Recent comments by RE

Bad Dawg Bobby wrote:

BUT,,,,,Completely FREE, so far.

Content-free posts are taxing not free.

burnside wrote:

One thing I don't think was brought up was our progress paying down ww2 debt. I don't know that the timing was ideal, but I tend to think there would have been a call for some kind of downward revision to the tax code regardless of who proposed it.

I tend to agree.

yuan wrote:

I don't think it was possible to not be a Keynsian during that era. I still believe that the targeting of those tax cuts (predominant benefit for the rich and corps -- low multiplier) and the message used to promote (shared prosperity -- yadda yadda) them was proto-supply side.

Nixon went the classical route first but it failed (obviously).

Nixonomics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nixon inherited a weak economy from President Lyndon B. Johnson, who didn’t follow the advice of his economists. In 1969, a tax bill passed that held several Nixon ideas, including a repeal of the investment tax credit and removal of two million of the nation's poor from the tax rolls. After a year it was becoming obvious that the plan wasn’t working. Nixon gave his budget plan to congress in 1971 in which he was to use a $11.6 billion deficit. Nixon then publicly agreed with Keynesian economic principles which stated that government expenditure could take the nation out of their recession, which was a considerably unusual view for a Republican president.

yuan wrote:

I think Kennedy's McCarthyism, his reckless and illegal militarism, and his support for trickle down economic policies are reason enough for me to view him as a deeply flawed individual.

I am not worshiping anybody and therefore expect grey. I personally agree with you regarding JFK's McCarthy issue and his militarism.

As to economics:

The Myth of JFK as Supply Side Tax Cutter - US News

Another important piece of context is the thinking behind the tax cuts. Kennedy's economic policies were rooted in a Keynesian belief in the stimulative effects of budget deficits. While FDR and his aides had embraced countercyclical deficits as necessary in times of recession or depression, Kennedy was the first to advocate planned deficits in a time of neither war nor economic emergency. The aim was for the tax cuts to stimulate demand, driving the economy from the bottom up.

Ed S. wrote:

What I seriously believe is that if any presidential hopeful put out a platform that mirrored the domestic economic and social policies of JFK and RMN they'd be laughed out of either the Red Team or Blue Team Clean Air? Clean Water?

You give Nixon too much credit.

The president did not propose giving the EPA any powers that its predecessor agencies did not have. The EPA was merely to assume responsibility for preexisting clean air and water, pesticide control, and radiation monitoring programs.
In 1972, water quality legislation entered a new era with the passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments. This bill represented the most wide-ranging and expensive environmental legislation enacted to that time. It only became law after Congress overrode Nixon's veto on the last day of the 1972 congressional session.

azurite wrote:

Or get rid of the Electoral College, that would make a difference.

That would help a bit but not much. Winner-Takes-All permeates the whole system.

Ed S. wrote:

If Nixon or Kennedy were to run for a nomination in 2016 with the policies advocated in 1960, the only party that would welcome them would be the Greens

While I agree, a third party is unlikely given Duverger's law and CU.

We need to learn to resolve issues within the two party framework.

I debunked, once again, the myth of the "conservative" Kennedy at the end of the last thread...

Comment by RE from thread 'Freddie Mac: 30 Year Mortgage Rates decrease to 3.69% in Latest Weekly Survey'

Cinco-X wrote:

Nixon WAS NOT a conservative. He was the liberal candidate in 1960 against JFK...Jeez...

BS. How many times has this been debunked here already? JEEZ!

Comment by RE from thread 'Las Vegas House sales up YoY in May, Inventory down sharply'

Here are excerpts from the Wiki about Kennedy's "New Frontier" theme. Puffery?

New Frontier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the words of Robert D. Marcus: "Kennedy entered office with ambitions to eradicate poverty and to raise America’s eyes to the stars through the space program"

We don't hear a lot about poverty today, do we?

