Comments on: Jobs saved and counterfactuals

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 04:39:00 +0000

mm hmmm… says the person who used George Bush’s warmongering as a reason to distrust thinking in terms of counterfactuals.

Yes, as we are all aware the Bush administration’s positions were very sound.

I’m not sure you have the tightest grasp on what makes a state dangerous, mommsen1625.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

As for what makes the state dangerous, well, that ought to be obvious; human beings make the state dangerous. Which is why the discretion that Democrats and Republicans like to give to the state so problematic. But of course there is always the “strong man” impulse amongst Democrats and Republicans.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 03:49:00 +0000

The estimates for “jobs created or saved” are the ultimate example of “mark to model” fantasy land accounting. You know, the kind of give-me-a-break, clearly-too-rosy-and-self-serving calculation that was being used by banks to mask their real losses. As they say on the interweb… pot, meet kettle.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:17:00 +0000

Re: “Then you aren’t terribly familiar with the history of the state.”

mm hmmm… says the person who used George Bush’s warmongering as a reason to distrust thinking in terms of counterfactuals. I’m not sure you have the tightest grasp on what makes a state dangerous, mommsen1625.

By: dan

dan — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:51:00 +0000

Can someone explain why the “created or saved” (or destroyed) argument for something as complex as this is not pure “witchcraft” in a world without time machines?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:12:00 +0000

Russ, you already lost by tacitly conceding that “saving jobs” is useful.