<< DENIER DISSED ~ MAIN ~ RANGOON HAS A LEADING FRENCH CHEF? >>

PREDICTIONS REVIEWED

A 1996 column from the Australian’s Alan Wood, not available online:

A draft letter is circulating around Australian economics faculties seeking signatures for an attack on the Howard Government’s fiscal policy.

Its originators are four academic economists: John Nevile of the University of NSW, John Quiggin of James Cook University, Frank Stilwell of Sydney University and Phil O’Hara of Curtin University ...

The letter consists of three paragraphs, which are worth considering in turn. The first paragraph reads:

“The Federal Government’s commitment to reduce expenditure by $8 billion is economically irresponsible. Expenditure cuts of that magnitude will inevitably cause job losses - directly in the public sector and indirectly in the private sector as a result of the downward multiplier effects. There is a strong possibility of precipitating a substantial economic recession.”

Ten years on, we have massive economic growth, no recession, and record lows in unemployment.

The second paragraph of the letter reads:

“The goal of a balanced budget indicates pre-Keynesian economic thinking. It ignores the creative role which fiscal policy can play in economic management, especially in tackling unemployment. Moreover, the expenditure cuts would likely fail to produce a balanced budget anyway because the consequent reduction in jobs and incomes would result in lower tax revenues being generated in the next fiscal year.”

This is just plain wrong.

Wood was right. Regrettably, tax revenues have increased since 1996.

Paragraph three of the letter reads:

“More attention needs to be given to the role of government expenditure on repairing the nation’s rundown infrastructure, creating jobs and fostering industry and regional development. If necessary, increased taxation and other revenue options should be under consideration. Savage expenditure cuts are economically irresponsible and socially damaging.”

As part of Howard’s “savage expenditure cuts”, Quiggin received a one million dollar grant in 2003.

Posted by Tim B. on 12/12/2006 at 07:04 PM
  1. Most politicians have never seen a spending increase they couldn’t justify on the basis of some ostensible “creative” role in fiscal management. Reduced tax rates are inexorably described as resulting in savage cuts to vital government services.

    George Orwell must be dizzy from spinning in his grave so often.

    Posted by Forbes on 2006 12 12 at 07:18 PM • permalink

  2. Completely off-topic, and I’m probably risking a dose of Zulu Spear Retribution.
    But it’s not every day you find a common sense solution to a common problem in your city newspaper.

    Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 12 at 07:20 PM • permalink

  3. If everybody stands on their toes, everybody can see better.

    That’s a fallacy of composition.  It’s all over the political branch of economics.

    What you get, following its recommendations, is perverse consequences.

    That is because all the problems that respond to direct action have already been solved.  What’s left is problems that respond perversely to direct action.

    It’s a law of survival for problems.  The most preverse ones take over the world.

    Which is why conservatives are mostly always right, and leftists are mostly always wrong

    Posted by rhhardin on 2006 12 12 at 07:41 PM • permalink

  4. Swinish

    An excellent suggestion. Problem is, most parents would never agree to it. They’d be hiring child development experts, and suing.

    Posted by JonathanH on 2006 12 12 at 07:43 PM • permalink

  5. Economists are like weathermen: everybody talks about them, but nobody ever smacks one, good and hard.

    Posted by paco on 2006 12 12 at 07:43 PM • permalink

  6. Pump priming may have worked years ago. So Quiggin is now a Keynesian? Really, that lot will choose any theory so long as it is opposite to what the Government is doing.

    Funny how they are silent on the subject of interest rates.

    Posted by Nic on 2006 12 12 at 07:44 PM • permalink

  7. #2

    University of WA child development expert Trevor Parry said the move to make the boys clean the site was positive, but the signs were too harsh and could cause long-term psychological damage.

    Swinish, I’m with you on this. “long term psychological damage” - if the damage switches on the synapses which enable the children to become aware of cause and effect, and responsibility for actions, well and good, it’s a success if you ask me.

    Sometimes they need their precious feelings hurt so that they become aware of the world and their place in it.

    Posted by kae on 2006 12 12 at 08:05 PM • permalink

  8. #2 - The article concludes, “University of WA child development expert Trevor Parry said the move to make the boys clean the site was positive, but the signs were too harsh and could cause long-term psychological damage.”

    And I immediately thought, “Good”.  I have no idea what kind of psychological damage the egghead was thinking of, but if it damages the kiddies to the extend they no longer commit crimes so much the better. It’s no worse than a couple of days in the stocks in the village square anyway.

    Posted by walterplinge on 2006 12 12 at 08:10 PM • permalink

  9. coach, kae - I read it thinking, At last, someone is teaching kids that their actions have consequences, and then I got to Parry’s comment. I may have snorted, but if I did, nobody else in the cafe noticed.
    Or showed they noticed, anyhow.
    You wonder how a clown like this reacts when his own property is trashed.

    Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 12 at 08:11 PM • permalink

  10. It ignores the creative role which fiscal policy can play in economic management, especially in tackling unemployment.

    The old, ‘Have one man dig a hole, and a second man refill it’, fiscal policy.

    A policy that comes fully equipped, no doubt, with an army of well compensated, creative, fiscal policy managers, to watch over the no longer unemployed sheaple.

    How very Nineties.

    Eighteen Nineties that is.

    Posted by Thomas on 2006 12 12 at 08:12 PM • permalink

  11. quiggans at james cook university in townsville- he should give up licking those cane toads- they do terrible things to a mind.

    you kind of wonder if these guys actually believed themselves.

    ruddio national still treat everything quiggan says like holy gospel

    Posted by eeniemeenie on 2006 12 12 at 08:12 PM • permalink

  12. The critical error in Keynesian thinking is in considering fiscal government entities as net producers, rather than net consumers, and that employment qua employment is a valuable social goal. If that were the case, we could set the unemployment rate at zero by getting welfare recipients to dig holes and fill them in again, ad infinitum.

    “Economists are like weathermen: everybody talks about them, but nobody ever smacks one, good and hard.”

    We’re not all that bad, paco. I’ve certainly felt like laying the smackdown on Quiggin before, or at least giving him a good shave.

    Posted by hayesy on 2006 12 12 at 08:18 PM • permalink

  13. The old, ‘Have one man dig a hole, and a second man refill it’, fiscal policy.

    Ah, didn’t see ya there, Thomas.

    Posted by hayesy on 2006 12 12 at 08:19 PM • permalink

  14. Heartless bastards - I’d pay twice that to shut him up.

    Posted by fidens on 2006 12 12 at 08:21 PM • permalink

  15. Sweet.  When we read Alex Robson’s splendid article yesterday about this petition, although he didnt’ name any of those academic economists, I’m sure many of us could hear the wind in the trees whispering “Quiggin…Quiggin..”, the pounding of the surf called “Quiggin…Quiggin…”  Even the wheels beneath my train carriage seemed to stammer out “Quiggin…Quiggin…Quiggin…”

    Posted by cuckoo on 2006 12 12 at 08:26 PM • permalink

  16. You’d think with a mill in his kick, he’d be able to spalsh out on a haircut, shave and something a bit snappier than long socks and Birkenstock sandals.

    No wonder these fucking parasitic hippy fucknuckles are such a fan of big government and high taxation- that buckethead would be living in a skip and scrounging Mickey D discards in the real world.

    Doncha just love this wicked economic rationalist neo-con federal government?

    I would*, if we ever had one.

    *Not really, because it would still be government.

    Posted by Habib on 2006 12 12 at 08:33 PM • permalink

  17. We’re not all that bad, paco.

    Oh, I know. I certainly didn’t mean to condemn the whole profession. There are quite a few economists I admire.

    Posted by paco on 2006 12 12 at 08:49 PM • permalink

  18. If necessary, increased taxation and other revenue options should be under consideration.”

    Correct! If it is necessary to do a thing, you should consider doing it. How much did you guys pay this retard to figure that out?

    Posted by Don't Bogart that Midget, Comrade! on 2006 12 12 at 08:54 PM • permalink

  19. Reading that second paragraph, I conclude that these clowns slept through the 1970s.  Here in the USA during the Carter Administration we had 14 percent inflation with sky-high unemployment and economic stagnation, a combination that Keynesian economists say is completely impossible.  Well it happened.  The problems disappeared as we got “savage” tax rate cuts and had the Fed squeeze the inflation out of the economy.  That was Reagan’s and Volcker’s doing.

    Of course that is merely actual eperience, so I don’t suppose Quiggen and company pay much attention to that.  “Don’t bother me with a mass of petty istinas,” as Lenin put it.  Istina is Russian for truth, the everyday truth such as 2 + 2 = 4.  Pravda is revealed or religious truth.  I love that line, it describes so many moonbat lefties to perfection.

    Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 12 12 at 09:08 PM • permalink

  20. #11
    Quiggin is no longer at JCU. He’s at University of Qld at St Lucia Brisbane.

    Posted by JubJub on 2006 12 12 at 09:12 PM • permalink

  21. JubJub—Well, wherever ole BushyChin is, track him down and make him give back the million, if he’s that worried…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 12 12 at 09:17 PM • permalink

  22. The goal of a balanced budget indicates pre-Keynesian economic thinking

    As Michael Lonie has pointed out, all ‘Keynesian thinking’ got us was out of control inflation accompanied by record unemployment.

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 12 at 09:32 PM • permalink

  23. Such reasonable, common-sense drivel from the blogheads. Only, you’re still looking  away. Why?

    Posted by Miranda Divide on 2006 12 12 at 09:35 PM • permalink

  24. I agree with all of you, fiscal responsibility combined with low interest rates and successive tax cuts has eased the natural drag on the Australian economy and been a prime mover of economic growth. Howard and Costello should be rightly proud of these achievements.

    The question I have is: what about the US? Its deficit is considered by many to be alarming. Is this fair?

    When you compare the Bush Admnistration’s fiscal responsibility with Australia’s it does seem to stink a little. I don’t even have to bring in Norway - who have such a big surplus that they are afraid of investing in their own country for inflationary reasons. Although, admittedly, Norway has been a major beneficiary of American foreign policy adventurism.

    Should Americans be concerned at such a fiscal approach?
    yours responsibly,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 12 at 09:36 PM • permalink

  25. ML, reminds me of the economist who, on seeing the resultant data from a specific government initiative, responded with “Granted it works in practice, but will it work in theory?”

    Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 12 12 at 09:38 PM • permalink

  26. Orders must have gone out from troll central.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 12 at 09:39 PM • permalink

  27. 18. Don’t Bogart that Midget, Comrade!

    “If necessary, increased taxation and other revenue options should be under consideration.”

    Ah, yes! Captain Obvious to the Rescue!
    See a similar application to The Problem with the Iraq Study Group.

    Don’t suppose that also you went to the Uni of Chicago, by any chance? :-)

    Posted by rml on 2006 12 12 at 09:43 PM • permalink

  28. Swinish Capitalist
    Yes, it’s about time we looked at solutions like these to solve the problem of crime. Simplistic approaches to incarceration have always had their problems - just look at the history of England and Australia in the 1830s. Or the US experience now. Record numbers in jail or a reliance on ever-increasing prison terms simply do not resolve the problems as easily as some would wish.

    The idea of public shaming has always been a way of having a just “punishment” without losing the skills of the criminal in perpetuity. Medieval villages and indiginous tribes alike have both enjoyed its advantages. It’s definitely time to reassess how we can balance punishment, morals, learning and a hope that young criminals might (just might) reform their wicked ways.
    yours agreeably,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 12 at 09:48 PM • permalink

  29. because so many criminals have so many skills besides committing crimes…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 12 12 at 10:02 PM • permalink

  30. Or the US experience now. Record numbers in jail or a reliance on ever-increasing prison terms simply do not resolve the problems as easily as some would wish.

    The hell? You realize crime rates are DOWN in the US, don’t you? There are some localized increases, but those generally have to do with LESS law enforcement and incarceration, not more.

    (IE, Cincinnati. The aftermath of the 2001 riots, when the police were treated as the problem in place of the demagogues, race-baiters, and criminals who really caused the problem, and reduced policing in the most violent neighborhoods. The result has been a race to set the record for most murders in a single year.)

    I’m all for humiliating those convicted of minor crimes, though. Given your agreement on that, and your base ignorance, I may have to reassess that opinion.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 12 at 10:03 PM • permalink

  31. Oh look. A troll convergence. Maybe if we reconfigure the main deflector array to emit an inverse tachyon beam we can use this convergent space-time anomaly to go back in time to when Quiggin’s unfathomable stupidity hadn’t been hilariously exposed FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME by harsh unyielding facts and real-world experience.

    Posted by Crispytoast on 2006 12 12 at 10:03 PM • permalink

  32. all ‘Keynesian thinking’ got us was out of control inflation accompanied by record unemployment.

    “That’s not a bug, that’s a feature.”

    (Well, it’s the only way I can explain people still clinging to it…)

    Posted by PW on 2006 12 12 at 10:12 PM • permalink

  33. #5: Paco

    Dear Mr Paco, I would like to complain about the nature of your comment at #5. It may come to you as a surprise, but some of us are visiting this blog on the sly whilst we should be working.

    Please do not make any more comments that make me laugh out loud and thereby cause me to have to lie to my workmates about what I am reading.

    Thank you.

    Posted by Penguin on 2006 12 12 at 10:13 PM • permalink

  34. The question I have is: what about the US? Its deficit is considered by many to be alarming. Is this fair?

    You’re starting to max out my parody-meter here.

    Posted by PW on 2006 12 12 at 10:14 PM • permalink

  35. Yes, it’s about time we looked at solutions like these to solve the problem of crime. Simplistic approaches to incarceration have always had their problems[...]

    I’m thinking we could put the criminals on a cruise ship and make PirateKing their captain. We could also round up Miranda Divide (look in the sewer pipes) and put her on board too, as steward. I’m envisioning a real Love Boat scenario, only with psychotic murderers, brutal thugs, sex offenders, and shivering trolls who have been thrust face-to-face with the results of their philosophies. Oh—and the ship would not be allowed to come onshore ever again. Supplies and medical equipment attached to flotation devices would be dropped off at infrequent intervals via helicopter in the waters near the ship. Whoever survived the swim to get the goods would get extra rations and maybe an evening alone with Miranda. Or maybe that last thing would be the punishment for rules infractions….

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 12 at 10:15 PM • permalink

  36. The question I have is: what about the US? Its deficit is considered by many to be alarming. Is this fair?

    Good lord, I just don’t know what to say. Well—why no, PirateKing, I think every nation should have huge budget deficits. There, is that what you meant?

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 12 at 10:20 PM • permalink

  37. Rob (#30), when you say crime rates are “down in the US” I assume you are comparing the US only to itself. If you compare the crime rates and incarceration rates to other advanced countries the picture is not so clear.

    I may be basely ignorant about truths you hold to be self-evident, but I would still suggest that a study of 19th century British legislation and sentencing, combined with the experiences in penal settlements such as Norfolk Island, Port Arthur and Moreton Bay, might be of value.

    I don’t know anything about Cincinatti and am a believer in strong policing to ensure public order. I also believe in incarceration as a part of the solution to crime. I also believe it might be possible for us to agree on some things and disagree on others. Sorry about that.

    Richard McEnroe, you are very witty. But yes, I do believe it is true that people who commit crimes may have skills other than merely committing crimes. And that’s just the guys we catch.
    yours comparitively,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 12 at 10:21 PM • permalink

  38. Back when I was edumacated, the teachers were still allowed to beat miscreants with the cane.  I had the misfortune of coming back to the boarding house one weekend whilst still drunk, and was busted by our house master.  Even worse, he was a stand-in as our normal house master was on leave.  The stand-in was an ex-Rhodesian who probably developed his skills from whipping darkies on his ranch.  He had a reputation as the harshest caner at school.

    Anyway, I got six of the best across the backside, and you know what?  I never committed that crime again.  And my compatriots, after seeing my misery, took heed of the lesson and came to a simple conclusion - don’t get caught!

    Yes, I was “psychologically damaged”, in that my thought patterns were altered so that I didn’t want to break the rules no more.  I was also physically damaged, in that I had six big, fat bleeding welts on my arse.  I learnt that some deeds are not worth the outcome, and altered my behaviour commensurably. 

    And I became a better person for it.

    Posted by mr creosote on 2006 12 12 at 10:25 PM • permalink

  39. Pirate King, your name is Ken, isn’t it?

    Posted by kae on 2006 12 12 at 10:30 PM • permalink

  40. Rob (#30), when you say crime rates are “down in the US” I assume you are comparing the US only to itself. If you compare the crime rates and incarceration rates to other advanced countries the picture is not so clear.

    It certainly is clear. The US has a different pattern of crime than other nations. What’s the crime rate in Britain doing? Increasing, last I heard. I understand there are more occupied home invasions in Britain than in the US—a part of the different pattern. You might also want to consider the distribution of crime in the US and the perverse incentives that distribution has created in dealing with crime.

    I may be basely ignorant about truths you hold to be self-evident, but I would still suggest that a study of 19th century British legislation and sentencing, combined with the experiences in penal settlements such as Norfolk Island, Port Arthur and Moreton Bay, might be of value.

    Why? You’ve clearly got a lesson in mind that should be learned from those examples. What is it?

    I don’t know anything about Cincinatti

    Clearly. You can’t even spell it when someone’s already spelled it for you.

    Oh, sod it. Either you’re a troll or you’re just too socially inept to realize why people assume you’re a troll.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 12 at 10:32 PM • permalink

  41. No, not really what I meant Andrea (#36), but I’m always happy to clarify any misunderstanding.

    The reaonable criticism of Nevile, Quiqqin, Stilwell and O’Hara, and the correct assessment that fiscal responsibility has been a benefit to the Australian economy has been the prevalent response to Tim’s clipping.

    I’m just wondering whether people are prepared to comment on the fiscal irresonsibility of the US in recent years, or whether that topic is out of bounds.

    yours responsively,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 12 at 10:33 PM • permalink

  42. Touching.

    Posted by Miranda Divide on 2006 12 12 at 10:34 PM • permalink

  43. Feeling!

    Posted by Crispytoast on 2006 12 12 at 10:36 PM • permalink

  44. Isn’t Keynesian economic thinking the Leyland P76 of the financial world: It was an interesting idea which just didn’t work.

    Posted by lingus4 on 2006 12 12 at 10:36 PM • permalink

  45. #41 Quiqqin?

    Posted by lingus4 on 2006 12 12 at 10:39 PM • permalink

  46. I’m just wondering whether people are prepared to comment on the fiscal irresonsibility of the US in recent years, or whether that topic is out of bounds.

    It wasn’t the topic, and the way you raised it reeked of trolling rather than trying to start a discussion. If you’re not intending to troll, go learn how to communicate.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 12 at 10:40 PM • permalink

  47. Here’s a hypothetical scenario I’d invite Tim Blair readers to consider.

    You are invited to attend a dinner party at the house of an acqaintance whom you have only met very recently. You are aware that you do not know any of the other guests but they will consist of a group of friends who have known each other well over many years. Do you:

    a) Listen carefully to the conversation and make brief, relevent comments as the discussion demands, only expanding on your points when others appear interested.

    b) Upon arrival, pompously attempt to dominate proceedings with your theory on how fiscal policy is damaging the migratory habits of the Norwegian Blue which is leading to the creation of more freedom fighting parrots to all and sundry; or

    c) none of the above (since you don’t get invited to any dinner parties).

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 12 at 10:40 PM • permalink

  48. “Quiggin received a one million dollar grant in 2003.”

    That’s one way to earn a buck…have the government steal it from taxpayers, and give it to you.

    I prefer to work for a living, personally.

    Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 12 at 10:40 PM • permalink

  49. “I’m just wondering whether people are prepared to comment on the fiscal irresonsibility of the US in recent years, or whether that topic is out of bounds.”

    Hell no, it ain’t out of bounds.  Our government never met a dollar it didn’t want to spend.

    Shoot, they’ve given billions of dollars to guys that are just as stupid (and useless) as Quiggin.

    Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 12 at 10:44 PM • permalink

  50. The question I have is: what about the US? Its deficit is considered by many to be alarming. Is this fair?

    That’s actually an important question, one which many people on all sides of politics tend to make assumptions about without really exploring the issue in depth. The truth is, budget deficits by themselves aren’t necessarily a bad thing. If you, for example, borrowed a million dollars in 1980 and invested it in Microsoft, the subsequent yield on your investment would make your temporary million dollar budget deficit very healthy indeed. The problem is that very few people tend to make such wise speculative investments with their own money, and even fewer politicians make wise investments with other people’s money. Further problems arise with Keynes’ contention that inflation is an aggregate-demand rather than a monetary phenomenon, and the crowding-out effects of public debt on private investment, but I think I’ve put enough people to sleep already. So yes, Bush’s huge budget deficits are worrying.

    Posted by hayesy on 2006 12 12 at 10:48 PM • permalink

  51. #23- Despite your off-topic attempt at a pathetic polemic, there is a correlation; I’ll try to use simple concepts so it doesn’t confuse your poor, pointy head. The fiscal responsibility of conservatives provides the revenues required to maintain a strong military, and to produce lots of explodey things to drop on and fire at atavist savages who want to disembowel stupid fucking hippies such as yourself, and use the resulting whiffy, vegan felafel-filled viscera as harness for their attack goats.
    A lefty govt would give them a grant to work on the viability of full-time evisceration, subsidise it when it wasn’t viable then give Quiggles a grant to explain why Keynsian theory had resulted in a 747 poking tail-up out of the food court at Westfield Parramatta.

    Posted by Habib on 2006 12 12 at 10:50 PM • permalink

  52. Yes Rob, clearly the pattern of crime is much different in the US. Crime rates - particularly violent crime - are generally much higher in the US than other developed countries; countries that typically have a more balanced approach to incarceration, rehabilition, sentence length and the like.
    I am not arguing against incarceration, or that “rehabilition” is even possible in many cases. But the lessons of the 19th century, simply put, are that increasing sentence rates, lengths and the severity of treatment have limits. At one stage it became a capital crime to steal something like a handkerchief, but still the poor stole.

    The most potent lesson of Australia’s development is that a whole “criminal class” (deemed irretrievable) was sent here. But by being given opportunity (as well as punishment) the convicts were able to help create one of the world’s finest and most law abiding democracies.
    yours patriotically,
    ThePirateKing

    P.S. thanks for the tip on Cincinnati, it’s quite a tricky word. I notice I’ve misspelled a couple of other more common words, so I’m glad you didn’t pick those up otherwise I really would look stupid!!
    P.P.S. no kae, wrong pirate, but I do have an Uncle Ken…

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 12 at 10:56 PM • permalink

  53. Why do I get the feeling that PirateKing is a college student whose major is something wet like Sociology and who is currently doing a research paper on the prison systems of 19th century Britain and Australia?

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 12 at 11:00 PM • permalink

  54. “Yes, it’s about time we looked at solutions like these to solve the problem of crime. Simplistic approaches to incarceration have always had their problems[...]”

    The biggest cause of crime is a lack of real and immediate consequences for the perpetrator:

    Things like getting your head blown off by the intended victims .45

    Posted by rickw on 2006 12 12 at 11:02 PM • permalink

  55. “The Federal Government’s commitment to reduce expenditure by $8 billion is economically irresponsible. Expenditure cuts of that magnitude will inevitably cause job losses - directly in the public sector and indirectly in the private sector as a result of the downward multiplier effects.

    Quiggins is being cute.  The multiplier effect is the increase in the overall economic activity that results from $1 of additional spending.  The idea is that when you spend that $1, a company sells its goods to you.  That requires it to hire people who in turn buys goods from other companies and so on.

    It’s estimated that the multiplier effect is about 8.  So for each $1 spent, it can increase the overall economy by $8.  But that is spending by the private sector.  Spending by the government is estimated to have a multiplier of 3.  Quiggins would be correct by saying that the reducing government spending can hurt the economy if that’s all there was to it.  But the Prime Minister’s ideas include keeping taxes low, possibly lowering them.  That means transferring spending from the government to the private sector where a larger multiplier awaits. 

    That, in turn, improves the economy.

    Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 12 at 11:02 PM • permalink

  56. Actually when I took Econ 101 (during the Carter Administration, can you imagine?), it was emphasized that there were two good ways to slow down an inflationary economy:  increase interest rates and increase taxes (allowing for increased government spending).  The best ways to spur a slow economy were the reverse.

    Word of advice:  never follow the economic advice of a Keynsian economist, especially Krugman and Quiggins.

    Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 12 at 11:07 PM • permalink

  57. Thanks for your points to consider ArtVandelay, much appreciated as a newbie. If I’d known this was a private dinner party - as opposed to an Internet blog - I assure you I wouldn’t have bothered.

    I started off by asking a few questions. By the time I had been called a “Euro-parrot, The Supreme Centrist, inchoate, feckless, gormless, (repeatedly) stupid and (repeatedly) a troll” I became quite intrigued.

    I genuinely thought that fiscal responsibility was the topic of this thread. If it isn’t, what is? I apologise for going off topic with the incarceration - although, for the record, I didn’t bring it up. I’ll try to be more disciplined in future.

    yours sincerly,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 12 at 11:17 PM • permalink

  58. “Why do I get the feeling that PirateKing is a college student whose major is something wet like Sociology and who is currently doing a research paper on the prison systems of 19th century Britain and Australia?”

    Maybe because you think that anyone who knows about things outside your own narrow perspectives must be a “left wing intellectual”. Sorry, but your intuition has let you down.

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 12 at 11:21 PM • permalink

  59. P.S. thanks for the tip on Cincinnati, it’s quite a tricky word.

    And it’s also a tricky place.  Kerry lost the election because he couldn’t take Cincinnati and the adjoining counties.  Thereby losing Ohio.  Which, in turn, means we’ll probably being seeing a great deal of Hillary beginning next year.  ~sigh~ 

    (Rob, he actually misspelled “Cincinnati”?  That’s criminal.  He damn well better not misspell Graeters or Skyline.  However, misspelling the Bungles is perfectly OK).

    Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 12 at 11:23 PM • permalink

  60. #41: I believe PirateKing’s comments at #41 are reasonable. It’s certainly fair to question the fiscal policy of Bush - or more to the point, Congress - since this has been a bone of contention in the U.S. among conservatives who otherwise support the President on other matters (e.g., the GWOT). I believe the Republicans were hurt, to some extent, in the recent elections because of the perception by many voters that they had become no better than Democrats at controlling spending.

    As to the employment of shame as a form of rehabilitative punishment, I think this becomes a difficult thing to do in a society that seems to be increasingly shameless. Unfortunately, the psychiatrists and their acolytes in other disciplines appear to have practically emptied the concept of significance.

    Posted by paco on 2006 12 12 at 11:24 PM • permalink

  61. #52 TPK,

    “Descendants”, you say? Nobody’s suggesting that crime is genetic.

    And only an idiot would claim that the US response to increased crime routinely travels back in time and causes the crime that inspired it. Time only moves in one direction up here, and I’m willing to bet it moves the same way in Australia, too.

    The actual reason we have high crime is a good question. Perhaps it’s because we’re aggressive, hyperindividualistic pricks, in which case it’s a virtue, and a self-sustaining one at that: You’re more than welcome to all the damp, timid little emigrants who think the big mean ol’ free market is scawwwy. You take them, and we’ll take the greedheads who think it sounds like fun. We love the greedheads. They raise up their kids to be greedheads, too. We call them winners. You call them sir. Everybody’s got his place in the world.

    Posted by Don't Bogart that Midget, Comrade! on 2006 12 12 at 11:24 PM • permalink

  62. #58 TPK,

    She didn’t say “intellectual”. She said “college student”. Your confusion about those terms leads me to suspect she has you pegged. It’s the stupidity, stupid.

    Posted by Don't Bogart that Midget, Comrade! on 2006 12 12 at 11:26 PM • permalink

  63. Loadedog.. *cough* I mean, PirateKing, standards of behaviour and manners applicable to dinner parties also translate to most other aspects of life. If you’re wondering why you always have such a hard time here, you should perhaps consider the possibility that the problem is with you.

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 12 at 11:29 PM • permalink

  64. Thanks for your input, haysey; your comment in #12 explained one chat I had with one resident idiot on another blog.  He was convinced that government was a net producer, in that the “produced” services like law enforcement and the military. 

    I pointed out that, with very rare exception, government consumes resources, not produces (actually, I used the term “overhead” for that, but I’m not an economist, just a hairy engineer with a bare minimum grounding of economics; what I know I’ve learned through the school of hard knockc).  But the character stuck to his guns, being oh so polite, but refusing to define “produce” the way it is in the dictionary.

    Now I know why: the idiot (and he is an idiot) is an ardent supporter of Keynesian thinking.  I need to do me some reading, I do!

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 12 at 11:36 PM • permalink

  65. #52 PirateKing;

    “Yes Rob, clearly the pattern of crime is much different in the US. Crime rates - particularly violent crime - are generally much higher in the US than other developed countries; “

    You’d best do some recalibration of your knowledge base; it appears to be leaking.

    For example, with the sole exception of non-negligent homicide, the UK (for just one example) has *higher* violent and non-violent crime rates than does the U.S.

    And over the past 30 years, the gap between the two nations with regard to non-negligent homicide has been shrinking, and the difference between them in other crimes has been growing.

    It certainly looks like they’re not exactly handling the problem in a perfect fashion.

    Posted by steveH on 2006 12 12 at 11:42 PM • permalink

  66. BTW, folks, do you notice how the Pirate King is arguing in circles, not answering questions, seeming to agree, then saying “But what about…...?”? 

    The pattern is “thread hijacking” and “answer deflection”.  Oh, and claiming to be a victim when called on his/her non sequitors and logical inconsistencies, especially after lambasting people for the crimes of “unthinkingly” and “parroting”.

    PirateKing is being fairly calm about it, but that’s the pattern I’m seeing.  Y’all might want to keep that in mind.  PK isn’t being totally honest in his/her discourse.  Or is that way naturally.

    Which strikes a thought.  Anyone every hear about Bryla lately?

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 12 at 11:45 PM • permalink

  67. #33 Dear Mr./Ms. Penguin:

    As you will recall, the waiver of liability that you had to sign when you were approved to comment on this site specifically acts as an estoppel to future complaints alleging job loss, restraint of trade, barratry and, er, enfoeffment. Please govern yourself accordingly.

