Still Hating America.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I believe Sebby started arguing with a line in the Washington Post article ...which observed that there is a general consensus among economists that income inequality is increasing, .... I agree with it.

That was the crux of the argument (which I understood) even though you blathered on about other irrelevent stuff.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop There is such a consensus, notwithstanding that you can frame and examine the issue from different perspectives, using different definitions and statistics.

This is where you are wrong. What I posted and what Sebby posted totally showed this assertion about the consensus to be in error. The statement is totally absurd because the term "income inequality is increasing" is too vague in itself to even have a consensus form around it.

[Spanky]

Looks like next weekend's California Party Republican convention may have a significant impact on the Presidential primary.


Conservatives Move To Tweak McCain, Schwarzenegger Primary


Disdainful of party heretics like Sen. John McCain, conservative California Republicans are devising a plan to short-circuit the early presidential primary when they meet this weekend in Sacramento. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger says a Feb. 5 California primary would make the state a player in national politics once again, but political analysts believe it also would give a big advantage to established candidates like McCain.
Assemblyman Chuck DeVore and his conservative colleagues are drafting a bylaw change that would allow Republican Party Central Committee members to pick a big portion of their presidential delegates in early February 2008, instead of just holding a statewide election among the entire party. The state GOP leadership is generally more conservative than the rest of the party, and such a rule change would certainly dilute McCain's support and quell whatever momentum he had gained.
"The activists on the state central committee here have still not forgiven him (McCain) for the McCain-Feingold assault on the First Amendment nor do they appear comfortable with his incoherent philosophical agenda," DeVore told the Washington Times. "Senator McCain seems to be more a product of the New York Times than of the party of Ronald Reagan."
Rather than spend $90 million on a special statewide election, DeVore told Political Muscle, about 1,600 members of the Central Committee could divide into caucuses and select their presidential delegates during their winter 2008 meeting. They would do this by Congressional district, so that 53 of the party's 165 delegates would be chosen in the critical early weeks of February. The rest would be chosen in June during the regular primary. This, he says, would give California a voice in the early stages of the primary and allow California GOP voters to make a decision as well.
DeVore said he has read the Republican National Committee rules multiple times and "it became very clear to me that it's entirely within our power as a party to change our bylaws to allow a portion of the delegates, or all of them if we wanted to," to be picked at the state convention. DeVore said the presidential primary is really designed to push through a weakening of the state's term limits law in favor of Democratic lawmakers and possibly Schwarzenegger.
"Ninety million dollars is a big cost for a stand-alone election for the sole purpose of allowing people to stay in office longer," DeVore said.
Such a bylaw change would take a 2/3 vote of delegates at next weekend's California Republican Party convention. If approved, it might give some Republican lawmakers less incentive to vote for Schwarzenegger's early presidential primary when it comes up. But if the Legislature does approve a full-blown Feb. 5 primary, DeVore said his bylaw change would not be implemented.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If I want to fix the roof on my house, it's going to cost some money, but paying a roofer a lot of money doesn't necessarily mean he's going to do a good job.

If you look really hard for a good roofer, and if the market for roofers is efficient, then the best ones will cost the most money.

Conservatives hate that sort of market-based thinking, though.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
My favorite scotch went from about $49 a bottle in 1996 to about $119 a bottle now.

I'm just venting.

I got married 11.5 years ago and bought a bottle of 1989 Chateau Margaux for $100. I should've bought a fucking carload.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I got married 11.5 years ago and bought a bottle of 1989 Chateau Margaux for $100. I should've bought a fucking carload.

you should have put the $100 in a fucking carload of Cisco.

[Spanky]

This if funny because I said on Equality of Opportunity Post #10

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Spanky
Yes, liberals believe that more spending equals better schools.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then Ty said:

I know many liberals, and I don't know any who believe that. If I hung with the kind of stupid liberals you hang with, I'd be a Republican activist too.

Then you said:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
If you look really hard for a good roofer, and if the market for roofers is efficient, then the best ones will cost the most money.

Conservatives hate that sort of market-based thinking, though.

Seems that you and Ty are now both arguing a point Ty earlier claimed that all the liberals never make.



Unfortunately what you assert is not the way the market works in education. We put more money and it didn't help. And if you look at at school districts their performance and their income is not related at all. There is a base amount of money you need to get a good result but after that it comes down to standards. An ineficient system, like Californias, will eat up all the money you throw at it and not improve (like happened under Davis).

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Spanky
This if funny because I said on Equality of Opportunity Post #10

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Spanky
Yes, liberals believe that more spending equals better schools.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then Ty said:

I know many liberals, and I don't know any who believe that. If I hung with the kind of stupid liberals you hang with, I'd be a Republican activist too.

Then you said:



Seems that you and Ty are now both arguing a point Ty earlier claimed that all the liberals never make.



Unfortunately what you assert is not the way the market works in education. We put more money and it didn't help. And if you look at at school districts their performance and their income is not related at all. There is a base amount of money you need to get a good result but after that it comes down to standards. An ineficient system, like Californias, will eat up all the money you throw at it and not improve (like happened under Davis).

What I get from this post is that the market for education is inefficient.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
This is where you are wrong. What I posted and what Sebby posted totally showed this assertion about the consensus to be in error.

It "totally" showed that? Huh.

Out of curiousity, did you read any of the stuff Sebby linked to? If so, which?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
If you look really hard for a good roofer, and if the market for roofers is efficient, then the best ones will cost the most money.

Conservatives hate that sort of market-based thinking, though.

Au contraire -- in my experience, they tend to see that wisdom when they are in the market for schooling.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Are Iraqi Sunnis buying weapons to down our helicopters with Saudi money?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
This if funny because I said on Equality of Opportunity Post #10

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Spanky
Yes, liberals believe that more spending equals better schools.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then Ty said:

I know many liberals, and I don't know any who believe that. If I hung with the kind of stupid liberals you hang with, I'd be a Republican activist too.

Then you said:



Seems that you and Ty are now both arguing a point Ty earlier claimed that all the liberals never make.



Unfortunately what you assert is not the way the market works in education. We put more money and it didn't help. And if you look at at school districts their performance and their income is not related at all. There is a base amount of money you need to get a good result but after that it comes down to standards. An ineficient system, like Californias, will eat up all the money you throw at it and not improve (like happened under Davis).

Seems the you remain incapable of recognizing sarcasm where you see it.

Democratic school district, huh?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Au contraire -- in my experience, they tend to see that wisdom when they are in the market for schooling.

What, you think Harvard is better than Bob's Community College and Grille? And that the 20 BB endowment has anything to do with that?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Well, the pentagon guy who called on companies to boycott law firms representing gitmo detainees has resigned

[SlaveNoMore]

Cletus Miller
Lagavulin? That's (relatively) temporary. Prices should come back down in the next couple years.

Lagavulin's still affordable and treading around $80.

I'm talking Macallan 18.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Are Iraqi Sunnis buying weapons to down our helicopters with Saudi money?

Why not? Saudi and Egyptian Sunnis sure brought down a few of our buildings with Saudi money.