From the annals of a backlog of thought[...]

[...] punctuation open

There was a feature of "political" economics where it seemed the problem was the use of infinity in regard to debt, deficits and budgets.  (to be searched on this blog)

To fast forward here, it seems the other extreme is now, being employed, in the stymied budget efforts at this time.  That being the consideration of tax-cuts that expire and thereby kicking their economic effects, like a can down the road.

This is aside from the duplicitous nature of their press dealings, as Rachel Maddow points to in the Steve(n) Munchkin[!] news.

search this blog
Related google finds.

Not to mention Moody.
Let alone another shot. (innoculation/vaccine)

Read or Ship?

Not fully sewn or C-sawed[!]


Pre~emptive Rant:
The Obama Economy is not working[!]   You got Ed!


Poll proposal:
Which would you rather have more Bane or change?


Pardon the irony or mixed parody, which would you rather have, more Republican in the form of X, or Democracy in the form of Y? Still frackin’ about the Bane or poll-R-ization?  AKA~
More of whatever Boehner is selling or more of what Warren in the form of Elizabeth and Buffet suggest?
　Post-Ship or Precalculus of WOT?
Purple Badge of Rhetoric.
SUBtext or setting:  
The Decartooning of Adam Smith or the full crumb of Keynesian/teeter recovery .  

INET

Joseph Stiglitz: Economics Has to Come to Terms with Wealth and Income Inequality
Xavier Gabaix: NFRY / PC

While reading the first I imagined a curve representing a tipping point and it's margins.  I also considered that dominoes can tip either way, but that is not the game called Dominoes. Then I properly applied the Laffer Curve but thought of a gulch of sorts.  (Ctrl F. Newtonian: not to mention 3-body problems.)  See PC and NFRY.  THE POINT ? [!] (Poe Pen dull  em?)

12-20-14
The mess ~ age is the message.  Not knot (~) exactly [!]
Fail fast/Bohemian Gravity/Enantiodromia=2#/8th. (Bohemian Irony Dimensions ... ?)

Meta-Flack

Nitty Piketty [!]
Or nickety snickers? (spectators)

[Mezzo flack ?  The dOW? 5 6 7 8 ]

( scroll / click ? ) (:~:)
[fb /   y-t]
p-o-b...
c-b- 




ow ?

Econ #$% ? (^)

Peter Paul and Pocket?
Red and Black and Grey all over.

Fiscal Krugman ? [!]




[Lede or * Ship?]


* bottoms up?
Later , V for Victim , A little knowledge is dangerous


a. The Bully..., c. Cost of Course, d. Lessons of War, EH? H. Post Newtonian Economics, j.It turns out... , k. The Be All and End All? , l. Hi Ate Us , m. Presidential SOTU , n. Coin-age of the day. o. Simon says 2 point or...? , p. Politics is local?


To Be Arranged , b.  hmmm? , c. Loose Lips and Sinking Metaphors , d. Blog-Oi-Ya-Bleep., eh? , F. Rat Races Van Mices? , G. The LESS THAN pentagonal file: , h. No0000![!]? (/\/) , i, , J? K!CAD (2 out of 3 be bad)


a. Fair and Balanced..., b. Genre Clash


Econ 101, 10, 1, L


Titanic Berg ?
QCON: TruthOut  (x)
Trick Question of the Day? (y)
FORGOTTEN HUMANITY!   (~)


(^) naut expletive
nor necessarily de-cap aster risks.
Econ 345?(6) or (lb. buck per cent?up)
OW: Chart ? ... math, English, Platonics~ Art
Grubergate: the knows under the elephants hump?(nose camel straw broke)
G O P : Governing Our Problem
 WON: War on Nuance

#D

or 3rd D'mN'shun.
[Too reed report, FP verses Tangents.]

5-7-14 Out of the Blue? 

6 times 7 equals

forty-two [?]

[Spoiler Alert]**

The question?
The pathology* is showing your work[!] 

*these are not just storied problems.
(or lazy nines)

[-] I parted company mid-number (aka mid-lede/equation)
Approx.paragaph ten. (i.e. googled some other data sources)
There is more to this, but it is wind related[!] {Link 16/paragraph 8}
.