    Sincerely,

    Paco, Paco, Paco & Paco

    Posted by paco on 2006 12 12 at 11:46 PM • permalink

  68. Circling “round and round” will be what Captain PirateKing will be doing on the Love Boat II!

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 12 at 11:52 PM • permalink

  69. If I’d known this was a private dinner party - as opposed to an Internet blog - I assure you I wouldn’t have bothered.

    Yes this is the equivalent of a “private dinner party.” Why do you think you had to go through that registration process, you idiot? If you want a free-for-all shit-flinging party, the Daily Kos and Democratic Underground await. Here you are expected to mind your manners and defer to the people who have been here before you or you’ll get thrown out on your keister.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 12 at 11:55 PM • permalink

  70. Circling “round and round” will be what Captain PirateKing will be doing on the Love Boat II!

    I see that whenever I flush the toilet.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 12 at 11:58 PM • permalink

  71. I may be basely ignorant

    Well, at least he recognizes the fundamental problem.  Next he might start to work on the snotty attitude.

    I suggest a study of the US deficit as a percentage of either the real-dollar GDP or the real-dollar tax revenue over the past 200 years would demonstrate to the pratking that the current deficit is well below the average of the past 100 years or so.

    I would also suggest that noticing that some deficits are actual useful investments (the building of the US Interstate Highway system springs to mind) so one should check to see what the ‘deficit’ is buying before one starts blowing it out one’s poopdeck.

    Finally, I would suggest extricating one’s cranial cavity from one’s anal aperture prior to condescending to lecture one’s intellectual inferiors might just possibly save one some well-deserved obloquy.

    Since I come from whatever is below the lumpenproletariat, I’m merely suggesting, is all.

    Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 12 13 at 12:14 AM • permalink

  72. Speaking of flushing something down the toilet; who, in their right mind, puts chili con carne on spaghetti?

    Posted by David Crawford on 2006 12 13 at 12:18 AM • permalink

  73. #52- How do you then explain the entrenched criminality among generations of inbred yahoos in sydney and Melbourne, and to a lesser degree other capitals? I’d say most would be the descendants of criminal migrants, either transportees or those who used the lax entry requirements in the early 20th century to establidh themselves in a whole new hunting ground.

    If there’s nothing genetic in criminality, please explain the phenomena of twin crims, you twat.

    Besides being off the topic, your blase’ social worker/caring and sharing glib platitudes are bollocks.

    Posted by Habib on 2006 12 13 at 12:23 AM • permalink

  74. #72—oh, yeah.  Cincinatti chili.  I lived just outside Washington Court House, OH in the mid-70s and they put macaroni in their ‘five-way chili’ there.  Woah!

    Proper chili contains no pasta (although I have been known to stir in come home-made sauerkraut when I get a smidge too much Dave’s Insanity Sauce in the mix).

    Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 12 13 at 12:24 AM • permalink

  75. For example, with the sole exception of non-negligent homicide, the UK (for just one example) has *higher* violent and non-violent crime rates than does the U.S.

    And if I’m not mistaken, the US includes manslaughter in its murder stats. The UK does not. You may have factored that in, however.

    Also, the US is so huge and culturally heterogeneous that it’s silly to talk about US crime rates. Some areas of the country are relatively violent, while others (like New England) are more placid than Europe. These regions are as large as most European countries, so it’s best to look at the United States individually.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2006 12 13 at 12:24 AM • permalink

  76. #66: if there is a real question that I haven’t answered, I’d be happy to hear it. And please don’t think I’ve ever claimed to be a victim, I only ever said I was intrigued by all the abuse.

    Andrea, just as I am intrigued by your lesson in manners. As to your suggestion that I will “defer” to anyone, sorry you’ve got the wrong pirate. I will treat people here at least as politely as they treat me and take their arguments on merit.

    Don’t threaten to kick me out either, it just makes you look weak. If you can’t handle the heat, just do it. It will reflect on you much more than it will on me.
    your obedient servant,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 12:25 AM • permalink

  77. #66: if there is a real question that I haven’t answered, I’d be happy to hear it. And please don’t think I’ve ever claimed to be a victim, I only ever said I was intrigued by all the abuse.

    There are two questions here

    The first one you never answered.  The second one you noticed (it “intrigued” you), but never answered.

    Back to you.  Better grab firm hold of the helm, I hear fighting a current can be tricky.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 12:33 AM • permalink

  78. The Pirate King. I think I know your father, Wayne. If only he’d stuck to that.

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 13 at 12:36 AM • permalink

  79. Dear TPK,

    Just a word of advice from another fellow commentor who’s dimmer than the North Korean power grid; If you don’t know what you’re talking about and truly want to learn - Shut the fuck up. Compared to most of the commentors here I’m thicker than Michael Moore’s ankle, so I just shuts me silly beer pipe when they’re banging on about quantum physics and whether Sumerian mead tastes better from a Ming Vase or Cleopatra’s sports bra.

    You really can learn a lot hanging around here and if you behave yourself they’ll occasionally chuck you a bone, in which case you can be all over it like an Islamist at a plutonium sale.

    Happy travels TPK. Keep up the limes and spare the cabin boys.

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 13 at 12:50 AM • permalink

  80. As part of Howard’s “savage expenditure cuts”, Quiggin received a one million dollar grant in 2003.

    We need more knowledge on the habitat and breeding of the Over-Renumerated Beardy Nuff-Nuff!

    Posted by Mr Hackenbacker on 2006 12 13 at 12:52 AM • permalink

  81. #61 and #73: I can’t find anywhere in my post #52 where I either used the word “descendants” or suggested crime was or wasn’t genetic. In fact, I agree that certain twin research would certainly suggest that it could. Were you looking at the wrong post?

    #65: Oh yes, APART from “non-negligent homicide”. The difference is even more stark if you compare it to Australia (with or without our convict genetics).


    #71: of course long term investments by government is important. It’s also true that deficits can be justified at certain times for certain reasons. I was comparing the US to the example (Australia) at the top of the blog. Oh, and Norway, because people here seem to know so much about it.


    #77: “Just how do you know that we don’t think about this, PK? “
    I was criticising unthinkingness in general (both “left” and “right”). I don’t know why you assumed I was talking about you.

    “just were does that leave you?”
    I already answered this as “An Australian. Label me if you will.”

    yours deferentially,
    ThePirateKing

    P.S. Thanks for the advice Infidel Tiger, you’re “Wayne” joke was very funny.

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 12:59 AM • permalink

  82. JeffS (#66), my theory was that the degree of social ineptitude exhibited by TPK was similar to that of Loadedog.

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 13 at 01:00 AM • permalink

  83. #47 - Nice metaphor. 

    #69 - Andrea : Cut the guy a little slack - there has been no abusive posts, no swearing, and very little hijacking going on as far as I have seen in this thread. And any disagreement has not been violent, and the attacks seem to have come first from slightly trigger happy regulars who have a fetish for shooting down trolls.

    I think better results (and possibly better experiences all round, including possibly a positive shift in view and in grammar on TPK’s part) may ensue if he is treated like an 18 year old who is sitting at a parents dinner - he is old enough and mature enough to have views, some of which may be valid, or at least partially so, but not experienced enough to know the best way to state them, or know how to avoid picking fights with those who dislike the intrusion. And since TPK is not a troll nor a total tool, it also makes no sense to fry him crispy.

    Oh, and I thought the registration process was so the government knew who to send their top secret Jew controlled space laser mind control beams after, to make us more compliant by avidly wanting to watch Dancing with the Stars, right?

    #76 - TPK : On that note, it always pays not to throw around threats to the site admin. In fact, it is pretty ghey to do so. And childish. Just take it cool, and if you bring up a point of contention, make sure you at least attempt to reply properly to those asking the questions. And play nice, eh? It doesn’t pay to knuckle up unless you got the skills to be a contender.

    Posted by Stuart Lord on 2006 12 13 at 01:00 AM • permalink

  84. Here’s another example of the tight-fisted parsimony and slow strangulation of the hard-working and beneficial public sector by the heartless, fiscally frugal and Friedman-driven Federal government.

    Just what government’s for to provide an overpriced, ugly and inaccesable home for hideous daubs, gargoylian geegaws and talent-free twaddle that no one in the free market would touch with a 40’ toothpick whittled by a Balmain Bohemian using his bottom.

    If you told punters what all this extraneous bollocks cost them, the most common decoration embellishing the national capital would be politicians and bureacrats empty heads on pointed sticks, and for once I’d cough for the airfare to Canberra to take in an exposition.

    Pandering to the cultural asthetes of shiny-arsed public servants who contribute nothing to the costs should be the end of any government in a right-thinking democracy.

    Ditto to giving 1,000 gorillas to a pinko prof who’s about as up to date on economics as Pauline Hanson (unless they’re 1,000 real gorillas- really hoeny ones who’ve been locked up for a long time, stuffed full of methamphetemine and in the mood for love with something hairy).

    Posted by Habib on 2006 12 13 at 01:12 AM • permalink

  85. I appreciated TPK’s positive response to my o/t at the start of the thread, but I have found some of his subsequent posts hard to follow.
    TPK - there was another character around here for a while: Lefty Latte Lover. LLL jumped around all over the place in his/her posts and attracted a lot of flak (I think) because nobody could figure out what the hell they were on about!
    Also, that ‘Yours ...ly’ signoff is something you could lose. Frankly, it’s just so Grade 5….

    Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2006 12 13 at 01:26 AM • permalink

  86. #83- Stuey: I do appreciate the support. It’s obvious where the aggression comes from, and as I’m impervious to condescension, I’m finding the dinner party metaphor a riot.

    I’m not sure I can let your final advice through to the wickie though. The administrator called me an “idiot”, then asked me to learn some manners. Is this normal behaviour?

    Also I’m answering more questions being asked of me than the other way around. If there are any I’ve missed, I’m happy to answer them (as I just did above).

    As to “playing nice” or “knuckling up”, I’m just hitting the ball back over the net. In the context of this little sandpit, being “childish” is hardly a sledge.
    yours thankfully,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 01:35 AM • permalink

  87. #67 - Paco, you left out mopery with intent to gawk.

    Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 12 13 at 01:37 AM • permalink

  88. Cheers Swinish, I like your name. I think you’ll find I’m pretty internally consistent, but because people start from the premise that I am a typical LLL, then they tend to attack things I’m not saying (like the genetics thing). When I’m copping it from all sides, it’s hard not to jump around a little (not that I’m complaining, mind).

    Given all the advice I’ve had, it’s hard to know whether to be less confrontational or more direct. I think I’ll be more direct to lessen misunderstanding.
    yours primarily,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 01:50 AM • permalink

  89. TPK
    1. “But the lessons of the 19th century, simply put, are that increasing sentence rates ...” this is the kind of statement which might brighten the faces of your intellectual companions, but demonstrates you lack research and/or comprehension skills. You should look these things up before crossing the Start Line.

    2. The term ‘penitentary’ is derived from the word ‘penitent’. It originated in the 19th Cent. However it would appear that ‘penitence’ is no longer a requirement of the Justice system, save for unusual cases as cited. Though you may be unfamiliar with ‘penitence’.

    3. (paraphrase) “The sign of an intelligent man is the ability to make distinctions”, I am quoting one of my profs. Given your penchant for equivocal comments, you might ponder the thought.

    Cheers

    Posted by J.M. Heinrichs on 2006 12 13 at 01:52 AM • permalink

  90. Pirate boy - despite the tax cuts a little quote from the Whitehouse website -

    “On October 11, 2006, President Bush Announced That The Deficit Has Been Cut In Half 3 Years Ahead Of His 2009 Goal And That The FY2006 Budget Deficit Was $248 Billion. The President’s pro-growth policies helped to strengthen our economy and create 6.6 million jobs in the last three years. This strong economic activity has generated historic revenue growth that has shrunk the deficit. A continued commitment to spending restraint has also contributed to deficit reduction.”

    While I think they deserve a could do better rating, I think this more than demonstrates the fiscal responsibility of the Bush administration - halving the deficit - despite what critics said would happen with the tax cuts.

    And comparing Norway and the US is ridiculous.

    Posted by Razor on 2006 12 13 at 01:52 AM • permalink

  91. TPK, you’d get a lot more respect if you weren’t so goddam wet. I mean you actually sign your posts “Yours responsibly”? You sound like such an obsequious shit, honestly. If you’ve got an argument, just make it. Go back and read your first post here. If you want to say Bushs’ deficits suck, then just grow some balls and say it, don’t pussy around asking if we think its “fair”?

    It’s not that you’re not welcome here, but at least hang around long enough to pick up the zeitgeist before you post, so you don’t sound like an ass.

    Posted by morbo on 2006 12 13 at 02:00 AM • permalink

  92. Razor, I’m glad the Whitehouse website thinks that their $248 Billion deficit proves this Administration is fiscally responsible. I’m not a trained economist like others on here, but isn’t creating growth through fiscal deficit just a little (gasp) Keynsian? [happy to be corrected] Either way, compared to Howard’s approach, “responsible” doesn’t seem the right term.

    JMH (#89)-
    1. I said “...the lessons of the 19th century, simply put, are that increasing sentence rates, lengths and the severity of treatment have limits.” We’re already over the starting line; your point is?

    2.Sorry, I understand your point, but not the link. Was this in reference to something I said?

    3. Don’t worry, I get it.
    yours ponderously,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 02:14 AM • permalink

  93. Morbo, that’s the first piece of decent advice I’ve had all day.

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 02:18 AM • permalink

  94. The administrator called me an “idiot”, then asked me to learn some manners. Is this normal behaviour?

    Only if you’re an attention whore.

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 13 at 02:28 AM • permalink

  95. Yeah, but, Art. Some people demand attention, others command it!

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 13 at 02:39 AM • permalink

  96. JeffS (#66), my theory was that the degree of social ineptitude exhibited by TPK was similar to that of Loadedog.

    You are probably right, Art, I was just reminded of that ham handed twit, Bryla, is all. 

    In any case, PK is certainly baiting us, like in #86, where s/he uses a condescending diminutive of Stuart’s name (“Stuey”, hmmmm?), after Stuart was supportive of PK. 

    Nope, not impressed.  PK needs to relax and listen…..and maybe learn something.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 02:43 AM • permalink

  97. TPK is male and juvenile:
    Tag of ThePirateKing and reference to (female) administrator (women’s) “intuition”; “young criminals might (just might) reform their wicked ways”.

    First post (#24) addresses all posters ... but claims does not condescend: me to all of you <insert category here>

    Poor face-to-face social skills?:
    “as I’m impervious to condescension”; “I’m just hitting the ball back over the net”; I’m finding the dinner party metaphor a riot.

    Sarcasm:
    “I genuinely thought that fiscal responsibility was the topic of this thread. If it isn’t, what is? I apologise for going off topic with the incarceration - although, for the record, I didn’t bring it up. I’ll try to be more disciplined in future.”
    “Maybe because you think that anyone who knows about things outside your own narrow perspectives must be a “left wing intellectual”. Sorry, but your intuition has let you down.”

    Issuing Orders:
    Don’t threaten to kick me out either, it just makes you look weak. If you can’t handle the heat, just do it. It will reflect on you much more than it will on me.
    your obedient servant,”

    This is abusive behaviour, thinly disguised.

    “I was criticising unthinkingness in general” “Label me if you will.” ... OK: Troll.

    yours responsibly, agreeably, comparitively, responsively, patriotically, sincerly, deferentially, thankfully, primarily, ponderously, ... too.

    Posted by egg_ on 2006 12 13 at 02:51 AM • permalink

  98. Infidel, I should probably clarify very, very quickly that the attention whore reference was directed very much towards TPK rather than Andrea!!

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 13 at 02:52 AM • permalink

  99. And PK doing a good job of hijacking the thread, egg_. 

    Maybe PK is an acolyte of Quiggie?

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 02:56 AM • permalink

  100. #98 - Oh Christ! I didn’t mean that either. I was referring to the young lady in your link, who is enjoying a delightful frollick by the seaside.

    Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 12 13 at 02:56 AM • permalink

  101. Oh yes The_Real_JeffS, listening and learning. Stuey’s lesson in condescension was so good that I couldn’t wait to get out there and use my newly acquired skills. I really enjoy learning how to behave from my elders and betters.
    yours attentively,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 02:56 AM • permalink

  102. Pirate Boy,

    Another poster already pointed out that as a percentage of GDP the current deficit isn’t all that big - so the actual number doesn’t really matter.

    I was more interested in making the point that the deficit has ben halved three years ahead of schedule.

    All the critics who said the tax cuts would not have the effect the Bush Adminstration sai they would have not only been proven wrong, the Bush Adminsistration have been proven to be overly cautious in their estimates of the impacts.

    If the deficit was a problem, the US dollar would have tanked.

    And as others have pointed out above, a large number of RWDB are economically conservative and don’t like the level of taxation or spending, but it could be a lot worse than it is.  And, given the burden the US is bearing in funding the War against islamofascists they are doing well in reducing it.

    Posted by Razor on 2006 12 13 at 03:02 AM • permalink

  103. #100, gotcha! I thought I’d better clarify my first comment since it was slightly ambiguous. I definitely like to play it safe when Andrea’s concerned! ;)

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 13 at 03:03 AM • permalink

  104. Stuey’s lesson in condescension was so good that I couldn’t wait to get out there and use my newly acquired skills.

    Oh, really?

    #69 - Andrea : Cut the guy a little slack - there has been no abusive posts, no swearing, and very little hijacking going on as far as I have seen in this thread. And any disagreement has not been violent, and the attacks seem to have come first from slightly trigger happy regulars who have a fetish for shooting down trolls.

    Heh.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 03:05 AM • permalink

  105. TPK is a KRuddy clone gone bad?

    Bet he’s the quiet, pimple-faced nerd alone in the corner of the library.

    Posted by egg_ on 2006 12 13 at 03:08 AM • permalink

  106. All the critics who said the tax cuts would not have the effect the Bush Adminstration sai they would have not only been proven wrong, the Bush Adminsistration have been proven to be overly cautious in their estimates of the impacts.

    The funny thing is, Razor, that you won’t find many articles ballyhooing the economic situation.  If anything, the improvements are hidden behind spin and misdirection. 

    But it’s kind of hard to hide continued low unemployment.  The smart people seek through the smoke and mirrors of the Keynesian adherents.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 03:09 AM • permalink

  107. TPK - if you wanted condescension and insults, I would have given it to you. Indeed, it would have gone something like this -

    ‘TPK - you act like a petulant child, making throw away comments of little content and less value, and then get upset and try and add sarcasm and infantile wit to try and cover over your gross inadequacies in rhetorical style, factual accuracy and purported intent. If you have something to say, think about it, then write it down, then screw it up into a little ball, and then set it - and possibly yourself - on fire. Then write it down again, come back in six months, and if it is still worth saying, you are still an idiot.

    Also, your ineptitude when it comes to making retorts is astounding - I’m surprised to see that you can type out half a cogent sentence, let alone spell your own name. And by the by, a nick name from a G&S production, if that is where it is from (which does surprise me, as I didn’t think that your mummy would let you stay up that late) is pretty poor form, especially as it is not even from the best song in the musical. So grow up, or go home, or both.’

    However, I am a nice guy, so I’ll just say ‘play nice or Andrea will take your ball(s) and go home’ and get on with my evening.

    Posted by Stuart Lord on 2006 12 13 at 03:13 AM • permalink

  108. JeffS (#96), you’re definitely right there. He uses very similar approaches to Bryla.

    Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 12 13 at 03:28 AM • permalink

  109. I love how people of the Phillip Adams/Ross Gittins school of thought claim that Howard’s reforms weren’t really that incisive, and only continued those begun by the great Paul keating in the 80s. It would appear that when the Howard Government began these reforms, the lefty intelligentsia didn’t see it quite that way. What a load of hysterical crap!

    It would be interesting to see Quigginesque articles from the mid to late 80s when Keating balanced the budget and then delivered a modest surplus. I wonder if he was as frightened then, as he was in 1996?

    Posted by AlburyShifton on 2006 12 13 at 03:31 AM • permalink

  110. 104 & 107: I think you forgot a couple of lines.

