Howard Kurtz FIRED Over Jason Collins Error

Howard Kurtz FIRED Over Jason Collins Error

jason collins the n_b_a_ player came out
last week and everyone does then howard kurtz who’s a writer for the daily basis who also doesn’t stop a daily download
who does c_n_n_’s reliable sources hume wrote the piece in which he sort of
attacked jason collins for not being
hundred-percent forthright in that uh… is coming out he said that he didn’t
announced he was engaged to a woman minor problem there he actually did say
that in the uh… sports illustrated peace so then uh… and at the beginning prior email after i was just one
sentence i want to give her explosions older libya so travelling dates of courts wrote this
piece and then on top of that made a video because these videos without for a
ashford where he discussed this and how we so
uh… i disingenuous and now the daily beast has let him go
and apparently as newsweek is let me know chapters that we think that tina is
not happy with them but then i on top of everything else now
it looks like c_n_n_ is reviewing his contract antonio why don’t you know
that that’s just happened the act now that
could be partly just because jeff zucker is reviewing everybody and this is just
a risky yesterday don’t say that it was the f_b_i_ says yes i thought it was it
was an unnamed c_n_n_’s or saving enough political article seemed like that
grievous and it seems like it this online silver sloppiness but but it didn’t seem like so likeness i’d
read that i was like also howard why didn’t you read the article like four
hundred you’ll not see that how did you not double-checked so as a and they’re still there and then
when called on it did you not say well this is the very thing i talk about and
i didn’t catch it and i’m so sorry idealistic instead he said well disguise should those images dot downplayed rakhi sorting cranky
backtrack a little bit but what but he was there and the point is that for a
guy who polices the media the sentence the key sentence i was engaged it was
their yet he was solely one issued in minnesota but it’s still the green and not the
fans profiler exodus something else going on
here right and and to me like i mean you will not fight over that would you no i would’ve mocked him and i would have said no man’s your job
here that media watchdog dot so that literally totally wrong and made a big
stink about it say you were wrong yet what we do
gilliardi in my opinion or his work i do think has taken a hit alaska was like
you said you you are unreliable sources last week and i said to you that afternoon that
i’ve felt he was sort of losing his engine not being as uh… you know ford
is used to be and did so i i’m not defending him
because i think he’s maybe should be let go but it seems like this was just in this doesn’t strike he he didn’t do
anything if you get your yet you know like nice just strikes me as an air yet
look for us for wrestles with drives us crazy about the mainstream media overall
in and howard kurtz is a part of it everything is equal you know but you know foxes or something regis and then have ascendancy and
passing so something a little optical so little wash it away right

100 Replies to “Howard Kurtz FIRED Over Jason Collins Error”

  1. "Privatizing anything…corrupt." It depends on what you mean by privatize. Some people say the health care system is 'privatized' but it works nothing like a free market. All companies and individuals act inside of a state managed care system with third party payer that removes consumer from cost, govt. created HMO regulatory structure, mandates, subsidies, govt. created insurance cartels that prohibit purchase across state lines, etc.

    It's govt. that creates political patronage systems.

  2. I have no idea why people continue to claim the free market works, when all it does is to provide the rich with a way to remain rich without actually working. Example: a couple decades back Congress was thinking of phasing out the USPS and privatizing postal services, and solicited private estimates from the major carriers. The idea was shit-canned when UPS was the low bidder for a one ounce letter at a cost of around $8, while the USPS was still breaking even at 37 cents.

  3. This shows you that private business is riddled with gouging levels of profit that goes to the rich for absolutely nothing. This same thing has been discovered by regional power authorities that took over their local power grid and power companies when the private costs became unmanageable. What they found is a sudden near 40% decrease in gas and electrical prices when run by democratic government cooperatives instead of private business.

  4. When you don't have to pay the rich so they can stay rich, costs drop and become reasonable. Privatization is nothing but organized crime by the rich. It is the very essence of corruption. Health care in the US is a mish-mash of public rules and kickbacks to rich operators so that it's difficult to see how any of it works, which seems to be part of the strategy or corruption.

