Political Calculus

Or Real Economics?More Trickle Down for New Orleans?
Or just what the doctor ordered.
Just say no economics>

Trickle Down Employment or Intelligent Design?
Or is the tripartite design of the stimulus the design that gives an alternative to bipartisanship or return to partisanship?

I'm guessing recalculations might be in order.
P.S. Has Louisiana's economy really not been hit as hard a most or is it like the global warming scam? It would seem that following Katrina and with the slow trickle down of aide, the needs and opportunities could be the reason or is it season. I am inserting irony here, others can insert the facts or economics of comparative recovery from disasters. Does this translate to hope or luck in Louisianna and for whom?

[Did we include apoplectic in the Four Eh?*]

* or montage

Back-Log August 19th, ("religious ghetto")

(Letter sent to local paper, unprinted.)
MEDVED'S NEIGHBORHOOD ALREADY TESTED!Michael

Medved sees a "religious ghetto" where "intelligent design" is not allowed to be taught as a science. If Lance Dickie actually wrote that any "questions never come up in science class", then he was wrong. That criticism aside I would suggest that Medved is confused about the difference between questions and the rest of the discipline of science. It is demonstrated by his most relevant and telling comment that "literally hundreds of academics have endorsed questions and research at the heart of intelligent design."

Questions and research are at the heart of science as well, but it is in the conclusions and their testing which education deals with. In this Medved fails or refuses to face any "global test". He claims that "it’s Darwinist fundamentalists who want to ban any challenge to evolution." His conclusion fails because evolution and science are always about being tested, while "intelligent design" is expecting a pass to be taught as science despite it being an un-testable conclusion let alone a preemptive answer.

Imagine the "ghetto" that science would be if only having more questions was what qualified one for the field, let alone allowed them to be taught. In fact we don’t have to imagine the world if education was only ongoing questions and we are facing that test, and its failure in the real world.

If any exception proves the rule, it is probably only through the generosity of some and the theft by others that we have not seen more evolution, let alone ghettos.

QCON: TruthOut

Quick Comment On the News or Question Context:

The following pieces deserve a more careful read, but for me, not yet.[*] TruthOut does a filtering of sorts, and I notice rather heavy reliance on the NY Times. Not that that is a bad thing, just not necessarily a liberal thing. The left, right and the middle can characterize a source as from a different perspective, but that should be the mark of good journalism. Again, not that they have hit the right mark, from our own perspectives.

While Super Delegates are an example of a problem that voters wish they could fix without being a part of the process, so are the choices of primary, or caucus, and financing and electoral college procedures. These are all complicated by the nature of our goverment, its three branches, a bi-cameral legislature, and the individual composition of state governments and their rights in relation to the federal government. And have I thrown in partisanship? This is not a civics lesson, but it would be nice if it were in schools.

For me this is the first time in 24 years I have not come out of my precinct caucus a delegate for some candidate. This year it was by design or rather lack of design. I was for Edwards. I ran the caucus as a PCO and was a decimal point or voter or two shy of ending up an uncommitted delegate. This is more than I intended to say today, but I guess it ties in. Because even if civics were in schools, the media and the voters would still have a very big job to understand what mechanisms are operating in each state. Did I mention partisanship? Not to mention the constitution? I won't go there, but too many feel that there is a conspiracy, and there is, only if you are not part of it.

What is represented in the following articles may very well be best efforts to represent reliable pictures, but that is not to say that other perspectives and sources do so well. [*] While some of the tactics candidates use are not appreciated by many, they are apparently working on some. And it must be remembered that we filter as well or poorly as the media or format we use.

I would like to close this comment with the feeling that it is hard to unite when the leader is still unknown, but it is better than being party to having a leader who will unite without knowing who the enemy is. If there is any obtuseness in this, maybe it is a riddle to solve.

