I'm in Houston, specifically North East of Houston.

But they claim that it is never about the amount of deficit spending. It is apparently about how much they can get away with.

Good eye, terrycan!
I'm sure it seems quite acceptable to so many of our politicians that believe deficit spending is good economics...
Regards,
O.A.

You just don't understand the rules of liberal math. And neither do I.

There's no way that an academic subject couched in logic and reason could be liberal. There are no naunces in math - it is concrete, eternal, and unchanging.

Notice the triangle in the photo. It does not exist. The sum of the 3 angles will always equal 180 degrees. Did the author fail geometry?

No, it's not liberal.

Max there are several gulchers on the gulf coast. Mind sharing your location?

Good for you.

Not to belabor the issue, but its mathematically to fit any curve to two data points. But I guess that supports his argument.

makes me mad

It was certainly closer to free market capitalism than whatever you want to call the travesty we have now.

I think they hide under a definition of emergency that is incorrect. Starving is not an emergency if you dont hunt or farm. Being on a sinking ship and being forced to save your family or somone elses is. This country and politicians have a bad tendency of claiming "emergency" whenever the shit hits the fan. I live on the gulf coast, hurricane central, if you dont have stored food, and water for as many days as it would take you to leave town and relocate, it is not an emergency when the storm hits and takes out infrastructure and you are left bamboozled. Its just stupid. Stupidity on anothers part doesnt create an emergency on my part. I honestly have little tollerance in this regard as im somewhat of a prepper. Ill go without air jordans or whatever $200 shoe is popular. I dont have nice rims on my car. I live modestly, and a bit below my means, because at any moment i could get pant'sed by mother nature. The wars and other manufactured "state of emergencies" that we are living under cease to be emergencies when they are perpetual. When ome is constantly in a state of emergency, what tjey are really in is a state of perpetual stupidity.

The media and literati are hugely liberal and progressive.

He is getting a huge amount of press.

What a totality of Bullcrap. Nonsense into any logic system will output nonsense.

"Although Ellenberg doesn't make this case explicitly, there's an argument to be made that the brand of mathematical thinking he's embracing overlaps heavily with a broadly liberal style of thinking about politics and the world."
No truer words were ever written, although not in the way this writer thinks. Ellenberg offers no empirical support for his hypothesis that prosperity versus "Swedishness" is nonlinear. The US experience offers confirmation that it is linear. Its best economic performance came during the Industrial Revolution (in terms of GDP and income growth), which is also the point that the US economy was freest. Other examples of outstanding economic performance under low tax and low regulation regimes are West Germany, Japan, and Hong Kong after World War II. Examples of economic decline after increased governmental involvement in the economy, including higher taxes and more regulation, are legion. Sweden itself has backed away from its own "Swedishness" the last few years as its economy sputtered.
Mathematical thinking is one facet of logical thinking, which requires looking at the evidence. Ellenberg simply makes an assertion of nonlinearity without citing supporting evidence and calls it mathematical thinking, which it is not. However, assertions without evidence are a hallmark of modern liberals (gun control reduces crime, redistribution reduces poverty, regulation benefits "consumers" and so on), so Ellenberg's "mathetical thinking" is indeed "a broadly liberal style of thinking."

Exactly. Life cannot be a perpetual emergency. By definition they are short -lived. Haiti is always an emergency due to failed governance and looters and citizens who are stuck in a daily malthusian trap. In those situations individuals find ways to leave. Notice how the democrats are happy to turn their boats back from our shores while turning a blind eye to our southern border...

Your idea of emergency is correct. An emergency is also unexpected and immediately handled. But, the news shows that that America is in a Perpetual State of Emergency because of the war on terrorism, the banking crises, unemployment, global warming, etc., all requiring a “temporary loss” of our freedoms.
Emergencies for a 100 years have been officially declared, alphabet soup agencies were created and many of those same emergencies and agencies still exist today.

You said, "one might make an argument that there are no ethics in emergencies." A lot of politicians and their cronies use that to grow and grow and grow their power, and shrink ours.

What emergency? By definition where is the imediate threat to life? It is not an emergency when one abdicates reason, or fails to plan ahead, or relies on someone elses ingenuity for their job, or votes their hedonistic desires to the point of destroying a country. Those arent emergencies which ine can escape, those are the consequences of actions, which, if we are ever to have a moral soviety, each man must bear for himself save the charity of another by their own choice.

Almost fully agree, but some have also made the argument that we have been and still are in an emergency.

The question to that "equality and fairness for all individuals" is loaded. Exactly what do those who are not having their property/lives sacrificed "give up". If we are discussing fair, how can "fair" be that one entire class is set to benefit, while another is set to be sacrificed. Sadly this is a concept that seems to escape most. I think we all could agree that great philanthropic things could be done with massive sums of cash freely given by those who can afford it, but if we have to steal it, or violate one's rights to take it, is it the philanthropy which results not tainted by the slavery which produced it? Do the Liberals not agree that slavery should have been ended? Is slavery by a different color not slavery? One might make an argument that there are no ethics in emergencies, however I fail to agree that one's inability to exceed the basics of fiscal stewardship necessitates an emergency.

yes, the definition of prosperity becomes a moving target, doesn't it? It sickens me that intellectually dishonest people like this mathematician starting out with flawed premises and then proving them while throwing in "charming/disarming" simple diagrams and anticdotal examples is neither brilliant or right-but his book takes off, garnering him accolades for his "smarts" like that french economist. What can we expect-every liberal university in the nation is teaching Keynsian economics to the next generation of economists...

The point I was trying to hammer into their "open minded" brains (which is funny because they refused to consider, or be open minded to my premise) was that economics do not determine what is moral and that therefore one cannot use the "curve" to plot the mix of statism versus liberty should they wish to determine the best course of action for an economy. Sadly subjectivism rules the day and the concept of the "ends justifying the means" is well baked into the brains of the collectivist mind (or lack thereof).