> "[Austerity] frees up resources for private investment" is a statement that
> does not match my perception of reality"

Well, far be it from me to try to introduce you to some basic epistemologies to which you may not be familiar: like rationalism, deduction, etc, in order to move you away from "authority" as the only path to knowledge you seem to use. Unfortunately, however, this "authority" method is inappropriate to the study of economics.

> "So, demand vs supply... we all know that discussion won't be resolved here,
> ever."

Keynes and Hayek were at it for a while. It's all in the two hip-hop videos.

> "It's utterly pointless."

Yes. There is nothing new not covered by Keynes vs. Hayek.

> "Shamelessness was my addition, my interpretation. "

Bad thymology (my interpretation).

> "He "weakens" society, economically, by suppressing aggregate demand.
> The more wealth you accumulate, the less of it, as a percentage, translates
> into demand."

I see. So, by this logic, any making of money is, in itself, a "weakening" of society. Unless I'm a socialist, like David Simon, then I cannot make money without also "weakening" society.

> "But since you apparently share the views of Hollenbeck, all of that was
> probably hogwash to you."

Yes, at best hogwash. Alas, I've no interest in going into this with you, especially since you've no have interest in actually looking at it. Had you any interest at all -- or studied the subject beyond deferring to the "authority" method of epistemology -- you could at least provide me with a concise explanation as to why you think the Austrian/Misean economic position falters. Rather than thinking for yourself, however, you dismiss it as "wrong," "right-wing," or "pointless" to debate or go into. "Here Be Monsters, period."

The Keynes/Hayek debates have the similar tones, with Keynes simply ignoring all of Hayek's points, evasions, and going off into something else. You clearly agree with the Keynesian approach/theory, which likely means you cannot really explain anything except through unfounded claims, that are "pointless" to argue, debate, or rationally defend.

As I have said before, one cannot have this sort of intellectual relationship with those either unwilling or unable to grasp basic economic principles, like for example those clearly explained by Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson." There's simply no common language through which to communicate. Confronted with these kinds of beliefs, one can either try to educate (but only those who ask for it, since attempting to educate those who do not want to be educated will likely fail, as any public school teacher can tell you) or one can pull out the snake oil and the cash register. The third option involves ignoring such ignorance altogether, and use what one knows for one's own financial and life benefit in ways that don't involve such people in the first place.

There are so many errors in the Keynesian 'demand' theory of economics (you can find much on that if you want to read up on it), but Keynesians tend to avoid any real debates. You're coming from the Keynesian fallacy of saving money as being bad for the economy (because spending it all/consumerism is supposedly what gets the economy going). And the even more absurd fallacy which presupposes (with no proof of it at all) that rich people keep most of their wealth stored somewhere outside of circulation. When in reality, rich people only save some and the richer they are the more they spend/invest. Of course, when the economy seem fragile, due to central banks meddling, bubbles, etc., investors get nervous and don't invest as much a they otherwise would. When they don't invest, it shrinks supply of things people would want to spend on. Demand does nothing, it doesn't exist, if there is nothing to supply that people want to buy.

In fact, I am starting to think that central bankers are not really Keynesian at all, in the sense that they don't really believe their own bullshit. They know better but also know how to exploit their positions as central bankers, making folks like @radx buy into it, the snake oil. For example, he may not care for gold, but bankers do. Whatever they say against it, folks will still buy it, both for themselves and the banks they run. And as @radx rightly says, he's a human. And apparently he can sell his 'charm' if push comes to shove.

That friend a yers with that hip-hop groove....GReeeeat stupid-face-pulled on that thumbnail man, couldn't be more WTF silly...

Cheers, will check it out.

My favourite bit of hip hop in the last few years is P.O.S..

@Trancecoach: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rrk3og (Lily Allen addresses your concern)

@EMPIRE @ChaosEngine: What you want is Deltron 3030, nerdy, socially critical sci-fi hip-hop

Hip Hop can be a great thing if you remove all that bling bling, "bitches", and bentleys.

Hip Hop used to be almost completely about social criticism. And it needs to go back to that.

Are you seriously suggesting that criticising the "bling" culture of rap is racist?

There's a massive difference between criticising people for their behaviours and criticising them for their race. I don't like the champagne/rims/gold jewellery bollocks either, does that make me racist?

If anything, it's racist to assume that all black people subscribe to the worst elements of hip-hop just because they're black.

Regarding the song itself: great message, lousy execution.

It will be released Nov 5, but 2 songs (Bezerk, Rap God) have been released already.

Bezerk is a old school hip hop style with samples/scratching, while Rap god is a boastful song with amazing flow and fast lyrics. Can't wait for the entire album.

You can ride those ramps in Ohio. Wish they were closer

[url redacted]

The feel,set up and music feels completely like Voorays videos. Happy go lucky fun with Can't Stop Won't Stop 'lively' songs (or other upbeat hip hop) over it. Not complaining, just saying. I actually thought it was another Vooray summer event.

[url redacted] - Vooray vids, worth the watch /; same styled events.

So...Napoleon Dynamite meets hip-hop?

He's walking on the eggshells of perception speaking on race, thought he stuttered through an explanation well..

What he mentioned about the Brits schooling the freed slaves in Jamaica? This would explain perhaps the reason reggae is superior to rap and hip-hop in so many ways? Much more political, insightful, hopeful and tuneful. Oh, and kinder, gentler rage...

Is hip hop ever not awkward in Nordic countries?

Doesn't seem to be an inordinate amount of obese folks in the Bulgarian herd, eh? Lesse...Fit, healthy, have their own language, a culture intact after how many centuries? Peeps have been in that region since way before Al the great and Rome fucked-em over, quite the rich, intact history.

Compare to my country with fast-food sense of culture, a language hi-jacked by hip-hop, mumblers, and newsspeak (can't decide which irks me most), and a history of ass-raping sans lube....3 of the many reasons the U.S. might make it to 250 years-old...Sooooo, 13 years left.

Empires don't die, they mutate like blobs in B-Movies.

Metal Head Kids from Hip Hop Neighborhood Tell Their Story has been added as a related post - related requested by zombieater on that post.

Just because someone is rapping in a song doesn't make it hip hop music.

read the description
http://videosift.com/hiphop

This video has been removed from all channels (Asia, Military, Hip Hop, Islam, Commercial, Dark, Africa) due to invalid channel assignment - nochannel invoked by kulpims. Please review the FAQ to learn about appropriate channel assignments.

Adding video to channels (Dark, Islam, Military) - requested by kulpims.