  5. But in single payer systems of government-run health care where profit is eliminated, we find the same services delivered in those western industrialized nations for under half the cost.

  6. All the government should do is make sure dependent children are cared for and their welfare assured. It should tax everybody for that, because everyone benefits in their old age by having a whole society of young people running everything for them and working when the elderly or childless cannot. Saying you shouldn't have to pay for kids, schooling, whatever, just because you don't have any kids is a dodge to avoid paying your fair share. And government should abolish legal marriage.

  7. Ironic that TYT did this video without checking to see what the true story was. Even the articles about this 2 days ago had sources saying it was because Kurtz was spending time on other ventures and Kurtz himself said it was in the works for some time. This is the 2nd major TYT fail in 2 days (along with the stupid story about the track team getting DQ'd).

  8. If by "gay lobby" you mean "the goodwill and rationale of a large and growing number of sympathetic Americans who don't wish to preserve the antiquated status-quo" then yes, the gay lobby is too powerful to oppose.

    Go sit on a dick.

  9. Because people are no longer being so tolerant that they tolerate intolerance. Imagine if strangers felt they had a say in your love life, constantly, unsolicited. '…don't support jason collins?' What are you not supporting? HIS right to choose HIS own sexual partner? Do you wanna pick out his clothes too?? When somebody introduces a spouse or girlfriend, the correct response is "How do you do?" not "I don't support you." He's a stranger; you're a bigot. Wrap yourself around it.

  10. "Single-payer govt. run…same services as those in other industrialized countries." The only non-single payer country in the West to compare those nationalized systems to is the U.S. But the mistake you are making is to assume that the U.S. has a free market in health care.

    In a free market the consumer isn't removed from cost. The govt. created third party payer system removes people from much of the cost. That's what creates excessive demand.

  11. "Under half the cost." Yes, but the U.S. system is not a free market.

    The monopoly (single-payer) systems ration. That's the only way to keep costs down once consumers are removed from cost. They delay services (long waits, esp. for specialists and elective procedures) and they ration/deny new drugs and new high-tech equipment.

    The U.S. govt. created a state-managed care system in the 60's. Prices soared. The response was the HMO regulatory structure which rations to a small degree.

  12. "Don't have to pay rich so they can stay rich…" But how does one get wealthy in a free market? The only way is to trade value for value. You must combine land, labor, and capital so as to meet consumer preferences if you want to sell a good at a profit. The profit/loss system is a feedback.

    However, the current system is not a free market. There is a Federal Reserve rigging interest rates. That benefits the rich, the govt., and the financial services sector.

  13. "Health care in U.S. is a mish-mash of public rules and rich operators." Yes, to a degree you are right. It's not just "public rules (you mean govt. rules), though. It's Medicare/Medicaid. It's govt. created state insurance cartels. It's a third party payer system that removes people from cost.

    Imagine if car insurance was third party payer by govt. designed. Employers and govt.'s pay the subsidies/premiums. People would buy most expensive parts and try to insure gas and tires.

  14. "Private business riddles with gouging levels of profit." Define gouge? Do you think that any given product has an absolute value? Time and space are part of the equation. A given good/service will fluctuate in value depending on circumstances. That's a good thing. If that wasn't the case, there would have to be rationing. There would be no discovery process. There would be an information relay problem.

    Socialists don't understand that prices force us to share.

  15. "Why people claim that free market works when all it does is provide for rich."

    Do you imagine that we have had anything remotely approaching a free market in a century?

    A free market has free market money. A free market doesn't have a central bank rigging interest rates.

    A free market doesn't have subsidies, patents, mandates (some firms always benefit from these), regulations designed to create barriers to entry, collectivized risk, public-private partnerships, etc.

  16. "UPS idea canned." Your USPS can't compete with UPS, DHL, and Federal Express in areas where those firms are allowed to compete.

