BellGab.com Archive

Quote from: Taaroa on May 07, 2018, 11:13:52 PM
I agree with all of this, which is what makes it extremely unlikely for them to give up their ultimate trump card. Better conditions (and I don't mean freedoms necessarily) for the populace also has ramifications for the stability of the country and regime as well as propaganda value.
What happened to Gadaffi is reason enough to give NK pause for giving up their weapons.

But let's say NK gets rid of their weapons tomorrow - they'll still have the knowledge and skills to sell to other groups, just not completed weapons. They're hardly the only guilty party in selling on nuclear expertise; there's been speculation over the years that Saudi Arabia helped fund the Pakistani nuclear program and/or have an agreement in place to transfer weapons should the 'need' ever arise.

I'm aware of the other proliferation issues but these comparisons just make the NK situation look even worse. At this point, I don't see a practical solution that doesn't involve unacceptable risks of major death and destruction.

As long as the Trump administration is in power (and who knows, maybe also the next administration), the most I could hope for is to keep the pressure on and pray for a miracle. As in, Kim chokes on a bon-bon or crashes his plane. We might have a better shot with the generals who come to power.

Quote from: Taaroa on May 07, 2018, 06:10:29 PM
It's wishful thinking sure, but maybe if there was less of a focus on the nuclear issue and more on peace and better conditions for the populace we'd have some progress as opposed to none. You don't see anyone complaining about their biological and chemical weapons, or the masses of artillery pointing at Seoul when they are just as deadly.
India, Pakistan, and the potential acquisition of nuclear weapons by Saudi Arabia are much more concerning than NK. NK is fairly predictable in the way they conduct themselves and - excluding the possibility of regime collapse - them having nukes doesn't really bother me at all beyond potentially selling their expertise to other parties as they have with other weapons.

You have a much more benign view of the dictatorship in NK than I do. Kim has no interest in "better conditions for the populace" beyond keeping it in the near-starvation state necessary to keep a primitive economy running and his military in line. "Peace" for them means the ability to keep their concentration camps operating and the population subdued without basic human rights without any interference or pressure from the outside world.

Nukes/missiles/icbms are a much greater threat than bio/chem weapons even though their use is less likely. NK has already tried building a nuclear reactor in Syria, helped Qaddafi with his nuke program, and will sell their tech to anybody if they need the cash enough.

Basically, NK is a large criminal organization with its own country, flag and now, nukes which are deliverable throughout the region and soon, the world.

It's fine by me if NK doesn't worry you much. That doesn't mean you don't have good reason to be worried.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on May 07, 2018, 02:30:59 PM

It doesn't affect anything? You're joking right? The other day he sent his latest lawyer Giuliani to say that three Americans held in NK would be released...The state department had no idea what he was talking about. Not only that, but he said that they were all taken prisoner when Obama was in office..Nope..One was. The other two were there since Trump took office.

Or perhaps the crap he said about getting Puerto Rico back up and running...They're nowhere near up and running and won't be when the hurricane season begins again..

Trump lies even when it is better for him if he tells the truth. What sort of brainless idiot does that? When he isn't driving that train wreck he's playing golf. He even cheats at that, so much so that no-one even cares, it's just 'what he does'. He's such a whiny, spoiled brat.


You say it doesn't matter; Well what if in the not too distant future the USA/NATO faces a very serious situation that literally is life and death for all, and only very careful diplomacy will make the difference? Who will believe what he says? And why should they?

Nobody's driving the bus, obviously. In a crisis, we've got to hope that one of the passengers closest to the driver's seat (perhaps a guy named Mattis) is able to grab the wheel for long enough to keep us from descending into a deep gourge. One fascinating thing about all this is the number of passengers who are not at all worried that there's no bus driver, much less a credible one. So, what to do? Not quit drinking, start smoking.

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on May 06, 2018, 08:09:22 PM
You are correct that US policy has been regional dialogue with the US, Japan, SK, China, Russia, and NK.  And that NK has wanted to divide Japan, SK, and the US and cut a separate deal with the US only.

