Linguistically I think it chunks like this: (Seven) (of what number) (is) (11%). The prepositional phrase "of what number" can be moved after the "11%" without changing the meaning.
We produce more food than anyone can eat. Remember the slashdot story a while back saying 30% of food produced does not enter a human stomach?
3D printers will print themselves! Open-source schematics and instructions on the internet can allow those who don't want to pay an expert to DIY...
The only reason you want someone to dig a ditch is so you can tell them to fill it up again, thereby getting your control fix for the day. That's not innovation, that's an opportunity cost squandered on stupid ppl games.
3d printer will print me a new robot part according to open source schematics put on the internet by real innovators, not just emotional manipulators like you...
I think the point is that evolutionary biologists can't account for the amount of altruism that exists, and religion is one way to try to explain the caring for non-kin that we see all around us. Wikipedia says: 'J.B.S. Haldane famously joked, "Would I lay down my life to save my brother? No, but I would to save two brothers or eight cousins".' Why is this a joke? Because we don't make calculations like this, because religion extends the family; thus we see soldiers, for example, laying down their lives to save those unrelated to them. Or lifeguards...
James 5:13-15 ESV Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him sing praise. Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
Matthew 25: 31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
Matthew 25:44 ESV Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’...
We do not have a production capacity problem. We can produce a lot more than we do. 30% of the food we grow doesn't get to a human stomach.
What we have is a psychological problem: the persistence of scarcity thinking from ancient times before technology increased our productivity exponentially, more even than our population has increased.
What we need to do is increase the pace of innovation by providing everyone with a basic income (as Tom Paine proposed in 1795, and Milton Friedman supported), and encouraging each of us to unleash our native curiosity and creativity through challenges!
Money is no longer the medium of exchange it started out as; it is now a distribution mechanism. Unemployment is falsely sold as the result of industrial breakdown when in fact it represents economic progress.
Was Aristarchus of Samos relying on faith when he proposed a heliocentric solar system in the 3rd century BC, deliberately ignoring the repeatable facts that the epicyclists brought up against his theory, such as that they couldn't measure parallax motion of the stars? But was he right?
Perhaps you aren't acquainted with Buddhism. From the Kalama Sutra (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html):
"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them.'
End the artificial scarcity of money. Say openly that unemployment represents economic progress, not industrial breakdown. Focus on innovation such as 3D printers that will make China's cheap labor advantage irrelevant.
Debt is a distraction. What matters is innovation. After the reagan years we invested in creativity and had one of the longest economic expansions ever in the US. Then focus shifted from innovation to real estate instruments, and when that crashed it caused a much much worse problem than when we were spending on innovation. So we need to go back to spending on advancing knowledge and technology, because that is what raises standard of living and survival fitness, by better allowing us to predict and adapt to sudden catastrophic change. If biz is sitting on trillions as they are now, then it is govt's role to create money and keep innovation progressing, preferably by instituting a basic income guarantee and stimulating creativity through challenges (which biz can hold too).
Panic of 1837, after Jackson paid down the debt to almost nothing, and it turned out not to be anything like the silver bullet pop economists were predicting.
Why is debt necessary? Bankers create money out of thin air, why do they have to attach debt to it?
Re the inches analogy: why would vendors cram more inches into the same size of lumber? Couldn't you create other things that use inches, pieces of string? Couldn't you make more measurements with the inches of things, things that hadn't been measured before? In the same way, we can use created money to spur innovation in ways that biz doesn't because they are too focussed on next quarter's shareholders' report, disruptive innovations like computers, the internet, gps, particle accelerators, nuclear power, etc.
US needs a vision. Use the bully pulpit to create a culture of innovation, empower individuals to create and advance knowledge without the need to work for a business. We have this marvelous tool of the internet that allows unprecedented communication, let us take advantage of it to unleash the natural wonder and curiosity each of us is born with, and use created money to advance standard of living beyond our wildest dreams faster than the market alone can!
Slashdot Mirror
To me, it's equivalent to "7 of how many is 11%?" The "of how many" can move to the other side of the "11%". "of how many" = "of what number".
Linguistically I think it chunks like this: (Seven) (of what number) (is) (11%). The prepositional phrase "of what number" can be moved after the "11%" without changing the meaning.
Yeah I haven't had mod points since modding up something in that thread!
We produce more food than anyone can eat. Remember the slashdot story a while back saying 30% of food produced does not enter a human stomach?
3D printers will print themselves! Open-source schematics and instructions on the internet can allow those who don't want to pay an expert to DIY...
