94 thoughts on “News

      1. pgl

        But the real question is what is this new information. A real economist such as Vince Lombardi might come out screaming “what the hell is going on here”. Before I go through the myriad of possibilities let me help our inventor of suppression economics out with some other market data:

        (1) The fall in nominal rates is coming more from a fall in real rates than a decline in expected inflation;
        (2) The dollar has appreciated of late;
        (3) The S&P 500 has increased over the last few days.

        Now back to Coach Lombardi’s question. We did get a weak employment report. Is this signaling a recesssion which is one reason interest rates fall. I would count that possibility as bad news but then we have people like JohnH cheering on a recession.

        Or did financial markets see this as inducing the FED to back off its tight money. I would call this good news but then we have little Jonny boy calling me a corporate shill for hoping we get a soft landing.

        But back to my (1) to (3). Since this is an economist blog, let’s see if the crew can tell us which scenario best fits the recent data. Hint – please avoid Stevie’s suppression hypothesis as that would take you down the rabbit hole.

        1. JohnH

          High interest rates translate automatically into a recession…or so some investor shills like pgl adamantly insist. So where’s the beef? Rates have been high for more than a year now, and a recession has yet to materialize. Instead, high interest rates have improved enhanced people’s ability accumulate enough savings to make the down payment on a house, to put their kids through college, to bolster their HSAs, to save for retirement, and even to retire with dignity. In fact, high interest rates may even increase incomes enough to boost aggregate demand, thereby staving off a recession or reducing its severity.

          But ZIRP/QE fanatics trump focus on only one set of effects–under the guise of protecting workers’ jobs, they champion rising asset prices and increased wealth inequality. The ZIRP/QE fanatics would have you believe that high rates kill productive investment…but in fact construction jobs are booming: “Construction Sector Adds 23,000 Jobs In October As Unemployment Rate Falls To 4.0 Percent; Record Job Openings Point To Need For More Workers.”

          And when Wall Street investors got a whiff of lower rates, the S&P 500 closed 4.62% higher last week. Yep, the rich get richer with lower rates, but the dominant narrative is that it is workers who are better off with lower rates. The tremendous benefits to Wall Street investors some how get overlooked.

          Whenever you hear mainstream economists and financial types bleating about workers are going to get hurt, it’s time to stop and smell the rat…someone is benefiting from “workers not getting hurt” and it may well not be workers.

          1. pgl

            You know – you have polluted this blog for far too long. Nowhere have I ever said higher interest rates = recession. After all, I have written on how the economic booms of the 1960’s and the 1990’s drove up interest rates. But I guess little Jonny boy does not get the economics of this either.

            Yes little Jonny boy is that damn stupid so he has to throw another pointless temper tantrum. Could you please ask your mother to change your damn diaper?

          2. pgl

            “Construction Sector Adds 23,000 Jobs In October As Unemployment Rate Falls To 4.0 Percent; Record Job Openings Point To Need For More Workers.”

            As I read this story, it struck me that the construction sector had elements of monopsony power. So this group would be doing a great service for its members and the efficiency of the economy if they pushed for a higher wage. But did faux progressive Jonny boy notice this? Of course not because little Jonny boy is a moron and no friend of the working class.

          3. Macroduck

            Johnny has claimed that high interest increase wealth, and has been informed that his claim is wrong. And yet, hre he is again, making the same mistaken claim. On net, interest payments are zero sum, and cannot create wealth. Savers, who tend to be wealthier, lend toborrowers,who tendto be poorer. Johnny, who pretends toroot for the little guy, claims higher interest rates create wealth, when what they actually do is transfer wealth from borrowers to lenders.

            As to accumulating a down payment, Johnny has ignored both the transfer of wealth from (poorer) borrowers to (richer) lenders and also the higher interest cost that mortgage borrowers end up paying.

            It’s remarkable that Johnny can be so strident in his claims, while being so utterly wrong. It’s equally remarkable that he refuses to learn when his errors are pointed out. Ignorance is one thing, but willful ignorance like Johnny’s is quite another.

          4. pgl

            “Johnny has claimed that high interest increase wealth, and has been informed that his claim is wrong.”

            Macroduck has your number dude. Oh wait – you just said lower interest rates increased the value of equity (S&P) so even Jonny boy is calling little Jonny boy a liar.

            Dude – we get you are stupid. We get you are a liar. Chill out and stop polluting this blog with your garbage.

          5. JohnH

            Actually, Tricky Ducky, I never made the claim that higher interest rates increase wealth. But what I did claim is that lower interest rates increase asset prices and thereby the wealth of Wall Street investors, something you can see with even your own poor eyes every time interest rates drop or there’s is even the slightest hint of lower rates, such as what happened last week with the 4.62% increase in the S&P 500 last week.

            Where does Ducky come up with this nonsense?

          6. pgl

            November 5, 2023 at 3:51 am
            Actually, Tricky Ducky, I never made the claim that higher interest rates increase wealth.”

