Sunday, April 23, 2017

“Civilized men are more discourteous than savages...”


"...beware the punditry, no matter how well-degreed they are, or well-spoken, or well-coiffed."

Did China Eat America’s Jobs? - Freakonomics: "Look at all those downstream effects from China’s manufacturing growth that David Autor identifies in the U.S.: job loss; wage depression; higher welfare spending. In another research paper, he and his colleagues found yet another downside. Many economists had suspected that greater competition with China would create incentives for American companies to invest more in research and development and become more innovative. But it hasn’t worked out that way. Instead, Autor and his colleagues found, Chinese competition has lowered profit margins for American manufacturers, leaving less money for R&D and resulting in less innovation. 

DUBNER: People like you – meaning economists, not like you David Autor necessarily – you know have been telling us for several decades now that globalization would be largely a win-win. I’m not so naive as to think that there are no losers. I get that. But that overall, we Americans should kind of sit back and relax, that it would be good for the median U.S. resident. So I don’t feel that way anymore and tell me if I’m wrong to not feel that way. And additionally if I’m wrong maybe to blame you and your cohort a little bit. 

AUTOR: I think if we had realized how traumatic the pace of change would have been, we would have at a minimum had much better policies in place to assist workers in communities that suffered these very severe and immediate consequences...

DUBNER: So David I know you’ve said that economics wasn’t entirely wrong on this prediction that global trade would kind of work out okay. But I do think a lot of people would disagree. Obviously it’s a matter of degrees. So if that’s my view and I think that you know many or most economists were wrong on something as basic and important as this, why should we ever listen to what you wonderfully educated egghead economists have to say when it comes to something as important and broad as macroeconomic issues that will affect my actual life? You can predict all you want about currency stories abroad, etc. But if it’s my life, my livelihood, my job, my family, and my ability to provide for them, you guys are supposed to be the nonpartisan, smart, apolitical cohort out there. And I trusted you and now I’m sorry I did. Because if I hadn’t, I might have changed course 15 or 20 years ago. And while I might well I might not be in great shape I’d certainly be in better shape than I am now...

This program has gone on and on about the folly of prediction. In fact, there’s a Freakonomics Radio episode from years ago called “The Folly of Prediction.” We talked about how one of the most common explanations of smart people, when their predictions turn out to be inaccurate was that “Well, we did the best we could considering the information we had at the time. If we’d had better information, we could have made a better prediction.” But you know what? If you had better information at the time, you wouldn’t have to make a prediction; the future would be obvious. But that’s the thing about the future – it’s rarely obvious. Which leaves a lot of room for all kinds of people to make all kinds of predictions that may or may not come true.

I’m not calling out David Autor here – again, I really appreciate his transparency and his doggedness. But the story of Chinese manufacturing and American labor is yet another reminder of how humble we should all be when we make a prediction, and how cautious we should all be when we hear one. Think about this: if the vast, vast majority of political pundits and TV journalists and even the most revered analytics geeks got the 2016 presidential election so wrong – and that’s a simple, binary choice, the Blue Team versus the Red Team – then how much harder is it to predict the downstream consequences as something as vast and broad as a global labor upheaval? I don’t mean to get all preachy on you; that’s not the Freakonomics way. But I will say this: beware the punditry, no matter how well-degreed they are, or well-spoken, or well-coiffed. Don’t assume they can know the future any better than you do; and don’t assume you’re such a genius either."


"The Invisibles" is a 1500 page (59 issue) masterpiece of Occult Literature, written in comic book form."

Alan Moore and Grant Morrison Occult War for 25 Years | Break.com: "So here's where we get to the part that most articles on the Moore/Morrison feud have missed. I'm a comics reader but probably not expert enough to really detail the history or quality of work other than at the 'fan' level. But I am an expert on occultism. And I can say this: the war between Moore and Morrison isn't just a "writers' fight", it's a "wizards' feud." It is two very different views on magick using comics as a medium to fire salvos at each other....

