Stuff like this...

“I don’t lose arguments”
“I am impervious to any and all attacks”
“quite short of my calibre of talent who writes among the deepest, most piercing, compelling prose”
‘He doesn’t exhibit the finesse I do”.

Such a tiny sample of the shit you’ve spouted and bestowed upon yourself in all the years I’ve been on WinMX.

No mere aspiration for eminence, however ardent will ever do the business though. You’ve always lacked a style of chaste, mate. The laborious study, attentive observation of the world and cultivating assiduously the habits of reading, thinking and observing. These don’t make you unique nor are they unfamiliar to me. My own research interests are abnormally profuse. I’ve always strived to have the knowledge to adapt myself with intuitive quickness and ease for every situation which I may chance be placed.

Knot4Prophet wrote:

There are multiple motives at work for attacking you. Using the smallest of forms would = boredom, humour, testing and useless curiosity. I can quite easily enfeeble you if I like. Your arrogance procures double dangers. Your delay in responding to this is more a case of relieving yourself from the fatigue and embarrassment of running. I manufactured it that way and you got sucked in. You are impervious to even the simplest form of attacks. Men are often shown to be what they really are; great or diminutive, equal or unequal to the occasion that calls them out. One only needs to contradistinguish hard facts against your own self aggrandising and Barrett’s shameful and unmanly limerence to shown that at their base they are unprecedented delusions.



When did this become universally applicable? It’s a fucking reckless statement. You are yourself (even though I didn’t assume anything) essentially assuming that age alone is the precursor for greater knowledge. Things aren’t that simple. You get back what you put in. Nature may have manifested a partiality toward someone whereas for others intelligence is predominantly a result of grinding up thy loins and going to work with all the indomitable energy of Hannibal sealing the Alps.

For the record: I have research interests in economic fluctuations and growth, labour market dynamics, preference elicitation and welfare measurement , small island economies, microeconomics with applications to regional and industrial economics. Moreover, growth cycles, macroeconomics, transition economics and European economic integration, globalisation; global capitalism and history of economic thought.

Let’s hope you are as unimpressed by that list as I was of yours.



You’ve ignorantly misconstrued my original assertion here.

Rhetorical comparative figures of speech, such as simile are species of metaphor distinguished by how the comparison is communicated. It is the same for metonymy, parable, and synecdoche. One who has acquired a mastery of the language would be more PRECISE and not use the parent terminology.

Do me a favour and take a gander at reintrepreted, conservativism, econmy, repsonding, upong, similie x6, bloviatiated, ad homimen, enviroment, platitidinous, encsonced (a)merican all words that are presented erroneously in your post. And this from someone who claims to be editing other people's essays and writings for content, clarity and grammar? Haha.

And here’s the big one, you’ve went and spelt simile incorrectly six times! Six fucking times! Ok I will allow one or two as typo but six? That’s just fucking dyslexic and tells me you didn’t even know what a simile was until you fucking Googled it.

So now we finally see the truth. Your use of English attemptsto go down the correct line yet even a mere wannabe bookworm is a miserable driveller to me in this informal environment.

And to address a jumble of shit you've written in here:



Quite a big chunk of my work history has been in procurement consultancy where copia verborum and “correct” taste in diction are paramount. I have led on 20,000 word contracts in excess of £2m spanning a variety of industries. I’ve gained a 1st at undergraduate and a distinction at Masters. I am now working towards publication of my PhD research and furthering my commitments as a Board Member to a number of not-for-profit organisations. Needles to say, I am also a major shareholder in a Group Ltd with all units profitable, something I attained when I was at a very young age and using nothing but capital I made off of my own back. Unless you have achievements to stack up against these (and working for daddy’s business doesn’t cut it) then I suggest you spare me the thin bullshit of your superior English and most definitely the questioning of my educational credentials because I assuredly trump you in every facet of those there mentioned. Indeed, whilst I debate and have my work critiqued by a panel of esteemed professors from disparate fields of study, you are busy testing out arguments with Bear on MSN, proof reading and helping Vampy cheat her way through basic management modules. You hurl words such as audacity, gall, ignorance, inadequacy and invalidness at me? Try looking in the fucking mirror, you hypocritical little shit.