            Once again Jonny boy caught with panties around his ankles and it is time for deny, deny, deny.

            Come on Jonny boy – no one believes a damn comment you make. No one.

          7. Macroduck

            Heeeere’s Johnny, lying again:

            JohnH November 5, 2023 at 3:51 am

            Actually, Tricky Ducky, I never made the claim that higher interest rates increase wealth…

            JohnH October 15, 2023 at 6:02 pm

            Funny…It’s always interesting to see Ducky mention the negative impact of high interest rates on the “wealth effect” but fail to make any mention of high interest rates giving an income boost which may well be helping consumers maintain their spending spree…

          8. baffling

            we have discussed this before with johnny. high interest rates are good for people who have extra cash sitting around to be invested. that is not the average household. they do not have enough cash sitting around for higher interest to be advantageous. but those households do have a lot of revolving credit, that is now much higher with increased interest payments. it means their new car costs a lot more. they cannot sell their house, because higher rates impact home price appreciation and make the next purchase less affordable. and higher rates tend to exist in conjunction with higher inflation, which is a negative for the average household. it is simply baffling how johnny can sit here with a straight face and argue that high interest rates are good for the average household and low interest rates are bad for the average household. simply baffling how he intentionally tries to mislead the readers. unless one’s goal is simply to encourage misinformation from the get go. see his comments on ukraine for confirmation.

        2. Steven Kopits

          We see over and over in the times series data that the suppression event looks unlike either a recession or a depression.

          If you take the view that a suppression is, what, a recession, then you will lack prescriptive tools. An example of this is setting the FFR to zero during the pandemic, which blew up house and asset prices and led to high inflation, with which we are still dealing in certain terms. In addition, overly generous fiscal policy led to vast cash surpluses which we’re still trying to work off. The Powell/Yellen prescription would have been correct if we had been facing a depression, as we were from 2008. But in the event of a suppression, that policy is materially incorrect.

          So, the question is whether one thing is like another. If it is, then the causality should be similar. On the other hand, If the graphs don’t look the same, then it’s probably something else, and distinguishing that event — by calling it a suppression in this case — if a useful exercise.

          That’s my view.

          1. pgl

            suppression? You are mucking up this discussion with your stupid pet terms again? Look dude – no one cares about your views as you are a total moron when it comes to macroeconomics.

  1. Macroduck

    Speaking of news –

    Mark Meadows received immunity from prosecution in the Georgia election case against Trump. However (heh, heh, heh) his repudiation of his earlier claims about the election amount to an admission that he lied to his publisher:


    The publisher is claiming losses suffered as a result. And any money Meadows received for the book is also at risk.

    Which reminds me of a book by Al Franken. You know the one:


  2. Macroduck

    Sorry, it’s the federal case, not Georgia, which has Meadows caught in a misrepresentation to his publisher.

  3. Macroduck

    Climate change just keeps happening faster than forecast, and then the forecast changes, and the climate change happens faster than the new forecast…

    Global warming in the pipeline 

    James E Hansen and a bunch of other researhers

    “Thus, under the present geopolitical approach to GHG emissions, global warming will exceed 1.5°C in the 2020s and 2°C before 2050. Impacts on people and nature will accelerate as global warming increases hydrologic (weather) extremes.”


    1. pgl

      Thanks for the latest research from the eminent James Hansen (even if he needs to chill on cap and trade v. carbon taxes). It is refreshing to see serious students of this issue producing real research especially given that little CoRev has been polluting this blog once again with the Koch Brothers sponsored trash from the Institute of Energy Research.

    2. pgl

      “Required actions include: (1) a global increasing price on GHG emissions accompanied by development of abundant, affordable, dispatchable clean energy, (2) East-West cooperation in a way that accommodates developing world needs, and (3) intervention with Earth’s radiation imbalance to phase down today’s massive human-made ‘geo-transformation’ of Earth’s climate. Current political crises present an opportunity for reset, especially if young people can grasp their situation.”

      Wise recommendations. I just hope young people realize that people like CoRev and the Institute for Energy Research are bought and paid for liars.

      1. CoRev

        McQuack and PGL, actually Hansen supports adding nuclear to the electricity/ energy mix: ” A rising carbon price creates a level playing field for energy efficiency, renewable energy, nuclear power, and innovations; it would spur the thousands of ‘miracles’ needed for energy transition. However, instead, fossil fuels and renewable energy are now subsidized. Thus, nuclear energy has been disadvantaged and excluded as a ‘clean development mechanism’ under the Kyoto Protocol, based on myths about nuclear energy unsupported by scientific fact [209].

        Why do none of you renewables’ zealots ever show us a successful demonstration project without thermal sources as backup, nor ever discuss the actual costs to add your renewables to the grid? Hansen even cites Sweden as an example, but when we look into Sweden’s data we find Sweden still gets ~50% of its electricity from traditional thermal sources. Unique to Sweden is that it also gets significant electricity sourced from hydro. Wind & Solar remain in the lower single digits for generation.

