SteadyMercury
Gold Member
- Jan 1, 2013
- 4,731
- 1,202
- 190
My family is destroyed? Hmm I never knew, I better call my sisters.dear, liberals destroyed the family and schools.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
My family is destroyed? Hmm I never knew, I better call my sisters.dear, liberals destroyed the family and schools.
there is no such thing as Republican economics.
Republican economics would primarily be capitalist economics while Democrat economics would primarily be be socialist economics. Now perhaps even you can understand why Republicans opposed ACA while Democrats supported it.
Simple enough?
Yes, simple (and wrong) is your middle name Bubba
(Re-)Introducing: The American School of Economics
When the United States became independent from Britain it also rebelled against the British System of economics, characterized by Adam Smith, in favor of the American School based on protectionism and infrastructure and prospered under this system for almost 200 years to become the wealthiest nation in the world. Unrestrained free trade resurfaced in the early 1900s culminating in the Great Depression and again in the 1970s culminating in the current Economic Meltdown.
Closely related to mercantilism, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics. It consisted of these three core policies:
- protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–70)
- government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)
- a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation
It is a capitalist economic school based on the Hamiltonian economic program. The American School of capitalism was intended to allow the United States to become economically independent and nationally self-sufficient.
Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.
American School economics - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
Republican economics would primarily be capitalist economics while Democrat economics would primarily be be socialist economics. Now perhaps even you can understand why Republicans opposed ACA while Democrats supported it.
Simple enough?
Conservative Economic Theories Just Don't Work
This word "literally" I think you're taking it where it isn't meant to be.What would you say about a drug that literally causes you to go blind and be anti-social? That's essentially what the iPhone does.
The only way an iPhone literally makes you blind is if I stab you in the eye with it, and even that I'd have to do twice.
Some would argue modern social media (enabled by gadgets) has made socialization change, not go away.
And none of those is "literally" going blind as you said, and smart phones provide a different kind of socializing.
I'm 46, same pre-internet mind. My Kindle has 287 books on it right now, that thing has made my love of reading so much more convenient and cheaper, especially with as much long-term travel as I do.
I love my Roku too. We don't watch TV enough for cable to be worth it, cut the cord and go with streaming on demand, Netflix + Amazon = under $20/month.
I get WSJ and Arizona Republic on the doorstep every day too, AZR is my breakfast paper and WSJ lunch.I read a great article in the WSJ called "Your eReader is Reading You". Yes, I still read paper newspapers. Anyway, your Kindle phones home regularly, reporting on which books you read, how fast, whether you finished them, etc, etc, etc.. Amazon has been able to determine that the most appealing male protagonist to a female reader has the following attributes; green eyes, slightly hairy chest, Euro accent, etc. 18,000 Kindle readers underlined this line from the second Hunger Games book- "Because sometimes things happen to people and they're not equipped to deal with them."
I doubt this is true. I've not read Hunger Games but there are thousands and thousands of authors out there with books available for consumption by e-readers, unless you can prove your claim that literature is becoming data driven with more than some thank you on the cover I remain skeptical. Was the author acknowledging others for actual writing it or for existing work that inspired author's story? The latter is quite common and always has been. I saw the movie The Hunger Games and first thing I thought of was she ripped off that Japanese movie Battle Royale, but overall was a decent movie.Hunger Games (if you read all the thanks for contributions on the inside cover) is a book that was seemingly written by a committee. Literature is becoming data-driven, engineered, rather than a product of a singular vision of genius.
Heh heh so a random scary comparison is supposed to accomplish what in your argument? Are you suggesting any evolution to socialization is inherently sinister and with only negative impacts? I don't use a smart phone and am not attached to twitter/facebook/etc. but I can certainly acknowledge the benefits of online socialization, we've met quite a few people who we consider good friends through online social connections and I've got nothing but positive to say about the experience.The internet has redefined socialization, as you say. So did the Borg.
I don't care what that article says, I never turn on the wifi of my kindle so it is impossible for it to communicate with Amazon. I buy it, turn it on to update the software to latest, then permanently put in airplane mode. When I get books I download it as an azw file and transfer it over USB cable.The WSJ article I linked refutes your claim that a Kindle does not mine data. Maybe there are different types of Kindles.
Definitely agree here.What I suggest is that tech advancements are a mixed bag. You gain something, but you also surrender something.
Hah I've resisted the call of the smart phone, and in great irony I'm a software developer who works with UIs that are compatible with smart phones and tablets.I swore I'd never get an iPhone that spies on all my movements and e-activities. But, I had to get one to remain employed. That's how they get you.
This is what I don't buy into. I see more avenues for creativity open up via technology, and more avenues for expression and exposure.At the same time they have trapped the spirit, fettered it, stifled it.
What I suggest is that tech advancements are a mixed bag. You gain something, but you also surrender something.
This is what I don't buy into. I see more avenues for creativity open up via technology, and more avenues for expression and exposure.At the same time they have trapped the spirit, fettered it, stifled it.
More avenues for creativity. For example, it has never been more easy to publish a book.
On the other hand, we have never been more bombarded by mass-culture. That's why I call this the copy and paste generation. The WWII generation invented swing and big band. The 1950's invented rock and roll, rhythm and blues. The 1960's were transformative. The 70's yielded punk and reggae. Our generation saw the inventions of metal, new age, techno and hip hop.
What do the millennials produce? Recycled material. Why? Because evolution happens in isolation, like on the Galápagos Islands. We live in an environment bombarded by mass culture. The only way to evolve from here is to adopt bio-machinery.
. Why? Because evolution happens in isolation, like on the Galápagos Islands.
Wow so you really think every generation until this latest one produced original music material?The WWII generation invented swing and big band. The 1950's invented rock and roll, rhythm and blues. The 1960's were transformative. The 70's yielded punk and reggae. Our generation saw the inventions of metal, new age, techno and hip hop.
What do the millennials produce? Recycled material. Why? Because evolution happens in isolation, like on the Galápagos Islands. We live in an environment bombarded by mass culture. The only way to evolve from here is to adopt bio-machinery.
That is interesting, what does refusing to step on their soil to interact with people who are in that system through no choice of their own accomplish? They have such a long rich history, so much to see and learn.Ed, are you a fan of the Chinese political system? It's interesting. I know quite a few people who have travelled there. I wouldn't step foot on their soil. Their system disgusts me.
Whatever you do, don't open up your computer and look inside.I try my best not to buy anything from their sweatshops.