Amongst the legislation passed by Congress during the Kennedy Administration, unemployment benefits were expanded, aid was provided to cities to improve housing and transportation, funds were allocated to continue the construction of a national highway system started under Eisenhower, a water pollution control act was passed to protect the country’s rivers and streams, and an agricultural act to raise farmers’ incomes was made law.[4] A significant amount of anti-poverty legislation was passed by Congress, including increases in social security benefits and in the minimum wage, several housing bills, and aid to economically distressed areas. A few antirecession public works packages,[3] together with a number of measures designed to assist farmers,[5] were introduced.

Not exactly issues of the right, are they? But let's go on.

Major expansions and improvements were made in Social Security (including retirement at 62 for men), hospital construction, library services, family farm assistance and reclamation.[6] Food stamps for low-income Americans were reintroduced, food distribution to the poor was increased, and there was an expansion in school milk and school lunch distribution. The most comprehensive farm legislation since 1938 was carried out, with expansions in rural electrification, soil conservation, crop insurance, farm credit, and marketing orders. In September 1961

And to summarize.

The facts, I believe, are otherwise. Kennedy’s legislative record in 1961–63 was the best of any President since Roosevelt’s first term

Much more in the article. I call complete BS on your claim.

yuan wrote:

The only way we can prevent idiots like him from being elected and perverting our democracy is by implementing strict voter ID laws, stringent voter registration anti-fraud tests, yearly redistricting by a panel of elected officials and their campaign staff, and making anyone who commits a statutory offence ineligible for the vote!

Ad we need more laws and/or SCOTUS decisions affirming that money is speech.

The Gini was brought up again as if its rise were a recent phenomenon (i.e. blame the Fed/QE).

There is a good in-depth article in the New Yorker covering the subject.

Why Inequality Persists in America - The New Yorker

... The evidence that income inequality in the United States has been growing for decades and is greater than in any other developed democracy is not much disputed. It is widely known and widely studied. Economic inequality has been an academic specialty at least since Gini first put chalk to chalkboard. ...
It might be that people have been studying inequality in all the wrong places. A few years ago, two scholars of comparative politics, Alfred Stepan, at Columbia, and the late Juan J. Linz—numbers men—tried to figure out why the United States has for so long had much greater income inequality than any other developed democracy. Because this disparity has been more or less constant, the question doesn’t lend itself very well to historical analysis. Nor is it easily subject to the distortions of nostalgia. But it does lend itself very well to comparative analysis.

Stepan and Linz identified twenty-three long-standing democracies with advanced economies. Then they counted the number of veto players in each of those twenty-three governments. (A veto player is a person or body that can block a policy decision. Stepan and Linz explain, “For example, in the United States, the Senate and the House of Representatives are veto players because without their consent, no bill can become a law.”) More than half of the twenty-three countries Stepan and Linz studied have only one veto player; most of these countries have unicameral parliaments. A few countries have two veto players; Switzerland and Australia have three. Only the United States has four. Then they made a chart, comparing Gini indices with veto-player numbers: the more veto players in a government, the greater the nation’s economic inequality. This is only a correlation, of course, and cross-country economic comparisons are fraught, but it’s interesting.

Then they observed something more. Their twenty-three democracies included eight federal governments with both upper and lower legislative bodies. Using the number of seats and the size of the population to calculate malapportionment, they assigned a “Gini Index of Inequality of Representation” to those eight upper houses, and found that the United States had the highest score: it has the most malapportioned and the least representative upper house. These scores, too, correlated with the countries’ Gini scores for income inequality: the less representative the upper body of a national legislature, the greater the gap between the rich and the poor.

The growth of inequality isn’t inevitable. But, insofar as Americans have been unable to adopt measures to reduce it, the numbers might seem to suggest that the problem doesn’t lie with how Americans treat one another’s kids, as lousy as that is. It lies with Congress.

justaskin wrote:

they haven't quite got the kinks out of the holodeck yet, RE

When I started in the software business (1973), it was considered highly unlikely that a program could ever beat a chess master. Fifteen years later...

sportsfan wrote:

Okay, RE, I've got to ask. What class of jobs do you see becoming obsolete if augmented reality ever becomes reality?

