Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 499733)

- Summers has certainly made mistakes. I'm right there with you on the regulations of derivatives.

- Consensus economics has largely failed the country and the people who vote for Trump over the last many years.

- Some of the things for which Sebby faults Summers are obviously not his fault, and there are important ways in which we would be better off if Summers were listened to more.

- Sebby's fondness for deriding Summer's weight is Trumpian.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 499735)

Deification of pure academics pontificating about real world processes is dangerous. This buffoon just recently argued that we should rid the world of $100 bills. This is a direct assault on our freedoms. Why? Well, of course, because Larry, who is right on everything in theory, knows what's best for us. Nevermind his track record and gross inexperience in working within the private economy he knows so well...

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 499736)

It is Trumpian. But Summers is Trumpian. They're perfectly matched egomaniacs known for boorish commentary.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 499735)

have never proven themselves in the private sector, inflicting their economic policy suggestions on us. These same criticisms could be aimed at Milton Friedman.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499739)

one is an accomplished academic and economist

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499725)

Mos Def and Talib, Kanye, Lupe, The Roots, and countless others all owe them their careers (or at least a major part of their sound), but none surpassed them.

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 499718)

All the time, Tip.

My love of hip hop and funk fed off each other. Sometimes I would first hear a hip hop song with a crazy sampled riff, and only later discover the funk tune that originally contained the riff (for example, Daily Dose #3 -- I had heard Public Enemy's "Timebomb" a thousand times before I discovered that the guitar sample was from the Meters' "Just Kissed My Baby"). Other times, I would hear a hip hop song and immediately recognize the underlying funk sample (Daily Dose #4 - I knew Tribe Called Quest was sampling Funkadelic the first moment I heard the song).

Yet part of what I loved about groups like Tribe and De La Soul was that they did not feel constrained to sample James Brown, Sly, P-Funk, and the Meters over and over. In fact, there appeared to be no limitations on where they would find their inspiration (De La's first album sampled everything from Steely Dan to Schoolhouse Rock; Tribe's first sampled Lou Reed, Stevie Wonder, and so much more). Tribe was also one of the first to truly incorporate jazz riffs in a way that did not seem forced at all. The Green Dolphin Street sample in We Got the Jazz was brilliant and for those who still think there is no artistry in hip hop, let that song alone be irrebutable proof that you are wrong. Hiring jazz great Ron Carter for one of the cuts on Low End Theory was also way ahead of the curve. Tribe's music and the lyrical interplay between Q-Tip and Phife Dawg sounds as fresh and relevant today as it did in 1989 (with the occasional exception of lines like "Mr. Dinkins, will you please be our mayor").

As Thurgreed would argue (and few would disagree), Q-Tip was the source of most of the musical and lyrical genius of the group. It is no accident that Q-Tip was just named the Kennedy Center's first Artistic Director for Hip-Hop culture. But on songs like Check the Rhime, the back and forth between Phife and Tip was magic.

Sadly, Phife has died at 45, probably from health problems related to his lifelong struggle with diabetes. So today's Daily Dose goes out to him. Minnie Riperton's "This Love I have" is really more a soul song than a pure funk song, but the opening riff that was sample by Tribe on Check the Rhime is straight up funky:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYUhMb74bjw#t=13

Check the Rhime by Tribe. R.I.P. Malik Taylor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3PW2dXh0dk

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499738)

I need you to explain why this is a bad idea.

TM

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499739)

??

Whether you agree with them or not, one is an accomplished academic and economist, the other is a fucking clown.

TM

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 499744)

1. Enables more oversight of all transactions.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 499744)

2. Assists in moving toward cashless system, which allows greater bank control (negative rates, etc.).

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499746)

How often does anyone use hundreds?

TM

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499746)

Why? Amounts that trigger review won't change.

Why? We are all moving in that direction already. What makes you think hundred dollar bills are what's keeping us in a cash-based system? How often does anyone use hundreds?

TM

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 499745)

Summers is also dangerous because he has a Rasputin effect.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499746)

How often does anyone use hundreds?

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 499745)

Wrong is wrong. When you're wrong on policy a lot, shut up and go away.