    USPS has a monopoly on first class letter mail by law. It's a govt. monopoly. USPS is bankrupt at the moment. Only govt. could be given a monopoly and have it fail!

    Why not allow firms to compete with USPS on letter mail. Consumers will pick USPS if it delivers a better product at a good price. Why are socialists afraid of competition?

  17. Oh, I agree that the US is far from free market health care, or we'd have seen an armed communist revolt by now. But the comparisons are apt in any case regarding the relative costs of ANY service that pays to provide the service AND provide profit for anybody in addition, when a socialized system doesn't need to pay profit to anyone. See the difference?

  18. In the case of health care, the only reason there is any unmet "demand" is because of the lower tier of income not being able to afford decent effective health care. It isn't a commodity that can that easily be over-used, people don't wish to be ill, and even the things they do that make them ill they would prefer they didn't do. It's like a food supply, just because when you offer more food more is consumed doesn't mean people are just irresponsibly eating too much.

  19. Instead it likely means that prior to your offer a lot of people were starving and now they are getting enough to eat. Beyond a certain sized supply of food, there won't be any increase ion consumption. Same with health care. Do YOU want an unnecessary operation? Or do you think you'd rather go on vacation?

  20. "Certain sized food supply increase in consumption." What?

    The food supply has grown exponentially over last century due to increases in techniques, capital, and technology. It's govt. central planning that has slowed everything down.

    Savings comes first in a real free market. Then comes capital investment (machines, tools, factories, etc.) derived from that supply of savings. That creates increased production/productivity. That means more supply/higher real wages. Then we get to consume

  21. There is no reasonable way to show that ANY profit scheme can EVER be cheaper than a non-profit scheme, simply because of having to pay that pesky profit to whomever. Without the cost of the profit, the cost is always lower!! The US govt has NEVER had a "state-managed" health care system. I have NO idea what you're talking about.

  22. Prices soared when physicians got greedy and went into specialties and cranked up their fees in response to the specialization of medicine being seen by doctors as a windfall gravy-train. Prior to the sixties, doctors made little more than an architect. After the 70's most doctors could buy ten architects. The HMO system was a response by industrialized greedy healthcare monopolies to try to contain costs so they could award more profit to their new super-rich stockholders.

  23. In the 50's and 60's medicine was owned by individual publicly supported hospitals and clinics, but the costs of new-fangled medicine grew faster than local public budgets could keep up. The new medical equipment started being funded by investment of the super-rich, who wanted a steep return on investment, and HMOs and super-rich specialist physicians were born.

  24. "Physicians got greedy…" In a free market they would have to compete. Prices aren't volitional in a free market, they are systemic.

    Prices really started accelerating after the establishment of Great Society programs. Anyone who is remedially illiterate in economics understands why.

    Once you remove people from cost, they overutilize. The providers don't have to compete on cost anymore for those people.

  25. There is nothing wrong with rationing health care so it isn't misused. It is important to have someone looking at quality of care and at costs and doing a balancing act. It is one of the very few virtues of the HMO system, except that usually the cost savings goes unnecessarily to paying the rich a profit, and results in a disadvantage for the patient.

  26. "HMO system was response to industrialized greedy monopolies."

    HMO regulatory system was an end result of removing people from cost to a degree. Health care costs increased by 10% faster in decade following Medicare/Medicaid than decades prior despite promises by economically illiterate govt. central planners to the contrary.

    The HMO regulatory structure was designed to ration to a degree. It's not wide-spread rationing as in the case of single payer (monopoly) systems, though.

  27. "No reasonable way to show any profit scheme ever be cheaper."

    You can make profits in a centrally planned system. However, the prices and products/services offered will be different in that system. The central planning structure short-circuits the discovery process of the markets.

    If you don't have profit/loss system, there is no feedback. There is no competition. You lose the dynamism and productive/production gains that result from those feedbacks. Govt. lacks those.

  28. "U.S. govt. has never had a state managed systems." That's what it has created.

