Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy Linky? (to something relevent debunking the points in the OP article.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constable Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 if it was eloquent it wouldn't be about 10 pages long it's awful (I like the wikipedia bit about DG attending debauched parties at university - debauched parties at university, well I never, hang on, it was as part of an exclusivge rich-kids debauched party dinner club, err that's really wild then) You don't care much for Guppy, fair enough. But what's awful about the article (content, not length)? I quite like him - society needs its rebels, wherever they come from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Linky? (to something relevent debunking the points in the OP article.) http://www.google.com/search?q=macroeconomics&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a#q=macroeconomics&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbm=shop&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wf&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=746d52669187352e&biw=1252&bih=643 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laughing Gnome Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 http://www.google.com/search?q=macroeconomics&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a#q=macroeconomics&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbm=shop&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wf&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=746d52669187352e&biw=1252&bih=643 Economists?!!? And you think Guppy is discredited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 http://www.google.com/search?q=macroeconomics&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a#q=macroeconomics&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbo=u&tbm=shop&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wf&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=746d52669187352e&biw=1252&bih=643 Try again, this time being relevent. All you've done so far is play the man and not the ball and be very vague. To me it looks like grousing dipshittery due to a VI on your part, or bluster now you've been called on a knee jerk position. I am sure readers of the thread cna make up their own minds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whalewatcher Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Perhaps using a 'dodgy' mouthpiece is a way of getting these ideas out into the field without startling the herd too much. Can't understand why, if he 'gets it', he still lives in Cape Town. Not a place to be when TSHTF. That's why I moved away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 You don't care much for Guppy, fair enough. But what's awful about the article (content, not length)? very flowery writing, suggests he hasn't written anything serious in a very long time about third para: In an article that was published some months ago (see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/7273332/Darius-Guppy-our-world-balances-on-a-sea-of-debt.html). I described how the activities of a former fellow-inmate, a master counterfeiter known as ‘Tommy’, and the banks are in essence the same – the manufacturing of money out of nothing. this paragraph is unfounded, because democratically elected governments and their appointed central banks/regulators have power to limit capital flows - he is making the common error of assuming there is some sort of demonic banking cartel, there isn't, they aren't that smart, the fact that GB (USA) and GB (UK) were even less smart was just a sign of the times and after that, the rest of his argument does not logically follow this is tangential - but if his argument was any good he would have worked at clarfying it rather than the clear obfuscation he has gone for, worthy of any amoral banker, granted, but a b*llocks approach nonetheless I quite like him - society needs its rebels, wherever they come from. I suppose so, he IS sort of entertaining, but largely just a medicocre crook who fantasises that there is some higher-level of crookdom that he has been left out of, there maybe, but there is far less of it about than he hopes for Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Try again, this time being relevent. All you've done so far is play the man and not the ball and be very vague. To me it looks like grousing dipshittery due to a VI on your part, or bluster now you've been called on a knee jerk position. I am sure readers of the thread cna make up their own minds. it was bl**dy relevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 it was bl**dy relevant Ok, we've had 1) An appeal to lack of authority of the author 2) irrelevencies as defense and now 3) assertions of previous nonsense with swearing. Do you have anything to add that is actually relevent and not ad hominem, or are you going to carry on coming out with crap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Ok, we've had 1) An appeal to lack of authority of the author 2) irrelevencies as defense and now 3) assertions of previous nonsense with swearing. Do you have anything to add that is actually relevent and not ad hominem, or are you going to carry on coming out with crap? I seem to recall you implying I'm a a dipsh*t the only irrelevancy is your own utter miscomprehension of the basics, in this case Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Constable Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Ok, we've had 1) An appeal to lack of authority of the author 2) irrelevencies as defense and now 3) assertions of previous nonsense with swearing. Do you have anything to add that is actually relevent and not ad hominem, or are you going to carry on coming out with crap? you have a way with words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Sadman Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 It's a several hundred word indictment of the banking system as a whole, specifically mentions the fact that it's an international debt based system that is failing and your response is this guff about tories? For the OP - the guy pretty much nailed it. The fact that such a thing is in a MSM publiction is fairly astounding. All i'm saying is he clearly has a partisan motive. Damages his credibility when you realise he wants Brown back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 