Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS News)   How did a 700-page book on economics surge to No. 1 on Amazon? Here comes the math   (cbsnews.com) divider line 161
    More: Interesting, Amazon, Thomas Piketty, economics, New York Review of Books, e-books, Lawrence Mishel  
•       •       •

12458 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Apr 2014 at 11:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



161 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-26 12:57:21 PM  

rewind2846: It is no.1 because it's the cold hard truth, backed up with facts, figures, charts, graphs and plenty of research. It's the kind of book that should not only be standard reading in ALL college economics courses (and AP high school as well), but mandatory for every member of congress, every state governor, and every state legislator.

This book rips the lid off the bullsh*t the republicans have been pumping for the last 30 years, and they are scare. All the more reason for everyone to read it.


Have you read it? If you're looking for the cold hard truth, backed up with facts, figures, charts, graphs and plenty of research, I would suggest "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis" by Ludwig von Mises
 
2014-04-26 01:01:57 PM  

impaler: DrPainMD: From Wikipedia: "The book has been compared to Marx's Das Kapital, improving his analysis by using modern economic data."

That's all I need to know. If you want to learn economics, start with "Economics in One Lesson" and move on to "The Failure of the New Economics," both by Henry Hazlitt.

Considering I have you favorited as "economic moron http://www.fark.com/comments/8128743", I'm sure those books are complete trash. I'll give them a look over though, to see where people get crackpot theories.


Here's "One Lesson." pdf only (unless you want to buy the paperback).

Here's "The Failure..." in epub or pdf

Enjoy.
 
2014-04-26 01:02:35 PM  

PreMortem: CruJones: PreMortem: DrPainMD: PreMortem: BalugaJoe: If economists knew what they were talking about then they would have all of the money.

One has nothing to do with the other. You have to be a psychopath who is willing to screw over your grandmother.

Or produce something of great value to others.

To me, making something for a dollar and selling it for ten is screwing someone over. Whether they think they are getting screwed over or not is irrelavent.

Shouldn't the real definition of value be what you're willing to pay? If I buy something that I like, and I feel I paid a fair price, I don't give a shiat how much it cost to make. That person found and brought this item to my attention and did everything necessary for me to obtain it. There's value in that. A quarter for a bouncy ball is ok regardless of the fact it was made for a penny because I'll get one cent's worth of entertainment. Bouncy Balls Inc did not rip me off.

There's a sucker born every minute.


Who's the sucker? If you see the price of something and decide you'll get enough enjoyment out of it to justify the cost, what's the problem? Sure, you'd like to pay less, and whoever's selling it would like you to pay more, but you both agree that it's worth buying and selling at that price, otherwise you wouldn't do it. Besides, who's to say what something "should" cost? How do you value the time of each person involved, or their skills? What about things that cost money to produce but can be sold repeatedly for little extra money? Things are worth what people are willing to pay for them.
 
2014-04-26 01:03:03 PM  

DrPainMD: From Wikipedia: "The book has been compared to Marx's Das Kapital, improving his analysis by using modern economic data."

That's all I need to know. If you want to learn economics, start with "Economics in One Lesson" and move on to "The Failure of the New Economics," both by Henry Hazlitt.




If the first book was called Economics in One Lesson, why did he have a second book?
 
2014-04-26 01:03:16 PM  

PreMortem: My point is not about commerce but about morality. Something conservatives, which you appear to be, don't understand.


Selling a product at a price that the buyer is willing to pay is immoral? How so?
 
2014-04-26 01:04:25 PM  
Oh, well, this has gotten tiresome fast.  Gotta finish my power slacking after my trip to Munich.

/tschüss
 
2014-04-26 01:05:41 PM  

DrPainMD: PreMortem: My point is not about commerce but about morality. Something conservatives, which you appear to be, don't understand.

Selling a product at a price that the buyer is willing to pay is immoral? How so?


