@NordlichReiter

The dollar is only really down to levels it was pre-financial crisis. Taking your reference point at the height of the global financial crisis is unfair because everyone was buying up US treasury bonds and over inflating the currency.

The fact that countries are considering moving away from the US dollar as the reserve currency, the currency they trade in, and which they keep as foreign reserves is a good thing in the long term. This has kept the US dollar overvalued for decades, and has contributed significantly to the unsustainable consumption and housing binge, and was obvious a major catalyst for the global financial crisis. A rebalancing would put the onus further on factors of GDP such as investment as a contributor to economic growth.

To say that the economy is in recovery is not disingenuous. They're simply using leading indicators such as stock price or inventory levels, which are generally good predictors of economic recovery and in this case a pending fall in unemployment. The scale of that is anyone's guess though, as is how much of the economy was spurned by returning business confidence in the private sector rather that purely government stimulus and specific programs such as first home buyer's grants and cash for clunkers.

Never underestimate the power of alcoholism as a catalyst for innovation...

The problem is if you guys ever did have another investigation no one would be happy. The terms would be too narrow or too wide. The wrong people would be appointed. Not all the evidence would be considered. And the answers wouldn't satisfy everyone.

I think you can spin an event like 9/11 anyway you want regardless of the evidence. And that's what we see happening all the time, with the internet as a catalyst. What surprises me is that there was a reasonably wide agreement that the authorities had forewarning. There was talk of incompetence. So what did it ever cost the politicians, CIA spies, policeman or government officials? Who saw the insides of a jail or lost their jobs? I'm surmising that no one did.

I'm still a little cloudy on the subject, but I guess that's because I'm not informed enough about politics, but I think I get your drift. Thanks NetRunner

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
Glenn Greewald wrote a great article on this topic that really digs into this, including Supreme Court decisions.

Re: the Franken amendment, it's completely nonspecific. The KBR case was certainly the catalyst, but the law is aimed at the behavior, not the individual.

With the push to defund ACORN, the reverse is true.

Glenn Greewald wrote a great article on this topic that really digs into this, including Supreme Court decisions.

Re: the Franken amendment, it's completely nonspecific. The KBR case was certainly the catalyst, but the law is aimed at the behavior, not the individual.

With the push to defund ACORN, the reverse is true.

... and if you add the Great Depression and our current depression respectively as a catalyst, it's all so very familiar.

Without the fiscal stimulus there's good reason to believe the unemployment rate would have climbed even higher. That higher unemployment could have been the catalyst for another vicious cycle of further unemployment and so on. In the middle of the crisis, the current unemployment level is not the status quo, it's where it's heading if nothing is done.

Unemployment has been shown throughout history to recover slowly. This has obvious reasons, some discouraged workers simply don't re-enter or may not be able to. Employers are hesitant to hire new employees early when they're uncertain of the outlook of the economy because the cost of firing them would be high if they had to. The main point, it's simply a fact that it takes several years at the least based on prior data.

Wasteful spending? Partly subjective and partly completely ludicrous hypocrisy coming from the GOP.

(Upvote for discussion content.)

Pfft. That's physically impossible. Lacking both a catalyst AND fuel? What, was this THE INTERVENTION OF GOD?! Ridiculous.

The absurdity of this clip just made me throw up a little in my mouth. >:[

All countries are dirty and doing underhand shit , but I dont see how that is relivent to the discusdsoin in this video. the simple facts are

Iran is Ment to be a democracy , It apears more than likely that the election was rigged , protesters are met with violence and jail time.

The Outside influence is the only defence the current rules of iran can use as the iran conservatvies are all to aware of previous outsaide meddling and controlling of the government and thus would be less trusting and are more inclined to believe outside meddling as the catalyst to protest again.

I think the problem is its like when the police go to a peaceful protest and start blocking people in causing the protest to turn into a riot.

The police should never act as a Catalyst / elivait a situation from a non problem to a problem.

In anny non illegal situation where police presence makes the situation worse the police should not be there.

The moment It was established that the guy owned the house the police should have apologized and left imideatly.

>> ^quantumushroom:
These fking animals just "happened" to be Muslim. Their barbaric "faith" had nothing to do with their being psychotic killers.

QM is totally right...religion makes people irrational and potentially dangerous. His extreme take on his faith (whether Islamic or something else) was probably the catalyst for this behavior.

An air pocket appears to escape when molten metal reheats semi-molten metal, giving an escape route towards the center of the mold (spraying out the latest section of the pour). Maybe impurities on the surface, a bubble of air at the start, or even water from washing out the mold a short time ago could help explain.