    The HMO regulatory structure, govt. subsidies, third party payer, regulations designed to create barriers to entry, govt. created state insurance cartels that prohibit purchase of major medical across state lines, and mandates INFECT everything. There is no discovery process when the state creates such a system.

    Companies act inside of centrally planned structure.

  29. "You have no idea what I am talking about." That's because you are not economically literate.

  30. AT&T used to have a govt. monopoly by law in long distance. The govt. set prices like it does for utilities. Economically illiterate politicians and socialists claimed that if the prices weren't set at those rates that consumers would be gouged.

    When long distance rates were deregulated (you are probably too young to remember) prices kept going down for decades. WHY? I suspect you don't know the answer because you aren't versed in economics. All you have are your false premises.

  31. "Agree that U.S. is far from free market…" Then why do you keep trotting out the free market boogieman for the sins of govt. central planning? Hello! You can't have it both ways.

    The areas of health care that are outside of state managed care system like cosmetic surgery and lasik eye surgery have seen falling prices and higher quality over last couple of decades. Why? Are they just less "greedy" than others. Moreover, this has happened in the face of much dollar debasement.

  32. "Govt. provide service without profit." If there were no difference besides profit, you would be right. The problem for you is that a govt. monopoly and a market don't have the same conditions.

    A free market has feedbacks. If a businessman combines capital/labor in a way that meets consumer preferences, he gets a profit. Consumers value his END product more than the starting resources by defintion, else there would be no profit. It's socially beneficial behaviour by consumer test.

  33. If a business combines land, labor, and capital in such a way that produces losses, then that is harmful social activity. Afterall, that land, labor, and capital has alternative uses. The losses signal that resources are not meeting consumer preferences. That harmful social activity must soon stop for lack of capital.

    Govt. has no such feedback. It only has arrogant central planners that can never possess enough information in time. It only has a corrupt political patronage system.

  34. EVERYONE who gets wealth or has ever got wealthy has done so by one means: STEALING!! Whether you CALL it "buy low-sell high" or wage differential, or investment and return on moneys skimmed from others that should have received it, ALL wealth comes by THEFT. It isn't actually possible to work at an honest job and save your money and get rich. It's possible to become comfortable, but NOT rich.

  35. Under the current system where you are deprived of your birthright at birth and you find it's been handed to some rich kid born alongside you, to whom you either have to pay rent or mortgage most or all of your life because you weren't granted your fair share of the earth's land to live on, it is even MORE impossible to get rich,. or EVEN to become comfortable. What most people who hear socialists talking don't quite understand is that the wealthy AREN'T NECESSARY!!

  36. We don't HAVE to heave wealthy people to have a decent economic system, in fact they stand in the way of it, and with their hand out. You don't NEED to have one guy with a lot of money start a business because he will profit immensely and become even MORE rich. If the people take and control all wealth and decide democratically what should be manufactured, grown, mined, produced, then we don't wind up with 50 shipping containers full of widgets made by poor people in sweat shops in Asia!

  37. And all because one clown thought he could sell them and get lots richer, when people could have told him they didn't want them. And as long as you have rich, and rich interfering in government, which seems to be an inextricable feature of having some be rich, you will have some rich people trying to grab it all away from lesser rich people using governmental institutions to do it. The key is to GET RID OF THE RICH!! ALL of them!!

  38. "Nothing wrong with rationing health care." Tell that to someone who endures pain, fear, and discomfort while waiting a year for a procedure. Tell that to an older person who is told to "take a pill" instead of a much preferable procedure that could add years and comfort to here life.

    Tell that to a person who has to wait 6-months for an MRI in Canada.

    Tell that to a person who needs correct eye procedure NOW, but must wait over a year instead.

    HMO's ration. You must love them!

  39. And not just the Federal Reserve and its minions, but all of those who would gladly conspire to form the NEXT Federal Reserve or whatever it would be called after you do away with this one. You see, as long as we let wealth be possible, we will be victimized. We don't HAVE to let people get rich!! It can be ENDED!! Someday inevitably, we WILL!! How soon is the only question!

