Krugman's short commentary on the situation.

There was an interesting article in GQ about fasting (only water is allowed).

http://www.gq.com/life/fitness/201311/six-day-water-fast-die...

Then would corporations have to pay a higher tax on the land they own as well? If so, costs of goods would increase, if not, what's to stop a person from starting their own corporation and using their firm to buy the land their house is on.

Furthermore, I believe it will just shift portfolio distributions. One would prefer to own shares of firms that require little real estate to operate like internet firms. Credit card and internet banking business come to mind as they are able to reach millions of customers without requiring lots of real estate. Manufacturing would get punished and I would foresee lots of middle class workers who work in manufacturing/industrial type jobs to get laid off.

On exchanges, the quality would be specified in trading though.

If you exclusively consume media and write emails, then tablets are quite suitable. They take up little to no space and are easy to carry around (one could argue laptops are portable as well, but compared to tablets, I find the difference to be quite big and I use a Lenovo X1).

I was looking at getting a surface pro as it met the amount of computing power I needed on a daily basis. And the fact that it has full desktop functionality is very attractive if I needed to use office applications.

That probably explains it. I prefer simple food and don't enjoy intense bursts of flavor.

But still, isn't the context of the sentence suppose to mean that those foods are more enjoyable because the higher levels of glutamate that make it more flavorful?

Almost all foods have some naturally occurring glutamate in them but the ones with most are obvious: ripe tomatoes, cured meats, dried mushrooms, soy sauce, Bovril and of course Worcester sauce,

There must be something wrong with my tongue. I don't particularly find any of those appetizing and actually don't eat many of those listed.

Interesting. I assume the results were simple averages? I wonder what the results would look like if the 10,000 were weighted by the number of films they have been in.

Have you ever lived in the suburbs though? You have so much more space for everything, hobbies and it makes things easier especially if you have a family. Having a car is a must though, but many people like driving anyways.

“Males reciprocate friendship requests from females faster than vice versa and hesitate to reciprocate hostile actions of females,” say Szell and Thurner.

A more serious problem could be the well known phenomenon that women tend to receive better treatment in male-dominated online gaming communities.

It's a good strategy though.

Its only annoying they think they know everything about the subject. Those who are willing to learn more when they engage in debates with others, and question what they have heard are fine though.

This reminds me of this article about constructed languages.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/12/24/121224fa_fact_...

...an idealized language whose aim is the highest possible degree of logic, efficiency, detail, and accuracy in cognitive expression via spoken human language, while minimizing the ambiguity, vagueness, illogic, redundancy, polysemy (multiple meanings) and overall arbitrariness that is seemingly ubiquitous in natural human language.”

Wray describes money in a country as a pyramid.

In "Modern Money Theory", Wray, pg 85.

Private financial liabilities are not only denominated in the government's money of account, but they also are, ultimately, convertible into the government's currency.

So from that alone, MMT does support the role of money issued by non-government entities. To see why, he continues on pg 86 with:

We can think of a pyramid of liabilities, with different layers according to the degree of separation from the central bank...The shape of the pyramid is instructive for two reasons. First, there is a hierarchical arrangement whereby liabilities issued by those higher in the pyramid are generally more acceptable...Second, the liabilities at each level typically leverage the liabilities at the higher levels.

From "Modern Money Theory" by Wray, pg 85:

Private financial liabilities are not only denominated in the government's money of account, but they also are, ultimately, convertible into the government's currency.

pg 86:

We can think of a pyramid of liabilities, with different layers according to the degrees of separation from the central bank.

So basically, other institutions can issue their form of money, but it all leads back to the government/central bank.

He then goes on to talk about the different layers of the pyramid like nonbank IOUs, Bank IOUs, then says:

Finally, the government is highest in the pyramid - with no liabilities higher than its inconvertible IOUs.

The shape of the pyramid is instructive for two reasons. First, there is a hierarchical arrangement whereby liabilities issued by those higher in the pyramid are generally more acceptable...Second, the liabilities at each level typically leverage the liabilities at the higher levels.

Great to see someone spreading the MMT theory. I find it too difficult to convince people since they're usually too grounded in the economics learned in school and it seems to require an overhaul in thinking to understand MMT.

Did you come up with that yourself or did you study MMT?

Thanks for taking the time to write up that explanation. In your original post, were you saying that we should incorporate these ideas into our (America's) current system or are you suggesting we replace them with these non-market economic systems?

There are more optimal ways to run our economies than unchecked markets.

Could you expand on that? I'm genuinely curious.

reality teaches us that capitalism has led to oligopoly situations in essentially every imaginable market.

I would argue that America is showing great innovation and increases in their standard of living (note that I am not American, so this is not an America is the greatest country etc. etc. opinion). Microsoft, a behemoth in the early days of computing is now competing heavily with Apple & Google. Apple which took away the smart phone market from RIM is now under intense competition with phones using Android. Everyone is forced to innovate and create a better user experience as a result (see Microsoft's revamped lineup: skydrive, outlook, w8, wp8, etc.). Outside of tech, things continually help make living easier and more comfortable. For example, those automatic shower cleaners and disposable toilet cleaning brushes make it quick and easy to clean your bathroom (especially useful for those uncomfortable getting close to toilets to clean them).

Oligopolies can be beneficial and I would say their presence does not necessarily mean a failure of capitalism. For example, accounting firms that audit multi national corporations essentially need to be an oligopoly. Oligopolies can also have the resources to innovate in a way small companies can't.

Caffeine may help ease Parkinsons’s symptoms: study http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/healt...

If you're into animals, you can go puffin and whale watching.

If you like natural landscape there's gullfoss falls, geysirs. Also, the ridge separating the North American tectonic plate and Mid-Atlantic plate, you can go scuba diving in the waters that separate it.

Iceland has great water so to speak, so a lot of people go to the swimming pools and the geothermal pool blue lagoon is a big attraction. Water is crystal clear wherever you go, so they always make good pictures.

Also, food is amazing. Great seafood, and the most popular restaurant is a hot-dog stand. You can Google it and Bill Clinton has even stopped by to eat there.

If you're into technology, you can tour their geothermal plant. Iceland is 99% powered by renewable energy so it's pretty neat to get to walk around their plant.

There is literally tons to do in Iceland and I'm sure you'll have a great time.

The point of the town is to enable researchers to test new technologies on existing infrastructure without interfering in everyday life. For instance, while some researchers will be testing smart technologies on old grids, others might be using the streets to test self-driving cars.

It would make sense in the example of self-driving cars. Shouldn't test those on real roads.

Article is from 2007, but still relevant.