The Librarian
Banned
Dan gender gap.
Is this unexpected? Women are smarter than men. ;D
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2013 |OT2| Worth 77% of OT1
- Thread starter The Librarian
- Start date
- Status
Is this unexpected? Women are smarter than men. ;D
The Librarian
Banned
Not about everything -
Generally! C'mon!
Black Mamba
Member
Are you sure men are more likely to watch men's tennis over women's?
personally, I prefer the female game. The men's game is overpowered. Too many aces.
And i'm sure a lot of men watch for the uniforms...
WNBA isn't useable. Only 7 people in America watch it.
The Librarian
Banned
man, i don't know i don't watch sports
Black Mamba
Member
Don't watch sports. Don't wear bikinis. Haven't seen any good movies. Don't like Zelda.
I have no idea what purpose you serve.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
making sandwiches and taking care of kids?
The Librarian
Banned
Black Mamba
Member
I'll be honest I imagined longer hair, though it sort of reminds me of Bayonetta this way. :lol
:lol
Perfect. It's the only place someone who doesn't like Zelda can go.
I can't breathe.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Is anyone talking about the fact that we're probably gonna launch some missiles at Syria?
Have you thought about letting your hair grow? And wearing glasses?
So that's your fetish
ClassyPenguin
Banned
That pic is syncing real well with the song I am listening to.
Also, dax is kinda cute.
Also, dax is kinda cute.
Black Mamba
Member
you guys treat objects like women, man.
I don't think too many people believe that we will actually do it. Even I am a bit skeptical.
RustyNails
Member
You look 20 times older than your current age with that hair...
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Don't tell me you're just now realizing this? Need I remind you?
you gonna be our go to guy for crossfire?
the meeting today had everybody there. IDK it seems real.
RustyNails
Member
Someone has to. Who else is gonna suffer an hour's worth of Newt Gingrich?
Don't tell me you're just now realizing this? Need I remind you?
I guess both Kamiya and Dax ruined your fetish then
NYCmetsfan
Banned
To be honest? I probably will... (are they having a audience and shooting in DC?)
But seriously an hour a day? At least their cutting down matthews "this town" BS to a single hour
The things I do for poligaf...
I hope Bayonetta 2 bombs hardcore cause of such a change.
Though it's probably gonna bomb regardless.
Dax, however still has time to save herself.
empty vessel
Member
Was this seriously something that aired on Fox News? Regardless, I do think Fox News is basically a purveyor of soft porn of the kind that is acceptable to old people. It's a porn channel for the older generation.
Also, in deflation news:
Private attorneys appointed by federal courts to represent poor clients will be paid $15 less per hour next year thanks to sequestration, the U.S. Judicial Conference announced Monday.
Under the plan, as laid out in a letter from Judicial Conference Chairman U.S. District Judge William B. Traxler Jr., private attorneys appointed under the Criminal Justice Act, known as CJA panel lawyers, would be paid $15 less per hour starting in September, and up to four weeks of their pay for fiscal year 2014 would be delayed until fiscal year 2015. ..
Under the plan, as laid out in a letter from Judicial Conference Chairman U.S. District Judge William B. Traxler Jr., private attorneys appointed under the Criminal Justice Act, known as CJA panel lawyers, would be paid $15 less per hour starting in September, and up to four weeks of their pay for fiscal year 2014 would be delayed until fiscal year 2015. ..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/19/sequestration-court-appointed-lawyers_n_3781706.html
And for the economically illiterate, deflation is not good. Far worse than inflation, which is normal.
Yes, they're doing it in part to help stave off deflation.
So it's probably an issue of consumer confidence? Stagnate wages?
I just find it surprising that the s&p can be at two year highs and still be here. Good time to be rich, I suppose (More so than usual, I guess).
The Librarian
Banned
Damn
It's the lighting making my face look red, trust me. I'm one of the youngest-looking people I know. And yes, I'm growing my hair out. Big mistake getting it cut so short last time. >.< I thought I'd like it as much, but alas! I like it in it's own way.
Also, I'm 5'10. Did I meet your expectations?
Damn
It's the lighting making my face look red, trust me. I'm one of the youngest-looking people I know. And yes, I'm growing my hair out. Big mistake getting it cut so short last time. >.< I thought I'd like it as much, but alas! I like it in it's own way.
Also, I'm 5'10. Did I meet your expectations?
5'10"? Shit that's almost as tall as me, I'd have pegged you at 5'8" tops.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
The sexist part is the part where she'd listen to my crazy conservative ramblings.
Seriously though, overdoing the sexy lady thing is rampant all over media, and Fox News is no worse at it than everything else, and most of them are as good if not better than the old guys on there when it comes to winning arguments by throwing out facts that are wildly out of context and appealing to emotions.
Black Mamba
Member
Damn
I propose it becomes your new avatar.
Trust me, this is only annoying til you're like 25. After that, it becomes awesome forever.
Dax being 5'10 explains so much, though. So so much.
The Librarian
Banned
HEY PD JUST WONDERING IF YOU STILL THINK I'M PRETENDING TO BE A GIRL
No new avatar; Sophie stays. And explains what? Explains what?! Don't be vague with me!
No new avatar; Sophie stays. And explains what? Explains what?! Don't be vague with me!
PhoenixDark
Banned
I've already apologized and sent you a PM months ago, explaining I didn't know. I'm an asshole, but not that type of asshole.
Today's Sunday, get ready to hear republican hawks complain about our imminent plans to strike Syria, Drudge to run "Obama's War" stories with pics of him winning the Nobel Prize, GAFers suggesting this is actually a ploy to distract from the (daily) NSA news, and senators who supported the Iraq war hand wringing over putting the military at risk in a dangerous region of the world.