In Two Battlegrounds, Voters Say, Not Yet
By Patrick Healy
The New York Times

Ballot Shortages Plague Ohio Election Amid Unusually Heavy Primary Turnout By Ian Urbina
The New York Times
A Clean, Fair Fight
The New York Times | Editorial

McCain Clinches GOP Presidential Nomination By Michael D. Shear and Peter Slevin
The Washington Post

[Update: Just as I put the finishing links on this post, breaking news on Thom Hartmann Show, about the Texas crossovers that Rush Limbaugh encouraged. (Guest David Sirota) Where in the primary, voters got their ballots, and if they were Republican and wanted to vote for Hillary, found that there were no Rebulicans on their ballot. Hmm. Who needs a civics lesson? Well, of course it seems wrong, but parties should be able to decide their candidate not a talk show host who wants a circus. Republicans were disenfranchised, by trying to vote for Hillary while not intending to support her in the general election. They could not vote for Hillary, and hope to influence their own party on local elections too. This "monkey business" is why the parties and the process is so complicated. It is further complicated by the electoral college process not to mention the winner take all nature of that delivery system. Independents and third parties are so hard to fit into this picture without major changes that themselves are so hard to bring about, but I really don't want to go there.(the link not the idea). Oh and that ploy by Rush Limbaugh may have hurt some local candidates and I won't hurt our heads by figuring that out, but it is a way to sort out some math.]

[*] I have yet to fully digest the four links above, but apparently the press have nibbled on some ribs. (Links, sausage, democracy: get it?) But I did scarf this down and indeed have had my own beach party.

FOOTNOTES PAGE January 2014

1-2-14  Knot to begin with Zor(R)o aster.*

1-5-14 ... Enterprise: Ezra Klein Project.
* 1-6-14  line pulled from uncertain post

1-10-14 [Closed Cap shun ? ] 1.The Hope'd4 Campaign , Snooze Alarm ,   2.Strike the Right..., CAD (Culturally Aided Design), C.In Balance... D.Political Football  3. The State of Religion? , CAD (Culturally Aided Design)   4. The Hegel Myth and Its Method

 

e 0

1-14-14 : It is not just 42itUS {a} we hold at 18 links.  No I was not hinting on the green or the rough.  I just did not feel like stopping at 13, not to be a #erologist, 3Erologist or numberologist.  The 18 links are 6462^ in their groupings, but those were not 4c'd 2 meet my model.  (i.e. there are now 6 edges.) Or was it about 4d Fair Lane?

1-16-14 : See Labels: Original Game Theory(1st use) Field Theory, Tetrahe..., TOW('at?)

^ Did Douglas Adams know Arthur Dantos and did Andrew Dice Clay* know either?  It may be somewhat of a popperism. You can't have Popperism without the prism. ? ?

*kNOT: Technically Rex Wiener ?  ? ? 

Geometry ?

FOOTNOTE PAGE FOUR

2-12-13 See*FP3*: ^
(b.s.) "stay+course" Who Are They Calling Elitist?, It's Obama's Turn, Spare the Rodney!, PHASE II: We need some movement! , FP?  Stay the Comity of Course , Are We "IN" Yet?, Stay the Comity* What's going on? , I'm not a lawyer but..., Out of Line? "Hogwash", *knot*, ...what about the damage to your Presidency?,  The other ground game..., Tony Baloney, Rest in Peace: Andrew Breitbart , Off the Cuff?, GO OBAMA!*(note2) Weeeee! or Fb?

(b.s.) "navigate"  Fine Tuning. OW2*3, Borrowed Comment!, All Politics is Local? , Try Angle,C-weeeee*, I Told You So.yeah(sc)right, Two Clever by One Third? , ABA Retracts "Lawyer" of the Years, Unity '08 (pOW), Local Content , LeftyBlog? , Once, Twice, Three Times A Charm, **

Note: problematic to LABEL at this time.[[?]] [^^] 
* (sc) [F&progress?]or *knot*
** note on progress in regard to this blog 'n case studies re:CAD) (fn)

(fn) TBA? CAD (Culturally Aided Design), CAD (2 out of 3 be bad), CAD (To be or not 3d), State of Politics, "you people..."? 