        If and when your wishes meet they are always expensive failures. Just like what is going on with EVs and ocean wind. The lost of failed liberal policies is growing.

        1. pgl

          WTF does any of your babble have to do with the point Hansen made – which basically is that your lies denying climate change are just that – lies.

          Come on CoRev – no one here gives a rat’s a$$ about your serial dishonesty. So save us all a lot of time and find some other blog to pollute.

    3. Ivan

      Its an unfortunate byproduct of both political pressure and the way science works. The political pressure is for end result that requires the least drastic intervention. So wherever a parameter or interval in the models has to involve a certain amount of guessing there is a tendency to make a conservative guess (don’t want to be accused of being alarmist – would we). The other problem is that few people understand what a 95% confidence interval truly means. So the models predicts a heating between 1.5C and 3.2C by a specific year (95% confidence interval). The true meaning is that there is only a 5% chance that we will only have 1.5C increase by that time. It often gets translated in the press and by biased politicians to being that we will heat up by 1.5C by that year. The fact that we end up with more heating than 1.5C is not a surprise if you read the report – but few does that.

    4. 2slugbaits

      Climate change just keeps happening faster than forecast,

      In that sense CoRev is sort of right when he claims that none of the predictions made by “climate alarmists” have been right. I say “sort of right” because most of the predictions have turned out to be too optimistic rather than too pessimistic, as CoRev would have us believe. So CoRev is right about climate scientists getting many of the predictions wrong, but he’s wrong about the direction of the error But CoRev is an old man with little regard for future generations, so he really doesn’t care about climate change. Besides, CoRev also believes the Rapture is nearly upon us (the war in Gaza is a sign of the End Times!!!), so none of it matters anyway.

      1. pgl

        “CoRev also believes the Rapture is nearly upon us”

        I bet CoRev is so old he does not even know about the Blondie song Rapture.

      2. CoRev

        2slugs finally admits: “because most of the predictions have turned out to be too optimistic rather than too pessimistic, as CoRev would have us believe. So CoRev is right about climate scientists getting many of the predictions wrong but he’s wrong about the direction of the error”

        Direction of error makes little sense when the hypotheses can not predict. It’s you guys who claim CO2s is the control knob for climate change. There is correlation to RECENT peak temperatures to El Niño-Southern Oscillation (“ENSO”) climate pattern. Now show is the correlation to CO2.

        1. pgl

          Lord – you are a MORON. Dude – you have been wrong about everything. But do keep writing this trash as I get a good laugh out of it.

        2. pgl

          ” the control knob for climate change”

          First of all no one has ever said that. But we do need to control knob to turn off the stupid garbage polluting this blog from your dishonest posts. It would be nice if you at least tried to engage in an honest and productive conversation. But I get it. If you did – the Koch Brothers would fire you.

        3. 2slugbaits

          CoRev Your predictions have been even worse. For many years you’ve been confidently predicting that cooler temperatures were just around the corner. Any day. So not only have your predictions been wrong, they’ve been wrong in the wrong direction. As to your claim that there is no correlation between CO2 and temperature anomalies, why not check the numbers before making such a ridiculous claim?

          Now show is the correlation to CO2.

          FYI, the simple correlation between CO2 and temperature anomalies over the 1980 to 2022 period is 0.94. You don’t need sophisticated software to figure that out.

          1. CoRev

            2slugs, what I love is the thought that correlation indicates CAUSE or EFFECT?!? Moreover belief that correlation over a very, very short time has any meaning at all. ” This study demonstrates that changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration did not cause temperature change in the ancient climate.” https://www.mdpi.com/2225-1154/5/4/76 And this older study quoted by that eminent Skeptical (sarc) site: “But in some of the ice-cores, temperature rises first and is followed, a few hundred years later, by rising carbon dioxide (CO2) levels.” https://skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

            So does increased CO2 drive temperature or is it an EFFECT of increased temperature? Bringing us to today. September saw a huge average temperature increase, but was there a correlated increase in CO2? https://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp/from:2021/plot/esrl-co2/from:2021/offset:-415

            PGL questions who has claimed CO2 as the control (knob) for temperature. Why James Hansen has done just that: “Chart 30 of my presentation shows the tight control CO2 exerts on atmospheric temperature. https://www.facebook.com/jimehansen/posts/taiwan-charts-co2-control-knob03-october-2018-james-hansena-talk-young-peoples-w/10156505929485993/

            If you truly do not believe CO2 is a control for temperature then why are yo so vociferously trying to reduce it in the atmosphere?

            You cognitive dissonance is amazing.

          2. CoRev

            2slugs, your belief and Climate Science is based on a false hypothesis, “Warming is BAD”. This is combined with a 2nd false hypothesis: CO2 is the driver to temperature change.

            Show me wrong, especially using how warming has reduced living conditions and lives since the LIA.

            I’ll wait.

          3. pgl

            November 6, 2023 at 4:45 am

            So many lies, so little time. I’ve grown bored with CoRev’s dancing on the head of a pin. Lots of luck trying to unwind so much disinformation.