Magically, the two believe in very different things. Neither of them are exactly orthodox, but Moore is a more traditionalist kind of wizard. He is an admirer of Aleister Crowley's "Thelemic" magick, and the philosophy in his Book of the Law. He appreciates the value of magick as a kind of art form, and in turn, considers art to be a kind of magick. Grant Morrison is from the school of "chaos magick", who practice magick that is less worried about rules and ritual and more about trying to get things done. Magick can be done from just about anything, as long as you have the right intention. Chaos magicians tend to like mixing up elements from a whole variety of different cultures and history, to reinvent it all to fit whatever they're in the mood for, and have no problem with doing magick for personal gain (or to change the world) rather than just for human transcendence. Moore's very loud statement of declaring himself a Magician in public may just have been a factor in motivating Morrison to go whole-hog with the 'occult comic book' thing, when he started on "The Invisibles" in 1994. "The Invisibles" is a 1500 page (59 issue) masterpiece of Occult Literature, written in comic book form. Its winding plotline tells a single long story (with various sub-plots) about a group of occult rebels using magick to try to liberate mankind, opposed by a cabal of black magicians in positions of power and authority trying to use sorcery to control and oppress humanity. It is, simply put, one of the greatest comic series of all time."


Cassie Jaye on Feminism and Men's Rights Activists.

"Cassie Jaye (Filmmaker, "The Red Pill") joins Dave Rubin to discuss her views on feminism, Men's Rights Activists, and her experience making her documentary "The Red Pill.""




Sunday, April 16, 2017

#SundayFunday

Clearly I have yet to get a handle on this whole "blogging while having a job" thing, but what kind of heathen would I be if I didn't post up on Zombie Jesus Day?  A mature, reserved, respectful heathen.  That's who.  Sure.  But who wants that?





Friday, March 10, 2017

Training.

3/10 - 5/3/1 deadlifts, Power Half Hour Stretch
3/9 - Simple + Sinister/swings + TGU
3/8 - Defranco Simple Six, 5/3/1 press, chins, dips, speed bag
3/7 - Simple + Sinister/swings + TGU
3/6 - 5/3/1 power cleans, squats
3/3 - 5/3/1 bench, chins, pushups, pushdowns, cable curls
3/2 - Simple + Sinister/swings + TGU, Power Half Hour Stretch
3/1 - 5/3/1 deadlifts, situps, backxt
2/28 - Simple + Sinister KB/swings + TGU, Power Half Hour Stretch
2/27 - Defranco Simple Six, 5/3/1 press, chins, dips
2/24 - 5/3/1 power cleans, squats, Power Half Hour Stretch
2/23 - Simple + Sinister KB/swings + TGU, Power Half Hour Stretch
2/22 - Defranco Simple Six, 5/3/1 bench, chins, pushups, Power Half Hour Stretch
2/21 - Simple + Sinister KB/swings + TGU, Power Half Hour Stretch
2/20 - 5/3/1 deadlifts
2/17 - Defranco Simple Six, 5/3/1 press, chins, dips, Power Half Hour Stretch
2/16 - Power Half Hour Stretch
2/15 - 5/3/1 power cleans, squats, sauna
2/13 - Defranco Simple Six, 5/3/1 bench, chins, pushups

The Will to Prepare to Win - RossTraining.com: "As complicated as life can be, the road to success is usually straightforward. Continually outwork those around you and you’ll eventually rise towards the top in whatever you pursue. Just don’t expect it to be easy. If it were easy, everyone would do it, and we know that’s not the case."









 Katie Anne - #Recomp pt. 2 ✌ 170lbs in 2011 to now. The other...: "170lbs in 2011 to now. The other day I posted a photo when I was a runner, weighing anywhere from 114lbs to 135lbs during that phase in my life. Soon after, I was injured running and decided not to run in college. And subsequently, I set my sights on bodybuilding. However, I was seeking extremes for everything. Leading to weight swings of up to 25lbs in a matter of a few weeks (binging, restricting, etc). Throughout this time, I learned #moderation, not deprivation. I learned consistency over extremes. Each phase teaches us important lessons. Remember that."