![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Scroll towards the bottom of this blog post for more on the wisdom of Glenn Beck.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
David,
I love how you use logic to refute the facts. Put your straw men down. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I suspect there are a lot of people here that don’t truly grasp the idea of marginally diminishing returns/utility, Which would explain why there are so many anarcho-capitalists here (I guess more so in politics).
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
I suspect there are a lot of people here that don’t truly grasp the idea of marginally diminishing returns/utility, Which would explain why there are so many anarcho-capitalists here (I guess more so in politics). [/ QUOTE ] Would you like to explain this a bit further? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I suspect there are a lot of people here that don’t truly grasp the idea of marginally diminishing returns/utility, Which would explain why there are so many anarcho-capitalists here (I guess more so in politics). [/ QUOTE ] Would you like to explain this a bit further? [/ QUOTE ] He could try. But since the first snide coment was exactly backwards i wouldn't expect much out of the explaination. NeBlis |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
One of the reasons I never wanted to study economics was because I was worried that even with approximations introduced into functions, theoretical models could still be way off due to hidden complexities.
Example: suppose the amount of tax revenue (R) is given by some complex function of the tax rate (T) like So: R= kT^2 +T/2Dsin(T) + c where k,c,d are constants fitting experimental data to this equation. Though I made up this equation and it is obviously not correct at all, there are tons of economics textbooks filled with equations like this that describe economic quantities like revenue and taxes. The reason I distrust these models is that I think there is alot of "variance" in economic phenomena caused by political, social factors etc. Taxes could suddenly be effected by some new crazy factor like a war. Because of this and also because I distrust economists in general I think that it is a bogus field. I'm interested if anyone else thinks that economic/mathematical theories are worth formulating and studying or not? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Without addressing the underlying Snyder jab one way or the other...
Donald Schlessinger once publicly fell for what might be called a "sucker bet". Does it follow, and does it meet objective analysis, that Donald Schlessinger is a "logic-challenged arrogant moron?" Or is it possible that anyone can be lead astray by abstruse (or even mundane) subjects from time to time? If so then how do we explain his excellent blackjack book? Hundres of pages of getting it right by being lucky? If I write how Issac Newton was best described as a logic-challenged arrogant moron on account of his laughable bible notions, I think I might get an objection or two...ya think? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
Without addressing the underlying Snyder jab one way or the other... Donald Schlessinger once publicly fell for what might be called a "sucker bet". Does it follow, and does it meet objective analysis, that Donald Schlessinger is a "logic-challenged arrogant moron?" Or is it possible that anyone can be lead astray by abstruse (or even mundane) subjects from time to time? If so then how do we explain his excellent blackjack book? Hundres of pages of getting it right by being lucky? If I write how Issac Newton was best described as a logic-challenged arrogant moron on account of his laughable bible notions, I think I might get an objection or two...ya think? [/ QUOTE ] blackjack attack was only correct through some .00000000000000000001 to infinity squared out of one coincidence, just as every one of us, along with our world (and any other worlds that perhaps exist), came to be. schlesinger knows less about blackjack than i know about poker. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
schlesinger knows less about blackjack than i know about poker. [/ QUOTE ]ROTFLMAO I finally get to meet the person who knows everything about poker! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Donald Schlessinger once publicly fell for what might be called a "sucker bet". Does it follow, and does it meet objective analysis, that Donald Schlessinger is a "logic-challenged arrogant moron?""
Did he still fall for it after thinking about it for dozens of hours and being told by acknowledged experts he was wrong? And did he then go on to write up his faulty analysis? |
![]() |
|
|