Welcome to the updated Slickdeals redesign beta. Learn more and give us feedback. Or, return to the classic view.

Search in
Frontpage Deal
DiscountMags Discounts, Deals and Coupon Codes

1-Year The Economist Magazine Subscription (51 Issues) EXPIRED

hypoh 5,931 November 2, 2012 at 12:15 PM in Other (3) More DiscountMags Deals
Deal
Score
+30
35,531 Views
See Deal
$50

Deal Details

Promoted 11-03-2012 at 12:00 AM View Original Post
Discount Mags has The Economist Magazine 1-Year Subscription (51 Issues) for $50 or student rate (school name required) of $45 when you apply coupon code SLICKDEALS at checkout. Thanks hypoh

Original Post

DiscountMags.com is offering 1 Year Subscription for $49.99 or $44.99 with a valid school name (there is no difference between the two subscriptions).

The Economist [discountmags.com] $49.99 with coupon code SLICKDEALS
The Economist (Student) [discountmags.com] $44.99 with coupon code SLICKDEALS

Economist print subscriptions include free digital/online access. You'll just need to wait for your first issue to arrive in order to activate.

Works for New or Renewal subscriptions.

157 Comments

7 8 9 10 11

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#151
Quote from Kumicho View Post :
If you're not going to bother reading my posts, there's no reason to even bother responding to you....

http://slickdeals.net/forums/showpost.php?p=54519674&postcount=131

You can just say you don't know. There's no embarrassment in admitting your ignorance.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#152
Quote from SiloSmashers View Post :
You can just say you don't know. There's no embarrassment in admitting your ignorance.
As amusing as your dodging / avoiding the question have been, it's getting tiring. If you're not going to respond to my point about M3's graph on SGS, there's really no point. Enjoy your delusions, I'm done here.


Btw, have you checked out the going rate on mortgages lately? My credit union is offering 3.25% on 30y fixed mortgages. If that's your idea of "inflation", I really don't know what to say...
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#153
Quote from Kumicho View Post :
As amusing as your dodging / avoiding the question have been, it's getting tiring. If you're not going to respond to my point about M3's graph on SGS, there's really no point. Enjoy your delusions, I'm done here.


Btw, have you checked out the going rate on mortgages lately? My credit union is offering 3.25% on 30y fixed mortgages. If that's your idea of "inflation", I really don't know what to say...

I love SGS. If the M3 is going down how do you explain the inflation rate on SGS?
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#154
Quote from Kumicho View Post :
As amusing as your dodging / avoiding the question have been, it's getting tiring. If you're not going to respond to my point about M3's graph on SGS, there's really no point. Enjoy your delusions, I'm done here.


Btw, have you checked out the going rate on mortgages lately? My credit union is offering 3.25% on 30y fixed mortgages. If that's your idea of "inflation", I really don't know what to say...
Quote from SiloSmashers View Post :
I love SGS. If the M3 is going down how do you explain the inflation rate on SGS?
So the source you use to show a decline in the m3 which you claim makes inflation impossible also shows high inflation. How embarassing for you.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#155
Quote from SiloSmashers View Post :
So the source you use to show a decline in the m3 which you claim makes inflation impossible also shows high inflation. How embarassing for you.
You mean the "high inflation" that's lower than the average rate that it's been since 2000? LMAO

We've dumped trillions into the marketplace and the best you can offer is "OMFG, we're just below 6% (SGS's 1990-based alternate inflation index), and below the rate from '00, '01, '03, '04, '05, '06, '07 and '08! RUN FOR THE HILLS!!"

We're below the median for the past decade+ based on whatever set of statistics you want to use. For some reason this whole Randian/Austrian bullsh!t didn't exist when there was a guy with an (R) after his name in the White House even though (as you've apparently admitted?) inflation was higher then as opposed to now.

Like I said, if you can't explain why we're actually facing (OMFG!!) inflation beyond misreading a graph on SGS, then there's really no point to this discussion. And I also notice that you completely ignored the fact that 30y mortgages are down to 3.25%... Then again, I'm not surprised that you just ignore facts that don't mesh with your (preconceived) worldview).
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#156
Quote from Kumicho View Post :
You mean the "high inflation" that's lower than the average rate that it's been since 2000? LMAO

We've dumped trillions into the marketplace and the best you can offer is "OMFG, we're just below 6% (SGS's 1990-based alternate inflation index), and below the rate from '00, '01, '03, '04, '05, '06, '07 and '08! RUN FOR THE HILLS!!"

We're below the median for the past decade+ based on whatever set of statistics you want to use. For some reason this whole Randian/Austrian bullsh!t didn't exist when there was a guy with an (R) after his name in the White House even though (as you've apparently admitted?) inflation was higher then as opposed to now.

Like I said, if you can't explain why we're actually facing (OMFG!!) inflation beyond misreading a graph on SGS, then there's really no point to this discussion. And I also notice that you completely ignored the fact that 30y mortgages are down to 3.25%... Then again, I'm not surprised that you just ignore facts that don't mesh with your (preconceived) worldview).

1) Firstly, you need to practice reading a graph.


http://www.shadowstats.com/altern...ion-charts


2) SGS puts inflation between 6-10%. Quick math question for you: How long will it take for your money to lose half it's purchasing power at 6% Inflation? 10%?


3) Why does your own source show such high inflation with a decreasing M3? This is something you claim can't/isn't happening.


4) Rates are set by the Fed and are artificially/stupidly low. If you can find a house that's price isn't stupidly overvalued because of low rates, consider it.


5) I hope I put this in a way that was simple enough for you to understand.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#157
Good grief. I give up. If you can't explain why 6% now is bad, while 5 years ago 10% wasn't, or 10 years ago 6% wasn't, then I'm talking to a brick wall. If you can't explain why being below average inflation compared to the past decade and a half is somehow equal to "high inflation", then there's really no point in going on.

I'm done here. Seriously, turn off Glenn Beck and open an Econ101 textbook some time.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#158
Quote from Kumicho View Post :
Good grief. I give up. If you can't explain why 6% now is bad, while 5 years ago 10% wasn't, or 10 years ago 6% wasn't, then I'm talking to a brick wall. If you can't explain why being below average inflation compared to the past decade and a half is somehow equal to "high inflation", then there's really no point in going on.

I'm done here. Seriously, turn off Glenn Beck and open an Econ101 textbook some time.

It's okay, there is no shame in not understanding economics (or basic reading). Just try not to pass yourself off as someone who does. That puts you in serious danger of embarrassing yourself further.


Look, you're probably a decent guy- well meaning, but ignorant. So I'm going to give you a little rhetoric tip. You can't just pepper in arguments your opponent didn't make or accuse them of watching a TV show and be taken seriously. Address the issue at hand or shuffle off to study more.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Page 11 of 11
7 8 9 10 11
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Slickdeals Price Tracker
Saving money just got easier.
Start Tracking Today
Copyright 1999 - 2015. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / DMCA Notice  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)