          4. pgl

            CoRev cannot refute global warming (even with his parade of lies) so now this fool is telling us that global warming is a good thing? Oh yea – he inhales the exhaust from his car on a daily basis. Maybe that is why little CoRev is so mentally unhinged.

          5. baffling

            covid still cannot even acknowledge the scientific fact that the greenhouse gas effect is true. what makes you think he is going to acknowledge any other evidence is true? i even have my doubts on his ability to accept gravity as fact. he won’t take a cruise for fear of falling of the ends of the earth…

          6. 2slugbaits

            CoRev what I love is the thought that correlation indicates CAUSE or EFFECT?!?

            Let me remind you that you are the one who asked for the correlation between CO2 and temperature anomalies. I was simply answering your question, which is more than you ever do.

            Yes, we all know that ancient ice cores show temperatures rising before CO2 levels rose. And there’s a perfectly natural explanation as to why that happened. Try reading up on it.

            Climate Science is based on a false hypothesis, “Warming is BAD”.

            That’s because too much warming is bad. Very bad. Apparently you think that a few degrees of warming only means a few more golfing days. If that’s what you believe, then you really do not understand climate science at all.

            BTW, this isn’t a very sophisticated model and there are lots of time series issues with it that are all way over your head, but below are the results of a simple regression of temperature anomalies from 1980 thru 2022 against a constant, CO2 levels and dummy variables for el Nino and la Nina years as defined by NOAA. Neutral years are captured in the constant:

            constant: -3.346
            CO2: 0.0104
            elnino: 0.0606
            lanina: -0.0967

            All estimates are highly significant with p-values well under 0.05 (HAC robust). The adjusted R-sq is 0.915. Residuals are normally distributed and no autocorrelation in the residuals. All coefficients have the expected sign consistent with climate science. It’s so braindead simple that even you could do it in Excel.

    1. pgl

      “Following President Trump’s withdrawal from the flawed Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), President Biden actively pursued a new and worse nuclear deal with Iran.”

      I know Stefanik is from New York but she’s almost as disgusting as Trump. Oh wait Trump is from New York too. My state owes the world the deepest apologies.

    2. 2slugbaits

      Macroduck We had this done, until Bibi told Trump to pull out oftheIran nukes deal.

      Another bad call from the Israelis. Once upon a time the IDF and Mossad were world in their respective areas of competence, but lately both of them seem to have lost a step or two. A lot of unforced errors, with the fiasco in Gaza being only the latest in a worrisome trend of intelligence mistakes and military bungling. Politically Biden cannot overtly cutoff resupplying Israel, but the Pentagon bureaucracy can be very inventive when it comes to finding ways to slow walk resupply if Biden and Blinken want to force a “pause” on the Israelis.

  4. pgl

    New flash – little CoRev is back to climate change denier citing his usual fellow liars a lot. OK that is old news. One of his favorite climate change deniers is all giddy that Shell pulled out of one of his agreements with a wind farm supplier. One agreement. Let’s see what this provider wrote a few days ago:


    SouthCoast Wind is developing an offshore lease area with the potential to generate over 2,400 megawatts (MW), or enough to power over a million homes. The lease area is located over 30 miles south of Martha’s Vineyard and 20 miles south of Nantucket. The project will occupy the 199-square mile (or over 127,000 acres) lease area, which was awarded through a competitive auction by the US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. By pursuing dual grid connection points – delivering 1,200 MW to Brayton Point/Somerset and 1,200 MW to Falmouth – SouthCoast Wind can maximize the potential of the offshore lease area’s generation capacity. Electricity customers of distribution companies from across New England will benefit from SouthCoast Wind’s clean energy resource as the power will contribute to the decarbonatization of the electrical grid. Eversource is the incumbent utility for Falmouth and Cape Cod, as well as for New Bedford and much of the SouthCoast. Somerset and Fall River are located in National Grid’s service territory, along with Portsmouth and all of Aquidneck Island. We are currently focused on conducting baseline surveys, stakeholder outreach, and other activities that advance the design, engineering, and permitting of the project. The project will require local, regional, state, and federal permits and approvals for relevant onshore, nearshore, and offshore work. These efforts have been, and will continue to be, pursued with input from local communities to ensure a safe, reliable, and responsible project that meets the expectations of Massachusetts ratepayers and makes the SouthCoast region a hub for offshore wind. The work we are doing on the first delivery of 1,200 megawatts to Brayton Point is convergent with our ongoing work in Falmouth. SouthCoast Wind stands ready to bring New England’s clean energy goals to reality while supporting the people and communities who help bring the benefits of renewable offshore wind energy to our shorelines.

    But little CoRev found one – count them one – contract that did not pan out. And now the poor little liar is being asked to read the latest real research from James Hansen. If CoRev cannot spin this latest science soon I’m afraid Big Oil will cut off little CoRev’s slush fund.