    Look TRJ, Stuey is not a total tool, but it doesn’t pay to knuckle up if you’re not a contender.
    yours as ever,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 03:32 AM • permalink

  111. Oh, and they conveniently forget that when Howard got in, Keating was presiding over a post recession economy with a budget defecit and unemployment rate approaching those Hawkey inherited from the Fraser Govt, and which Keating had harped on about for a full 13 years.

    10 years on, and we’ve got tolerable inflation, low unemployment, a high budget surplus and a balance sheet wiped clean of Hawke/Keating era government debt.

    Posted by AlburyShifton on 2006 12 13 at 03:37 AM • permalink

  112. 104 & 107: I think you forgot a couple of lines.

    No, in #104, I omitted them.  Deliberately.  Hence the link. 

    Look TRJ, Stuey is not a total tool, but it doesn’t pay to knuckle up if you’re not a contender.

    Hmmmmm…..he supports you while suggesting that you adjust your behavior from spoiled kid to mature student, and Stuart is merely “...not a total tool…”?

    Which makes me (and others, I assume), by inference, total tools. 

    Nice to see the gloves coming off.  And the mask.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 03:41 AM • permalink

  113. He uses very similar approaches to Bryla.

    Eh, PK could be loadedog as well, Art.  One never knows.

    PK might be a college student, pumped full of pseudo knowledge by clueless professors, primed by the social discourse down at the student union, and braves the savagery of the INTERNET to save the world from us evil neocons. 

    Or it could that PK is on Christmas break, is bored, and found a way to pass the time until s/he can return to school and resume his/her normal routine of sleeping in class and partying at night.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 03:47 AM • permalink

  114. Look TRJ, I really did appreciate the fact the Stuey stood up to be counted. But if you’re saying that when he used those exact words he was simply delivering sage advice, but when I use them “the mask is coming off” it doesn’t really add up, does it?

    So when Stuey complains that I’ve been “condescending”  - having called me “not a total tool” - he comes across as someone who can dish it out, but not take it. Like a few others here.
    your humble student,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 03:49 AM • permalink

  115. As far as the homicide rate in the US is concerned, I suggest you dig up a Mark Steyn column on gun ownership and crime where it is mentioned that African-Americans, who comprise 13% of the population, commit over 50% of all homicides.

    His point I think is that if you live in an area which is free of the very high rates of black-on-black homicide, the US is actually more peaceful than Canada.

    I’d post the link, but I can’t be shagged.

    In the UK, it appears that crime is rising all over, not just in a few benighted hot-spots.

    Posted by mr creosote on 2006 12 13 at 03:51 AM • permalink

  116. Stuart, how’s it going? You know <G>.

    Posted by kae on 2006 12 13 at 03:54 AM • permalink

  117. It’s a fair comment mr creosote, but I change in a similar way…[just a guess, but you can see where I’m heading]

    Do people think this link with race and crime is to do with the social structure of American society or is mainly genetic?

    Is this fact a positive, negative, or just a warning to live North, not South of the Potomac?

    yours positively,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 04:01 AM • permalink

  118. That should read:

    It’s a fair comment mr creosote, but I suspect that if you applied the same filtering to UK stats, they might change in a similar way…

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 04:03 AM • permalink

  119. “cuts of that magnitude will inevitably cause job losses”: self-preservation comes to the fore?

    #118
    What, no tag line?

    Posted by egg_ on 2006 12 13 at 04:11 AM • permalink

  120. My presumption is that it’s all social and not at all genetic.  It’s how people are brought up.  It’s who they associate with. 

    It’s whether they are encouraged to build something with their hands (metaphorically) or do something with their life or to just be a “the world owes me a living” type of person.

    I’ve only been to the US once, but I found it to be a very large and diverse place, and from that visit I vowed never to believe a single over-arching statistic about the place ever again.  The homicide rate is one such statistic - there are pockets of bloody mayhem and miles and miles of very polite suburban peacefulness.

    Posted by mr creosote on 2006 12 13 at 04:12 AM • permalink

  121. As part of Howard’s “savage expenditure cuts”, Quiggin received a one million dollar grant in 2003.

    You mean that bastard picked our pockets to the tune of 5 cents each?? I want my money back!

    BTW, are we still paying 8 cents a day for the ABC?

    Posted by AlburyShifton on 2006 12 13 at 05:08 AM • permalink

  122. my law professor used to argue that there was no upward social mobility in the US

    I found some statistics that showed that 90% of people in bottom 10% (in terms of income) weren’t there 10 years later.

    she said no, because they were all in prison. I said what, all of them? She yes yes, all of them.

    At which I thought fuck this and stopped looking up statistics. 

    She also thought trees should have standing to sue, and once wore a set of fairy wings to class. I’m not kidding.

    Posted by JonathanH on 2006 12 13 at 05:13 AM • permalink

  123. btw that was Greta Bird, former adviser to the Hawke/Keating govt on Access & Equity

    Posted by JonathanH on 2006 12 13 at 05:36 AM • permalink

  124. Ooooohhhhh Christ.  Another one of those trolls.

    “Lets drop in and stir up the neo cons.  Bet they can’t match the intellectual arguments and we won’t loose our cool while we stir them up.  Boy this will be FUN!”

    PK, I admire your ability to type while pulling yourself.  Its obviously a skill you picked up while hanging out with the other lads whilst doing detention.  Just make sure you wash your hands afterwards, eh?

    Child, although you’re no doubt squealing and gurgling with excitement at the attention you are getting, we’ve seen your type before, more than once.  Its boring.  We’ve probably seen you before, haven’t we?  I admit, we haven’t had a decent troll here for ages; the last one got their rocks off in posting some nasty stuff. 

    Have a look here.  Read it all, then come back to us with a summary as to why your attention seeking is futile.

    And wash you hands!

    Andrea, this dickhead has ceased to be interesting.  While wronwright’s busy elsewhere, I wouldn’t mind if you got old faithful off the wall.

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 13 at 05:48 AM • permalink

  125. Ah Ha!  I knew I’d seen PirateKing before!

    At least an intellectual equal.  Caution!  Germs!

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 13 at 05:59 AM • permalink

  126. Since TPK is new, I’m really not upset by his posts.  I barely read them assuming he’s a troll.  (Presumed guilty until proven innocent here bucko).

    But I’m absolutely flummoxed by the heretic statements made by David Crawford and JorgMcKie about Cincinnati style chilli spaghetti.  It might sound bad, but I can assure you it’s delicious *!  Indeed, even Frischs Big Boy offers a version of it.  What better testament can one receive?

    * it’s also addictive

    Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 13 at 06:02 AM • permalink

  127. Oh!  Hi, er wronwright!  Weren’t you supposed to be polishing Crown Prince Ferdinand’s riding kit?

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 13 at 06:10 AM • permalink

  128. I’m late to the party, but one statement by the RobberBaron (excuse me, PirateKing) was too hilariously to pass up:

    “Why do I get the feeling that PirateKing is a college student whose major is something wet like Sociology and who is currently doing a research paper on the prison systems of 19th century Britain and Australia?”

    Maybe because you think that anyone who knows about things outside your own narrow perspectives must be a “left wing intellectual”.

    You really haven’t bothered to read this blog at all before you started posting, right TPK? “Left wing intellectuals” are the last people any of us would expect to “know about things outside [their] own narrow perspectives”. Just pick a random thread that includes the words “Global Warming” or “Quiggin” (hey, like this one right here!) for evidence of that.

    The reason you’re being pegged as a clueless college student is that you obviously believe yourself to be very educated in a number of areas, while those here with some actual insight into those areas are flabbergasted at your demonstrated lack of knowledge. (Not that I think more pure knowledge would really do you much good; your logical reasoning skills appear to be too limited to make much use of it.)

    Posted by PW on 2006 12 13 at 07:21 AM • permalink

  129. Don’t threaten to kick me out either, it just makes you look weak. If you can’t handle the heat, just do it. It will reflect on you much more than it will on me.

    I didn’t threaten to kick you out, I told you what the penalties were for being an asshole. Whinging about that makes you look weak.

    Another way to get kicked out is to lecture the admin.

    Stuart Lord: when you have a blog with a large registered membership to maintain, you make the rules. You may not have noticed but “swearing” and such aren’t proscribed here. However, PK is condescending and smarmy, as well as a topic hog. Like many trolls, he has turned every comment thread into a show about him and whatever his favorite subjects are, and he is becoming increasingly, not less, bumptious and demanding. He is following the path many other trolls have here in the past. These people all ended up being banned.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 13 at 07:22 AM • permalink

  130. “She also thought trees should have standing to sue, and once wore a set of fairy wings to class. I’m not kidding.”

    Well, if that isn’t nature’s warning signal…

    Posted by wreckage on 2006 12 13 at 07:23 AM • permalink

  131. Andrea, I’ve dealt with three topics today:
    1. fiscal responsibility
    2. incarceration policy
    3. my attitude

    None of these were my own.

    I do recognise that I “dominated” the blog today - but that was a function of the number of responses to my posts. If people want to accuse me of not responding to posts, then they should hardly complain when I do. As I indicated earlier, some people here can dish it out, but not take it.

    Still, if you or the other bloggers can’t deal with ideas that I bring to the debate, then ban me. It’s your choice.
    yours sincerely,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 07:58 AM • permalink

  132. Still, if you or the other bloggers can’t deal with ideas that I bring to the debate

    HAAAhahahahahahah! (Deep breath.) AHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! (Gasp. Wipes eyes.)

    Thanks for the comedy waker-upper, PK.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 13 at 08:08 AM • permalink

  133. Andrea - I know, I know. I didn’t realise he was doing this over multiple topics, so I do apologise for that, and for any lecturing tone.

    And as for lecturing itself - I would call what I did merely stating an opinion based on the partial facts for your consumption. As for potentially banning me, well, that would disapoint so many people interested in my love life, let alone those interested in how I can give advice to two people on either side of an argument and get them both to think I am trying to jerk them around, even if my advice is consistent between the two, and I didn’t intend to give either a hard time.

    TPK - I never protested against anything you said against me, nor did I get upset about what you said. I merely corrected the condescending claim you made to show you what it would be if I really was condescending towards you.