^ see more than one level of problematic aster risking and design.  Which should be revisited from the top line down, with focus on Labels, all annotations marks, PAGES and *FN* heading, and TBA laters.

[^^] 2-13-13 [Do I have to return to *legend*
[!] = pun, satire, etc.  [[?]] could mean later question mark inserted. Of course most puns are a matter of timing and sometime anachronistic.  
BUT BACK TO TODAY'S (FP4) Here: Not that I intended to hit(A.) on (B.) the anachronism.
(b.s.) "articulated+bus"= A. NO JOKE , B. UPDATE ONLY? KNOT[!]  [**] {L}

CAD (Culturally Aided Design)

That was not my original insult.  I mean intent.
Nor the original CAD or (under)mine,
speaking of Cause Affect Deficiency: (updated Cause Affect Disorder)

I feel like Ann Romney, with an early Birthday present.(ala CNN and the Hilary Rosen War) Yesterday someone tossed an expletive at my Obama bumper sticker. Speaking of CAD, Ted Nugent is a Raw Money reincarnation of the Swift Boaters. Only he needs a vet for his Cat Scratch Fever. More on CAD, it is not computer-aided design, it is cause and affect deficiency. 


BTW: it is still our turn,(thanks Ann) if Bush could get a second one in the middle of a war, no matter who started it.


CAD-2.0: more or less

[Not to demonize or capitalize on catholic and deficiencies*, but if government is a business and corporations are people, what is bankruptcy, let alone where is the death penalty?]

*not to decapitalize

[Clue to the G'Ribble.]
[update decapitalize: Huffington Post throws journalism in the pit.]

UPDATE 4-24-12 (images)

CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)

May Day ain't what it used to be.
Cads are what they will be.
CAD used to stand for Computer Aided Design.
Fore! To correct the swing of sorts.

I recently referred to Ted Nugent as having CAD, Cause Affect Deficiency or Disorder, along with Mitt Romney.   And since it is all about the defining issues of our time, or the 2012 election, the ideal flip-flop from Cause Affect Disorder is Culturally Aided  Design.  If fact I feel that the Jonathan Haidt book, The Righteous Mind may be enlightening to read, but I believe it has some imbalances.

Why does he pick the categories he does to distinguish liberals from conservatives?  Why is having them balanced better than in some hierarchy?  Why should we look to the sacred, and wouldn't the rest follow of sorts?  SEGUE
If moral psychology is the foundation for politics and religion, what is the foundation of economics?  Or physics and philosophy?

Now I know I am avoiding comment on the May Day issues**, but in the greater scheme of things, there may be a related point to do so.  While I have yet to get the book, I have perused more than once most of the links in the previous paragraph(pre-segue).  Not that they may be inserted only slightly more than haphazardly.  In my lede, I have hinted that to be a CAD is not always bad, but sometimes it is just*** a tool*.

*BTW:  it was more than just for convenience that I used affect over effect.
** 5-2-12
***5-3-12 "CAD" and "just" links are not endorsements of confrontation without consequences.  Violence and destruction must not be condoned.  Anarchists should be seen as part of the 1%. (Hijacking the message, much as the Tea-party had their's hijacked by the Koch bothers.)  I might add that globalization, capitalism and even cap and trade, are not the problems or solutions^.  It is the entitlements of the 1% in their hyperbola of fantasy.  The only difference between anarchists and libertarians is the fantasy.  Not that anarchists are more real, at least they realize that their is something about the foundations over the fountainhead.

[5-4-12 On the globalization front.]

Bio ~ engineering.

My first major was Chemical Engineering at USC before a stint in their East Asian Languages and Cultures Department.*  After a sabbatical for a number of years, the result was a BA in Liberal Studies at the University of Washington.