That he's academically accomplished is irrelevant. Robert McNamara was brilliant. Most of the neocons were smart.

Adder's point about about macroeconomics being a field where people are wrong all the time says it all. Anyone practicing in this area is probably pretty intelligent, but also "respected" largely if not solely for his theoretical analysis. Judged purely on results, a guy like Summers might not be worthy of more respect than a guy who's figured out how to consistently pick the ponies.

Summers is also dangerous because he has a Rasputin effect. Politics and bureaucracy aren't fields attracting exceptionally intelligent sorts as a rule. The elected and powerful in these areas are often entirely reliant on experts like Summers, Rubin, Friedman, Laffer, etc. The abstract musings of these exalted policy sages, which might otherwise never leave the university or think tank, too often find their way - undistilled - into the real world. There's no cure for this, of course. But we should remind ourselves from time to time that people like Larry Summers are often just intellectually "riffing," and shouldn't be taken too seriously.

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 499747)

Ask YC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5w21_Vphbg

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499751)

Consider:

"Wow, Bill Belichick really drew up an awful offensive scheme for the Super Bowl. Denver was all over them on every play. He got everything wrong. We should hire Donald Trump to be our head coach next year. He's very rich, and although he has absolutely no experience with football, he can probably figure it out. And if he can't, he'll just hire smart people to assist him."

TM

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499752)

How dare you post that after your post yesterday. I am disgusted.

TM

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499746)

How often does anyone use hundreds?

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 499754)

it might make sense

https://soundcloud.com/howardstern/larrydavid_jets

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 499755)

I don't even know who YC is, but that song has come to represent to me the lowest common denominator of commercial rap these days. It is basically the anti-Tribe.

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 499756)

Excluding Las Vegas, basically never. (I mean, now that I'm no longer involved in an international drug cartel.)

Those few days after I come back from Vegas and I still have hundreds in my wallet are always weird. But, sadly, it's not usually enough hundreds to bother going to the bank. So I get like $97 of change from the coffee shop downstairs (the owner always knows when people have been to Vegas).

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499757)

Sorry. I do not listen to Howard Stern as a matter of principle (even if his guest is Larry David, who I love).

TM

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499758)

You still made me listen to 5 seconds of it.

If you had sent me a link to this, I might have forgiven you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE3yia1AJeQ

And I'm ashamed I've listened to this song more than 4 times.

TM

Originally Posted by Not Bob (Post 499753)

More anecdotal evidence from Chris Arnade in the Guardian about why working class voters are pissed and maybe voting for Trump and Bernie. But, hey, the economic data says everything's swell, so this can't be right.

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 499761)

You should be ashamed. That Tyga song is basically the same song as the YC song. And so is this one, which was the other one I was going to link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI0gk2KJeho

Just terrible.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499763)

The worst.

But I will say this. This is club music. And when I'm out (which is rare), I don't walk out when they play this garbage. It's a strange phenomenon.

TM

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower (Post 499764)

I know all these songs mainly because of someone who works here who goes out to clubs on hip hop nights and made me a CD of the songs in heavy rotation.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 499759)

I had the opposite of this repeatedly in St. Louis. I was there several times on a lawsuit. The train into town from the airport gives change in $1 coins. No one anywhere else (at least in Detroit) has any idea what they are, so it is hard to spend them. So I took to trying to get rid of them in the airport before flying home.

This led to me offering to buy the lunch a young man in army fatigues behind me in line at a food kiosk was about to order. You know, in thanks for his service. I had 5 coins I needed to get rid of. I think the guy thought I was coming on to him.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 499765)

(Don't mind me, I'm just an old crank that doesn't get the kids' music)

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499762)

This article is just amazing to me. Not because I disagree. But the stuff it addresses, namely:

• The problem of the lack of available jobs for people in certain geographic areas
• The reality of Republicans blaming those who are poor for those circumstances
• The revelation that the poor, who seemingly have no future, often turn to drugs
• The available jobs being of the service variety, which result in wage stagnation
• Etc.

is (i) what black people have been complaining about since the dawn of time in this country while being ignored, ridiculed, and over-policed and (ii) the direct result of the policies of the Republicans these people continually vote into office.

