Hmm, Bubbles aren't caused by a lack of omniscience. They aren't characterized by overly cautious investement, which if people didn't feel certainty about the future would be the case. We also can't absolve investors of being ignorant of the concept of bubbles or of being unaware of historical data regarding past bubbles.
.
But you misunderstand my post, it wasn't in support of, or critical of, the airlines attempt to have the oil market regulated differently. (It would be naive to believe that the oil market isn't already heavily regulated along with the energy industry as a whole, so what the airlines are proposing is a change in regulation not regulation of an unregulated market.)
No, I was merely pointing out the Bubble, because some people believe that we have hit Hubbert's peak, and the Bubble provides an alternative explanation for the high price of gas. I picked on the airline's letter, because it's evidence that some of our largest fuel users, who believe me analyze all kinds of economic data to come to their conclusions believe that the price of fuel's relation to the cost of fuel is largely an illusion.
However, I take issue with your idea that economic instability and the boom-bust cycle are a necessary part of a free market. I believe it lets greedy fools and economic bottom feeders off the hook. Every Bubble brings more government control over the economy, we don't want that and we don't want any more Bubbles. Can government regulation fix it? Unlikely, the government seems to like Bubbles and do what it can to fuel and nurture them with its regulations, so no help there. (Well, they tend to be friendly toward economic bottom feeders who grow rich on the distortions they in the government introduce into the economy.)
Oh, I'm not opposed to some fluctuation in the market, don't misunderstand. I just don't think Bubbles are normal. I mean, yes, the Tulip Bubble was great for the Tulip Industry, tons of new breeds were created, and it was a golden age for tulips if you could afford them. However, it led to a lot of mal-investment. Also, I'm not saying government regulators should even need to step in. If it truly is a bubble, then people in the finance industry should be stepping in to tell their customers to diversify their investments.
.
Of course, I think a lot of people who should know better get dragged along, and some of those who don't are opportunistically (which is not an evil thing, don't misunderstand) exploiting the situation, riding the wave and trying to judge when to divest. Anyway, no one needs to worry about what I think anyway, because nobody's going to listen to me anyway. I just like playing Cassandra.
This Oil Bubble has been fun, huh? Sort of like the Housing Bubble, different than the Tech Bubble. With the Housing Bubble it was "oh no, real estate is going to just keep going up, after all, no one is making more land." Of course, looking at the situation now, it seems someone was making more land, at least with the price declines we've been seeing.
.
Now we have an Oil Bubble, and it is fun in its own way. Peak Oil! We're all doomed, the great die-off! Foriegners are eating our lunch! Kuntsler hasn't been this happy since we were all going to be totally doomed by Y2K!
Of course, I wouldn't mind seeing trains make a comeback, and some serious investment in improving nuclear tech, but I'm guessing that the current bubble will pop before we get very far in either on one them. You know its bad when, 12 U.S. airlines call on Congress to curb excessive speculation.
I'm wondering what the next Bubble will be. Some are thinking a Green Tech Bubble, but I'm hoping for a Water Bubble. You know, sort of like that episode of Darkwing Duck with the Liquidator.
Of course, someone could do something about all the insane, emotion-driven speculation but that wouldn't be as much fun. It might lead to economic stability, and who wants that?
You've gone soft on me, Henry Allen So-Called-Venture! You used to be all 'Go Team Venture!' but now? Now you're all 'Go Team... b- Boobies!' Gosh!
-- http://mantiseye.com/?ep31
Oh, don't worry about that, when they say "Intelligent Design" what they really mean is that they are going to teach Creationism. (Basically, the most ignorant-fundie version of Genesis they can come up with.)
.
The Blind Watchmaker won't ever come into it, it's basically an excuse to have a tent-revival-salvation show in your child's biology class instead of teaching biology.
