I don't understand why the chain of custody matters if DKIM and DMARC are legitimate ways to verify the communications contained in the laptop. The focus on crack smoking hookers getting clapped by Biden isn't as interesting when it comes to political malfeasance.
> I don't understand why the chain of custody matters if DKIM and DMARC are legitimate ways to verify the communications contained in the laptop.
Whether the information is real is orthogonal to how it was obtained. Conspiring with a hostile adversary to release damaging information about a political opponent is also political malfeasance.
The circumstances of how the information was obtained is incredibly suspect and that deserves scrutiny, even if the information is legitimate and actionable.
> The focus on crack smoking hookers getting clapped by Biden isn't as interesting when it comes to political malfeasance.
That's kind of my point: why was that stuff leaked and spread when there was actually damning evidence? To me, it seems like the point was to release as much damaging and embarrassing content as possible to harm Joe Biden.
Economics is the lies told by some middle class assholes with a degree and/or credential that get paid just enough by upper class assholes to trick low class rubes.
> Economics is the lies told by some middle class assholes with a degree and/or credential that get paid just enough by upper class assholes to trick low class rubes.
Why does nonsense like this get parroted so much? Economics is as much a science as any other social science. Which is to say that it's certainly imperfect and is subject to social problems surrounding science (e.g. the replication crisis), but it's still very much a science. Obviously it's an evolving field with many areas of disagreement among experts, but what science isn't? Plenty of economic principles/models have strong predictive power and broad consensus from economists.
As for your (apparent) critique, economics currently isn't very good at long-term (especially macroeconomic) forecasting. But then science isn't great at predicting weather or earthquakes long term, yet we don't dismiss those fields as lies propagated by the elite. This isn't a defense of Moody's or anything - they may well have ignored the risks of mortgage-backed securities for financial gain, and I can't speak to the accuracy of their podcast.
But your argument seems no different than claims that because pharmaceutical companies have lied and caused harm in the name of profits, the entire field of medicine is nothing but lies and propaganda and we should throw it out and switch to curing cancer with juice cleanses.
Any economic thought a bit further left than left-of-center gets quickly deemed "not economics."
Phrased differently, the field of economics dismisses any economic thought that doesn't serve the interests of capital and the people with the capital.
I don't think people take an issue with economists' predictions as much as their prescriptions. Younger econ doctoral candidates would do well to spend some time hanging out with the political scientists on campus. (They largely are doing this.)
> Any economic thought a bit further left than left-of-center gets quickly deemed "not economics."
I would encourage you to listen to actual economics experts and academics, not right-wing hacks dressed in economic cosplay. Despite their posturing, libertarians and free-market fundamentalists are just as divorced from economic reality as anyone else.
Economists in the US actually skew significantly Democrat[1] and surveys of economists on various topics generally show left-of-center leanings[2]. It's worth noting though that the political leaning of an economist need not indicate the quality of their research and plenty of good results have come from economists with atypical views.
I totally agree with this comment. You put my thoughts into words.
Unfortunately that kind of cheap comments (Economics is the lies told by some middle class assholes with a degree and/or credential that get paid just enough by upper class assholes to trick low class rubes.) are quite common over the internet and mainstream media. Just enough to keep people not thinking about it and everything is a lie by the elite and we can do nothing about it.
It's parroted because it's make sense. Every 'imperfection' of an economists idea has led to further concentration of capital in the hands of incumbents. Many of these incumbents have already failed and only exist by way of heinous regulatory choices, only to be bailed out because economists said its better this way or things will be worse (take hostages much?).
My critique is that the short term is all that matters because accountability and culpability aren't available to institutions and individuals because they are too important. There is seemingly an infinite amount of labor arbitrage to make when you can make horrible medium/long term capital decisions that appear good because of short term market gains, all because the fix (govt bailout) is in.
Does you think capital has product value without the application of technology or labor? Why is the most important aspect of the equation the least valued?
> It's parroted because it's make sense. Every 'imperfection' of an economists idea has led to further concentration of capital in the hands of incumbents.
Has it? Are you talking about actual economics research or conservative politics wrapping itself in free market fundamentalism disguised as economics? It's understandable but endlessly frustrating how politics has convinced the public that economics is a bunch of libertarian nonsense.
The correct analogy would be the Healthcare system as a whole, and it would indeed hold water.
Social sciences is a complete misnomer. It should be social theories, there's zero scientific basis for them.
You can't compare the science of the physics of the universe to gender studies and economics. One studies the laws of the universe, the other simply talks about an irrational thing irrational beings created, and pretends its science.
Why did we owe the Iraqis thousands of our soldiers lives and a couple trillion dollars? You morally justified all this by concluding we improved the situation of Iraqis? What currency is their oil sold in? What companies discover and drill for it? I bet most are subsidiaries of Western corps. I did a google, looks like it's Exxon and Schlumberger International getting 96 new wells as of June 2021 (https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/exxonmobil-basrah-oil-ink-de...)
"Condemn the Iraqi people to go back to that?"
I condemn them to figure out their own future, do what's necessary and proper to attain it - whether it be suffer under Saddam or overthrow him is for the Iraqi people to decide. Not American politicians and intelligence services you seem to be a sycophant for.
"I'd like to see someone stand up and proclaim it would have been better..."
False choice, get better at your moral justifications. Going to address the way the US public was lied into the Iraq Pillaging? You compare the Pillaging of Iraq with the Korean War - one had an aggressor (KPA crossed the line a thing that actually happened to instigate the war) and we had obligations to the First Republic of Korea. The US had and has no obligations to the Iraqi people, we just lied about Iraq and Saddam's relation to terrorists so the American ruling class could do it's thing.
I can't get passed this post boiling down to "we shouldn't have gone, but we did and Iraq is better for it" You completely fail to address the opportunity costs involved from the US side. Who are you trying to convince with this moral justification for invading Iraq, yourself?
I'll chop a hand off if Iraq becomes anything like South Korea before 2100.
The people collecting now paid in at 6-10%, I'm paying out to them at 15%. They also paid no health insurance premiums on the come up, I've paid them since I was 22 without needing to use them. Also made it illegal to not pay into the fraud for a bit.
Evil ol' bastards.
They can fuck off and die already.
I thought that's why the childless were obligated to school taxes and inflated health insurance premiums?
The child rearing consume what the childless have earned under the "do what's best for everyone" motif of social programs. Who's getting the best? Do the childless get to participate in this best?
Why would they stop their violence and be held accountable when the authorities people like you put in power aren't able to be held accountable?
How do you feel about the board and executive team at Purdue Pharma?
Weird how we invaded Afghanistan and then how much does it hurt and how much heroin do you need became part of every medical diagnosis.
What are you organizing around Mr. Chief Architect? Your company does data visualization for financial firms. Financial firms that don't have a loss condition. How many extrapolations from reality is your business? At least 2, maybe 3, more? As long as the markets your pretty pictures represent can't take a loss - you're only justifying your undeserved opulence. Every bail out absolves people like you from their failure, and denies people like me a better opportunity to out perform you.
Have the labor classes of the U.S. seen any advancement in the last few decades? Are the advances the labor classes of other (US/India) even worthwhile given the lack of political bargaining power?
You economically depress local workers, and sell them on their freedoms and in then in the next breath you're politically oppressing foreign labor classes while selling them on their economic advances. Both are true, but you take the larger margin from both.
