Or both. The start of an article on President Obama has lost the argument on Iran.
When your best argument for an agreement is that the deal’s opponents are “making common cause” with your negotiating partners, it’s safe to say you’ve lost the debate.
As for those who take his word for things being idiots, he was elected twice and the media still love him. Highly rational with a deep respect for the past, for freedom and the constitution is not part of their frame of reference.
Funny in a not-so-funny sort of way. It doesn’t matter, anyway. Obama is out to kill Hillary’s run for president, and will have her in jail before he will let her take the nomination.
Why do we even know what Malcolm Turncoat’s views are? Hasn’t he heard of cabinet solidarity?
Tony Abbott is staring down internal critics of his plan for a plebiscite on same-sex marriage, locking in conservative support in the wake of a Coalition dispute that has triggered renewed sniping over his leadership.
The Prime Minister threw more weight behind the plebiscite hours after Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull warned against the proposal, highlighting a conflict within the government over the way the idea was devised.
Another Donald Trump, who knows only his own opinion, respects no one else’s and cannot convince anyone of anything they don’t already believe.
Whatever you may think of the crash in the Chinese economy, who are suffering from the after effects of their Keynesian stimulus – ghost cities anyone? – what I really find interesting about these headlines from Drudge is the comment from Donald Trump. The American system lacks a leader of the opposition; now it has one, of sorts. If Trump comments, it’s news. It has nothing to do with Obama and American politics, but that’s because it is hard really to see Trump as opposed to what Obama is doing anywhere outside of immigration, and even then it’s not all that certain.
CHINA MOVES SPOOK STOCKS…
Roils Markets Second Day as Yuan Cut by 1.6%…
EXPORTERS REELING…
RISKS CLASH WITH USA…
DOW ‘DEATH CROSS’…
TRUMP: Currency devaluation will devastate…
No one else is news. How do any of the established Republican candidates get a look in? He is leading the opposition, but just who or what he is opposed to is still to be determined.
This was the original question posed on the History of Economics discussion thread:
I am researching the debates over the Ten Hours Bill in 1844. One of the disputants observed 5 mills, spinning
“No. 14, 15, 30, 38, and 40 yarn”
These numbers are calculated by measuring the length per unit of weight of the cotton spun. I can’t find what unit of length and what unit of weight was employed (the larger the number. the finer the yarn). Any ideas?
The discussion then revolved around something I recall from my youth, which is the “denier”, pronounced, as I also recall, “den-yair”. Which led to this post, since I hadn’t even noticed the alternative current meaning as the discussion wandered along.
I remember now — hosiery ads (and maybe bed-linen ads?) used to say “21 denier” and I had no idea what that meant.
No idea how to pronounce it, either. One on-line dictionary says to pronounce it DENN-yer.
I put the word into Google Ngram Viewer and after a century of noise, the graph suddenly leaps up after 1940, to a peak in 1950 three times higher than the secular background level. Then it falls back to the secular level by 1960. I would guess that this reflects the use in hosiery ads (etc.).
More recently we have “global warming denier” and the like. I don’t suppose the ngram viewer can distinguish that meaning, if we search for only the one word and not some contextual phrase. But by default the viewer stops at the year 2000.
But what I found fascinating was that the original poster finally explained what the numbers had meant, which had nothing to do with “denier” in the measurement sense:
Thanks for all of the helpful suggestions. It turns out that this is not a “denier system” That is a direct-management system where the smaller the number, the finer the thread. Instead, Manchester employed an “Indirect System”. The numbers are sizes, that is the length of yarn (in yards) needed to reach a weight of one pound. Thus the higher the number — 14, 15, 30, 38, 40 — the finer the yarn or thread.
Scholarship at its best.
With Mark Steyn, you always want to quote the whole thing, but I won’t. Just go to the article, “A Disgrace to the Profession” which has as it subtitle, “The World’s Scientists – in their own words – on Michael E Mann, His Hockey Stick and their Damage to Science – Volume One”. I will give you a couple of paras but don’t deny yourself, read the whole article and then buy his book. And while you are reading the article, do keep in mind that Mann has sued Steyn for defamation!