Lt. Col. Grossman, a former paratrooper who has taught psychology at West Point and is now a professor of military science in Arkansas, has Good News and Bad News to reveal. The Good News is the attractive and inspiriting proposition that most people have a powerful instinctual disinclination to kill other human beings, and under normal conditions, including their own presence on a battlefield in immediate proximity to homicidal strangers, will refuse to do so. The Bad News is that modern media culture produces an abnormal condition in which ordinary children are all too likely to become much more effective killers than, say, a typical American GI facing the SS in Normandy. And Col. Grossman is supremely confident that he can prove both of these contentions. His attempts to do so, in these two fantastic and extremely dispiriting parodies of rational argument, are fascinating illustrations of the intellectual level of much contemporary American social science.
Some absurdity:
Grossman is much given to psychologizing monocausal explanation, with the result that many of his military historical dicta are absurd. Take a single example: Gunpowders superior noise, its superior posturing ability, made it ascendant on the battlefield. The longbow would still have been used in the Napoleonic Wars if the raw mathematics of killing was all that mattered, since both the longbows firing rate and its accuracy were much greater than that of the smoothbore musket. But a frightened man, thinking with his midbrain and going ploink, ploink, ploink with a bow, doesnt stand much of a chance against an equally frightened man going BANG!BANG! with a musket. The traditional explanation for the decline of the longbow is less subtle: an arrow could not penetrate plate armor, whereas an arquebus ball could, and did, and gunpowder thus rendered the longbow thoroughly obsolete by the mid-16th century, around which time the last Dialogue Between Hermes and An English Solider was published.
This is just sad, but what's even sadder is that there are people who take this nonsense seriously.
I'll leave it with his conclusion:
Brooding over this review, I was pondering Grossmanism with a friend the other day; if you dont know any history, he remarked, you dont know anything at all:. That, I think, is indeed part of the story: a genuine ignorance of history is probably a pre-condition for this sort of warmed-over Rousseauvian sentimentality about an extremely violent human past, and contemporary American social scientists are pretty innocent of history, particularly of the range of historical evidence that makes historians intensely hostile to this sort of overarching claim; historians are by nature splitters, not lumpers. A reverence for quantitative methods is also part of the story: Grossman, after writing off the most recent evidence as indeterminate, proudly disdains data for American violence which predate FBI statistics, appearing innocent of the problem that the FBI started accumulating statistics fairly recently, and did so at the start of a long fall in American crime rates, followed by a long rise, so in essence two data points become the statistical universe for conclusions about allegedly fundamental human traits. Marshall, too, fell afoul of this reverence for quantitative methods, and as a result invented the statistics that would instantiate his claim. Finally, Grossmanist thought is wonderfully prepared to write off all of our ancestors experience as unscientificthey are assumed to have perfectly misunderstood themselves, and the vast array of their art and literature and political philosophy that concerned itself with war and violence is readily written off as no better than fantasy.
Is it a fact that the Democrats lack spine? Or is it that Democrats believe that the President should be above the law and those who aid him should be above the law. I'd say it is the latter.
Ultimately, I've always felt that watching the Democrats and Republicans is along the lines of watching a rivalry between say, Harvard and Yale (almost literally). In other words, while they might have the odd tiff, they still see each other as Ivy Leaguer's and the rest of us as schmucks.
.
Here's a test, what did Nancy Pelosi say was "Off the table" when she became Speaker:
A. Nuking Iran
B. Drilling in ANWAR
C. Impeaching the President or Vice President
If you answered C, you've been paying attention, are very cynical or both (likely because paying attention will inevitably lead to becoming cynical.).
My opinion of the "Methusalah Quest" is that any treatments that come out of it will instantly become non-controversial as soon as they become readily available. As a sufferer of "andropause", I can tell you that like a lot of other men I've never even thought twice about availing myself of Taldafil when the need arises. (Something which falls into the category of a miracle of modern science, as far as I'm concerned.)
.
Oh, I'm supposed to ask a question, so I will. I believe that as treatments appears to fix the "inevitable" aspects of the aging process, they will be widely utilized and fairly non-controversially included in modern medicine, much as treatments for both great and small age related diseases have been up until now. Do you agree? Or do you expect villagers with torches and pitchforks to storm Frankenstein's laboratory when he comes up with a method to let Granddad hang on for a few hunderd years more?
Actually, what this always makes me feel is that the people who are for prison rape are:
.
