Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To be fair, it's not really fair. They only run on gas.If I'm remembering correctly, Chomsky was at one time the most frequently quoted scholar in academic journals. He was the only living academic to be quoted often enough to make the all time top ten list of thinkers quoted in those journals, but, of course, conservatives know better.Yep. Not to mention nitpicking over stuff recently said by (an amazingly still sharp but nonetheless) ninety year old. And finding a token black guy for backup, LOL. All leftists though, discussing world affairs at a high level. Anything noticeably missing?
Whoa... so he's saying that the term "libertarian" means something different outside the US? Jeez, that kind of thing has never happened before. Thanks for the important info.
I also heard that "fag" means something different in the UK. And a "fanny pack" is something altogether different. And why can't they pronounce aluminum properly?
He's saying your idiot ideology is pig $hit.Whoa... so he's saying that the term "libertarian" means something different outside the US? Jeez, that kind of thing has never happened before. Thanks for the important info
He's saying your idiot ideology is pig $hit.Whoa... so he's saying that the term "libertarian" means something different outside the US? Jeez, that kind of thing has never happened before. Thanks for the important info
Image search - "healthcare.gov headquarters" - just look at all that gubmint!Consider the Affordable Care Act. Because Democrats lacked the votes and political will to fight for a true public program, we were left with a mandate for citizens to buy private insurance, subject to complex regulations, subsidies, and enrollment procedures. The launch of the program was a mess. To many citizens, the fiasco confirmed everything they suspected about government and liked about markets. How come it's so easy to order a book on Amazon and so hard to enroll for health insurance on Healthcare.gov?
You had to be a political scientist to appreciate the full explanation that Obamacare was the bastard child of market institutions (drug and insurance industries) that had become too powerful and a government settling for the best it could get. It was also a product of some moderate Democrats' misplaced belief that a government-regulated "insurance market" could solve problems in a public good (health care) that markets haven't solved and can't solve. At this writing, some government officials are chiding frustrated citizens, who like the coverage but are exasperated by Healthcare.gov, for their failure to do enough shopping around for insurance. Most citizens would prefer the convenience, reliability, and simplicity of a trusted public program like Medicare to the ordeals of comparison shopping and detail-deciphering on their laptops.
Yes-time to dump Trump AND every DEMoCRAT in Washington!George Conway is a fat nobody-don't humor him with mentions/----/ So some former professor knows more about business than the billionaire who is also the most powerful man in the world. Yeah, Spanky.Possibly true, but doubtful.
The real damage to the US dollar, is the damage to capitalism and productivity.
The reality with all exchange mediums... is all mediums only have value for what you can exchange them for. That's why we call them a medium of exchange.
Gold has no inherent value. The value of gold, is in what you can exchange it for.
Same is true of any other exchange medium.
As long as there is a massive amount of goods and services that you can exchange the US Dollar for, the dollar will have value.
Efforts by the government to weaken the dollar, will only be effective in one of two ways. Either they drastically reduce the productivity of the US, resulting in fewer goods and services being available, which results in the value of the dollar going down..... or they print money and cause inflation.
I don't see either of them doing that, but I do see Warren wiping out the economy.What at Trump vs. Warren 2020 showdown would mean for the U.S. dollarEfforts by the government to weaken the dollar, will only be effective in one of two ways. Either they drastically reduce the productivity of the US, resulting in fewer goods and services being available, which results in the value of the dollar going down..... or they print money and cause inflation.
I don't see either of them doing that, but I do see Warren wiping out the economy.
"But both Trump and Warren contend an overly strong dollar hurts U.S. competitiveness..."
"Trump has made his displeasure with the dollar’s persistent strength relative to other major currencies clear on Twitter and elsewhere, even prompting fears of a return to unilateral intervention in currency markets, despite assurances by White House officials that such actions were off the table.
"Warren, in outlining what she calls her 'plan for economic patriotism', wrote that the U.S. government 'should consider a number of tools and work with other countries harmed by currency misalignment to produce a currency value that’s better for our workers and our industries.'"
