Long time user and donor to NakedCapitalism. I wish they would come to Substack. It's a tremendous site. The comments section is the best on the internet. Great readers with vast knowledge and experiences.
Long time user and donor to NakedCapitalism. I wish they would come to Substack. It's a tremendous site. The comments section is the best on the internet. Great readers with vast knowledge and experiences.
I looked at this website after reading Matt's article and I think it is one of the biggest echo chambers I have ever seen. Everyone seems to be anti-growth and worse. I thought by its title it might be worthwhile however I was wrong.
There are people with opinions, on both sides. You will find pushback and good discussion and links to information. A single day won't give you a good feel for the depth of conversation. Science gets discussed there in the context of published papers and public data. The info on the financial system is the same. Yves book "Econned" is a must read. They moderate comments so well, you do not find name calling fighting and such BS going on.
Remember gentle reader, the 1st amendment is not for speech you love, it's for speech you hate. I could personally do with a bit of anti-growth in the kleptocracy we call the USA.
Surprising (well, I guess not so) that NakedCapitalism was getting censored, because when I was reading it, it was pretty tame, dry stuff. And comments were censored as well. Zerohedge is way more off the hook.
I started reading Zerohedge when I saw Matt describe it as something like "The always excellent Zerohedge". The more doctrinaire libertarians get as tiresome as woke ideologues, but there is some quite informative writers featured there, including occasionally our gracious host.
So I checked NC for their 2016 election coverage, especially in October and November, which is my metric for any and all claims about expertise.
Yves et al missed all the clear indicators that Trump would win. I'm not about to dive into the weeds to search for 'maybe' and 'coulds'. Turns out Yves and her crew are so selective about evidence as to be indifferent to fact. Little wonder Matt looks smart to Yves.
Politics, economics, and government are not my areas of expertise. Lots of very 'smart' people aren't. We're all blind to what we can't see and if we don't start looking hard, we're going to miss the facts. Most did in 2016 isn't an excuse or a viable defense.
I watched one Trump speech in late August 2015 and was stunned by the viability of his message. Never heard anything like it from a candidate.I knew zip about the rodeo cowboy, then, beyond blondes, casinos, avarice, and narcissism. He talked about jobs lost, getting screwed by both parties, protecting social security, avoiding foreign wars, bounty, and individual freedom. Huge, bigly skillful messaging and marketing. He listened to the outrage (unlike most) and fed it right back to the audience amped to the max. Most important: He wasn't 'them'. He wasn't 'them'. He wasn't 'them'.
Two weeks later, I stated that Trump would win the presidency at the one left-leaning site still willing to permit my heresies. Took no end of abuse throughout 2015 and 2016 as victory became clearer and clearer (to me). Twas fun! Banned late in 2017 for repeatedly pointing out that the expert left a/ had completely failed to understand the electorate (Yves included) b/ had completely signed up as security state stenographers (Yves not included.)
My visit to NC did nothing to impress me. Her links are useful, but I can find plenty of those myself. Designing mixed-method research instruments is situation and task specific. Not clear that Yves and her crew have any idea of how to identify and interpret task-specific metrics. Hint: if one walks past an empty diner, odds are the owner's going broke. But we have to check to be sure. As for the comments - yawn. Sorry!
"I watched one Trump speech in late August 2015 and was stunned by the viability of his message." Yeah, Paul, same for me. For decades, I had nothing but contempt for Trump but when he began to break all the unwritten rules and say all the things politicians were not allowed to say, I knew he had a chance to win.
Not the least surprised you caught it, too. The icing on the cake was during the GOP primary debates when Trump stood on the stage alongside the donor stooges smiling, gloating even, while boasting that he'd end America's wars, protect America's borders and jobs, and cut-off cheap foreign labor even as the donors in the audience shrieked and booed. Loved it. What a moment.
My great hope in 2017 was that Dems would look in the mirror and ask themselves: WTF? I've no idea how I could have been that dumb. Donors selected HRC in 2016, and Biden in 2020. Remember those DNC debacles? Sanders protesters villified, Bloomberg drafted in 2020 - anything to stop a meaningful restructuring of an utterly corrupt edifice.
Then things got worse. Hard to believe, really, but that's what comes from people being fussy about their change agent. We don't get to choose. We get them, or we get Trump. There is no door number three.
My late mother was an old school journalist. She told me in 2015 that Trump would win the nomination and the election. I knew almost nothing about him, but what I thought I knew was not good. I started digging into articles written about him before he ran (scrubbed from the internet now). I liked what I saw, watched him work a crowd, and figured why not end my run of voting 3rd party out of protest. When he got in and did what he said I was shocked and saw most of my leftie friends come around to supporting him. We will see what happens this round, but he may very well win again.
