And small-numbers is all you'll ever get. Social science is not like physics or pharmacology. Hell, the whole "justice" system is built on the fallacy of hasty induction, under the rubric of "precedent".
What country do you live in? Here in the U.S. we are conducting several simultaneous wars of aggression, including a civil war "on herbs" and an global war on Islam.
Redshift is poor evidence for a theory which is inconsistent with observed redshift. The two elephants in the room are quantization and misordered objects.
The article baldly assumes as much. It would be nice if we could get back to the days in which the data was primary and cosmological theories were secondary.
It used to be the case that debt was voluntary. I can't really make a moral objection to voluntary servitude. But the U.S. Federal budget has insured that we are all indentured. My great-grandparents were free. My grandparents were 10% slave. My parents were 25% slave. I am 40% slave. At this rate it seems likely my children will be 60% slave, and my great-grandchildren will be chattel.
My experience (which is vast) has been that every problem large enough to make it worthwhile to parallelize can be made, by hook or by crook, to be the right kind of data parallel problem. The critical question is whether the cost of making it so is excessive. That cost has two forms: Expert man-hours and time-to-delivery. Given a sufficient budget, I've never seen a problem I could not solve. That may simply mean that the number of available problems is large enough so that I never ran out of solvable ones, and past performance is no guarantee of future performance, but it is the best available factual indicator.
All the circulating money. Non-circulating money does not affect the ratio. Thus you make the point that the deposit of such a coin is not intrinsically inflationary; only the injection of currency borrowed against it into the actual economy is inflationary. Given the economic impact of political instability, one might reasonably conclude that maintaining adequate spending to insure political stability is crucial to economic vitality.
Your post also makes the point that increasing the money supply will not affect the value of the currency if proportionate wealth in goods and services is simultaneously created. The dominant Keynesian model holds that stimulus spending will, if the velocity of money is sufficient, cause enough economic activity to increase material wealth beyond the requirements of currency stability.
A present problem with undertaking policy action on a Keynesian basis is the low present money velocity. Inflation tends to increase money velocity, with homeostatic effect. Given that the material present fear is deflationary, would not a mildly inflationary stimulus be wise? Another serious policy problem is that money supply is essentially the only knob being twiddled (with interest rates stuck in ZIRP for good reason). If you can come up with a good way to increase money velocity independent of money supply changes, we'll all be grateful.
I frankly cannot foresee a situation in which some form of continued quantitative easing is not applied within the next year. For that reason, I consider diagonal calendar spreads on gold and silver options to be the baseline against which all other investments should be measured.
Schools have been operated profitably since before Aristotle. National defense has been operated profitably since before Artaxerxes. There is no function of government which cannot be operated profitably. It might not be possible to operate it in the way that you wish, but it is certainly possible to operate it in some profitable way.
physical dvd players with display on your local device. $0.83 to rent a dvd for 2 weeks. since it is physical dvd, they have new releases. library is small but very current right now, constantly growing. i like. i cancelled nflx.
Interest rates will go exactly where the FRB wants them to go. If interests rates rise, they can buy bonds in POMOs. Raising the debt ceiling will not make U.S. bonds and bills more secure. It will make them less secure, because the debt will expand to unservicable proportions. It doesn't matter much whether an Economist is left or right. If they can't catch mice, don't put them in charge of the stable.
Your grandparents got nothing out of it. They were ripped off by a Congress bought and paid for by multinational corporations. The worst you can blame them for is voting for the sock puppets.
Slashdot Mirror
You manage to demonstrate ignorance, arrogance, and bigotry in one paragraph. Bravo.
God is not threatened by knowledge; people are threatened by deceit.
> I think it will turn out that after all Korean science will not surrender to religion
Right. It will surrender to politics. Some improvement, that.
Is it moral to refrain from protecting yourself when "yourself" includes millions of innocents?
tens of millions of unicorns farting rainbows, you mean
Well that should be easy enough to arrange, for a motivated party such as a certain little state in the levant.
