing hate thread on SF.

[goonster]

more portmanteau words,

Poorly used, at that. Apparently the author knows what a shibboleth is.

[keno]

"brifter" is the only portmanteau word that quickly comes to mind. Which were those in the article?

swt, "ultra right wing", how did you get there? Certainly not by reading the article if it's the same one I read.

keno

[93legendti]

Hey look! Another day another ultra right wing hate thread on SF.
Huh?

what do newt gingrich, paul wolfowitz and john bolton have in common?

a bad batting average with reality.

[jim in pc]

Thank you, I stand corrected on the meaning of "portmanteau words."

Please substitute with "pretentiousness."

[beungood]

I'm clinging to my guns and religion.

[1centaur]

Two threads linked into: one reasonable and thoughtful, one rambling and emotional. One mature and experienced, one reminiscent of the college newspaper where I was an undergrad. One could agree or disagree with the whole or parts of either, but for those unwilling to wade through several thousand words style will be the determining factor in acceptance or rejection. The older you get the more you recognize that style makes things worth reading or not, because style tells you where you're heading and what kind of person is taking you there.

[rounder]

I read that today. My first thought was it sounded a lot like what 1centaur has been saying (but not expressed as well as he did). Things became so complicated that they could not be understood and, therefore, could not be controlled. It wsa not, necessarily, about greed. My second thought had to do with sonething else i read about math modeling and how it is an imperfect science...it will give you an answer, but does not guarantee that it is right.

[jim in pc]

If you want reasonable discussion, you have to be reasonable. Making broad, rigid claims about style being an indicator of quality - between a published article and a blog post no less - is laughable. I refuse to take that seriously. It's not reasonable. Not even close.

I could refute it all day, and enjoy doing so. John Yoo's torture memos? Nicely written, polished, deeply offensive and criminally wrong. Wittgenstein's Tractatus - wow, there's sprawling mess of the finest thought ever produced by man. See how un-serious you are being?

If you think Robb is wrong, tell me why. Dispute his facts. Point out flaws in the logic leading to his conclusions. Offer something better. Telling me you don't approve of his prose style is a merely a dodge. It concedes defeat yet reserves the right to believe whatever you want to believe. And if you're going to believe whatever you want, if that's your starting point and your ending point, then why post at all? It's not productive discussion.

[rounder]

If you want reasonable discussion, you have to be reasonable. Making broad, rigid claims about style being an indicator of quality - between a published article and a blog post no less - is laughable. I refuse to take that seriously. It's not reasonable. Not even close.

I could refute it all day, and enjoy doing so. John Yoo's torture memos? Nicely written, polished, deeply offensive and criminally wrong. Wittgenstein's Tractatus - wow, there's sprawling mess of the finest thought ever produced by man. See how un-serious you are being?

If you think Robb is wrong, tell me why. Dispute his facts. Point out flaws in the logic leading to his conclusions. Offer something better. Telling me you don't approve of his prose style is a merely a dodge. It concedes defeat yet reserves the right to believe whatever you want to believe. And if you're going to believe whatever you want, if that's your starting point and your ending point, then why post at all? It's not productive discussion.

esoteric.