I guess it'd depend on the product, a luxury item like an iPhone:  Sure bilk them for all their worth.  A basic necessity like water or Burger King Onion rings?  Morally bankrupt.
 
2014-04-26 01:07:55 PM  

DrPainMD: rewind2846: It is no.1 because it's the cold hard truth, backed up with facts, figures, charts, graphs and plenty of research. It's the kind of book that should not only be standard reading in ALL college economics courses (and AP high school as well), but mandatory for every member of congress, every state governor, and every state legislator.

This book rips the lid off the bullsh*t the republicans have been pumping for the last 30 years, and they are scare. All the more reason for everyone to read it.

Have you read it? If you're looking for the cold hard truth, backed up with facts, figures, charts, graphs and plenty of research, I would suggest "Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis" by Ludwig von Mises


I am on chapter 4 on my Kindle.
And as I said, any book that has conservatives as scared as you are is worth a weekend's read.
I especially like reading their kneejerk reactions and hearing the cries of "SOSHULIZMZ" and "MARXISISMZ".
I especially enjoy the squirming.
/he's gonna sell a lotta books
 
2014-04-26 01:08:45 PM  

DrPainMD: PreMortem: One has nothing to do with the other. You have to be a psychopath who is willing to screw over your grandmother.


Jerry Seinfeld is worth $800 million. Who did he screw over?


Didya see the Seinfeld series finale?
 
2014-04-26 01:09:52 PM  

rewind2846: It is no.1 because it's the cold hard truth, backed up with facts, figures, charts, graphs and plenty of research. It's the kind of book that should not only be standard reading in ALL college economics courses (and AP high school as well), but mandatory for every member of congress, every state governor, and every state legislator.

This book rips the lid off the bullsh*t the republicans have been pumping for the last 30 years, and they are scare. All the more reason for everyone to read it.


It's not an easy read and I paid $22 for the Kindle edition, so I don't think everyone will read it.

Here is an extensive review:

Link
 
2014-04-26 01:11:05 PM  

jake_lex: Well, if it's about the current economic system, there'll be a lot more rape in it than other books that have topped the Amazon best seller lists, like the Song of Ice and Fire books.  Figurative rape, to be sure, but rape nonetheless.


Still a better love story than twilight
 
2014-04-26 01:12:07 PM  

Doc Daneeka: neon_god: TheHighlandHowler: So the top limit on investment yields should be capped at the country's rate of growth?

No, because it's good that people can earn outsize returns for backing good ideas. In particular, risky projects can only get capital because of the possibility of huge returns. And anyways, with the globalization of financial markets and the increasing role of technology in the economy, capital will probably inevitably become more important, and so better paid, relative to labour. Cutting off returns in any one country would just push a lot of money elsewhere.

Income inequality is not such a bad thing in and of itself, provided those on the bottom are taken care of. Higher capital gains taxes and a stronger welfare state are probably the best that can be done. In particular, healthcare and education need to be available to all.

It is a problem in and of itself insofar as it it undermines democracy.

Even if there is an adequate safety net for the poor and working class, concentrating an ever increasing proportion of wealth in the top 1% means concentrating an ever increasing share of political power in that tiny group.

And it's not like there is much social mobility either up and down the latter. Sure you can always point to ordinary people who struck it rich, but these are rare exceptions, and in any case, the increasing concentrations of wealth in the top 1% means that that wealth is becoming increasingly hereditary, not self-made.

We are headed to a society where the levers of power are going to be increasingly wielded by a few super-rich, politically powerful dynastic families. And that undermines democratic and meritocratic ideals.


That's true to a certain extent, although I think you'd find that mobility into and out of the very top 0.01% is higher than you'd expect. Ordinary people striking it rich are rare, but the total number of the super rich is small. You're right that the creation of a hereditary upper class of the super rich is a problem. I think the solution lies more in taxing large estates and in ensuring that everyone has access to the education necessary to advance socially than in preventing the accumulation of large fortunes in the first place.
 
