A sentence worth diagramming

poseur-smallOther than deleting a couple of comments he made here a while back, I have not interacted with Rod Kailey in months. So it was odd to read this:

Soren Kierkegaard pointed out in the book “Either/Or” that ofttimes we are identified by our enemies more so than by our friends. So, Mark decided that Dave Budge and I were his arch-nemeses, and I haven’t had much peace online since.

There is talent in that sentence – real talent. There is fake victimhood, poseur-like intellectual musings, and brothers-in-arms coupling of himself with Dave Budge. As I used to say of my former boss, a woman with a net worth of $35 million at that time, between the two of us we averaged $17.5 million each.

Here’s my take on Dave Budge: He comes off, oddly, as a wounded refugee. He came, apparently, from high finance, and is a recovering drug addict. I cast no dispersion aspersions on that matter. It’s a lifelong battle, and he is winning at this point. He’s an educated intellectual, well-read, and is a gifted writer with a well-developed sense of humor. He suffers from arrogance but also has the ability to self-reflect and has at times attempted to squash that trait. But it is always there. (Trust me, I know these things.) He finds me intolerable – I bring out his anger, and since no one can live with such feelings for very long, has banned me from his website. He reads this site, probably only occasionally, but never comments other than to sneer in a passive-aggressive manner elsewhere.*

My problem with Budge has always been the other end of the grinder. No matter what quality material goes in, it always comes out breakfast sausage. He advocates economics of the Austrian school, a little more developed than standard neoclassical fare, but still a deaf-mute when it comes to describing the world as it really exists. The whole of the profession of economics is, in my view, cloaked ideology. Unfortunately, the one lurking behind the Friedman and Hayek and Mises and so many others is fascism. They didn’t knowingly advocate such a thing, of course, nor does Budge. However, there is big money behind the universities, endowed chairs and think tanks that promote it. Even as it fails on every level, it is standardized thought for anyone entering the profession. It is the voice of the 1%. Nothing else is taught in significant degree. (It must be said, in fairness, that Budge has thought deeper than most about income distribution and health care, and has non-standard views on those and a few other matters.)

Imagine that all the companies that process carbohydrate-based food also funded food science … wait. They do. That’s why food science advocates high-carb low-fat diets. In economics, the high-carb equivalent that prevails in the face of all evidence is called neoclassical, with the Austrian School the equivalent of a Jenny Craig diet. So virtually all dietitians advocate low-fat diets, and all economists are neoclassical.

Anyway, that’s Budge – complex, flawed, human, arrogant, wrong, right, interesting, funny.

Kailey, on the other hand, is just a dick.
______________
*Only Max Bucks is banned here, and not for content. Just volume.
______________
The drawing above is called poseur, by adrienne price

About Mark Tokarski

Mostly retired CPA living the life here in Colorado. Formerly Montana, 59 years, which is why so much of this blog is devoted to Montana issues.
This entry was posted in Esoterica. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to A sentence worth diagramming

  1. Retreating to your barricaded confines to lob shit at detractors: how conservative.

    • It would help if you actually read. No one is banned here including the idiot Kailey.

      • It might be interesting to read your solutions to what you seem to perceive are insurmountable challenges to the American Experiment rather than having to sort through your biases.

      • Man, we get that a lot. First we describe a problem you’re not even aware of, then you demand we solve it. Some problems are intractable, but that does not make them less a problem, and pretending they do not exist is hardly a solution.

        Anyway, I suggested one idea to you: Campaign finance reform. Currently many thousands of good people are excluded from the political system because they are not deemed worthy of bribes. If we had public financing of campaigns and strict regulations on advertising, the one party masquerading as two would quickly crumble.

        Thereafter, light would enter the system. Life is never easy, but at least people with new ideas could speak and he heard.

  2. Ed Kemmick says:

    If you did cast dispersions, what would that entail?

    • Alrighty then, Mr. Language Hawk. You just reminded me of an email I sent to Gary Svee many tears years ago – I wasn’t sure if my service was working, and so called it “Test.” Right away I heard back “So, how did I do?”

      You guys in your business have editors, and that is mostly bad, but sometimes good.

    • By the way, that sounded serious. Thanks for a good laugh.

  3. steve kelly says:

    Campaign reform. Finance is but one major factor among many structural obstacles in the war against democracy. Campaign “season” should be limited to 30 to 90 days, or somewhere in between, before an election. All political contributions must be disclosed — amount, affiliation, source (names and address of real people). Eliminate all tax-deductions for political activity of all kinds, including lobbying. A portion (10%) of all contributions are either taxed, or given to charity. Ballot is open to anyone, or any party, with an interest in serving city, county, state or country, and 500 petition signatures of eligible voters. Term limits for all statewide and federal officials (10-12 years). Cap wages, salaries and benefits for all public servants to a percentage (100 to 150%) of mean annual income of jurisdiction being served. All public servants punch a time clock to record actual amount of time devoted to public service — fundraising and travel time do not count. Elites out, ordinary people in. Happy New Year!

    • rightsaidfred says:

      steve kelly: So who is going to enforce these laws? Probably the same people enforcing our immigration laws. And our drug laws. I’m waiting for the Democrats to turn on their credit card verification.

      Anyway, every proposal here can be rapidly gamed. Do you think you can win this game of whack-a-mole?

      There is a social dynamic here. As government becomes more important, people become more willing to spend to get the politicians they want. We’ve got to invest in the process to keep our EBT cards full.

  4. steve kelly says:

    right….

    As a wise friend has said to me more than once: “How the hell should I know?” But at least you’re thinking beyond simple passage of such reform measures. I like that optimism. What I do know, however, is that doing nothing gets you nothing. I am resigned to do something. That something may not be easy. It may fail in the end. But doing nothing is unacceptable given the gravity of the situation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s