Special Krugman Friday

Darla said:
Have you read Piketty's book?

SF just goes sideways anytime you mention an economist or a book you're going to read, or that you think someone else is smart. It surprises me how automatically I tune out that fallout now.
Click to expand...

So discussing the very topic this french economist is known for is somehow 'going sideways'? Ok Darla.
 
Superfreak said:
Funny how you still refuse to simply address the points. Again... what is your solution? Will you take it by force? Restrict their ability to gain? What do you think is a solution?

The math is simple (complex for you, I know)... as long as the economy is moving forward, the wealth gap is going to continue to increase. So what is your master plan Dung?



I call him a moron because he wants to do precisely what I am guessing you would do. But I will wait for you to actually provide us with your thoughts on a solution... please, share with the board how you would resolve this issue.
Click to expand...

Superfreak why don't you read the book before demanding master plans etc. You've really gone sideways here, and I have no idea whose ass you think you kicked or why, but, no.
 
I mean, sf you seem to actually believe you are going to "debunk" a book that by many accounts is going to continue reverberating through economic scholarship with your posts. Wow. I mean, what do you even say to that? I'm going to read the book. I'll let you know what I think. Good luck with your other stuff.
 
Darla said:
Have you read Piketty's book?
Click to expand...

I haven't read the book, but I've read a lot about it. The idea that Piketty is a "moron" is laughable and says a whole hell of a lot more about SF than anyone else.

Darla said:
SF just goes sideways anytime you mention an economist or a book you're going to read, or that you think someone else is smart. It surprises me how automatically I tune out that fallout now.
Click to expand...

He's a weird dude.
 
Darla said:
Superfreak why don't you read the book before demanding master plans etc. You've really gone sideways here, and I have no idea whose ass you think you kicked or why, but, no.
Click to expand...

I don't need to read the book to be able to see what the book is about Darla. Again Darla, to discuss what the economist in your OP stands for is not going sideways. To discuss the issue of income inequality when THAT is the topic of the OP is not going sideways.

Take a good look at who it is trying to avoid discussing the actual topic Darla. You will find it is you, Dung, Dantes that are doing so. It is the three of you that are doing everything you can to avoid actually discussing the issue. Funny how that is.
 
Superfreak said:
I don't need to read the book to be able to see what the book is about Darla. Again Darla, to discuss what the economist in your OP stands for is not going sideways. To discuss the issue of income inequality when THAT is the topic of the OP is not going sideways.

Take a good look at who it is trying to avoid discussing the actual topic Darla. You will find it is you, Dung, Dantes that are doing so. It is the three of you that are doing everything you can to avoid actually discussing the issue. Funny how that is.
Click to expand...

Listen, I know I'm fucked in the head, but I"m going to read the book before I get into a protracted debate over who the moron is. I realize that men absorb information through their penis, just by touching it against a book cover like a wand. I am even told if the book is big enough, the penis lights up from all of the information it is absorbing and shakes mightily.

But, I'm just a girl and have no penis-wand, I have to find out what an 800 page book says the old fashioned way, by reading it.
 
Superfreak said:
Says the fucking retard that refuses to discuss what has been said.
Click to expand...


Me and SF IRL:

rocky.gif
 
The book is out of stock at Amazon. Won't someone lend me their penis-wand so I may utilize the "search inside this book" function? That way I can absorb this book at Amazon without even buying it and in five minutes I'll know everything!
 
Superfreak said:
Funny how all the 'brilliant' Dantes can do is name call and evade the questions. Shocking that someone so 'brilliant' cannot respond to a simple math question. Add in the fact that he refuses to tell us what this french economist has done that has him so in love with him and you get why everyone with common sense sees Dantes as a fuking idiot.
Click to expand...

I did answer your question mediocre man! Sorry you missed it! I can even do the required math. It is you who never answered my question regarding what constituted success in your question about socialism. But I don't think you were serious about the question; you mediocre men never are. You throw out questions like that about the success of socialists as if the question itself somehow shows your superior knowledge and if someone answers, you claim that isn't what you meant by "successful" and then pretend that the question wasn't answered. But when I asked you to define what you meant by "successful" or what constituted this success, you ran away and ignored that question. If I don't know what you mean by successful the question becomes meaningless and impossible all at once: lost in the abstraction, ambiguity and contingency of the term "successful" the question looses all meaning except as rhetorical hucksterism. Truly representative of a mediocre man!
 
Superfreak said:
You know what really drives inequality...

1) Stock market increases over the past five years (helps top 20% far more so than bottom 50%)
2) High levels of unemployment (kind of hammers those without jobs... who thus are in the bottom 50% of income... obviously)

You want a good start to resolving inequality... quit enacting policy that hurts job growth domestically. 5 years of inept management from the Obama admin... yet Dems want to blame 'the rich' (unless of course the rich in reference are democrats... then they are ok)
Click to expand...

According to the author of the book what really drives inequality is inheritance of vast amounts of wealth like that inherited by the Waltons! But go ahead and continue to believe otherwise. The top 1/10 of one percent are deliriously wealthy and the top 1/100 of one percent are even more so.
 
Dantès said:
According to the author of the book what really drives inequality is inheritance of vast amounts of wealth like that inherited by the Waltons! But go ahead and continue to believe otherwise. The top 1/10 of one percent are deliriously wealthy and the top 1/100 of one percent are even more so.
Click to expand...

I think that since 80% America's millionaires are first generation millionaires, that his theory doesn't hold much water.
 
Darla said:
Eh. It doesn't bother me. Maybe because Tom has worked himself into a literal, foaming rage against rape victims and even now is in hysterics about "Feminists" who believe rape is the responsibility of the rapist.

SF's joking sexism, while I can see how someone wouldn't find it funny, really pales in comparison. Into invisibility IMO.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure SF knew this was a joke since I poke him routinely for his wise ass comments but just in case he's not sure here's an edit:

"Just wondering if you say stuff like this to your female co-workers." :pke:
 
christiefan915 said:
I'm pretty sure SF knew this was a joke since I poke him routinely for his wise ass comments but just in case he's not sure here's an edit:

"Just wondering if you say stuff like this to your female co-workers." :pke:
Click to expand...

Your loony friend has worked herself into a real lather, now she claims to have me on ignore but I'll believe that when I see it.
 
Dantès said:
I did answer your question mediocre man! Sorry you missed it! I can even do the required math. It is you who never answered my question regarding what constituted success in your question about socialism. But I don't think you were serious about the question; you mediocre men never are. You throw out questions like that about the success of socialists as if the question itself somehow shows your superior knowledge and if someone answers, you claim that isn't what you meant by "successful" and then pretend that the question wasn't answered. But when I asked you to define what you meant by "successful" or what constituted this success, you ran away and ignored that question. If I don't know what you mean by successful the question becomes meaningless and impossible all at once: lost in the abstraction, ambiguity and contingency of the term "successful" the question looses all meaning except as rhetorical hucksterism. Truly representative of a mediocre man!
Click to expand...

Maybe Superfreak is getting a massage today. He was talking to himself yesterday so...his doctor could have recommended something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top