BTW, “…….. Because I am Black” doesn’t come out clean in the wash here. $700,000 for gigolo service paid by the county doesn’t fly no matter what your skin tint is.
Ivan
What seems to be missed in this diversion is that none of that makes Trump any less guilty of the accused crimes. You could even say that if the accusations are true that would be to Trumps benefit. Lets say the prosecutor actually did waste resources on getting an incompetent lawyer hired to do part of the investigation and preparation for trial – that would be to the benefit of Trumps and his co-defendants.
So far all I have seen are a bunch of accusations that there are personal wrong doings but with little evidence for anything but a nasty divorce. You know how much crap can flow during those things, right? Knowing Trump, my guess is that we are just dealing with another head-fake from his side to try and distract the prosecutors just as things are heating up.
Moses Herzog
“The non-denial denial” from Willis tells us boatloads—i.e. she is guilty of the accusations. How it effects the trump case, I think mainly in the public opinion. Either way, if she is wasting county taxpayer money, which most likely she is, to the tune of over a half-million dollars, citizens/voters have a right to know that, and judge her accordingly when they choose their next DA.
Ivan
As much as this has nothing to do with the Trump case – it certainly has everything to do with her job performance and reelection campaign. I don’t know how much of the accusations are Trumped up BS and how much is true – but she will indeed have to defend herself against the accusations at her next election.
Ivan
First he deny that it is a real thing – then he claims it is too late to do anything about it. Fact is that whatever we do to reduce green house gases will reduce the heating and the likelihood of reaching ill defined tipping points – and also increase the time before we reach such tipping points.
For those who have denied climate change-and you know who you are-this graph is a devastating indictment of your ignorance or moral failings. Climate change is happening. And for those who now say its too late to di anything about it, i say screw you. No climate denier should be permitted to elected office again.
pgl
“For those who have denied climate change-and you know who you are”
I wonder if CoRev will find a way of posting his usual obnoxious trash despite being banned.
Through certain means, he could probably get in, and theoretically we wouldn’t know. But I don’t think CoRev is near smart enough to figure out those avenues.
baffling
wait for it, wait for it…the econned whining will commence shortly.
Bruce Hall
Ah, for the good old days when we didn’t worry about the heat:
When you start a data series from a period of lower than normal values, you might expect a trend toward higher values. But, hey, warmth is terrible so we should send our money to one or more of the many organizations advertising on Facebook.
More like an idiot. He seems to have missed that no matter what period they had chosen it would have shown the same, because the normalization to zero determining “anomaly” is the average over the full period. In this case they started at 1850 because that is when we began having fairly reliable direct measurements covering the temperatures for the northern hemisphere. However, regardless of where you put zero, the steep rise from 1980 will be undeniable.
Bruce Hall
Ivan, it doesn’t matter that there is a “normalization to zero”. If you begin at a very low value for any series, it will be expected that there will be an increase. If we had picked US population as the series, you could “normalize to zero” at any starting point and still have and increasing trend. What have you proved?
Prove to me that any variation within the long term trend (dating back to the Little ice Age) can be attributed to one factor. You simply can’t. I’ll provide some information as an example for you to consider, but I’m sure that your response will be the same snarky ad hominem remarks that are the staple among the climate economists here. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/11/25/climate-co2-and-the-sun/
“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” – H. L. Mencken
Ivan
You still don’t get it. No matter what you normalize to you are still getting a huge spurt up in the past 50 years. Even your own link show that.
Macroduck
“If you begin at a very low value…”
Who says this series started low, by some objective definition of “low”?
“…it will be expected…”
By whom?
Comparing a serves that has risen fairly steadily for the past 10,000 years – human population – to a series that had been variable but not trending until the early 20th century is just desperate. Seriously, you give the impression that you don’t believe your own nonsense.
And your “prove to me” demand as constructed, is straight out of the “fake science” playbook. You are not the standard for credibility. The scientific consensus is. You’re just a guy who makes lame arguments.
Macroduck
Shorter Brucie:
“I don’t care how much proof you offer, I’ll find some way to deny it.”