You are also correct that Kim is likely up to the same old trick of getting what he wants upfront, with him making promises to (not) be carried out down the line.  Like the previous NK deals, and like Obama's Iran deal


But let's wait and see.  NK and SK had direct talks, so SK wasn't cut out.  Perhaps NK is ready to make a real deal.  I believe Trump when he says he's ready to walk away if they aren't serious.  They've had the lower level meetings that take place before the summit meetings, and a hard line guy like Mike Pompeo is still on board.  I don't see this ending up like a Bill Clinton or Obama type deal.

I can definitely see Trump walking away, one way or another. And probably more pissed off than ever about the whole situation. What he does or doesn't do next is the big question. Tweeting and making speeches is one thing, giving Little Rocket Man a bloody nose is another. But I'm all for waiting and seeing. Won't be boring to watch.

Quote from: Taaroa on May 06, 2018, 05:57:38 PM
I think there needs to be less focus on the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula and more progress on improving the lives of their citizens and developing better relations between the South and North (eg a more formalised end to the Korean War, resolution of border issues, etc). If I were NK I wouldn't give up my ultimate trump card either and would be nervously looking at the history of countries and regimes which have either given up the weapons completely or ended WMD programs following international pressures.
It also comes across as a hypocrisy that you have countries like the US pushing for denuclearisation when they themselves have a massive arsenal of nuclear weapons, and when other arguably less stable countries (ie Pakistan and India) have nuclear weapons without a peep from anyone.

I don't expect them to give up their nukes or for reunification to suddenly occur, but maybe with further talks there'll be some improvement of the general situation in the region...

Your last thought is a nice, reasonable wish -- gradually lessening tensions thanks to regular, ongoing diplomatic activity -- except for the reality that the two people calling most of the shots are Trump and Kim. They're each looking to score a coup. Slow, long term progress is not really on the table. They each want a big win and they want it now.

Worse still, the U.S. and its allies have security interests diametrically opposed to North Korea's, especially now that they have nukes and are close to having a working ICBM. Maybe everyday border disputes (eg. fishing rights) and some other issues could be successfully negotiated, but there's no middle ground here between having nukes and totally giving up those nukes. Not with a dictatorship as historically untrustworthy as NK. Inspection regimes have been tried in NK and failed. The possibility of Kim accepting an effective inspection regime is extremely unlikely.

So, I'm guessing the summit will fail and each side will return to threatening the other with total destruction. Until we get a new and much smarter set of leaders in Washington, the best policy may just be for everyone to keep their fingers crossed.

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on May 06, 2018, 12:29:14 PM
Well, we expect our allies to fund NATO at the levels they agreed to.  We would like to be in sync on foreign policy, but that's never been the case on all issues.  That the leadership in Western Europe and elsewhere leaves much to be desired isn't our fault.

I don't see him sucking up to Putin.  He's stood up and opposed him more strongly that Obama ever did.  I think it would be in our benefit to be on as good of terms as practicable, as there are areas of both conflict and joint interest we need to work together on.  If you want an example of how not to deal with him, and get completely played at every juncture, see the Obama presidency and the Hilary Clinton State Department.  I get that you need to believe otherwise for the whole ''collusion'' narrative to make sense though. 

Somehow the way he's dealt with NK has gotten them to the table with SK and with us.  That you don't even give him credit for that says much.


And yes, he hamstrings himself.  That doesn't mean the Democrat Fake News Media isn't going all out to do that as well.

Just wanted to point out that many people and most of the media are making it seem like an accomplishment to get NK to the bargaining table on their nuclear program, more so because it's a direct negotiation between NK and the U.S. involving POTUS.

IMO, at this point it's no accomplishment at all. NK has always wanted direct talks with the U.S. (mainly for propaganda purposes and to cut out local allies like Japan). We've always refused direct talks, even before nukes were the issue. So, this is a win for NK to this point. Also, China is starting to relax sanctions, taking advantage of all the happy talk.

Kim is playing this smart. He's given up nothing tangible to date and he's already made gains ahead of the summit. As for the outcome, I'd bet on Kim being a better negotiator than Trump and the world holding its breath and hoping that hawks like Bolton and Pompeo can stop Trump from making dangerous concessions in return for empty promises. Oh, the irony of Bolton maybe getting in Trump's ear and saving us from an even worse situation than we have now.

