i still haven't seen any actual results. listen: this is a really hard math problem. it's not your average two candidate race. two-three percentage points is a reasonable margin of error for this kind of problem.
you really should not have a lot of faith in the algorithm.
i mean, it could be right, anyways, but you should wait before you move on.
....but, i'm starting to see the angle they're using.
they take a guy and give him every status quo position that there is, but assign him a new party name. and, voila: the status quo is a historic change.
most people are not dumb enough to fall for this and will in the end just not vote. i don't expect that they'll allow le pen to win. so, they're left with lingering resentment and the same basically unstable situation.
five years of macron pushing the same policies that created le pen will just make it that much harder to keep her out of power, the next time.
Sunday, April 23, 2017
whether this is true or not, it is the reason that the americans won't/can't provide the rebels with air support.
in a doomsday scenario, the americans would no doubt win. but, they'd have to eat a dozen f-*s and swallow a huge amount of pride in the process.
the rebels were supposed to take out the sam sites from the ground, first, to allow for massive strikes - but they couldn't do it.
as an aside: the day that israel can no longer assert air superiority over the broader levant is the day that the balance of power in the region shifts. this was always the fear, here: that syria is going to emerge from this much more powerful and much more assertive than they were at the start.
they should have let assad step down peacefully when he wanted to, years ago. and, the architects of this failed war in syria should be sent to the hague.
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201703171051691543-israeli-plane-downed-over-syria-analysis/
in a doomsday scenario, the americans would no doubt win. but, they'd have to eat a dozen f-*s and swallow a huge amount of pride in the process.
the rebels were supposed to take out the sam sites from the ground, first, to allow for massive strikes - but they couldn't do it.
as an aside: the day that israel can no longer assert air superiority over the broader levant is the day that the balance of power in the region shifts. this was always the fear, here: that syria is going to emerge from this much more powerful and much more assertive than they were at the start.
they should have let assad step down peacefully when he wanted to, years ago. and, the architects of this failed war in syria should be sent to the hague.
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201703171051691543-israeli-plane-downed-over-syria-analysis/
considering that belarus is....
why does belarus exist, anyways? it was basically some despot taking advantage of the collapse of the soviet union, to turn a russian province into a country. it's not a baltic state, even though it was a part of lithuania. you could argue it should be in lithuania, or it should be in poland, or it should be in russia - or even that it should be in ukraine. you could argue it should be split up. but, it's not actually really a thing.
belarus should really not exist.
as it is, it's this kind of client state of the russians. people call putin a dictator, and it's kind of an insult to real dictators; lukashenko is a legit dictator. the guy dresses like fucking hitler. he's like the kim of europe.
...says the guy with the moustache that wears military costumes to work.
anyways.
the russians could solve all their problems if they just annexed belarus. and, i mean, who is going to really push back against this? it's basically a formality.
the reason this would work out so well for them is because of the little enclave of land they have there between lithuania and poland, called the kaliningrad enclave. to clarify the point:
the distance from belarus to kaliningrad can't be more than 50 km. and, they could probably even just buy a corridor of land along the border between lithuania and poland.
there's no reason for all these gymnastics. but, i guess russians like gymnastics, right...
http://www.russia-direct.org/sites/default/files/field/image/Russia-Europe-gas.jpg
why does belarus exist, anyways? it was basically some despot taking advantage of the collapse of the soviet union, to turn a russian province into a country. it's not a baltic state, even though it was a part of lithuania. you could argue it should be in lithuania, or it should be in poland, or it should be in russia - or even that it should be in ukraine. you could argue it should be split up. but, it's not actually really a thing.
belarus should really not exist.
as it is, it's this kind of client state of the russians. people call putin a dictator, and it's kind of an insult to real dictators; lukashenko is a legit dictator. the guy dresses like fucking hitler. he's like the kim of europe.