There is a scientific concensus that climate change – the rise in average global temperature and the resultant changes in other climate features and in weather patterns – is the result of the release of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere as the result of human activity. That’s what the vast majority of specialists agree on.
When Brucie and others of his tribe demand “proof”, they are engaged in a massive pretense; the proof exists in scientific journals, and has for years. When Brucie and his tribe insist that some individual line up all that proof, it is a trick from the “fake science” playbook. The trick is to create the impression that for every fact the Ivan’s of the world can provide, Brucie can offer a contrary “fact”. Ivan has limited time and casual readers have limited patience. It is entirely possible, in a ginned up exchange like the one Brucie demands, to give the impression that science deniers “have a point”, that “the claims of climate science are controversial”. That’s the reason for this particular demand – “show me proof” – when the scientific journals are full of proof; draw attention away from the scientific consensus and create an impression that the science is unsettled.
That’s what Brucie and his tribe do. That’s who they are.
Bruce Hall
Ivan, “No matter what you normalize to you are still getting a huge spurt up in the past 50 years. Even your own link show that.”
Well yes, “huge” if a fraction of a degree is huge. I provided you a link to an article that explains the multi-factor issues regarding short and long term temperature fluctuations. There are periods when temperature rise/fall slowly and then periods when they happen quickly. Coincidence may be correlation and correlation may be causation, but unlike the unsettled science of physics or astrophysics we have complete faith the the simple rise in CO2 is not only the sole cause of temperature increases, but it is all human caused… uh, huh.
There is much to the world temperature database that is less than precise and consistent despite efforts to adjust the actual record. The errors are large enough that we can say there has been warming, but not accurate enough to say with absolute precision which might be considered important if you are dealing in one or two degrees. Furthermore, the satellite temperature records don’t show the same pattern as the surface temperature records which are influenced by a variety of land use impacts.
But if fear is your happiness, continue to be fearful.
pgl
“I’m sure that your response will be the same snarky ad hominem remarks that are the staple among the climate economists here.”
Do you just read the snarky comments as you do not understand WTF that post was about. Never fret as the clown who wrote the post put up as much disinformation as he could muster. Come on Brucie – even someone as stupid as you are knows this blog is a disinformation machine and nothing more.
Pgl
Brucie is Corey’s Minnie Me
Bruce Hall
Baffling, speak to the reality rather than practicing your ad hominem remarks. History is not kind to people who ignore it.
If people really believed the decades of doomsaying and failed prognostications, they would not act in the manner shown by US internal migration and Barack Obama. The reality is that the moderate warming since a particularly cold period chosen as a starting point for the climate change/global warming baseline has been welcomed and beneficial. Sure, there have been hurricanes causing economic damage in vulnerable areas where people should not have populated, but the record is clear that there are now fewer high intensity hurricanes than 90-100 years ago… likewise tornados. But that’s a people problem, not a “climate change” problem.
Even NASA admits that earth is now greener as vegetation has benefitted from higher CO2 levels, but of course it must give the obligatory warning that it will only lead to damnation and death. Meanwhile, our government pushes its wealth redistribution scheme to its friends and favored supporters in the form of subsidies and tax credits for expensive, less functional technologies. But, trust them, it will all be cheaper, better, and safer if we just wait long enough… and the seas will recede from Barack’s mansion.
Water tends to take longer to change temperature, ocean waters tend to “moderate” temperature. So what do you think it tells us when ocean water is warming quickly??
Baffling
As i said, a fool and miscreant. Your arguments are just silly.
Macroduck
If people believed? That’s your standard? Ignore science and declare what “people believe”? Gads! People buy anti-bacterial soap, you dope.
And besides, you’re just making stuff up. The fact is, over half of Americans believe climate change is a threat:
The Cherry-picking of healthy seniors is on full display when they advertise free gym memberships (something that would only attract seniors healthy enough to go to the gym), but they apparently have whole organizations dedicated to identify and target the more lucrative seniors. A big ugly crash is now brewing with a lot of provider organizations simply cutting out Medicare Advantage patients all together. So the problem of not being able to see a competent doctor within a reachable distance, may become the problem of your long-term doctor no longer accepting your Medicare “Advantage” plan at all.
pgl
Bruce Hall notes the ban of CoRev and tries his little best to be substitute global denying troll of the year. But I have to say this was a weak effort even for little Brucie Boy.
