Re: tax rebate

On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:22:31 -0700, boots <no@xxxxx> wrote:

Josh Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jan 2008 02:05:18 -0700, boots <no@xxxxx> wrote:

Josh Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:06:19 -0700, boots <no@xxxxx> wrote:

Josh Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 05:05:19 -0700, boots <no@xxxxx> wrote:

Josh Hill <usereplyto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

That's the same mistake Pies made. Don't schools teach *** in this
country any more? You and Pies seem to be completely unaware of every
development in economics since 1936, when Keynes published his General
Theory of Employment, Interest and Money -- not just Keynesian
economics, but Monetarism as well.

There you go again. You learnt it in school, you learnt it from the
latest scholastic publications, it MUST be true. It's fucking idiocy
that you continue to expound, Josh.

You putz. I've never taken a course in economics. Not ever. I've read
Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and a classic paper by Keynes. That's it.

When will it occur to you that some of us are able to think for
ourselves?

When you begin showing evidence of it.

Uh, right.

Dude, whenever I've mentioned things that aren't in the book, you've
dismissed them. Just as you dismiss things that are in the book.

The evidence is there, but you are unable to see it.

What book? You think I'm talking about fucking books? Jayzus, pass
the bong, it's crazy in here. Throw away the books, either you've
read them or you'll never get around to it. Now that you've rid
yourself of the books, do what's left. Exhibit some visible reasoning
if you want folks to believe you can reason, don't tell them what's in
some books that you once read while you had chicken pox. The
important reasoning is what happens in realtime.

I do precisely the opposite, Boots. Most people can't follow my
reasoning -- it's wildly intuitive. They don't understand why I say
what I say and I can't figure out why they can't see what I see. This
has been true since I was a little boy and people used to amuse myself
by asking me things that I couldn't know or posing puzzles that the
grownups couldn't solve and watching me solve them.

So stop right there. Intuitive is not wrong, it's just
unconventional; if it works it works, if it doesn't it doesn't.

The intuition works. But most people can't follow it. I know, from
experience.

So I look for
conventional sources, e.g., quote references and facts and figures
that don't really figure in my own thinking, that I find superfluous.
I'm trying to translate.

Translate by using words to express what's going on, and you might
experience better results than you do by parading out some crap that
you (and probably your audience will) consider nonsensical.

Read the above paragraph.

I have this intuition about how the economy works. And it's right, or
seems to be. Now I'm debating online. Keynes had the same intuition,
or Friedman. Why shouldn't I refer to Keynes and Friedman? People like
authority. And they can read the explanations on some web page, or
Wikipedia, and get up to speed if they aren't already.


/You/ may not think like that, but I've found
that most others do.

Humans are fucking weird, so get over it, or is there someone standing
behind you that hits you with a stick if you aren't like everyone
else?

Essentially, yes, online. I learned the hard way that most people
couldn't follow me when I tried to take them through the actual
thought process. Not infrequently, they'd claim that I'd gotten what I
was saying from some source -- Geno did that just the other day. Or
they couldn't believe how many factors I'd considered. So whatever I
say, people are going to misunderstand it, like my fifth grade
teacher, who said it was amazing that I picked up as much as I did
since I spend the day doodling and didn't seem to be paying any
attention. What she didn't get is that I wasn't paying any attention.
If I needed to learn something like long division, I'd figure it out
myself. And I didn't understand them, either. I didn't understand why
I was supposed to do a simple problem 500 times, over and over and
over again. I didn't understand why I was supposed to "show my work"
when there was no work. It was a glorious mess. I still cringe to
remember it.

--
Josh

"My name is not Strangelove. I don't know about Strangelove. I'm not
interested in Strangelove. What else can I say? . . . Look, say it
three times more, and I throw you out of this office."

--Edward Teller
.

Loading