Now name one thing you would do differently - as a politician, as a citizen or as a human being. I'll be damned if you can come up with a single example.
I really, really can't understand what this debate is all about (other than in an immature 'I did not evolve from the apes' or 'I am really frustrated the earth is not at the centre of the solar system' kind of a way). Hell, even this debate is more relevant.
Now can we please, as a culture, move on?
Popular Posts
-
A key objective of QE2 is to raise nominal spending. Given sticky prices and excess economic capacity, this increase in nominal spending wo... -
This is the way capitalism is supposed to work. The weak go under, merge, or get swallowed up. It does not cost anyone a dime. The New York ...
-
As the NY Times is reporting , a federal judge has kicked the city in the butt over those gruesome cigarette signs: "A federal judge on...
-
We, as always, have been far from reticent in deconstructing Mike Bloomberg's magical economic mystery tour-something that, in our vie...
-
I'm thinking about posting on: Recent empirical results on the labor theory of value A collection of recent papers from Ian Steedman dem...
-
Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer likens economy to depressions of 1837, 1873, and 1929 Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer sketch...
-
We begin the New Year as we left the old one-speculating on how much the mayor has been wounded by the twin catastrophes that walloped his a...
-
Well, Sarah, I'm calling you a liar. And not even a good one. Trig Paxson Van Palin is not your son. He is your grandson. The Daily Kos ...
-
Scott Sumner on the efficacy of monetary policy even when the policy interest rate hit zero: Zero rates don’t really make monetary policy m... -
Samuel Brittan is not the only one in the UK who thinks stabilizing total nominal spending should be the objective of monetary policy. Gile...
Review topics and articles of economics © 2011 Assume blacks have lower IQ than whites and DNA is to blame
0 comments:
Post a Comment