But that's just not true.

Firstly I'm not defending either US sponsored coup to install Pinochet or his repression. Purely the economic policies.

The fact is, Chile has the highest GDP per capita, the highest literacy rate and the highest Human Development Index of all major South American countries. It's also the least corrupt.

http://tinyurl.com/lf22scc
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/

Admittedly most of the growth came about in the past 2 decades after Pinochet, but an honest reading of history shows that most of the groundwork was laid while he was in power.I don't take any comfort in attributing economic success to a mass murderer but those are the facts.

Frankly, while I agree with Naomi Klein on a number of things, she is absolutely clueless when it comes to economic policy. You can argue on certain specific policy choices (say restricting labour unions) or on the speed of reforms (which was also a major problem in Russia), but taken as a whole, you can't argue with the results.

No doubt, Milton Friedman was a genius. With his brilliant command of Neo-Liberal policies his "Chicago Boys" basically destroyed Chile. There's a reason why places that are under American control are set way further back than countries in the same region with about the same resources. Milton Friedman has many great ideas that have been used to destroy countries, knowingly to enrich those who invested in the country and not the people of that country who should actually benefit from it's resources.

Anyone want to read something enlightening about Friedman's ideas and policies and the mark they've left on the world can check out "The Shock Doctrine". It's an excellent book by Naomi Klein.

My oldest boy loves to conduct. He also sings the instrumental parts of songs, especially Mozart's Eine Kleine Nachtmusik.

CBD possesses sedative properties (Carlini and Cunha, 1981), and a clinical
trial showed that it reduces the anxiety and other unpleasant psychological
side effects provoked by pure THC (Zuardi et al. 1982). CBD modulates the
pharmacokinetics of THC by three mechanisms: (1) it has a slight affinity for
cannabinoid receptors (Ki at CB1 = 4350 nM, compared to THC = 41 nM,
Showalter et al. 1996), and it signals receptors as an antagonist or reverse agonist
(Petitet et al. 1998), (2) CBD may modulate signal transduction by perturbing
the fluidity of neuronal membranes, or by remodeling G-proteins that
carry intracellular signals downstream from cannabinoid receptors, and (3)CBD
is a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A11 metabolism, thus it blocks the
hydroxylation of THC to its 11-hydroxy metabolite (Bornheim et al. 1995).
The 11-hydroxy metabolite is four times more psychoactive than unmetabolized
THC (Browne and Weissman 1981), and four times more immunosuppressive
(Klein et al. 1987).
CBD provides antipsychotic benefits (Zuardi et al. 1995). It increases dopamine
activity, serves as a serotonin uptake inhibitor, and enhances norepinephrine
activity (Banerjee et al. 1975; Poddar and Dewey 1980). CBD protects
neurons from glutamate toxicity and serves as an antioxidant, more potently
than ascorbate and α-tocopherol (Hampson et al. 1998). Auspiciously, CBD
does not decrease acetylcholine (ACh) activity in the brain (Domino 1976;
Cheney et al. 1981). THC, in contrast, reduces hippocampal ACh release in
rats (Carta et al. 1998), and this correlates with loss of short-term memory consolidation.
In the hippocampus THC also inhibits N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)
receptor activity (Misner and Sullivan 1999; Shen and Thayer 1999), and
NMDA synaptic transmission is crucial for memory consolidation (Shimizu et
al. 2000). CBD, unlike THC, does not dampen the firing of hippocampal cells
(Heyser et al. 1993) and does not disrupt learning (Brodkin and Moerschbaecher
1997).
Consroe (1998) presented an excellent review of CBD in neurological disorders.
In some studies, it ameliorates symptoms of Huntington’s disease, such
as dystonia and dyskinesia. CBD mitigates other dystonic conditions, such as
torticollis, in rat studies and uncontrolled human studies. CBD functions as an
anticonvulsant in rats, on a par with phenytoin (Dilantin, a standard antiepileptic
drug).
CBD demonstrated a synergistic benefit in the reduction of intestinal motility
in mice produced by THC (Anderson, Jackson, and Chesher 1974). This
may be an important component of observed benefits of cannabis in inflammatory
bowel diseases.

