Dumb and Stupid Quotes Thread: Idiotic Source and Context are Key.

[Kyriakos]

You sort of missed the point. Christianity is judaic in nature and also non-logical re ethics as well as a load of other things-. My point was to present the rather clear difference between logical and religiors ethics. Your view that it isnt clear must be down to not identifying what is meant by logic based ethics. An example from the stoics: greed leads to needing more so as to feel happy. Compare with stuff like: the rich man has to give stuff to god or he will burn in hell with a pariah now being happy in heaven, cause the latter was a friend of some bizarre god-elevator.
Btw, nietzche isnt the nazis; lets not go completely mental here

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I don't know whether this is an issue of outdated writing (did nurse practitioners exist in 1962 America?) or Mr. Friedman's ignorance. Still though, you have to wonder about someone making grand proclamations on a field they know next to nothing about.
"many things are restricted to licensed physicians that could perfectly well be done by technicians, and other skilled people who do not have a Cadillac medical training. I am not enough of a technician to list the examples at all fully."

It's actually the back-alley doctors that create innovative medical techniques. Since there are no examples listed, I have to assume the source is Milton Friedman's ass.
"Advances in any science or field often result from the work of one out a large number of crackpots and quacks and people have no standing in the profession."
-Milton Friedman, "Occupational Licensure", Capitalism and Freedom (40th anniversary edition)

 

[Arakhor]

A famous example of this would be Albert Einstein's annus mirabilis, with no less than four papers published out of the blue about the brand new science of quantum physics.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

At the time he wrote those papers, he was completing a physics Ph.D. program. Not exactly someone with no standing in the world of physics.

 

[Arakhor]

Knowledge, certainly, but little or no social recognition (i.e. standing).

 

[Traitorfish]

The juxtaposition of Einstein and Friedman is a useful reminder that not all outsiders are quacks, and not all quacks are outsiders.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Misunderstanding socialist thought is de rigueur for capitalist apologia, but it should still be called out.
"Labor is 'exploited' only if labor is entitled to what it produces. If one accepts instead the socialist premise, 'to each according to his need, from each according to his ability' - whatever that may mean - it is necessary to compare what labor produces, not with what it gets but with its 'ability', and to compare what labor gets, notwith what it produces but with its 'need'."
-Milton Friedman, "The Distribution of Income", Capitalism and Freedom (40th anniversary edition)

 

[Gori the Grey]

I don't know whether this is an issue of outdated writing (did nurse practitioners exist in 1962 America?) or Mr. Friedman's ignorance. Still though, you have to wonder about someone making grand proclamations on a field they know next to nothing about.
"many things are restricted to licensed physicians that could perfectly well be done by technicians, and other skilled people who do not have a Cadillac medical training. I am not enough of a technician to list the examples at all fully."

Whatever you might think about his authority for making such a claim, he turned out to be prescient. A lot of medical tasks formerly handled by doctors are now handled by physicians assistants.

 

[cardgame]

Misunderstanding socialist thought is de rigueur for capitalist apologia, but it should still be called out.
"Labor is 'exploited' only if labor is entitled to what it produces. If one accepts instead the socialist premise, 'to each according to his need, from each according to his ability' - whatever that may mean - it is necessary to compare what labor produces, not with what it gets but with its 'ability', and to compare what labor gets, notwith what it produces but with its 'need'."
-Milton Friedman, "The Distribution of Income", Capitalism and Freedom (40th anniversary edition)

Man that's weak writing, all he is doing is restating what is already said.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

From what I vaguely remember of Piketty's graphs of decile and centile shares, this is just straight-up bullpocky.
"Among the Western countries alone, inequality appears to be less, in any meaningful sense, the more highly capitalistic the country is: less in Britain than in France, less in the United States than in Britain"
-Milton Friedman, "The Distribution of Income", Capitalism and Freedom (40th anniversary edition)

 

[Lexicus]

Misunderstanding socialist thought is de rigueur for capitalist apologia, but it should still be called out.
"Labor is 'exploited' only if labor is entitled to what it produces. If one accepts instead the socialist premise, 'to each according to his need, from each according to his ability' - whatever that may mean - it is necessary to compare what labor produces, not with what it gets but with its 'ability', and to compare what labor gets, notwith what it produces but with its 'need'."
-Milton Friedman, "The Distribution of Income", Capitalism and Freedom (40th anniversary edition)

Now this is actually interesting and insightful. And it's worth pointing out that a lot of anticapitalist rhetoric seems to oscillate unpredictably between a proper "according to need" and some form of producerism where the workers are morally entitled to control over what they produce. I have likely been guilty of this myself, though lately I've tried to come down pretty decisively against producerism and say that humans are entitled to stuff because they're human.

From what I vaguely remember of Piketty's graphs of decile and centile shares, this is just straight-up bullpocky.

Could the discrepancy be the result of the four decades or so between the publication of the one book and the other?

