Neo

My heart smiles. Unapologetic, as used by you in this context, moves to first place in my word of the month contest for August.* PA's "Luddite" remains in the race!

The demand. Satisfy an existing demand, or uncover an unknown demand with innovation, and profit is yours. The determinative power is in the demand.

I'd argue those people are nuts. Probably voters criticizing outsourcing and the politicians pandering to them. I've found them in red and blue shirts.

Is everyone happier with the cheaper better goods? Manipulate me, baby!

WB, Oddball! Innovation is the discovery of a good. Supply and demand act in concert to find market equilibrium for that good. My language, for clarity. I don't say the supply created the demand. Supply without demand is obsolete inventory.

It's true more often than not. The Russians and the Chinese are figuring it out. I'm not an economist, but I'd say innovation captures most of the "supply creates demand" arguement. Innovation, that wonderful result of the profit motive. Careful, though, some existing florist gets bruised when the supply of new plastic flowers creates a demand for them. (I'd argue the unarticulated demand existed first, but that's another post). After the innovation, supply levels to demand. I am on thin economist ice! I can think of no "non-innovation" or "non-scarcity" situation where supply created demand. When new items, and when new supply and demand, arise in concert, there is a period where supply and demand are carts running abreast of horses.

My experience, captured best by your words.

Awesome! Here, here - and hear, hear. Magical Mystery Tour was my first record.

I'm a terrible shopper.

It was our (the diners) slavish obsession with profit that cost him his job. Flowers adorned gas stations, too. We turn left instead of right for 1 cent a gallon. We self served gasoline to save a few cents more. The smiling uniformed guy had to adapt. My only point: owners and customers squeeze the .001% you mentioned. Broader than a 1950s conversation, I'm sure. I'm not saying that while eating cake. It's a truism we're all involved with. I've abandoned "should" in favor of "will". In that framework, I still look for kinder, gentler. I just don't look to legislation contrary to human behavior. Legislation fails too often to be relied upon. What do you think of Uber?

I'd prefer flowers everywhere. There are restaurants that give me fresh cut flowers at the table. They're more expensive than gravel. Others, as you point out, do not. Me and 330 million of my closest friends decide where to eat every day. Before I get depressed, I remember America gives me both choices. PS: I'm having a six inch tuna sub at Subway, between appointments. The flowers are on the wall, in pots, and plastic.

They paid the appropriate rate relative to the needs of an appropriately sized government. Are you asking a rhetorical question or setting up an insight? They must've. The economy grew. The error, of course, would be concluding the taxes caused the growth. I'm more interested in growth than throwing elbows at the successful wealthy. I have two responses - race and wealth. I give you, America, the mindset that explains the predicament!

Pension reform, I'm in. Social Security, the biggest whale of 'em all, included. Participation for all races, creeds, etc. I'm in. Social advances. Add LGBT, too. Two changes that'd be wonderful. I look at what activity worked, what infrastructure worked, and reform for each that didn't work. I'm less attracted to changing infrastructures so all can equally underachieve. White vs. black issues are real. They're limiting when evaluating what works or what doesn't, unless you think races have different abilities. I don't. I think you're stuck in what's become our polarized thought process. I'm so modern! I'd list what worked for human beings, keep it, and make sure it's available to all human beings. I'll not change society's infrastructure because I've determined different human beings require different things to thrive. Or, if I do, I'll not complain about the predictable consequences.

I wouldn't call that a thorough assesmemt of the 1950 economy. I'm not even sure it's accurate. Labor and management colluding is interesting. Would that be a good thing? People worked, earned living wages and had retirements all without massive federal debt. What can was kicked, who kicked it, and what were the consequences? Do you object to growth, affordable college, and full employment as a description of conditions at the time?

I'm not an old rich white guy. My wife's not an old rich white woman. We're interested in the next century. The 1950s had some crazy music, though! Advice to the battling generation. You may want to consider what it was about the 1950s that lead to growth and not inflation, affordable college without debt, and full employment. You can toss out desired results with the bath water and sneering commentary, or you can look, learn, and use what worked while improving what didn't. There are consequences to both approaches. Guess which approach leads to better results.

i was spinning things around in my head this morning, and found myself enjoying the deliberative possiblaties in a club where Armageddon is only slightly off topic!

Great to see you, NS! A treat, no doubt.

I was moved by your plight at the hands of our moderators. I offer the following. I like each!

This baby boomer will gladly add his voice to the millennials' (if only this one time).

I will close my DSD conversation with this. Tonight, I will tell my family that I have been accused of misrepresenting the Intersex Society of North America.

Missed this while debating chromosomes and the distinction between the word offensive and the phrase less-charged. True, indeed.

See my post, above. Edited and Cited! It's the best I can do. I believe, Hoss, you're speaking to the disorder. I'm speaking to what ISNA identifies as the continuing evolution of terms, which was the very initial debate and the only topic of my posts. Aren't you confirming the word evolution so frustrating to JJ? "Over the past year, we ("ISNA") have begun to use the term “disorders of sex development,” or DSD, in place of “intersex” in these contexts. It’s not our intention to make intersex an entirely medical issue. But we are addressing people working in a medical context. We have found that the word DSD is much less charged than “intersex,” and that it makes our message of patient-centered care much more accessible to parents and doctors. Our aim is to meet them where they are. "

Ayn Rand wrote a novel about it a few years back.

"Disability" didn't wait to be a pejorative before it became offensive. I think that's the rub. The insults are real, from time to time, but they're also imagined from time to time. I didn't know the terms intersex or DSD until yesterday. Intersex was presented here as the alternative to the offensive hermaphrodite. Now, the Intersex Society of North America ("ISNA") website* is urging us to DSD. Who knew today's "intersex" would be offensive like yesterday's "hermaphrodite". I've found websites encouraging the replacement of DSD with the less offensive Gender Dysphoria. I kid you not. Yesterday's revelation (intersex) is now two iterations dated. Intersex didn't wait to be a perjorative. Offense arose organically. JJ said he can't keep up. Hoss suggested this may be some combination of traits unique to JJ. If the uber-informed Hoss can't keep up, then neither can I. I admire JJ's candor, believe he wasn't deliberately offensive, and suggest the solution lies in the offended, not the offenders. *. Transparency: Over the past year, we ("ISNA") have begun to use the term “disorders of sex development,” or DSD, in place of “intersex” in these contexts. It’s not our intention to make intersex an entirely medical issue. But we are addressing people working in a medical context. We have found that the word DSD is much less charged than “intersex,” and that it makes our message of patient-centered care much more accessible to parents and doctors. Our aim is to meet them where they are.

I should have known that you'd know the contractual ins and outs. Salary caps, CBAs and royalties.