The only reason you want someone to dig a ditch is so you can tell them to fill it up again, thereby getting your control fix for the day. That's not innovation, that's an opportunity cost squandered on stupid ppl games.
It should be about what's best for the nation and the General Welfare.
3d printer will print me a new robot part according to open source schematics put on the internet by real innovators, not just emotional manipulators like you...
Japan's debt-to-gdp of 200% and a currency they consider too high is proof that inflation does not depend on debt or money supply.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Components_of_US_Money_supply.svg
Where was the inflation during the past 30 years?
But what if light works something like this https://hekla.ipgp.fr/IMG/pdf/Couder-Fort_PRL_2006.pdf ?
So do companies that make popups and popunders. What's your point?
I think the point is that evolutionary biologists can't account for the amount of altruism that exists, and religion is one way to try to explain the caring for non-kin that we see all around us. Wikipedia says: 'J.B.S. Haldane famously joked, "Would I lay down my life to save my brother? No, but I would to save two brothers or eight cousins".' Why is this a joke? Because we don't make calculations like this, because religion extends the family; thus we see soldiers, for example, laying down their lives to save those unrelated to them. Or lifeguards...
http://www.openbible.info/topics/caring_for_the_sick
James 5:13-15 ESV
Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him sing praise. Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will save the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.
Matthew 25:
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’
Matthew 25:44 ESV ...
Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’
We do not have a production capacity problem. We can produce a lot more than we do. 30% of the food we grow doesn't get to a human stomach.
What we have is a psychological problem: the persistence of scarcity thinking from ancient times before technology increased our productivity exponentially, more even than our population has increased.
What we need to do is increase the pace of innovation by providing everyone with a basic income (as Tom Paine proposed in 1795, and Milton Friedman supported), and encouraging each of us to unleash our native curiosity and creativity through challenges!
Money is no longer the medium of exchange it started out as; it is now a distribution mechanism. Unemployment is falsely sold as the result of industrial breakdown when in fact it represents economic progress.
Yeah, we can build holodecks where God exists or where we are gods or where the laws of physics are whatever we feel like...
Was Aristarchus of Samos relying on faith when he proposed a heliocentric solar system in the 3rd century BC, deliberately ignoring the repeatable facts that the epicyclists brought up against his theory, such as that they couldn't measure parallax motion of the stars? But was he right?
Perhaps you aren't acquainted with Buddhism. From the Kalama Sutra (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html):
Yeah, figures in a ledger book are more important than ppl suffering. Except if you're at war!
End the artificial scarcity of money. Say openly that unemployment represents economic progress, not industrial breakdown. Focus on innovation such as 3D printers that will make China's cheap labor advantage irrelevant.
Debt is a distraction. What matters is innovation. After the reagan years we invested in creativity and had one of the longest economic expansions ever in the US. Then focus shifted from innovation to real estate instruments, and when that crashed it caused a much much worse problem than when we were spending on innovation. So we need to go back to spending on advancing knowledge and technology, because that is what raises standard of living and survival fitness, by better allowing us to predict and adapt to sudden catastrophic change. If biz is sitting on trillions as they are now, then it is govt's role to create money and keep innovation progressing, preferably by instituting a basic income guarantee and stimulating creativity through challenges (which biz can hold too).
Panic of 1837, after Jackson paid down the debt to almost nothing, and it turned out not to be anything like the silver bullet pop economists were predicting.
You're welcome.
Why is debt necessary? Bankers create money out of thin air, why do they have to attach debt to it?
Re the inches analogy: why would vendors cram more inches into the same size of lumber? Couldn't you create other things that use inches, pieces of string? Couldn't you make more measurements with the inches of things, things that hadn't been measured before? In the same way, we can use created money to spur innovation in ways that biz doesn't because they are too focussed on next quarter's shareholders' report, disruptive innovations like computers, the internet, gps, particle accelerators, nuclear power, etc.
Yeah, because you get to vote for who robs your house...
If you look at a chart of the money supply over the past few decades, you will observe that some 90% of money creation is due to the private sector.
US needs a vision. Use the bully pulpit to create a culture of innovation, empower individuals to create and advance knowledge without the need to work for a business. We have this marvelous tool of the internet that allows unprecedented communication, let us take advantage of it to unleash the natural wonder and curiosity each of us is born with, and use created money to advance standard of living beyond our wildest dreams faster than the market alone can!
Japan is leading the way to a new economics that builds on Reagan's proving that deficits don't matter.