<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Repealing Economic Law</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/</link>
	<description>A First Things Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 May 2013 04:22:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lastest Abundance And Prosperity News &#124; Abundantly</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-20174</link>
		<dc:creator>Lastest Abundance And Prosperity News &#124; Abundantly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 24 Jun 2012 12:56:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-20174</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] conversation with one of my sons about the amazing abundance and prosperity in &#8230; Read more on First Things (blog)   This entry was posted in Abundance And Prosperity and tagged abundance, Lastest, News, [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] conversation with one of my sons about the amazing abundance and prosperity in &#8230; Read more on First Things (blog)   This entry was posted in Abundance And Prosperity and tagged abundance, Lastest, News, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kate Pitrone</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19689</link>
		<dc:creator>Kate Pitrone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2012 17:10:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19689</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I thought you had to have made that up, but Wikipedia tells me Singularitarianism is a real ism.

&lt;em&gt;Although acknowledging that there are some similarities between the Singularity and the Rapture (i.e., millenarianism, transcendence), Singularitarians counter that the differences are crucial (i.e., rationalism, naturalism, uncertainty of outcome, human-caused event, nature of the event contingent on human action, no insider privilege, no religious trappings, no revenge against non-believers, no anthropomorphism, evidence-based justification for belief).&lt;/em&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought you had to have made that up, but Wikipedia tells me Singularitarianism is a real ism.</p>
<p><em>Although acknowledging that there are some similarities between the Singularity and the Rapture (i.e., millenarianism, transcendence), Singularitarians counter that the differences are crucial (i.e., rationalism, naturalism, uncertainty of outcome, human-caused event, nature of the event contingent on human action, no insider privilege, no religious trappings, no revenge against non-believers, no anthropomorphism, evidence-based justification for belief).</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sally Morem</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19635</link>
		<dc:creator>Sally Morem</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2012 03:44:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m wondering how the PoMos here would react to the coming true repeal of all economic scarcities by accelerating tech.  As a Singulatarian, I&#039;m expecting big changes caused by the emergence of full-fledged nanotech in the 2020s.  Star Trek replicators in the 21st century, not the 23rd.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m wondering how the PoMos here would react to the coming true repeal of all economic scarcities by accelerating tech.  As a Singulatarian, I&#8217;m expecting big changes caused by the emergence of full-fledged nanotech in the 2020s.  Star Trek replicators in the 21st century, not the 23rd.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Lewis</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19627</link>
		<dc:creator>John Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 22:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19627</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We most certainly have not repealed the law of scarcity.  We never will, or at least not on a Macro-scale.  We have however changed the scarcity of certain goods. Salt is a big one.  Sugar I suppose is another, albeit technically lets call it corn syrup (a substitute).  

Brian was talking Atkins. The key I think is not to eat carbs, carbs cause an insulin spike, and an increased uptake of nutrients.  So theoretically you might be able to consume 3000 calories fat heavy and only absorb 2000. You starve your body of carbs and your body does not efficiently absorb calories. 

Fat still has 8.5-9 calories per gram.  It is not a rumor that eating a high calorie diet leads to fat (amount absorbed greater than amount burned off).  

I strongly disagree with Brian. That said I don&#039;t disagree with Atkins. 

I slightly agree with Brian in so far as I think a 2000 calorie diet made up of say Olive Oil (close to pure fat, will cause you gain less weight than an equal amount of calories consumed as refined sugar.) 17 tbsp of olive oil about 2000 calories.

One thing that is cheating about this is that carbs bind to water, so you get more water retention eating the carbs...(if the metric is weight) 

But if you eat 250 grams of sugar that is also 2000 calories.  But the sugar will cause an insulin spike, and increased absorbsion. 

But the increased absorbsion from the insulin spike short term, would not be enough to offset the caloric content of fat vs. carbs on a gram by gram basis. 

You will get fat faster on a 250g fat diet vs. a 250g carb diet.  But you won&#039;t get as fat as the calories would suggest you would (measured on a scale), for one thing because the loss of carbs will decrease water retension, for another thing because the calories in the olive oil in a carb starved system will not be properly/fully absorbed. 