    1. Noneconomist

      In a related note, Trump told a Texas audience that California had widespread blackouts this summer because the state didn’t have sufficient electricity to meet demand. Likely, CoRev won’t be far behind.
      Not true, of course. Even better, looks like we’ll escape again (in the Sierra foothillls) without mandatory power shutoffs during high wind/low humidity events.
      CalISO , which manages the power grid for 80% of the state: no grid emergencies this summer requiring electricity outages. Rain here tomorrow and Monday.
      Most serious power outages here have occurred in winter with low snows toppling trees onto power lines, and with flooding at lower elevations.
      There was, however, “no big brownout” all summer.

    2. CoRev

      PGL claims: “One agreement. ” No! 3 contracts HERE on the East Coast. The real issue is that it is happening world-wide. Orsted has withdrawn from the North Sea Project, Ocean wind farms all over the world are unable to compete, and requesting relief from their contracts. But, some here are still making the claim that this energy is FREE.

      Show is the successful demonstration project.

      1. pgl

        OK three out of how many in the world. Gee CoRev – did you have to take you shoes off to count beyond two?

      2. pgl

        “Orsted has withdrawn from the North Sea Project”

        No link CoRev? I’m looking at what Orsted is telling us about their investments in wind farms in European waters. Either they are lying or you are. I wonder what the Moneyline is on this bet.

          1. pgl

            This from the troll who told us that Global Warming is a good thing. Even though JohnH is a serial liar he is no match for little CoRev.

          2. pgl

            Swedish utility Vattenfall is a different commpany from Orsted – dumbass. Wow – little CoRev found one more case out of how many windfarm projects in the world? Oh wait – little CoRev does not know.

          3. CoRev

            PGL gasps: “This from the troll who told us that Global Warming is a good thing.” He must truly believe that living in LIA conditions must have be our heaven on Earth goal. Here’s a chart showing death rates he actually is wishing to happen: https://preview.redd.it/c7vzrribnrq61.png?auto=webp&s=d121c833e0f50b28eb1fd87a2d06cf2647dc7691 What aknob.

            Maybe 2slugs can do a correlation of warming Vs deaths, and PGL can again cite the externalities of warming Vs cooling.

            Neither can actually the science that proves cause of those deaths is warming. The actual data shows the opposite. As does the science.

          4. CoRev

            PGL, no! You were the one to say Orsted was going bankrupt. Please stop the lying. Search on bankrupt and see who is associated with the term.

            November 5, 2023 at 10:02 am

            BTW, Hornsea(X) is the names of the wind farm, and Orsted and Vattenfall are co-owners, 40-60% respectively. Maybe your search of annual reports can show the stressors created for Orsted when its major partner, Vattenfall, withdraws. Just remember in PGL-world warm is bad and annual data shows immediate contemporary financial stress, and being financially stressed means bankrupt.

            Only PGL can make this stuff up.

          5. pgl

            I see CoRev’s subsequent comments are most deranged than even Trump’s testimony yesterday. At this point it is clear the man lies more than even Trump. May I suggest such persistence dishonesty gets this troll banned. He would not be missed.

  5. pgl


    More on CoRev’s lying. He wants us to believe that Orsted – a wind farm supplier – was going belly up. Yea – a few write downs of late and that sky high stock price from a few years ago has come back down.

    But wait – a market cap still at $120 billion. A guess a surge in revenues in 2022 and a profit margin near 10% is why people are still investing in this company.

    Which is to say CoRev knows nothing about basic financial economics. But you knew that already.

    1. Ivan

      Wind farms require upfront investments, then produce pretty much free energy thereafter (because there is little money needed to keep them going). So the projects are sensitive to interest rates (the lower the rates the bigger the profits). Not a big surprise that certain projects get postponed (waiting for lower rates) or that projected profits are reduced (and stock prices fall as a result of lower projected profits). This does not mean that wind energy will “fail” or projects never be build. Just that all businesses make calculations to maximize their profits. The cost of renewable energy is still lower than fossil fuel energy and is continuing to fall. Slight adjustments to how much more competitive alternative energy projects are compared to fossil fuel projects will not change the trends or the inevitable outcome.

      1. CoRev

        Ivan believes that electrons from wind farms are FREE and inexpensive: ” The cost of renewable energy is still lower than fossil fuel energy and is continuing to fall.”, after saying: “Wind farms require upfront investments, then produce pretty much free energy thereafter (because there is little money needed to keep them going).” But, reality says otherwise: “The company announced late Thursday that a review of issues at subsidiary Siemens Gamesa had found a “substantial increase in failure rates of wind turbine components.”” https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/23/siemens-energy-scraps-profit-outlook-as-wind-turbine-troubles-deepen.html

        What has been happening in the UK is that Wind farms have been able to SELL energy at going rates well above those they contracted, making for wind fall profits. The ability was removed this year for the UK suppliers, and the US contracts have not had these provisions. OPEX are much, much above FREE, as Ivan persistently opines without evidence.

        1. pgl

          Wait – you were telling us the Orsted was bankrupt and withdrawing from what you just called profitable operations. Damn CoRev – the you lie reminds me of a dog chasing its own tail.

