18 Oct 2019


Bob Murphy Show, Potpourri 5 Comments

==> In the latest Bob Murphy Show I interview Jeff Snider on the repo market flare-up.

==> Why the media needed the new Joker movie to fail.

==> Kopczuk explains some of the background on the new inequality claims.

5 Responses to “Potpourri”

  1. Tel says:

    On the general topic of Potpourri.


    Have you tried emailing Redsquare at the People’s Cube to see if he will do interviews? Could be a great opportunity for some all purpose comedic Eastern Bloc accents … comrade!

  2. Tel says:

    Another random link which someone sent me.


    Your mate Gene Callahan, looking into the Libre Software movement. It’s not too badly written but based on the comments at the bottom seems there’s a lot of people struggling with concepts there. It’s a few years old, maybe you have seen it already, but then again I couldn’t find it posted here anywhere.

    Gene does not bother to isolate voluntary collectives (where capital gets distributed as part of the constitutional agreement) as opposed to involuntary distribution of capital by some superior power. For that matter, most Distributism enthusiasts are a touch vague on that voluntary vs involuntary split and that’s a shame because for Libertarians it does kind of matter.

    The Libre Software movement is all 100% voluntary and based within a framework of very strict intellectual property rights. Certain people choose to share capital by building a big pool of capital, because it’s more efficient to do so under certain conditions. That does result in an outcome the Distributists would approve of, but by methods the Libertarians would approve of. However, I put it to you that this might be a special case.

  3. Harold says:

    “The goalposts keep shifting in the debate over climate change policy. For example, it used to be called “global warming,” but now is called “climate change.”

    Really, by trotting out these tired old denialist tropes you give yourself away. No reasonable, disinterested observer could make such a claim in good faith, so it absolutely reveals a disinformation agenda and shows where you get your information from. And it is not a good place.

    It is pretty obvious that this is just wrong if you look at the name of the big bad global organisation, the IPCC. Odd that it was not called the IPGW if it used to be called global warming but that has been changed to climate change for the reasons you state.

    The claim is almost pure nonsense, but the one true aspect is that the use of climate change instead of global warming was promoted for political reasons, but the opposite of what you claim. Frank Luntz, advisor to G. W. Bush said:
    “It’s time for us to start talking about “climate change” instead of global warming and “conservation ” instead of preservation.
    1. “Climate change’’ is less frightening than “global warming;” As one focus group participant
    noted, climate change “sounds like you’re going from Pittsburgh to Fort Lauderdale.” While
    global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it, climate change suggests a more
    controllable and less emotional challenge. ”

    However, climate change and global warming are different things. Global warming is one cause of climate change. Both terms are useful and necessary.

    • Harold says:

      This should have been a reply to the 16th October Potpourri.

      • Mark says:

        Harold: 12 years? No, 12 minutes.

        This simple youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8455KEDitpU destroys in 12 minutes the bogus Chicken Little argument from AOC, et al, that we’re all going to die in 12 years.

        Above Tel linked to a pic of a satire(ish) newspaper with a headline that read

        Climate Study: “There’s no need for climate protests in China because China is already communist.”

        Those 13 words tell you all you need to know about climate change.

Leave a Reply