And beyond all the above, I’ve taken an “in vivo” research approach to regional variances of dialect and accent across Britain, the Americas and the Common Wealth realm. My interests include slang, catch phrases, argot, colloquialisms, tomfoolery, conservative, general and advanced received pronunciation to name but a few. This is so that I can speak and write promptly, easily and with a variety of different styles. Some appreciate the way I express myself, others do not. There are then individuals like you who appear ignorant enough to mock the words and metaphors I use without fully understanding 1) the motives behind their use and 2) their origins or rather various origins. You will find that some are a continuation and development of Anglo-Saxon settlers to the North East in the 5th century which differ in phonology, morphology, syntax and lexicon. Others I may choose to apply can be traced to the period of ‘carboniferous capitalism’ or even witty, charismatic, sadistic and frightening terms circulated across Australian penitentiary divisions in the late 70s. Understand that that much of it is designed to be irreverent, humorous, different or startling. At the source they were crafted by relevantly uneducated people in necessitous times. It is not appropriate to critique them as thought I deliver them as terminology in my ‘grey literature’.

Thus far Knot you’ve shown a truly unforgiveable lack of prudence and are clearly out of your depth.

And another thing:

Haha ok then smart lad, post your next fucking reply in French and give me the headache of costs and translation because I think this is a prevarication.



Merely remembered? Hardly, mate. You searched around then it was with the advantage of twenty-twenty hindsight that you went for it. What else could you have confronted me with? You’ve got virtually nothing. I hardly chat to be people on here or in chat rooms, there’s no MSN or anything there like. I’m a monologist who distances himself from the ideologue of bullshit, everyday life chit-chat.

Yeah the measures I listed were all in short, lucid format. Many heady formulations that the current administration used in an attempt to solve the crisis. What did you do? You fucking dismissed them all in panoptic fashion without displaying any technical knowledge of them or applying any constructive or objective discourse on their performance.

Look at Obama’s performance and particularly when compared to what happened before under Bush’s term. There’s no doubt it helped the US from sliding into a depression. Without any stimulus unemployment would be higher, much higher, than it is today. Having said that though 9.1/4% (right now) it’s a disgrace. I doubt it’ll be right until the middle of the decade. Also, during the crisis there’s been spending on two fucking wars, which is spending that does not stimulate the economy. It provides the least favourable cost-to-benefit ratio in terms of the economy of almost any other kind of spending. And yet more, at the time of posting who could have predicted the freefall other than say Roubini.

The negatives are that the handling of the bankers was way too-lenient, that HAMP can be looked upon with sneering-disbelief, the stimulus wasn’t big enough and by design it was flawed because it was Obama’s tax cuts vs. real stimulus.



You’re attempting to take gratification from “rightly predicting” Obama and his team would not make any epochal shifts from the dominance of free-market economics. Haha. That’s essentially what you predicted with the “the very necessary reconsideration of the economy as a whole” comment. You couldn’t have made a more common sense postulation! A lot of what you ask for, however, completely deviates from the rule of practical policy recommendations that actually have a chance of winning broad public support or being enacted by Congress. Why don’t you fucking move from rhetoric to reality and understand where my position has been from the start.

I mean, the reconsiderations you're presenting as black-and-white view are not implemented for a number of reasons mate. Too many to address here. Essentially though it’s because no one is willing or able to come up with a reconstruction.

You also need to get in your thick skull that many economists are idealists, they’re pursuing knowledge and trying to make our society better but they also have career concerns. In terms of academia it means you have to publish, which means you have to be accepted by journals then being accepted by journals means you have to go through peer review process and that means the model has to be accepted by other economists or other social scientists. This means there’s an obstacle where standards are set by your peers/elders and there develops an assembly, some parts of this are good such as discipline and what are accepted explanations but some parts means one can get snagged or trapped in a set of hypothesis which are accepted within a circle but are in fact not good descriptions of the world in current operation or not good in addressing the key problems.

One of Adam Smiths basic insights is that people try to establish monopolies, restrict competition and it’s also the same for the marketplace of ideas. Ideas that challenge conventional wisdom are even more troubling than products that challenge in a dominant firm. There is great resistance to unconventional ideas. Always has been. You know, some of the most influential papers in economics have been rejected by 3 journals before being accepted by the fourth and these are people have had a Nobel Prize for their work.

And before you jump to conclusions I’m an advocate of radical reform as capitalism has been clearly shown to have a self-destructive streak. At the outset, Obama should have taken a more solid stance. That’s initially applying Keynesian theory then moving to a more social market economy. We would have seen harder regulation with barriers placed in front of the banks and their marauding instincts and even pulling to pieces their assets and nationalising aspects of them. The state and the political system would still remain the definitive player but more democratic and focused on people’s requirements. As requirements, people would be put on green and infrastructure projects for decades. The stimuli would have been a vision for the long-term future generations and not the short-term.

But honestly it’s probably going to take many more periods of economic instability, international pressures and a general sense of anxiety over the future before any significant strides are made on these utopian economies.

