http://worldinnovationfoundation.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-uks-and-usas-per-capita-decline-in.html

Still on your revisionism, I see, as you demand that I be you, completely and obviously ignorant of an event. It’s you, it’s always been you, and your complete lack of knowledge of the FT’s attack on Piketty is yours.

Of course you read the share prices with great interest, 1%er. And nothing else, as it seems. That you’re adverse to your own posts…is not my problem, “ignorance pool man”, as I now dub thee.

Nothing you’ve said “refuses to accept the claims the FT has made” because you haven’t bothered to acquaint yourself with what the FT has said. You’re just reacting to what others have said.

I do know. I subscribe to the FT, purely because of the quality of their analysis of public policy issues. I read/ follow a lot of other publications, etc, too. But I have an aversion to uninformed discussion, otherwise known as the pooling of ignorance.

Why don’t you just say that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about? To be fair to you, I should have twigged that a while ago.

Keep spewing your personal abuse, claiming you’re mind-controlling me now, as nothing I’ve said refuses to accept the claims the FT made!

That YOU don’t know what the heck I am talking about, as you’re will fully ignorant…

The FT tried to debunk him. They failed. Get over it.

Ah, reality has begun to dawn on you! You began your stream of unsupported assertions by claiming that the FT coverage had been “thoroughly debunked”. When invited to comment on a specific part of that coverage, you duck.

How did that feel (reality impinging on your consciousness)? A rare experience? Too much to hope that you could learn from it?

But thank you for disclosing why you are so poorly informed on the issue (and, presumably, many more). Rather than looking at, and considering, the primary sources/ evidence for yourself, you see whether a big “news splash” has been made – and if it has, you assume that it can be relied on… Says it all…

PS Just for your information, 1 + 1 = 2. Here are the requests:

1. Have you read the FT’s coverage? If so, can you please point (insofar as the paywall allows) to the articles to which you are referring?

2. Do you think that the comments that

“French economist Thomas Piketty has written an extraordinarily important book. Open-minded readers will surely find themselves unable to ignore the evidence and arguments he has brought to bear.”

have been “thoroughly debunked”?

Ah, reality has begun to dawn for you!

You began your stream of unsupported assertions by claiming that the FT coverage had been “thoroughly debunked”. Now, when invited to comment on a specific part of that coverage, you duck.

How did that feel (reality impinging on your consciousness), Leon? A rare experience? Too much to hope that you could learn from it, and start engaging your brain before scribbling drivel and pressing the ‘send’ button?

But I now understand ” where you are coming from. You really believe that because something is “all over the press” it’s true? Says it all, really…

“Why let the truth interfere with your comfortable, simplistic, binary myths?”

Indeed, that does describe your position.
Again, you’re not even aware of the FT’s poorly done criticism of the book, but continue to revel in your ignorance, harping back to a review in the past.

I’m not here to do your basic google searches for you, when it was all over the press…

Your disinclination to respond to my repeated requests to identify the specific FT articles, or the problem (for you) with the review of Pickett’s book, appears to say a lot…

Why let the truth interfere with your comfortable, simplistic, binary myths?

Yea, you’re not even aware of the issue.

You are insulting me because of your own ignorance. Nothing more.

You give a highly convincing impression of trying to imitate an ostrich, Leon.

Do you think that the comments that

“French economist Thomas Piketty has written an extraordinarily important book. Open-minded readers will surely find themselves unable to ignore the evidence and arguments he has brought to bear.”

have been “thoroughly debunked”?

Maybe one day you’ll discover that the earth isn’t flat, even if you keep increasing the volume with which you insist that it is? We can only live in hope.