Which candidate likely has a better understanding of Macroeconomics?
George Conway on TwitterTrump owes all his "success" to an accident of birth:So some former professor knows more about business than the billionaire who is also the most powerful man in the world. Yeah, Spanky
"In Donald J. Trump’s version of how he got rich, he was the master dealmaker who parlayed an initial $1 million loan from his father into a $10 billion empire. It was his guts and gumption that overcame setbacks, and his father, Fred C. Trump, was simply a cheerleader.
"But an investigation by The New York Times shows that by age 3, Donald Trump was earning $200,000 a year in today’s dollars from his father’s empire.
"He was a millionaire by age 8.
"By the time he was 17, his father had given him part ownership of a 52-unit apartment building.
"Soon after he graduated from college, he was receiving the equivalent of $1 million a year from his father."
Chomsky, not so much.
4 Ways Fred Trump Made Donald Trump and His Siblings RichImpeach him too.George Conway is a fat nobody-don't humor him with mentions
Giuliani Associate Says He Gave Demand for Biden Inquiry to Ukrainians
"Not long before the Ukrainian president was inaugurated in May, an associate of Rudolph W. Giuliani’s journeyed to Kiev to deliver a warning to the country’s new leadership, a lawyer for the associate said.
"The associate, Lev Parnas, told a representative of the incoming government that it had to announce an investigation into Mr. Trump’s political rival, Joseph R. Biden Jr., and his son, or else Vice President Mike Pence would not attend the swearing-in of the new president, and the United States would freeze aid, the lawyer said."
Too much winning?
Economists Use “Fuzzy Graphs” to Challenge Data on the Human Cost of Trump Sanctions on Venezuela
"In our paper, 'Sanctions as Collective Punishment: The Case of Venezuela,' we looked at some of the ways in which the sanctions on Venezuela imposed by the US government curtail access to essential and life-saving imports, and some of the data on impacts such as mortality. We concluded that US economic sanctions since August 2017 have likely caused a dire rise in mortality and a grave aggravation of Venezuela’s economic crisis"
So let's have a lesson in "Lies, damned lies, and statistics.".
Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.
But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.
Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.
Charting The Decline Of Venezuela's Oil Industry
During that time Chavez fired 19,000 oil workers, and replaced them with loyalists to his government. Loyal to Chavez, but not experienced in the oil industry.
In 2007 with the rise of prices, the oil companies operating in Venezuela, began increasing production. Instead of enjoying the added income, Chavez demanded more money from oil, and the companies refused. He then expropriated their assets by force.
Now understand why.... Venezuela's oil is heavy crude, which is super difficult to refine. Thus it requires tons and tons of capital investment. That's why the government of Venezuela invited foreign investment to begin with, because their oil is difficult to deal with, and extremely expensive to refine.
Chavez, expropriated their assets, which of course made all the companies abandon the investing in the country. (why would you invest, if the government just steals it?). Not only that, but Chavez diverted all that money to his social programs, which made him popular, but.... without capital investment, it was impossible to maintain oil production on extremely difficult heavy crud oil that Venezuela produces.
As a result oil production in the US, was increasing year over year, during the exact same time that Venezuela's production was falling year over year.
View attachment 289236
View attachment 289237
So looking at 2009 on... you can see that US production went up even though oil prices were falling. And equally Venezuela's production was going down.
Even if you could say that the sanctions hurt exports, which they clearly have.... that doesn't explain why production has fallen.
Even if you can't export the oil.... they could use that oil to keep the lights on in Venezuela. In a country that has nation wide black outs, certainly having a few diesel generators keeping the power on would be a wise use of the vast oil wealth in the country.
I mean after all, isn't it the left-wing that constantly complains that the US steals the resources of other countries? Well here's a case where the country can keep the resource for themselves. So why don't they produce more oil for their own use?
Again, because Chavez stole all the capital investment money, and spent it on social programs. So as the NPR reported, even their existing investments have fallen into disrepair.