Also, explain to my why the fuck you felt it necessary to rip apart a perfectly good thread and sew it back up as this knot versus the world advertisement. I thought this was free speech where things don't get tampered with as guarantee.

Sigh. Lol.




When you put something in quotes, you should be directly quoting the other person, not summarizing what you feel they are saying. To do anything but, is not just foolish, but intellectually disingenuous. I do claim to not lose arguments, with the addendum you failed to include, which is that I don't argue any subject to which I'm not fully apprised. I do say that I'm impervious to any and all attacks, because I am. I just don't give a fuck what others think of me. My opinion of myself is an educated, comparative opinion. Your opinion of me depends on the mood your in that day. That third quote I've never made, directly or indirectly, and speaks more to your opinion of my writing, than my own. : ) The fourth quote is the only direct quote, from an earlier post here, and it still stands. Don't attempt such tomfoolery in misquoting people when you write your big PhD, ok fella?





Lacked a style of chaste? Lmao. Scroll through your own posts on this forum to clearly see a lack of chaste in style. I, on the other hand, can and have written both with and without obscenity, and numerous posts of each kind can be found on this forum, and other places where my writing is exhibited. So then, you are either unobservant, or again, disingenuous - you choose.



The first "sentence" here isn't even a sentence:



It has no predicate. You actually do this quite often, though I've got better things to do than go around mopping up your bad grammar on this forum. Comma Splices too, you suffer from, incidentally. So perhaps you should "strive to have the knowledge to adapt" yourself "with intuitive quickness and ease" for situations that require a modicum of proper grammar.









None of these motives are near the truth, for the reasons you specifically attack me, repeatedly. Those reasons might account for why you may attack random people, but not why you focus so much effort on me. Ah, but I know why. And so does most anyone following this forum for years.



Lol. How so? By pointing out typos? Lmao. OMG, I'm so weakened now.



Apply that to yourself, to divest yourself of hypocrisy.




There is no fatigue in doing nothing. And I rarely get embarrassed by anything - certainly not from a pretentious, trenchant windbag such as you. Notice too, how I respond to every little thing someone says. You quote large tracts of my posts, respond to very little, if any of the specific claims, thereby side-stepping having to actually face up to what I've said. It's a common tactic employed by those who hide; perhaps fatigued and embarrassed? Lol. Some people feel that if they type voluminously, while avoiding the actual points raised, that it won't be noticed that they are avoiding them. I'll be sure to point out your avoidances, since I'm much more thorough than are you. My delay in responding was exactly what I said it was, and nothing more. I do have better things to do than school you in English.




You manufactured it what way? Sucked into what? Sucked into responding after a couple months? Lol. Make some sense. First you claim I was running and hiding from your pathetic invective, and now you claim I got "sucked in". Which is it? I can't both be sucked into responding, and running and hiding. Smh.




Agreed. I sure am. *"...any and all attacks." Thank-you for noticing.




".. to shown.." ? Are you inserting a past tense incorrectly here? Surely you wouldn't make such a glaring faux-pas as this, considering how you subject your writing to so many learned peers for review? Ha. Where's your "hard facts"? All I've seen out of you is emotionally charged editorializing.




Wrong. I did not ever once say that "age alone is the precursor for greater knowledge". I merely said that you aren't accounting for it, and it is a major factor, though certainly not the only precursor for greater knowledge.



We weren't discussing intelligence. We were discussing knowledge. They aren't even close to the same thing, Mos. I'm not surprised you lack the meticulousness to see when you make such blatant failures of logic, though. It's rampant. We were discussing knowledge and whether or not age is a factor in accruing knowledge. And it is, as I've said. Your attempt to misconstrue is noted. And, since you brought up intelligence, now, I must take issue with your conclusions on how it can be attained, and your lame analogy to Hannibal.

Intelligence can not be gained by "going to work" at anything. Intelligence is static. This is why IQs are shown to be static throughout life, regardless of one's age. You are confusing intelligence with knowledge. They are far from the same thing. One can be intelligent, but lack knowledge ( a clever child ). One can be knowledgeable but lack intelligence ( these types abound ). And your analogy likening gaining intelligence to Hannibal "sealing the Alps" is flawed and inapplicable. You cannot gain intelligence through effort. Too bad too, because you would be much more intelligent now, after such capacious circumlocution that you attempt to pass off as posts. Lol.



Even more so, I'd wager. My "research interests" go far beyond mere economics.