Whatever the catalyst, expanding air flicks the hardening aluminum at the tongue in the center of the mold as it flies out, making the 'ping' sound.

Oh Difty my friend, your faculty is remarkable, I don't stand a chance challenging you in anything, much less your beliefs.

But I thought we were supposed to be the tolerant ones, the accepting ones, the inclusive ones. Your approach to Aemaeth didn't make me feel this way. We have purged the Sift of those who held any beliefs that weren't truly progressive. Bannings and Sifquisitions, Sifticides and and Self-immolations. You led the charge in many cases. I cheered you on, even if I didn't upvote it. Prop 8 broke my heart, too. In California no less. I thought we didn't have to worry about Cali.

Your beliefs are what? You and Issy clearly have a moral code. She as the first indication to me that this was a place on the internet I belonged. Such sweet decency. So what is it? Karma? Be Real? Do the right thing? Just conscience?


In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
First off, I enjoy having my belief system challenged, because it results in either a stronger, deeper understanding of current beliefs, or an ideological upgrade. Win-Win.

I disagree that individuals should not be held accountable for the actions of their religious, political, or other organizational/ideological memberships, especially when those individuals support injustice through tithing or donation. If not, then what is the value of the stake they hold within the organization? I could write a letter to high ranking clergy, but somehow I don't think that would be as effective as a widespread backlash.

Backlash is a good thing. It's a healthy, instructive consequence for misdeeds, an important form a protest and a great catalyst for change. It's also a great way to exert pressure from the bottom of an organization up to the untouchables at the top. For instance, the backlash against Bush and the Republicans was arguably a better force for political enlightenment and change than anything Clinton did in his 8 years in office.

Also, religious ideology should absolutely not be exempted from scrutiny. If you substitute Republican, Libertarian or Democrat for Mormon in my comments, they suddenly become uncontroversial and commonplace. I see no reason why religion should get a free pass, especially when that religion gets into the politics business.

Finally, shielding the religious from scrutiny denies them the opportunity to use all that gray matter up in their head cavity. An opportunity was missed here for someone to stand up for what they believe in and confront troubling perceptions of their faith. Had he mounted an argument he felt comfortable with, he'd never have to worry about getting into a tussle again, because he'd be prepared. Then again, retreat can be significant too, if it is the result of doubt.

Que sera, sera...

Anyway, thanks for challenging my beliefs, kitty kitty. You are the moral heart of the sift.

First off, I enjoy having my belief system challenged, because it results in either a stronger, deeper understanding of current beliefs, or an ideological upgrade. Win-Win.

I disagree that individuals should not be held accountable for the actions of their religious, political, or other organizational/ideological memberships, especially when those individuals support injustice through tithing or donation. If not, then what is the value of the stake they hold within the organization? I could write a letter to high ranking clergy, but somehow I don't think that would be as effective as a widespread backlash.

Backlash is a good thing. It's a healthy, instructive consequence for misdeeds, an important form a protest and a great catalyst for change. It's also a great way to exert pressure from the bottom of an organization up to the untouchables at the top. For instance, the backlash against Bush and the Republicans was arguably a better force for political enlightenment and change than anything Clinton did in his 8 years in office.

Also, religious ideology should absolutely not be exempted from scrutiny. If you substitute Republican, Libertarian or Democrat for Mormon in my comments, they suddenly become uncontroversial and commonplace. I see no reason why religion should get a free pass, especially when that religion gets into the politics business.

Finally, shielding the religious from scrutiny denies them the opportunity to use all that gray matter up in their head cavity. An opportunity was missed here for someone to stand up for what they believe in and confront troubling perceptions of their faith. Had he mounted an argument he felt comfortable with, he'd never have to worry about getting into a tussle again, because he'd be prepared. Then again, retreat can be significant too, if it is the result of doubt.

Que sera, sera...

Anyway, thanks for challenging my beliefs, kitty kitty. You are the moral heart of the sift.

AH FANTASTIC ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE

Although yes the placebo affect is valid and Yes It is very important that we research and understand how mutch the mind and thinking can heal people. lets not then use that as a catalyst to start believing in non evidential non reasonable philosphies.

Just because my skin can regrow without medical intervention dose not make my skin magic and super natural. ore some insane thing that lies outside the con finds of everything else. Scentests don't fully understand how some things can regrow themselves and others not this is simular to how we don't understand the "placebo affect" fully.

If this program is actually reasonable then i take back my comments but im 95% sure its gonna be bs from the music editing and what was sead in this clip. It look like it was made by the retards who did that thing "the secret" .