TacticalFox88
Banned
Everybody in here is telling me to watch something. I can't remember it all!
Write it down in your binder.
Everybody in here is telling me to watch something. I can't remember it all!
I haven't been on the intranets all day.
What was the biggest news today so far?
Dax hasn't seen Groundhog Day.
Okay, campers, rise and shine, and don't forget your booties 'cause it's cooooold out there today.
Write it down in your binder.
Dax hasn't seen Groundhog Day.
Oh, you boys.
Next you're going to tell me you didn't watch The Big Lebowski.
Dax, I swear Dax...don't you dare tell me you haven't!
Next you're going to tell me you didn't watch The Big Lebowski.
Dax, I swear Dax...don't you dare tell me you haven't!
I haven't. And you want some irony with that? I'm a film studies student.
Not a very good one it seems.
I have not seen The Big Lebowski. And you want some irony with that? My major is Film Studies.
Someone having not seen Groundhog day makes me feel VERY old. Please at least have seen Top Gun and/or The Goonies.
NopeHave you just not gotten up to modern film yet?
OK, how about Pulp Fiction? You must have seen that!
I have not seen The Big Lebowski. And you want some irony with that? My major is Film Studies.
Nope
Well, it's obviously not English.
You're so mean!Well, it's obviously not English.
Yes. Saw it before I went off to college, actuallyOK, Doctor Strangelove. You have to have seen Doctor Strangelove! I can't fathom a film studies class that wouldn't show something like that.
You're so mean!
Yes. Saw it before I went off to college, actually
You're so mean!
Yes. Saw it before I went off to college, actually
This whole page has been a stab to my nerd/cultured heart.
Only big movies I haven't seen are James Cameron movies for some reason.
Does anybody else think that since the Soviet Union lost the cold war there has been immense revisionist history on it?
Don't get me wrong I hate the iron and sickle flag as much as anybody but its a common myth that the nation always had a terrible economy for economic growth. This is ridiculous the nation had the fastest growing economy for 40 years. It couldn't just be due to oil because modern Russia hasn't had such success nor has any other oiled filed nation.
Does anybody else think that since the Soviet Union lost the cold war there has been immense revisionist history on it?
Don't get me wrong I hate the iron and sickle flag as much as anybody but its a common myth that the nation always had a terrible economy for economic growth. This is ridiculous the nation had the fastest growing economy for 40 years. It couldn't just be due to oil because modern Russia hasn't had such success nor has any other oiled filed nation.
While the growth of communist economies was the subject of innumerable alarmist books and polemical articles in the 1950s, some economists who looked seriously at the roots of that growth were putting together a picture that differed substantially from most popular assumptions. Communist growth rates were certainly impressive, but not magical. The rapid growth in output could be fully explained by rapid growth in inputs: expansion of employment, increases in education levels, and, above all, massive investment in physical capital. Once those inputs were taken into account, the growth in output was unsurprising--or, to put it differently, the big surprise about Soviet growth was that when closely examined it posed no mystery.
But what they actually found was that Soviet growth was based on rapid--growth in inputs--end of story. The rate of efficiency growth was not only unspectacular, it was well below the rates achieved in Western economies. Indeed, by some estimates, it was virtually nonexistent.
This comprehensibility implied two crucial conclusions. First, claims about the superiority of planned over market economies turned out to .be based on a misapprehension. If the Soviet economy had a special strength, it was its ability to mobilize resources, not its ability to use them efficiently. It was obvious to everyone that the Soviet Union in 1960 was much less efficient than the United States. The surprise was that it showed no signs of closing the gap.
Second, because input-driven growth is an inherently limited process, Soviet growth was virtually certain to slow down. Long before the slowing of Soviet growth became obvious, it was predicted on the basis of growth accounting. (Economists did not predict the implosion of the Soviet economy a generation later, but that is a whole different problem.)
The thing is though is that they were nowhere near the only nation making that transition at the time. Pretty much the entire world was.If I remember right most of the soviet growth was just industrial growth. Going from agriculture to industry will always lead to growth. Its economy went to crap once they became pretty urban. Its just really hard to be able to centrally control that big of a machine.
The thing is though is that they were nowhere near the only nation making that transition at the time. Pretty much the entire world was.
"But what they actually found was that Soviet growth was based on rapid--growth in inputs--end of story. The rate of efficiency growth was not only unspectacular, it was well below the rates achieved in Western economies. Indeed, by some estimates, it was virtually nonexistent."
What' "efficiency growth"?
Nope
Productivity gains. The workers weren't contributing the the growth. It was just giving them better machines.
And their competition with the US and growth of population with the formation of the Union gave them opportunities that others didn't have. Their growth is the same reason why Asia grew. (That's Krugman's thesis you can read the whole thing here http://www.ft.com/cms/b8268ffe-7572-11db-aea1-0000779e2340.pdf)
Its 20 years old so I don't know how it holds up.
This is a problem, Dax. A very big problem.
Note to Republican Presidential candidates, if Chris Matthews thinks you're going to get the nomination, you're fucked.
We could always treat Dax like Donnie till she watches that movie.
Edit: Should I put this up for motion. Maybe we should make our own bylaws now that we are in the community section.
If you don't like films that's fine, but if you do, then you're really missing out on some great moviesChances are, I'm gonna be really unpopular after this post, but what the hell.