  40. "The Federal Reserve.." The Federal Reserve is anathema to a free market. It was sold to socialitic-minded rubes as a way to counter the big banks.

    The Federal Reserve is a govt. created money/banking cartel. It allows member banks to inflate in unison with little fear of redemption claims. There are no feedbacks in a central banking system.

    A central bank is a partnership of state and business.

    In a free market banks would have to compete. There would be no collectivized risk.

  41. "Clown thought he could sell them higher." Why doesn't LG company just raise the prices on everything by 100% tomorrow? Because prices aren't volitional in a truly free market, they are systemic. They must compete against other firms.

    What short-circuits the foregoing are state sanctioned cartels, mandates, subsidies, public-private partnerships, limited liability, regulations designed to create barriers to entry, and patents.

  42. "Get rid of rich." If there is no incentive to profit fully from one's mental and physical labor, then people will not take risks with capital.

    You imagine that if not for the "evil" rich that the pie would be the same size to divy up amongst the collective. NOPE!!

    You have your inante intutions that evolved in a mind that existed during hunter-gatherer/tribal times. An understanding of economics requires study. It's counter-intuitive and learned. You are not economically literate.

  43. Cost isn't important. A person who is dying will want it even if it is costly. There's your unlimited demand. But that blinds the patient to the fact that it might be the wrong thing to do for him. We need committees to decide such things, and the GOP will scream "death councils!" but we have them now, we just call them HMOs. The GOP doesn't seem to mind them deciding whether to spend what THEY see as THEIR money on the patient, even if it was actually the patient's money, fee or taxes.

  44. Because as soon as you hand some rich people more money, the GOP loves them and calls them their own! Sure, the system is a leaky boat patched with leaky patches, but that's because it bears the scars of battle between the rich and the poor in Congress, and unless you shoot all the rich people, and half the Congress that serves the rich, you won't see a democratic system resulting from normal honest people seeking a way to make it work, instead of their next vacation at a fabulous destination.

  45. The shit we get now isn't government, it is government infected by the rich who are trying to kill the patient before it can fight off the disease called the GOP! Kill the GOP and government will suddenly work right, because the one thing rich people don't like is their victims ganging up against them, and that is what government has been since the Magna Carta. Democracy was invented to take first political and now economic power away from the rich nobility.

  46. Gouging is undeserved payment. Every product has an absolute value, add up the number of human hours it takes to make 10,000 of them, from mining to manufacturing to delivery and divide by 10,000 and those hours are its cost. If you pay less you're cheating, if you pay more you're getting gouged. When nothing is produced before it is ordered, and an order consists of a promise to labor a certain number of hours to compensate for others producing that item.

  47. Then you are buying it, and when your labor is complete and the item is delivered then you own it. It should have your name on it on nano-particles adhered to it, and if someone else is caught with it without your permission they should be killed on the spot. All exchanges of items should be carried out through state agency so that everybody can know who owns what and how they earned it.

  48. Your assertion that socialists don't understand sharing is an oxymoron. Rationing suggests there isn't enough to go around. If you ordered what you needed that can't happen. "Rationing" is another word for everybody getting precisely what they deserve because they worked for it.

  49. Nothing fluctuates in value except for stolen goods because of desperation and dishonesty, which theft should be punished by death. There is no "information relay problem". Nothing is made till it is desired, and nothing delivered till it's paid for. Giant eBay in the sky.

  50. No "free market" remains "free" because, being "free" people are free to construct ways to pervert it. If you wish to do away with the right to make contracts with others, then what is "free" about it? If you don't, then it won't remain "free" because all the things you claimed a "free market" doesn't have would be invented just as they came to be already. We don't have a "central bank" we have the Federal Reserve, which despite its name, is a PRIVATE bank! It is just one of many banks.

  51. You see, "free market" bozos always claim that oh it would be just so perfect and work so well if it didn't have any of the features people have added to it that "corrupt" it. But the way they claim that could be done always prohibit the very "free"-ness they want it to have, and make it useless. Without patents nobody knows how anything works and you have to find a rich person to pay for you to learn physics, because it is a privately held secret!!