No, I've not misconstrued anything. You clearly attempted to discredit my labeling of your similie as a metaphor. You were wrong. All similies ARE metaphors, and no amount of babbling you attempt will change that "hard fact". Lol.



Oh gosh, you've found some typos in my 1000+ word post! Wow, you really got me there, eh? Haha. I admit I do suffer from exhaustion induced dyslexia at times, and as you can see most of them typos consist of inverted letters. I've already pointed out your much more serious grammatical and comprehension errors, multiple times. If typos produced at 6 am, when I'm half asleep writing a post on a forum to some pretentious upstart, qualify as a victory for you, then by all means, enjoy it. : ) ... because both you and I know, that I can spell all those words and many, many more. In fact my vocabulary and spelling acuity was at university level, when I was 9 years old, in the fourth grade. Lol. And no, I don't merely "claim" to edit other people's writing. I actually do it. Singling out a few typos of words we both know I can easily spell, at best, speaks to my own laziness in responding to your posts.



Actually, wrong again. "Similie" is just a variant spelling of simile. : ) You try so hard, too. It's cute. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Similie



"attemptsto" ? Wtf is that? A typo!? Lol. Can you smell the fucking hypocrisy? Lmfao.




Oh, bra-fucking-vo. What a bunch of balderdash. I could give a fuck less about how much money you've made, or how far along in your studies of economics and business you are. You pretend your English is perfect. While you may be handy with a spell checker, your perspicacity with English is still not apparent. You certainly have copia verBOREum, but any idiot can write volumes that say very little. Your little list of accomplishments means nothing to me. I do not measure "success" in dollars or by the esteem of some economics instructors. I measure "success" in life by quality of relationships and impact on others, and I've excelled at both. I could care less about money and the lack of advertisements on my websites, despite the fact that I'm barely scraping by, is a testament to my claims. So no, I don't count as an achievement that I make myself available to work for peanuts for my greedy father who only calls me when he absolutely can't work without a second person. Rather, that is an example of my charity. : )



I'll mock anyone's "metaphors" (yes, you are now referring to the similie of yours as a metaphor, though you attempted to discredit me for it! LMAO) if they lack substance. I learned long ago from English professors how to properly construct metaphors, and how to avoid metaphors which lack parallels - you obviously have not. While you were busy studying economics and how to insult someone with slang terms from around the world, at your age, I was busy studying Chemical Engineering, physics, mathematics and instrumentation. English I had down well before that age. Lol. Here's your earlier "metaphor":

"Stack it up against reality though and all the flair and finesse tapers like a signal flare."

And another:

"...intelligence is predominantly a result of grinding up thy loins and going to work with all the indomitable energy of Hannibal sealing the Alps."

I understand the "motives behind their use" and "their origins". That you can manufacture simpleton metaphors doesn't negate their inapplicability and lack of parallelism. You won't learn this in economics class, or studying how to cuss in Swahili. Lol.



Bloviation. Perhaps you can research the rich etymological history of that word, when you have some time. Lol. And your two cited metaphors... to which era are you harkening back, with them? Merely citing Hannibal's lust to conquer and attempting to construe that as how intelligence can be gotten through sheer effort, is flawed and inapplicable. Never use metaphors unless they actually bring MORE meaning to your prose; otherwise, they'll only detract from it.




"as thought I deliver" ?? What's this, ANOTHER grammatical error? Where's this team of specialists who review your writing, now? Perhaps you should submit it to them first, before bothering to post here, because it only exposes your continuing hypocrisy.



Clearly not. Lol. … and “unforgiveable”? Did your team of grammatical professionals not teach you how to spell? It’s unforgivable, Mossy. You take issue with obvious typos of mine, yet you make spelling and grammar errors all through this post! Now that is unforgivable. Lol.



En fait, ce n'est pas un subterfuge. Je parle et j'écris couramment en anglais et en français. J'ai deux enfants en immersion école française, qui sont sur la bonne voie de devenir bilingues. Nous sommes obligés d'apprendre le français dans les écoles publiques au Canada et j'ai excellé en elle, comme je le fais dans tous les sujets que je tente.

Not only is my written French excellent, but I also pronounce it perfectly, as well - in both Canadian and France's pronunciation propensities. Vous perdez, encore une fois.




Yes, I "merely remembered". I did not "search". I did not even look at your old post about Obama. I didn't quote any of it, which is a clue, because when I do cite a specific post, I generally directly quote it and answer to any and all points raised (or razed, as here) in it. But in this case, I had no call to quote you. It was quite simple to remember your optimistic idealism, and momentarily harken back to it. I can confront you with all manner of criticisms, in fact, without bothering to scour through old posts or logs of my chat, or anything else other than my boundless, exacting memory. Memories like you spending literally hours per day, posting rap lyrics into my chat room. Lol. Were you testing out your skillz in "phonology, morphology, syntax and lexicon." then? Haha.



