Notre Dame
This is the worst restoration job since Ecce Mono.
Posts
Nailed it!
If the Gimp crawls out of his cage and sees his shadow, there will be 6 more weeks of #BTFD! https://t.co/X440gw1OVd
— W.C. Varones (@wcvarones) January 30, 2019
The science is settled
On incentives in science:
“It is just not true that the scientists try to minimize the effects of radiation,” Thomas added. “ It would actually be against their own best interests to do this. They are mostly academics and are required to produce large amounts of money and papers for their Institutes. You would be expecting them to argue for larger effects of radiation as the more serious the health consequences the more the money flows.”
“It is just not true that the scientists try to minimize the effects of radiation,” Thomas added. “ It would actually be against their own best interests to do this. They are mostly academics and are required to produce large amounts of money and papers for their Institutes. You would be expecting them to argue for larger effects of radiation as the more serious the health consequences the more the money flows.”
Stephen Moore repeats the Menzie Chinn fallacy
In 2014, economics professor and Obama fanboy Menzie Chinn suggested that Obama's 3.1% GDP growth forecast was reasonable because the US had grown at that rate in the late 20th century. He gave absolutely no consideration to the enormous contribution of credit growth to 20th century GDP, and the unlikelihood (impossibility) of that explosion in credit to be repeated now.
Proving that both sides can have equally stupid partisan shills, here's Trump fanboy Stephen Moore in the WSJ:
Skeptics in and out of the Fed still think sustained 3% to 4% growth is out of reach. Nonsense. The combination of stable prices and sharp tax cuts in the 1980s produced an average of 4% growth for seven years. Imagine if we had a similar stretch of sustained growth, with low inflation and rising wages. Just as Menzie did, Moore completely ignores the vastly different debt and demographic conditions between 1980 and now.
We're not going to get sustained 3% to 4% real GDP growth.
Proving that both sides can have equally stupid partisan shills, here's Trump fanboy Stephen Moore in the WSJ:
Skeptics in and out of the Fed still think sustained 3% to 4% growth is out of reach. Nonsense. The combination of stable prices and sharp tax cuts in the 1980s produced an average of 4% growth for seven years. Imagine if we had a similar stretch of sustained growth, with low inflation and rising wages. Just as Menzie did, Moore completely ignores the vastly different debt and demographic conditions between 1980 and now.
We're not going to get sustained 3% to 4% real GDP growth.