  52. All sorts of wild things happen when you try to make a contradiction in terms work like someone's unrealistic adolescent fantasy about it. The "free market" isn't free or fair, and can't be without it being eliminated. Every feature you want in a "free market" leads directly to it becoming the same thing we have now. Want "incentive"? Another word for unchained greed! Etc.

  53. A lot of the ways the free-market has been modified were to prevent overthrow of the national government and a future that brings you revolutionary tribunals where all the rich would be tortured and killed!! So popular is this so-called "free market", which doesn't turn out to be so free finally for most people, the ones with tumbrils and pitchforks and torches and guillotines, that the rich themselves modified it to keep it from getting THEM KILLED!!

  54. A "single payer" for absolutely everything, democratically controlled, works a lot better, pleases more people, and if they wish they can modify it weekly and see the result

  55. Sure, and let's hope the USPS AND ALL governments remain bankrupt, because it means they are taxing us just enough and never too much. The solicited estimates by the common carriers were given that the USPS would be abolished an they should give an estimate based on their fair market costs to carry all mail. This precludes "monopoly" and thus your comment is baloney.

  56. Socialists know that whenever capitalists "compete" that they try to destroy democratic government and its competition WITH THEM!

  57. The food supply grew because of petroleum, it has nothing to do with anything else. The government promotion of the Green Revolution at home and abroad has as much to do with it as private hands did, they were all promoting it, and now it turns out it has enslaved a fair part of the world and resulted in the monstrous expansion of foreign debt by small third world countries who tried to use our methods and wound up with westerners owning their countries and their farmland.

  58. Capital is fictional nonsense, the only "capital" is human labor hour investment. First you work, then you eat. You don't need the rich to invest first, you kill the rich and invest yourself.

  59. In a free market physicians would simply raise prices till people started coming after them and killed them. Only then might they learn a hard lesson. In the 60's physicians informally fixed prices, they found out what their golf-mate was charging and raised theirs to match it, "keeping up with the Jones's", we'd say. Every time there was a furor over prices they'd relax them and offer wildly generous payment terms, and then crank them back up later when no one was looking.

  60. You keep saying "over-utilize", but that's nonsense, nobody intends to be sick, or to over-eat, or to use more than their fair share of fire department manpower. None of those "over-uses" are "useful"!! Great Society programs were started to counteract the already troubling gouging being done at the end of the 1950's when the huge disparity between rich and poor was finally noticed by privileged Americans.

  61. We need a democracy that oversees medicine and tells them what they can charge. Pay for all education, train a lot more doctors instead of limiting class size as most med schools do, and pay them the same per hour as everyone else and make them collaborate on treatment instead of making each doctor a fiefdom unto himself.

  62. There are no "central planners", there SHOULD be, but there aren't. You're confusing things that happened around the same time for causing one another, and you're doing it merely to please your fantasies. The problems with Medicare-Medicaid were the same as what's wrong with ALL medicine, there was no cost controls, providers were allowed to stick it to the patient with impunity, they couldn't be touched.

  63. They only had to make sure they didn't price themselves out of the market set by their own golf-mates, is all. Where physician fees had previously been a tenth of a hospital bill, they shot up to half of it in just ten years. HMOs were an effort to reduce costs for patients in group plans by rationing care, but people reacted against those and it almost killed the three biggest insurers because people wouldn't sign onto them anymore.

  64. What people wanted was a reduction in physicians' fees, and the government never gave it to them, they had been well-lobbied by physicians' lobbyists.

  65. You COULD make a monolithic government that was a profit engine, why, the old monarchies of Europe were such a thing. People overthrew them and hanged or killed lots of them, remember the 18th century, hmmmm? The feedback argument has been taken apart and jammed up free-marketers' butts so often that I'm surprised they can still present it without clenching their cheeks.