First he finds a cold winter from 1890 and claims this was the start date of the NOAA chart. Even Mr. Magoo realized that the start date was 1850. Brucie – I might say this was a nice try but come on man. Off by 40 years?
And Obama canceled his trip to Martha Vinyard because of the climate? I guess Brucie Boy did not read his own link again. It had something to do with an uptake in reported COVID cases. Hey Brucie – did you tell the former President about your little bleach routine?
If I read the AKM stuff right, firms that pay better for a given quality of worker rely less on networks (who you know) and more on postings (anonymous cattle-calls) than do firms which pay less well. Not what I’d have guessed.
The article is fairly comprehensive, but doesn’t cover any new ground. Two paragraphs do raise important issues:
“Geopolitical tensions and financial technologies (such as blockchain-based decentralized digital currency networks) may provide strong incentives and nuanced mechanisms for alternative financial systems to emerge and expand. The adoption of local currencies and financial digitization brings economic benefits to those involved in these new systems by improving transaction efficiency and reducing transaction costs.
“However, it is important to note that governments pursuing de-dollarization initiatives are not solely motivated by economic and efficiency gains. The governments of countries in rivalry or competition with the United States, such as China, Russia and Iran, all seek to have a plan B to hedge against sanctions. By diversifying away from the U.S. dollar and dollar-based system, they aim to reduce their geopolitical vulnerabilities and strengthen their financial security in the face of geopolitical challenges.”
History strongly suggests that currency turn-over and reserve currency status change slowly. Network effects are strong, conferring a large price advantage in currency exchange long after commercial leadership has been lost.
It’s true that “governments pursuing de-dollarization initiatives are not solely motivated by economic and efficiency gains,” but private actor have strong price and liquidity incentive to continue using the dominant currency. To the extent that private actors have a choice, China, Russia and Iran will have to compensate them for using currencies other than the dollar in trade andl finance as long as the dollar is cheaper and more liquid. And a “plan B” which is arranged but not much used isn’t going to be of much use should if a “plan B” is needed; plumbing is tricky.
This, I suspect, is where block-chain technology may come in handy. The point to block-chain exchange is to provide secure, low-cost transactions. Who needs renmimbi-based exchanges if block-chain payment systems are available? If block-chain exchanges can provide cheap THB/RUB and IDR/ARG, etc, clearing, who needs dollars OR renmimbi?
Well, any private entity which seeks to hold financial assets other than in THB, RUB, IDR or ARG, that’s who. Just because you sell to Argentina doesn’t mean you want ARG-denominated assets. This is an issue which is not covered in the article, and largely ignored in de-dollarization schemes.
High-quality financial assets, protected by the rule of law, are a big deal. Russia remains a kleptocracy. Saudi Arabia? Ask the princelings who were locked up until they signed over their assets. China, home of the disappearing CEO? So, yeah, the West seized Russian assets. So did Russia. And spreads didn’t really budge when the West did it, so tell the “seized Russian assets” story till the cows come home, it hasn’t changed private investment decisions much.
So just maybe, de-dollarization will depend on technology, not political considerations.
Ivan
As long as China insists on a huge trade surplus with the west they have to keep a lot of assets in dollars – and they will indeed be at risk of sanctions if they attack Taiwan. You are also absolutely right that rich people in dictatorships have a strong urge to move money to countries like US where they are not nearly as vulnerable to losing it. Xi is getting desperate to break dependency on dollars, but not willing to pay the cost of breaking that dependency.
Macroduck
Recession (or not) watch: Which of these is not like the others?:
Old data, I know, but it’s odd. Is this part of the high r* story?
pgl
Bruce Hall provides not just one stupid long winded reply but three – none of which address the points that were raised about his whining.
First of all, Dr. Chinn’s starting point was 1850 not the 1890 date Bruce pulled out of his rear end.
Second of all, his own global denying clown picked 1850 which is 40 years before Brucie’s cold winter.
