Bernie Sanders has new advisor for economic issues

[mookiemcgee]

Hey Goranz, you want to know how to verify my statements? Have you ever heard of Google? It is a great website; you should check it out and then do a search and that will verify my statements. In fact, I challenge you to find a credible source (website) that will dispute most of what I post online here in this forum. You may find something, especially on the issues related to man-made Global Warming; however, as pointed out by others and by me, those opposing views have credibility issues.

Oh, and in my early response on the statement, there is no such thing as a free lunch, I cited and linked to a URL that will verify my definition and explanation of that statement. JUS to be clear, I already knew most of the information on that statement (I do admit that I was not aware of the origin of that statement.) And then I posted that same link in my 2nd response to your comment about free lunch does not mean free education. I guess you did not bother to use that link to verify my statement that time either.

And, do you know how I found that website. Goranz? I used Google. Again, try it and see what information can be verified and see what you have been missing.

Oh, and did you not read that my statement about no free lunch (or government services, such as education or health care) are not free? Read what was posted by Dukasaur and NomadPatriot. They both offer good explanations, perhaps better than mine.

So Goranz, to summarize, I offer you 3 ways to verify my statement: There is no such thing as a free lunch (or free education or free health care). For the person benefiting from that service, it may be free. But someone, usually the taxpayer, does PAY for that so-called "free" service.

JP.. try using Bing.. Google censors & filters their results to fit the 'Company Narrative' they want to push..
Bing gives exact results for what your looking for..

just a thought

https://www.wired.com/story/tried-bing-search-google-microsoft/

This dumbass... Bing also filters it's search results to fit it's company narrative. Bing is "just as evil", it just not as ubiquitous.

Try Duck Duck Go, if you want a search engine that is not backed by a multinational with a narrative it's pushing. (and it doesn't spy on you).

[NomadPatriot]

This dumbass... Bing also filters it's search results to fit it's company narrative. Bing is "just as evil", it just not as ubiquitous. Try Duck Duck Go, if you want a search engine that is not backed by a multinational with a narrative it's pushing. (and it doesn't spy on you).

does Duck Duck Go give you reward points for using their website for internet searches…?

Bing does.. .I get a $5.00 a month via a Amazon gift card .. = $60 a year..

just reference a news story involving Bing doing this.. but i am pretty sure the only ones you will find is the one about China...
but if you find any others. I will read up on it..

[GoranZ]

Duk and NomadP both have answered this matter about a "free lunch", but I want to make one additional point on this topic. The term "free lunch" is not talking JUST about lunch, but applies to many economic concepts and government programs. The term "free lunch" applies to all types of programs, including, but not limited to: free health care (for some in the USA and for all in some countries), free education, and in assistance to the poor (in its many forms, such as EBT benefits, public housing, unemployment benefits, and many more). This also applies to governments helping to build roads, bridges, libraries and providing mental health services.

So Goranz, when I speak of "free lunch" I am not talking JUS and only about a lunch or a meal. Ultimately, as others, including myself, have already stated, all such programs are paid for by someone, and in most situations, that person is the taxpayer (or future generations, if that money is borrowed). So there is no such thing as a free lunch, or free education, or free health care, and so forth.

To quote a wise man, the only things certain in life are death and taxes.

I didn't saw your reply to Duk's post. Have you personally replied to him?


I admit I'm not an expert on economic issues, I only have basic understanding(I posted in another thread how I acquire it). Obviously Dukasaur has much more knowledge then me in that field. So here is your second chance to reply to Duk's post.

Let me put this simply, succinctly, and cogently: you do not understand education, economics, or the English Language.

There is no such thing as Free Lunch. The only things really Free are air and death.

There is a economic cost associated with nearly every thing in this world. Apparently you do not grasp this simple idea, Goranz.

Go to a real school that is NOT Free and you might actually learn something of value and truth. Apparently they teach neither in North Macedonia.

First of all, there's no need for these gratuitous insults. Ad hominem arguments are degrading to both the target and his assailant. I have defended you in the past when you've been attacked but lately you see to be doing more attacking than being attacked, so I give up. (And no, before you ask, no this is not an official warning as a mod. It's just me expressing my opinion as an individual.)

Now, if Goran's opinion is too unsophisticated for you, perhaps you will consider mine. Here's my credentials:

1. I took economics as a context elective in university. I scored 95% in Microeconomics and 92% in Macroeconomics. My marks in my elective courses were actually far, far higher than my marks in the science courses I was supposed to be majoring in.
2. I spent seven years in the trenches as a Libertarian activist. So trust me that I know every free-market argument inside-and-out, back-to-front, left-to-right. I parted company with the Libertarian movement and moved to the left not on some capricious whim, but because I found the flaws with those arguments.
3. Yes, I know what tanstaafl means. I actually own every Heinlein book ever written. Two or three copies of some of them.

