The Major Difference Between Not Studying Electronics & Not

[Bret Cahill]

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.


Bret Cahill

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 22 Dec 2012 19:40:02 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com>
wrote:

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.


Bret Cahill

As Phil says, any field that includes the word "science" in its name isn't one.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators

 

On Sat, 22 Dec 2012 21:24:36 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sat, 22 Dec 2012 19:40:02 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com
wrote:

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.


Bret Cahill

As Phil says, any field that includes the word "science" in its name isn't one.

Likewise, any that includes the word "studies", doesn't.

 

[Bret Cahill]

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.

Bret Cahill

As Phil says, any field that includes the word "science" in its name isn't one.

The polymath Jefferson said the three greatest men who ever lived were
Bacon, Locke and Newton.


Bret Cahill

 

[Bret Cahill]

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.

Bret Cahill

As Phil says, any field that includes the word "science" in its name isn't one.

Creationism "science" is certainly a perversion of the natural
meanings of words and 8 sig fig accuracy isn't always necessary in
medicine but that doesn't mean the word "science" doesn't have any
meaning.

The great thing about politics is they'll try any scam. The numerous
tactics are portable to other fields where they may be 100% ethical.
When Jefferson wrote "the feeble engines of despotism" it was a great
analogy. Few things are easier to monkey wrench than an engine and
this includes the popular prime movers that were invented after his
death.

I didn't get the displacement / vacuum cylinder of my deep well pump
from well drillers or fluid mechanics. I got it from the U. S.
political debate. Basically they displace what they don't want from
the political debate [economic issues] with what they do want in the
political debate [culture wars].


Bret Cahill

 

[petrus bitbyter]

"Bret Cahill" <Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:57284928-424f-4bdc-a53e-dd1b41bd2cf0@uc4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.


Bret Cahill

Looks like your brains're too small to recognize reality.
- Neither electronics nor politics are sciences.
- The ones that study them tend to learn nothing.
- An electronics tech, engineer or designer may accidentally kill himself.
- Criminals tend to kill others.
- Politicians let others kill others.
And that's only the short list.

 

[Bret Cahill]

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.

.. . .

- Politicians let others kill others.

Half the time they have no choice but to encourage it, supply arms,
etc.


Bret Cahill

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 22 Dec 2012 19:40:02 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.


Bret Cahill

Somehow your posts never make sense to me. I suppose it could be my
fault.

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 21:47:18 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill
<Bret_E_Cahill@yahoo.com> wrote:

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.

Somehow your posts never make sense to me. I suppose it could be my
fault.

You claim political science isn't rocket science. Well, at times it
would seem like you would be correct.

For example, one theory proffered by the GOP [Laffer] claims that tax
cuts on the rich increase revenue.

Laffer said that the tax revenue vs tax receipts curve peaks and then
dips. He's obviously correct. 0% rates raise no tax revenue, and 150%
don't raise any either. The question is where we are on that curve.
The bigger question is, *should* the government seek to maximize tax
revenue? (Hint: the answer is Hell, No!)

But it's more complex. A tax rate increase may increase tax revenues
in the short term and reduce them in the long term. There is no single
2D Laffer Curve, because time is involved, too.

Another theory proffered by the

claims that tax cuts on the rich
will "starve the beast."

Obviously wrong. Washington will increase spending irrespective of tax
revenue. We just borrow the money. Stimulus now, prudence in some
distant future.

Well? Do tax cuts on the rich increase revenue or do they starve the
beast?

It's not that simple. High corporate taxes kill jobs. Inheritance
taxes kill small businesses and farms. Once income taxes, on people or
businesses, cross 50%, tax avoidance becomes more important than
producing and earning. Taxing productive businesses does more harm
than taxing parasitic ones.

The real point is that tax policy is pitched to benefit the governing
class, and not the governed, and certainly not the working class.

Without even going near the vis viva equation it was possible to sway
[ridicule] trillions in fiscal policy!

So you are absolutely correct. Political science isn't [always]
rocket science!

The really hard part of political science is having the psychological
strength to be independent of the herd.

Political science is nonsense. It's the training ground for the next
generation of the governing class.

The wealthiest counties in the USA surround Washington, DC. The
best-funded, worst-performing schools in the country are
Democratic+Union strongholds, including DC.

That's how Buffet and Soros got to be billionaires. The herd bets one
way [the wrong way] and Buffet and Soros bet the independent [common
sense] way.

That's the Wall Street Casino. Nothing gets produced.

 

[Bret Cahill]

If you don't study electronics maybe you'll shock or kill yourself.

If you don't study political science you'll definitely kill everyone
-- no ifs ands or buts about it.

Somehow your posts never make sense to me. I suppose it could be my
fault.

You claim political science isn't rocket science. Well, at times it
would seem like you would be correct.

For example, one theory proffered by the GOP [Laffer] claims that tax
cuts on the rich increase revenue. Another theory proffered by the
same party [Libertarian-Norquist] claims that tax cuts on the rich
will "starve the beast."

Well? Do tax cuts on the rich increase revenue or do they starve the
beast?

Without even going near the vis viva equation it was possible to sway
[ridicule] trillions in fiscal policy!

So you are absolutely correct. Political science isn't [always]
rocket science!

The really hard part of political science is having the psychological
strength to be independent of the herd.

That's how Buffet and Soros got to be billionaires. The herd bets one
way [the wrong way] and Buffet and Soros bet the independent [common
sense] way.

I'm not posting this to encourage anyone here to become
billionaires. I'm just trying to encourage more inventing.


Bret Cahill


"Common sense isn't so common."

-- anon

 

[Bret Cahill]

The wealthiest counties in the USA surround Washington, DC.

But, on the plus side, students from NoVa compete in the math olympics
against _real_ math students from Poland, UK and Russia. Supposedly
Va. Beach is doing pretty good although someone might want to double
check that one.


Bret Cahill