Cheers. Wonderful comment. I actually know a number of largely apolitical folks (mostly not Americans) who saw past the mean tweets and wanted a Trump victory. Like you, I was delighted he did his best to get the job done despite the best/worst efforts of the elites and their tools. I've gone back and forth on whether he could have won 2020. Massive fingers on the scales in that one. The evidence strongly suggests the selfie 'insurrection' was organized by the same folks. So, expect the same, only worse in 2024
I think/hope he will have a larger margin of victory in 2024 which will be more cheat resistant. I have never seen counting stop in the middle of the night and resume later before, and only in swing states... There has always been cheating and by both parties, only by centralizing the counting can it be very significant and we need to clean up our elections. Whether it was enough to swing the election or not, having a system that appears bad, like not showing ID, creates a cloud over the elections and needs to stop.
When I was outside the US in Costa Rica and Italy I met people who would feel me out first, then tell me they loved Trump. It was a surprise to me. I also saw that in Latin America people saw the election as dirty as they have expertise in fixing elections. I do not doubt that some of the accusations of fraud were false, but not all were and it was never properly investigated.
And she had no qualms about praising Trump when he did things that she thought were beneficial. But seriously, her real claim to fame was shredding Obama for the god awful sellout he was and the never ending kid glove treatment he got from the press.
Here is a data point for you: Yves Smith got jabbed with J&J's vaccine.
She and Lambert Strether were very critical of the liability exclusions provided to Moderna and Pfizer. In fact, they and the research experts that contribute to the site had many criticisms for the roll-out of the vaccines.
What you call obsession, I call a sensible caution about an extremely dangerous virus. How can you discount a barrage of studies showing long term adverse effects? What is inaccurate or plainly wrong in either of the two articles you linked?
The virus is 100 times less lethal now than at the start of it all. And that early lethality was probably more a product of panic than anything intrinsic to the disease. https://github.com/s1rh3nry/covid_calc
Does the graph depict the consequences of COVID or is it depicting the vaccine-injured? I wasnтАЩt able to establish the underlying cause of the disabilities from the info in the graph
They flagged COVID in China in early Jan and warned it would go worldwide; We didn't start shutting down till mid March. They have been a bit to covid maximalist for my taste, but they are almost twice my age, so they have a different risk profile. They were very anti vax mandate and have done nothing but shred the CDC at just about every turn.
I got jabbed 4 times and finally stopped before the 5th. The Cancer, the aggravation of joint pain, and P.O.T.S. (Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome), a know and document adverse vaccine reaction. I did it because I was doing healthcare work. I was not convinced that the COVID vaccine was dangerous or harmful until I experienced the effects, and even now I don't know for sure, correlation does not equal causality and all that...
No, they constantly trashed Fauci for the lie and turnaround on masks, have been very skeptical of using untested mRNA vaccines, and are very opposed to mandates. They do overplay the risks of getting COVID and long covid a bit, but they are pushing 70 IIRC. so they are in a higher risk bracket.
Young reporters who figure going on the campaign trail with the candidates to meet voters is a waste of their valuable time. That's the state of modern journalism. To be fair to Yves, she's light years ahead of these two. Both, of course, were promoted up for getting 2016 wrong. Surprise!
Once a Substack comment thread gets to more than ~50 comments or so, there are some usability flaws that are kind of horrible. I really wish they would make improvements.
Long time user and donor to NakedCapitalism. I wish they would come to Substack. It's a tremendous site. The comments section is the best on the internet. Great readers with vast knowledge and experiences.
I looked at this website after reading Matt's article and I think it is one of the biggest echo chambers I have ever seen. Everyone seems to be anti-growth and worse. I thought by its title it might be worthwhile however I was wrong.
I couldnтАЩt care less what her opinions are. No one should be able to intimidate, censor or demonetize her.
Well, when one has no ability to write a reasoned rebuttal, I guess тАЬspoiled childтАЭ tactics are easier to use.
If you read my comment you will note that I didn't say anything about her situation. I actually agree with your opinion in regard to her.
IтАЩm not sure what type of growth you are referring to, but we all are living in the Holocene extinction.
Assuming that is a joke
There are people with opinions, on both sides. You will find pushback and good discussion and links to information. A single day won't give you a good feel for the depth of conversation. Science gets discussed there in the context of published papers and public data. The info on the financial system is the same. Yves book "Econned" is a must read. They moderate comments so well, you do not find name calling fighting and such BS going on.
second all of that. it is a daily must read for me.
Remember gentle reader, the 1st amendment is not for speech you love, it's for speech you hate. I could personally do with a bit of anti-growth in the kleptocracy we call the USA.
So you're an American.
Surprising (well, I guess not so) that NakedCapitalism was getting censored, because when I was reading it, it was pretty tame, dry stuff. And comments were censored as well. Zerohedge is way more off the hook.