  66. If the free market actually HAD feedback, you might have a point, but it does a startlingly good job of ignoring any feedback at any point where profit is reduced, and tends to gag itself to death more often than not, not realizing that the hand choking it is its own. Govt has lots of feedback, it's just of a different kind, but the private and public bureaucracies are similar in that they ignore feedback reflexively, and head down stupid paths as often as any drunken sailor with a hard-on.

  67. If feedback worked in private sector we'd see fewer rich idiots trying to get rich with moronic widgets which languish in container ships at docks all over the world waiting for the next idiot who might take them for a song, which is the corollary of the public sector ponce who ignores the people once too often on a bad day. Both could use a lesson in controls theory.

  68. Oh, I see, you claim it had management, but not that it had any system! Okay, we'll play with it. The system was created by big insurance companies and handed to the government as a way to avert a crisis, they never saw what hit them. There was no discovery process in that privately created privately administered management system either. They didn't WANT one!!

  69. There's not that much TO economics, so don't prance just yet, you could bruise a hoof. What you mean is that I don't happen to agree with you about what is important in an economic system. I see capitalism as a joke waiting for a punchline, and it'll be along shortly. All you're doing is reciting the same old hackneyed formulaic mantras of econ teachers the world over which they think are so profound, and rest of us wonder why they bothered or if there really is a major in glorified accounting.

  70. They went down because of the invention of the transistor and fiber-optics, as any physicist like me knows all too well. Beware of cause and effect arguments when you don't know what causes what. The old Strowger "click and bang" relays were extremely labor intensive to maintain as compared to the new solid state relays which hardly ever failed and required NO maintenance until and unless they did. So much for me not knowing the answer because I'm not "versed".

  71. Poison is poison, even if diluted a bit. Capitalism and the so-called "free market" (and yes, I DO mean the kind YOU'D like to talk about) are poison that harms people. All surgery has gotten better from micro-instruments, lasers, and computer controlled devices. The changes due to technology in almost every field of endeavor are so huge as to swamp any supposed analysis that ignores them.

  72. Everything has feedback. I'll bet you know nothing of proportional integrative differential controls, (known as PIDs in electronic controls theory) but any engineer can point out countless ways in which every system has feedback, except for isolated black board examples that never exist in real life. The reasons for profit and loss are often totally unrelated to how the investor administers his reactions to feedback, and attempting to simplify such things as economists are wont to do is juvenile

  73. I guess you ignore job security, elections, and who will want you to work for them when you leave office, not to mention less common ones like criminal charges and lawsuits. Reputation also figures mightily in this, presidents have been know to go all out in their last term to build some type of legacy for themselves. And as for central planning, they don't have time. Nobody does.

  74. That's not "rationing", that's depriving. Often patients don't know what will really endanger them and what will not, and they may rag on about their case and their doctors and the government and etc., but most of these newsworthy (cough-cough) stories are either falsehoods or misunderstandings. I've seen this happen over and over professionally.

  75. But: In my youth I used to be an EMT and in-house procedurist for a midwestern US hospital, and people seldom grasp the precise nature of their condition or care or what is being done for them and they feel scared and ignorant and etc. They are apt to say virtually anything to the cameras at that point and often do.

  76. MRIs for disorders that are either likely to get worse sufficiently rapidly for other diagnostics to be more apt in their case are often scheduled in future, because we have found that nothing can be seen early, a waste of time, but if it gets worse later it is more likely to be seen, and if it gets better it was probably nothing.

  77. In the USA so much patient pressure is conferred through their doctor who is sucking on their wallet (or insurance) that the hospital gets pressured into it early just as physicians here are pressured into giving out antibiotics for viruses, useless, which causes the evolution of resistant strains of bacteria.

  78. When it comes to medicine, the customer is NOT always right, and in fact SELDOM is. And the wait here is not much less than Canada, as has been revealed by close study of the allegation. We tend to have more delays here BECAUSE of misuse of the facility than not.

