Hell No...

I am sure I will have a lot to post about this week....with and interesting conversation going over the role/proper actions of the press here, here, and here. A couple of hearings are going on. And a couple of friends celebrated new additions to their families (Congratulations to Ed & Kelly, and Tony & Jill on their new bundles of joy!).

But forget all that for second, and focus on this instead.

Someone invented this.


I mean seriously....I know gals think leggings are "teh awesomesauce", but come the fuck on....I can not divine what function of this things. Is it, "It is too cold for flip-flops and I totally can't wear sock with them...so I will combine the two!". This had to be thought in some meth induced fever dream......it's like mating a pug and a platypus; violates nature and neither one of them are particular happy about it.....

If I see these in public I can not be held accountable for my actions.....

May the Lord have mercy on us all...

-Cheers

1937 all over again.

It really sucks to be right about the predictability of politicians and the punditocracy. But if I recall, some extremely brilliant blogger had this to say several months ago:

It is like people refuse to learn the lessons that history teaches us.

Reminder FDR listened to those who were clamoring for "deficit reduction" and that plunged the US back into depression.

I make this simple statement ignore the budget hawks for now. Do what we must to repair the economy and get job growth positive. I guarantee the public will not say a fucking word about the deficit if that happens.

The American people have an extremely limited vocabulary when it comes to economics. During high economic anxiety deficit reduction is always the first thing people say they want, even though it is the wrong thing to do in the midst of an economic contraction.

But don't listen to me, I don't really know that much about economics or "liquidity traps", but there are a few articles, from actual experts like Dr. Paul Krugman here and here, with a solid piece in the Washington post, here.

This is why we need to do better at teaching history.

This also looks very bad, for the rest of us, because the people in charge are either to blinded by
ideology or too stupid to take the proper corrective.

-Cheers

Getting that stop sign out of the closet...

I am sure Andy will be pleased if this should happen.....



Not quite the zombie apocalypse....

-Cheers

Old Republic News.....

I am certain no one cares but me. But I'll be damned, if this trailer isn't the hottest electronic loving I have gotten in sometime.



*giggle*

-Cheers

No seriously, you don't know your limit.....

It is interesting how people always overestimate their capabilities. This graph I found pretty interesting:

In the dark bars up there are the number of drinks the college students thought they would have to drink in order to have the adverse consequences listed. The white bars are the ACTUAL number of drinks they'd have to have.

And what it shows is that college students (shockingly) don't really learn from their previous mistakes. They aren't learning their alcohol limits effectively. In addition, the students that overestimated their limits the worst, were the ones that were undertaking the most risky drinking practices.

It turns out that this is not abnormal. People who experience the negative aspects of drinking more often are more likely to exhibit risky drinking behavior in general. Basically, even when risky drinkers have experienced the negative consequences of drinking heavily, it doesn't stop them from doing it again.

And there are people who really want to re-create the "30 bar mega bar crawl"!

-Cheer

A few scattered pieces....

Cation mentioned this to me cause I think, the only channels that he thinks I watch are news, Comedy Central, and G4.

He is probably correct on that assertion, but even still. I am glad to see Oliva Munn get some props. She is thoroughly entertaining, and I have a solid nerd crush on her. I mean seriously who doesn't love a woman who will eat hot dogs on national teevee to get laughs!

But I would be remiss in not bringing up the fact that G4 has made some of the most awesome commercials ever, the first and probably the creepiest of those being:



Man those commercials still make me giggle in an evil sort of way.....

-Cheers

Political Science vs Pundits

I happened to find this article entertaining. Essentially it is an attempt to show what a news article would look like if it were written by academics as opposed to pundits. Instead of substituting their opinion for that of the populace it would be nice if they based that on something.

A powerful thunderstorm forced President Obama to cancel his Memorial Day speech near Chicago on Monday—an arbitrary event that had no affect on the trajectory of American politics.

Obama now faces some of the most difficult challenges of his young presidency: the ongoing oil spill, the Gaza flotilla disaster, and revelations about possibly inappropriate conversations between the White House and candidates for federal office. But while these narratives may affect fleeting public perceptions, Americans will ultimately judge Obama on the crude economic fundamentals of jobs numbers and GDP.

Chief among the criticisms of Obama was his response to the spill. Pundits argued that he needed to show more emotion. Their analysis, however, should be viewed in light of the economic pressures on the journalism industry combined with a 24-hour news environment and a lack of new information about the spill itself.

Also I found this interview extremely informative. This bit, was illuminating....

Frum: If someone believes that markets should exist, but subject to the regulation that markets should meet the test of cost-benefit, that person is not a socialist … John Maynard Keynes wasn’t a socialist, Jimmy Carter wasn’t a socialism … Richard Nixon wasn’t a socialist … What it means to be a non-socialist is to believe in markets, private property and decentralized economic decision-making … Those would be the kind of things we’re talking about … I think you are demonstrating one of the things that I’m concerned about. I don’t think you really think President Obama is a socialist. But you are constrained here because to say ‘well, y’know, he’s spending too much money, and I think he’s taking on too much debt, and I think some of his specific ideas are overburdensome on private industry’ – that’s just not exciting enough.

Goldberg: Look, I’m trying to deflate – to siphon off the poisonous and radioactive level of the word ‘socialist’.

Frum: Was Richard Nixon a socialist?

Goldberg: He certainly – uh, he was sort of a corporatist. Look, I think there were socialistic elements, certainly wages and price controls and whatnot.

Frum: Was Richard Nixon more or less socialist than Barack Obama?

Goldberg: Uh, I would have to say less.

Frum: A President who imposed two wage and price freezes?

So the basic gist of this is that, "if I disagree with you then any term I use to describe you is okay!".

Yeah, that is why our politics are so messed.

-Cheers

About Time....

To do a blog revamp! Don't you think?


-Cheers

Once again...Paul Krugman doing work....

I have been kicking around a couple posts in my head the last couple of days, but until I can get my ideas sorted on those I thought I would instead post this blog entry by Dr. Krugman, who just absolutely demolishes the idea that CRA (community re-investment act) was at the heart of the housing crisis. The charts he posts are pretty damning:

Just to repeat the basic facts here:

1. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 was irrelevant to the sub-prime boom, which was overwhelmingly driven by loan originators not subject to the Act.

2. The housing bubble reached its point of maximum inflation in the middle years of the naughties:

Robert Shiller

3. During those same years, Fannie and Freddie were sidelined by Congressional pressure, and saw a sharp drop in their share of securitization:

FCIC

while securitization by private players surged:

FCIC

Of course, I imagine that this post, like everything else, will fail to penetrate the cone of silence. It’s convenient to believe that somehow, this is all Barney Frank’s fault; and so that belief will continue.

So yeah when someone brings out the tired trope that poor people buying houses caused the financial collapse....you can drop this on them....or hit them with a smelly fish.

-Cheers