Dismissed them as you do to the bulk of my posts? As noted, I already said you quote large tracts of my posts, then take issue with perhaps one sentence... or worse yet, some typos! Lol. I didn't need to go through your panoply of economic band-aids, because I already know their efficacy - the national debt of the USA, under GWB rose 4.4 trillion dollars, in 8 years (while funding wars). The national debt under Obama has risen 3 trillion in 2 years. Do the fucking math. Printing more money to "pay" for new initiatives does not "solve" the economic crisis. Printing money only dilutes the value of all money.



I just did a comparison. Even while funding major wars, over 8 years, Bush only added 4.4 trillion to the national debt. Obama has added nearly that much in a quarter of that time. There's "no doubt" that printing money to address real economic concerns helped the US from sliding into depression? Dream on. You can pretend there is "no doubt" about any hypothetical that never happened, but I won't subscribe to it. And an unemployment rate of 6-10% is exactly what industry has always wanted - a generous unemployed labour pool from which to draw from, and with much competition for jobs, it keeps wages low. Duh. The unemployment rate BALLOONED under Obama and hasn't changed since. But hey - it's bad for business if we're all employed, anyway.



Gosh. How learned of you. Did they teach you this is Economics class? i.e., how to push off your predictions years ahead, so that they won't have to be tested. Lol. First, you act like Obama will be our new economic saviour. Now, two years later, all you can point to are some fucking band-aids he created by printing money out of thin air at the Federal Reserve! Lol. Sure sure, in half a decade all this printing of money will be felt - as fucking inflation.



Whose choice is it to continue funding on "two fucking wars"? Obama's. His grandiose plans and platform promises were of the same ilk as any other bullshit politician in this system.



Blah blah blah.




I don't much give a fuck what will win "broad public support". I'm talking about what will actually work. To have a revolution, there must be revolutionary ideas, and leaders (not unlike Ron Paul) who have the stamina and intestinal fortitude to promote and implement them. The public doesn't understand the intricacies of the economy - the leaders do. Obama is an abject failure, economically and all major economic indicators prove it. Argue them all you want, but save your bullshit forecasting from the Oracle of Optimism for those inclined to astrology or other such nonsense.



Agreed. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.



Here's an example of a comma splice - where you've separated two complete sentences with a comma. I guess they don't teach you them in economics class either, huh. Lol. I know full well about economists, past and present. Current economists are no paragons of virtue as you'd have us believe, and their collusion with big business, alone, is enough to hold them in contempt.



Oh, I am well versed in the dynamics of "getting published". This is nothing new. Wander back to Watson and Crick and their ruthless, ego-driven lust for being the first to publish about the structure of DNA, for a decades old, well known example of this.

"a set of hypothesis" is wrong. The plural of "hypothesis" is hypotheses, idiot.

If leaders want to lead, they do not subscribe to business as usual. They do not worry about "peer review" and being accepted by the established norms. That is only a recipe for propagation.



"Always has been." is a sentence fragment. Ah, so you do see the profit in revolutionary ideas. Good. So you finally agree with me, after all this circumlocution. You could have saved us both some trouble and admitted it from the start, before you bothered to profess on the "accomplishments" of Obama.



You cannot both be a proponent of Obama and an advocate of radical reform - they are mutually exclusive. Obama is anything but radical.



Blah blah blah.



"Stimuli" is plural. You can say "the stimulus" or "these stimuli", but technically, you cannot say "the stimuli". Another job for your team of professors to ferret out for you.



Ah, what a preDICKtion. Your summary basically says "we're not out of the woods yet". Lol. Is this what your years of economic study have afforded you? Smh @ the education system.


Now then.

What you avoided in this post is my charge that you didn't understand, though you clearly quoted me, that I never once said the measures applied in 1929 SHOULD have been applied in this crisis. You can't even own up to when you are wrong. At least I admit to when I am. Sure, I made a few typos, from typing very fast, while being up very late. What's your excuse for not answering to direct accusations like the one just mentioned? What's you excuse for a litany of spelling and grammar errors in a post where you attempt to discredit my English superiority by pointing out a few typos? What's your excuse for "heaping laurels" on yourself when you clearly lack the proficiency with English that you claim.

Stick to your copia verborum and 20 000 word, 2 million British pound contract filings, because you sure as hell are no English master, "matey". Lol.