--"Cannabis and Cannabis Extracts:
Greater Than the Sum of Their Parts?
John M. McPartland
Ethan B. Russo"

Some of you probably know I'm a few shades pinker than Castro. Yet I'm disappointed by the left on this matter. I first got nervous when the gun control debate began following the Javon Belcher (KC chief player) incident. It seemed ridiculous to me because obviously no form of reasonable gun control could have stopped an incident like that. It was a linebacker murdering his slight girlfriend and then committing suicide. He didn't need a gun. Still the media began the debate as though they were clearly itching too. That was quickly overshadowed by the Sandy Hook tragedy which was a much more effective rallying cause. Obviously it's natural for the debate to be rekindled after that sort of an incident, but I was disappointed by how disingenuous and emotionally driven it seemed. I couldn't help but think about the availability heuristic ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic ) and how obviously it was coming into play. I thought the left would be better than this. We're supposed to be known for our rejection of knee-jerk responses preferring instead data driven policy. I was reminded of the Republican line-toeing following 9/11. It honestly sickened me.

The fact is every stat I've seen supports this guy's claim (and I spent many hours doing my own research, not just quoting links I found on huffpo or whatever). There is effectively no data that supports the sort of legislation being put forth and virtually no reason to fear that your children are at risk. Basically every case made against assault rifles can be made with much more conviction about alcohol. They are things that a subset of people enjoy, yet occasionally cause harm to people that don't. Alcohol much more so (by a huge factor, something like hundreds depending on how you measure it) than assault rifles. This incident is being used in keeping with Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine. Don't get duped just because they are playing to your fears instead of redneck fears.

Also, it isn't racist to suggest that a large portion of the US murder rate is urban gang and drug related. That's a fact. That someone would even suggest that it is racist further sickens me. You all seem more interested in political correctness than data. Put on your skeptics hat folks. Question what you believe for once.

There's a few studies done about Nikes advertising to inner city kids and the effect it had. I think Naomi Klein discussed it in her book No Logo. It's pretty messed up how Nike operates actually, selling expensive shoes to idiots.

Here's a tip, buy shoes that make you feel like you're barefoot, and if you're buying shoe's over $60, you're a sucker, they're no different at $60 than they are at $200.

"Diversity has been written into the DNA of American life; any institution that lacks a rainbow array has come to seem diminished, if not diseased".
Joe Klein

Looks like ol' Joe may need to expand his horizons ... It's obviously NOT just for Americans anymore =oD

>> ^KnivesOut:

This reminds me of the logic behind the Klein bottle. It's the allowance for intersections that makes it "possible".


Yeah they kind of lost my interest at that point as well. I guess if you're working with theoretical mathematics, it's acceptable to consider theoretical materials too...

This reminds me of the logic behind the Klein bottle. It's the allowance for intersections that makes it "possible".

Also a good reminder as to how they're able to so quickly replace broken glass at NHL games and *bravo for the Mozart. I think I'll point to some appropriate Mozart now...

Most economists agree that the stimulus worked. Not that that fact should stop the Koch Brothers from creating propaganda videos like this one.

Here's a WP article on a few studies: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/did-the-stimulus-work-a-review-of-the-nine-best-studies-on-the-subject/2011/08/16/gIQAThbibJ_blog.
html

....for anyone unfamiliar with Chile 1973.

In 1973 he collaborated with brutal Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet to force 'free market' reforms on the country by way of a coup. The coup used murder and torture to terrify opponents into silence. Business owners sympathetic to the coup allowed their warehouses to be used as impromptu torture centers to torture union members that had previously been employees. The national futbol stadium was transferred into a massive torture/rape/prison/execution complex where tens of thousands of Chilean citizens died. Milton said his coordinated economic plan for the coup would require some 'shock therapy'.

For more on this, read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein. It details this incident and dozens of similar ones to impose 'free market' capitalism on the people by way of fear, torture, force, bribery and blackmail. http://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0805079831

related sifting:

http://videosift.com/video/Sept-11-The-start-of-a-dark-era-for-Chile
http://videosift.com/video/USA-commits-911-attrocities-on-Chile
http://videosift.com/video/The-War-On-Democracy-by-John-Pilger

Today we are adding another rule: No suggestive or sexual content featuring minors.
we have banned all subreddits that focus on sexualization of children ...
We're concerned about the slippery slope from banning one specific type of content to banning other types of content.