2014-04-26 01:14:53 PM  
Kinetic King:
he 'greed is good' mentality has gotten to them and they went Galt on society by deciding that stocking their wine cellar is more important than having a child.  If the meme ever gets out that cutting back on kids is the only real way to hit back on the plutocrats, expect long lines outside of Planned Parenthood clinics.  And I doubt that the plutocrats will ever take away all our birth control without risking a revolution--and remember that women are ...Either way, I think this is going to make for a massive demographic upheaval in the long run, say in a generation or two...


Could you speed things up here a bit?  I'm not getting any younger, and I would really like to see some kind of Hunger Games/Running Man mashup, with 1% ers as the contestants.
 
2014-04-26 01:16:20 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: DrPainMD: From Wikipedia: "The book has been compared to Marx's Das Kapital, improving his analysis by using modern economic data."

That's all I need to know. If you want to learn economics, start with "Economics in One Lesson" and move on to "The Failure of the New Economics," both by Henry Hazlitt.

If the first book was called Economics in One Lesson, why did he have a second book?


He wrote a bunch of books, most of which you can get for free (epub and/or pdf files). He wrote "Failure" to refute, line by line and page by page, Keynes' "General Theory." Not that he had to... anybody who reads it can tell that Keynes doesn't know what he's talking about. He gives a half-dozen different and contradictory definitions of the term "the marginal efficiency of capital" for Pete's sake. His "liquidity preference" theory of savings goes directly contradictory to the facts it claims to explain. Heck, many of his assumptions contradict his own formal definitions. In Chapter 6 he explains how saving and investing "have been so defined that they are necessarily equal in amount, being, for the community as a whole, merely different aspects of the same thing." (p. 74). He then spends much of the rest of the book talking about how great investing is and how bad saving is.
 
2014-04-26 01:16:55 PM  

Kinetic King: Haven't read it yet, but wonder if Piketty took into account the biggest demographic upheaval in history.  Places like Brazil and India have seen their fertility rates plummet drastically to about 2.5 kids per woman, just above replacement level.  The US is already below replacement, and in many industrialized countries like South Korea or Germany, it's just above 1.0 kids per woman.  Every time I see a picture of third-worlders in National Geographic or somewhere, they're all holding smartphones--usually of newer vintage than my cellphone--and it's obvious that women in the third world are catching on to the idea that there's more to life than sitting in a hut and popping out babies like a Pez dispenser.  Women in the industrialized countries would rather have a career than lie back and think of England.

Truth is, the only real scam that's ever existed is the 1% of the 1% (most 1%ers are doctors, engineers, or other people who actually contribute to society) have always depended on a never-ending supply of peasants to keep the price of labor low.  And if there's too many of us, they throw a war or two.  In spite of their self-serving objectivist crappola, they really depend on us peasants more than we depend on them, and it takes a lot of us to support the lifestyle of one of them.

Most people are limiting the number of kids they have mostly in their own self-interest.  They're prolly just out of college and with a huge loan debt, working some crappy non-paying internship, and simply can't afford kids.  Or, perhaps the 'greed is good' mentality has gotten to them and they went Galt on society by deciding that stocking their wine cellar is more important than having a child.  If the meme ever gets out that cutting back on kids is the only real way to hit back on the plutocrats, expect long lines outside of Planned Parenthood clinics.  And I doubt that the plutocrats will ever take away all our birth control without risking a revolution--and remember that women are ...


You sir, are (mostly) correct.
The U.S. is at the replacement rate (due to immigration)
 
2014-04-26 01:17:46 PM  

Kinetic King: Again, folks, the biggest news that's not getting reported is the plummeting birth rates around the world.  If Piketty's or any other economist's treatise doesn't take this into account, they've left out a very important detail.  IIRC, after the Black Plague killed off about 1/3 of Europe, the peasants had their biggest increase in the standard of living since the collapse of the Roman Empire.  With birth rates in nearly all industrialized countries plummeting to well-below replacement levels, I think that the standard of living around the world will ultimately rise in the long term...