Nonetheless, I look forward to your further objurgation and bloviation, now that I have some limited time to dissect it.

_________________

"..explain to my why..." OMG - ANOTHER spelling error. For shame.

Rip apart a perfectly good thread? It had nothing to do whatsoever with the topic being discussed - Shy Kitty.

The reason anyone on forums splits threads, is most often because they deviate from the subject.

You should be fucking thanking me, for taking the time to give this subject the exposure it deserves, rather than have it buried on some thread about Shy Kitty, when nothing in any of these posts has anything to do with her.

And how does MosDEAF + Odilon = The World? Lol. Such unmitigated audacity.

You thought this was free speech?

Have I ever locked a thread?

Have I ever deleted posts?

Have I ever limited anyone's speech here in any way?

Absolutely not.

Splitting this topic onto its own was doing it a service, not an injustice. Your pitiful attempt to pretend your "free speech" was hindered because I split some off topic posts to their own thread, is totally preposterous, but I'm starting to expect such emotionally driven drivel from you.

_________________

Oh... and since I was just reviewing this thread, I noticed you also misspelt "quantative" and "plaintitively". More work for your team of professionals, Mos.

_________________

Fuck me, this is gonna take a long time.

Lol. Now you know how I feel.

_________________

I’ll address this first since it takes care of the bulk of your tripe.

A self-proclaimed English flâneur dishing out hubristic proclamations charges me with fuck all mate. Your gig online has always been verbose textual diarrhoea, never letting apples be apples and desperately trying to impress. I’ve always typed straight off-the-cuff and actioned without any nervous backward glances. Modesty rarely get abandoned unless clever dicks try to question my educational credentials. History on this forum shows I apply leeway to the syntactic rules of language in an informal environment. I said as much when arguing with Thompson, I said as much in my last post to you Timmy (suicide thread too) and anyone who knows me understands this.

All I’ve seen in your post is a 40 year old giggling like some hormonal teenage girl and repeating the same joke half a dozen fucking times. I’m also pretty sure you even labelled one of my responses as “cute”. It’s an astonishing moment of chutzpah when you act like that and think you can somehow stand with me.



Now you’re wrapped up in some giant Kinder Egg of befuddlement. I took a cathartic blast on Twce last week then after a night’s kip and a good old friend casted a wise light on the moment, there I was, on the forum apologising.

About your English failings, you can coat the cracks like Artex on the dividers of a house built too close to a cliff edge all you want but I’m not buying it. Go to work on that mate, I implore you.



The quotes are actually all from the forum. I don’t have chat logs since I don’t suffer from worthless fucking disposophobia like you.



Then you should stay away from Economics because you seem nothing more than a punk who sits up through the night eating Desbutal pills and summarizing the less than hyper-sensuous side of political economics.



Oh you did type that nonsense, though I’m not surprised you wish to distance yourself from it. Let me refresh that “boundless, exacting memory” of yours. http://forums.knot4prophet.com/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=191&p=780&hilit=compelling#p780

It's at the bottom of your ridiculous post.



If I attack anyone repeatedly then it’s Barrett and that’s because I think he needs it. You caress the lad too much. Look at the monstrosity he has become. You’ve had a big hand in that.



Yeah, I do notice [you really need to stop getting excited over it] and it’s extremely uninspiring to watch you assemble adjective after adjective and attempt to make short punchy sentences. Your posturing has essentially become a bit passé. I go about quoting large tracts of your posts because they garner such little respect from me and I prefer polychronicity.



Intelligence was a slip up but not through a lack of understanding of the differences between the two. I merely typed the wrong word while interjecting. It should be understandable since I have to sift through an endless amount of fucking tedious one liner’s aimed at every fucking titbit of my post. I will say though, whilst intelligence is overwhelming regarded as static there are eminent scientists and neuropsychologists who have published empirical evidence suggesting IQ’s can be improved but I guess that’s a weak rebuttal since I remain doubtful myself.

One needs to be honest here as well because we were discussing fuck all about the topic in the first place. You brought it up and you never used the word “account”, "accounted" or “accounting” you used the word “assume”. And how do you even know I wasn’t accounting for it?

Anyway fuck it, pointless discussion.



Even more so, you say? That’s quite striking actually since much of my learning is from peer-reviewed periodicals which require substantial subscription fees. It sounds like you can barely put food on the table for you and yours.

And yeah, mine go far beyond economics too. Well done lad.



Oh fucking hell, show me where I said simile was not a metaphor then. You’re still fucking spelling it wrong too.



Go and consult a wealth of popular and reliable language reference sources and you’ll see “similie” has no credibility.