The Fallout From A Seemingly Sweet Oil Deal For Venezuela's Neighbors
There are a several reasons for this. First, Venezuela oil industry is in turmoil. Venezuela's oil rigs, which had been producing nearly 3 million barrels of crude a day in 2014, are now producing just a fraction of that.
Much of the oil that they are extracting is now going straight on to tankers bound for Russia or China to pay off Venezuela's debts to those countries.
So notice, existing oil rigs, that used to produce 3 million barrels a day, are not producing very little. Capitalist investment is vital in all industry. If you take away the profits..... the industry dies. This is why socialism the world over has failed.
However, it is true that US Sanctions do hinder the oil industry.
But you need to also understand exactly why the US did this. We have clear documented proof, that the state run oil company in Venezuela, is being used by those in power, to load up off shore banks accounts.
The money from the oil exports isn't going to feed people anyway. We already know this for a fact. The companies endless corruption, and Maduro cronies moving cash out of the country, has not been used to help the poor.
This idea that somehow if sanctions didn't exist, that money would flow to stock the shelves is ridiculous, especially given that food shortages started before the sanctions did.
What definition of "screwed" are you using?Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.
But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.
Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.
Image search - "healthcare.gov headquarters" - just look at all that gubmint!
Image search - "healthcare.gov headquarters" - just look at all that gubmint!
It's nuts isn't it? Look at all those images!
Image search - "healthcare.gov headquarters" - just look at all that gubmint!
It's nuts isn't it? Look at all those images!
Be sure and report any suspected INSURANCE FRAUD you see out there like a good little boy!
But, but, it's the big ole bad, bad gubmint! They just force their will, don't they?. Who's really in change here anyway?“Disproportionately, the sick are signing up and the healthy are dropping out,” said Laszewski, adding that alternative plans with fewer benefits but lower costs should be made available.
Yeah, but enough distraction about me.
Just following your example perhaps.. Ever consider that possibility, Mr. OhSoClever?Yeah, but enough distraction about me.
That's be nice. But you never post anything of substance, so that makes it hard. There's nothing to respond to, other than your dickhead persona.
To be fair, it's not really fair. They only run on gas.If I'm remembering correctly, Chomsky was at one time the most frequently quoted scholar in academic journals. He was the only living academic to be quoted often enough to make the all time top ten list of thinkers quoted in those journals, but, of course, conservatives know better.
Good old Chumpsky.
Economists Use “Fuzzy Graphs” to Challenge Data on the Human Cost of Trump Sanctions on Venezuela
"In our paper, 'Sanctions as Collective Punishment: The Case of Venezuela,' we looked at some of the ways in which the sanctions on Venezuela imposed by the US government curtail access to essential and life-saving imports, and some of the data on impacts such as mortality. We concluded that US economic sanctions since August 2017 have likely caused a dire rise in mortality and a grave aggravation of Venezuela’s economic crisis"
So let's have a lesson in "Lies, damned lies, and statistics.".
Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.
But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.
Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.
Charting The Decline Of Venezuela's Oil Industry
During that time Chavez fired 19,000 oil workers, and replaced them with loyalists to his government. Loyal to Chavez, but not experienced in the oil industry.
In 2007 with the rise of prices, the oil companies operating in Venezuela, began increasing production. Instead of enjoying the added income, Chavez demanded more money from oil, and the companies refused. He then expropriated their assets by force.
Now understand why.... Venezuela's oil is heavy crude, which is super difficult to refine. Thus it requires tons and tons of capital investment. That's why the government of Venezuela invited foreign investment to begin with, because their oil is difficult to deal with, and extremely expensive to refine.
Chavez, expropriated their assets, which of course made all the companies abandon the investing in the country. (why would you invest, if the government just steals it?). Not only that, but Chavez diverted all that money to his social programs, which made him popular, but.... without capital investment, it was impossible to maintain oil production on extremely difficult heavy crud oil that Venezuela produces.
As a result oil production in the US, was increasing year over year, during the exact same time that Venezuela's production was falling year over year.
View attachment 289236
View attachment 289237
So looking at 2009 on... you can see that US production went up even though oil prices were falling. And equally Venezuela's production was going down.