/and if a robot can replace a worker drone, it can also replace a CEO drone as well




In theory that is what should have happened.

That's not what actually happened.

King Edward III passed a law forbidding serfs and peasants from charging more

In other words, The Golden Rule. He who has the gold, makes the rules.
 
2014-04-26 01:20:20 PM  

Doc Daneeka: It is a problem in and of itself insofar as it it undermines democracy.

Even if there is an adequate safety net for the poor and working class, concentrating an ever increasing proportion of wealth in the top 1% means concentrating an ever increasing share of political power in that tiny group.

And it's not like there is much social mobility either up and down the latter. Sure you can always point to ordinary people who struck it rich, but these are rare exceptions, and in any case, the increasing concentrations of wealth in the top 1% means that that wealth is becoming increasingly hereditary, not self-made.

We are headed to a society where the levers of power are going to be increasingly wielded by a few super-rich, politically powerful dynastic families. And that undermines democratic and meritocratic ideals.


This is correct. And a winner are you as well.
 
2014-04-26 01:24:21 PM  
This book on economics explained things in a more clear way than my Econ 101 professor ever did.
 
2014-04-26 01:28:07 PM  

SDRR: If you laid all of the economists in the world end to end they would fail to reach a conclusion.

or, something like that



yea, and scientists/engineers never got us to the moon.  it was all belief and religion that did it.

moron
 
2014-04-26 01:31:07 PM  
Economics in 'murica:  where's my goddamned money/stuff and f*ck you!


stay classy and civilized, 'murica.   your future looks bright.
 
2014-04-26 01:34:30 PM  

DrPainMD: Darth_Lukecash: DrPainMD: From Wikipedia: "The book has been compared to Marx's Das Kapital, improving his analysis by using modern economic data."

That's all I need to know. If you want to learn economics, start with "Economics in One Lesson" and move on to "The Failure of the New Economics," both by Henry Hazlitt.

If the first book was called Economics in One Lesson, why did he have a second book?

He wrote a bunch of books, most of which you can get for free (epub and/or pdf files). He wrote "Failure" to refute, line by line and page by page, Keynes' "General Theory." Not that he had to... anybody who reads it can tell that Keynes doesn't know what he's talking about. He gives a half-dozen different and contradictory definitions of the term "the marginal efficiency of capital" for Pete's sake. His "liquidity preference" theory of savings goes directly contradictory to the facts it claims to explain. Heck, many of his assumptions contradict his own formal definitions. In Chapter 6 he explains how saving and investing "have been so defined that they are necessarily equal in amount, being, for the community as a whole, merely different aspects of the same thing." (p. 74). He then spends much of the rest of the book talking about how great investing is and how bad saving is.




You know, I can tell you take economics seriously, because you took a one line joke and gave me a paragraph missing the point.

Since you are into economics guy, I figured a chart will help
cyberbrethren.com
 
2014-04-26 01:37:29 PM  
My book, "Serving The Rich" is not 700 pages long.

Some chapters:
Boiled Rich
Fried Rich
Beer Battered Rich
Butterflyed Rich
 
2014-04-26 01:39:13 PM  

DrPainMD: He wrote a bunch of books, most of which you can get for free (epub and/or pdf files). He wrote "Failure" to refute, line by line and page by page, Keynes' "General Theory." Not that he had to... anybody who reads it can tell that Keynes doesn't know what he's talking about.


I find it utterly fascinating how you often try to shift the thread to be about literally anything than its topic - you don't actually argue against that topic, you just try to derail the thread.

Normal people don't do this. I've seen you try to do it a dozen times, always when there's some story that reflects poorly on either a right-wing position or person.
 
