Deficits
- goIftdibrad
- Chief Master Soft Brain
- Posts: 16746
- Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
- Drives: straight past the apex
i like money
brain go brrrrrr
- troyguitar
- Command Chief Master Sirloin
- Posts: 20088
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:15 pm
- Drives: Trek Domane
- Location: Swamp
All spending is wrong, unless the money is going to me.
- wap
- Chief Master Sirloin of the Wasteful Steak
- Posts: 45310
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:52 pm
- Drives: Blue Meanie
- Location: Pepperland
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daniel_J._Mitchell
Mitchell is a serial global warming denialist, apparently believing it to just be an excuse for bigger government or a scam by scientists to take government grants.[2][3] He has gotten better about this over time but still says global warming may or may not be a serious concern, and that he doesn't trust those big government environmentalists to handle the issue. He has also endorsed myths surrounding DDT, primarily the myth that Rachel Carson killed millions by inspiring environmentalists to ban DDT in areas of the world where it could have been used to fight malaria, even though there were always exemptions to DDT bans when it was used to fight malaria.[4]
Mitchell has also tried to scare his audience from the idea of universal healthcare by making faulty claims about Britain's National Health Service. The most egregious example of this is when he wrote a column alleging that Josef Stalin would be proud of the NHS because they had allegedly starved 1,165 of their patients.[5] This is a false claim, since the vast majority of those numbers come from people who were malnourished when they died, which doesn't mean that they died from malnourishment. The distinction is an important one since many fatal conditions make it more difficult to retain nutrients, inevitably leading to malnourishment. Nevertheless, Mitchell tried to pass this off as a government attempt to kill patients. His main source for this information was the Daily Mail (whom he often cites in other columns).
For whatever reason Mitchell considers Paul Krugman his greatest enemy, probably because he's just one of the most famous Keynesians out there. Krugman has responded to Mitchell by calling him dishonest in his claims.[6]
wap wrote: ↑Tue Nov 06, 2018 1:40 pm
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Daniel_J._Mitchell
Mitchell is a serial global warming denialist, apparently believing it to just be an excuse for bigger government or a scam by scientists to take government grants.[2][3] He has gotten better about this over time but still says global warming may or may not be a serious concern, and that he doesn't trust those big government environmentalists to handle the issue. He has also endorsed myths surrounding DDT, primarily the myth that Rachel Carson killed millions by inspiring environmentalists to ban DDT in areas of the world where it could have been used to fight malaria, even though there were always exemptions to DDT bans when it was used to fight malaria.[4]
Mitchell has also tried to scare his audience from the idea of universal healthcare by making faulty claims about Britain's National Health Service. The most egregious example of this is when he wrote a column alleging that Josef Stalin would be proud of the NHS because they had allegedly starved 1,165 of their patients.[5] This is a false claim, since the vast majority of those numbers come from people who were malnourished when they died, which doesn't mean that they died from malnourishment. The distinction is an important one since many fatal conditions make it more difficult to retain nutrients, inevitably leading to malnourishment. Nevertheless, Mitchell tried to pass this off as a government attempt to kill patients. His main source for this information was the Daily Mail (whom he often cites in other columns).
For whatever reason Mitchell considers Paul Krugman his greatest enemy, probably because he's just one of the most famous Keynesians out there. Krugman has responded to Mitchell by calling him dishonest in his claims.[6]
time stamped for your pleasure.
- goIftdibrad
- Chief Master Soft Brain
- Posts: 16746
- Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
- Drives: straight past the apex
Disregard the text in the tweet because it's nonsense too. The fact that it's illegal and domestic violence means it's socially unacceptable. Jordan is right there.
But to say men can be controlled or are civil because the threat of violence(which has to be true if his statement is true)? Insanely stupid. No ones afraid of Jordan Peterson physically. Wars are fought, people are shot, violence plays out every day between men. How is that "control"?
This is red meat for dudes who see themselves as victims or have something else they feel they need to (over)compensate for.
Nonsense.
But to say men can be controlled or are civil because the threat of violence(which has to be true if his statement is true)? Insanely stupid. No ones afraid of Jordan Peterson physically. Wars are fought, people are shot, violence plays out every day between men. How is that "control"?
This is red meat for dudes who see themselves as victims or have something else they feel they need to (over)compensate for.
Nonsense.
I can't control a women because fighting her is socially unacceptable.....
I can control a man because we can fight potentially....
Well what if you get your ass kicked old man? You won't be able to control your bladder, let alone someone else.
Also, as if it's socially acceptable to just duke it out in the street because someone is a Keynesian and your not.
I can control a man because we can fight potentially....
Well what if you get your ass kicked old man? You won't be able to control your bladder, let alone someone else.
Also, as if it's socially acceptable to just duke it out in the street because someone is a Keynesian and your not.
- goIftdibrad
- Chief Master Soft Brain
- Posts: 16746
- Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:01 am
- Drives: straight past the apex