** (10-16-13)  To UnRock the Boat.
Hint: There are(were) 18 links in this post

Re: Orient / Balance of Powers

UNtill* then,

8 Reasons Democrats Should Refuse a Shutdown “Grand Bargain”

Page Theory.

*pun on field type-O[!]
Speaking of fields or math.(77/22= 213/69?)
 

In the mean time...

6-25-13:  In the mean time[*], I ran into someone who was quite concerned with the likes of the current goings on, in particular certain market happenings.  Not to be obtuse but it gave me a chance to till my fertilizer and other field theories. (fn1)  

[*] post post read(as in finally have read preemptive spot on, or rather bubble off or up!)

7-10-13 update label & PAGE

Local Journalism

Seattle P.I. (fiscal week)
Alternative* Daily
The Stanger
The Weekly**
PubliCola/ State Races

*non-local alternative.
** speaking of  trolls [?]
[some navigation required...ha!]
[fiscal cliff?]

11-22-12 [C-VC]

Thinks fall apart.***

It is almost like they knew what works...
and what doesn't and gave up on what doesn't to blame* what does**. 



* in no particular order ? ^
** politics, economics, democracy (ironic 1st 3 links).
*** The impetus for this heading ? [ ! ]

^ Rovian Bowles Simpson Clinton ? [k n o t]

I'm not saying...

what ? [!] # *

Bane or** Tan Gents?(& gals)***

* un-embed ? ! ? :-)

** pr0-gress
*** not an endorsement of anything
[also... the opposite of congress is digress]

[DUC! i.e. CHECK "DRAFTS Under Construction", ouch.(GPS) Tick'd TOC?]

Mini-Plank ?


CAUTION:  R,R,R... No Texting while...










SEG WAY APOLLO GEE [!] 
[The layout of these images may depend on your own desktop choices(Re:dimentionalism.)  I was shooting for Romney(located) at the point of the cornicopia, and Obama at the harvest end.(until I bailed with an edit).  With a tip of the hat-trick and arithmatic or lip stick to navigation and the web we weave. ]



















[NOT EXACTLY]
(f..n...irony [!]  3, 2, 1...blast )
[Buy (X) George !]

P.S.  I only heard recently that The Stanger was brought to Seattle by the producers of The Onion.

The other ground game...

<*>

I am for some reason unable to put my usual* into this lately.
Not to quote Martha Stewart but it might be a good thing, or I just have other things.

I have two submissions saved in draft:
IMHO ^
Turn Around(F'N 3.0)
Time Stamp: 8:19 10-9-12

*  Don't you mean refreshingly in accord with "your perception" of reality?  OUCH.  I did not mean to hit so close to the bone of reality or nuance, just making a preemptive comment based on a reading of the first few sentences, where the logic seems... interestingly framed to say the least.  And while I might read more, I might not have more to say.  It just seems to fit a playbook of sorts that may or not be written but is my "perception" of familiar tactics.  BTW:  Sorry "F" "bailed"^^^ so-to-speak,but I will not feel the need to fill his loss.  

OCCUPY FACT-CHECKERS**
Yeah... that's the ticket.*** 

** well... the anachronism of my asterisks is my usual (as well as links inserted)
***  To the Obama campaign: an unembedding of diplomacy and humor, stay the course (Ctrl "F" 'n zingers.)   Far be it from me^^ to tell people not to be them, but I don't think Joe Biden will go overboard with humor, I think he will be taking things serious.  Make it about congress, and bi-partisanship, and the dynamics of cooperation and compromise, without being too patronizing.  Substance seems to be the football that the Republicans Lucy to our Charlie Brown.  
    
^ posted(and links added) post-time-stamp
^^ latest M'bed (The irony is steep.)
^^^ FB link removed @*

Re:Focus

TIME is not on anyone's side.

(NFRY)
related links : Joe Klein
Paralysis Rules
One for All and All for One
Is Romney a Realist or an Idealist?
Paul Ryan's Grand Vision
The Trouble with Simpson-Bowles

(fn) not yet

[Re-visit ! ?]

[Re:Boot ?]

[Let her role ?^^ ]
AM ?
NOW ?
Mitt-matic ?
Cheese US ?
Or Bane^ ? !
Or Diploma See!