A guy can’t sit around waiting for litigious fake Nobel Laureates to agree to discovery and deposition. So, with the Mann vs Steyn Trial of the Century currently stalled in the choked septic tank of the DC court system, I figured I might as well put some of the mountain of case research clogging up the office into a brand new book – all about the most famous “science” graph of the 21st century and the man who invented it.
Michael E Mann’s defamation suit against me for a 270-word blog post is about to enter its fourth year in the District of Columbia Superior Court, so I’m confident this little tome should be good for at least a third of a century. Therefore, without further ado, I’m pleased to announce the summer beach read of 2015:
“A Disgrace To The Profession”:
The World’s Scientists – In Their Own Words – On
Michael E Mann, His Hockey Stick And Their Damage To Science
Volume OneIt’s a snappy title, I think you’ll agree. Personally autographed copies are available right now at the SteynOnline bookstore, and profits therefrom help to prop up my end of the forthcoming trial.
You really do have to wonder about political reporting. This is a brief story on Glenn Beck’s reaction to Donald Trump:
Conservative radio host Glenn Beck called Donald Trump a “son of a bitch,” and panned his performance in Thursday night’s GOP presidential debate.
On his Friday broadcast, Beck argued that the GOP front-runner was a “big loser” in the first showdown between Republican candidates.He is the most arrogant candidate next to the candidate called Barack Obama,” he said. “I mean, there’s nobody I’ve seen more arrogant than him.
“This guy will be Barack Obama times 10 with enemy lists,” Beck added of Trump’s unpopularity with other Republicans. “[He is] really dangerous.”
Beck admitted that Trump’s inclusion produced entertaining political theater, calling it the “best presidential debate” he has ever seen.
“I could watch this as sports [if] my country wasn’t dying,” Beck quipped.
Trump instantly drew boos on Thursday evening by refusing to rule out a 2016 Oval Office bid as an independent.
My guess is that Glenn wasn’t being lighthearted.
I’ve been paying close attention to Donald Trump since we happened to see his speech in Las Vegas that took him to the top of the polls. But politics is not about having a set of opinions. It is about working with other people to achieve collective ends. The business with Megyn Kelly is the finish of him so far as I am concerned, and I am unlikely to be alone on this.
It’s not just the disgust he creates. It’s his lack of proportion. It’s his attitude to the views of those who disagree with him that is so disturbing. He has never run for or held political office. He has only run businesses, which is precisely the wrong kind of experience for anyone in politics. A business is an organisation that does work by command and control. There are decision makers and those who put those decisions into effect. That is not the way a free society works.
Obama has much in common with Trump and has turned out to be the worst president in American history. My way or the highway, with the result that everything of any significance he has become involved with has turned out a disaster. Trump would be no worse, but he would be no better.
A presidential system is the worst form of democracy you can have. The last few years have shown how flawed a system it can be. We can only hope for a better outcome after 2017.
It’s only the headline writer, but it is the most common of all economic illiteracies. From The Australian: Growth rates slashed as GFC fallout lasts decade.
Normal economic growth rates won’t resume until at least 2017, the Reserve Bank declared yesterday as it slashed its growth forecast for next year, leaving Australia with weak growth for almost the entire decade since the global financial crisis began.
The Reserve Bank’s vision, outlined in its quarterly review of the economy released yesterday, now stretches for another 18 months, with a 0.5 percentage point downgrade in growth estimates for next year, to 2.5 per cent, casting a shadow over budget forecasts.
Let me couple this from Drudge today:
Record 93,770,000 Americans Not in Labor Force…
Participation Rate 38-Year Low…
Record 56,209,000 Women Not Working…
The only relationship between the GFC and the dismal economic outcomes today is that the GFC led one government after another to put in place a Keynesian stimulus. As I said at the time, we will be lucky to get out of the problems created within a decade. If you would like more of the same, Policy in the Pub on Wednesday the 19th.
I was already convinced the UK should leave the EU. If all this is true, it is crazy for the UK to stay in.
Law of Markets 