Within her area of expertise, Yves is a useful voice. Zerohedge is more of a rode clown - fun, but a little too wild.
I started reading Zerohedge when I saw Matt describe it as something like "The always excellent Zerohedge". The more doctrinaire libertarians get as tiresome as woke ideologues, but there is some quite informative writers featured there, including occasionally our gracious host.
So I checked NC for their 2016 election coverage, especially in October and November, which is my metric for any and all claims about expertise.
Yves et al missed all the clear indicators that Trump would win. I'm not about to dive into the weeds to search for 'maybe' and 'coulds'. Turns out Yves and her crew are so selective about evidence as to be indifferent to fact. Little wonder Matt looks smart to Yves.
Politics, economics, and government are not my areas of expertise. Lots of very 'smart' people aren't. We're all blind to what we can't see and if we don't start looking hard, we're going to miss the facts. Most did in 2016 isn't an excuse or a viable defense.
I watched one Trump speech in late August 2015 and was stunned by the viability of his message. Never heard anything like it from a candidate.I knew zip about the rodeo cowboy, then, beyond blondes, casinos, avarice, and narcissism. He talked about jobs lost, getting screwed by both parties, protecting social security, avoiding foreign wars, bounty, and individual freedom. Huge, bigly skillful messaging and marketing. He listened to the outrage (unlike most) and fed it right back to the audience amped to the max. Most important: He wasn't 'them'. He wasn't 'them'. He wasn't 'them'.
Two weeks later, I stated that Trump would win the presidency at the one left-leaning site still willing to permit my heresies. Took no end of abuse throughout 2015 and 2016 as victory became clearer and clearer (to me). Twas fun! Banned late in 2017 for repeatedly pointing out that the expert left a/ had completely failed to understand the electorate (Yves included) b/ had completely signed up as security state stenographers (Yves not included.)
My visit to NC did nothing to impress me. Her links are useful, but I can find plenty of those myself. Designing mixed-method research instruments is situation and task specific. Not clear that Yves and her crew have any idea of how to identify and interpret task-specific metrics. Hint: if one walks past an empty diner, odds are the owner's going broke. But we have to check to be sure. As for the comments - yawn. Sorry!
"I watched one Trump speech in late August 2015 and was stunned by the viability of his message." Yeah, Paul, same for me. For decades, I had nothing but contempt for Trump but when he began to break all the unwritten rules and say all the things politicians were not allowed to say, I knew he had a chance to win.
Not the least surprised you caught it, too. The icing on the cake was during the GOP primary debates when Trump stood on the stage alongside the donor stooges smiling, gloating even, while boasting that he'd end America's wars, protect America's borders and jobs, and cut-off cheap foreign labor even as the donors in the audience shrieked and booed. Loved it. What a moment.
My great hope in 2017 was that Dems would look in the mirror and ask themselves: WTF? I've no idea how I could have been that dumb. Donors selected HRC in 2016, and Biden in 2020. Remember those DNC debacles? Sanders protesters villified, Bloomberg drafted in 2020 - anything to stop a meaningful restructuring of an utterly corrupt edifice.
Then things got worse. Hard to believe, really, but that's what comes from people being fussy about their change agent. We don't get to choose. We get them, or we get Trump. There is no door number three.
My late mother was an old school journalist. She told me in 2015 that Trump would win the nomination and the election. I knew almost nothing about him, but what I thought I knew was not good. I started digging into articles written about him before he ran (scrubbed from the internet now). I liked what I saw, watched him work a crowd, and figured why not end my run of voting 3rd party out of protest. When he got in and did what he said I was shocked and saw most of my leftie friends come around to supporting him. We will see what happens this round, but he may very well win again.
Cheers. Wonderful comment. I actually know a number of largely apolitical folks (mostly not Americans) who saw past the mean tweets and wanted a Trump victory. Like you, I was delighted he did his best to get the job done despite the best/worst efforts of the elites and their tools. I've gone back and forth on whether he could have won 2020. Massive fingers on the scales in that one. The evidence strongly suggests the selfie 'insurrection' was organized by the same folks. So, expect the same, only worse in 2024
I think/hope he will have a larger margin of victory in 2024 which will be more cheat resistant. I have never seen counting stop in the middle of the night and resume later before, and only in swing states... There has always been cheating and by both parties, only by centralizing the counting can it be very significant and we need to clean up our elections. Whether it was enough to swing the election or not, having a system that appears bad, like not showing ID, creates a cloud over the elections and needs to stop.
When I was outside the US in Costa Rica and Italy I met people who would feel me out first, then tell me they loved Trump. It was a surprise to me. I also saw that in Latin America people saw the election as dirty as they have expertise in fixing elections. I do not doubt that some of the accusations of fraud were false, but not all were and it was never properly investigated.