Dax may be a horrible person, but guess what? She's not alone! Yes, I too have never seen Groundhog day.
...or The Big Lebowski
...or Dr. Strangelove
...or any of the Lord of the Ring movies
...or any of the Godfather movies
...or Schindler's List
...or The Silence of the Lambs
...or Citizen Kane
...or any Indiana Jones movies
Want me to keep going? And you know what else?
Dexter >>>>> Breaking Bad
WHADDYA SAY TO THAT?
If you don't like films that's fine, but if you do, then you're really missing out on some great movies.and LOTR, if you're into midgets walking and flyover shots.
And while I personally think people tend to overrate Breaking Bad quite a bit, it's miles ahead of Dexter, which I think is just terrible.
Chances are, I'm gonna be really unpopular after this post, but what the hell.
Dax may be a horrible person, but guess what? She's not alone! Yes, I too have never seen Groundhog day.
...or The Big Lebowski
...or Dr. Strangelove
...or any of the Lord of the Ring movies
...or any of the Godfather movies
...or Schindler's List
...or The Silence of the Lambs
...or Citizen Kane
...or any Indiana Jones movies
Want me to keep going? And you know what else?
Dexter >>>>> Breaking Bad
WHADDYA SAY TO THAT?
Not yet, watching it tonight.Did you watch last night's?
Not yet, watching it tonight.
And just so we're clear, I enjoy Breaking Bad quite a lot, it's probably the best shot TV show in history and just fun to watch, but I think it's mostly pulp, and really can't be talked about in the same sentence as something like The Wire.outside Skylar of seasons 1-3 and that stupid fly episode
I would like to mention that I was kidding about the Dexter part. That show's become utter trash.
And yet I keep watching.
Productivity gains. The workers weren't contributing the the growth. It was just giving them better machines.
And their competition with the US and growth of population with the formation of the Union gave them opportunities that others didn't have. Their growth is the same reason why Asia grew. (That's Krugman's thesis you can read the whole thing here http://www.ft.com/cms/b8268ffe-7572-11db-aea1-0000779e2340.pdf)
Its 20 years old so I don't know how it holds up.
Not yet, watching it tonight.
And just so we're clear, I enjoy Breaking Bad quite a lot, it's probably the best shot TV show in history and just fun to watch, but I think it's mostly pulp, and really can't be talked about in the same sentence as something like The Wire.outside Skylar of seasons 1-3 and that stupid fly episode
Weeds, however, I made a conscious decision to stop. It became unenjoyable in every way at some point.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...g-will-pick-obamas-intelligence-review-panel/The man who misled Congress on spying will pick Obamas intelligence review panel
On Friday, President Barack Obama promised to appoint an independent group of outside experts to review the governments surveillance programs.
Today, the president formally ordered the formation of this group, giving us a sense for just how independent the group would be. The announcement doesnt inspire confidence that the president is interested in truly independent scrutiny of the nations surveillance programs.
The panel will be chosen by, and report to, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. Clapper famously answered no sir when Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asked whether the NSA collects information about millions of Americans. Clapper has since conceded that this answer was clearly erroneous.
And there are other signs that the group wont turn out quite the way the president described it on Friday. Fridays speech talked about the need for input from outside experts with independent points of view. The president made no mention of the need for outsiders or independent viewpoints in his memo to Clapper.
The stated mission of the group has also shifted. On Friday, Obama said the group would examine how we can maintain the trust of the people, how we can make sure that there absolutely is no abuse. But todays memo makes no mention of preventing abuses. Instead, it will examine whether US surveillance activity optimally protects our national security and advances our foreign policy while appropriately accounting for other policy considerations, such as the risk of unauthorized disclosure and our need to maintain the public trust.
For students of history, this will be a familiar pattern. In 1975, President Gerald Ford created a commission headed by Vice President Nelson Rockefeller to examine allegations of abuses by American intelligence agencies. But the commissions close ties to the executive branch prevented it from doing a thorough and vigorous investigation of the intelligence agencies activities.
Instead, truly vigorous oversight came from independent committees created by Congress: a Senate Committee headed by Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) and a House committee headed by Rep. Otis Pike (D-N.Y.). The same point is likely to hold today: genuinely independent oversight will only come from Congress, not a commission hand-picked by the nations top intelligence official.
You really should watch it, it's not only the best TV show in history, but one of the best things in any medium.I can feel that. Though I've not seen the wire. Which now makes me feel bad. Its sitting in my HBOgo playlist so this will be fixed
That's fair, I picked The Wire mainly because I didn't want to pick another fight about another show.The Wire is unique. I don't think anything should really be compared to it.
I know you got the hots for skysky, we crossed horns about it before, but did you also like that stupid fly episode?Also, so disagree with your spoiler stuff. So so so so so disagree.
I believe it. I started watching the first episode one night but got a bit distractedYou really should watch it, it's not only the best TV show in history, but one of the best things in any medium.
Believe the hype.
I'm not the biggest critic of the NSA but I'm greatly disappointed with the lack of information non intelligence committee members are given. I don't think the NSA is abusing much of their power but I'll be damned if they don't make it easy to portray them that way.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...g-will-pick-obamas-intelligence-review-panel/
Makes Obama's press conference look even worse. This is why people don't trust you.