sowhatquestion

Glad to see someone repping van Parijs on HN... while we're at it, I feel like I should recommend his longer and more systematic treatment of the subject, "Real Freedom For All" ( http://www.amazon.com/Real-Freedom-All-capitalism-Political/... ). Parts of it are sort of obtusely written (he spends a lot of time responding to other thinkers, e.g. Marx and Rawls, along the way), but there are good arguments scattered throughout.

I can't remember the specifics offhand, but I used the built-in value "NotImplemented" to address a problem like this once.

I'm astonished (in a good way) to see a perspective this radical represented on HN. Considering how the discussions of sexism usually go--i.e., a circle jerk in which we all congratulate ourselves for having slain the dragon of "political correctness"--I can't imagine it will be received well... but in any case, major kudos to the author and submitter.

This can be edited down to six lines with a simple trick: a Python string multiplied by True will return itself, and multiplied by False will return the empty string.

  for i in range(110):
      pr = ""
      pr += "Fizz" * (i%3 == 0)
      pr += "Buzz" * (i%5 == 0)
      pr += "Bazz" * (i%7 == 0)
      print (pr if pr else i)

I iterated over range(110) to show that it handles the "FizzBuzzBazz" case correctly.

EDIT: Or we could use lambdas as OP's Ruby code did; this might be more maintainable...

  cases = [
      lambda n: "Fizz" * (n%3 == 0),
      lambda n: "Buzz" * (n%5 == 0),
      lambda n: "Bazz" * (n%7 == 0) ]

  for i in range(110):
      pr = ""
      for case in cases:
          pr += case(i)
      print (pr if pr else i)

That's nine nonblank lines.

As of 6:30ish p.m. EST, this (http://linkdaq.net/sites/247vicodindrugstore.com) is one of the top "movers and shakers"... Can that be where the prize comes from? ;)

Some excellent points here, but his conclusions seem to be severely limited by self-interest and/or nostalgia.

"Individual investors and the funds that just invest in stocks and bonds are not going to crash the market."

So what happened in 1929 then?

Excellent response. I would just like to add that I've heard it pointed out many times since the 2008 financial crisis that, e.g., China's extremely high savings rates have been a drag on its economic recovery. The level of consumption required for growth can't happen if the vast majority of your population is neurotically saving every penny for retirement because they know there's no safety net.

Another point that the article makes is that these savers are rarely making "investments" that would meaningfully help the economy down the road (a possible argument against nudging them towards consumption). They're "stuffing it under the mattress," parking it in the safest investments they can find (cf. lower-middle-class America watching Glenn Beck and then rushing off to buy gold from his advertisers). Or at best, they're entrusting it to a "guy" (as described in TFA) who does roughly the same thing for them, while providing a nice placebo effect that makes them believe they're "investing."

I'm pretty sure where he gets it. For comparison: Rush Limbaugh, a social conservative, is threatened by any narrative of history that attributes great misdeeds, e.g. the genocide of Native Americans, to the dominant social group (Christian white males of European descent). Any evidence for the narrative that Limbaugh disfavors must be due to a conspiracy of minorities--hence we end up hearing him claim that Native Americans should pay reparations to white people. ESR, a libertarian, is threatened by any narrative of history that decouples the outcomes of individuals' lives from their innate merits, and instead places emphasis on the role of background factors such as race/class/gender/sexuality (viz. Alan Turing's persecution for being gay leading to his suicide). Any evidence for the narrative that ESR disfavors must be due to a conspiracy of bleeding-heart liberals--hence he throws Turing as well as Ada Lovelace under the bus.