        2. pgl

          Oh gee – Siemens Gamesa had stock price decline which is what one would expect if its cost of capital increases. Which was Ivan’s point. But yea I get you never got the DCF model.

          I just checked with Duke Energy’s stock price. It has declined a lot too. Duke is one of your precious fossil fuel companies. Do you even the slightest clue why its shareholders are facing write downs? Didn’t think so.

        3. Ivan

          A company has a loss from defective products – and now all the laws of economics are out the window?
          A company has a smart contract that allows them to make more profits – and now all the laws of economics are out the window?

          For those interested in the price of energy from different sources here is a great link:
          Yes wind and solar is about $40/MwH and combined cycle gas about $55 – and that was back in 2019. The rate of decreased prices is way better for the alternatives and the predictions are for solar to get to $20/MwH in 5-8 years.

          1. CoRev

            Ivan comes lying again: “Yes wind and solar is about $40/MwH and combined cycle gas about $55 – and that was back in 2019. The rate of decreased prices is way better for the alternatives and the predictions are for solar to get to $20/MwH in 5-8 years.” Nope! Wind wasn’t even mentioned in his 4 YO reference.

            Worst he chose only to show “On shore” solar when the discussion has been about “Off shore Wind“. Mr. Irrelevance still has not supported his it’s FREE contention. It’s highly unlikely, since many of the existing renewable sources are asking for substantial price increases to better compete with existing thermal sources. OPEX is obviously NOT FREE.

          2. Ivan

            I think the readers can check the link and shake their heads as soon as they compare the data in the first figure to your statement that “Wind wasn’t even mentioned”. The good news is that your babbling will not change reality – the bad news is that I just wasted 2 min. of my life responding to it.

          3. pgl

            Notice how CoRev often fails to link to his alleged source of quotes. OK – CoRev found one Swedish company we never heard of that canceled one project. Whoopie $hit.

          4. pgl

            An interesting discussion. Maybe not every economic factor but a lot more coherent than those distortions CoRev loves to parade.

        4. pgl

          I do declare – I have never seen someone so mangled up basic accounting terms in such an incomprehensible manner. Fess up CoRev – you are letting some defunct and outdated version of ChatGPT write the trash you put up as comments.

  6. pgl


    Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasized that Russia did not initiate the conflict in Ukraine; rather, it is actively working to bring it to a resolution. He stressed the importance of conveying this central message to the international community, stating: “As our president has stated, we didn’t initiate the conflict; we are in the process of ending it.

    This is the rubbish we routinely get from JohnH. Putin invades a nation all on his own but no, no, no – Joe Biden made him do it. Or maybe there were Nazis in Kiev. Peskov is a liar as well as a moron. After all – Putin can easily end his war crimes by withdrawing Russian troops. But that is not what he is doing.

  7. JohnH

    The beginning of the end to yet another pointless and futile proxy war? “U.S., European officials broach topic of peace negotiations with Ukraine, sources say
    The conversations have included very broad outlines of what Ukraine might need to give up to reach a deal with Russia.”

    Of course, all the carnage and destruction could have been avoided if Ukraine had abided by the Minsk agreements. And much could have been avoided if the US hadn’t blocked an agreement in April, 2002: “Former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder is the latest figure to confirm that a Russia-Ukraine peace deal was nearly reached in the spring of 2022. He discussed the apparent near-success that could have brought the war in Ukraine to an early end in an interview with Berliner Zeitung on October 21.’At the peace negotiations in Istanbul in March 2022 with [the now Defence Minister of Ukraine] Rustem Umerov, the Ukrainians did not agree on peace because they were not allowed to. For everything they discussed, they first had to ask the Americans,” Schroeder told the German newspaper.”

    Instead, the predictable happened: Chris Hedges–“Ukraine’s Death by Proxy…There are many ways for a state to project power and weaken adversaries, but proxy wars are one of the most cynical. Proxy wars devour the countries they purport to defend. They entice nations or insurgents to fight for geopolitical goals that are ultimately not in their interest. The war in Ukraine has little to do with Ukrainian freedom and a lot to do with degrading the Russian military and weakening Vladimir Putin’s grip on power. And when Ukraine looks headed for defeat, or the war reaches a stalemate, Ukraine will be sacrificed like many other states, in what one of the founding members of the CIA, Miles Copeland Jr., referred to as the “Game of Nations” and “the amorality of power politics.”

    1. pgl

      In the middle of all of Jonny boy’s Go Putin I guess this liar missed:

      As the parties moved towards concluding the deal, the massacre at Bucha in Ukraine, a slaughter of hundreds of innocent civilians committed by retreating Russian troops, was discovered.

      That’s right Jonny boy – your side continued to murder innocent Ukrainians. And the Minsk Agreements? I guess you were not told that Russia both tried to annex part of Ukraine using these negotiations while violating the terms to commit more war crimes.

      Oh wait – you get off when Ukraine’s children are murdered by Putin’s war machine. Sorry for the interruption. Get back to watching film of children being slaughtered as we know that excites you.