...says the guy with the moustache that wears military costumes to work.
anyways.
the russians could solve all their problems if they just annexed belarus. and, i mean, who is going to really push back against this? it's basically a formality.
the reason this would work out so well for them is because of the little enclave of land they have there between lithuania and poland, called the kaliningrad enclave. to clarify the point:
the distance from belarus to kaliningrad can't be more than 50 km. and, they could probably even just buy a corridor of land along the border between lithuania and poland.
there's no reason for all these gymnastics. but, i guess russians like gymnastics, right...
http://www.russia-direct.org/sites/default/files/field/image/Russia-Europe-gas.jpg
so, the free market fundamentalists claim that supply management leads to higher prices, whereas the farmers that support it claim it leads to lower prices. which is it?
neither. sometimes, it inflates the price; sometimes, it leads to lower prices than the market would imply. what it actually produces is stability.
now, let me tell you - as a poor person on a fixed income, that stability is what i actually want. i know what the price of eggs is, so i can budget for it; i never have to worry that a price spike is going to screw me over for the month. that stability is worth far more to me than the opportunity to get a good deal in march - if it means i'll get fucked in may, as i no doubt will.
it's funny who it is that seems to be concerned about the poor on this issue, isn't it? they're not your usual anti-poverty activists. in fact, they're usually apologists for big businesses - like factory farms.
regardless, it's not like dairy prices are the only factor creating poverty - or even a measurable factor, really. i promise you that i'm not losing $300/year over dairy, but i am getting $375/yr back on gst, and pretty much the only taxable items i buy are doritos and dr. pepper. it's crazy to take it out of context, like that.
so, it is true that supply management shifts the subsidies from government to consumer, but it's not like the government doesn't further compensate on top of it. further, is it not more fair to make the people that consume the product subsidize the industry they're supporting? and, we need to subsidize in order to compete.
it's a broader social issue to keep the farmers at work - and, we're winning because we did the math.
the reality is that america needs to stop blaming other people for constantly failing at math.
neither. sometimes, it inflates the price; sometimes, it leads to lower prices than the market would imply. what it actually produces is stability.
now, let me tell you - as a poor person on a fixed income, that stability is what i actually want. i know what the price of eggs is, so i can budget for it; i never have to worry that a price spike is going to screw me over for the month. that stability is worth far more to me than the opportunity to get a good deal in march - if it means i'll get fucked in may, as i no doubt will.
it's funny who it is that seems to be concerned about the poor on this issue, isn't it? they're not your usual anti-poverty activists. in fact, they're usually apologists for big businesses - like factory farms.
regardless, it's not like dairy prices are the only factor creating poverty - or even a measurable factor, really. i promise you that i'm not losing $300/year over dairy, but i am getting $375/yr back on gst, and pretty much the only taxable items i buy are doritos and dr. pepper. it's crazy to take it out of context, like that.
so, it is true that supply management shifts the subsidies from government to consumer, but it's not like the government doesn't further compensate on top of it. further, is it not more fair to make the people that consume the product subsidize the industry they're supporting? and, we need to subsidize in order to compete.
it's a broader social issue to keep the farmers at work - and, we're winning because we did the math.
the reality is that america needs to stop blaming other people for constantly failing at math.
i have not been watching french media and do not have any insight into what it is broadcasting. but, this macron character strikes me as an obvious pinata. i think you should expect a surprise.
i don't think it's going to be le pen, who is going to just get destroyed in the second round, anyways. i'm skeptical about the links between trump and putin, but i am not at all skeptical about russia's support for right-wing nationalists in europe. le pen is legitimately a russian pawn. but, she's more comparable to a rand paul in the united states (in several ways, actually). remember: my analysis is that trump was the choice of the american deep state, and that it was being broadcast over media in the weeks leading up to the election. while i have not been watching french media, i think it is safe to rule out the idea that le pen is the choice of the french military, in whatever limited capacity it is that they operate outside of nato.
i do not think isis is responsible for these attacks. i think the russians are responsible for these attacks. even if this tactic were to work, i would expect the french to rig the election against her. i know - i just walked into a forest of hypotheticals, here. the point is that i don't think she's the deep state candidate, like trump was, and that creates a very different scenario.
but, like i say - maybe somebody that's been watching tv in france has a different perspective.