2014-04-26 01:45:39 PM  

Gunther: DrPainMD: He wrote a bunch of books, most of which you can get for free (epub and/or pdf files). He wrote "Failure" to refute, line by line and page by page, Keynes' "General Theory." Not that he had to... anybody who reads it can tell that Keynes doesn't know what he's talking about.

I find it utterly fascinating how you often try to shift the thread to be about literally anything than its topic - you don't actually argue against that topic, you just try to derail the thread.

Normal people don't do this. I've seen you try to do it a dozen times, always when there's some story that reflects poorly on either a right-wing position or person.


The subject isn't economics?
 
2014-04-26 01:47:13 PM  

DrPainMD: And the $700 "stimulus" bill from 2009 would have worked.


A $700 "stimulus" bill isn't going to provide very much stimulus in any case...
 
2014-04-26 01:47:35 PM  

Kinetic King: Haven't read it yet, but wonder if Piketty took into account the biggest demographic upheaval in history.  Places like Brazil and India have seen their fertility rates plummet drastically to about 2.5 kids per woman, just above replacement level.  The US is already below replacement, and in many industrialized countries like South Korea or Germany, it's just above 1.0 kids per woman.  Every time I see a picture of third-worlders in National Geographic or somewhere, they're all holding smartphones--usually of newer vintage than my cellphone--and it's obvious that women in the third world are catching on to the idea that there's more to life than sitting in a hut and popping out babies like a Pez dispenser.  Women in the industrialized countries would rather have a career than lie back and think of England.

Truth is, the only real scam that's ever existed is the 1% of the 1% (most 1%ers are doctors, engineers, or other people who actually contribute to society) have always depended on a never-ending supply of peasants to keep the price of labor low.  And if there's too many of us, they throw a war or two.  In spite of their self-serving objectivist crappola, they really depend on us peasants more than we depend on them, and it takes a lot of us to support the lifestyle of one of them.

Most people are limiting the number of kids they have mostly in their own self-interest.  They're prolly just out of college and with a huge loan debt, working some crappy non-paying internship, and simply can't afford kids.  Or, perhaps the 'greed is good' mentality has gotten to them and they went Galt on society by deciding that stocking their wine cellar is more important than having a child.  If the meme ever gets out that cutting back on kids is the only real way to hit back on the plutocrats, expect long lines outside of Planned Parenthood clinics.  And I doubt that the plutocrats will ever take away all our birth control without risking a revolution--and remember that women are ...


unfortunately.......    look at the ratio of old to young.   Also, India is overpopulated which is why Indians want to GTFO.
 
2014-04-26 01:48:42 PM  

DrPainMD: The subject isn't economics?


I think you are wrong on most econ things, but, yeah....your posts were on topic.
Don't know what he is talking about.
 
2014-04-26 01:50:44 PM  
I have to read a book to know that there's a million-light-year-long gap between rich and poor in this country? It's pretty blatant just by simply going outside or turning on the tv/internet. But we're not alone by a long shot. We're still not as bad in that department as Mexico, Brazil, South Africa, much of the Middle East, China, and way too many others to name. And it's been that way since time immemorial, and will stay that way. So just gotta suck it up.

Kardashians make more than doctors or firefighters.
Politicians make more than the people they send off to die in wars that they profit from, only to toss said people off to die in sub-marginal health care (the VA) and minimal pay.
People get rich in ridiculous lawsuits over medial bullshiat while innocent people sent off to prison for decades wait years on end to get compensation after being released.

The disparities are far too many to name, and I wouldn't waste money on a book to tell me about it.
 
2014-04-26 01:51:44 PM  

naris: DrPainMD: And the $700 "stimulus" bill from 2009 would have worked.

A $700 "stimulus" bill isn't going to provide very much stimulus in any case...


$700 would stimulate me all to hell.
Just sayin'.
 
