The anthropic principle, evolution and economics.

While it's true that I have some certain doubts about the intellectual basis of what I sometimes refer to as the "Sciforums treatment"--see 15ofthe19's latest two cents in this topic, for instance--it's more a jibe aside at certain people, who, in the past, have felt the need to dispute issues with me while proudly crowing that they're not reading my posts. Some of them say they're too long (which would be problematic), some in the past have actually gotten angry at me and complained, "I can't understand what you're saying; you use too many words." And yet people wonder why I pick on reading comprehension around here . . . .

You wrote:

It all depends on where you choose to throw your lot with the word "we." If you'd stuck with the word, "I," there would be no cause for such a note. Maybe some other, but not something nearly so broad and condemning.

And also, at the end of all that, there is the real consideration that if I was shooting for publication, the Sciforums crowd is about the last group of people in the world that any publisher undertaking to release such a volume would turn to for criticism. And that includes me, should it be, say, your manuscript.

Our working environment around here not only is not prepared for such an undertaking, but pretty much is determined by the posters to despise such prospects.

Doesn't mean the individuals themselves aren't qualified, but this is Sciforums, and the posters who represent the individuals . . . I mean, damn.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Stupidity is such an ugly sickness.

Give it another whack when you grow up and get healthy, boy.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

T you aren't the first, and certainly wont be the last to duck me when I base an argument in matter-of-fact real world examples of the effects, good or bad, depending on your POV, of Globalism on the U.S. economy and more importantly the collective psychology of a given segment of the global workforce.

Specific to the U.S., if you decry so-called "trickle down" economic principles, how do you reconcile that with the fact that low personal property and real property taxes along with lower corporate tax rates are some of the biggest factors in determining where a potential overseas investor decides to locate a tax-generating, job creating facility within a potential region?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oh, why don't you wait until you base a real argument on real examples instead of fallacious appeals to emotion and truckloads of childish, bitchy attitude?

Depends on the entity. Why don't you try explaining your theory instead of being a pathetic little cuss?

And try to be coherent. That would be helpful.

 

I can only interpret your response, or more accurately a lack of a response to mean that you simply have no idea what I'm talking about because you simply have no idea how any of the fundamentals of economic development factor into the equation of who builds what facility and where. There is no appeal to emotion here T.

If you want to learn, I will be more than happy to teach you.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

During your time at Sciforums, your reading comprehension, attitude problem, and devotion to divisive and provocative behavior indicates that you are simply not smart enough to make such a declaration.

Seriously, you're one of the few people I've encountered who puts such effort into both promulgating and attempting to disguise his own stupidity.

Try pointing out the real argument, and showing what it has to do with anything.

Profanity, limited circumstances, and an appeal to emotion: you've got nothing, little boy.

 

Wess:

Ha!

I know damn well my lack of knowledge in this field stinks to high hell in this thread so I'll be dead honest with you- the businessworld, to me, fucking blows.

I had no clue prominent economists were using 'scarcity' for politcal means in their "smarmy" asshatteque, Wes. My mind is made for other things, so its all Greek to me.

Tessie:

Well then, do yourself a favor and at least address them when they actually do.

I've actually read your shit and understood you for once and what does gendanken get? Nothing. Nada. Punto.

At least let a girl know she's a rambling idiot or something. You'll only make it worse on yourself by proving our own theories on what you are.

 

"your reading comprehension, attitude problem, and devotion to divisive and provocative behavior indicates that you are simply not smart"

You've burned it onto all those tattered banners no? Seems like part of your trophy... your burden.

It's a shame they all bashed themselves into oblivion like that...

Banging against pink's wall.

 

Actually, the most part of it is finished. I apologize for the delay. I'm having an ethical quandary about whether or not to buy an online copy of a magazine article that's simply hiding from me in the stacks.

No ... you're not necessarily a rambling idiot. It's just that you raised a couple issues I'm happy to address, and I might as well put some effort into it so I don't have to go through it six more times with other people.

In the meantime, I do apologize for the delay. I admit it's easy to forget the more substantial issues when they arise among the bullshit factor being piled on by people who, while they may be at least as annoyed with me as you are some days, simply aren't willing to put the effort into attempting to understand their annoyance that you've shown since our first ugly encounters.

Gendy? Yeah, I can believe you're trying. Toward what is beyond my speculation, but I say that without sarcasm; one thing that's obvious is that you are indeed your own person.