    As for me dishing it out - buddy, you don’t know when you have it good. A little ribbing, yes, but if you want to be cut up, I can do it - I’ve had plenty of practice when I wrote for Webdiary.

    Indeed, I’ve probably been the most polite and supportive person on this thread towards you. Accept, and move on, and don’t pick fights with those trying to help you out - it isn’t good practice. Just play it cool, and take a step back from the arguments - even if you think you are not at fault. It makes you both more mature and a better person on the other side if you just get on with it, and you won’t bug the hell out of everyone by spraying out at everyone who takes an issue with you.

    The same goes for others as well, but since you haven’t had the best start with the regulars, who have built up friendships and acquaintances , it especially applies. And it doesn’t just apply to this web board, which (probably correctly) you don’t care much about, but to all of life. But you can take it or leave it.

    Kae - It is going well with the <G> - got a picnic down in the botanical gardens this Sat. And she genuinely does like me, so that’s good to know. And I genuinely like her back, and that’s even better. And as she is another Christian Theocon like myself, it works out pretty well. She has met the rest of my family, and didn’t run screaming away from my three brothers, so that’s another good thing. Just need more ideas for further stuff to do - not as essential as we get more comfortable, but still nice to do/have in the back of my mind.

    Posted by Stuart Lord on 2006 12 13 at 08:44 AM • permalink

  134. PK:
    then ban me. It’s your choice.

    No shit, Sherlock?  BTW did you wash your hands?

    Watch it Andrea, he’s a sharp one this one.

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 13 at 08:48 AM • permalink

  135. I’m impervious to condescension

    Much as a geyser is impervious to a garden hose.

    I’m finding the dinner party metaphor a riot.

    Probably one of those people who thinks manners and politeness are out-dated and oppressive, too.

    Fer crissake, I know people diagnosed with social phobia who have better social skills than you. Maybe, like the demotivator poster says, your purpose in life is to serve as an example for others.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 13 at 08:52 AM • permalink

  136. TPK: “it doesn’t pay to knuckle up if you’re not a contender” ... what’s the contest?

    Luke Skywalker delusions?

    The penis mightier than the sword?

    Posted by egg_ on 2006 12 13 at 09:01 AM • permalink

  137. However, in good news for air travellers in Turkey….

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 13 at 09:03 AM • permalink

  138. I reckon the Pirate is a Ginge. No doubt about it.

    Posted by CB on 2006 12 13 at 09:43 AM • permalink

  139. My presumption is that it’s all social and not at all genetic.  It’s how people are brought up.  It’s who they associate with. 

    I agree, mr. creosote.  Criminal behavior is a learned behavior, like any other social interaction.  How people interact with other people is learned (poor or otherwise) as a child.  Teaching an adult new behavior often requires draconian measures.  That’s why laws and punishment were invented (unless you’re a law professor who wears fairy wings, natch!  [sheesh!  wotta story, coach]).

    wronwright—Ohioians actually ruin perfectly good chili by mixing it with pasta?  O, the humanity!!!

    Oh, yes….there’s some hope for you, PK.  You actually do ask some good questions, and have made some good points.  But even though I am a long time denizen of this blog, I try to read first, learn, and then comment.  Or not comment, if I might be exceeding my area of expertise.  I’ve failed before, and I’ll fail again….mistakes is one way that people learn (sometimes to their embarrassment).

    Just a thought.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 10:30 AM • permalink

  140. wronwright—Ohioians actually ruin perfectly good chili by mixing it with pasta?  O, the humanity!!!

    Keep in mind that Cincinnati chili is NOT the chili you’re thinking of. It’s actually descended from a Macedonian recipe, and includes cinnamon and chocolate.

    It also makes Cincinnati an oddity in that it’s a relatively conservative region in which discussion of three-, four-, and five-ways is quite common.

    (Then there’s that OTHER subject that gets a bit of discussion around here, to the confusion and amusement of the rest of the English-speaking world. *shudder*)

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 13 at 10:37 AM • permalink

  141. Cincinnatti chili is different?  With chocolate

    Then it ain’t chili.  There will be no leftie tactics of re-defining or hijacking words for personal gain here, less I file a complaint with Lord Karl…..and I will go around wronwright if I must.

    This is America, d’ya hear?!!??!!

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 10:45 AM • permalink

  142. Cincinnati chili is different?  With chocolate?

    Then it ain’t chili.

    Yeah, probably. But it was the only word at hand, and at the time, I don’t think “real” chili had penetrated into the Midwest.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 13 at 10:51 AM • permalink

  143. Weren’t cacao nibs originally eaten with chili by South American Indians?

    Posted by egg_ on 2006 12 13 at 11:09 AM • permalink

  144. Stuart, where did you get the idea that I was planning to ban YOU? Oy.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 13 at 11:37 AM • permalink

  145. The Mexican dish known as Mole Chicken (pronounced “mo-leh”) is made with chocolate. The Aztecs used to drink unsweetened chocolate flavored with chili pepper. Chocolate: it’s not just for sweets.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 13 at 11:40 AM • permalink

  146. Chocolate: it’s not just for sweets.

    I grew up in an homogenous cultural matrix in Middle America™, where I was insulated from UnAmerican Influences™.  I didn’t even have a passport until I was 45!!!!  O, the horrors!!!  The shame!  And the pain continues on.

    /EuroWeenie Mode

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 12 13 at 12:30 PM • permalink

  147. After he was earlier prattling on about “our narrow perspectives”, PK now blesses us with this nugget:

    Still, if you or the other bloggers can’t deal with ideas that I bring to the debate, then ban me.

    Ohfergawdssake. Let’s be a little more blunt, then: Among the readers and commenters of this blog you can find students, teachers, scholars, researchers, cab drivers, factory workers, doctors, engineers, journalists, cartoonists, film makers, soldiers, policemen, government workers, and a gazillion more backgrounds (even a nuclear facilities inspector and a couple of former diplomats have commented on occasion, as I recall).

    This group of people is located in all parts of the Anglosphere, as well as various European and Asian countries. (We’re a bit short on the ground in Latin America and Africa, but oh well.) Politically, the readers of this blog run the gamut from reformed leftists, to center-left types with common sense, to libertarians of various stripes, to almost all manner of conservatives (basically every type except Buchanan-style isolationists and David Duke-type fascist fuckwits). The only thing not on offer here are crazy leftists who fancy themselves part of a “reality-based” community while engaging in whole-sale denials of observable reality. If that’s too narrow an outlook for your precious refined tastes, tough cookies.

    At any rate, if you’re planning to be taken seriously at all, you best acknowledge (and act appropriately humble) that on any given subject you may want to talk about, there are at least a handful of potential commenters here who will know a shitload more about it than you do, your obvious delusions of intellectual grandeur notwithstanding. So excuse me if I (and most others here, it would appear) are none too impressed with the “ideas that you bring to the debate”, nor your preferred smugly-condescending style of presenting them.

    Posted by PW on 2006 12 13 at 01:18 PM • permalink

  148. Hey The_Real_JeffS, I’m going to take your comments on a complete level. Thank you. I agree that I could have handled things differently. If there was one thing I could change, it would be my first post. I did not, I confess, understand that this blog is the regular target of genuine trolls who have no interest in debate and that my (I thought lighthearted) opening foray would engender such a dogged emotional defence.

    Still, where I come from the idea of “deference” is completely foreign. Either people have something to say and can stand up for their beliefs or they can’t. I don’t care if someone is 15 or 50 - if you are in a debate you deserve to be listened to, but no-one’s ideas are untouchable.

    I have questions and opinions and can stand up for them. If people think they know more (and I’m sure they will know more on many topics) they should be prepared to prove it. Threatening to “cut me up” with their superior knowledge and wit is just hot air. I know it and they know it.
    yours agreeably,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 01:19 PM • permalink

  149. I thought lighthearted

    Lightheaded, rather. And heavy-footed.

    where I come from the idea of “deference” is completely foreign.

    Ah. “I and my close circle of friends believe in Brutal Honesty™ and sticking it to the Squares, and we don’t need no rules or manners or any of that old-fashioned crap.” This attitude usually lasts until someone’s bong sets someone else’s dorm room on fire.

    Posted by Andrea Harris, Administrator on 2006 12 13 at 01:51 PM • permalink

  150. Like I said earlier:

    Probably one of those people who thinks manners and politeness are out-dated and oppressive, too.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 13 at 01:58 PM • permalink

  151. P-Dub, I hope I remember your post so’s I can copy-and-paste it next time Miranda spews her “lock-step blogsheep” drivel. Nice summary.

    Posted by Dave S. on 2006 12 13 at 02:34 PM • permalink

  152. As to “playing nice” or “knuckling up”, I’m just hitting the ball back over the net.

    So, in essence, you’re just here to argue and it doesn’t matter what the argument is.

    In the context of this little sandpit, being “childish” is hardly a sledge.

    Explain to me how this sentence is not smug and condescending.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 13 at 03:05 PM • permalink

  153. TRJS, Rob Crawford, and others, with all due respect to Paco, I agree with you guys about chili.  I grew up in Texas, for God’s sake!  And even though I’ve lived in Ohio for a lot of years, I can’t even look at Skyline chil—- chilk—- I can’t even say it.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 13 at 03:31 PM • permalink

  154. Ohioians actually ruin perfectly good chili by mixing it with pasta?

    If they do, isnt the resultant nothing more than a church-basement-grade hotdish?

    As for the unholy addition of cinnamon to any meat-dish, excuse me while I wretch.

    ...yours in apathy…

    Thomas

    Posted by Thomas on 2006 12 13 at 04:01 PM • permalink

  155. Andrea - Well, right above where you spoke to me you said ‘Another way to get kicked out is to lecture the admin.’

    As it could be taken as last words to TPK or first words to me, I decided that I would cover by bases (and therefore my backside) by treating it as if you had directed it at me, both allowing me to woo myself into your heart and act like a slightly wronged party, which does give me sympathy points for next time I try to support some tool who looks like an intellectual (and possibly physical) child but is really an intellectual/possibly physical eunuch. 

    Egg - see my comments around #60 or #70 or something about the boxing analogy, which he reused. Silly, eh? The indicator of a second rate mind is stealing someone elses idea in a discussion you are having and then trying to turn it into your own. Ah well.

