Occupy Wall Street

[buckethead]

No worries.

[bigpeach]

Mostly a). Economists have enormously less influence on policy than people think. Even when a good idea is sent to Congress lobbying efforts water it down or kill it completely.

But I apologize for sounding smug. It's an epidemic in my profession, and something that I'm trying to work on.

Economists don't influence public policy because they rely on logic and analysis. Politicians have to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and due to our evolutionary history, concepts like math and probability were of little to no value compared to concepts like fear and fight-for-your-life, so to really get the masses to support them in an election, politicians have to play the fear card over the logic card.

[Turdacious]

Pinky, I like you, but the way you talk smug and superior makes me wonder why this country is so fucked up even though there are economists all over DC.

Either a) you economists are sooo right but no one implements your ideas or b) y'all really don't have any practical foundation for your theories.

I'm no PhD in economics, but I would also argue that:
c) most people in DC don't know a damn thing about economics and even the basic concepts are over their heads
d) most economists are specialists and aren't qualified to talk about other areas at a high level
e) too many macro economists look at things in very broad terms (if their model says more government spending is needed, they don't look at the quality of government spending; if their model says raise taxes, they don't look at the quality and effect of the taxes; etc...)
f) many of them are government employees, so Pinky automatically assumes that they are lazy
g) politicians and lobbyists are whores, and there is no really good economic theory about that kind of prostitution.

[Thatcher II]

...It's an epidemic in my profession, and something that I'm trying to work on.

I would say its endemic.

Also,"Profession"? Srsly? Some "ezperimentations" on how humans distribute limited resources, producing little predictive capability of worth? More of a hobby, surely.

[Turdacious]

I'm wondering about this STD epidemic-- is HPV one of the biggies?

[Turdacious]

Solidarity dammit!

In a move that may redefine the term “strange bedfellows,” the American Nazi Party issued an official endorsement of the Occupy Wall Street protest movement on Sunday afternoon. The announcement put the organization, a self-described “National Socialist” political party, in company with the Socialist Party USA, which explained its own support for the left-wing protesters in a nationwide conference call last Tuesday night, crediting organized labor with the protests’ strength and sophistication to date.

The American Nazi Party is the most politically sophisticated U.S. remnant — but by no means the only one — of white supremacist Adolph Hitler’s murderous 20th century movement, which sought to establish socialism for Aryans, and to subjugate non-Aryans. The party calls Hitler’s Mein Kampf “an ideological blueprint for healthy Aryan survival.”

In its statement on Sunday, the Westland, Mich.-based Nazi party wrote that the Occupy Wall Street protests are “TAYLOR [sic] MADE for National Socialists, as well as WN [White Nationalists] who are serious about DOING SOMETHING.”

“I urgently URGE all of you,” the statement’s unnamed author added, “to TAKE PART and JOIN IN when these protests hit your neck of the woods. Produce some flyers EXPLAINING the ‘JEW BANKER’ influence — DON’T wear anything marking you as an ‘evil racist’ — and GET OUT THERE and SPREAD the WORD!”

While Nazis seem unenthusiastic about visibly linking their flagship organization to the vocal protests that have popped up in dozens of U.S. cities, the same can’t be said of the Communist Party USA.

John Bachtell, an Illinois-based community organizer and Communist Party USA board member, addressed the “Occupy Chicago” protest on Saturday.

“I bring greetings and solidarity from the Communist Party,” Bachtell said to hoots and applause. “We are here, marching side-by-side. We’ll sleep here. We’ll be with this movement ’til the very – ’til we make all the changes that we know we have to make.”

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/17/red-w ... -protests/

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHowDp1G0oM[/youtube]

[Fat Cat]

[Herv100]

Speaking of which

[Herv100]

Obama Defies Base, Hires Wall Street Lobbyist for Re-Election Campaign

http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/25/obama ... -campaign/

Obama Has Actually Raised More Money from Wall Street Than Romney

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-actually-ra ... 30978.html

[Fat Cat]

Speaking of which

I like this. I couldn't find one with both parties represented.

[Fat Cat]

Fuck off turd, you're like a mosquito. Here are the top 10, with last years political donation next to their name:

National Education Association...$3.7 million

Service Employees International Union...$2 million

United Food & Commercial Workers...$1.9 million

International Brotherhood of Teamsters...$2.3 million

American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees...$2.3 million

Laborers' International Union of North America...$1.7 million

American Federation of Teachers...$2.4 million

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers...not available

International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers...$1.98 million

United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America...$1.6 million

Source: Center for Public Integrity

The ones in bold are public sector unions. That's 40%. And on second look, 4 of the 5 largest contributors were public sector unions.

