Spreadin’ Love

Recovering from cooking Easter Dinner for 18 last night. I have exactly six minutes before class. I forgot my lectures notes at home. Excellent. Excellent. Just some quick links and I'll  return later.

Quote of the day: “If more homosexuals were in the Obamas’ lives,” the writer said, “there is no way Michelle would have worn a twin set when she met the queen.”

What is the career choice du jour, now that finance has been discredited? The Times says public service. I'm going to quiz the kids about that in approximately three minutes.

A student dropped off publicity about an upcoming tea party in New Jersey. Do I have to start paying attention to those things?

Tons of stuff in the business section today about changes in the media industry.

9 thoughts on “Spreadin’ Love

  1. “A student dropped off publicity about an upcoming tea party in New Jersey. Do I have to start paying attention to those things? ”
    Krugman says yes, in the same sense that you have to pay attention to the people who still fight about the scientific validity of evolution theory, 83 years after the Scopes Trial.

    Like

  2. “If more homosexuals were in the Obamas’ lives,” the writer said, “there is no way Michelle would have worn a twin set when she met the queen.”
    That may be sufficient, but it isn’t necessary. I hardly know any homosexuals and I never wear twin sets.
    Also, while I have no doubts about the scientific validity of evolution, I sort of admire creationists. First, twenty years after my graduation, I still enjoy causing annoyance to teachers. Second, my personal political views are moving in the direction of populism, which, given where I’m from, makes me think fondly of William Jennings Byran. Third, I’m always a bit suspicious because evolution seems to be the one scientific theory everyone is supposed to get right. Fourth, recent events have convinced me having a large portion of the population that flat-out refuses to accept expert opinion isn’t always a bad thing. It forces experts to continually state/improve their case, slows down change and provides a counter-weight to the influence of technocrats and specialists. I’m thinking here of the economy.

    Like

  3. I was looking at a web page that showed five dozen Tea Parties scheduled for April 15 in Texas in cities from A-W (Abilene to Wichita Falls). There are supposed to be two events that day pretty handy to me. If I go, I’ll do the lunchtime one downtown. It’s for the kids.
    I don’t really get the creationism analogy. How does Krugman think this can all get paid back without a) killing the economy with taxes b) inflating the currency or c) a and b?

    Like

  4. MH, you would get along with my dad, who is an intelligent design advocate, mainly because he likes challenging scientific groupthink. He’s also an atheist, though I’m pretty sure the scientists he argues with don’t believe him.

    Like

  5. I don’t think Krugman made the Creationism analogy; I did, based on the general notion that you have to pay attention to the nutty ideas even when they’re obviously wrong (which Krugman did say about the tea party philosphies). I plan on getting all my information about tea parties from 11D & Krugman, though, so I’m counting on you guys to keep me informed. I got from Krugman that there’s a reference to the boston tea party, but don’t get it, since I don’t think that we’re taxing the tea party attendees without representation (unless they’re all immigrants or illegal aliens, and I don’t think that’s the case).
    I guess atheism and ID are compatible, if you believe that aliens designed us, or, say, the smallpox vaccine. But, that doesn’t undermine the theory of evolution itself, since without deism, it just pushes evolution back a step. Does your dad also argue against the groupthink of a spherical earth, gravity, and the laws of thermodynamics? Or is there something special about evolution that lets him differentiate between the different theories?
    Amy, I suspect Krugman does think that we can inflate the currency and increase taxes, eventually, to get the economy back on its footing (i.e. deficit spending by the government during a economic contraction being the equivalent of cutting taxes to increase revenue).
    My son, though, proposed another solution this morning, out of the blue this morning. He thinks we don’t really need money. He thinks we don’t need anything but food (not even toys, really, he says) and that we can just take food from the stores. On questioning, he said we can ask the stores if we can take the food we need. We’re going to talk next about how food is made. I think he thinks it spontaneously appears in grocery stores (kind of like dirty rags producing rats).

    Like

  6. “I plan on getting all my information about tea parties from 11D & Krugman, though, so I’m counting on you guys to keep me informed.”
    That’s a heavy responsibility. I suppose that means there needs to be a “What did you see?” thread for April 15.
    “Amy, I suspect Krugman does think that we can inflate the currency and increase taxes, eventually, to get the economy back on its footing (i.e. deficit spending by the government during a economic contraction being the equivalent of cutting taxes to increase revenue).”
    It is a very tricky situation. From what I hear, the current pressure is deflationary (all those bad debts and asset value going poof cause trillions of dollars to disappear from the economy), so there is a need to pull out of the deflationary spiral. The logic of deflation is that you shouldn’t buy today what you can buy tomorrow with more valuable money, but once tomorrow arrives, the same is true again–so why buy at all? The trick would be to introduce just enough inflation to pull out of the deflationary spiral, without accidentally triggering hyperinflation. I think this is going to be really hard (if not impossible).

    Like

  7. One more thing about hyperinflation. It’s hardest on the most vulnerable people in society–elderly people living on fixed incomes, people on disability, etc. Anybody whose income can’t “float” and move with the currents of the economy at large will be worst hit. Coincidentally, the older boomers are about to hit retirement age in the next couple of years and (contrary to popular mythology on the boomers) they don’t have adequate savings.

    Like

  8. bj, I can’t defend or attack my dad’s theories because it’s science, and science is not my strong point. I do know he is not disputing the process of evolution over the years. Species evolve. It has to do with the why/how of it all. And, logically, I think it is possible to be an atheist and believe that something was responsible for creating life. You don’t have to worship it, get all spiritual about it, or follow what you think its moral code might be.

    Like

Comments are closed.