Even if you could say that the sanctions hurt exports, which they clearly have.... that doesn't explain why production has fallen.
Even if you can't export the oil.... they could use that oil to keep the lights on in Venezuela. In a country that has nation wide black outs, certainly having a few diesel generators keeping the power on would be a wise use of the vast oil wealth in the country.
I mean after all, isn't it the left-wing that constantly complains that the US steals the resources of other countries? Well here's a case where the country can keep the resource for themselves. So why don't they produce more oil for their own use?
Again, because Chavez stole all the capital investment money, and spent it on social programs. So as the NPR reported, even their existing investments have fallen into disrepair.
The Fallout From A Seemingly Sweet Oil Deal For Venezuela's Neighbors
There are a several reasons for this. First, Venezuela oil industry is in turmoil. Venezuela's oil rigs, which had been producing nearly 3 million barrels of crude a day in 2014, are now producing just a fraction of that.
Much of the oil that they are extracting is now going straight on to tankers bound for Russia or China to pay off Venezuela's debts to those countries.
So notice, existing oil rigs, that used to produce 3 million barrels a day, are not producing very little. Capitalist investment is vital in all industry. If you take away the profits..... the industry dies. This is why socialism the world over has failed.
However, it is true that US Sanctions do hinder the oil industry.
But you need to also understand exactly why the US did this. We have clear documented proof, that the state run oil company in Venezuela, is being used by those in power, to load up off shore banks accounts.
The money from the oil exports isn't going to feed people anyway. We already know this for a fact. The companies endless corruption, and Maduro cronies moving cash out of the country, has not been used to help the poor.
This idea that somehow if sanctions didn't exist, that money would flow to stock the shelves is ridiculous, especially given that food shortages started before the sanctions did.
What definition of "screwed" are you using?Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.
But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.
Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.
Did you notice the sources?
What motives would OPEC or USEIA have in screwing the results?
Venezuelan oil production declines from 2368 to 1235.
Colombian production falls from 1015 to 866.
What explains the divergence between the two curves over 2017 to 2018 if not Trump's sanctions?
Economists Use “Fuzzy Graphs” to Challenge Data on the Human Cost of Trump Sanctions on Venezuela
"Santos begins with a graph from our paper that shows both Venezuelan and Colombian oil production on the left and right-hand axes, respectively, in thousands of barrels per day, from 2013 to 2018.
"Both are fairly constant on average (with Colombian production much more volatile) until January of 2016; they then decline at about the same rate until August of 2017, when President Trump issued an executive order imposing broad financial sanctions on Venezuela.
"Venezuelan oil production then falls at three times the rate that it had been falling since January 2016."
He's a linguist. You may as well ask Sean Penn his views on geopolitics.If I'm remembering correctly, Chomsky was at one time the most frequently quoted scholar in academic journals. He was the only living academic to be quoted often enough to make the all time top ten list of thinkers quoted in those journals, but, of course, conservatives know better.Yep. Not to mention nitpicking over stuff recently said by (an amazingly still sharp but nonetheless) ninety year old. And finding a token black guy for backup, LOL. All leftists though, discussing world affairs at a high level. Anything noticeably missing?
For liberalism, humanity is pushed aside in favor of society. And liberty is not given any consideration at all.In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away.Because they were never really rational to begin with. I know, rhetorical
Easily triggered by critiques of capitalism? Yes.
Rational? No.
Just imagine the crow eating it took, the suffering involved, to actually laud and quote Nader in one's crazed attempt to put Chomsky in his place? LOL
I heard that show. The Ralph Nader radio hour is the best podcast bar none.
(Though Jimmy Dore is a close second.)
Some of my earliest conversations with conservatives took place over a half century ago.Because they were never really rational to begin with. I know, rhetorical
Easily triggered by critiques of capitalism? Yes.
Rational? No.
That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.By "liberal" you mean..?That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.
Liberalism - Wikipedia
"Over time, the meaning of the word liberalism began to diverge in different parts of the world.