But if you want the excuse list, my mother stopped by to see her granddaughter, there was a Metallica show in there somewhere, and for once the handful of topics I find myself involved in for the long haul generally taxes my intellect and not my patience.

I see in your post an opportunity to tax myself in that more rewarding manner, and promise to have it for you just as soon as I dig up a reference from one of the twentieth century's finest windbags in order to try to nail down for you a contextual consideration of myth.

And yes, I should have at least dropped a note that I saw the post and was on it. M'apologies, m'lady.

 

And as long as I'm checking in on this topic:

'Tis, replied Aunt Helga.

 

Tessie:

No, when I say I'm dumbfounded I actually am dumfounded. I'm not working towards anything.

It was like sitting down and listeing to the quiet after the storm..............on you?

I really did understand you, a little. Fancy.

 

Not even understanding?

I actually got that impression; it's part of the reason I'm holding out for this article. I smell opportunity, not blood. The only tragedy comes up if I'm suffering some sort of pseudo-cryptomnesiac muddling of articles, though I'm pretty sure I'm not. (It's one of those things that sat in the stack of books under the nightstand until a few weeks ago. I'm not responsible for that reorganization of the living space, but it's starting to get to me. I even found an old Crab Creek Review, and an issue of Parabola from 2002. Unfortunately, these aren't what I need. (That's the problem of reading those damn magazines that look like thin trade-paper books.)

 

Round the world and back again....THAT's the sailor's way.
I've been around the world and back again, and yet find his post delayed...
In the meanitime:

15:

I place before you a soap box. Teach.

 

Oh fair dizzy, where should I begin?

You must un-learn all that you have learned.

There is no try. Only do, or not do.

If you are ready to leave the dark side, you must surrender any notion you might have held that anything about this world is fair or just. Only then can you fully accept the charge you have to keep. We must now leave the dark ones to wallow in their own crapulence, and move to a place of light and wisdom. The Festivus Pole is in its proper place, the Feats of Strength are over, and now we can begin.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Question the first: Why do some have more than others?

 

15:

A task easily achieved by blue eyed vermin.

Ha!

Prole. "Fair and just" is for the idiot to sing about when he's playing with his fingers up in his ivory towers.

Answer the second: Because some are smart enough to not look their nose down on the virtues of greed, vice, and savagery.

 

That's an interesting way to put it. I'm not positive that virtue is the word I would have used in that context, but I wont quibble. Quibbling over semantics is for pseudo-intellectuals.

Question the second: Why is there more than one color of umbrella?

 

Why is there more than one color umbrella...
Why is there more than one color umbrella....
Why is there more than onecolor umbrella..

Answer the third: For the atmosphere of choice. Or competition.

Answer the fourth (in case you were being sarcastic and only 'playing' with gendanken as if you could): in case a girl feels like impaling you with blue umbrellas on Wednesdays and black ones on Fridays.

 

Actually it's just answer the second. You're sort of getting the order of things screwed up there. Nevertheless, you're correct. There are millions of colors of umbrellas because people like having choices.

Question the third: Who or what should limit how many makes, models and styles of umbrellas are available to the public, and on what authority?

 

Ha! Ha-ha! Ha-ha-haha-ha-ha!

Got it ....

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Gendanken, I decided to scour around for any prior reference I had made to this particular article on the web. I knew I had somewhere. It took about six Google searches before I stopped looking for the windbag and started looking for a specific phrase that I remembered using.

Turns out I was looking for the wrong windbag. It's been 102 weeks, it turns out, since I last mentioned it, but it's obviously not worth dragging this out another two weeks just to be cute.

I'll finish up and get it posted this evening. I'm holding the book I need in my hands ... well, not exactly in my hands as I type, but I see it. It ain't goin' nowhere. It ain't gettin' lost.

 

Allright, good. So you're not only being a dipshit trying to play games with a girl he doesn't take seriously. I'll be serious then:

Answer the third: the Politburo. Those with the instinctual drive to manage, distribute, and maintain. Those in power and on the authority of those consenting to it.

Wesmorris:
I've noticed something- in you saying this:

Are we not saying the same thing? Unless you think I've been rambling then perhaps you don't know, so I'll show you:

"Reminds me of why I have failed economics not once but twice- its in all the abstracts they use to fit into their theories, the soft monies and 'phantom' profits of the business world is what I could never undertand because it stunk of politics.
"- gendanken, 3 or 4 posts ago.

Tessie:

Tick, tick, tick, tick...