Times.konradturski.com – Political and Economic Commentary by a Postgrad in London

My Favourite Conservative, Bill Kristol, has a new article in the NYT  today, bashing a Moveon.org ad that, in turn, bashes John McCain and his 100 years in Iraq misquote. I’ll skip right to the chase today, because I have an exam tomorrow. In his page long review of Moveon.org’s ad (I’ll let you guess his verdict), Kristol Googles up McCain’s addendum to his famous 100 years quote, which goes as follows:

As long as Americans are not being injured or harmed or wounded or killed, it’s fine with me, and I hope it would be fine with you if we maintain a presence in a very volatile part of the world. …”

The implication being that, given the state of events, America cannot afford not have military bases in Iraq, double negative and all.

Oh yes it can. Here are the three reasons McCain has some explaining to do, if he thinks Baghdad can be transformed into another West Germany.

Read the rest of this entry »

The BBC reports today that Britain’s lovable Chancellor of the Exchequer, Alistair Darling, is politely asking everyone to restrain themselves to 2% wage increases this year, to fight inflation.

But John Nash and his “friends” proved this does not work, forty years ago! And then they all got Nobel Prizes. How will Chancellor Darling overcome incentived cheating, collective action problems, and human rationality to prevent a catastrophic descent into Nash Equilibrium hell?

Raw Unadulterated Charisma.

When the Democrats took control of both legislative chambers in 2006, I was unpleasantly surprised by the rapidity with which they caved into the Bush administration’s successful push for an endless occupation of Iraq. I will not discuss that mistake at present, other than to say that it is disappointing to watch dozens of legitimately and democratically-elected peoples’ representatives shirk their mandate and their convictions as a result of a daylong testimony by a pre-emptively deified military man (Gen. Petraeus). What I will argue is that Obama is falling into a similar trap, a trap conveniently set by a national discourse that continues to value the appearance of strength more than the safety, security, and consistency that come from rationality and common sense.

It is  called the “Strong” fallacy, and it is what convinced Hillary Clinton to vote in support of the Iraq War five years ago. It was Obama’s common sense that allowed him to understand, back in 2003, the logical inconsistency of a “strong” national policy that leads your nation to war and ruin. To put it bluntly, Obama grasped the fact that it doesn’t matter how much you love your country, if you destroy it in the process.

Unfortunately, that stroke of common sense seems – like so many a college student this summer – to have gone on holiday. Consider these four recent examples:

Read the rest of this entry »

In 2007, I graduated from Amherst College. I thought I had a pretty good idea of where the world was headed,  and like many who graduated in my field (economics, mathematics, and history) I was faced with various entry-level slots at economics and finance-related firms and policymaking institutions.

What would the future have held for me if I had chosen these professions? Let’s take a look, shall we.

Read the rest of this entry »

…But WHICH ONE?

Oh, it was Jerome, again.

Hey Tom, if you love Egypt so much, why don’t you MARRY IT?

NYT Op-Ed Today

…NYT Op-Ed Last Week

Related Posts:

More of Thomas Friedman’s Boneheaded Shenanigans

Say Again?