Understand that large websites like Wikipedia will include words such “similie” within the DNS tree structure for idiots like you who are unfamiliar with the term and can’t spell it correctly.



This is the usual response from someone who hasn't and never will have anything to compare to another’s accomplishments. You brought them all into question and I gave you some facts. Must be a bitter pill to swallow having all that knowledge you possess yet the sum of its application is on WinMX, MSN and some management modules. Oh and then there’s that trivia room you run. Haha.

By the way, what essays were you referring to earlier?

Something else I wanna bring up is this:



Honestly, I forgot how much that made me laugh the first time I read it. Notice the part in bold too which negates an earlier claim that your never focused your attention on it as career. Also, I was talking to Ashwing a while ago about her writing and I’m pretty sure she mentioned you had started to focus on yours.

Have the guts to admit that your writing career has failed miserably, you’re not alone though mate just look at the endless amount of blogs on the Internet.



Ah listen mate, in principle I’ve got the utmost respect for those that place emphasis on relationships and positive impact on others but I’m fucking certain excelling at them doesn’t stand up in your case.

LadyWitch said she despised the person she became whilst with you and anyone around at that time will remember the blast of indescribable filth that came out of her fucking trap whilst you sat back and laughed with her. We’ve then got Barrett Thompson who you’ve given a dour makeover. He’s an unpicked scab, an overgrown fingernail and a sudden, unremitting testicle itch all rolled into one. I then call to mind the circulation of promiscuous chat logs of yourself and Taz in an attempt to ruin her marriage and credibility. There is then the many years of trolling Christian rooms taking sultry pleasure from belittling and antagonising them. More recently at your grand old age you’re making shitty WinMX forums with wild-eyed energy as a result of some useless WinMX World knock back and that’s not even mentioning the various other immature, non sequitur shit you aggrandize on here from your WinMX existence. Importantly too, let’s not forget the time you encouraged me to not let up on attacking your pal Pantele with the picture of his daughter.

You’re even an unaccomplished liar, mate.



That isn’t what I asked for. I could produce that on Google Translator. Do the fucking job properly! I’ve got a beauteous maid from St. Mary’s SLA school ready to dissect it with a lot of vigour and sass.



It was just one aspect of the gargantuan ethnography study I’ve been undertaking on WinMX for many years.



I’m actually listening to rap right now as I type. Here, check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYoBin63S84



Flawed comparison.

This is situation when Obama assumed office: YOY change in industrial production as comparison to the recession in the mid 70s (2008 was around -9.4 and 1974 was around -8.4). Housing unit starts were at their lowest in over 40 years. (2008 low was 978) The YOY change in non-farm payroll accounts averaged -0.6 in 2008 which approached the W shaped recession in the 80s. Global output and trade plummeted as uncertainty rose and credit constrained. Purchases as 70% of the US economy crashed (112.9 75.0 78.8 70.1 50.5 46.7 -21.9 -58.6 -119.0 -139.4 -162.8 -225.7)

To complicate matters Obama was dealing with a recession that didn’t neatly follow the pattern of past downturns and the assortment of worrisome symptoms ran deeper than anyone imagined.



More like you can’t. I think that’s pretty clear now.



I know and it was fucking flawed [see above].

The actions and stimulus packages I’ve referred to were more than just printing money. I’m talking about two rounds of stimulus, financial stabilisation measures, and broader Fed activity. Look at the fucking list of measures I outlined for you but you continue to dismiss because you don’t know what the fuck they mean.



Oh yeah, don’t subscribe to the fact that during 2008-2009 the stock market fell more sharply than in the six months after Black Tuesday in 1929. Don’t subscribe to the fact that global trade declined more rapidly than in the first year of the Great Depression. Don’t subscribe to the fact that the economy was not self equilibrating and that a variety of vicious cycles were pulling it down even deeper, at a rate of 700,000 jobs a month at the worst of it.

Moreover, don’t subscribe to CBO and CEA reports detailing the economic impact of the stimulus. Don’t subscribe to the empirical forecasting models that were used to simulate the macroeconomic effects of the government’s total policy response and found that the range of monetary and fiscal policies fended off another depression. Hell, even economists from both parties said a stimulus package was needed and even a fucking flawed one to prevent the economy from sliding deeper into the mire.

You’re a fucking idiot, mate. It’s actually frustrating seeing how little you comprehend at your age.



Yes, straight from Marx’s reserve army of labour concept. Such boundless knowledge you have. Did you read that in a textbook down the library or have you personally experienced it whilst on daddys payroll. Hah.