self indulgent verbose guff written by a dodgy attention seeker, printed in a newspaper that no-one reads +2 It's all a load of pub economics, written by someone with a massive chip of their shoulder that society have not recognised them i.e. paid them, for being the genius. As you get older and move around you constantly bump into these sorts of people - sent to a private school by their parents then go a do whatever low effort/high reward job that inevitably crashes down round their ears - Lloyds name in the mid to late 80s, hedge fund in the 00s. Anyone remember that Channel 4 play from years ago - Good At Games (or something similar). Besides if my ancestors where going to name a fish afterh them I would have insisted on somehting more manyly like a conger eel or a sahrk. Guppies are gay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rentforlife Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 couldnt get past the first paragraph - could someone with more ability not to fall asleep at their PC give me a summary of what this story was about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 All i'm saying is he clearly has a partisan motive. Damages his credibility when you realise he wants Brown back. The labour and tory stuff is what? A paragraph on the back of some very astute analysis of international debt based money, FRB and compound interest in a finite world. It also doesn't matter how partisan he is, what he says is either right or wrong. Most of it is right. No one who has wanted to diagree with him has answered any of his points, everyone (so far) has attacked the man himself or gone after some minro quibble. You might as dismiss it for having bad grammar or being written in something other than helvetica for all the relevence such things have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 couldnt get past the first paragraph - could someone with more ability not to fall asleep at their PC give me a summary of what this story was about Sure. Debt based capitalism is why the economy is so ******ed, the neo liberal consensus is damaging cobblers, banking is a pathetic fraud and bankers are all fraudsters to a man, politicians of all stripes are their bitches and the system of exponential growth must fail due to the physical constraints of a finite world and it's just a matter of when the system ends in a catastrophy, not if. i.e. It's a very long "what is money, anyway?" thread on HPC, but in the MSM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 or gone after some minro quibble. like the first few paragraphs and then, following on from that, the entire logical basis of the article Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 like the first few paragraphs and then, following on from that, the entire logical basis of the article Look, do your cause a favour - take some paragrpahs put of the article and specifically go through them showing how they are illogical or counter factual. Just stting there going "it isn't so" over and over makes you look like a crazy cat lady or something. Especially when I keep kicking your **** over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Look, do your cause a favour - take some paragrpahs put of the article and specifically go through them showing how they are illogical or counter factual. Just stting there going "it isn't so" over and over makes you look like a crazy cat lady or something. Especially when I keep kicking your **** over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 Sure. Debt based capitalism is why the economy is so ******ed, the neo liberal consensus is damaging cobblers, banking is a pathetic fraud and bankers are all fraudsters to a man, politicians of all stripes are their bitches and the system of exponential growth must fail due to the physical constraints of a finite world and it's just a matter of when the system ends in a catastrophy, not if. i.e. It's a very long "what is money, anyway?" thread on HPC, but in the MSM. that's a good precis, shame the original article was so waffly world isn't finite, there's a start, as economic growth isn't predicated on resource growth; and whilst fractional reserve banking holds risks, this is an argument FOR regulation not against - currency is indisputably needed, ergo central banks are too, and yup they get things wrong, but doesn't mean they aren't needed; to argue against central banks is a bit like arguing against traffic signals, and multifaceted to boot (you get accidents either way and sometimes you get less when there aren't any, but largely you need them) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 that's a good precis, shame the original article was so waffly world isn't finite, there's a start, as economic growth isn't predicated on resource growth; and whilst fractional reserve banking holds risks, this is an argument FOR regulation not against - currency is indisputably needed, ergo central banks are too, and yup they get things wrong, but doesn't mean they aren't needed; to argue against central banks is a bit like arguing against traffic signals, and multifaceted to boot (you get accidents either way and sometimes you get less when there aren't any, but largely you need them) Well, economci growth isn't based on resource growth, but GDP growth is, FRB banking is a fraud, it doesn't "old risks" it's a complete predation, regulation ha snever worked, ever, currency no one wants (we know this because there are laws making us use it), central banks are useless engines of theft no one wants or needs bar the clique that runs them and roads with no traffic signalling are much safer than ones with them. Apart from being completely wrong about everything, not bad. You actually managed a proper response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 ...and roads with no traffic signalling are much safer than ones with them.... Apart from being completely wrong about everything, not bad. You actually managed a proper response. if you say so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 if you say so No, factually. I love facts, me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si1 Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 No, factually. I love facts, me. oh of course Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 13, 2011 Share Posted June 13, 2011 oh of course Glad you agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.