But OK – I went to NOAA tool and chose 1890 and it did not materially change either.
Come on Brucie – please try to figure out what the eff you are babbling about before you waste our time with another long winded comment that only proves what we already knew – you are one MORON!
pgl
Bruce Hall continues to spin that trash from Andy May even though we have been over this before:
we rate Watts Up with That a strong pseudoscience and conspiracy website based on promoting consistent human-influenced climate denialism propaganda and several failed fact checks.
Bias Rating: CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Watts Up With That? (or WUWT) is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006? The blog predominantly discusses climate issues with a focus on anthropogenic climate change, generally supporting beliefs that oppose the scientific consensus on climate change. According to their about page, “WattsUpWithThat.com is the world’s most viewed website on climate.” Anthony Watts states he was a “television meteorologist who spent 25 years on the air and who also operates a weather technology and content business, as well as continues daily forecasting on radio, just for fun.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
The blog is owned by Anthony Watts and is funded through advertising and donations. The website does not disclose donors.
Analysis / Bias
In review, the sole purpose of the website is to debunk human-influenced climate change. Climatologist Michael E. Mann has called WUWT the leading climate change denial blog. There are numerous articles about WUWT and many failed fact checks that can be seen here through a factual search.
Failed Fact Checks
“there has not been a long-term distinctive change in sea level rise rates in the last 120 years” – Inaccurate
“The amount of coral on the Great Barrier Reef is at record high levels”; those claiming the reef is threatened by climate change are alarmists – Inaccurate
“Great Barrier Reef Sea Surface Temperature: No Change In 150 Years” – Inaccurate
More Embarrassment: COP26 Luxury EVs to be Recharged Using Diesel Generators – Mostly False
“Facebook is spamming all climate articles by misleading readers about” the accuracy of climate models.” – False
“…Seven and a half years have passed since there was any trend in global warming at all” If global warming was caused by human emissions, temperature would rise at a steady rate. – Incorrect
Overall, we rate Watts Up with That a strong pseudoscience and conspiracy website based on promoting consistent human-influenced climate denialism propaganda and several failed fact checks. (2/14/2017) Updated (D. Van Zandt 04/11/2022)
Of course Bruce Hall has even less shame than he has intelligence. Dumber than a rock and dishonest as it gets.
At the risk of taking donald trump’s side on an issue, I gotta say, this one SMELLS. And the bad odor is coming from Fani Willis’s corner of the room:
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/13/georgia-trump-prosecutor-nathan-wade-contempt-00135478
BTW, “…….. Because I am Black” doesn’t come out clean in the wash here. $700,000 for gigolo service paid by the county doesn’t fly no matter what your skin tint is.
What seems to be missed in this diversion is that none of that makes Trump any less guilty of the accused crimes. You could even say that if the accusations are true that would be to Trumps benefit. Lets say the prosecutor actually did waste resources on getting an incompetent lawyer hired to do part of the investigation and preparation for trial – that would be to the benefit of Trumps and his co-defendants.
So far all I have seen are a bunch of accusations that there are personal wrong doings but with little evidence for anything but a nasty divorce. You know how much crap can flow during those things, right? Knowing Trump, my guess is that we are just dealing with another head-fake from his side to try and distract the prosecutors just as things are heating up.
“The non-denial denial” from Willis tells us boatloads—i.e. she is guilty of the accusations. How it effects the trump case, I think mainly in the public opinion. Either way, if she is wasting county taxpayer money, which most likely she is, to the tune of over a half-million dollars, citizens/voters have a right to know that, and judge her accordingly when they choose their next DA.
As much as this has nothing to do with the Trump case – it certainly has everything to do with her job performance and reelection campaign. I don’t know how much of the accusations are Trumped up BS and how much is true – but she will indeed have to defend herself against the accusations at her next election.
First he deny that it is a real thing – then he claims it is too late to do anything about it. Fact is that whatever we do to reduce green house gases will reduce the heating and the likelihood of reaching ill defined tipping points – and also increase the time before we reach such tipping points.