[anachronistic writing]**
*removing the impression that I am at all responsible for the hyperlink
** the following are notes in progress akin to side notes on a page being read

NOTES:
Madhyamaka     /     Dialetheist       crazy ~  unmattaka
M-theory of D {?}
Paraconsistent Logic
Paradox ~ ironic ~ rhetorical device
Conceptualization ~/~ falsifies

Nietzsche: tT~ER (eternal recurrence)
Radical Contextualist Semantics ~requires meaning
Statement ~\~ truthmaker (not required)

=====================   segue   ==========
W-Theory  ~ Milo Wolff
Logical Positivism   Fusion v. Confluence
Defluence is the struggle[!]
=====================   theory?==========
LEVEL TWO NOTES:
W for Wolff AND Wave
Not to mention paradox of M.
Model / Madhyamaka / meaning?
D for Dialetheist, Dimensions and Design
Even rougher notes:
Paraconsistent Wittgenstein
Popper's poker.
=============
Then there is Methane[!]
Big T, and small t: Truth and Tetrahedron
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

* asterisk info only added 5-2-16
Pardon my style.

Neo-toll-keen.

Trolling[?]

There was something that inspired this, and there is a tangential creation that I have in process elsewhere. I believe it was the word "bridge", hence the Lord of the Rings reference.
Now for another leap or we've[!]

The "Perception Bridge".  Evonomics.
Capitalization* of Design. Daniel Dennett
Fuller's Manifesto? (R. Buckminster) Maria Popova**


* my take
** cartographer of [?]
"use"

CAD (To be or not 3d)

Cause Affect Disorder* or Culturally Aided Design
[Objective / Subjective ?]

(counter point)

* Ted Nugent had a deficiency,
Romney's may be full blown disorder.

[Not to demonstrate the former...(see *)]
** yet to be linked/asterisked (see [**])
*** again who needs Republicans ?
[To cut through the CAD part...]

[**] Maybe the Title should read (3B or not 2D) As in three branches with discernible diplomacy?  Except for the disorder bit. Now that is survival*** of the asterisks.

[If President Obama were half of what is feared and smeared from the Right he would be more than then Left even hoped for, and even the middle might understand they are better off.  If he were the other half he would be just another empirical politician.  The point is that there is only so much that a President can do, to undo what previous administrations and congresses have undone.  Not to be a CAD, but computer aided discernment brings a hopeful and peaceful May Day?]

[Ryan Shrugged = more Mitt-Flop or disavowing the moral case for capitalism. Note on The Last Word. ^ Not to mention The Ed Show ?!?!]

^5-1-12
[Led Better Bill?]

P.S. (Pre-Selection: Romney/Ryan 2012)

Bricks and stones

no bones about it?

Too many threads.*
Still in the process of reading the links embedded and woven aknew[!]***

*2-24-13 

[a different Handy**]
[not to get a degree in Bacon but sometimes shelves are handy]
** found on one of my shelves.

***  Rhee-Marshall-Handy
In Charles Handy's The Age of Paradox,(**) there are two chapters I navigated to, but first I would say that every age is a paradox, as that is the nature of nature. Anyway, they are The Federal Idea p. 109) under Practicing the Preaching, which referenced back to the Sigmoid Curve(p. 49) under Finding the Balance.  I would like to weave in the Paradox of Choice by Bob Schwartz to determine if management of information and business is what education should be based on. 

Forbes Thought Of The Day
“Money never starts an idea; it is the idea that starts the money.”
— William J. Cameron

[See under degree / on, (b.s.)finds "tetra+heed+run" / "Platonic+plank" = Education/Business/Government loopiness. Not to suggest nonsense or SixSigma, but a Six Edged 4Mat of dynamics and what matters and is the point, balancing change and individual freedoms.  (Platonic Platforming and Planks Constant?)]