It's going to take one very smart, very tough president to get NK to give up its nukes, something they have absolutely no intention of doing regardless of what they say. Trump will fail like all his predecessors. But hey, maybe the next president. Always hope, I guess.

Quote from: 21st Century Man on May 05, 2018, 02:48:31 AM
I can see a talented pro becoming successful with an internet show.  It is the wave of the future but I don't think that breakthrough is going to be MITD.

The key too is if someone reliable is brought on like Schrader, radio affiliates would probably line up to carry the show.  Remember Cumulus was ready to sign Art and MITD but then Art decided to quit for the final time.  Schrader's not Art though and it would be a tough slog for him to make the breakthrough.  I just don't think Dave is that interesting a personality though I could be wrong..

Well, that's the thing -- it's all about having "that interesting a personality." I've got an idea on that challenge in particular. Stop looking for a replacement Art in the universe of current paranormal hosts. C2C will probably have a lot of them under lock and key anyway. Find someone who's a talented radio host and can handle Bellian type subject matter, maybe from a fresh perspective.

Here's one suggestion: Chuck Nice, a stand-up comedy guy with lots of radio experience and who actually co-hosted Star Talk with Neil DeGrasse Tyson, so he knows how to talk about sciency stuff and make it interesting. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Nice). He would be a helluva choice, if Keith could somehow get him for at least a trial period.

If not, there are no doubt others in this vein. Bottom line for Keith, look at the options you're probably not even considering. Too bad he is such an 0s and 1s guy and probably is not getting much creative input.

Quote from: 21st Century Man on May 04, 2018, 10:53:45 PM
Nice to see you back, PI.  To answer you question, you got most of it. Keith has a new host for Monday but as yet we do not know who it is though many here think it is Dave Schrader.  I don't think the money is good enough for Schrader.

Ah, 21, greetings and felicitations. You're looking like a new man. I had to drop by when I heard about Art. Seems like nothing changes whether he's in this world or the next. The eternal quest continues.

Hate to say it but I'm as skeptical about all this as I was when Art quit MITD. Unless someone is willing to put up the bucks to get a viable show up and running, it's just a pure miracle that Keith finds somebody with talent willing to work for peanuts.

I mean, has anybody really made this internet radio/subscriber model work successfully? Who knows but we might have a better shot of getting the show we want from someone like Sirius/XM. Granted, that didn't work out with Art. But at least they have the cash to fund a quality niche show and build an audience. Maybe Keith should consider talking to them again -- if that bridge isn't totally burnt.

Quote from: Rix Gins on May 04, 2018, 10:49:14 PM
Yessir.  I mean, yes sir.

Thank ye kindly.

Okay, I've been out of the loop but have I got this all straight? Heather, the self-anointed one, doesn't show up for work after Art's death... Keith fires her and is working to find a new host for MITD... Heather meanwhile announces that her show will somehow continue without Keith's support or help... and everybody's back to square one, namely the point at which Art quit the show and everybody was hoping for a permanent host that wasn't Heather.

And then Keith has the same problem as when Heather was bleeding subscribers: you maybe can't afford the talent you want without the revenue to pay him/her and said talent may not want the risk of trying to rebuild the show. So, Catch-22.

Is this basically the story now?

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on May 03, 2018, 06:23:49 PM
He was impeached for lying under oath, when in the WH.. The porn star story is far funnier with the Trump slapstick because they can't even keep their story straight.. Cohen insisted Trump knew nothing about it..(Lie #1). When asked on AF1, Trump said he didn't know anything about Cohen giving money to Ms Daniels. (Lie #2).. Meanwhile her lawyer is moving to get both Cohen and Trump to court to testify under oath that they hadn't paid her off.

Trump rants on Fox and Friends to say he didn't have Cohen do much for him, but mainly the "Stormy Daniels mess" (Simultaneously throwing his devoted lacky Cohen under the bus and  Lie#3)..His new NY lawyer Giuliani goes on Fox news to tell Hannity that Trump had reimbursed Cohen (Trump denied he had anything to do with the $130000 paid) and makes the legal hole that Cohen and Trump is in even deeper.  It looks more and more that Trump had the Daniels issue covered up to stop it getting out before the election, which if proven (And it's looking very likely Trump and co have done enough themselves to incriminate him without any prosecution lawyer lifting a finger) is illegal as it contravenes the election law.   