    Posted by Stuart Lord on 2006 12 13 at 05:20 PM • permalink

  156. TRJS, Rob Crawford, and others, with all due respect to Paco, I agree with you guys about chili.

    Hey! I don’t count that Cincinnati stuff as chili!

    Posted by paco on 2006 12 13 at 05:20 PM • permalink

  157. Great Stuart, progressing nicely. Keep smiling (didn’t run screaming from family, a good sign).
    Good Luck.

    Posted by kae on 2006 12 13 at 05:38 PM • permalink

  158. PS Stuart, <G> is grin (but if she makes you smile, that’s what we’ll call her). <EG> is evil grin, but we’ll have none of that around here.

    Posted by kae on 2006 12 13 at 05:41 PM • permalink

  159. Heh, Kae - Her name also starts with G, so I was really confused. But <G> does make a lot of sense for her name. And thanks. And don’t worry, I’ll let you know if/when <EG> becomes more appropriate.

    Posted by Stuart Lord on 2006 12 13 at 05:51 PM • permalink

  160. PK:

    I don’t care if someone is 15 or 50 - if you are in a debate you deserve to be listened to, but no-one’s ideas are untouchable

    Then why won’t you debate me huh?  Huh? Well?  Scaredy cat?  Join the debate!  Answer the questions! 

    What are you?  Anti-capitalist?  Anti-environment?  Anti-progressive?  Anteroom? Anti-semitic?  Anti-American?  Anti-muslim?  Antidisestablishmentalarism? Anti-logging? Anti-rwandan? Anti-football?  Anti-choice?  Anti-Kath-and-Kim?  Anti-Collingwood? 

    You have posted here a lot, but we still don’t know the answers to any of these questions!

    And did you wash your hands?

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 13 at 05:57 PM • permalink

  161. And even though I’ve lived in Ohio for a lot of years, I can’t even look at Skyline chil—- chilk—- I can’t even say it.

    I grew up on it, so I love it. I like the regular kind, too, but Skyline (or, rather, Gold Star, since I’m an east sider) is great.

    I just realize it’s not what most people think of as chili.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 13 at 06:40 PM • permalink

  162. Rob,

    Oh for crying out loud, be a man!  You’re from Ohio!  Don’t buckle to the likes of anyone from Texas.  Remember, their candidate needed Ohio, twice, to elect him as President.

    Also, I don’t care what anyone else says.  Cincinnati chilli is chilli.  Yes, it has cinnamon and chocolate in it.  But that only makes it better chilli.  Having Rebecca, paco, and Texas Bob say differently doesn’t mean shit.

    Third point, a few years ago they had a chilli contest.  Cincinnati chilli won, defeating Texas style chilli by a big margin.  (dang, never did send a thank you note to Diebold)

    Fourth, I laugh when you say you’re an eastsider.  Only a Cincinnati native knows the difference between eastside and westside culture.

    Lastly, I still laugh when you talk about having met Marty Brennaman.  I’m not sure the Aussies are impressed.  But I certainly am.

    Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 13 at 07:04 PM • permalink

  163. Third point, a few years ago they had a chilli contest.  Cincinnati chilli won, defeating Texas style chilli by a big margin.  (dang, never did send a thank you note to Diebold)

    Really? I honestly find that hard to believe.

    Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 12 13 at 08:33 PM • permalink

  164. #163

    Don’t let the try-hards worry you. No-one can remember the last time Australia won the boomerang throwing competition.

    Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 12 13 at 09:41 PM • permalink

  165. #162: Cincinnati chilli is chilli.

    Yes, in the same way that peanut butter is butter.

    Yes, it has cinnamon and chocolate in it.  But that only makes it better chilli.

    No it doesn’t. That makes it a pregnant woman’s craving. It makes it chinchilla. It makes if chockalilli. But it doesn’t make it chili, let alone better chili!

    Posted by paco on 2006 12 13 at 10:23 PM • permalink

  166. Actually, the US does lag far behind the rest of the covilized world in car burnings and car bombings.  Mebbe our yurpeen betters can tell us how to catch up and have a proper crime rate…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 12 13 at 10:24 PM • permalink

  167. “and once wore a set of fairy wings to class.”

    Appropriate garb for a socialist, given their penchant for dispensing fairy tales.

    Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 13 at 10:33 PM • permalink

  168. “Cincinnati chilli is chilli.  Yes, it has cinnamon and chocolate in it.”

    And, people talk about atrocities being committed in Iraq.

    Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 13 at 10:35 PM • permalink

  169. No worries SCD (#160), happy to answer your questions.

    I am in business, so not anti-capitalist. Generally speaking, I believe that the free market delivers the most efficient results. As stated, I believe in fiscal responsibility, but certainly recognise the need for government investment (as some here have pointed out). In fact, if I was to be critical of the Howard/Costello economic performance it would be that their “no government debt” slogan is now a bit simplistic and perhaps they need to reconsider the government’s gearing (I’m sure they will). But these are nuances.

    I am concerned about the environment, but sceptical of lobby groups and slogans. In Australia the most important issue is water. In other parts of the world there are other concerns. I’m interested to find out more about “climate change”, but do not currently understand all the science. I haven’t seen Al Gore’s movie.

    Anti-progressive? Not sure what you mean here, but I doubt it.

    Anti-Semitic, Anti-American, Anti-Muslim? No to all of these, but I reserve the right to comment on the behaviour or beliefs of anyone. Happy to provide specifics.

    Anti-logging. I’m pro jobs but interested to explore better ways to manage our natural resources. Happy to provide specifics if you have a scenario in mind.

    Anti-football? No, love all codes. Anti-Collingwood? Not from Melbourne.

    If you want to know anything else, just ask.
    yours obligingly,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 10:55 PM • permalink

  170. OK PW (#147), I’ve read your words, let’s move on.

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 11:01 PM • permalink

  171. Har, PiratePorker, me ‘ol slick-palmed hearty!

    You are pretty deft on the easy ones, but I see you studiously avoided the difficult issues, to wit:

    Anteroom? Antidisestablishmentalarism? Anti-rwandan? Anti-choice?  Anti-Kath-and-Kim? 

    And also the most persistant unanswered question remains:

    Did you wash your hands?

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 13 at 11:06 PM • permalink

  172. See, TPK? That is good - more concise, articulate, and less petulant. I won’t condescend by saying ‘well done’ or anything like that, so I’ll merely say ‘keep it up’.

    Posted by Stuart Lord on 2006 12 13 at 11:08 PM • permalink

  173. #172 Duly noted and appreciated.
    yours positively,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 11:13 PM • permalink

  174. Yeah, sorry SCD, got distracted by some pop-up porn, so had to take a break. You’ll be relieved to know my hands are washed and keyboard scrubbed.

    I’m totally for most of those things, I think they’re great. Especially rooms. But you really have stumped me with “Antidisestablishmentalarism”. Are they like a mental offshoot of the antidisestablishmentarians? Happy to have it explained.

    yours hygienically,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 13 at 11:25 PM • permalink

  175. As to “playing nice” or “knuckling up”, I’m just hitting the ball back over the net.

    So, in essence, you’re just here to argue and it doesn’t matter what the argument is.

    In the context of this little sandpit, being “childish” is hardly a sledge.

    Explain to me how this sentence is not smug and condescending.

    Ignored these, I see.  Typical and telling.  Now, on to more important business:

    Wronwright, dear heart.  Third point, a few years ago they had a chilli contest.  Cincinnati chilli won, defeating Texas style chilli by a big margin.  What was this Texas chili contest where Cincinnati chili won?  I demand proof!!

    Defend Cincinnati sock-chili if you will, I refuse to accept it as part of the chili family. 

    Apologies to Paco for slandering him with chili-canards.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 14 at 12:09 AM • permalink

  176. Sorry PiratePorker - the cricket’s started now, so you’ll excuse me if I go engage in something which is not only interesting, but has a point to its existance.

    Why not tootle off now to Web Dreary - you’ll be able to condescend to a whole new class of people..

    Oh!  See here for antidesestablishmentarianism.  They even spell it correctly.  See, even you can learn something here.

    Bugger!  Ponting’s out.

    Posted by Stop Continental Drift! on 2006 12 14 at 12:14 AM • permalink

  177. “The Federal Government’s commitment to reduce expenditure by $8 billion is economically irresponsible. Expenditure cuts of that magnitude will inevitably cause job losses - directly in the public sector…”

    A bunch of guys who depend on government money (like his Quigship) wish to keep on recieiving government money.

    What a shocker.

    Nothing more need be said on the subject, methinks.

    Posted by Dave Surls on 2006 12 14 at 12:19 AM • permalink

  178. #174: Thanks for your time SCD. But any occasion you want to explain “Antidisestablishmentalarism” I’d love to hear about it. Thanks for the spelling tip, but I’m not sure what you are referring to; did I misspell something?

    #175: not sure which post you were quoting there (those words have been on a few). If you’ve got any questions, I’d be happy to answer them. If you don’t have any questions I’d be happy to not answer them as well.

    yours evenhandedly,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 14 at 12:22 AM • permalink

  179. Did I mention that Big Boy has chilli spaghetti?

    (that should end this argument)

    Posted by wronwright on 2006 12 14 at 05:45 AM • permalink

  180. #179: No it doesn’t. The lousiest service I ever got in a restaurant was in a Big Boy’s. I consider it a distinctly inferior chain. I bet they put Alpo in their “chili”.

    Posted by paco on 2006 12 14 at 09:06 AM • permalink

  181. #178,  The post was #152.  I’ll repeat:

    As to “playing nice” or “knuckling up”, I’m just hitting the ball back over the net.
    So, in essence, you’re just here to argue and it doesn’t matter what the argument is.

    In the context of this little sandpit, being “childish” is hardly a sledge.
    Explain to me how this sentence is not smug and condescending.

    The words in italics are yours.  Care to answer my questions now, or will we just assume no one is reading and you’re free to dodge once again?

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 12 14 at 10:27 AM • permalink

  182. No worries Rebecca, bit busy now, but would love to answer your questions a bit later.
    yours responsively,
    ThePirateKing

    Posted by ThePirateKing on 2006 12 14 at 05:21 PM • permalink

  183. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.