Not to suggest a tipping of the tetrahedron, or BEG the work of N-title meants but which comes first? Business/Education/Government slash results or causes and affects of design?

Conservative Foray (4A)

The right wing rhetoric suffers
from four faults or defaults:
Anecdotal
Apocryphal
Anachronistic
Academic[*]

In particular:
Lew Rockwell
Anne Wortham
Betsy McGaughey
Floy Lilley **

I did not select these, they were being spread by a victim of the victim hoods.

[* This 4A was held in draft, and pondered till I arrived at the right Initialism. Speaking of design and initialism the origin was:
often A$$ Backward Oops!! - Pardon my Cheney , I meant acronym-ism.]

**[Hopefully I have these in descending order.]
[(CTTC)Cutting through the Cr@p:
I would love for economists to cut through some of this.]
[Academic is a word like politician and lawyer that have developed a poor reputation, not to mention rhetoric and Swift Boaters. Or Bottom Line? ]

[(CTTC2.0)I have two bold links above that I would like economists to examine, in particular in light of the bad rap Keynesian economics keeps taking. In that regard, on a lighter and less silly or harsh note; Greenspan seems to be learning, or has he, and in regards to the Floy piece and the bottom line;
is there not some synergy that needs to be worked out? Meaning current efforts cannot be compared to past efforts directly, while problems that are missed will be the devil in the detail. The Carbon Market may be a solution, but not if the Market period is the problem. In other words, I have not looked too deeply into the hot air side (climate matters) of the equation, but feel that the thin air problem (financial matters)is deeper. To re-embed in aphorism, there is bang for your buck and there is the value of your bang. And there is likely more that matters.

The Great Wall Recycled.

My teaser hints at a tangent
of Nietzschean proportions.
Bush Army in Brzezinski's Afghan Trap

Or Rumsfeld's ReDucks
or Donald's Duck and Cover Up History
I will not dig into the depths of it,
or what fell into my inbox from TruthOut.
But to feel we have been there before.

My threads:
Berlin + Wall
Vietnam + Economy
Not a wall

Out of the Blue Summary:The irony of intelligence I have recently heard is the contrast between Truman and Eisenhower over the long and the short of it as far as agency and militancy, not to mention in-corporations of it.
A set-up or by intelligent design?

[6-22-08 Bicameral NOT.]
[Prior Restraint: Post Information ]

Not Exactly

Random (not so) links:
Beck Ed:
Bachman Palin Express How's that new normal working for ya?
the Apostle Paul in letters
Cognitive Policy Works?
Obsolescence?

Of hate or humor?
Media Matters?

As a personal recipient of the Palin humor or bumper sticker advice, I have a suggestion: advice does not fit on a bumper sticker and apparently not even in your rallies.

I was at a metered on ramp and a white SUV was aside me, with the character driving smiling and speaking through my slightly open window on a beautiful day. As I smiled and rolled down my window, he said: "How's that hopey changey thing working out for ya?" (To be honest I am not sure that he or I now have it correctly spelled or quoted.) I flashed an even bigger smile and a vigorous thumbs up, and he continuted: "Are you a commmunist or do ya just vote for them?" To which I replied: "Are you kidding or(?)" ...we moved on. But that guy did not know who he was messing with (someone who knows better*)... someone with a sense of humor and a sense that righteousness is a lack of faith. (I just came up with that, as I really had some wise cracks, some even appropriately expletive(Tea "partier")adjusted. Speaking of what's in the bag. I have mysteriously completed a loop as to who or what is working? I will call that my Ribble of Intelligent Design at which I will give the links by number.

{It might take a while to sort out the serious, but I do emphasize the jest or just nature, rather than any unintended vitriol(wiki google branch: ethereal.) or Con Sequences. See Comment.]

Less than raw links:
catharsis
RE:Schadenfreude
Gloom at other's successes.