The problem isn't the slippery slope leading to banning some other type of content, but rather how do they define what they're banning now? How many debates have we had here about different posts that may or may not be considered pornographic. Now throw in another variable about the age of the people in the video. Are they kids? Do they look like kids? Are they acting childish? And those are the easy ones.

Do they prohibit certain Calvin Klein ads? Or movies like Hard Candy, Lolita, and Kids? What about novels like Shardik, or even clinical textbooks on how to deal with issues of child molestation? All of the examples I mention in this paragraph probably fall under the ban they've described, though it's hard to say because they are fairly vague about defining the proscribed content ("suggestive"? wtf does that mean?).

I'm definitely not suggesting that Reddit allow itself to be a network hub for child pornographers. They claim that they did not "make this policy change lightly or without careful deliberation." I imagine they did struggle with the decision, but it doesn't seem they spent much time figuring out just what it was they were banning.

"Taken literally, the top 1 percent of American households had a minimum income of $516,633 in 2010 — a figure that includes wages, government transfers and money from capital gains, dividends and other investment income." -Washington Post

In the video, Romney and the interviewer are specifically using the term "millionaires," so I have to take their exchange at face value as meaning anyone with a net worth of at least 1 million dollars. They could have a salary of $1 for all I know, but somewhere they have assets and cash available to them summing to a million dollars.

I'd be envious of an income of $500,000 all the same, since I could become a millionaire in under 3 years by just continuing to live as I do now.

>> ^cosmovitelli:

>> ^HaricotVert:
I should have clarified. The absolute definition of "millionaire" would describe anyone whose net worth is greater than $999,999.99. Many people who have barely over the $1,000,000 threshold lead rather reasonable lives, as in they don't drive Lamborghinis or own private islands or have yachts.

Surely a million doesn't get you into the 1%? Maybe in 1990.. At a guess I'd say you needed at least $5 million to qualify, no? And probably invested in a dozen properties so the 'envious' can pay off your mortgages..
Btw well done QM he's black and has big ears! Well spotted, again. Now let adults talk.

Ron Paul is against EVERYTHING, and he is savvy enough to market politically profitable "anti" positions to the correct single issue constituents without letting them know that he is also against tons of things that those constituents support.

-He is against SOPA, but he is also against Net Neutrality.(1)
-He is against our current war, but he is also against all military intervention including fighting Hitler (2), the confederate south (3) and presumably any legitimate future Hitlarian tyrant that may pop up.
-He is against drug laws, but he is also against environmental protections. (4)
-He is against Federal laws against gay marriage, but he supports them at the state level and opposes the Supreme Court ruling on state issues even if they are deemed unconstitutional. (5)
-He is against civil rights protections for minorities, women and gays. He'd like to repeal those civil rights protections and allow states to legalize discrimination at their leisure. (5)
-He is against public education. (6)
-He is against the separation of church and state. (7)
-He wants to deregulate the banks. (8)
-He wants to give corporations a huge tax cuts at a time of record productivity, record unemployment and record corporate profits. (9)
-He would make massive cuts to science (10) and is a global warming denier. (11)

He is a terrible candidate. You aren't a rebel if you support him. You are just bucking one undesirable status quo for an even worse anarcho-capitalist flavored status quo. He is consistent, but foolishly so. Look a little deeper before giving your blind support to this guy.

I'm so sick of the internet's uninformed Ron Paul circle jerk.

He is not the political savior you are looking for.

Cites:
(1) http://www.issues2000.org/tx/Ron_Paul.htm
(2) http://www.mediaite.com/online/former-aide-ron-paul-claimed-saving-the-jews-was-absolutely-none-of-our-business/
(3)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbOE4Ip7In0
(4)http://lewrockwell.com/block/block189.html
(5)http://steviemcfly.tumblr.com/post/15660334642/ron-pauls-strange-relationship-with-privacy
(6)http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/education/
(7)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Religion
(8)http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/gop-deregulate-wall-street/2011/08/25/gIQAeJmNuL_blog.html
(9)http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/ron-paul-plan-to-restore-america/
(10)http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2011/10/ron-paul-would-erase-billions-in.html
(11)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hCc5Gk1nops