1. Dangerous socipaths.
2. Kept in line primarily by fear, with no concept of morality.
3. The kind of people who commit atrocities when they think they can get away with it, or when some authority figure tells them that it will be no problem to do such things to an unperson.
#21: Are you the bully of your school? Or the victim of bullying? Do you watch movies about costumed heroes and think, "Wow, that guy's a pussy. I sure hope a much cooler bad guy kicks his ass."?
#24: (unconvincingly) Wow, it's like you were reading my mind.
#21: I am not a mind reader, stranger. You, like so many others, are drawn to this sexy, action-packed lifestyle of the professional henchman.
#24: But I could never be a henchman. I am just a normal guy who is between the age of 18 and 30. A loner who lacks ties to friends and family.
#21: You, stranger, are the perfect candidate for costumed aggression.
Gang Member 1: Yo, fat boy. You get to carry a piece?
#21: But of course. Your standard Grade One henchman in service of the mighty Monarch is issued a dart gun and a grappling cannon to name only a few of the exciting accoutrements that will aid the henchman in his wonderous world of career henching.
Gang Member 2: Hey, what kind of ride we get?
#21: How does an enormous flying cocoon sound to you?
#24: Wow, a flying cocoon. I can already feel my life getting better!
The "rag-tag resisters" fighting in Iraq are a proxy army with the backing of another government.
Sigh...
I suspect he does, actually. He's just trying to persuade his Bible-oriented readers that Iran is threatening the Holy Land. So he plays this shell game with the suckers: one minute it's Iranians capturing Israelis, next minute it's Hezbollah. Eventually he compromises by calling Hezbollah "a proxy of the Iranian government."
.
That's another lie, of course. Even if you don't know recent Middle Eastern history, you should be able to see through this "proxy" nonsense. If there's anything that recent military history shows clearly, it's that nobody, not even a superpower, can create a proxy army that will really fight and Hezbollah proved pretty clearly that they can fight.
America and the USSR tried creating proxy armies all through the Cold War years. The only time it worked was when the locals had their own reasons to want to fight. In those cases, it's just a matter of sliding the cartons off the C-130's and cracking 'em open. Local war-lust will do the rest.
But when the locals are only fighting because some foreign power pays them, they're worthless. I hate to bring up painful memories, but anybody remember our old pal ARVN the Army of the Republic of Viet Nam, aka South Vietnam? We poured so much blood and money into the South Vietnamese Army that it still hurts to think about it. At its peak, ARVN had 544,000 soldiers, one of the biggest and definitely one of the best-funded armies in the world. But without U.S. combat troops to provide some spine and USAF sorties to run their offense, ARVN collapsed as fast as Enron and for pretty much the same reasons.
-- His God Must Be Crazy By Gary Brecher
I remember when I was a child, multitasking was primarily a term of art in the computer industry, and basically referred to computers which could do the amazing thing of running more than one process at once. Multitasking replaced the old way of doing things, where the CPU would have to be freed up by one task before it could start another.
Of course, nowadays, multitasking is a corporate buzzword which mainly means that you have to do the actual task you were hired to do, but also usually do a lot of other bureacratic, time consuming stuff at the same time. It's why people are happy when they can work outside of their primary hours and actually get things done.
I actually have to wonder about this as a pro-nuclear power person though. How can it be that they have been so successful in preventing nuclear power plants from being built, when they've done nothing to prevent a single nuclear missile from being built? Remembering that all nuclear missiles are an ecological nightmare waiting to happen, by design. They've also had no effect on our nuclear powered navy.
My guess? The other sectors of the energy industry, the ones not involved in nuclear power, have been very good at lobbying to keep the status quo going. The anti-nuke environmentalists at best provide greenwash for the coal and oil industry. They aren't nearly as powerful as they are made out to be, or as they think they are.
I was just playing Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines, last night. I decided to go for it and attack Pisha instead of going on her lucrative quests.
Needless to say, the results were... ahem... interesting. After loading my saved game I decided to wait before trying it again.