^ The Best Defense(Mine'd Hive?)
^^ But a blimp[!] The Mark Leder Twain.

[Fog of Math!?]
[Brass Balls? Or Dorothy's Slippers?]

Braking Emale[!]

Consult* a  Congress ...person?


[!]= (sic) sarcasm / irony
[earlier two read]
Ribble:  What a Lefty Rush might have said about congressional testimony on the subject?
[Talk about a fluke: sorry to mix a ribble with real news.]
* actual most current email

[8-1-12:  Belated ** Fluke or Not ?  My original intent centered on one of two organizations, which I hoped to touch upon.  With irony I let the ribble rest in immodest irreverence.  The answer to my riddle is something I would not have put it past Gore Vidal to answer, but I will go no further than my hint in comment.]

** Nexus of tortured rhetoric : Not to be a Lefty Rush.

Romney Mumbles Economy

"It's coming back."  Cincinatti
verse us
Obama turns it around...in Cleveland.

[Comments filed yesterday:  Norman Goldman  President had congress**?  Mitt Robney,
If it is possible to be wrong in two dimensions, Raw Money might be able.  At least he is wrong twice in one claim in regards to Obama and the economic turn around.  But while two wrongs don’t make a right. Two rights do make a turn around, but not two lefts.  Well it is a matter of degrees.  (‘scuse me Mitt RobbedMe*) 

Anyway, back to the two wrongs, A.) the President can’t turn the economy around, congress passes all legislation.  B.) the economy has turned around.  C.) turning it around again will be the wrong direction.  D.) There is plenty of turn left.

There is plenty of dispute about how and how much to turn.  There is even plenty of dispute as to how much it was turned.  But there is no disputing that the economy has been turned around and it is still being turned.]

As for "Talk is cheap"? ** Just ask Wisconsin and the V.A., not to mention the middle-class and home equity.  Bubble-up is more economical than trickle-down.   

* Wed. & Thurs. openings
** not frackin' really

[Of course it was mumbled(aka nuanced), it was anachronistic, dependent on looking back.]
http://www.electmitt2012.org/ Quote: "Mitt Romney is focused on implementing a set of conservative principles to reinforce the America we once knew."

Mitt might just be me, but I find it hard to find the Cincinnati speech in full text or video.
Romney Pac Charlie Brown ads running on or from Congressional Budget acts.  Choice or Referendum?  Compare or Retreat.
Martin Bashir
Lawrence O'Donnell

The History of B.S.

[Herstory and Blog Searches* aside.]
[Originally Drafted May 26, 2012]
There is a joke about what the oldest profession is, but I won’t go there.  It is more or less about procreation. The B. S. I am talking about is the flip-flop of Simpson-Bowles.[1] Yes, I believe that was its name before it hit the road.  It was supposed to be a bi-partisan committee on the debt, but could not come up with any consensus on how it should be addressed, so its full report was submitted more like a Supreme Court decision that was tied. 

Recently it seems that its name was changed, to Bowles-Simpson.[2]  Was there some reason for that?  Could it be to honor the real oldest profession?  And I don’t mean the Barter System.  If this is too nuanced, maybe it is the joke, to be less about creation, more about pro$e.  Either way this is a very economic and political history. 

[More Bio-Product.]***
Speaking of PEG’d...(Private Equity Government)[3] or nailed it, Coffee Table This! [4-7] Now that is creationism.

[Now I realize that some boots may be needed for the above, but I was trying to be economic. But the point is that it is always political and it has not been bi-partisan except on the Democratic side.  Pun on BP aside.** The irony is that it is about walking a plank.  Both want a rising tide, but the Republicans want the people to walk the plank, while politicians take one to the other party boat. Unfortunately this may need deeper boots or Mitt-Flops for the economics, let alone politics.   The B.S. may be in this writing, but it is in the links and balanced solutions as well.]

*literally I will present this without links(see footnotes later)
** bi-partisan (now that is slick)
*** oops:  sorry for anachronisms

Dough Ha!

Michele Bachmann endorses Mitt Romney and Doha?

On the(not so funny) China front?

Update 5-4-12:  On the globalization front.(For later reading)(et al)
[Noun verb Bin Laden, and China Kristol, speaking of table ]
5-16-12 update tweet

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.]

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.]