On your last point, the legality/illegality of the $130,000 payment apparently depends 1) on the actual source of the money (still unconfirmed) and 2) how the money got paid (IRS regulations being one aspect of this). So Trump may find himself in the clear as far as the campaign contribution laws go but still get nailed on another violation of the law.

The other thing is that Trump's statements/lies on the Daniels situation will likely kill his chances to defend successfully against the defamation lawsuit. And he may have set himself up for having to be deposed, which, as in the past, presents a big risk of him committing perjury. At the least, he may end up paying Daniels even more money, just because he couldn't keep his mouth shut or control what came out of it.

Good to talk to you again, YP.

Quote from: GravitySucks on April 25, 2018, 05:21:41 PM
Probably until someone talks about peeing in the shower.

Greetings, Gravity. Somehow I think of that as the good old days. I hope you and my other friendly acquaintances have been hard at work making Bellgab great again. Along with the newer members.

Quote from: anon on April 25, 2018, 10:51:28 AM
welcome back, buddy.

Well, I'm not sure if I'm back but thank you. We'll see how much deja vu I can stand.

Quote from: jedimiller on April 22, 2018, 02:14:12 AM
I've been reading the posts lately after Art's death. And some of you people are disgusting hating trolls. You hate on Heather, Noory and everyone on the radio. Why even be here at all? Personally, I think this site should be shut down or moderated by someone who actually cares about Radio and these issues. The stuff that has been said about Art and his family is shocking and sick. I want everyone and each of you to apologize and reinvent yourselves. Hating on a person who is doing a radio show is a shame. It's having no decency and it shows just how insecure and how much you hate yourself. I've had my own monsters but I move up and respect people. You haters hiding behind a computer, talking smack about these people working is absolutely, shameful. I had hope for the human race and for the fans..but just reading this board recently, I can see humanity degrading and going back 10, 000 years. I guess you guys never learned anything from art.

If I remember right, Art did finally have his fill of Bellgab (was it 2016?) and made a point of not posting here any more. He seemed to have a bunch of objections, one of them being what's bothering you. So yes, "AB would never accept..." and so on and so forth. Point taken for whatever it's worth.

But you might want to hop on the Internet Wayback Machine and check out Bellgab from a year or two ago. It's been awhile since I've looked at this site (as with others, Art's death made me think of Bellgab) but it seems to me that there have been some positive changes around here. It seems vaguely livable now, if not lovable.

Whether this place is about hating Noory or hating Heather, there are definitely worse things to hate than bad radio.

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 05, 2016, 08:48:51 PM
I think Trump showed fairly clearly during the campaign he doesn't give a shit what anyone else thinks.  That doesn't mean he isn't going to respond to it whenever he wants.

This isn't about one person 'poking fun' at him one time.  The people of this country are fed up with Hollywood being so continuously and pervasively one sided when it comes to political 'humor', taking cheap shots in one direction only, and it's great someone at this level is pointing it out.  Trump is playing to his voters with a lot of what he's doing.  If he keeps it up, he'll be wining a lot others over.

Who cares if he likes the show or thinks it's funny? Or cares whether he tweets about it? The audience likes it and is laughing (the Kellyanne performance is actually very funny also) and what else is there for a comedy show? As they say, lighten up Francis. Laugh while you still can.

Quote from: Segundus on December 05, 2016, 06:18:23 PM
Didn't he consider offering Veteran's Affairs to Sarah Palin?  Veterans and HUD are probably two areas on which he doesn't plan to spend much time.

Apparently, he was considering her and changed his mind. At that point, she decided to criticize him on his Carrier move. The scary thing is that, for once, she was right. And when Sarah Palin is right, whereas your new president-elect is wrong, it's probably safe to assume that the end times have arrived.

Come to think of it, I think Sarah has said we're in the end times (or maybe it was her soul sister, Michele Bachman), so she could very well be right about two things.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on December 05, 2016, 12:13:04 PM

Trump cabinet: Ben Carson nominated for housing secretary  www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38209969

Seventh day adventist who thought of hitting his mother with a hammer, and believes the pyramids were grain stores..

Even Trump thought him a bit cuckoo. But, as with his other 'rivals', its all forgotten now.