It’s common for declines in the unemployment rate to lag behind economic recoveries. It’s common sense that unemployment balloons in economic downturns.

Look at recent data from the Labor Department showing unemployment at a two-year low of 9% In January. That was a drop from 9.4% in December and 9.8% in November last year. Manufacturing employment jumped by 49,000 in January.

The big problem is that idiots like you don’t observe the millions of jobs that would have been lost, without stimulus. But you’re very much aware of the millions of workers who currently lack work.



I was talking about unemployment not being healthier until the middle of the decade. The CBO originally projected it would average 4.8% from 2015 to 2020 then later revised it to 5%. But hey, econometric evidence and trends in the labour market don’t mean shit to you when you’re sat at home making magnificent proclamations that Obama won’t budge from free-market capitalism.



Whose choice was it to go to war in the first place? Would you have them just down tools and go? No controlled reduction? Not bothered about energising the extremist movement, al-Qaida recruitment, operations, fundraising and so on? Nonchalantly abandon 31 odd million people? I thought you were a man of humanity? Let’s just leave the armed forces and police with the inability to defend themselves properly. Yadda-yadda-yadda.

Note: there’s going to be a 100,000 troop withdrawal in July with full pull out by 2014. Combat troops left Iraq two weeks ahead of deadline. In terms of spend there will be a $42 billion cut representing the lowest spending on war since 2005.



Nice one, that about sums up your economic knowledge.



Economics is a young science, and a lot of the knowledge is uncertain. If you go to an Economics class you’ll see professors kick off courses with profit maximization, supply and demand, comparative advantage and marginal revenue–marginal cost method. This is stuff that’s a bed of roses for economists. Later they’ll turn their attention to less certain disciplines like macro and microeconomics, monetary theory, growth theory and theory of business cycles. One of actual topics which sees economist most sharply disagreeing on is Keynesian paradigm and it’s what governments utilise and work on most during times of recession. Most of the stuff you suggest falls under heterodox economics.

Reflect on this: “those who reside permanently in the world of ideas, alone and untested do not help anyone when they refuse that reality is more complex than theory’.

Let’s put something into perspective here too: We have Obama and his team, they strode intp the White House and saw a recession that didn’t cleanly follow the motif of past downturns yet they had no choice but to pinpoint the problem and present for action some sort of plan. There was, however, little room for trial and error: Their only testing ground was the economy they were trying to sort out and time was imperative, as markets continued to plunge, jobs disappeared, bad news mounted and confidence eroded.

Now then, the Department of Labor released an assessment in early 2009 where Obama’s advisors adjudged that if they did nothing then unemployment would reach over 9% which would equate to the highest level since 83. Obviously we now know they decided on a cure of stimulus which entailed spending huge sums. According to them, however, that measure would see unemployment not go above 8%. As we now know things currently stand much higher and even higher before that. Clearly things didn’t go to plan...

In terms of economics, this brings up questions. Why were predications wayward? What do these stimuli policy experiences teach us going forward? And what can the administration do now as employment is still high? Sorting out these questions shows the difficulty Obama and his team are confronted with in a crisis, but also the uncertainty and limitations of the economics profession – things idiots like you need to keep in mind while you sit in your ivory tower and on your philosophical arse critiquing things you have no clue about.



Wake the fuck up, mate. Once you have a deeper understanding of economics you’ll be a lot more humble on its applications. They set out to accomplish two broad goals: to stabilize the financial system and to mitigate the burgeoning recession. Now go and have a look at the economic indicators from that perspective.



I don’t think you do, like, AT ALL.



Really? Do you have first-hand experience of getting published or even first-hand experience of the peer-review process? Don't make me laugh.



Economists labour for politicians. They also consider economic theory and data but also voter views and political actualities. Economic policy is not just applied economics.



Yes but I’m also cautioning you about throwing out the baby with the bath water even as those who have applied themselves to economics will have heavily reflected or revised their views as a result of the problems of the last decade.



I can do what the fuck I like, mate. Indeed, I’d like the west and developing nations to stop treating the atmosphere as a fee good and I’d like some modest international monetary reform too.



Excellent.



At this point you’re not making a blind bit of fucking sense. I was saying international isolation, economic turmoil and instability leads to accountability and change in economics. Things like financial intermediation, fractals and inequality as well as the canonical form of an industry going forward will require reformulations. Events of the last decade will only scratch the surface of what will or can be done.

This took far too fucking long. Mostly because of the statistics.

And Barret, I'll deal with you later, you little fuckin runt.

Don't ever lump me in with your previous mistakes.

PS: I'm moving house so any response might be delayed.