You're wrong. Air and death are not free. Have you seen the price of a coffin lately?

When people talk about free education and free health care, they are not under some ridiculous illusion that these things come at no cost. They are called free because they are provided without charge to the client. Is there a cost to society at large? Yes, through taxes there is a cost. It's done because the cost that a society pays if it does not provide these services is far greater. Your country is full of brilliant people who will never develop their potential because they cannot afford university, and it is full of mediocrities who will never accomplish anything but sit on the board of a major corporation because their parents were able to buy them an Ivy League entry ticket. That waste of brilliant minds and that promotion of mediocre minds is a cost far greater than what you would suffer if you distributed free education to everyone who wants it and spread the cost evenly.

Now, I have a question for you. I've asked other right wingers before, and never gotten an answer, so maybe you will have the courage to answer honestly. In your country, primary education is seen as a basic right, free to everyone. Secondary education is seen as a basic right, free to everyone. Why then, do you think that free tertiary education is such a radical and threatening concept? What is so supernaturally different about tertiary education that you think it must be expensive while primary and secondary education are free?

Go ahead dont be shy.

Hey Goranz, you want to know how to verify my statements? Have you ever heard of Google? It is a great website; you should check it out and then do a search and that will verify my statements. In fact, I challenge you to find a credible source (website) that will dispute most of what I post online here in this forum. You may find something, especially on the issues related to man-made Global Warming; however, as pointed out by others and by me, those opposing views have credibility issues.

Oh, and in my early response on the statement, there is no such thing as a free lunch, I cited and linked to a URL that will verify my definition and explanation of that statement. JUS to be clear, I already knew most of the information on that statement (I do admit that I was not aware of the origin of that statement.) And then I posted that same link in my 2nd response to your comment about free lunch does not mean free education. I guess you did not bother to use that link to verify my statement that time either.

And, do you know how I found that website. Goranz? I used Google. Again, try it and see what information can be verified and see what you have been missing.

Oh, and did you not read that my statement about no free lunch (or government services, such as education or health care) are not free? Read what was posted by Dukasaur and NomadPatriot. They both offer good explanations, perhaps better than mine.

So Goranz, to summarize, I offer you 3 ways to verify my statement: There is no such thing as a free lunch (or free education or free health care). For the person benefiting from that service, it may be free. But someone, usually the taxpayer, does PAY for that so-called "free" service.

I know what Google is, but the question is... Do you know what Google is? Since I'm an expert in that field(University IT degree and 12 years in IT industry) let me explain it to you in the simplest form so even you can understand it. Google is web search engine. Basically its a page that gives results based on your entered words/sentences(in the IT world your entry is called search query). That's it.

Google has a simple job... It needs to understand what you are looking for in order to give you the information about that particular topic. So if your are looking for information that Free Education is bad, or that Global Warming is not man-made or Free Health Care is bad google's job is to provide you with the information your are looking for. If Google provided you with the information that you were looking for in the past, then it means that it understood your need and provided you with adequate information for you.

Since you are using Google its obvious that you are happy with the results and you consider them as the truth, although Google never claimed that the results it provided are the truth. Unfortunately Google doesn't function the way you want and it provides results based on ranking and keywords. That means that if your search query is "global warming is not manmade"(without quotes) you will get ~9.5 million results and in the first page you will get 0 results that support your claims. If they are not on the first page then where are they? I dont know exactly but majority of them are at the bottom of those 9.5 million results. What does that mean? Well you are grown up men figure out on your own

Obviously you are not an expert in the field of Economy, Environment or IT. So your opinions about any of those have no value(even for Google ). You can still have your opinions, no one is stopping you but they are meaningless for others.

[mookiemcgee]

This dumbass... Bing also filters it's search results to fit it's company narrative. Bing is "just as evil", it just not as ubiquitous. Try Duck Duck Go, if you want a search engine that is not backed by a multinational with a narrative it's pushing. (and it doesn't spy on you).

does Duck Duck Go give you reward points for using their website for internet searches…?

Bing does.. .I get a $5.00 a month via a Amazon gift card .. = $60 a year..

just reference a news story involving Bing doing this.. but i am pretty sure the only ones you will find is the one about China...
but if you find any others. I will read up on it..

Wow, that's more than the allowance you parents give you! Maybe you could even buy premium membership to CC with that kinda of money.

[NomadPatriot]

This dumbass... Bing also filters it's search results to fit it's company narrative. Bing is "just as evil", it just not as ubiquitous. Try Duck Duck Go, if you want a search engine that is not backed by a multinational with a narrative it's pushing. (and it doesn't spy on you).

does Duck Duck Go give you reward points for using their website for internet searches…?

