Skeptics of an economic recovery

Follow us on Twitter!

Poll - What do you think?

Latest Activity

Joe Monk replied to John A. Jasilli, Esq.'s discussion 'Guantanomo Lawyers at Justice'

I disagree. Not all "controversial cases" are the same. In order to understand what makes the cases "controversial" and how, you need to look at the underlying merits of the cases. I notice also both Michael Mukasey's (former AG under Bush) law fir…

9 hours ago

John A. Jasilli, Esq. replied to John A. Jasilli, Esq.'s discussion 'Guantanomo Lawyers at Justice'

Well I think that's specifically not the point (the underlying merits of the cases). The point is about attroneys who take on controversial cases.

10 hours ago

Joe Monk replied to John A. Jasilli, Esq.'s discussion 'Guantanomo Lawyers at Justice'

I'm not seeing too much here. Of course, the Cheney crew can say exactly what they like, no matter how off the reservation. I don't see that your criticism of Holder goes through, for the following reason. Holder merely says "we'll be looking for…

19 hours ago

John A. Jasilli, Esq. added a discussion

Guantanomo Lawyers at Justice

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/09/attacking-lawyers-from-the-right-and-left/ This is quite controversial, but I don't think I see a problem here. Ostensibly, Liz Cheney was asking for information which the Justice Dept. is required…

yesterday

Joe Monk replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

Actually, I see that, according to the OED, the first recorded use of statistics as a mathematical term is 1837.

yesterday

Joe Monk replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

Oh, so now you don't like the use of statistics in the study? Perhaps you could try to be a little more specific about your problems in this regard. I'm not sure that this generalized diatribe against statistics is particularly constructive. Also I…

yesterday

John A. Jasilli, Esq. replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

Let me telescope out, per our face-to-face discussion yesterday. It is possible to find statistical support for nearly anything, and its opposite. If we are unaware of, or purposely exclude, the opposite, then we appear to have proof of our pet prop…

yesterday

Joe Monk replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

I think perhaps we're getting lost in a lot of irrelevant stuff here. Your are introducing a lot of subjective stuff and then questioning whether this subjective stuff can be studied. The studies are much simpler than all of this. The tests are des…

yesterday

John A. Jasilli, Esq. replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

(1) Statistics is a pretty well developed area of mathematics. Its strengths and weaknesses have been widely debated for at least 100 years. If you have a specific problem here, perhaps you can state it. It is no clear to me that statistics can app…

on Monday

John A. Jasilli, Esq. replied to John A. Jasilli, Esq.'s discussion 'Affects of Race & Gender on Judicial Decisions'

What I meant is that there is no proof of the article's assertion that the judges followed the law, in that the law may have ambiguities, or undeveloped aspects, such that it is not necesarliy "followable" in a unitary way. Also my criticism is of t…

on Monday

Joe Monk replied to John A. Jasilli, Esq.'s discussion 'Affects of Race & Gender on Judicial Decisions'

Well I wasn't in the business of proving anything here. I was merely reacting to the contents of the article. Perhaps you would like to prove something here? As I said "I would guess.."

on Monday

Joe Monk replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

Just a couple of reflections on this. As I said, I would report back about this some more late on this week. (1) Statistics is a pretty well developed area of mathematics. Its strengths and weaknesses have been widely debated for at least 100 years…

on Monday

Joe Monk replied to Dave Nadeau's discussion 'Will China DEvalue. Not REvalue, but the contrary...'

Somewhat thought-provoking article about this (Never short a country with $2 trillion in reserves?): http://mpettis.com/2010/02/never-short-a-country-with-2-trillion-in-reserves/

on Sunday

Joe Monk replied to Dave Nadeau's discussion 'Will China DEvalue. Not REvalue, but the contrary...'

(Bloomberg) China to Nullify Financing Guarantees by Local Governments: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aIcTfdm5rWdY&pos=1

on Sunday

John A. Jasilli, Esq. replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

I must confess that I have a hard time dealing with the validity of the soft sciences, and statistical sampling. The soft sciences make much use of statistical techniques, which to me is a double whammy. One of the problems I have is the existence…

on Sunday

John A. Jasilli, Esq. replied to Joe Monk's discussion '"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" -- the Dunning-Kruger Effect'

I'll have to re-read the study. Though this appears to be interesting, it seems to beg the question of the mathematical verity issue.

on Sunday