And small-numbers is all you'll ever get. Social science is not like physics or pharmacology. Hell, the whole "justice" system is built on the fallacy of hasty induction, under the rubric of "precedent".
> we are at peace
What country do you live in? Here in the U.S. we are conducting several simultaneous wars of aggression, including a civil war "on herbs" and an global war on Islam.
That's a laugh. You're deaf, and you're going to sue because you couldn't hear something? Good luck.
Untrue. You can buy hearing aids on the intertubes, and pretty cheaply, but they kinda suck.
Redshift is poor evidence for a theory which is inconsistent with observed redshift. The two elephants in the room are quantization and misordered objects.
The article baldly assumes as much. It would be nice if we could get back to the days in which the data was primary and cosmological theories were secondary.
It's a bully pulpit. You want someone in there preaching that the feral govt can rape everyone?
It used to be the case that debt was voluntary. I can't really make a moral objection to voluntary servitude. But the U.S. Federal budget has insured that we are all indentured. My great-grandparents were free. My grandparents were 10% slave. My parents were 25% slave. I am 40% slave. At this rate it seems likely my children will be 60% slave, and my great-grandchildren will be chattel.
You could have an even number of spouses.
My experience (which is vast) has been that every problem large enough to make it worthwhile to parallelize can be made, by hook or by crook, to be the right kind of data parallel problem. The critical question is whether the cost of making it so is excessive. That cost has two forms: Expert man-hours and time-to-delivery. Given a sufficient budget, I've never seen a problem I could not solve. That may simply mean that the number of available problems is large enough so that I never ran out of solvable ones, and past performance is no guarantee of future performance, but it is the best available factual indicator.
This is Big Lie propaganda. There is no war. Moreover, the victim in this case was not a combatant.
All the circulating money. Non-circulating money does not affect the ratio. Thus you make the point that the deposit of such a coin is not intrinsically inflationary; only the injection of currency borrowed against it into the actual economy is inflationary. Given the economic impact of political instability, one might reasonably conclude that maintaining adequate spending to insure political stability is crucial to economic vitality.
Your post also makes the point that increasing the money supply will not affect the value of the currency if proportionate wealth in goods and services is simultaneously created. The dominant Keynesian model holds that stimulus spending will, if the velocity of money is sufficient, cause enough economic activity to increase material wealth beyond the requirements of currency stability.
A present problem with undertaking policy action on a Keynesian basis is the low present money velocity. Inflation tends to increase money velocity, with homeostatic effect. Given that the material present fear is deflationary, would not a mildly inflationary stimulus be wise? Another serious policy problem is that money supply is essentially the only knob being twiddled (with interest rates stuck in ZIRP for good reason). If you can come up with a good way to increase money velocity independent of money supply changes, we'll all be grateful.
I frankly cannot foresee a situation in which some form of continued quantitative easing is not applied within the next year. For that reason, I consider diagonal calendar spreads on gold and silver options to be the baseline against which all other investments should be measured.
Schools have been operated profitably since before Aristotle. National defense has been operated profitably since before Artaxerxes. There is no function of government which cannot be operated profitably. It might not be possible to operate it in the way that you wish, but it is certainly possible to operate it in some profitable way.
But at what interest rate?
physical dvd players with display on your local device. $0.83 to rent a dvd for 2 weeks. since it is physical dvd, they have new releases.
library is small but very current right now, constantly growing. i like. i cancelled nflx.
Inflate it to zero.
Inflation is the most progressive form of income tax.
Interest rates will go exactly where the FRB wants them to go. If interests rates rise, they can buy bonds in POMOs. Raising the debt ceiling will not make U.S. bonds and bills more secure. It will make them less secure, because the debt will expand to unservicable proportions. It doesn't matter much whether an Economist is left or right. If they can't catch mice, don't put them in charge of the stable.
Your grandparents got nothing out of it. They were ripped off by a Congress bought and paid for by multinational corporations. The worst you can blame them for is voting for the sock puppets.