Re: Four Horsemen
- --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "walto" wrote:
> --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "mattbieker" wrote:I'm well aware. It's my favorite "Langstonianism," because it so accurately describes the process by which people continue to be wrong, even when confronted with facts that prove it. Harry has been made aware that his argument that checks displace money is wrong. There's no doubt he's read and considered it. He simply refuses to know it proves his argument wrong. Sounds weird, sure, but that's just exactly what's happening. If you've seen some of Roy's work on the internet's various forums, you've seen people refuse to know some pretty unbelievable things.
> Your steadfast refusal to know that fact....
> In case you hadn't realized this (aka "refused to realize" it) the expression "refusal to know" is a Langstonianism, pure and simple. Presumably, one can only "refuse to know something," by refusing to believe it. And, I don't know about you, but most of us don't actually choose most of the things we believe. Largely beyond our control.
> There may, however, be a refusal to consider the evidence.
- --- In LandCafe@yahoogroups.com, "harrypollard" wrote:
> So why not say they are changing systematically?"Inflation" is shorter and more descriptive.
> How does calling rising prices inflation help to "understand how, when and why"?Having a label and definition for the concept helps people share information about it.
> Whereas inflation in its original meaning indicates that the money issuer has done something.Maybe that's part of it: the apologists for bankster privilege want to conceal the fact that it is private commercial banks that are issuing the money, not government.
-- Roy Langston