in a situation like this, you would expect the republican party candidate to walk into the vacuum, which is what fillon initially did. it's time to switch parties, right? but, apparently, he's been hit by a lot of scandal, and that ceded some space to macron. an easy way out of this is for the pollsters to exaggerate the effects of the scandals, but you also need to look at the sources of those scandals to work this out and i just haven't done that research. without doing this research, but not entirely a priori, fillon actually strikes me as the most likely victor.
melenchon appears to be my preferred candidate, but i haven't looked too closely into this, either. there's an angle on this - it's a potential way to avoid a legitimate russian puppet from winning, without sparking a civil war in reaction to vote suppression - but these kinds of candidates are usually public enemy #1. if melenchon is allowed to get to the second round, you should be extra careful in deciphering his past and future statements, and you may find out you were misled. again: i have not been consuming french media. but, he's either a persona non grata to the ruling class, or he's a fraud - and you'll find out by how well he is allowed to perform.
there's way too many permutations, here, to come up with a reasonable prediction on how this works. but, i'd guess that the actual front runner, here, is fillon.
i don't think it's going to be le pen, who is going to just get destroyed in the second round, anyways. i'm skeptical about the links between trump and putin, but i am not at all skeptical about russia's support for right-wing nationalists in europe. le pen is legitimately a russian pawn. but, she's more comparable to a rand paul in the united states (in several ways, actually). remember: my analysis is that trump was the choice of the american deep state, and that it was being broadcast over media in the weeks leading up to the election. while i have not been watching french media, i think it is safe to rule out the idea that le pen is the choice of the french military, in whatever limited capacity it is that they operate outside of nato.
i do not think isis is responsible for these attacks. i think the russians are responsible for these attacks. even if this tactic were to work, i would expect the french to rig the election against her. i know - i just walked into a forest of hypotheticals, here. the point is that i don't think she's the deep state candidate, like trump was, and that creates a very different scenario.
but, like i say - maybe somebody that's been watching tv in france has a different perspective.
in a situation like this, you would expect the republican party candidate to walk into the vacuum, which is what fillon initially did. it's time to switch parties, right? but, apparently, he's been hit by a lot of scandal, and that ceded some space to macron. an easy way out of this is for the pollsters to exaggerate the effects of the scandals, but you also need to look at the sources of those scandals to work this out and i just haven't done that research. without doing this research, but not entirely a priori, fillon actually strikes me as the most likely victor.
melenchon appears to be my preferred candidate, but i haven't looked too closely into this, either. there's an angle on this - it's a potential way to avoid a legitimate russian puppet from winning, without sparking a civil war in reaction to vote suppression - but these kinds of candidates are usually public enemy #1. if melenchon is allowed to get to the second round, you should be extra careful in deciphering his past and future statements, and you may find out you were misled. again: i have not been consuming french media. but, he's either a persona non grata to the ruling class, or he's a fraud - and you'll find out by how well he is allowed to perform.
there's way too many permutations, here, to come up with a reasonable prediction on how this works. but, i'd guess that the actual front runner, here, is fillon.
support for supply management is neither nationalist nor insular. what it is is a competing model. and, it doesn't even need to generalize - you can support supply management in one industry and free trade in another, if the conditions suggest one is better than the other. it is the tendency to ignore rational considerations in favour of a uniform solution that generates the term free market fundamentalist.
the free market fundamentalist wants to propose market solutions for industries where markets are easily demonstrated to produce mass failure - such as health care and dairy farming. these industries require some kind of benevolent management in order to function effectively.
we know this because we've done these experiments.
the ideal solution would not just be for states like wisconsin and new york to adopt supply management, but also for these supply management systems to work together with supply management systems in canada, and in mexico.
what is absolutely foolish is to refuse to manage your supply effectively, then blame other people for your mismanagement. but, what else are we to expect from donald trump?
the free market fundamentalist wants to propose market solutions for industries where markets are easily demonstrated to produce mass failure - such as health care and dairy farming. these industries require some kind of benevolent management in order to function effectively.
we know this because we've done these experiments.
the ideal solution would not just be for states like wisconsin and new york to adopt supply management, but also for these supply management systems to work together with supply management systems in canada, and in mexico.
what is absolutely foolish is to refuse to manage your supply effectively, then blame other people for your mismanagement. but, what else are we to expect from donald trump?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)