I expect "high-touch" jobs to be degraded first. The expertise of a local realtor is highly devalued if I can "conference" in my expert from anywhere with full sense awareness.

The same is true for your run of the mill physician whose primary asset is proximity.

Proximity, which is still a major value proposition today, won't be of significant value tomorrow. A HUGE change and unavoidable.

Sorry, I got to go.

emergency hotdog wrote:

and productivity will skyrocket. you'll wear the ar device as a tool to help you work with others. meanwhile, in the cloud, the machines are watching your every move. those 15-30 (sometimes 45 minute) smoke breaks will be much harder to hide. Same with the hours per day people spend looking at facebook and twitter on their phones.

Exactly. This marks the next step in corporate monitoring. First it was keyboard, then system, followed by GPS monitoring, Now whoever is your Brother will be with you in YOUR reality.

Great to see you sportsfan. I missed you.

emergency hotdog wrote:

been watching them. looks really cool but i can't find much info about them or their product. i'd like to see the hardware. looks like facebook threw 2 billion down the tubes with oculus - it makes everybody sick after about 15 minutes of use. that's sorta embarrassing. the htc vive looks like it will be freaking awesome.

I am interested in the general purpose applicability of these developments.

For instance, today many jobs are thought to be safe from outsourcing because they involve "high-touch". Think realtors. With augmented reality a whole other class of jobs, up the food chain, becomes obsolete.

sportsfan wrote:

Which direction has she selected for your books?

Great to see you. I missed you.

josap wrote:

That would give me nightmares.

With wearables (iWatch, etc.) this will soon be "reality".

Why worry about towers?

Reality becoming surreal (augmented). Google already invested $542 million in this hyper-reality company.

Just another day in the office at Magic Leap - YouTube

Magic Leap demo promises to transform offices into augmented-reality games -

What if you could transform your office into a steampunk robot shoot-‘em-up video game?

That’s what mysterious, though buzzworthy, augmented-reality company Magic Leap is proposing via a surprise YouTube clip released Friday. The clip is an intriguing indication of what augmented-reality gaming could soon look like, in what is already a watershed year for the nascent technology.

$[]Rob Dawg wrote:

RE wrote:

Well, well, well. A little research and what do I find? The chart you posted is NOT from the study you referenced!


You substituted the chart under false pretenses. That should be obvious to any reader. This is why you didn't post the link.

I repeat, you are utterly dishonest!

Rob Dawg wrote:

No. You said and I quote:

You have the audacity to equate the scientific value proposition of a chart from an unattributed denier website with a research letter from very reputable sources:

You made a mistake in fact and serious breach of civility. In short you were wrong. Now doubly wrong because you "stand."

Well, well, well. A little research and what do I find? The chart you posted is NOT from the study you referenced!

Here is your original link: 

And here is the chart from the Cook paper:

The full PDF is here. The chart is on page 2.

Check out the difference between the two especially around year 2000 on the far right.

NO apology forthcoming!!

Rob Dawg wrote:

Long-Term Aridity Changes in the Western United States

Only 965 cites. What a lame lash out.

Thanks for the link but I stand by what I said.

The linked paper is from 2004, at east 11 years of an increasingly severe drought behind the assessment of the newer study.

Was the age of the study the reason why you didn't link it?

The western United States is experiencing a severe multiyear drought that is unprecedented in some hydroclimatic records. Using gridded drought reconstructions that cover most of the western United States over the past 1200 years, we show that this drought pales in comparison to an earlier period of elevated aridity and epic drought in AD 900 to 1300, an interval broadly consistent with the Medieval Warm Period. If elevated aridity in the western United States is a natural response to climate warming, then any trend toward warmer temperatures in the future could lead to a serious long-term increase in aridity over western North America.