Make one wonder whether, if his patients knew about his remarkable beliefs, they would still have allowed him to operate on their brains. I would think not.

OTOH, it hasn't been reported that he bungled a bunch of operations. So, by the same "logic," it makes perfect sense to trust him with HUD, about which he has no expertise, experience or training. What could go wrong?

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 04, 2016, 09:58:30 AM
It's been nearly 70 years since the takeover of the mainland in 1949.  So far, no war.  Hardly fanatical.  Taiwan is heavily defended, it's not at all clear things would go China's way, and there is no reason for them to try.

Do some research before you draw conclusions. Look at the forces the mainland keeps constantly deployed all along the coast near Taiwan. An overwhelming array of missiles and planes (supported by the world's largest army), all aimed at Taiwan. And all for offense, not for defense. They train routinely for amphibious assault with Taiwan as their objective.

Only the threat of American help in defending Taiwan (no defense treaty) has deterred an invasion. If relations deteriorate enough and they feel provoked, they are likely to invade and to do it when we don't have the forces in place to stop them succeeding (it takes time to get carrier groups in place). The Chinese feel much more strongly about Taiwan than the Russians do about Crimea -- and look at what the Russians have done in Crimea.

Never underestimate the enemy or overestimate your own power. Particularly when you're trying to operate just hundreds of miles from their territory and thousands of miles from your own.

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on December 03, 2016, 09:14:40 PM
Something along the lines of signaling no more business as usual, that we're no longer going to cower to PRC Communist Party threats.  It will be nice to have a President for a change who believes other countries ought to be a little more concerned about our reaction to them, rather than the other way around.  Worked for Reagan.

Especially China.  They are quite conservative when it comes to war.  They will take and take when others show weakness, but will back off when confronted.  I recommend Sun Tzu's The Art of War.  These basic military philosophies have not changed in China since it was written 2500 years ago.

We are the United States.  Taiwan is a friend and ally.  China is a trading partner.  We can talk to whoever we damn well want.  If China wants to act all upset about it, so what?  They are the ones who make a big deal of this stuff, and we don't have to cater to it.  We don't have to go along with all their bullshit, all the garbage they come up with for everyone else to kowtow to, lest they be ''offended''.

That's a great emotional argument but not very practical. Taiwan is the one place where Beijing wouldn't be reticent about going to war. They are fanatical on the subject. Also, they can be reasonably sure that if they chose to invade, they would be successful. They would pay a price but they wouldn't have a problem justifying the action or the consequences to their people.

So, nothing tangible to be gained by needling them on Taiwan and a battle we would likely lose if the shooting started. But I'm sure that John Bolton thinks "playing the Taiwan card" is a terrific idea and probably told Trump that.

Quote from: Penis mv on December 02, 2016, 02:49:12 PM
Actually, WW2 is within living memory of a great many volk here in Los Estados Unidos.  When I am at the VFW, the older dudes quaff their Scotch like it's tap water and pontificate quite readily about the ass rape that is Europe, europeon politics and it's ppl.   The consensus seems to be that the Euros had us over to settle their shit.  Twice.  Next time, fuck 'em.  

I also remember fm school, that the general opinion of the U.S. is that we were separated fm Europe by the Atlantic Ocean by our creator.  For obvious  reasons.

That's never been the consensus of World War II vets in general. Most understood that fighting the Nazis in Europe or the Japanese in Pacific island chains was a better option than fighting them on American soil. Nobody likes cleaning up other people's messes but the U.S. acted mainly out of self-interest in World War II and an appreciation for the kind of world America wanted to live in in the future.

Quote from: SredniVashtar on December 01, 2016, 10:31:54 AM
You're being incredibly dishonest here. You only ever use 'leftist' to convey scorn in one way or another. And you only used 'unfortunate, sophomoric, oversimplification' because you think it sounds like a decent put-down, not because it actually carries any information in it. Like so many of your views, they are cliched, hand-me-down, and a bit dull.

Part of the problem of discussions like this is that they are often not very interesting, because too many people aren't prepared to accept that they don't have all the answers. Unless there's a reasonable chance that I might learn something from somebody else then I tend to zone out. You didn't address any of the substantive points I raised, but  instead gave me a lot of waffle about your 'perspective'. I don't really care about your perspective if you are going to use  that to hide behind a lot of tendentious posturing.