Congratulations on using blithely correctly in a sentence. Try learning the definition of all.

Nope. In fact it's more like 2.5 not 3, since the AFT is a mixture of public and private. SEIU isn't even all American, what to speak of American government employees.

[nafod]

Mostly a). Economists have enormously less influence on policy than people think. Even when a good idea is sent to Congress lobbying efforts water it down or kill it completely.

But I apologize for sounding smug. It's an epidemic in my profession, and something that I'm trying to work on.

Economists don't influence public policy because they rely on logic and analysis. Politicians have to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and due to our evolutionary history, concepts like math and probability were of little to no value compared to concepts like fear and fight-for-your-life, so to really get the masses to support them in an election, politicians have to play the fear card over the logic card.

This is one of the more insightful articles I've read. It's about war, but applies to everything.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2008/08/3599006

EMOTIONAL SELF-INTEREST

Instead of clinging to the failed model of rational self-interest as an analytical tool, substitute “emotional self-interest.” It’s akin to switching on a light. If, instead of fabricating logical sequences of calculation where none exist, we accept that indi¬viduals, peoples and states act in ways that are emotionally sat¬isfying, no end of knotty analytical problems dissolve. Whether we look at why we vote for the candidates we do, why a terror¬ist straps on a suicide belt, why Hutus massacred 1 million Tutsis with cold steel or why states blunder into war, assessing the degree of emotional satisfaction gained from the act is as enlightening as seeking logic in such deeds is frustrating.

[Fat Cat]

It's definitely a useful interpretive model on many levels. I know in counseling psychology, when you're looking at persistent but maladaptive behaviors, always look for the payoff, the "emotionally satisfying" aspect of their behavior which is the behavior-reenforcing reward.

[DrDonkeyLove]

Mostly a). Economists have enormously less influence on policy than people think. Even when a good idea is sent to Congress lobbying efforts water it down or kill it completely.

But I apologize for sounding smug. It's an epidemic in my profession, and something that I'm trying to work on.

Economists don't influence public policy because they rely on logic and analysis. Politicians have to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and due to our evolutionary history, concepts like math and probability were of little to no value compared to concepts like fear and fight-for-your-life, so to really get the masses to support them in an election, politicians have to play the fear card over the logic card.

This is one of the more insightful articles I've read. It's about war, but applies to everything.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2008/08/3599006

EMOTIONAL SELF-INTEREST

Instead of clinging to the failed model of rational self-interest as an analytical tool, substitute “emotional self-interest.” It’s akin to switching on a light. If, instead of fabricating logical sequences of calculation where none exist, we accept that indi¬viduals, peoples and states act in ways that are emotionally sat¬isfying, no end of knotty analytical problems dissolve. Whether we look at why we vote for the candidates we do, why a terror¬ist straps on a suicide belt, why Hutus massacred 1 million Tutsis with cold steel or why states blunder into war, assessing the degree of emotional satisfaction gained from the act is as enlightening as seeking logic in such deeds is frustrating.

Ralston's "Book of Not Knowing" talks about an emotional self that we create and will do all kinds of extreme things to support. Emotional self-interest must be at least as important as rational self-interest with most of us.

[buckethead]

Great article Nafod. Made me realize why my Libertarian friends drive me mad. It's not that the ideas are bad or wrong or shouldn't be pursued. It's that they seem to have bought into the idea that emotional self-interest can be dropped easily. In fact, now that I look at it, their vitriol against anything non-Ron-Paul is simply a testament that emotion is their driving force, as well, still.

[Fat Cat]

[johno]

Is Jesus is your favorite political philosopher?

[Fat Cat]

Is Jesus is your favorite political philosopher?

Huh?

[johno]

Seems to me, the ^ implication ^ is that Jesus was a political philosopher, that his example & exhortations to love one another and to be our brother's keeper were a societal prescription.

[cleaner464]

Ronald Reagan > Milton Friedman > Jesus, according to the GOP.

[Turdacious]

Barack Obama = Jesus, Nancy Pelosi = John the Baptist, Ben Nelson = Judas-- according to the Donkeys.

[Fat Cat]

I'm not sure what you are talking about but I'll be clear what I think. Jesus is not on the wide of Wall Street. Whether he would be supportive of a broad group like OWS is certainly debatable and I wouldn't really try to make that case, but it is clear to me that Wall Street and the culture that pervades it are antichrist.

1 Timothy 6:10 - For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

[CharlieBob]

1 Timothy 6:10 - For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

Quoting the bible is pointless...

[Fat Cat]

[Fat Cat]

1 Timothy 6:10 - For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

Quoting the bible is pointless...

I have that book, thought it was very informative albeit rather imperfect, and want to tell you that you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.