Hot Republican women?Don't tell me you're just now realizing this? Need I remind you?
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Seriously.
Every day, take a look at the Fox News website and the middle section of headlines/pictures. Usually, a few of them have women in skimpy bikinis or a blurred out nude picture. It's crazy.
Avon Barksdale
Member
Sippy Cupp is with CNN now.
empty vessel
Member
The Fed isn't handing out free money (and never has). It is just swapping reserves (which aren't really money) for bank assets. It has no direct or meaningful impact on the economy. Monetary policy in general is not an effective manager of aggregate demand. Fiscal policy--spending and taxing--is.
It is buying back govt backed securities, no? Bonds that aren't worth anything because interest rates are close to zero. Hence "free money". Are you not a Keynesian?
And you don't believe monetary policy has an effect on the economy? I don't believe it "trickles down", but I do think there's a supply-side effect; it boosts private investment.
Though I suppose we could be arguing different points. What are your indicators for a recovering economy? Personally, I look to things like structral unemployment combined with the gist of the stock market. Unscientific, but generally gives me a desent idea.
I'm not trying to argue, I honestly just want to know your premises.
RustyNails
Member
I agree, Stephanie Cutter is better.
empty vessel
Member
I don't understand why you think bonds are worthless. Bonds are an asset. If you give it up for cash, the cash you get in return is not "free money." You have given up an asset for it. But what banks get is not money anyway, but reserves, which are a special entity.
Monetary policy just sets the short term price of money (the price of credit, really). That price is currently 0. Because it can't make the price of credit any less, QE is an attempt to stimulate the economy. It is just an asset swap between the central bank and financial institutions which is (misguidedly) intended to promote lending through increasing reserves on banks' balance sheets. The money created by the loans would then be spent in the economy, raising aggregate demand. But, it doesn't work, because a bank's lending practice does not depend upon the amount of reserves it has. Rather, it depends mostly on the existence of credit-worthy borrowers asking for loans. Altering the portfolios of banks does not generate customers. That's why it is ineffective.
Fiscal policy is an effective manager of aggregate demand because it gives (spending) or takes (taxing) money into and out of people's hands directly. It doesn't use banks as a middle man and lie in wait for loan applications. Looked at this way, QE is really quite silly given how simple it is to accomplish the end sought. If the aim is to put money in people's hands (which it is), then just spend it out into the economy directly! Of course, the principal problem with this is the stunning economic ignorance of our current governing class.
Employment is a good indicator. Unemployment is unused labor. Unused labor represents economic slack and waste, since it could have been put to use generating social wealth but wasn't. Unemployment is true waste that can't ever be recouped, at least until we invent time travel.
I don't think the stock market conveys much information other than how well the top 1% is doing.
Half and half
Member
Hey, does anyone have any good links or resources discussing premiums for the ACA's catastrophic plans?
I know people wil be eligible if they're under 30 or get a hardship exemption, so I'd expect the costs to be really low. But I really don't know.
I know people wil be eligible if they're under 30 or get a hardship exemption, so I'd expect the costs to be really low. But I really don't know.
TheLaughingStock
Member
I suppose you believe the GOP forced Obama to hire folks like Larry Summers and Tim Geithner as well...
400 billion was not spent each year. The economy needed at minimum 9-10 million jobs. Not 3. Additionally, apart from automatic stabilzers in the US being greater than ARRA's impact in FY09/10, other economies had a similar countercyclical reversal in 2009. It's absurd and revisionist to claim the GOP is primarily at fault when Summers is one of the architects of the stimulus and played a big role in creating a criminogenic environment in the financial sector to begin with. Very amusing that you think Obama was at all concerned with a full recovery driven by fiscal stimulus. He's waiting for a credit expansion.
Black Mamba
Member
This is a red herring.
I never argued there was $400 billion in spending. In fact, I specifically mentioned tax cuts being part of it in a later post.
I think everyone here agrees the stimulus and spending was far too little. And no one is arguing that the automatic stabilizers didn't have a greater effect. Again, these are red herrings. But the stimulus was positive even if it fell well short of what was needed (or even anticipated at the time). Very few predicted the bad January and February at the time the stimulus was being devised in December.
Furthermore, do you understand why the Obama admin and Summers ended up arguing for under $1 trillion in stimulus? It was precisely because he knew the GOP along with blue-dog dems would never go for it. So yes, the GOP is primarily at fault because they would never have allowed the admin to go after the stimulus we needed. How many voted for the stimulus? How many agreed to pass Obama's later policies or even entertain them such as more infrastructure spending? The WH tried to take a rational approach to Congress, which at the time was almost irrational. Now, it's fully irrational all because of the GOP.
What would have happened had Obama proposed $1.5 trillion in stimulus? Nothing. We would have gotten zero stimulus, specifically on the spending side. Because of the GOP.
It should also be noted that the last 30 years of deficit cries from the GOP is also at fault. If not for their deficit and debt idiocy becoming the mainstream in the national dialogue, no one would give a fuck about the deficit or debt. Because we shouldn't. But we do because of them.
I don't care that Summers was part of the problem in the 90s. People make mistakes and he has since changed his mind. Bernanke didn't believe in the Fed trying to estimate housing bubbles and getting involved in them if they did exist. He's since changed his mind, too. Reality has a way of doing that to open-minded people. Nobody's perfect and as long someone is willing to change their course when presented with irrefutable evidence, I'm okay with that.
Dax01 said:
Oh, you know! You know very well.
- Status