2014-04-26 01:52:07 PM  

kling_klang_bed: The disparities are far too many to name, and I wouldn't waste money on a book to tell me about it.


it's not that there is, but why it is bad besides the envy angle.
 
2014-04-26 01:56:00 PM  

DrPainMD: PreMortem: One has nothing to do with the other. You have to be a psychopath who is willing to screw over your grandmother.

Jerry Seinfeld is worth $800 million. Who did he screw over?

Newman

Yoko Ono is worth $500 million. Who did she screw over?
The Beatles

Stephen King is worth $400 million. Who did he screw over?
Carrie

JK Rowling is worth a billion. Who did she screw over?
Lord Voldemort
 
2014-04-26 01:57:36 PM  

vpb: PreMortem:
One has nothing to do with the other. You have to be a psychopath who is willing to screw over your grandmother.

 Or just be born to the right grandmother.


Or just trust your grandmother to not have made dumb decisions all her life.
 
2014-04-26 02:04:36 PM  

Kinetic King: Again, folks, the biggest news that's not getting reported is the plummeting birth rates around the world.  If Piketty's or any other economist's treatise doesn't take this into account, they've left out a very important detail.  IIRC, after the Black Plague killed off about 1/3 of Europe, the peasants had their biggest increase in the standard of living since the collapse of the Roman Empire.  With birth rates in nearly all industrialized countries plummeting to well-below replacement levels, I think that the standard of living around the world will ultimately rise in the long term...

/and if a robot can replace a worker drone, it can also replace a CEO drone as well


ratio of old to young........
 
2014-04-26 02:08:20 PM  
The book looks very boring and French.
 
2014-04-26 02:27:36 PM  

TheHighlandHowler: So the top limit on investment yields should be capped at the country's rate of growth?


GDP growth +10% for incentive to improve. Anything over that cannot be declared as profit, you have to invest in your business, distribute to employees as bonuses, or pay out as dividends. Rule #2: No employee or officer of the firm can earn more than ten times the pay of the lowest paid worker, bonuses and stock options are not exempt from this rule.
 
2014-04-26 02:32:26 PM  
A left wing French socialist comes out against capitalism? color me shocked. Also, show me a better system.
for all the folks yapping about the 1%, the interesting thing there is the 1% is not static - if you look at the 400 richest people 20 years ago, I believe there is only 1 name on the same list today. fortunes come, fortunes go. I don't begrudge anyone who invented something, started a company, etc, who became wealthy from their ideas and efforts.
 
2014-04-26 02:46:16 PM  

snocone: My book, "Serving The Rich" is not 700 pages long.

Some chapters:
Boiled Rich
Fried Rich
Beer Battered Rich
Butterflyed Rich


Rich Gumbo
Pan-Seared Rich
Rich Salad
Broiled Rich
Rich Flambe'
Rich Soup
Stir-Fried Rich
Rich with a light cream Sauce
Oven-Roasted Rich
Rich Tartare
Baked Rich
Barbequed Rich


/just might get to that 700 pages
 
2014-04-26 02:48:09 PM  

DrPainMD: The subject isn't economics?


You seem really eager to dismiss the book this thread is about out of hand.

You'd prefer we discuss obscure Austrian economists whose theories have been debunked. So lets do that. Milton Friedman showed definitively that Austrian economics bears no resemblance to reality in the 60's and the predictive failure of it since the financial crisis hit in '08 should really have nailed the coffin shut. The people that still cling to it remind me of Harold Camping's followers trying to rationalize their prophet's failure after the world stubbornly continuted to exist in 2011.
 
2014-04-26 02:50:58 PM  

impaler: DrPainMD: From Wikipedia: "The book has been compared to Marx's Das Kapital, improving his analysis by using modern economic data."

That's all I need to know. If you want to learn economics, start with "Economics in One Lesson" and move on to "The Failure of the New Economics," both by Henry Hazlitt.