Raw links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_to_the_Thessalonians
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Thessalonians+3&version=NIV
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_was_Paul_in_the_Bible
http://www.gotquestions.org/twelve-apostles-disciples-12.html
http://sunandshield.wordpress.com/2007/08/04/is-the-apostle-paul-one-of-the-12-disciples/

* in the particular case I am a minority (OK, I did not take the poll, but it is hard to believe it is representative of the truth. That would mean a thumbs up for the media, and I don't know what for congress.) But that is really cherry picking.

[Speaking of Bridge or post lonesome roads or sections of a train?.]

RIGHT TO LIFE?

OR...

PRO DEBT?


Who's your daddy?
[Not encompassing...]
[Who's your maid?]
[Pre-(or Post) Nuptual? Not to get sexist or legal.]
[Oh those (darn*) laws of unintended consequences.]

* darn as in yarn (i.e. I forgot my tetrahedron.)

[Not to pun on intelligent design, but that is the law.**]

**spelled out

Minimum Wage Resources

http://www.epi.org/publication/importance-study-design-minimum-wage-debate/

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/economics/inequality/the-effects-of-raising-the-minimum-wage



http://www.nber.org/papers/w12663.pdf?new_window=1

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/44995

http://americanactionforum.org/insights/what-the-weight-of-minimum-wage-research-shows

https://www.facebook.com/eddiegilchrist/posts/10208542946436436

https://www.facebook.com/raiseourwage/photos/a.1676792199227347.1073741828.1672542002985700/1681523792087521/?type=3&theater

http://evonomics.com/no-one-knows-why-trump-is-winning/



http://evonomics.com/economist-debunks-one-of-the-biggest-myths-about-governments/
http://evonomics.com/apes-make-irrational-economic-decisions-that-includes-you/

http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/what-wrecked-scotus-nominations-623482435586
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/rachel-maddow-breaks-down-how-badly-the-us-needs-a-full-supreme-court-going-into-the-election/

Mocumentary: Expelled (Exposed?)

Featured DO NOT SEE!
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. *

Idol Chatter: Pre-Screaming.
Reuters: No "Intelligence" evident in Stein documentary Post comment.
Angry Astronomer reports.

An unwilling participant!
And a Willing participant?

* OK, see the trailer, which is admittedly more a mocumentary.

[Now I will add my only little discourse:

Fear Based Blame Game

Speaking of Labeling, I did not know I would go here. It is not a matter of Faith. It is a matter of evidence. Not that faith is wrong to have. But it must be based on evidence. Of course there is evidence for faith. But can you question faith? You can question evidence. But would you have faith in unquestioned evidence? Evidence can give you an answer, if you have a question. If you have faith in unquestioned evidence, can you question faith? If it is a matter of freedom, would anyone choose freedom from evidence? Would anyone choose freedom from faith?

Of course this is just a ramble. Unless one chooses to answer, whether you have faith in evidence or no evidence. Would anyone base their answers on a writer, actor, economist, lawyer? Just because a dog does not all of a sudden become a cat, does not mean that things don’t change, and not always for the better. But apparently with intelligent design, anyone can be anything, no matter their department or intelligence. There is now evidence for that.]

[[If the above ramble is hard to follow, maybe reading the following will help.
The Information Challenge by Richard Dawkins -- Maybe not, but it may make it seem easier. (It may also be helpful to point out that this is only an example used by unwilling participant above.) ]]

[04-22-08: more links on Expelled - -
PZ Meyers Expelled, Gains Sainthood -
Lying for Jesus - (nfry)

It is one of the classic philosophical fallacies to derive an 'ought' from an 'is'. Stein (or whoever wrote his script for him) is implying that Hitler committed that fallacy with respect to Darwinism. If we look at more recent history, the closest representatives you'll find to Darwinian politics are uncompassionate conservatives like Margaret Thatcher, George W Bush, or Ben Stein's own hero, Richard Nixon. Maybe all these people, along with the Social Darwinists from Herbert Spencer to John D Rockefeller, committed the is/ought fallacy and justified their unpleasant social views by invoking garbled Darwinism. Anyone who thinks that has any bearing whatsoever on the truth or falsity of Darwin's theory of evolution is either an unreasoning fool or a cynical manipulator of unreasoning fools. I will not speculate as to which category includes Ben Stein and Mark Mathis.