Rob Dawg wrote:

adornosghost wrote:

These observations from the paleoclimate record suggest that high temperatures have combined with the low but not yet exceptional precipitation deficits to create the worst short-term drought of the last millennium for the state of California. 

What fools do you think most people here are?

You have the audacity to equate the scientific value proposition of a chart from an unattributed denier website with a research letter from very reputable sources:

Department of Geography, Environment and Society, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA

Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA

You are not only superficial but utterly dishonest.

Jackdawracy wrote:

Any news on whether Frack It Backed Securities will be bought up by the Fed en masse?

From what I remember, that would entail a change to the Federal Reserve Act. So a confident no IMO.

JP wrote:

I assume you are also part of the vast conspiracy to cycle through the progression of "now you need a mainframe" ... "now you need a personal computing device" ... "now you need centalized computing"... ad infinitum.

I was in need of revenue. So what can I say... Wink

But seriously, when I did tuning, client/server was hot. Most of the shops with serious performance issues were hot on the trail of spending vast sums on bandwidth to resolve them while often completely ignoring the real culprit, latency.

With the "intelligent client" issuing lots of SQL calls, hardly any system would scale. Duhhh.

For the techies on the board. What any performance tuner always knew and here we are. It's back to the future in a revised form of "central computing", i.e. mainframes.

The PC Is Dead. Long Live the PC! - Datamation

... In a way, I think this is the way all personal computer purchases should have always been handled because good craftspeople generally get some say in their tools. The best mechanics, for example, own their own high-end tools which they take from job to job.

Recently, the growth of file sizes has begun to stress networks. This and the fear of a Sony-like hacking event have combined to encourage companies to start looking for a different solution particularly when workstation users are geographically far apart. It can take hours to move massive files between locations, and during that time, they can get out of sync if two groups are working on different versions of the file at the same time. That results in the need to go through some kind of a regression process to sync up again, adding days and months to a process that generally is already too long and expensive.

These firms needed a product that put the processing next to the data and while still allowing the engineers to be remote. This arrangement would eliminate the problems of file transfer and offer better security. If you don’t need to copy a file, IT can reasonably block that function making theft of these files far more difficult.

arthur_dent wrote:

you have to get out more, the McKinsey study. Its been posted several times, but apparently does not rise to your standard.(best gallic shrug).

Worldwide yes. But as McKinsey acknowledges, the U.S. has IMPROVED!

So do you hail the U.S. approach?

arthur_dent wrote:

nothing to do with it. If I see credit/income stop accelerating, then I'll say, hmmm, maybe these guys know what they're doing.

That is EXACTLY what has been happening. Yet you remain in complete denial.

For the nth+2 time...

Graph: All Sectors; Credit Market Instruments; Liability, Level / Gross Domestic Product - FRED - St. Louis Fed

josap wrote:

Wages haven’t been this crucial to U.S. economy in half a century

That is not a sign of easy credit. Quite to the contrary.

Rob Dawg wrote:

The guardian has a circulation of 175,000. Why do we even pay attention to their drivel?

Are you actually positing that circulation/popularity is a reflection of accuracy and quality?

I'll remind you next time you play the "liberal" MSM card.

aClem wrote:

I had an Osborne 2, wrote a program to teach myself to type, which was one of the smartest things I ever did. Not the Osborne, not the program, but learning to touch type.

I was tempted but lack of graphics, Z-80 (non 286) and small floppies stopped me.

Rob Dawg wrote:

64k pages held back programming more than registry.

Not at all and page size is usually hardware dependent. As a programmer, unless you are at the system/OS layer, you are isolated from 99%+ of page size issues.

sm_landlord wrote:

Well, at about that time, I remember adding a second bank of 64K to my Z-80 S100 system. So 640K actually did seem like a lot in a world where you ran one instance of Wordstar and maybe one or two small ISRs to put a clock on the screen or something.