    2. Noneconomist

      You can’t do it. It’s simple. Just write “All the carnage and destruction could have been avoided if Russia had not invaded Ukraine,” and you’ll be at least semi believable when you babble on about pointless, futile wars,
      Without the invasion, there’s no carnage or destruction. None. And none of your previous babbling about de Nazification, government corruption, the zillionaire Zelenskys, et. al. is necessary.
      Your charade has been exposed time and time again. Either you’re not smart enough to realize that, or you’re happy living with an extremely forked tongue.
      Your support of those who murder and maim women and children has been duly noted many times. You have no high horse to ride on.

    3. 2slugbaits

      JohnH Why are you citing Schroeder as a reliable source? Apparently you don’t know that former Chancellor Schroder was expelled by his own SPD party because it turned out that he was a paid shill for the Kremlin.

        1. JohnH

          Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu and Numan Kurtulmus, the deputy chairman of Erdogan’s ruling party and Naftali Bennet, former prime minister of Israel said the same thing as Schroeder.

          Apparently reality has a pro-Putin bias…

          1. pgl

            Naftali Bennet? Gee Jonny – me thinks you are lying again:


            Former Israeli prime minister rebuts claim, boosted by Russia, that the US blocked a Ukraine peace agreement: ‘It’s unsure there was any deal to be made’
            Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett discussed his efforts to broker peace between Ukraine and Russia.
            Pro-Russia commentators have focused on his saying that a peace deal was “blocked” by the West.
            But Bennett has clarified that no such deal existed — and said talks broke down because of apparent Russian war crimes.

            Come on Jonny boy – are you that dumb? You had to know we would check on your little claim here. Yea – you are not only a liar but you are the dumbest troll ever.

          2. pgl

            Jonny boy wants us to believe the Turkish government is buying Putin’s position. More proof that Jonny boy is a liar:

            Erdogan says Russia should return all captured Ukrainian territory.

            Now if Putin did that and stop his war crimes, this war would end. But it would also mean little Jonny boy would not get to see Kremlin film of Ukrainian children being massacred. And what would Putin’s poodle do then?

      1. Ithaqua

        I don’t believe he was actually expelled from the SPD. However, his Wikipedia page contains many damning facts about his long pro-Russia behaviour, stretching back decades, and how much it has antagonized everyone except Russia, even before the Russian invasion of Ukraine. He compared the Russian seizure of Crimea with NATO’s intervention in the Kosovo war. He celebrated his 70th birthday (in 2014) in St. Petersburg with Putin.

        An excerpt from Wikipedia:

        “After the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Schröder was criticized for his policies towards Vladimir Putin’s government, his work for Russian state-owned companies, and his lobbying on behalf of Russia. On 1 March 2022, Schröder’s entire staff including long-time office manager Albrecht Funk resigned due to Schröder’s alliances with Russia and Putin directly.[3] On 8 March 2022 the Public Prosecutor General initiated proceedings related to accusations against Schröder of complicity in crimes against humanity due to his role in Russian state-owned corporations.[4] The CDU/CSU group demanded that Schröder be included in the European Union sanctions against individuals with ties to the Russian government.[5]

        On 9 March 2022, the SPD initiated proceedings to expel Schröder by early 2023.[6] A party arbitration committee ruled that he had not violated any party rules and would remain a member of the party.[7]”

    4. Macroduck

      Johnny, p!ease tell us you preferred outcome in Ukraine. And in the proces, please keep in mind a few simple facts.

      Russia invaded Ukraine. Russia is not a proxy for some other nation, and neither is Ukraine. When you blather on about “proxy wars”, you mischaracterize what is actually happenin; Russia has invaded Ukraine – twice. If you think naked aggression is OK, say so. Don’t disguise our view by pretending the war in Ukraine is something it isn’t.

      And no more hiding behind links. Sure, you can find some other shill who says what your masters want you tosay , but that means nothing. Are you saying that Russia should be able to take other countries’ land because it has the military powerto do so? Is that the standard you propose?

      Come on, Little Johnny, tell us in simple, straightforward terms, what you believe. Or anyhow, what you’re paid to say you believe.

      1. Noneconomist

        He either can’t, won’t, or he lacks a prepared script that would allow him to do so.
        He’s a babbler who can never, it seems, give a direct answer. That suggests scripting with help coming from others who assist in finding articles that support his opinions.
        Fairly obvious that commenters here realize his postings are redundant, that he harps on the same subjects while, as you’ve often mentioned, finding a convenient quote to support his current babbling.
        He’s been called numerous times on his supposed concerns over useless, wasteful, pointless wars. When asked to condemn the current useless, pointless, futile war in Ukraine he can’t, won’t , or he lacks the script allowing him to do do so.
        He—if he is in fact a single individual—is little more more than a babbling bs’er. At best a fraud. At worst a happy Putineer content to earn his keep condemning economists, posing as a friend of labor, pointing out past transgressions of various western democracies including the U. S.
        I could go on, but , to paraphrase the old saying, if you add a quarter to of his posts, they’re each worth 25 cents.