When people asked, "What's the matter with Kansas," everyone, including the people who are the focus of this article were angry that people on the left didn't understand that the social issues used as a pre-text to get these people to constantly vote against their own economic self-interest were so very important.

But what really surprises me is that any of you think that their support of Trump is any different than the status fucking quo. Trump doesn't give a fuck about these people. Just because he's not a career politician doesn't mean he's not going to completely screw them over like he's done to business partners, lenders, employees, etc. If they're voting for him because they think they're in this predicament because of Mexicans, Muslims, and black thugs--all the time pointing at black people in a WORSE position and faulting them for being lazy criminals--then they deserve what they get.

TM

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 499773)

I do think that what is happening now, with Trump, is different from the status quo, for a number of reasons. In no particular order:

It's far less focused on moral and social issues. While Trump will say stuff that's anti-abortion rights or anti-gay rights or whatever, that is not the focus of his efforts (in my opinion, he does that to pander to a particular audience, and his overwhelming need to pander to everyone will kill him in a general election). Trump will fight Cruz for evangelical votes, but it is not his primary focus.

It's more focused on economic issues -- all of which are the fault of "foreign" people (which, need I say, includes Americans who are not white). It's China and Mexicans and on and on and on.

It's a whole lot nastier. Trump is saying things that a lot of grumpy white people have said for a very long time, but have gotten quieter or more careful about where they say those things in recent years. He's ripped off whatever was covering up that ugliness, and stoked the shit out of it.

Those, in my view, are the main difference.

Oh, and also -- it's the motherfucking Apocalypse if he's elected.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499775)

I don't think we are disagreeing. While I tend to think that his followers think of his endless hate speech as addressing "social views" that are important to them, when I said it's status quo for them, I meant that, if elected, he is not going to help any of them out in any way whatsoever. The rich will get richer, faster. And everyone who voted for him will get fucked. Maybe they will be comforted by him calling women disgusting pigs or tweeting out made up bullshit about how blacks kill 80% of whites or continuing to promise to build a wall to keep Mexican rapists out. Whoever they vote for on the right just holds up another shiny object to distract regular people while the rich enjoy rack city with ten, ten, ten, twenties and them fifties bitch.

TM

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 499776)

I'm going to assume the last part is from that link that I Will Not Click. With so much good music in the world, why would I?

Anyhoo -- Yeah. Status quo for the people who support him. At best -- and maybe much worse.

For the wealthy? I actually think a President Trump will so thoroughly fuck up the country that anyone but the super-wealthy will be fucked. We could all end up as security guards for Koch or Ellisons compounds. This shit is not going to be pretty.

I may be exaggerating, but I actually think Trump could drive this nation straight off the cliff. And if he doesn't, he still will most likely benefit only the super-rich.

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 499773)

I do think that what is happening now, with Trump, is different from the status quo, for a number of reasons. In no particular order:

It's far less focused on moral and social issues. While Trump will say stuff that's anti-abortion rights or anti-gay rights or whatever, that is not the focus of his efforts (in my opinion, he does that to pander to a particular audience, and his overwhelming need to pander to everyone will kill him in a general election). Trump will fight Cruz for evangelical votes, but it is not his primary focus.

It's more focused on economic issues -- all of which are the fault of "foreign" people (which, need I say, includes Americans who are not white). It's China and Mexicans and on and on and on.

It's a whole lot nastier. Trump is saying things that a lot of grumpy white people have said for a very long time, but have gotten quieter or more careful about where they say those things in recent years. He's ripped off whatever was covering up that ugliness, and stoked the shit out of it.

Those, in my view, are the main difference.

Oh, and also -- it's the motherfucking Apocalypse if he's elected.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 499774)

http://theslot.jezebel.com/lindsey-g...ium=socialflow

TM

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 499773)

It's more focused on economic issues -- all of which are the fault of "foreign" people (which, need I say, includes Americans who are not white).

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 499780)

See, I'd say it's more focus on the foreign people, who can be glibly blamed for economic issues. Which is why its ugly.