My pride and joy was a 768KB, 800*400 graphics, 1.2MB floppy Victor 9000.

I used GW Basic for graphics and did buffer management prototypes with PASCAL dynamic arrays.

Hail Niklaus Wirth.

Blackhalo wrote:

Still a fine and believable example of a monopoly, using monopoly power, to set a standard that negatively impacts an industry for a decade, whether he said it in real life, or not.

Agree. Attack Gates for highly dubious business practices but not for an infantile misunderstanding of tech trends.

Comment by RE from thread 'Bernanke Testimony Preview'

EngineerJim wrote:

"640K ought to be enough for anybody.” -Bill Gates (1981)

A typical, unverified and very likely wrong quote. Silly.

The '640K' quote won't go away -- but did Gates really say it? | Computerworld

A claim that a profane variation of the quote was included by author Stephen Levy in his seminal book Hackers turns out to be untrue. And in March, the Bits technology blog published by The New York Times reported that the chief editor of The Yale Book of Quotations had tried without success to verify the quote. Fred Shapiro, the editor in question, said last week that he's still convinced the comment was apocryphal, despite receiving about 100 responses to his plea for information.

greenchutes wrote:

Honestly, if the GINI here and emro here and in Sushi after a decade of ZIRP here and two there ain't enough content for you, none of us can help.

Who is "us"?

Can you actually coherently debate my post that you responded to without hiding behind motherhood and apple pie.

Otherwise, why waste my time?

greenchutes wrote:

Now you've got the rentiers on the run

... a few more years of ZIRP and a clean double of GDP with national debt should do the trick.


As usual, you shoot from the hip without content but laden with straw men.

However, I missed the veritable Nixon gold reference. That would have made it almost perfectly repeatable.

It's a pity, you showed promise a long time ago.

Pigged JP wrote:

sm_landlord wrote:

I wonder if a rate hike would actually improve things at this point.

Wouldn't it be a laugh if raising interest rates turned out to be stimulative because of all the pent-up savings suddenly earning interest and hence disposable income?

I did a quick analysis a while ago.

Obviously higher interest rates than the market requires involves excess money printing which is stimulative.

The immediate beneficiaries are savings account holders of which corporations have the largest balances followed by the top 10%.

As time goes by and treasury rates, mortgages and consumer credit facilities go through interest rate adjustment, the benefits of increased cost/printing accrue more and more to treasury holders and creditors (the top 1%).

The balance in my little spreadsheet turned decisively away from savings account holders towards creditors after 18 months.

As interest rates rise, investment likely slows, reducing competitiveness and in turn jobs.

Artificially high interest rates disproportionally benefit the rentier.

Pigged JP wrote:

Out of curiousity: Who were the biggest beneficiaries by that measure? (Finance?)

I'll check it out over the next few days. Manufacturing has to rank near the top as well.

This is what prompted my post:

Hourly Earnings vs Corporate Profits - Inflation Adjusted

sum luk wrote:

RE wrote:

Ever heard of DOT-COM and looked at its effects? 

And the biggest beneficiaries of the tech boom weren't tech companies as can be seen in overall corporate profitability.

arthur_dent wrote:

No amount of new credit can change the basic rate of technological improvements, that's just a meatware limitation.

Please... Ever heard of DOT-COM and looked at its effects?

Blackhalo wrote:

Literalism kills the joke, gramps.

Is it dilettantes that joke about subjects they don't understand?

Like mixing up SAP and SAS?

Blackhalo wrote:

How many punch-cards does it take to fill a K of RAM?

Just for kicks.

1K=1024 bytes

1 card=80 bytes

12 cards total

I worked extensively in 370 assembly, PL/I and COBOL on mainframes. Later even in C.

Rob Dawg wrote:

Double fucking lame.

lol but you claim French heritage as well...

lawyerliz wrote:

My hub is 1/4 French and i have a French name with an unpronounced t.

Same ancestral history here except it is the missing accent on the vowel.

Going for the triple.