This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - More Than Mortal
Pages: 1 ... 356357358 359360 ... 502
10711
« on: November 23, 2014, 01:13:53 PM »
No.
10712
« on: November 23, 2014, 01:10:02 PM »
I need sources for this.
However, 3 is a non-starter because free will doesn't exist.
10713
« on: November 23, 2014, 12:27:27 PM »
When has the US or the UK ever not been in debt?
What does that have to do with anything? The point is that a negative demand shock is pretty much guaranteed to be caused by bad monetary policy, and then exacerbate any debt issues. Don't get me wrong, the subprime crisis would've happened, but Lehman Brothers didn't fail until the U.S. had already been in a recession for about eight months.
10714
« on: November 23, 2014, 12:19:44 PM »
It was a housing bubble, and houses are the largest asset for every home-owning individual. Of course it's going to be severe.
Except that simply isn't true. Financial crises have never been enough to push a country into recession. Most countries, IIRC, didn't even experience a bubble, prices just plateaued. Not to mention, the stock market crash of 1987 had similar levels of bad debt to 1929, yet nothing even comparable to the Depression or the Recession followed.
10715
« on: November 23, 2014, 12:15:15 PM »
Recessions aren't controllable. They happen... well naturally almost.
Of course they're controllable. It must have some sort of endogenous cause. Recessions will always happen, sure, but there's no reason they have to be so fucking severe.
10716
« on: November 22, 2014, 05:35:30 PM »
Ben Bernanke.
Mark Carney.
George Osborne.
10717
« on: November 22, 2014, 05:13:58 PM »
Why don't you guys get business degrees first? They're the most in demand degree right now.
Because nobody capable of running the economy gets a business degree, when that is quite obviously focused on microeconomics. Not the consequential things like, y'know, monetary economics. Hey, Dustin, do I need to get a BA in PPE or an MSc in Economics before you get of our backs?
10718
« on: November 22, 2014, 04:35:28 PM »
I'm not overly fond of his economic ideas though.
Thou art forgiven.
10719
« on: November 22, 2014, 03:36:06 PM »
So what are her beliefs?
Well she's a Keynesian and doesn't seem too concerned about inflation >.>
Well, fuck.
Saying that, don't you support old Ronny? That's not much better <.<
10720
« on: November 22, 2014, 03:09:04 PM »
Ah somewhat
You guys are all right, you get to own handguns.
10721
« on: November 22, 2014, 02:47:46 PM »
We are talking about the term "Middle East", right? The term "Middle East" may have originated in the 1850s in the British India Office. However, it became more widely known when American naval strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan used the term in 1902 to "designate the area between Arabia and India".
The first official use of the term "Middle East" by the United States government was in the 1957 Eisenhower Doctrine, which pertained to the Suez Crisis. Secretary of State John Foster Dulles defined the Middle East as... I thought it was "Greater Middle East" we were talking about.
10722
« on: November 22, 2014, 02:47:15 PM »
So what are her beliefs?
Well she's a Keynesian and doesn't seem too concerned about inflation >.>
10723
« on: November 22, 2014, 02:41:06 PM »
Yes, looking through the most sig-  Ah, well, okay then. Libertarian Republicans who have some interest in monetary economics!  Oh, all right! Libertarian Republicans who are monetary economists. Now, I'm not making the claim that this is statistically significant in any way - it's merely interesting to note, and might raise some questions on old biases. Libertarian Republicans who aren't economists are woefully uneducated on the issue, pretty much like most other people who aren't economists. However, taking the two previous chairmen of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke, both of them performed remarkably well while both being LRs. It'll be interesting to see what Janet Yellen, the new Democrat chair, does with the economy. Although, given some of her beliefs, I'm not optimistic. Thoughts? Spoiler Just to remove any possible accusations of bias - if I were American, I wouldn't vote Republican.
10724
« on: November 22, 2014, 02:06:03 PM »
I live, apparently, in a moderately rough area (for England) and as I get older I can certainly see why my friends say that.
After being stabbed a couple of years ago, and my subsequent dealings with the police, I don't have a lot of confidence in them. While you should always, on some level, be ready to defend yourself if necessary, I don't have any confidence in the police to handle an incident properly after in occurs, or get to me in enough time to ensure my protection.
So, whenever I walk to the local shop (which is literally just down the road) when it's dark, I always walk with my house key between my two middle fingers.
10725
« on: November 22, 2014, 01:29:12 PM »
They aren't killed by lynch mobs however,
Because they don't need to. The Saudi government does it for them.
