PlanMaestro

New wave of American design stokes Detroit 3 market share gains http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130525/OEM03/305259999/new-wave-of-american-design-stokes-detroit-3-market-share-gains#axzz2UFq8elTj

I introduced no straw into the argument. What you said was ridiculous and indefensible. Which is why your only defense was an ad hominem. OK, show some data or evidence that demonstrates the economic impact of the printing press since its invention in 1454 and let's say 1700. I've been alone here putting evidence on the table, while most dismisse it with a sleight of hand. My only defense is that evidence: * Agriculture was 99.9% of the world output until the industrial revolution * The printing press does not show in the slow advances of agriculture, detailed in 1493. * There is no evidence in output per capita growth in history until the industrial revolution. * The gap of the richest countries compared the poorest countries until the industrial revolution were minor compared to today's standards. * Check the graph of historic GDP per capita. You can't see the printing press, you can see the steam engine. Now, if you think that the printing press was an enabling technology for the industrial revolution 300 years later, that only reinforces the point of that post: a technology is a tool, and its worth only depends on its use. You use it for art you get Gutenberg's bible, you use it for science you get Principia Mathematica, you use it for political theory you get The Prince, you use it for religion you get Luther and the King James' bible. Why wasn't it used for agricultural innovation? The industrial revolution is one of the most mysterious events in human history. What was stopping the invention of the steam engine or the cotton gin for centuries? The technologies are not that complicated. I doubt that it was the printing press but I concede that an argument can be made on it importance disseminating the steam experiments in France from the late 1600s … but letters worked well for Kepler and Brahe. I was reading today about the semaphore, the predecessor of the telegraph, that was introduced during the French Revolution and latter perfected by Napoleon. The technology is so ridiculously simple that it is not easy to understand why it wasn't introduced thousands of years before. No need of a printing press for that. The industrial revolution origins are not that clear even today after dozens of books and hundreds of years of accumulated investigation. Almost every year there is a new book (irony) that fails to solve that puzzle.

LoL, I love the smell of straw in the morning from a confessed anarchist.

BTW, these 31 charts are great. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/24/these-31-charts-will-destroy-your-faith-in-humanity/

Really? Impact doesn't matter? "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."

The point is that the title of this thread is "There's been no REAL innovation for the last 30 years", not that there hasn't been a rise in the standards of living over the last 250. The difference of productivity growth of 3% per year vs 1% per year compounded is a huge reduction in expectations, and has a real impact as you can see in the GDP per capita numbers.

Straw man. http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3699/8815760610_bc28e74bbb.jpg

http://www.krusekronicle.com/kruse_kronicle/2008/03/charting-histor.html#.UZ-g_GSG1QY BTW, the world before the industrial revolution was 99.9% agriculture. "1493" shows well how the very slow agricultural productivity improvements were achieved. The printing press doesn't show, only trade.

http://www.ggdc.net/maddison/maddison-project/home.htm Except if 300 years is short term.

No argument there, knowledge and technology can be beautiful and so can be art. But technology can also have bad effects. For example, the invention of the printing press had no economic impact at all, and instead was a trigger of religious wars.

Peter Thiel's comment is firmly backed by economic data. The ways how technology affect productivity and growth are very counterintuitive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity_paradox For example, many very simple technologies that are not in the headlines, like the container, had a much bigger impact in our living standards than anything that Apple has done. http://www.amazon.com/Box-Shipping-Container-Smaller-Economy/dp/0691136408 And to reinforce that point, the main impact that PCs had in the 90s productivity, some would say the only impact, was in retail and wholesaling through the Wal-Mart effect. Not in the cool applications that we read every day. The "Power of Productivity" is an excellent book for a deep dive in these issues. http://www.amazon.com/Power-Productivity-Wealth-Poverty-Stability/dp/0226476987/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1369412691&sr=1-1&keywords=power+of+productivity

http://www.amazon.com/Unexpected-Returns-Understanding-Secular-Market/dp/1879384620/ref=la_B001K87MBQ_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1369334496&sr=1-1 http://www.crestmontresearch.com/docs/Stock-PE-Report.pdf http://www.crestmontresearch.com/docs/Stock-PE-Pinnacle.pdf http://www.crestmontresearch.com/docs/Stock-Inflation-and-PE.pdf

ah, "The Widowmaker." http://rdd.me/ztfnbpep

With "I don't know" I meant "I haven't read it". From 1493 I think I can guess 1491 major themes: 1. The underestimation of the size of the native population before Colon. 2. the hugely disproportionate role of germs in its population collapse compared with the European "advances". (like 95/5 versus guns and steel) 3. a complete misunderstanding of the native crops and techniques with an underestimation of their productivity and defense against pathogens. 4. The observed "underutilization" of nature only a misperception based of (2) and (3) 5. and the observed "savagery" just a result of the huge collapse of population and civilization. But I can't know for sure his support for those assertions. However, in 1493 the parts that I knew well were accurately told, the parts I didn't know had support and acknowledgement of the ambiguities, and all in context it tells a thrilling and surprising story.

I don't know about 1491, but I just finished 1493 and it's impressive.

Behind the scenes, Straubel keeps Tesla running at pivotal time. http://www.autonews.com/article/20130518/OEM02/130519890#ixzz2TfH1FnN …

BREAKING on Bloomberg: Hartford said to hire Deutsche Bank for sale of Japan annuity unit. http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-MMUKOD6K512S01-62HA4T7OO4HN06C3AV2BPMMQFS

Extract from an email I sent last week to a known blogger that was asking about Life Insurance in general and Genworth in particular. Here are some comments on Genworth from a year ago. After the run-up, they look stupidly conservative but remember that at that time the world was going to collapse (once again) and there were plenty of cheap financials. Also, it's not much of a life company. http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/gnw-genworth-financial/msg82841/#msg82841 From last year, I would say the thing that changed the most is that the regulator concerns are much less of an issue now. It's very cheap but still a crappy business. I would guess, considering the similar position sizing to the warrants, that he likes the upside but sees some small probability of catastrophe.

Big 3 dominate vehicle quality survey, take or tie for 12 top spots http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130514/AUTO01/305140327#ixzz2TKSXfO5q

Morningstar: Open Road Ahead For U.S. Auto Companies http://www.readability.com/articles/vj8eke78

You're one tough jew. :)

non le imprese, solo le nazione.

You can always count on Kraven to make you laugh.

While doing some research about Portugal… http://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/empresas/detalhe/fundos_pabrai_investment_venderam_total_da_posicao_na_sonae_capital.html

http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2013/06/steve-cohen-insider-trading-case