No I am not interested in joining in on how many collectivist ideas fit on the head of a pin ‘discussion’. It is limitless for it has no substance.
This said Jon does do benefits for our troops and vets. Nor does he brag about it. He is not Maddow’s nihilism. He is a very good guy and American. But lost in his space and time.
Yes, nuns are still the only known force which can drive Mr. O off in panic. But they have to be real nuns, Jon. It is the moral power of vows of service and not the ruler. Although the vision of Mr. O getting wacked by a ruler wielding nun could raise big money for worthy causes. Father Morse it is Lent and has Mr. O been to confession and assigned penance?
Obama’s coalition of personal power is built upon unnatural political patronage. It is economic and general lawlessness patronage. Selecting which laws to ignore or enforce only by the personal political power it delivers.
In the end analysis our economy is last place in our modern history primary due to the irrationality Obama is imposing. Winning an election by manipulation and abuse of our government and digital age micro targeting of every base alienated emotion discovered in our most unaware fellow Americans. Wild lawlessness no in no small part obfuscated by targeting the emotion of racism.
Maddow is the most uninteresting intellect on tv. Endless preprogrammed determinism. With nothing else to cover Obama’s failure, she is back to Bush is worse. Six year later and we all know about Jon’s nature and its relationship to time.
The ‘evil’ Republicans have moved on from Bush in dramatic fashion. The wild spending of Bush and the patronage driven Republican Party of that time are view as Obama lite, under the political banner of ‘caring conservatism’. Further that this irresponsibility empowered the Progressive sweep; not democratic by any definition, trying to impose a delusional altered reality as fundamental change. (The Tea Party is the rejection of both.)
Of course it did not work. It never does. So it is a shame Jon let Maddow take him back to already nostalgia of collectivist superman cooling the planet and ordering the waters to recede ‘Hope and Change’. Seriously where was American common sense when this hubris was uttered? Poor Jon has enough trouble getting out of the back swirls of time without additional encouragement.
What our veta deserve is the American of individual opportunity they believed in enough to fight for. Patronage first dibs on politically imposed limited opportunity is not what they chose to fight for. Like our Marines; only color green, returning from WWII we owe them economic opportunity to match their character of optimism.
Corn ethanol is so defective in every way it is evil. Truly evil. It has patronage power in both the Democrat and Republicans parties so we should be able to work together to end it.
American natural gas serves the GW primitives and drives our economy to growth, higher living standards and jobs. Not to mention given us a reason not to get involved in wars. Surely the Progressive luddite environmentalist who gave us corn ethanol should be allowed to do it again.
The shameless meter is pegged. This is true. But it is pegged because America will not do the most basic common sense policy actions.
Each American came home with the optimism to build his place in America. Many started small businesses which is truly what made LA a wonder.
In Britain the feeling was a people and government who could win the war could engineer social justice beyond what could be achieved by capitalism. Fairly close to the failed and discredited scientism of Progressives like Wilson and Sanger.
Now was Britain or another European country going to be able to complete with the American system of consumerism improving the human condition by free choice and enterprise? No politics is irrational and patronage based. So as the Europeans fell behind, they resorted to that Progressive/collectivist delusion we see in Obama, ‘we are more intelligent, cultured and civilized so superior’. Americans are base cowboys rather than creative enterprising adapters fuel by optimism.
When we get to the end of Marx even he admits communism/socialism/progressism will be buried by the Anglo/American capitalism. It will not be able to adapt to keep up.
Mr. Varney witnessed firsthand the decline of Britain due to collectivism. With a brief reprieve under Thatcher the Great.
No one would have predicted destroyed Japan with no natural resources would rise to be the world’s second largest economy. That mighty Britain under equality delusions would become nearly irrelevant on the world stage. It was not predetermined except by 'politics' chosen with in democracy.
Chris are you smoking?
It was of course the same generation under FDR, Truman and Ike.
When a war ends there is usually a deep recession or depression due to capital and labor dislocation misallocation to peace. So this is what the 'wise' predicted and there was a slow down after the war.