I would like to remind voters that a vote for the GOP means committing our grandchildren to extinction level climate change. Even the “normal” GOP candidate Nikki Haley eagerly did Trump’s bidding and withdrew from the Paris Agreement and would undo all the Biden administration progress to reduce CO2 emissions. The Biden administration understands global warming is real and is trying to account for the societal cost of the effects of various greenhouse gas pollutants. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/21/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-to-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-combat-the-climate-crisis/ The Biden administration is moving us to 50% reduction in U.S. Greenhouse Gas Pollution from 2005 Levels in 2030 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/22/fact-sheet-president-biden-sets-2030-greenhouse-gas-pollution-reduction-target-aimed-at-creating-good-paying-union-jobs-and-securing-u-s-leadership-on-clean-energy-technologies/
A vote for fraudster Trump would mean utter chaos on policy.
For those who have denied climate change-and you know who you are-this graph is a devastating indictment of your ignorance or moral failings. Climate change is happening. And for those who now say its too late to di anything about it, i say screw you. No climate denier should be permitted to elected office again.
“For those who have denied climate change-and you know who you are”
I wonder if CoRev will find a way of posting his usual obnoxious trash despite being banned.
pgl: Corev has been banned.
Through certain means, he could probably get in, and theoretically we wouldn’t know. But I don’t think CoRev is near smart enough to figure out those avenues.
wait for it, wait for it…the econned whining will commence shortly.
Ah, for the good old days when we didn’t worry about the heat:
• https://www.theweatheroutlook.com/twoother/twocontent.aspx?type=tystat&id=752
• https://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/2017/jan/05/think-its-cold-try-the-winter-of-1889-90/
• https://www.nola.com/archive/you-think-its-cold-now-in-1899-the-mississippi-river-froze-over/article_c502d458-cc64-5ab2-808b-8aedceb1e754.html
When you start a data series from a period of lower than normal values, you might expect a trend toward higher values. But, hey, warmth is terrible so we should send our money to one or more of the many organizations advertising on Facebook.
Meanwhile, people are desperate to seek cooler climates and doing something on their own: https://www.northamerican.com/migration-map
Even former President Barack Obama has recognized that climate change/global warming will result in much higher sea levels and flooding of coastal areas and have sought refuge in higher elevations: https://www.townandcountrymag.com/leisure/real-estate/a30169311/barack-michelle-obama-buy-marthas-vineyard-house/
Send your money now! Save the planet.
You are a fool and miscreant bruce.
More like an idiot. He seems to have missed that no matter what period they had chosen it would have shown the same, because the normalization to zero determining “anomaly” is the average over the full period. In this case they started at 1850 because that is when we began having fairly reliable direct measurements covering the temperatures for the northern hemisphere. However, regardless of where you put zero, the steep rise from 1980 will be undeniable.
Ivan, it doesn’t matter that there is a “normalization to zero”. If you begin at a very low value for any series, it will be expected that there will be an increase. If we had picked US population as the series, you could “normalize to zero” at any starting point and still have and increasing trend. What have you proved?
Prove to me that any variation within the long term trend (dating back to the Little ice Age) can be attributed to one factor. You simply can’t. I’ll provide some information as an example for you to consider, but I’m sure that your response will be the same snarky ad hominem remarks that are the staple among the climate economists here.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/11/25/climate-co2-and-the-sun/
“For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” – H. L. Mencken
You still don’t get it. No matter what you normalize to you are still getting a huge spurt up in the past 50 years. Even your own link show that.
“If you begin at a very low value…”
Who says this series started low, by some objective definition of “low”?
“…it will be expected…”
By whom?
Comparing a serves that has risen fairly steadily for the past 10,000 years – human population – to a series that had been variable but not trending until the early 20th century is just desperate. Seriously, you give the impression that you don’t believe your own nonsense.
And your “prove to me” demand as constructed, is straight out of the “fake science” playbook. You are not the standard for credibility. The scientific consensus is. You’re just a guy who makes lame arguments.
Shorter Brucie:
“I don’t care how much proof you offer, I’ll find some way to deny it.”