Faith in doubt and inquiry -
Related video link:
'New' American Theology of Civil Submission - ]

Try Angle

Here are a few pieces that intersect.
Re-Rights,
Checks,
And Balances. [^^^]

How? Well, we have the Judiary, Congress, and the Executive perspectives.
The bottom line is account ability. Yes, that is two words under three branches.
We have the accounting of Bush v. Gore, trickle down, and the slippery slope. Juctices can't count, economics does, and they all matter. I will try not fall into the trap of the previous post with technical difficulties arising from the burden of
tangents and links, or whatever the problem*** is, but it is a matter of looking back** at where we were and how we got there, with Bush the Decider, the current economic climate of understanding Trickle-Down and Slippery-Slopes, and the Executive we are lucky to have in the face of mythical* obstructionism and obfuscation. In fact, again I have only read the first and glanced a bit at the others but they are almost a protractor or other instrument of our graphic nature and the geometry of purpose that some have. i.e. It was not my original intent but maybe there is some intelligent design, in that it is about Re-Writing our social architecture. Re-writing checks and balances, economics is the bottomline and whether there is Bane or Change, and I don't mean Bain or Boehner.

* mythical: as in monstrously huge if not fantastical.
** well they did arise so there! I mean here:
and see Lord of markets,
and values politics. Economics is not without politics and values.***

*** "convenient" link see placement(^) of asterisk "the problem" re: positive/normative "dispute" or die-manics of dynamics.

(^) (more ttdl: footnote search own comment(^^) re: economics being engineering. ...?)

(^^) [3-13-12 update: my ttdl(temp tech difficulty linking) is now corrected, also found my comments on economics being a field of social engineering. Featured caricature? Herbert Spencer. ALSO RE : Politics ]

[ Unrelated: if war were not related to economics.(NFRY) Also too bad.]

[^^^ Tag tomorrow : From the original Try Angle we have the 3 branches as we navigate the world of economics and power relations.]

Re-Mix

and woe* man?


Not to di-Spencer with his story or trick L-down... 
*'n whoa




3 body problem ?












(1) The Internet is one giant hoax
(2) The 75 Albums Every Man Should Own
(3) A. Unreasonable Proof of/or Reality., B. F'n P[!],  C. Apples and Oranges and Cherry Picking.**
(4)   Hack list No. 1: Mike Allen
(5) White House panel proposes sweeping NSA reforms

** links sometime expire or there are scroll click anomalies ^ or Al Gore Rhythms. (See C. pick axe not A or Y?)
^  Place Holder? 4a / foray / for(ay)
3 / 4 ~> evolutional insert or by design ? ( OW ?) cc ?
[art added]/ R U Yellen ? [!] dove tail ? ! ~ % & tip of/or !



Material Dynamics

















Still trying to caption the original source or capture the captain of the berg... bingo!
IC but PC 2!



Rising Re:Tide

or 20 mule...irony ...

You are not alone...

in not making much economic sense. There are always people who think they know better, it does not mean they have solutions to the problems. There is a case for change, but until there is enough, there are still the same solutions needed*. That is not to say there can't be too much. There can. And Obama isn't it. Too much change that is, but hopefully, incrementally just enough.

We must have a design with an intention, not just a bottom line that starts at the top. Those that see the deficit as the greatest problem and cutting spending as the simplest solution, should know better**, not that it influences their success or advice.

* proper investments(not just jobs) are needed along with top down reform of the "invisible hand" and "bubble" blowing; a tweaking or replacement of Keynesian economics.

** 5-28-10 the other Washington link and labels(I-1098)added.