In terms of survival if one person has a bottle of olive oil and the other has a 5lb bag of sugar they should share with each other, and to get the most of the calories they should always eat sugar about 3-4 minutes in advance of consuming the olive oil. In this way the body will absorb the 8.5-9 calories from per/g fat.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We most certainly have not repealed the law of scarcity.  We never will, or at least not on a Macro-scale.  We have however changed the scarcity of certain goods. Salt is a big one.  Sugar I suppose is another, albeit technically lets call it corn syrup (a substitute).  </p>
<p>Brian was talking Atkins. The key I think is not to eat carbs, carbs cause an insulin spike, and an increased uptake of nutrients.  So theoretically you might be able to consume 3000 calories fat heavy and only absorb 2000. You starve your body of carbs and your body does not efficiently absorb calories. </p>
<p>Fat still has 8.5-9 calories per gram.  It is not a rumor that eating a high calorie diet leads to fat (amount absorbed greater than amount burned off).  </p>
<p>I strongly disagree with Brian. That said I don&#8217;t disagree with Atkins. </p>
<p>I slightly agree with Brian in so far as I think a 2000 calorie diet made up of say Olive Oil (close to pure fat, will cause you gain less weight than an equal amount of calories consumed as refined sugar.) 17 tbsp of olive oil about 2000 calories.</p>
<p>One thing that is cheating about this is that carbs bind to water, so you get more water retention eating the carbs&#8230;(if the metric is weight) </p>
<p>But if you eat 250 grams of sugar that is also 2000 calories.  But the sugar will cause an insulin spike, and increased absorbsion. </p>
<p>But the increased absorbsion from the insulin spike short term, would not be enough to offset the caloric content of fat vs. carbs on a gram by gram basis. </p>
<p>You will get fat faster on a 250g fat diet vs. a 250g carb diet.  But you won&#8217;t get as fat as the calories would suggest you would (measured on a scale), for one thing because the loss of carbs will decrease water retension, for another thing because the calories in the olive oil in a carb starved system will not be properly/fully absorbed. </p>
<p>In terms of survival if one person has a bottle of olive oil and the other has a 5lb bag of sugar they should share with each other, and to get the most of the calories they should always eat sugar about 3-4 minutes in advance of consuming the olive oil. In this way the body will absorb the 8.5-9 calories from per/g fat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kate Pitrone</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19621</link>
		<dc:creator>Kate Pitrone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 18:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19621</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Brian, I am not writing as a dietician.  Rumor has it that that too much fat causes too much fat.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brian, I am not writing as a dietician.  Rumor has it that that too much fat causes too much fat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kate Pitrone</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19620</link>
		<dc:creator>Kate Pitrone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 18:31:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19620</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gene Callahan, God knows if the error was through autocorrect or my stupid fingers.  Thanks for pointing out my error so I could repair it: apologies and embarrassed laughter.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gene Callahan, God knows if the error was through autocorrect or my stupid fingers.  Thanks for pointing out my error so I could repair it: apologies and embarrassed laughter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gene Callahan</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19619</link>
		<dc:creator>Gene Callahan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 18:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19619</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;While I was reading Peter Lawyer’s post on The Fat Tax,&quot;

Is that a more legalistic version of Peter Lawler?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;While I was reading Peter Lawyer’s post on The Fat Tax,&#8221;</p>
<p>Is that a more legalistic version of Peter Lawler?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sally r</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19615</link>
		<dc:creator>sally r</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 16:59:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19615</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[He&#039;s saying that sugar is cheap and so we become fat.  The fat that comes cheaply is the stuff on our hips and bellies.  Go to any impoverished part of the USA and what you see is not skinny emaciated people, but rather very fat people.  It is indeed a world turned upside down.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>He&#8217;s saying that sugar is cheap and so we become fat.  The fat that comes cheaply is the stuff on our hips and bellies.  Go to any impoverished part of the USA and what you see is not skinny emaciated people, but rather very fat people.  It is indeed a world turned upside down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/2012/06/04/repealing-economic-law/comment-page-1/#comment-19612</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/postmodernconservative/?p=7202#comment-19612</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;Fat comes cheaply, not just on humans, but for consumption.&quot;
It&#039;s becoming more and more clear that the notion that &quot;eating fat make you fat&quot; is just not true, never was true, and never even had the slightest shred of evidence to support it besides &quot;hey, that sounds like it might be true!&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Fat comes cheaply, not just on humans, but for consumption.&#8221;<br />
It&#8217;s becoming more and more clear that the notion that &#8220;eating fat make you fat&#8221; is just not true, never was true, and never even had the slightest shred of evidence to support it besides &#8220;hey, that sounds like it might be true!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