There is a scientific concensus that climate change – the rise in average global temperature and the resultant changes in other climate features and in weather patterns – is the result of the release of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere as the result of human activity. That’s what the vast majority of specialists agree on.
When Brucie and others of his tribe demand “proof”, they are engaged in a massive pretense; the proof exists in scientific journals, and has for years. When Brucie and his tribe insist that some individual line up all that proof, it is a trick from the “fake science” playbook. The trick is to create the impression that for every fact the Ivan’s of the world can provide, Brucie can offer a contrary “fact”. Ivan has limited time and casual readers have limited patience. It is entirely possible, in a ginned up exchange like the one Brucie demands, to give the impression that science deniers “have a point”, that “the claims of climate science are controversial”. That’s the reason for this particular demand – “show me proof” – when the scientific journals are full of proof; draw attention away from the scientific consensus and create an impression that the science is unsettled.
That’s what Brucie and his tribe do. That’s who they are.
Ivan, “No matter what you normalize to you are still getting a huge spurt up in the past 50 years. Even your own link show that.”
Well yes, “huge” if a fraction of a degree is huge. I provided you a link to an article that explains the multi-factor issues regarding short and long term temperature fluctuations. There are periods when temperature rise/fall slowly and then periods when they happen quickly. Coincidence may be correlation and correlation may be causation, but unlike the unsettled science of physics or astrophysics we have complete faith the the simple rise in CO2 is not only the sole cause of temperature increases, but it is all human caused… uh, huh.
There is much to the world temperature database that is less than precise and consistent despite efforts to adjust the actual record. The errors are large enough that we can say there has been warming, but not accurate enough to say with absolute precision which might be considered important if you are dealing in one or two degrees. Furthermore, the satellite temperature records don’t show the same pattern as the surface temperature records which are influenced by a variety of land use impacts.
But if fear is your happiness, continue to be fearful.
“I’m sure that your response will be the same snarky ad hominem remarks that are the staple among the climate economists here.”
Do you just read the snarky comments as you do not understand WTF that post was about. Never fret as the clown who wrote the post put up as much disinformation as he could muster. Come on Brucie – even someone as stupid as you are knows this blog is a disinformation machine and nothing more.
Brucie is Corey’s Minnie Me
Baffling, speak to the reality rather than practicing your ad hominem remarks. History is not kind to people who ignore it.
If people really believed the decades of doomsaying and failed prognostications, they would not act in the manner shown by US internal migration and Barack Obama. The reality is that the moderate warming since a particularly cold period chosen as a starting point for the climate change/global warming baseline has been welcomed and beneficial. Sure, there have been hurricanes causing economic damage in vulnerable areas where people should not have populated, but the record is clear that there are now fewer high intensity hurricanes than 90-100 years ago… likewise tornados. But that’s a people problem, not a “climate change” problem.
Even NASA admits that earth is now greener as vegetation has benefitted from higher CO2 levels, but of course it must give the obligatory warning that it will only lead to damnation and death. Meanwhile, our government pushes its wealth redistribution scheme to its friends and favored supporters in the form of subsidies and tax credits for expensive, less functional technologies. But, trust them, it will all be cheaper, better, and safer if we just wait long enough… and the seas will recede from Barack’s mansion.
https://www.science.org/content/article/global-warming-speeding-ocean-currents-here-s-why
Water tends to take longer to change temperature, ocean waters tend to “moderate” temperature. So what do you think it tells us when ocean water is warming quickly??
As i said, a fool and miscreant. Your arguments are just silly.
If people believed? That’s your standard? Ignore science and declare what “people believe”? Gads! People buy anti-bacterial soap, you dope.
And besides, you’re just making stuff up. The fact is, over half of Americans believe climate change is a threat:
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/08/09/what-the-data-says-about-americans-views-of-climate-change/
And belief is heavily skewed along political lines, just like your arguments.
“People believe” (69% of Americans) that angels exist:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/nation/nearly-7-in-10-u-s-adults-believe-in-angels-ap-norc-poll-find
About a third believe the 2020 presidential election was stolen:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/shows/meetthepress/blog/rcna90145
Twenty-one percent believe in magic:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1272243/belief-in-spells-or-witchcraft-in-the-united-states/#:~:text=About%20two%20in%20ten%20Americans,believe%20in%20spells%20or%20witchcraft.
