the IDIOT

this reads like early versions of the wikipedia Arrested Development page:

In linguistics, productivity is the degree to which native speakers use a particular grammatical process, especially in word formation. Since use to produce novel (new, non-established) structures is the clearest proof of usage of a grammatical process, the evidence most often appealed to as establishing productivity is the appearance of novel forms of the type the process leads one to expect, and many people would limit the definition offered above to exclude use of a grammatical process that does not result in a novel structure. […]

ahhh!

[…] Unless things change, the post office will run out of money by the end of the fiscal year in October, Postmaster General Patrick R. Donahoe told the House Oversight subcommittee on the postal service.

Donahoe said that as of Sept. 30 his agency will owe the federal government a payment of $5.5 billion to fund medical costs, in advance, for future retirees, and in November it will need to make a $1.3 billion payment for worker’s compensation.

“The Postal Service will not have the cash available to make both of these payments. We need legislation this year to address that fact,” he said. […more]

“legislation”? repeal the criminal “private express statutes” and let the wholly unconstitutional USP”S” fraud disintegrate naturally, albeit hundreds of years late.

only tools arrogant and sophistic enough to “run for congress” could twist “The Congress shall have Power […] To establish Post Offices and post Roads” into “The Congress shall have Power To prohibit competition with its Post Offices”. (more…)

appears some people really care if saif gaddafi’s “doctoral” thesis (whoever wrote it) uses unattributed verbiage from outside sources. (more…)

wikipedia “economics” bullshit that has been worshiped via massage and basically extant since 13 september 2010:

The four basic laws of supply and demand are ^[1]

1. If demand increases and supply remains unchanged then higher equilibrium price and quantity.
2. If demand decreases and supply remains the same then lower equilibrium price and quantity.
3. If supply increases and demand remains unchanged then lower equilibrium price and higher quantity.
4. If supply decreases and demand remains the same then higher price and lower quantity.

(more…)

lew rockwell’s finally gone around the bend, or bill rounds is paying to regularly serve up promo shit for his “How to Vanish” empire, much like the “how to be a man even though you never will” pussies lew was shilling for. this made my night: (more…)

check these two article leads:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure

Market failure is a concept within economic theory wherein the allocation of goods and services by a free market is not efficient.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_failure:

Government failure (or non-market failure) is the public sector analogy to market failure and occurs when a government intervention causes a more inefficient allocation of goods and resources than would occur without that intervention.

“non-market failure”! WTF. gets worse though:

Likewise, the government’s failure to intervene in a market failure that would result in a socially preferable mix of output is referred to as passive Government failure (Weimer and Vining, 2004).

wikipedia blows hobo nutsack.

watch the steady dance away from reality in this typically bootlicking article from war street journal:

The Federal Reserve spent the past three decades getting inflation low and keeping it there. But as the U.S. economy struggles and flirts with the prospect of deflation, some central bank officials are publicly broaching a controversial idea: lifting inflation above the Fed’s informal target.

The rationale is that getting inflation up even temporarily would push “real” interest rates—nominal rates minus inflation—down, encouraging consumers and businesses to save less and to spend or invest more.

blah blah. now search the article for “debasement”, “devaluation”, “fiat”, or — a brief time waste — “counterfeiting”. the very foul nature of “legal tender” and aggressive fractional reserve banking is ignored through apparently bilateral writer/reader agreement to embrace fiction.

big question: if this is the go-to daily paper for the supposed crop cream in world finance, when did world finance become such an embarrassment of twaddle pushers and receivers? don’t miss this:

Both inside and outside the Fed, though, such an approach is controversial. It could undermine the anti-inflation credibility the Fed won three decades ago by raising interest rates to double-digits to beat back late-1970s price surges. […]

anti-inflation credibility. (more…)

re: Money Should Be Boring

Posted by David Kramer on September 18, 2010 09:38 PM

Charles—considering that only deceased people are legally allowed to be depicted on U.S. currency, is that One Dollar Bill with the face of Obama on it a premonition of something?

his blabbering ass links to an article regarding only coins.

Only the Dead May Appear on U.S. Coins by Law

Nowadays, it is federal law that no living man or woman can appear on the U.S. coinage. Presidents must be dead for at least two years before they are eligible for inclusion in the Presidential Dollar series. I wonder if Americans will ever find a public figure who is so revered by the populace that they would allow a living person to grace the circulating coinage. I wouldn’t bet on it!

looks like a wikipedia editor. buffoon dave, link to or quote the “law” or don’t bother.

coke’s big blunder. right. i’ve never believed that, and i think only spoon-fed monkeys would assert it. this “blunder” was one of the largest free-press handouts in history, led consumers into thinking they were seated directly at coke board meetings, and provided a handy excuse for a company to anoint its newly-HFCS‘d prime product “classic” — the product return “you” demanded.

yeah, stupid move.

attempted refutations of the possibility are soft, centering on the tactic of the horrible snopes.com — bastard cousin of the wikipedia scam and “mythbusters”-idjit types.

oh, that glorious wikipedia — quoted authoritatively by mushbrains over the world.

again i attempt to correct the stupid: if the wikipedia article you’re quoting as an authority is properly written, it will list its sources, and those sources (preferably stripped to their origin), at best, are what you should quote. original research is, with only extremely rare exception, prohibited by wikipedia policy.

me, writing the author of a post lew rockwell pointed to as a supposed refutation of helicopter bernanke:

"Even wikipedia".

absent referral to the direct source(s) that any properly written wikipedia article must have for any assertion (thereby bypassing wikipedia, except perhaps to say it's where you found your source), "wikipedia" is essentially a fancy way of saying "someone no one's ever heard of", while pretending it bears great weight.

then, in perspective, "Even [someone you've never heard of]" says blah blah? wow!

it marks you.

wikipedia supposedly serves as a beacon of free marketry, yet articles on politics/economics remain overwhelmingly statist, sucky, inaccurate, and anti-liberty. example:

Price fixing is an agreement between business competitors to sell the same product or service at the same price. In general, it is an agreement intended to ultimately push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all the sellers. Price-fixing can also involve any agreement to fix, peg, discount or stabilize prices. The principal feature is any agreement on price, whether expressed or implied. For the buyer, meanwhile, the practice results in a phenomenon similar to price gouging.

Price fixing requires a conspiracy between two or more sellers; the purpose is to coordinate pricing for mutual benefit at the expense of buyers. [...]

(more…)

according to the fools who composed and monitor the wikipedia article on bigotry:

A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his own, and bigotry is the corresponding ideology.

so according to these dumbasses, if i’m intolerant of, for example, benito mussolini’s lifestyle — his differing from mine — i’m therefore a bigot.

“bigot” is becoming nearly as overused and little understood as “racist” and “homophobic” — all favored widgets from the toolbox of the passive-aggressive asshole/moron (i.e., average modern human). not by mere coincidence, the normal spewer of “bigot” is a bigot. same with “racist”.

longtime LRC poser ass ryan mcmaken today implies that there’s significance in “the grammar used when referring to the UAE at the wikipedia site” — specifically the plural part of the phrase “the UAE were known as”. (more…)

wikipedia remains both the best and worst of recent information experiments, testament to the core failure of the average human — neurotic disinclination to question bullshit when presented with the desired wrapping. (more…)