It's currently available on Steam for anyone who missed it the first time, $20 well spent. (I forget what I paid for it... but it's given me years of entertainment, that's for sure.)
Agressive War: You attack and kill people in order to kill them and take their stuff. (In a U.S. context, examples are the War of the Phillipine Insurrection, The First Seminole War, The Second Seminole War, basically all the Indian Wars, the Vietnam War and the Iraq War)
Defensive War: You defend against and kill people in order to prevent them from killing you and taking your stuff. (In a U. S. context, can't think of a single one, but wars between two Empires, such as the U. S. and Japan over who gets to kill Southeast Asian people and take their stuff are often portrayed as such.)
Genocide: American style genocide means that there are a lot fewer American Indians than there were before Americans started killing them. Not as efficient as German style genocide, but it got the job done.
No point mistaking bad intelligence and unquestioning politicians for malice.
Ok, as you are speaking of Australia, this may not apply to you. After all, I could see the government of Australia accepting intelligence from their ally the United States in good faith. However, citizens of the United States, you should understand that there is a difference between cooked intelligence and bad intelligence.
Bad intelligence is when Achmed is giving you information, but he is actually secretly working for the Taliban. Cooked intelligence is when there is no Achmed, and the information you supposedly got from him was actually created by the Office of Special Plans out of whole cloth. Basically, black propaganda aimed at your own populace.
Bad intellegence can be incompetence (or it can just mean the other side is better than you), but cooked intelligence is definitely malice.
Slashdot Mirror
.
But you misunderstand my post, it wasn't in support of, or critical of, the airlines attempt to have the oil market regulated differently. (It would be naive to believe that the oil market isn't already heavily regulated along with the energy industry as a whole, so what the airlines are proposing is a change in regulation not regulation of an unregulated market.)
No, I was merely pointing out the Bubble, because some people believe that we have hit Hubbert's peak, and the Bubble provides an alternative explanation for the high price of gas. I picked on the airline's letter, because it's evidence that some of our largest fuel users, who believe me analyze all kinds of economic data to come to their conclusions believe that the price of fuel's relation to the cost of fuel is largely an illusion.
However, I take issue with your idea that economic instability and the boom-bust cycle are a necessary part of a free market. I believe it lets greedy fools and economic bottom feeders off the hook. Every Bubble brings more government control over the economy, we don't want that and we don't want any more Bubbles. Can government regulation fix it? Unlikely, the government seems to like Bubbles and do what it can to fuel and nurture them with its regulations, so no help there. (Well, they tend to be friendly toward economic bottom feeders who grow rich on the distortions they in the government introduce into the economy.)
Is that so?
.
Of course, I think a lot of people who should know better get dragged along, and some of those who don't are opportunistically (which is not an evil thing, don't misunderstand) exploiting the situation, riding the wave and trying to judge when to divest. Anyway, no one needs to worry about what I think anyway, because nobody's going to listen to me anyway. I just like playing Cassandra.
Now we have an Oil Bubble, and it is fun in its own way. Peak Oil! We're all doomed, the great die-off! Foriegners are eating our lunch! Kuntsler hasn't been this happy since we were all going to be totally doomed by Y2K!
Of course, I wouldn't mind seeing trains make a comeback, and some serious investment in improving nuclear tech, but I'm guessing that the current bubble will pop before we get very far in either on one them. You know its bad when, 12 U.S. airlines call on Congress to curb excessive speculation.
I'm wondering what the next Bubble will be. Some are thinking a Green Tech Bubble, but I'm hoping for a Water Bubble. You know, sort of like that episode of Darkwing Duck with the Liquidator.
Of course, someone could do something about all the insane, emotion-driven speculation but that wouldn't be as much fun. It might lead to economic stability, and who wants that?
Sorry about that.
.
The GP is suggesting that if they had the profits they lost due to piracy, they wouldn't have closed.
.
The Blind Watchmaker won't ever come into it, it's basically an excuse to have a tent-revival-salvation show in your child's biology class instead of teaching biology.
.