"According to the Encyclopædia Britannica: "'n the United States, liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal programme of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies'"Liberalism has many flavors:In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away
Liberalism - Wikipedia
"The diversity of liberalism can be gleaned from the numerous adjectives that liberal thinkers and movements have attached to the very term 'liberalism', including classical, egalitarian, economic, social, welfare state, ethical, humanist, deontological, perfectionist, democratic and institutional, to name a few.[37]
"Despite these variations, liberal thought does exhibit a few definite and fundamental conceptions.
"At its very root, liberalism is a philosophy about the meaning of humanity and society."
What's "the meaning of humanity and society"?
"In America, libertarian means "extreme advocate of total tyranny."To be fair, it's not really fair. They only run on gas.If I'm remembering correctly, Chomsky was at one time the most frequently quoted scholar in academic journals. He was the only living academic to be quoted often enough to make the all time top ten list of thinkers quoted in those journals, but, of course, conservatives know better.Yep. Not to mention nitpicking over stuff recently said by (an amazingly still sharp but nonetheless) ninety year old. And finding a token black guy for backup, LOL. All leftists though, discussing world affairs at a high level. Anything noticeably missing?
BULL CRAP.......
"There are more poor people in the US, than there are people in Venezuela......."
Right there, he lost me. "Poor people" in the US are filthy rich compared to those in Venezuela.
I don't see poor people living in refrigerator box.
I don't see poor people, wearing rotted out cloth, for clothing, and sifting through a garbage can to find moldy bread to eat.
This mindless idiot you posted a video of, has no idea what he is talking about.
Our poor people have the highest rates of obesity. In Venezuela, people are literally dying of starvation.
Videos like the one you posted, are proof that we live in a spoiled brat infested fantasy world. If you think we have 'poor' people in the US, you are so out of touch with reality, you need to have your head examined by a professional. You need to join a charity organization, and do a mission trip to Uganda, and find out what real poverty looks like.
BULL CRAP.......
"There are more poor people in the US, than there are people in Venezuela......."
Right there, he lost me. "Poor people" in the US are filthy rich compared to those in Venezuela.
I don't see poor people living in refrigerator box.
I don't see poor people, wearing rotted out cloth, for clothing, and sifting through a garbage can to find moldy bread to eat.
This mindless idiot you posted a video of, has no idea what he is talking about.
Our poor people have the highest rates of obesity. In Venezuela, people are literally dying of starvation.
Videos like the one you posted, are proof that we live in a spoiled brat infested fantasy world. If you think we have 'poor' people in the US, you are so out of touch with reality, you need to have your head examined by a professional. You need to join a charity organization, and do a mission trip to Uganda, and find out what real poverty looks like.
Step outside your bubbleRight there, he lost me. "Poor people" in the US are filthy rich compared to those in Venezuela.
I don't see poor people living in refrigerator box.
How did scores of homeless come to live at the Convention Center?
Remember, California criminalized plastic straws to save the planet.For liberalism, humanity is pushed aside in favor of society. And liberty is not given any consideration at all.In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away.Some of my earliest conversations with conservatives took place over a half century ago.
That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.By "liberal" you mean..?That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.
Liberalism - Wikipedia
"Over time, the meaning of the word liberalism began to diverge in different parts of the world.
"According to the Encyclopædia Britannica: "'n the United States, liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal programme of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies'"Liberalism has many flavors:In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away
Liberalism - Wikipedia
"The diversity of liberalism can be gleaned from the numerous adjectives that liberal thinkers and movements have attached to the very term 'liberalism', including classical, egalitarian, economic, social, welfare state, ethical, humanist, deontological, perfectionist, democratic and institutional, to name a few.[37]
"Despite these variations, liberal thought does exhibit a few definite and fundamental conceptions.
"At its very root, liberalism is a philosophy about the meaning of humanity and society."
What's "the meaning of humanity and society"?
Remember, California criminalized plastic straws to save the planet.
And how are the Toddster and ShootEmUpDave doing here lately on that score?But you never post anything of substance, so that makes it hard. There's nothing to respond to, other than your dickhead persona.