 

[Cutlass]

From what I vaguely remember of Piketty's graphs of decile and centile shares, this is just straight-up bullpocky.
"Among the Western countries alone, inequality appears to be less, in any meaningful sense, the more highly capitalistic the country is: less in Britain than in France, less in the United States than in Britain"
-Milton Friedman, "The Distribution of Income", Capitalism and Freedom (40th anniversary edition)

This has changed over time. The Reagan/Thatcher revolutions made a major change in the distribution of incomes in those 2 countries. And Friedman was writing in the 1960s and 1970s.

 

[Zkribbler]

This has changed over time. The Reagan/Thatcher revolutions made a major change in the distribution of incomes in those 2 countries. And Friedman was writing in the 1960s and 1970s.

Too true.

The inequity of wealth in the US is seem elsewhere only in the Third World.

 

[Cutlass]

Too true.

The inequity of wealth in the US is seem elsewhere only in the Third World.

And UK.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Now this is actually interesting and insightful. And it's worth pointing out that a lot of anticapitalist rhetoric seems to oscillate unpredictably between a proper "according to need" and some form of producerism where the workers are morally entitled to control over what they produce. I have likely been guilty of this myself, though lately I've tried to come down pretty decisively against producerism and say that humans are entitled to stuff because they're human.

I think that's falling to the same trap Mr. Friedman did: confusing the current system for a future system ("to each...") where the wealth distribution is more equal. If everyone had equal access to the means of production then there would be no conflict between producer control of output and the ability of people to provide for themselves.

Could the discrepancy be the result of the four decades or so between the publication of the one book and the other?

Not sure what you're saying here: did the economists of the 50's and 60's not have access to the same wealth distribution records Piketty did? His graphs for the US, France, and Britain go all the way to the 1890s.

 

[Lexicus]

I think that's falling to the same trap Mr. Friedman did: confusing the current system for a future system ("to each...") where the wealth distribution is more equal. If everyone had equal access to the means of production then there would be no conflict between producer control of output and the ability of people to provide for themselves.

What does it mean, practically, for "everyone to have equal access to the means of production"? I submit to you that such a thing is not really possible.

Not sure what you're saying here: did the economists of the 50's and 60's not have access to the same wealth distribution records Piketty did? His graphs for the US, France, and Britain go all the way to the 1890s.

My point is, could what Friedman said about income distributions be accurate for the time he was writing?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

What does it mean, practically, for "everyone to have equal access to the means of production"? I submit to you that such a thing is not really possible.

I'd like to know too, and I am always curious about the details of what socialists plan to do. A more equitable distribution of wealth would be part of it, but capital is more than just liquid assets.

My point is, could what Friedman said about income distributions be accurate for the time he was writing?

I'll have to dig up Piketty's graphs to verify that.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Ah yes, like how the F-117 totally prevented any expulsions of Albanians from Kosovo. When it comes to complicated humanitarian conflicts, technology is all you need!
"We can now only wonder what things would be like if the F-22 was employed early on as a low risk concept for denying Assad's continued and brutal use of air power against his own people and moderate free Syrian rebels. In addition, if the US had air supremacy over Syria years ago, our surveillance information and reconnaissance aircraft could have been operating at will over that country and would have better observed ISIS's rocketing rise to power. Then again, maybe Assad would already be out of power and ISIS would never have had the ridiculously fertile breeding ground in which it rapidly expanded its military reach, geographic control and wealth in the first place."
-Tyler Rogoway, "The F-22 Raptor Bloodies Its Talons iin First Attack Over Syria"

 

[Broken_Erika]

Ah yes, like how the F-117 totally prevented any expulsions of Albanians from Kosovo. When it comes to complicated humanitarian conflicts, technology is all you need!
"We can now only wonder what things would be like if the F-22 was employed early on as a low risk concept for denying Assad's continued and brutal use of air power against his own people and moderate free Syrian rebels. In addition, if the US had air supremacy over Syria years ago, our surveillance information and reconnaissance aircraft could have been operating at will over that country and would have better observed ISIS's rocketing rise to power. Then again, maybe Assad would already be out of power and ISIS would never have had the ridiculously fertile breeding ground in which it rapidly expanded its military reach, geographic control and wealth in the first place."
-Tyler Rogoway, "The F-22 Raptor Bloodies Its Talons iin First Attack Over Syria"

All the worlds problems can easily be solved with an orbital Ion Cannon.

 

[r16]

Tyler Rogoway, "The F-22 Raptor Bloodies Its Talons iin First Attack Over Syria"

one of those mighty blogs where "civvies" teach the less fortunate , about how the mighty US dominates the world and stuff . Even if such a status also forces him and his ilk to speculate the vaunted North American Airspace is violated at will and it's always an undeclared USAF test plane . Plus , making Esad fall would make it far harder to create a case for gods of war aka the Kurds who are bestest and finestest warriors on earth and the only option to fight ISIL and for that to happen there also had to be ISIL , now that Nusra -before and after- uses any pretext to avoid a good old bad response from people you wouldn't rightly know . Indeed F-22s are expected with much exciment , to see how it can go to Moon , too .