10726
« on: November 22, 2014, 01:03:17 PM »
Countries such as? Just curious - their recession likely stemmed from the recession of other countries - not internal problems. I think Canada and Australia were the notable ones, but I can't find the fucking data at the moment >.>
Yeah - both of their recessions likely stemmed from the recessions in other countries, especially Australia.
Actually, if I remember correctly, Australia avoided a recession. But then, that's unsurprising given Australia's usual resilience to shit like this. Canada also fared very well, too, mostly thanks to Mark Carney who was head of the Bank of Canada. Spoiler And who is now head of the Bank of England, suck it yanks!
10727
« on: November 22, 2014, 01:01:15 PM »
Why the government, Meta?
Monetary policy was incredibly tight, and caused nominal income to tank. The subprime debt crisis certainly would've been a problem in itself, and we'd have experienced a measure of debt deflation and falling money velocity, but nothing on such a tremendous scale.
10728
« on: November 22, 2014, 12:55:34 PM »
Countries such as? Just curious - their recession likely stemmed from the recession of other countries - not internal problems. I think Canada and Australia were the notable ones, but I can't find the fucking data at the moment >.>
10729
« on: November 22, 2014, 12:44:34 PM »
The problems escalated for roughly twenty years, and then came crashing down.
I'm not sold on the whole bubble theses, it's too easy to retroactively say "Oh look, a bubble!" Not to mention, a few countries which did go into recession didn't even see a collapse of the housing market. The markets were signalling poor performance prior to the crash, but - at least in my opinion - the government failed to respond.
10730
« on: November 22, 2014, 12:40:52 PM »
This is always a fun topic.
I blame the gub'ment.
Who do you blame, and why?
10731
« on: November 22, 2014, 12:05:05 PM »
From the Independent.Terror organisation al-Shabaab have claimed an attack that killed 28 people on a bus in Northern Kenya.
Around 100 gunmen, who are believed to have travelled over the border in Mandera county from Somalia, took the bus off the road before separating the passengers.
It is believed they asked travellers to recite passages from the Koran, shooting dead those who were unable to prove they were practising Muslims.
A statement on a website linked to the extremist organisation said the attack was carried out in retaliation for security raids on mosques in the coastal city of Mombassa earlier this week.
Kenya's Ministry of Interior and Coordination of National Government claimed on their official account earlier today: "Attackers camp has been destroyed by KDF using helicopters and jets, many killed, operations continue."
The bus was travelling to the Kenyan capital Nairobi when it was stopped in the northern county that borders Somalia.
Around 60 people were on the bus at the time of the attack, and it is thought that among the dead are Kenyan public servants – including four police officers - who were heading to the capital for the Christmas holiday. Remind me again how scripture doesn't motivate these people.
10732
« on: November 22, 2014, 11:16:58 AM »
 blump
10733
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:56:26 AM »
liberal
>mfw im not a liberal 
10734
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:53:25 AM »
But if it is done in love, that is all He wants.
Is Jeffrey Dahmer in heaven then? Or John Wilkes Booth?
10735
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:46:21 AM »
>thinking free will exists
my sides
10736
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:35:38 AM »
10737
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:32:42 AM »
Why did it say DAS BOOT quoted me? >_>
We're lovers, and have been merging into a single ontological entity for some time now. The transformation is almost complete.
10738
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:28:16 AM »
Extremist: "a person who holds extreme or fanatical political or religious views, especially one who resorts to or advocates extreme action." A highly contingent term; again, fundamentalism is better. If people want to kill, they will find a reason even without religion. This is self-evidently not true. People use religion as a justification for non-violence - one group, Quakers, even faced persecution for that belief - and thus it must hold that the reverse is true. We see ideologies like Marxist-Leninism, Stalinism, Nazism - et cetera - as the proximate cause of violent action, religion is no different. People are the problem. What a facile thing to say. I'd have thought a semi-decent God would communicate ideas in such a way as to not allow his flawed creations to misconstrue them, and then be punished by dint of their own nature. To try and palm it off as "people" being the problem is just hand-waving, since religion was made by people and is operated by people also.
10739
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:22:24 AM »
 Thoughts?
10740
« on: November 22, 2014, 10:21:06 AM »
Is somehting still religious extremism if it's a wide held belief though?
Extremism is a term that should be discarded in favour of fundamentalism, since the two seem highly correlated. However, extremism suggests being on the extremity, which isn't true for fundamentalist Islam, and fundamentalism really highlights what the issue is - the fundamentals.Nobody's worried about fundamentalist Jains, and nor should they be.
Pages: 1 ... 356357358 359360 ... 502
|
Show Posts