Using the term 'leftist' isn't offensive, it's just boring and predictable. It would be too embarrassing to elaborate further here. I don't want to be insulting.

Now you're starting to make sense. We were bound to get there in the end.

I guess the biggest irony about Herr Trump is that he was elected via the electoral college, when previously the only way that most of his supporters got into any sort of college was if they were employed as a janitor.

This bit here amounts to *most* of the problem with politics forums like this one. Many or most people are more interested in defending their opinions than they are in exploring and questioning what's happening and what could happen in the world. There are plenty of unknowns which are more interesting topics for discussion than who is the bestest, wisest pundit to grace a forum.

The additional insults and put-downs usually just make the already boring into the newly tasteless. If someone needs to be insulting, at least show some creativity instead of using the same repetitious crapola. As an example, I submit the phrase you introduced on one of your more inspired rants -- "witless chutney ferret." If a BellGabber can't render an insult with this kind of style, don't even bother. You're just wasting bytes.

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on November 27, 2016, 11:07:17 PM
It's a bit more than that.  The violence is preplanned.  It's central to the entire endeavor.  That's why it's the same thing across the country, in riot after riot, year after year.  It's one thing to be a dupe and give these people $100, it's something else to be at the center of it - organizing, planning, coordinating, funding. 

Flyers, tents, food, cash, bail, sophisticated social networking, knowing just how to manipulate the media - whether before the event, during, or in interviews after being released from jail.  All just spontaneous and organic to the local area? 

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or did you truly believe Occupy when they said they didn't have leaders and were 'non-violent, and thought it was just a coincidence their riots had the same pattern as all the other ''peaceful demonstrations'' of the past 30 years?

Look at the bright side. You're living in one of the few places in the world where it's even possible to join a street demonstration without being in some way attacked by the government. I wouldn't try to justify any protester getting violent but watching people peacefully protest while police just stand and watch is very impressive. Not every protest is a riot.

Quote from: WOTR on November 27, 2016, 04:12:58 PM
I remember when television stations would actually go off the air at night.  Their broadcast days would begin and end with a "thought for the day" (Usually brought to you by a religious official.)

Anyhow, I nominate this as the "thought for the day."

I'm fairly nostalgic about test patterns signaling that you are now disconnected and alone with your thoughts, for even a brief time. Being disconnected from the hive must be a terrifying concept for the Internet generation. It's also a terrifying thought that this terrifies them.

Quote from: Juan on November 27, 2016, 03:07:57 PM
I'm curious.  What do you think that would accomplish?

There's quality of life and quality of death. Better to go after hearing an honest admission of guilt than with a lie ringing in your ears.

Also, there's a small chance of leaders making greater efforts to avoid nuclear war once they acknowledge outright that it would be their fault and their failure. That's human nature.

Quote from: Yorkshire pud on November 27, 2016, 02:20:33 PM
There you go. 'classic leftist mindset'. Do you seriously see me as an automaton? 

As for caring what happens in the US; I think most thinking people all over the world care. Because the US has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the planet they share. And the planet really would rather that if they want to play at being grown ups with big toys, they appoint an adult as the family head, rather than a thin skinned, whiney, megolamaniac.

It would be a nice gesture if the U.S. and Russia -- the only two powers with the capability to end human civilization, if not the human race -- would just issue a standing provisional apology to mankind. Something along the lines of, we're sorry in advance if anything we do causes billions to die and sacrifices millenia of human progress, but you know, stuff happens and we take responsibility.

But no, people in charge will be spinning and BSing right to the end, which would make it all that much more unpleasant to behold.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 27, 2016, 02:42:31 AM
I can't agree with that. This is something that is hard to quantify but I don't see any evidence of people acting irrationally outside of politics.  Have car crashes increased?  Have other types of accidents increased?  Have millions of people quit their jobs to 'live for today?'

I haven't looked but this sounds to me like George Noory's 'people are suddenly acting weird' which he's been saying for probably at least five years now.

Sorry, I know being compared to The Nooron is the lowest insult possible.

