really no one?

With respect Sic, you have a tendency to post some really oddball things. I'm just going to guess that this guy is saying something that can be summed up by the statement "bad times are coming" - which isn't exactly news.

If he's saying something more extreme, then I'd be interested in what all the other economists are saying. There are a handful of wacky-assed "biologists" who support Intelligent Design and "doctors" who think vaccines will kill you and 'climate scientists' who think Global Warming is all a myth - since I'm a layman in these subjects, I'm kinda going to go with the opinion voiced by the vast majority of the field in the absence of some serious proof

Went to go check. A couple of points:

* Someone who teaches economics at Berkeley - which isn't exactly known as a business school
* Democracy Now! - also, not exactly an unbiased news source

"Undeveloped" nations exhibit the characteristics shown here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underdeveloped_countries

I'm having a hard time seeing us dropping into that bucket anytime soon.

I'm sorry I had trouble with the link, where arnt we going anytime soon?

I also have not watched since I am in the library, but I can guess it went something like "Western countries imperialism exploit global south democracy in the workplace unions fractional reserve banking is evil homophobic patriarchy sustainability George Bush."

I'll finish up my work as soon as I can to check how accurate I was.

Democracy Now! is fairly unbiased. At least compared to the 'mainstream media' it is, anyway.

Your source of that information, JECE?

Generally speaking I distrust any organization that feels that the suffix Now! is needed

or to be specific, I distrust their impartiality

Democracy Now! receives no corparate funding, it's designed to be impartial and not hide the facts. Don't right sources off as biased just because they tell more facts or even draw conclusions from these. What makes you distrust Democracy Now! broadcasting? As for the 'Now!', part if it's name, yeah, it's weird, but so what?

I distrust news organizations that draw conclussions on principle. Report the facts to me and let me draw my own fucking conclussions.

Draugnar: Then never watch the news on regular TV stations in the United States. They always, and I mean always, leave out key facts. And they give you conclusions as well, whether you notice them or not.

Don't worry. I don't trust them either. Rigged pickup trucks exploding supposedly as a result of a crash. Paid for "news stories". I don't trust any of them whether they be conservative (Fox is fair and balanced, yeah right) or liberal.

@stratgos: "There are a handful of wacky-assed "biologists" who support Intelligent Design and "doctors" who think vaccines will kill you and 'climate scientists' who think Global Warming is all a myth "

What's funny is that I would have sworn that that sentence was going to end like this:
There are a handful of wacky-assed "biologists" who support Intelligent Design and "doctors" who think vaccines will kill you and 'climate scientists' who think Global Warming is real AND man-made.

Because honestly, it's the warmers who are analogous to the creationists on that argument. Start with a conclusion, and tailor the evidence to fit it, ignore evidence that doesn't, discount and demonize those who disagree.

But I get that your point was that the "vast majority agree" part. I'm just glad Darwin and Galileo didn't defer to the vast majority of their times.

Did this economist really say that earthquakes and volcanoes were a part of global warming? His whole spiel seemed pretty silly and alarmist.

*Technically* volcanoes can contribute to climate change, but they tend to have a *cooling* effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1883_eruption_of_Krakatoa#Global_climate

I realize that, but that didn't seem like what he said. He made it sound like the increase in earthquakes and volcanoes (which is nonexistent) was a result of global warming. If he can make a ridiculous claim like that I don't know how valid any of his other arguments could be, since tying earthquakes to CO2 levels easily could be the result of lazy thinking.

Oh, I can make that argument! Watch:

Global warming makes people dislike fossil fuels
A dislike of fossil fuels leads to a desire for more renewables
One of the renewables that has more interest is geothermal
One of the downsides of geothermals is the risk of increased seismic activity.

Therefore, global warming causes earthquakes. Q.E.D.

Assuming that using geothermal power causes increased seismic activity, which seems wildly unlikely. I get the joke, though.

Some of the newer technologies can have a tendency - not huge earthquakes, but some small ones - I can't find the link, but there was something in the Economist a few weeks ago....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_geothermal_systems#Induced_seismicity

Still not at all what he was talking about, and more akin to a sinkhole forming when you pump out all the ground water than humanity altering the movement of the earth's crust.

so then no real comments on what he was saying?

@Sic - with respect, I'm not feeling he's an expert with a view that is so overwhelmingly well researched that I'm going to waste 20 minutes looking at him talk - so if you want to summarize, I'll discuss it (without blaming you for his viewpoints), but I'm not feeling an overwhelming desire to listen to him.

I listened to all 28 minutes. I thought it was interesting, and I agree with some of his arguments (wealth is not the key to happiness) but not others (like the environmental gloom-and-doomism). The one major point I thought he was really talking about throughout the interview seemed to be not that America is undeveloping, but that there's a huge disconnect between Academia and much of the rest of society, and that there is a lot of stuff you can't learn from an Ivory Tower. I wholeheartedly agree on that point.

thanks you tolstoy.

jesus, it can really be a pain in the ass to get some simple feedback huh?

yes, people are so unreasonable. What exactly does this thread have to do with diplomacy? or is it just pure unadulterated entertainment?

@sic - so if I asked you to read something you were pretty confident was going to be biased and a waste of your time - say a book that argued that tax cuts for the rich would magically fix the budget deficit - how high would it be on your list of priorities?

It isn't unreasonable for us to assume that something you post is going to be similar to stuff you've posted in the past, and 'poorly researched and biased' can describe more than a bit of what you tend to bring to the table.

So if its a biased waste of your time, why did you even bother posting in this thread?
It seems just about everything you posted is basically saying how biased it is (before actually watching it) and what a waste of your time it is.

Thats like a sign on a roller coaster that says 'caution, low sign'

What do you want me to do, Sic? You post crap that you acknowledge is flawed after people point out errors, then expect then to come back to the well time and time again? You wanted a response, you got it - if you didn't want feedback, you shouldn't have friggin requested it *several times*.

but your not giving me feedback. You're just telling me your reasons for not giving me feedback. If you think I only post crap, then why on earth do you always comment on it?
just ignore it.

Sic, you wrote the following on Friday: "so then no real comments on what he was saying?"

I interpreted this statement to read as "why is no one commenting on what he is saying", and I answered this question.

If you want people who don't feel it's a good investment of time to ignore your stuff, it behooves you not to bitch when they do exactly that.

So, I will refrain from commenting on your posts if you will refrain from bitching about the fact I'm not commenting on your posts.

It's not about you "commenting on my posts" this sint fucking facebook.
Its that the thread was meant to be a disscussion of the things he said. yet your first post was about how watching it would be a waste of time. thats just unnessessary. You could have made the same statement by not posting at all.

"Thats like a sign on a roller coaster that says 'caution, low sign' "

lmfao - fucking brilliant!! I'm going to use that.

I must warn you, I think I ripped it off looney toons

Draugnar: Then why not go with those who are at least sincere in their efforts to inform you?

Meh, the civil war continuing is more likely to happen

loony toons was often brilliant