Bing does.. .I get a $5.00 a month via a Amazon gift card .. = $60 a year..

just reference a news story involving Bing doing this.. but i am pretty sure the only ones you will find is the one about China...
but if you find any others. I will read up on it..

Wow, that's more than the allowance you parents give you! Maybe you could even buy premium membership to CC with that kinda of money.

that is your reply..? geez..

isn't it a parole violation for you to talk about adolescents online..

[jusplay4fun]

Despite Goranz's claim of being an expert in IT:

1) he told me nothing I did not know with his last post;
2) he does not know how google or any search engine works.

Here is my support for the second point:

Goranz types:

That means that if your search query is "global warming is not manmade"(without quotes) you will get ~9.5 million results and in the first page you will get 0 results that support your claims. If they are not on the first page then where are they?

Why would a google search or any search of global warming is not man-made tell me why global warming IS man-made? Why would that appear on page 1 of my search results? I thought the search engine try to find information on what is asked (searched); it is not intended to find answers to the point diametrically opposed to what I was searching.

Also, my google search of global warming is not man-made = 9,730.000 hits;
then I searched for global warming is man-made = 17,900,000 hits.

I will go one step further. Individuals looking for support that global warming is not man-made will continue to look for support on their biased opinion. They will be VERY unlikely to search for the opposite viewpoint. They want confirmation of their point of view. They will not consider scientific points that oppose their rigid and prejudiced thinking. They are the least likely to consider other points of view. They are simply looking for affirmation, not looking at the topic objectively to learn the truth.

And a look at many of the hits on NOT man-made would show the same few source repeated numerous times and cited by many other right wing and biased and non-scientific websites. In other words, the same 10 lies (and/or incorrect information) gets quoted by 100,000 sources and one gets 1,000,000 hits.

And why must I reply to Duk's post? I actually have replied online to his inquiry and admonition in this forum thread, but I will let the intelligent Goranz figure that out for himself.

Lastly, I do not have to be an expert in a field to offer information to support my point of view. One can use information of others who are considered experts in a field and with the application of logic and reasonable thought, can arrive at a reasonable conclusion. Those are the essence of logic and thought and inquiry started and written about by the ancient Greeks.

[Bernie Sanders]

Despite Goranz's claim of being an expert in IT:

1) he told me nothing I did not know with his last post;
2) he does not know how google or any search engine works.

Here is my support for the second point:

Goranz types:

That means that if your search query is "global warming is not manmade"(without quotes) you will get ~9.5 million results and in the first page you will get 0 results that support your claims. If they are not on the first page then where are they?

Why would a google search or any search of global warming is not man-made tell me why global warming IS man-made? Why would that appear on page 1 of my search results? I thought the search engine try to find information on what is asked (searched); it is not intended to find answers to the point diametrically opposed to what I was searching.

Also, my google search of global warming is not man-made = 9,730.000 hits;
then I searched for global warming is man-made = 17,900,000 hits.

I will go one step further. Individuals looking for support that global warming is not man-made will continue to look for support on their biased opinion. They will be VERY unlikely to search for the opposite viewpoint. They want confirmation of their point of view. They will not consider scientific points that oppose their rigid and prejudiced thinking. They are the least likely to consider other points of view. They are simply looking for affirmation, not looking at the topic objectively to learn the truth.

And a look at many of the hits on NOT man-made would show the same few source repeated numerous times and cited by many other right wing and biased and non-scientific websites. In other words, the same 10 lies (and/or incorrect information) gets quoted by 100,000 sources and one gets 1,000,000 hits.

And why must I reply to Duk's post? I actually have replied online to his inquiry and admonition in this forum thread, but I will let the intelligent Goranz figure that out for himself.

Lastly, I do not have to be an expert in a field to offer information to support my point of view. One can use information of others who are considered experts in a field and with the application of logic and reasonable thought, can arrive at a reasonable conclusion. Those are the essence of logic and thought and inquiry started and written about by the ancient Greeks.

You went from "google" to "ancient Greeks" in your rambling reply to GoranZ post. My head is spinning.

We all can see how upset you are in your ineffective attempt to come off as some type of intellectual. You really try to hard.....may I recommend that you return to your copy/paste of articles and keep your own words to a minimum. No need to embarrass yourself.

Did you get your diploma from Trump University?

[GoranZ]

Despite Goranz's claim of being an expert in IT:

1) he told me nothing I did not know with his last post;
2) he does not know how google or any search engine works.

Here is my support for the second point:

Goranz types:

That means that if your search query is "global warming is not manmade"(without quotes) you will get ~9.5 million results and in the first page you will get 0 results that support your claims. If they are not on the first page then where are they?

Why would a google search or any search of global warming is not man-made tell me why global warming IS man-made? Why would that appear on page 1 of my search results? I thought the search engine try to find information on what is asked (searched); it is not intended to find answers to the point diametrically opposed to what I was searching.

Also, my google search of global warming is not man-made = 9,730.000 hits;
then I searched for global warming is man-made = 17,900,000 hits.

I will go one step further. Individuals looking for support that global warming is not man-made will continue to look for support on their biased opinion. They will be VERY unlikely to search for the opposite viewpoint. They want confirmation of their point of view. They will not consider scientific points that oppose their rigid and prejudiced thinking. They are the least likely to consider other points of view. They are simply looking for affirmation, not looking at the topic objectively to learn the truth.

And a look at many of the hits on NOT man-made would show the same few source repeated numerous times and cited by many other right wing and biased and non-scientific websites. In other words, the same 10 lies (and/or incorrect information) gets quoted by 100,000 sources and one gets 1,000,000 hits.

And why must I reply to Duk's post?

No, but many of us are encourage you to do it

[NomadPatriot]

I will go one step further. Individuals looking for support that global warming is not man-made will continue to look for support on their biased opinion. They will be VERY unlikely to search for the opposite viewpoint. They want confirmation of their point of view. They will not consider scientific points that oppose their rigid and prejudiced thinking. They are the least likely to consider other points of view. They are simply looking for affirmation, not looking at the topic objectively to learn the truth.And a look at many of the hits on NOT man-made would show the same few source repeated numerous times and cited by many other right wing and biased and non-scientific websites. In other words, the same 10 lies (and/or incorrect information) gets quoted by 100,000 sources and one gets 1,000,000 hits.

this would apply to anyone searching for anything.. whoever has a stance on something will accept viewpoints that support their ideology and disregard viewpoints counter to their ideology...

your view is global warming is man-made.. any viewpoint counter to that ideology of yours is labeled by you as " right Wing, biased & non-scientific".. even when scientists are quoted in said links..

if someone does agree with you.. you label them..
your biased to your viewpoint. .
others towards theirs. .
just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are Right-Wing..
are you Left Wing..?
do you consider opposition an enemy or a counterpoint view.. ?

[Bernie Sanders]

I will go one step further. Individuals looking for support that global warming is not man-made will continue to look for support on their biased opinion. They will be VERY unlikely to search for the opposite viewpoint. They want confirmation of their point of view. They will not consider scientific points that oppose their rigid and prejudiced thinking. They are the least likely to consider other points of view. They are simply looking for affirmation, not looking at the topic objectively to learn the truth.And a look at many of the hits on NOT man-made would show the same few source repeated numerous times and cited by many other right wing and biased and non-scientific websites. In other words, the same 10 lies (and/or incorrect information) gets quoted by 100,000 sources and one gets 1,000,000 hits.

this would apply to anyone searching for anything.. whoever has a stance on something will accept viewpoints that support their ideology and disregard viewpoints counter to their ideology...

your view is global warming is man-made.. any viewpoint counter to that ideology of yours is labeled by you as " right Wing, biased & non-scientific".. even when scientists are quoted in said links..

if someone does agree with you.. you label them..
your biased to your viewpoint. .
others towards theirs. .
just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are Right-Wing..
are you Left Wing..?
do you consider opposition an enemy or a counterpoint view.. ?

Look who's calling the kettle black, lol

[Dukasaur]

[quote="GoranZ"]

[jusplay4fun]

Are there only two sides? left and right? Is the world only one dimensional?

JP

I will go one step further. Individuals looking for support that global warming is not man-made will continue to look for support on their biased opinion. They will be VERY unlikely to search for the opposite viewpoint. They want confirmation of their point of view. They will not consider scientific points that oppose their rigid and prejudiced thinking. They are the least likely to consider other points of view. They are simply looking for affirmation, not looking at the topic objectively to learn the truth.And a look at many of the hits on NOT man-made would show the same few source repeated numerous times and cited by many other right wing and biased and non-scientific websites. In other words, the same 10 lies (and/or incorrect information) gets quoted by 100,000 sources and one gets 1,000,000 hits.

this would apply to anyone searching for anything.. whoever has a stance on something will accept viewpoints that support their ideology and disregard viewpoints counter to their ideology...

your view is global warming is man-made.. any viewpoint counter to that ideology of yours is labeled by you as " right Wing, biased & non-scientific".. even when scientists are quoted in said links..

if someone does agree with you.. you label them..
your biased to your viewpoint. .
others towards theirs. .
just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are Right-Wing..
are you Left Wing..?
do you consider opposition an enemy or a counterpoint view.. ?