The Progressive with their worship of the Constitutional criminal FDR have created a general mass delusion about our 1950s expansion. That our war time weapons factories could just start turning out consumer gooods like an unintended accident - determined It is true rationing created pent up demand and Americans had plenty of savings.
But looking at the advertisements from the 1950's, what was being sold was modernity. Plenty of wild ideas we wished well but did not think would work. Understanding it was not that uncommon convention wisdom would be proven wrong. Our cultural optimism was back after the depressing FDR.
Here is the problem.
Progressive and their libertines reject all concepts of virtue. They have emotions of caring and act emtionally to show they care more. Not surprisingly they do not give themselves but demand other American's money to show they care more.
Obamacare is imploding because it was a political therefore emotional construct. Worse still of one party so a wave of special interest riding over the other rather than finding any balance. It may focus on insurance but the objective was always redistribution and political entitlement to hold it in place. The claims of additional efficiency to gather support we now know were lies, first hand.
The free market groups were attempting to use the insurance markets to create market forces to drive efficiency.But we individualists assume like Plato and our American Founders, that the average American can be virtious and therefore rational. Of course our Founders understood the Helper is required while Plato just understood it was logically necessary.
Jon is from the mound. The older time. He believes all people are irrational.
So it is impossible to have a discussion.
If American consumers can make rational informed choices; like every other product we buy, then the government should be able to stand back and encourage rational consumer choices and dirve efficiency through competition. What is will change in time like every other business.
But as Jon does not believe in the average Americans rationality, he is always waiting for superman. Obama dissappoint him. Pelosive scared him. Although he has already been waiting a very long time, poor Jon has no choice but to wait for Superman to make his desires a reality. Yes a delusion.
It is strange. But before we can have a productive discussion with Jon, he has to admit average Americans really do have Liberty. Self agency. A thousands of year leap perhaps Jon is to old to make, now.
The response of the skeptics is to claim that daily reality contradicts Plato, and that contrary to number one, tyrants, motivated by unjust principles, may be found to be happy. Moroever, they argue that contrary to number 2, saints and renunciates are known to suffer, rather than to be happy. This is where Plato's theory of the Soul is established. He argues to the contrary that the three basic energies of the soul must be ordered in order for a person to be happy. The Emotions (reactions like anger or fear) and the Appetites (needs for food, sex, money, etc), must be ruled by Reason (thinking, persuasion, arguement) in order for a person to be truly happy. When the lower passions are ruled by Reason, a person is also therby just.
In response to the skeptics, Plato argues that the tyrant is not therefore truly happy, and that this can be seen in his behavior. Ruled by lower passions, tyrants are known to displace Reason with Emotion, such as the fear of being assassinated, the inability to trust others; or, he will displace Reason with Appetite, such as the unsatiable greed for riches or power. In the end, such a person will be pulled apart by his lower passions, and cannot possibly find happiness with a disordered soul. Plato brings up the ancient figure of the tragic hero in order to illustrate this. Moreover, Plato argues, the suffering saint is happy amid his suffering because he is ruled by reason, and his soul is ordered. Happiness thus springs from inward qualities in the soul, according to Plato, and is not contingent upon external circumstances. When the lower passions are ordered by Reason, there is "psychic harmony," a quality of soul that is not vulnerable to a fatal blow from an external source. A person can therefore suffer externally, and remain happy because there is harmony internally, in his soul.
Poor Jon really was trying to have a conversation or the beginning of one. But there is the problem of his ancient being, before Greek Logic.
Very well done - Essortment Short too
Plato Theory Of The Soul
Plato theory of the soul is the origin of his theory of the state. In it he claims that the only happy person is the just person, or the person who is ruled by Reason.
According to Plato, the soul consists of three basic energies which animate human beings: Reason, Emotion, and Appetite. Reason is given the greatest value, while Emotion and especially Appetite are regarded as the "lower passions". The soul that is ordered is governed by Reason, and therefore keeps one's emotions and one's appetites under control. The lower passions *must* submit to the dictates of Reason.
Plato's theory of the soul can be found in his major work, *The Republic*, where it is a response to the challenge of the Sophists as to why one ought to live morally. The Sophists in Plato's time were men who used philosophy for profit, inventing moral loopholes to get people out of obligations, or to excuse what would otherwise be considered immoral behavior. The skeptics ask why one ought to be moral when morality is apparently a social device for maintaining order. But if there are no consequences to "immoral behavior," then there is no motivational pressure for morality.
Plato answers by claiming that morality is a necessary cause of happiness, that one's happiness is correlary to one's moral behavior. Therefore, an immoral person would be motivated to be moral if he wants to be happy. The happy person, according to Plato, is the just person, a claim that he posits in two ways:
1. If x is happy, then x is just, and
2. If x is just, then x is happy.
No One was prepared for the affraien like the clash of ancient media titans.
I fully expected Jon would therefore prepare for the mild mannered DeMint as he does for Mr. O. Great stories recount!
But when the blast of Mr. O blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger:
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favored rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect:
Let it pry through the portage of the head
Like the brass cannon;
Jon’s head does seem like it might do that, some times.
Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit
To his full height!
This too but you have to pay closer attention.
Keep doing my taxes or go over and see the whole interview? Yes go over and see the whole interview. Then do taxes.
Bet Jon actually enjoyed it. Nothing like the Pelosive interview where the lights were out and the ghost in the machine appeared, out.
I could not help ponder Jon's comment that only political voting is an Americans voice in America. Actually what we purchase is most important as Nardili Depot proved. Huge companies can and do dissappear in America.
BUt of course when Progressive make food and energy massively and artifically more expensive, Obama voters have only their political power. But how did that solve the problem?
Yea he should have worked a little harder and included surfer dude in food stamps. Driving an SUV caddy and eating lobster on food stamps. He believes he is not responsible because JOn Stewart likes the system the way it is.
Hey it was a good show and interview. He could be more aggressive with Cruz as he was captain of debate.
really test Jon's interview skills to keep it informative.
So please do not pretend the experiment has not been run and the results known. Europe has demonstrated before us where Progressivism goes. Decline and self absorption into national and cultural irrelevance.As the world swirls on in time. They cannot even handle a petty dictator with a hopelessly antiquated conscript army.
What was understood in the 1950s and 1960s coming off the depression is that a sound economy is built of lowering the cost of food and energy. Americans of the depression were more than happy to have their own small house and quality food on the table. But our incomes grew beyond all expectations as the full personal consumer based economy developed. Democrats like Kennedy used the term Liberty not freedom to demand entitlement from fellow Americans.
This is all very silly as well.
We know eliminating corn ethanol and encouraging natural gas will dramatically improve economic growth and potential. We know it will improve family incomes from the bottom up by lowering cost of living.
So the rest of this is delusional. How many Progressives thoughts can fit on the point of a pin.
Limitless for they do not reason. Rather they are fabulists; like Jon Stewart, trying to be cunning animals take advantage of fellow American by secular myth.
Eliminating corn ethanol and encouraging our natural gas into our economy is rational therefore responsible. Nothing else required on the subject.
Repeating your ignorance does not make it valid.
What was British production during the war? In 1945? Was their economy destroyed?
How about the Russians? The armies they equipped had sharp stick?
How about French war time production?
Sadly even German war time production?
The Fab 50s was simply because FDR had one major sucess. He asked and the CEO of GM accepted the job of industrial planning and management of our war time economy - for $1 a year salary. Our industrialists came from our consumption economy. So they were already preparing for a peace time transition well before the end of the war. Europeans thought government should manage the transition.
Britian went socialist and kicked out Churchill at the critical moment of economic transition They never recovered. Although Europe did ok compared to us at the point we elected Reagan and they went Progressive collectivist. Look at their living standards today. Their middle class is materially poorer than our poor.
Yes, collectivist policy flamed the NAX5000 bubble and yes collectivist political policy flared the housing bubble. Just as Obama intelecual and moral corruption continues the corn ethanol bubble.
It seems to me that socialists today can preserve their position in academic economics merely by the pretense that the differences are entirely moral questions about which science cannot decide.
Friedrich August von Hayek
In economics, comparative advantage refers to the ability of a party to produce a particular good or service at a lower marginal and opportunity cost over another. Even if one country is more efficient in the production of all goods (absolute advantage in all goods) than the other, both countries will still gain by trading with each other, as long as they have different relative efficiencies.
For example, if, using machinery, a worker in one country can produce both shoes and shirts at 6 per hour, and a worker in a country with less machinery can produce either 2 shoes or 4 shirts in an hour, each country can gain from trade because their internal trade-offs between shoes and shirts are different. The less-efficient country has a comparative advantage in shirts, so it finds it more efficient to produce shirts and trade them to the more-efficient country for shoes. Without trade, its opportunity cost per shoe was 2 shirts; by trading, its cost per shoe can reduce to as low as 1 shirt depending on how much trade occurs (since the more-efficient country has a 1:1 trade-off). The more-efficient country has a comparative advantage in shoes, so it can gain in efficiency by moving some workers from shirt-production to shoe-production and trading some shoes for shirts. Without trade, its cost to make a shirt was 1 shoe; by trading, its cost per shirt can go as low as 1/2 shoe depending on how much trade occurs.
The net benefits to each country are called the gains from trade.
True because countries are people, therefore true of Americans as well.
I do not understand why this concept is counter intuitive. Probably as the collectivists have been teaching godless zero sum nihilism in public school for generations now. Full employment and rising incomes set this wonderful wind in motion.
Progressive high structural unemployment insures it never goes into motion.
Well to remember Clintron's conservative policies did produce 'black' opportunity. Jobs. Why?
"Afterward, Cummings, of Maryland, said he wanted to point out that despite Republican claims of a political conspiracy, the committee's investigation so far has not shown any political motivation by IRS agents. The investigation also hasn't shown any links to the White House, Cummings said."
No, Obama's political appointments blamed ordinary IRS agents. When in fact they directed all the applications up to fellow Obama political appointments or slowed it all down by clogging the flow with volume.
Cummings needs to retire. No shame does not mean no public disgrace.
Maybe John P can explain how Cummings disgraceful and dangerious behavior in supporting a clearly guilty collectivist IRS appointment serves inner city Americans?
We have all seen the nasty dirty things the OLB says here when their inferiority complex gets the better of them. They have to view fellow Americans as inferior rather than see each person with gifts from God which are going to waste primarily due to personal patronage of one form or another. The OLB in their delusions believe they actually care more for they would force crumbs from the political table for the inferior. The reckless breeders of Progressiveness and eugenics which Hitler embraced.
I do not know what went wrong with the brave and humble servant of youth, Cummings. I do know he started out demanding equal access to America’s full employment 50s and 60s economy. Wasted gifts not developed into talents, which should have been expanding our economy to full AMERICAN potential.
Yes LNCO will avoid all the issues of a partnership in a tax deferred account.
Plus given the retained earnings in BRY and coming c-corp acquisitions you will not pay the 15% qualified rate or the really significant and costly Obamacare diaster kickers.
As a side note. If your marginal tax rate is low go ROTH.
Good Morning Sand,
I agree. Clearly management was tight lipped about their targets.
I am more than pleased to collect a secure 9% distribution and watch.
this is where management made clear they are heading and it is not reflected in our unit price.
Yea the shorts are hammering results this quarter were not good because the BRY dilution. But the BRY dcf was mostly excluded as well.
The key was management guidance of a coverage ratio of about 1 for the year.
In the real world the most BRY cash generation for the quarter came over in the balance sheet.
remember Permian/Wolfcamp was not included in guidance. Management clearly believes this is a game changer as they cut back the capital budget to improve capital efficiency or reduce risk. They were trying to demonstrate the distribution is secure without the upside. Analysts said show me the money.
Watch permian. We should all ask Sand nicely to post anything he finds interesting on the subject.
American middle class was built on full employment and productivity.
The fab 50s economic performance under Individualist Truman and Ike eliminated poverty in America.
I am not anti-union in concept just the sad practice of today. What remains of the productive sector unions gives political money to Progressives busy eliminating their jobs. XL is just the tip of a very nasty iceberg union leadership sees and ran the membership into for their personal Patronage systems.
Can you tell me how American unions helped produce full employment and increased productivity?
In rail roads management and unions are working together. They are both focused on the business rather than political payoffs. They are doing very well despite Obama killing their biggest business for no rational reason.
So it is nothing like the Auto Workers.
. Have expensive aluminum work trucks and battery cars no one wants. Toyota survived Obama regimes corrupt political attacks and is introducing the replacement for ice which is the fuel cell.
How is this a positive outcome? BMW surrendered all their fuel cell research to Toyota to share as they were so far ahead.
Not true of American energy production which is heavily unionized. So how again are Progressives pro-union? Has the Progressive unemploying all our coal workers done anything to reduce co2? Nope.
It increased co2 as coal is cheaper therefore Asia and Euopre burn more.
So again who is supportive of unions and who treats them as necessary sacrifices to fundemental change? Just like American in our inner cities.
Common sense mean Just fairness.
Now now John.
All you have done is demostrate your ignorance. Would you say this is a life full and well lived?
It is interesting John. Here is the Progressive on an investment board and insisting all is determined random chance. So you logically have no reason to be here. Except to broadcast your emotions.
Reagan American family incomes +10%
Obama family incomes negative 9%
No question Obama refusing to follow his duty and the Renewable Fuel Standard Law causing corn to explode from $2 a bushel to over $8 is a central factor. It is the foundation of the American diet so 70% to 80% of the carbon in our bodies can be traced to corn.
NO question using passive agressive politics and falsifying pollution results has dramatically slowed natural gas adoption and capital investment. Yet Americans have recieved a huge benefit in our heating bills which Obama policies have blown away with artifical food and energy inflation.
So maybe rather than continueing your fabulist daily performance you might try logic and reason.
We need to put economically viable American produced energy into our economy.
Corn ethanol, solar panels and wind mills do not reduce co2. Certainly they do nothing to address Global Warming. If Global Warming is man made which all the models do not support for they are wildly wrong.
But there is no reason to get emotional about it. Using American natural gas will reduce co2 40%. So unlike europe our co2 is lower rather than increasing.
I prescribe Daily Show reruns for you. It will not improve you ignorance but it will make you laugh.
Why yes you can make up a truly wacky myth if you are Progressve.
Clinton had $10 oil and went with 'conservative' policy of the Republicans. Which was a powerful combination. The sad part was encouraging the NAZ5000 bubble to escape his personal childishness of having sex with a young intern in our house on our time. Not to mention being a serial sexual assault machine.
Reagan's real world demostration of strength kicked over Soviet union and brought Suadi Arbia into our sphere of influence. Which stablized oil price in mutual interest.
We also know the Progressive have been not just wrong but completely dissembling about American energy reserves for generations.
Yes Pat you can make up some really delude myths.
BUt Econ 101 and basic diplomacy is not very difficult to understand unless of course you need to make up some real whopper stories to cover failure.
We would have to go back to the 1950s with Truman and Ike to have any reasonable economic comparison.
The terrible 1950's when Truman desegergated our military and Ike signed Civil Rights in 1957? and 1960? only to have LBJ blcoked it,
Myth making and the necessity to dissemble only goes so far in the internet age.
Sadly Obama is benefitting from some very powerful digital age economic efficiency/productivity gains. A primiary reason corporations have record profits while his policy engineered low employment levels mean capital keeps it all rather than it passing to labor.
As happened under Reagan. A function of real employment utilization.
Toyota is bringing out the hydrogen fuel cell next year. So ice of any sort is heading for the dust heap.
Plus Europe went diesel so it has a premium cost above even the additional energy content.
Friend has the M5 out of warranty. Car filled with water when it rained. Two little plastic pieces dryed out and caused the sun roof to leak. No fix except full replacement. Over $2k. Trany broke.Other minor stuff except for the cost to repair.
Wife's 300hp Lexus? No problems except it was 1% less sporty than the m5 new.
BMW is an awesome car. But it is not transportation.
Hydrogen Fuel cell is a solution. Beyond any Progressive babble. So of course we hear and read little about a revolution about to happen.