So, are we going to follow the facts, or whatever drivel Brucie serves up about what “people believe”?
Your point, other than bile?
Anybody can throw rocks. When you don’t have anything reasonable to say, I suppose throwing rocks is an option.
Macroduck,
Were you looking in the mirror when you penned that?
I wrap my rocks un facts. You should try it.
Medicare Advantage is a scam that takes advantage of seniors. Here is a nice summary of the 4 main ways they milk the system.
https://www.levernews.com/insurers-are-gaming-medicare-to-the-tune-of-140_billion/
The Cherry-picking of healthy seniors is on full display when they advertise free gym memberships (something that would only attract seniors healthy enough to go to the gym), but they apparently have whole organizations dedicated to identify and target the more lucrative seniors. A big ugly crash is now brewing with a lot of provider organizations simply cutting out Medicare Advantage patients all together. So the problem of not being able to see a competent doctor within a reachable distance, may become the problem of your long-term doctor no longer accepting your Medicare “Advantage” plan at all.
Bruce Hall notes the ban of CoRev and tries his little best to be substitute global denying troll of the year. But I have to say this was a weak effort even for little Brucie Boy.
First he finds a cold winter from 1890 and claims this was the start date of the NOAA chart. Even Mr. Magoo realized that the start date was 1850. Brucie – I might say this was a nice try but come on man. Off by 40 years?
And Obama canceled his trip to Martha Vinyard because of the climate? I guess Brucie Boy did not read his own link again. It had something to do with an uptake in reported COVID cases. Hey Brucie – did you tell the former President about your little bleach routine?
Off topic – here’s a result that surprised me:
https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/how-workers-and-firms-meet-labour-market-and-why-it-matters
If I read the AKM stuff right, firms that pay better for a given quality of worker rely less on networks (who you know) and more on postings (anonymous cattle-calls) than do firms which pay less well. Not what I’d have guessed.
Nice to see serious work on “search”.
Apropos of this:
https://econbrowser.com/archives/2024/01/fx-reserve-holdings-50-years-of-data
…there’s a new piece on China’s efforts to de-dollarize from Zongyuan Zoe Liu at CFR:
https://www.noemamag.com/china-wants-to-ditch-the-dollar/
The article is fairly comprehensive, but doesn’t cover any new ground. Two paragraphs do raise important issues:
“Geopolitical tensions and financial technologies (such as blockchain-based decentralized digital currency networks) may provide strong incentives and nuanced mechanisms for alternative financial systems to emerge and expand. The adoption of local currencies and financial digitization brings economic benefits to those involved in these new systems by improving transaction efficiency and reducing transaction costs.
“However, it is important to note that governments pursuing de-dollarization initiatives are not solely motivated by economic and efficiency gains. The governments of countries in rivalry or competition with the United States, such as China, Russia and Iran, all seek to have a plan B to hedge against sanctions. By diversifying away from the U.S. dollar and dollar-based system, they aim to reduce their geopolitical vulnerabilities and strengthen their financial security in the face of geopolitical challenges.”
History strongly suggests that currency turn-over and reserve currency status change slowly. Network effects are strong, conferring a large price advantage in currency exchange long after commercial leadership has been lost.
It’s true that “governments pursuing de-dollarization initiatives are not solely motivated by economic and efficiency gains,” but private actor have strong price and liquidity incentive to continue using the dominant currency. To the extent that private actors have a choice, China, Russia and Iran will have to compensate them for using currencies other than the dollar in trade andl finance as long as the dollar is cheaper and more liquid. And a “plan B” which is arranged but not much used isn’t going to be of much use should if a “plan B” is needed; plumbing is tricky.
This, I suspect, is where block-chain technology may come in handy. The point to block-chain exchange is to provide secure, low-cost transactions. Who needs renmimbi-based exchanges if block-chain payment systems are available? If block-chain exchanges can provide cheap THB/RUB and IDR/ARG, etc, clearing, who needs dollars OR renmimbi?