  79. I think you should go re-read the history of the Fed before calling its early folk "socialist rubes".

  80. Of course, but MOST of the pricing BASE held in COMMON among manufacturers of these KIND of products is a result of informal PRICE FIXING!! Only the minor variations are systemic. Manufacturers LIKE knowing how many they will HAVE to sell, because they know how many they CAN MAKE right now, so it is useful to let competition succeed so that the demand is stabilized and they don't look incompetent.

  81. When capital is managed by the democracy, there is no "risk", per se, anyway!!! We don't NEED the rich. When there is no incentive to profit, others take its place, the incentive to innovate, the incentive to provide a service you enjoy providing. You cannot make someone be a physicist or engineer merely by offering him enough coconuts. You can't even interest him in TRYING to BECOME one if he doesn't LOVE it anyway and WANT to do that even if he were PAID NOTHING!!

  82. If you don't think that's true, then you REALLY don't understand scientists and engineers, and I've known VERY FEW economists who DO! This pie you imagine, producing it can just as easily and MORE effectively, be administered by a democracy of interested people, without any rich class at all. In fact the rich have always ruined it by making it out of widgets that break the second time you use one, and products very few of us want.

  83. To get a BETTER pie, we want to make-build-innovate what WE want, and NOT what the rich imagine they can gouge us for and "make a bundle"!! If I'm a hunter-gatherer, then why am I also a gardener, and a husbander, and why do all those things tell me that we don't need rich chieftains to tell us what to do, and we never did. This crap called cities was almost certainly a bad idea, and we need to back out of that blind alley and go another direction. I'm betting we will !!

  84. You are naive. Why is it then that in High school your teacher are always saying do something you like not something that bring in money? The human mind is not so altruistic that all of the populations will seek to innovate just to benefit mankind. A person can't be made a engineer by offering enough cocunuts but once the value of the item goes up you can. The population that has the most money at their grasp have it because they innovated, using legal or illegal means.

  85. Can you please use an article? Even they mostly have an informal price fixing that would just make some manufacturers go under the informal set price just to lessen the competition. That's just logic you don't want to sell more/less than you have because you lose money. Having only one source of a product stabilizes the demand also, look at De Beers.

  86. No, paying people lots of money won't make them engineers or physicists. They usually don't like science and having to suffer the indignity of failure at every turn and fired for incompetence is too great an emotional trauma. They WOULD be fired first week anyway. It's not something you can do OR learn merely by trying hard without interest, the interest is the key ingredient. Now why would an engineer or physicist go into that line of work anyway, if it only pays $60K and they're super smart?

  87. Simple, they are interested. People not interested in science REALLY do NOT like to hear that someone that smart would rather do science for NOTHING than be rich without science!! It awes them and makes them feel stupid, like they are missing something in life that must be wonderful, and that's because THEY ARE!!!

  88. Teachers in high school know this too, they tell people that IN CASE their imagination and interest can be ignited, because whereas you can usually tell a scientist at heart quite early, it is not always so. Teachers also have a sense of fair play, and $60K is a lot more than they pay at Mickey Dees.

  89. Motivation to innovation does NOT come from compensation. It isn't altruism either, precisely, it is obsessive interest in how the world works, although, interestingly, altruism seems to arise from it. How do I know all this? Simple, I'm a physicist.

  90. An article? Like "a" "an" or "the"?? Or do you mean a reference? I don't need them. You don't either, if you think you do you've been in school too long without having to function in the real world. If price fixing wasn't profitable, why did society make it illegal? See, that wasn't so hard. Stabilizes demand is another word for cranking the price up beyond the cost of manufacture. That should be illegal. It's called gouging when you're not looking for a euphemism.

  91. Reap what you sow – progressives led the charge for all the PC bullshit and it's come full circle and anyone with a mere hint of anything not 100% PC is immediately ostracized or outright dismissed. This is part of that abuse; another is by the religious to make themselves above scrutiny; another is the two-sides to everything media. This is what happens when you limit free speech under the guise of protecting against offensive speech… who knows how much worse it can get!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *