Sometimes his observations are right on; other times they're just completely illogical:
Message 26119454
His agenda against the warming hypothesis overrode his ability to think rationally.
---
I got my first ban ever a couple of weeks ago, from Mish. The reason I mention this is that he was, from a somewhat influential position, beginning an anti-union diatribe. Now that's OK; if someone dislikes unions, that's their right, and there can be no reasonable objection. There's no question that public-sector unions will have to make adjustments --- but they negotiated lawful contracts in plain sight. What's more, there's a lawful method to get them in line: negotiation. And get in line they will, or be gone. Anyway, I started an uproar, getting large numbers of recommendations; so he banned me. The point is that I viewed Mish's somewhat disguised attack on unions as a predicted outcome of this crisis, where economic pressures would set various interests against each other. In that context I viewed Mish as (possibly) a Wall Street mouthpiece, being used to deflect attention from the real crooks by attacking a favorite straw man.
---
I don't really think Mish IS a Wall Street mouthpiece, but he's devoted very little space to the people who did the most damage - and continue unreformed. I don't doubt for a minute that Wall Street is paying to divert attention, and promote its agendas.
---
It's difficult to respect anyone who pontificates without knowledge or research and can't engage in a rational discussion. If you can't tolerate logical and factual debate it's a sign of weakness, not strength.
When you must always be right, there's something wrong.
Message 26343189
Jim |
