Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Your video, Smartypants gets Tasered, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 2 Badge!

A summary of what I saw:

Dude says Romney, Santorum and Obama are clueless on the economy, but Ron Paul is super-fantastic with his talk about hyperinflation and dollar devaluation.

Smart interviewer asks "So tell me Mr. Smartypants Ron Paul supporter guy, are you putting your money where your mouth is? Are you selling your dollars? Are you shorting U.S. Treasuries?"

The answer? "Uh, no, I'm holding onto my dollars, and I'm gonna go long on Treasuries, because there are 'lots of reasons' to do the exact opposite of what Ron Paul says a smart investor would do..."

Indeed there are, indeed there are.

>> ^marinara:

this is actually very possible, you smartypants would know this if you watched star trek.
In the episode "I, Borg" the crew develops a virus that operates on the visual processors of the borg, infecting them with a "topological anomaly" that could destroy the collective.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/I_Borg_(episode)

They should have just told the Borg "this sentence is false". Works every time

this is actually very possible, you smartypants would know this if you watched star trek.

In the episode "I, Borg" the crew develops a virus that operates on the visual processors of the borg, infecting them with a "topological anomaly" that could destroy the collective.
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/I_Borg_(episode)

Ok, I changed it now so it better work, mister Smartypants!

In reply to this comment by Lawdeedaw:
Awesome, but the title of Police Horse Vs Attack Dog would have this a number one vid

@marbles "axiom" is the smartypants word for "assumption". This video starts with an axiomatic assertion of property that's not incontestably true.

Put more simply, it's not a proof that property is right, it's a description of a moral framework that's derived from the assumption that property is right.

It's definitely not an answer to people who raise legitimate questions about the morality of property itself, and who vehemently disagree with the idea that "liberty" must be subservient to the doctrine of property.

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:

[T]he politicalmathblog post comes across as fairly even handed. The point of the first 4 graphs is to explain how a state can grow a bunch of jobs but still have a high unemployment rate.

Read what he's saying about the charts. Each chart is meant to say "Rick Perry's job creation in Texas is awesome!" Chart 1 is raw jobs, unadjusted for population growth, even according to him. Rather than saying "hmm, I wonder if that actually means the jobs situation has improved when you look at population," instead he says:

In a "normal" employment data set, we can easily look at it and say "Yep, that's where the recession happened. Sucks to be us." But not with Texas. With Texas, we say "Damn. Looks like they've recovered already."

Liar!

Chart 3 is a similarly unadjusted factor, though at least he puts it as % of raw jobs grown, so it's not as distorted.

Chart 4 finally reveals what's going on -- Texas's population is growing way faster than it's creating jobs. Aha! That's why the unemployment rate has just been going up!

Moreover, it means the jobs market in Texas is really getting worse, because while there have been jobs created, the number of people looking for a job per job opening has actually increased. Does he summarize it that way? Nope, not remotely.

Instead he summarizes that finding by saying:

People are flocking to Texas in massive numbers. This is speculative, but it *seems* that people are moving to Texas looking for jobs rather than moving to Texas for a job they already have lined up. This would explain why Texas is adding jobs faster than any other state but still has a relatively high unemployment rate.

Liar, liar, pants on fire!

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:
His supposition that Texas is the victim of it's own success is the only controversial statement in that section, and he clearly labels it as his own opinion.

It's not the only controversial statement, but it's the most blatant falsehood of the whole article. Yes, he makes it clear that it's his theory, but he's presenting his theory while summarizing the data that invalidates his theory!

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:
Meanwhile your think progress article seems completely irrelevant. Since it doesn't normalize for population size, their graph is naturally going to have longer bars for larger states, so calling someone the "worst" is basically just saying, "its bar goes in the wrong direction and it's a big state."

The politicalmathblog didn't either, and you're not rejecting it out of hand. Everyone who cites some statistic in pursuit of calling Texas's job record a "miracle" has to ignore the size of Texas's population, and it's population growth rate.

If you account for those factors, it looks like a below-average jobs record, and we can't have that.

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:

But do the directions of these bars even mean anything? Look at the "best" state on the list. It's Michigan. Is Michigan's economy doing well lately?

The bar isn't meant to show goodness or badness, but the rate & direction of change. Michigan was in bad shape, but it's improving quickly.
Here's the unemployment rates of Texas vs. Michigan.

Texas was at 4.5% before, rose to about 8% and then never really got better. Michigan started at 7%, rose to 14%, and then rapidly went down to 10%. Both are unfortunately taking turns for the worse as the economy weakens again.

What's that mean? Hard to say in isolation, but someone could easily make a bunch of charts to support the idea of a "Michigan miracle", and spin a story about how it was Obama's rescue of the auto industry that's responsible, and that Texas has stagnated at its peak because it refuses to engage in fiscal stimulus.

You know, sorta like politicalmathblog did for Texas...

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:
This makes me believe that this measurement has little to do with the actual economic health of a state.
Maybe some smarty pants economist can come explain why I should care about that chart, but for now I don't, and I don't think you should either.

If you want a smartypants economist saying the same thing I am, I'll point you to the link included in the thinkprogress article with Paul Krugman giving his analysis of the Texas job situation.

>> ^thinker247:
I'll give you a calculator that doesn't have a square root button. Have at it, Mr. Smartypants.


Now ok, i couldn't work out exactly what the value was, but i could tell you without thinking for a matter of miliseconds that the square root of 2 was between 1 and 2.... I just worked out in my head that..

1.5x1.5 = 2.25
k, lower it bit by bit and you'll get 2.. I mean if i had a calculator without a square root button, easy as pie..

1.4x1.4 = 1.96
1.45x1.45 = 2.1025
1.425....... and so on and so forth.

Do i win something? Or is this as easy as i thought it was? You learned THIS at university?

I'll give you a calculator that doesn't have a square root button. Have at it, Mr. Smartypants.
>> ^jimnms:
Give me a calculator and in 2 seconds I could have told you that.

Well then, can you sync to GeoCities pages, Mr. SmartyPants? Yeah, didn't think so.

>> ^westy:
It's a children's show. Would she be "manipulated" and "used" if she was explaining photosynthesis? Sure, science and evidence speaks for itself, but not in a children's show.

That smartypants dance looks like the Money Ritual Dance
http://wtf.videosift.com/video/Mega-Church-Money-Ritual

Also whys it gotta be atheists huh huh? One can believe in God and in evolution, whatcha gotta say to that mr. smartypants ?