Well, any private entity which seeks to hold financial assets other than in THB, RUB, IDR or ARG, that’s who. Just because you sell to Argentina doesn’t mean you want ARG-denominated assets. This is an issue which is not covered in the article, and largely ignored in de-dollarization schemes.
High-quality financial assets, protected by the rule of law, are a big deal. Russia remains a kleptocracy. Saudi Arabia? Ask the princelings who were locked up until they signed over their assets. China, home of the disappearing CEO? So, yeah, the West seized Russian assets. So did Russia. And spreads didn’t really budge when the West did it, so tell the “seized Russian assets” story till the cows come home, it hasn’t changed private investment decisions much.
So just maybe, de-dollarization will depend on technology, not political considerations.
As long as China insists on a huge trade surplus with the west they have to keep a lot of assets in dollars – and they will indeed be at risk of sanctions if they attack Taiwan. You are also absolutely right that rich people in dictatorships have a strong urge to move money to countries like US where they are not nearly as vulnerable to losing it. Xi is getting desperate to break dependency on dollars, but not willing to pay the cost of breaking that dependency.
Recession (or not) watch: Which of these is not like the others?:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1e9tv
Old data, I know, but it’s odd. Is this part of the high r* story?
Bruce Hall provides not just one stupid long winded reply but three – none of which address the points that were raised about his whining.
First of all, Dr. Chinn’s starting point was 1850 not the 1890 date Bruce pulled out of his rear end.
Second of all, his own global denying clown picked 1850 which is 40 years before Brucie’s cold winter.
But OK – I went to NOAA tool and chose 1890 and it did not materially change either.
Come on Brucie – please try to figure out what the eff you are babbling about before you waste our time with another long winded comment that only proves what we already knew – you are one MORON!
Bruce Hall continues to spin that trash from Andy May even though we have been over this before:
Watts Up with That – Bias and Credibility
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/watts-up-with-that/
we rate Watts Up with That a strong pseudoscience and conspiracy website based on promoting consistent human-influenced climate denialism propaganda and several failed fact checks.
Bias Rating: CONSPIRACY-PSEUDOSCIENCE
Factual Reporting: LOW
Country: USA
Press Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Website
Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Watts Up With That? (or WUWT) is a blog promoting climate change denial that was created by Anthony Watts in 2006? The blog predominantly discusses climate issues with a focus on anthropogenic climate change, generally supporting beliefs that oppose the scientific consensus on climate change. According to their about page, “WattsUpWithThat.com is the world’s most viewed website on climate.” Anthony Watts states he was a “television meteorologist who spent 25 years on the air and who also operates a weather technology and content business, as well as continues daily forecasting on radio, just for fun.
Read our profile on the United States government and media.
Funded by / Ownership
The blog is owned by Anthony Watts and is funded through advertising and donations. The website does not disclose donors.
Analysis / Bias
In review, the sole purpose of the website is to debunk human-influenced climate change. Climatologist Michael E. Mann has called WUWT the leading climate change denial blog. There are numerous articles about WUWT and many failed fact checks that can be seen here through a factual search.
Failed Fact Checks
“there has not been a long-term distinctive change in sea level rise rates in the last 120 years” – Inaccurate
“The amount of coral on the Great Barrier Reef is at record high levels”; those claiming the reef is threatened by climate change are alarmists – Inaccurate
“Great Barrier Reef Sea Surface Temperature: No Change In 150 Years” – Inaccurate
More Embarrassment: COP26 Luxury EVs to be Recharged Using Diesel Generators – Mostly False
“Facebook is spamming all climate articles by misleading readers about” the accuracy of climate models.” – False
“…Seven and a half years have passed since there was any trend in global warming at all” If global warming was caused by human emissions, temperature would rise at a steady rate. – Incorrect
Overall, we rate Watts Up with That a strong pseudoscience and conspiracy website based on promoting consistent human-influenced climate denialism propaganda and several failed fact checks. (2/14/2017) Updated (D. Van Zandt 04/11/2022)
Of course Bruce Hall has even less shame than he has intelligence. Dumber than a rock and dishonest as it gets.