bascule

The salary caps are making some banks consider returning the government money. Sounds like it's effective at least to a certain degree.

I think the government is trying to keep the economy from collapsing, as opposed to a "return to bubble conditions." This is damage control, not a move by the government to reinflate the bubble. Housing prices are still going to go down, they're just not going to hit rock bottom.

Jeff Hawkins has a mixed reception among the neuroscience community... seems like a "love him or hate him" sort of thing. That said, for those of you who are too lazy to read, here's a video series with him you can watch:

The Daily Show made a great point last night: the Republicans are only paying lip service to fiscal conservativism. The Republicans are advocating tax cuts as an alternative. "Tax cuts" are little more than a euphemism for "paying for things with debt instead of tax revenue".

It will create jobs. How is it not beneficial to the economy?

Jon Stewart has probably done the best job of pointing this out that I've seen so far with some pretty hilarious juxtaposition of "before and after" clips showing Republicans staunchly defending spending under Bush, talking about how invaluable Iraqi democracy is that we really can't put a price on it (of billions), then turning around and ranting and raving about the stimulus bill and the multigenerational debt we're engendering: http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/index.jhtml?episodeId=217691 I think it's clear Republicans are opposed to deficit spending, but only when Democrats are in power. McCain, who suspended his campaign to spend a day lollygagging around before returning to Washington under the auspices of solving the financial crisis, was more than happy to help push through a similarly priced bailout bill which seems to have done an incredible job lining the pockets of Wall Street executives, but calls Obama's stimulus plan "generational theft" I'm not a big fan of deficit spending and long for a return to a balanced budget. As an American I look to our neighbors to the north, who are running budget surpluses, and go "Canada can figure this out... why can't we?" Yet I can't help but feel that in the present situation, with skyrocketing unemployment rates, New Dealesque spending might be in order. I find it hilarious that in the wake of a situation where I find myself coming around to potentially supporting deficit spending, the Republicans are doing just the opposite. Deficit spending is all well and good when it's going towards rebuilding Iraq, but as soon as we need to do it to rebuild America, it's "generational theft". Zuh? I'm glad to see Republicans returning to fiscal conservativism, but they sure picked a hell of a time to do it...

One "cure" for a leaky dam is to just let the dam collapse. Then all that pent up water will come gushing out, destroying everything in its path. But the body of water will return to its "natural" mode of behavior, unpredictable with occasional bouts of seasonal flooding. Or you can try to shore up the dam...

HOLY CRAP. Of all people to finally pay some attention to A.Q. Khan, Hillary Clinton is expressing her concerns. Wow. For the time being I take back my criticisms about Hillary being Secretary of State.

To copy and paste from my last post: As far as I'm concerned Musharraf was harboring a dangerous criminal selling nuclear secrets to hostile nations at the same time Bush was touting Pakistan as an ally.

The situation is a bit different than it was under Bush/Musharraf, and it's perhaps entirely coincidental that A.Q. Khan recanted his previous confession contemporaneously with Musharraf exiting office. As far as I'm concerned Musharraf was harboring a dangerous criminal selling nuclear secrets to hostile nations at the same time Bush was touting Pakistan as an ally.

I saw something very depressing today: a man on the side of the road dressed in a Statue of Liberty costume holding up a big arrow with "STIMULUS LOANS" on it Ugh

Not declaring them an ally is a good start

You seem to be describing the prevailing attitudes and courses of action taken by the Republicans circa 2000-2006 which instigated this mess in the first place. Perhaps you're confusing economics with homeopathy? We tried that. It failed... miserably. The electorate has realized how badly they failed and spoken... time for something else. But I'd like to pay specific attention to this: For someone who bitches and moans about the devaluation of our currency as you do why on EARTH would you support additional tax cuts? I mean, keep in mind... we're talking about an enormous SPENDING bill that Republicans are whining needs a bunch of tax cuts as riders. More tax cuts means more T-bills and foreign borrowing which means a weaker dollar. Do you support a weaker dollar?

If war crimes occur those responsible should be held accountable. And note that while I have repeatedly insisted that Bush should be tried for violating FISA and for outing Valerie Plame, I've never suggested he should be tried for "war crimes" I don't know specifically what Richard Armitage did in Pakistan. Bush was calling Pakistan an "ally in the war on terror" at the same time Musharraf was harboring A.Q. Khan, a man who admitted to selling nuclear secrets to Iran and North Korea, and also shielding him from questions from both U.S. and IAEA investigators. I don't think Pakistan has ever been an "ally in the war on terror" as much as it has been a likely hiding place for Osama bin Laden.

Well, I could just as easily phrase as question like "Do Republicans avoid sodomizing their pages?" and the answer is "Yes, just not ALL Republicans" as well...

For the record, I don't think Bush payed enough concern to Pakistan...

For the most part that's a valid point Not as much as I should, perhaps

Looking at this... ...I'd say they failed miserably (that's the current national debt, if you hadn't put that together already) The national debt was $5.8 trillion when Bush took office. Under Bush the national debt nearly doubled. And how many of those tax cuts are there at the behest of Republicans? The Republicans really seem to be one trick ponies with their "throw more tax cuts at it" approach to fixing, well, any economic problems.

To answer the topic: yes, Democrats pay taxes.

If a Turing machine were to be conscious its thought process would be bound no more by formal logic than ours is. Consider the case of a brain simulation. Penrose, particularly in things like his Godelian argument, assumes the thought process of a "robot mathematician" is bound by formal logic because the underlying system is one based on formal logic. Humans don't reason with formal logic (by default, of course we can learn it), and Penrose uses this to try to conclude that there's something "special" about us (i.e. thought is intrinsically tied to quantum waveform collapse) However, Penrose's Godelian argument is not only flawed for other reasons but it makes little sense to treat consciousness itself as a formal logic system.

I like it. While the attitude of your "average American" (an improbable beast representing the attitudes of your median citizen) lies somewhere in the middle, I think his hypothetical disposition evolves over time, and by dashing back and forth between two extremes we can experiment with different kinds of attitudes and see what works and what doesn't in today's society, and the people can use that information to decide what they want to try next. Overall it would seem developed nations are growing increasingly liberal, or maybe that's just a "European" thing.

So what Hamas has done is so bad that Israel should be given carte blanche to do whatever they want to the Palestinian people? When did the Palestinians stop deserving human rights? Are you cool with Israel opening fire on the UN and the Red Cross?

How do you "compare the results"? In order for this idea to seem remotely tenable I think you'd need to have a pretty myopic view of the economy. The two programs will feed back off each other in nonlinear ways, each altering the outcome of the other, in positive or negative ways. Maybe the Republicans will come up with a terrible idea which actually works in conjunction with the Democrats idea, or vice versa. Maybe the Republicans have a great idea which won't work in conjunction with the Democrats' idea. Who knows? I still wonder why anyone pays any attention to Rush Limbaugh at all.

All that shows is you'd rather argue semantics than substance. I say electromagnetic fields are physical, and you say they're spiritual. Sorry, you're wrong, they're physical. And to reiterate: the brain is a classical physical system.

There's nothing spiritual about electromagnetic fields. They are just one of the four fundamental forces. They are very much a part of the physical world, especially with their role of holding together all matter as we know it. Thing is, we've done that: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16267-mindreading-software-could-record-your-dreams.html