Considering I have you favorited as "economic moron http://www.fark.com/comments/8128743", I'm sure those books are complete trash. I'll give them a look over though, to see where people get crackpot theories.


Ooh! Ooh! Do me next!!
 
2014-04-26 02:56:24 PM  

cwheelie: A left wing French socialist comes out against capitalism? color me shocked. Also, show me a better system.


If you'd read so much as a short summary of it you'd know that's not what it's about. Delay posted a link to a review above; you could skim it and not seem like an ignorant asshat.

cwheelie: if you look at the 400 richest people 20 years ago, I believe there is only 1 name on the same list today.


You might believe that but it's farking nonsense.
 
2014-04-26 02:56:44 PM  
Amazon's best-seller list depends on sales rate, not sales volume. A couple of years ago a relative of mine wrote a lengthy but well-received historical biography. A few days after it came out he did a long interview on NPR to discuss the topic, and at the end of that interview every university librarian in the US ordered a copy from Amazon. The result: his book was number eight on the Amazon best seller list for a day ... on the basis of a few hundred sales.
 
2014-04-26 03:14:02 PM  
cwheelie - Name 1 person who became wealthy without the support of society. When you have wealth you are dependent on a multitude of public resources to create, amass, and maintain it. The sooner people stop pretending that wealth is "self made", the sooner we can stop the petty arguing and try and fix things so that society is better off as a whole.
 
2014-04-26 03:24:45 PM  
"Here comes the math" == Unless a famous pop writer or celebrity has a new release, it doesn't take much to make the NYT best seller list or Amazon #1.
 
2014-04-26 03:34:08 PM  
Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of the smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organised political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. (Albert Einstein, 1949)
 
2014-04-26 03:35:04 PM  

BalugaJoe: If economists knew what they were talking about then they would have all of the money.



yea, because everyone worships money.  everyone just lives for the dollar.
 
2014-04-26 03:35:40 PM  

vpb: BalugaJoe: If economists knew what they were talking about then they would have all of the money.

They do.  This one has a bestseller on Amazon.



damn, you stuck that one in deep.  lol
 
2014-04-26 03:38:53 PM  

ForeRight: DrPainMD: PreMortem: One has nothing to do with the other. You have to be a psychopath who is willing to screw over your grandmother.

Yoko Ono is worth $500 million. Who did she screw over?

Music fans.  You may have a point on the other ones.


the vast majority of wealth in 'murica is inherited wealth, dinky.   and they loves them some GOP too.  bush jr himself got rid of the estate tax.  the estate tax's purpose was to prevent an Aristocracy from getting a firm foundation in 'murica.

course. bushie boy knows better.  you can't fool him.
 
2014-04-26 03:40:40 PM  

orbister: Amazon's best-seller list depends on sales rate, not sales volume. A couple of years ago a relative of mine wrote a lengthy but well-received historical biography. A few days after it came out he did a long interview on NPR to discuss the topic, and at the end of that interview every university librarian in the US ordered a copy from Amazon. The result: his book was number eight on the Amazon best seller list for a day ... on the basis of a few hundred sales.



keep hoping, Repug.  all you have to do is believe.    lol
 
2014-04-26 03:42:25 PM  

rewind2846: snocone: My book, "Serving The Rich" is not 700 pages long.

Some chapters:
Boiled Rich
Fried Rich
Beer Battered Rich
Butterflyed Rich

Rich Gumbo
Pan-Seared Rich
Rich Salad
Broiled Rich
Rich Flambe'
Rich Soup
Stir-Fried Rich
Rich with a light cream Sauce
Oven-Roasted Rich
Rich Tartare
Baked Rich
Barbequed Rich


/just might get to that 700 pages



or.............you just might get Ideas out to the little people that just might ream your people a new asshole.
 
2014-04-26 03:43:21 PM  

BalugaJoe: The book looks very boring and French.



yea, especially for someone who has never been out of the lower 48.
 
Displayed 50 of 161 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report