Had you been a Naked Capitalism reader, you might have been treated to the experience sooner.
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/07/fear-and-loathing-at-the-cross-arena-in-bangor-maine-donald-trump-makes-headlines.html
She was not anti-Trump. Really, she was behind Sanders but hated Clinton. This is the piece that introduced me to the site. https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/06/our-politico-story-on-why-clinton-does-not-deserve-the-sanders-vote.html
And the site was rather ambivalent about November 2016. In case you weren't sure, indented text is a quote, generally followed by snarky disagreement. Like in this post from election day before polls closed, which was actually bullish on Trump. https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/11/200pm-election-day-water-cooler-1182016.html
And she had no qualms about praising Trump when he did things that she thought were beneficial. But seriously, her real claim to fame was shredding Obama for the god awful sellout he was and the never ending kid glove treatment he got from the press.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/03/the-empire-continues-to-strike-back-team-obama-propaganda-campaign-reaches-fever-pitch.html
Naked Capitalism were very pro-COVID-panic and pro-Pfizer/Moderna.
Here is a data point for you: Yves Smith got jabbed with J&J's vaccine.
She and Lambert Strether were very critical of the liability exclusions provided to Moderna and Pfizer. In fact, they and the research experts that contribute to the site had many criticisms for the roll-out of the vaccines.
To quote Ms. Smith, "you are making shit up!"
That's Yves in a nutshell: "I have an opinion, your job is to agree."
itтАЩs more like donтАЩt disagree without providing supporting evidence. and logical fallacies are outтАж
You remember, thanks!
OK, I seem to be wrong about the shots. But they sure are obsessed with COVID. https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/03/im-doc-reports-on-covid-not-waning-long-covid-effects-as-lambert-lambastes-latest-cdc-guidance-as-crime-against-humanity.html
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2020/07/mask-mandates-and-other-lockdown-policies-reduced-the-spread-of-covid-19-in-the-us.html
You are the self professed data guru, here is a graph:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=17ENT
What you call obsession, I call a sensible caution about an extremely dangerous virus. How can you discount a barrage of studies showing long term adverse effects? What is inaccurate or plainly wrong in either of the two articles you linked?
The virus is 100 times less lethal now than at the start of it all. And that early lethality was probably more a product of panic than anything intrinsic to the disease. https://github.com/s1rh3nry/covid_calc
Does the graph depict the consequences of COVID or is it depicting the vaccine-injured? I wasnтАЩt able to establish the underlying cause of the disabilities from the info in the graph
They flagged COVID in China in early Jan and warned it would go worldwide; We didn't start shutting down till mid March. They have been a bit to covid maximalist for my taste, but they are almost twice my age, so they have a different risk profile. They were very anti vax mandate and have done nothing but shred the CDC at just about every turn.
I got jabbed 4 times and finally stopped before the 5th. The Cancer, the aggravation of joint pain, and P.O.T.S. (Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome), a know and document adverse vaccine reaction. I did it because I was doing healthcare work. I was not convinced that the COVID vaccine was dangerous or harmful until I experienced the effects, and even now I don't know for sure, correlation does not equal causality and all that...
Roughly translated for the non-Racket News commenter: "pro-public health."
No, they constantly trashed Fauci for the lie and turnaround on masks, have been very skeptical of using untested mRNA vaccines, and are very opposed to mandates. They do overplay the risks of getting COVID and long covid a bit, but they are pushing 70 IIRC. so they are in a higher risk bracket.
Like our leaders, they only think of the 70 plus age bracket. Meanwhile kids had to stay home from school and wear masks for years on end.
Good job being against vaccine mandates. That's one good call versus a bunch of bad ones.
Yves Smith banned me for refusing to retract my charge that Matt Yglesias is a dunce. (circa 2010). At NC, it's her way or the highway.
So Yves doesn't like truth either?!
Invaluable data point from 2016 Enjoy, runs about 5 minutes, if you can't take that much: https://bloggingheads.tv/videos/39548?in=00:35
Young reporters who figure going on the campaign trail with the candidates to meet voters is a waste of their valuable time. That's the state of modern journalism. To be fair to Yves, she's light years ahead of these two. Both, of course, were promoted up for getting 2016 wrong. Surprise!
Considering she was calling Ezra Klein "Baghdad Bob" for his relentless shilling of Obama's worst ideas, there has to be more to that story. https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/08/memo-to-ezra-klein-doing-something-stupid-isnt-smart.html
From what I can recall, there was another comment or two where I disagreed with her. Water long under the bridge. I wish her and hers well.
Once a Substack comment thread gets to more than ~50 comments or so, there are some usability flaws that are kind of horrible. I really wish they would make improvements.