Massive quotes to follow:
The Premise:
Some absurdity:
This is just sad, but what's even sadder is that there are people who take this nonsense seriously. I'll leave it with his conclusion:
Ultimately, I've always felt that watching the Democrats and Republicans is along the lines of watching a rivalry between say, Harvard and Yale (almost literally). In other words, while they might have the odd tiff, they still see each other as Ivy Leaguer's and the rest of us as schmucks.
.
Here's a test, what did Nancy Pelosi say was "Off the table" when she became Speaker:
A. Nuking Iran
B. Drilling in ANWAR
C. Impeaching the President or Vice President
If you answered C, you've been paying attention, are very cynical or both (likely because paying attention will inevitably lead to becoming cynical.).
.
Oh, I'm supposed to ask a question, so I will. I believe that as treatments appears to fix the "inevitable" aspects of the aging process, they will be widely utilized and fairly non-controversially included in modern medicine, much as treatments for both great and small age related diseases have been up until now. Do you agree? Or do you expect villagers with torches and pitchforks to storm Frankenstein's laboratory when he comes up with a method to let Granddad hang on for a few hunderd years more?
.
1. Dangerous socipaths.
2. Kept in line primarily by fear, with no concept of morality.
3. The kind of people who commit atrocities when they think they can get away with it, or when some authority figure tells them that it will be no problem to do such things to an unperson.
In other words, budding Lieutenant Calleys or Josef Mengeles.
I never, ever wonder how so many Germans could go along with the Nazi's because if America takes a wrong turn we'll see the same behaviour here.
"Shriek" From DC Animated Universe Wiki, the DCAU Database
Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines True v5.04AT Unofficial Patch
The History of Computer Role-Playing Games Part III: The Platinum and Modern Ages (1994-2004)
#24: (unconvincingly) Wow, it's like you were reading my mind.
#21: I am not a mind reader, stranger. You, like so many others, are drawn to this sexy, action-packed lifestyle of the professional henchman.
#24: But I could never be a henchman. I am just a normal guy who is between the age of 18 and 30. A loner who lacks ties to friends and family.
#21: You, stranger, are the perfect candidate for costumed aggression.
Gang Member 1: Yo, fat boy. You get to carry a piece?
#21: But of course. Your standard Grade One henchman in service of the mighty Monarch is issued a dart gun and a grappling cannon to name only a few of the exciting accoutrements that will aid the henchman in his wonderous world of career henching.
Gang Member 2: Hey, what kind of ride we get?
#21: How does an enormous flying cocoon sound to you?
#24: Wow, a flying cocoon. I can already feel my life getting better!
Well, Clinton (either one) might've.
Of course, nowadays, multitasking is a corporate buzzword which mainly means that you have to do the actual task you were hired to do, but also usually do a lot of other bureacratic, time consuming stuff at the same time. It's why people are happy when they can work outside of their primary hours and actually get things done.
My guess? The other sectors of the energy industry, the ones not involved in nuclear power, have been very good at lobbying to keep the status quo going. The anti-nuke environmentalists at best provide greenwash for the coal and oil industry. They aren't nearly as powerful as they are made out to be, or as they think they are.
Needless to say, the results were... ahem... interesting. After loading my saved game I decided to wait before trying it again.
It's currently available on Steam for anyone who missed it the first time, $20 well spent. (I forget what I paid for it... but it's given me years of entertainment, that's for sure.)
Everything old is new again!!!
Defensive War: You defend against and kill people in order to prevent them from killing you and taking your stuff. (In a U. S. context, can't think of a single one, but wars between two Empires, such as the U. S. and Japan over who gets to kill Southeast Asian people and take their stuff are often portrayed as such.)
Genocide: American style genocide means that there are a lot fewer American Indians than there were before Americans started killing them. Not as efficient as German style genocide, but it got the job done.
Bad intelligence is when Achmed is giving you information, but he is actually secretly working for the Taliban. Cooked intelligence is when there is no Achmed, and the information you supposedly got from him was actually created by the Office of Special Plans out of whole cloth. Basically, black propaganda aimed at your own populace.
Bad intellegence can be incompetence (or it can just mean the other side is better than you), but cooked intelligence is definitely malice.