        1. Noneconomist

          The same Jeffrey Sachs who was spanked by 300 academics after a prior nonsense piece on Ukraine, including more than a few of his colleagues at Columbia?
          How about a Here’s JohnH condemning the Russian invasion and the needless civilian deaths resulting from it? Coupled with the obvious admission that this pointless, wasteful, futile war could end tomorrow with a Russian withdrawal?
          No need to involve any other opinions, just your own. You’re either for continuance of the war, or you’re not. No what about or other digressions necessary..
          Post all the stuff you want, but if your backbone has disappeared, it’s impossible to substitute talking for walking. You’ll just keep falling flat on your face.

        2. pgl

          In his recent press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron, President Joe Biden stated, “I’m prepared to speak with Mr. Putin if in fact, there is an interest in him deciding he’s looking for a way to end the war. He hasn’t done that yet. If that’s the case, in consultation with my French and my NATO friends, I’ll be happy to sit down with Putin to see what he wants, has in mind.” President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman replied that Russia is ready for negotiations aimed “to ensure our interests.”

          Putin has never been serious about ending his war crimes. Anyone who would suggest he was is insane.

      2. Ivan

        I think you are expecting way to much from Johnny when you ask for rational fact-based thoughts and statements. He is a joke in any real debate. A mixture of trolling and contrarian outflows is all I have ever seen from him. He cherry-picks and misrepresents sources sometimes from the most “exotic” corners of the internet.

        You may ask what drives a person to humiliate himself with that sort of BS on a daily basis – and the answer is the same as for all the other similar characters seen all over the internet. They get an endorphin rush from being contrarian and saying things that others reject. The more they are attacked and rejected the bigger their rush (because they see it as proof they are smarter). They are too stupid or deluded to understand their humiliation and repudiation. Because they have no ability to sort information and seek reliable sources – or even sort obvious BS from facts – it is quite easy for them to find what they consider “support” for their contrarian postulates.

        These are not people who ever amounted to much, or ever will. You cannot affect the world unless you have some basic tools and capabilities to understand it. Their main “contribution” are to waste peoples time whenever they manage to hook someone to provide them with their pathetic little endorphin rushes.

    5. pgl

      Since leaving public office, Schröder has worked for Russian state-owned energy companies, including Nord Stream AG, Rosneft, and Gazprom.

      Uh Jonny boy – you have already been called out for citing Schröder who is another Putin stooge. How effing stupid are you anyway?

    6. pgl

      More about Schröder

      During Schröder’s time in office, first in coalition with the environmentalist Green Party, then with a clear majority, Lower Saxony became one of the most deficit-ridden of Germany’s 16 federal states and unemployment rose higher than the national average of 12 percent.

      In 1996, Schröder caused controversy by taking a free ride on the Volkswagen corporate jet to attend the Vienna Opera Ball, along with Volkswagen CEO Ferdinand Piëch.

      During his two terms as chancellor he pursue Third Way or neoliberal policies which angered the progressives in his own party.

      Let’s see – Jonny boy pretends to be a progressive. Jonny boy pretends his is against deficits. Jonny boy pretends he is against crony capitalism. But Jonny boy cites Schröder as his new guru. Once again Jonny boy latches onto someone not have a damn clue who that person is.

  8. pgl

    CoRev is baaaack with his serial lies that convince no one. But you have to admit CoRev recognizes he is far behind JohnH for 2023 troll of the year. And Jonny boy has picked up his pace on dishonesty and stupidity.

    So I guess we should plead with CoRev to try even harder. After all – we want competitive race here. Go CoRev!

    1. CoRev

      PGL claims: “CoRev is baaaack with his serial lies that convince no one.” So show us the lie(s). 😉

      I’ll wait.

      1. CoRev

        PGL, so you can not show where I led. OK! The lie is obvious.

        Baffled, since where have I ever denied that the greenhouse effect is untrue?

        I’ll also wait for your findings. Why is is it you zealots have to lie to make a point?

        It is an amazement.

        1. Baffling

          Every time you chime in about carbon dioxide and photon absorption, what you are saying is that you do not believe in the greenhouse gas effect. Every single time you argue in denial. You are wrong, obviously, but you argue nevertheless.

          1. CoRev

            Baffled claims: ” You are wrong, obviously,…” but can/will not show instances.

            Why is is it you zealots have to lie to make a point?

            It is an amazement.

          2. baffling

            covid, let me repeat. every time you chime in about carbon dioxide and photon absorption, you are saying that you do not believe in the greenhouse gas effect. are you denying that you make those claims about photon absorption? you have done so repeatedly. and you are wrong, repeatedly. you cannot make claims against the basic mechanisms of the greenhouse gas effect, and then claim you have not argued against its existence. you have been denying what is a scientifically proven fact, for years. you are what is called anti-science (and anti-social, but i will leave that for another post).

Comments are closed.