Society hasn't broken down yet but there are big cracks forming, most of which are economic. The housing bubble and resulting financial meltdown were all about irrational thinking and behavior by millions of Americans, many of whom never really recovered, even if they're still walking around and voting.

Student debt is the latest form of economic insanity afflicting otherwise sane people. We've never seen what happens when millions of young people with debt in six figures (beyond those who were in major debt back during the Great Recession) and nothing to fall back on other than their already suffering parents, run into a major recession.. We'll find out.

The economic troubles are feeding the growing polarization in society, as is the falling public confidence in virtually all the traditionally stabilizing institutions and the information overload WOTR mentions. I see a growing sense of desperation and anger with less and less hope. This all set the stage for Trump of course, but it's about a lot more than politics.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 27, 2016, 02:12:13 AM
Well, I just learnt a lesson that the basic calculations can be more important than I gave them credit for.

Also, you're just looking at political events.

I was generalizing about various kinds of human attitudes and behavior which go far beyond politics. Political events in this country just reflect what's going on in people's heads anyway, meaning how they perceive the world. There are some big changes going on between those ears.

The world, meanwhile, is basically the same place and reality, as always, will assert itself regardless of perception.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 27, 2016, 12:22:45 AM
One more point about this.  I think most people regard mathematics as a computational exercise.  Except where precise numbers are required, the computation is minor.  If you want to multiple 99 * 103 and instead take the estimate based on 100 * 100, for most things that's more than close enough.

So, this is an example.  You might frequently hear many people say "men are stronger than woman."  In general, sure.

But, if you think of how this phrase would look with bell curves, you would have one bell curve for men and another bell curve for women further to the left, if for example, this test was done by the ability of a representative sample of men and women lifting weights.  However, you would also see that there would be some overlap.  So, you would then note that some women are stronger than some men.  For the sake of argument, let's say that 10% of women are stronger than 10% of men (at least in regards to weight lifting.)

I think there are two important lessons here:
1.There is, of course, a  cognitive bias of stereotyping.  If you look at things as to how they fit on a bell curve, I think this might help to reduce stereotyped and prejudicial thinking a little.  Most if not all cognitive biases seem to be ingrained in humans likely based on how brains (or minds) developed, but maybe some people would question what the basis of their thinking is a little more.

2.There is a logical fallacy known as hasty generalization.  In my example, if you randomly select one man and one woman and tested their strength through weightlifting, there is a 10% chance that the woman would be stronger than the man.  As George Noory says "a 10% chance?  That's huge!"  So, again if people thought about how things fit on a bell curve, it would be obvious that it's impossible to make judgments on most things on the basis of one single example.

Of course, many cognitive biases and logical fallacies aren't subject to mathematical analysis.

Well, I hear what you're saying and there's no question that people who have the ability to correct their own thinking have a big advantage over others, particularly where recognizing reality and adapting to it are concerned. However, with the exception of some small bubbles of intellectual honesty, which are increasingly becoming scarce, we have entered an age where "Don't confuse me with the facts" is becoming the common outlook.

I'm guessing that many of the lessons learned in recent decades under the banner of progress, now being questioned, will have to be relearned through sometimes bitter experience. If don't think that bell curves and pie charts have the power with most people that they used to have, and besides, they don't trust the source -- any source. We're back to the lesson of the hot stove and people will only understand and believe something when they touch the stove themselves.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 26, 2016, 06:02:41 PM
My mental calculator works by placing most everything somewhere on a bell curve.

Yes, I see that you reason this way. For me, bell curves have analytical value in some areas, but I see the dangers in over-embracing a relativistic form of morality based on comparing data points.

Past a certain very limited point, for example, it does no good to debate whether this serial killer was worse (or somehow "better") than another serial killer. They are on the same moral (and legal) plane and it's best to leave it at that, whether they killed twelve or fifty. Everything in life can't be reduced to a mathematical equation, as attractive as that notion is to some people.

Quote from: norland2424 on November 25, 2016, 12:42:36 AM
your pics are the reason why Art knocked uped his wife again.

Who's to say having another kid was Art's idea? He obviously likes the idea, no doubt for a bunch of reasons, but his wife likely has plans and ideas of her own. She doesn't post here and we know next to nothing about her, but that family is only part Art.