Non Sequitur by Wiley Miller for August 19, 2015

And same old corn poop on a stick…..

I’ll have a large glass, thanks.

Is that an economist rushing to put a gag on the vendor?

take my word for it…..stay away from the smarm au jus….

Hmmm, simplistic.like, perhaps…" I’ll repeal blah blah blah, and replace it with something better?"

Not sure why the multiple posts. My humblest of apologies, especially if this one multiplies as well. I really, truly have no idea why it did that. Especially if this one does as well. :/

Giant, just delete the extra ones….I wonder why there are double postings today…Same on Arlo and Janis…

Hey,mine just came up double, too…I deleted the other one….

And the hallmark of this strip – smugness – resurfaces.

Why isn’t Maureen Dowd, Paul Krugman and KelthnOberlin leading the pack. Talk about “Smarm Au Jus”!!!!

They must be stuck in the ’70’s..‘cause they just keep truckin’.

“I’ll have the Donald Trump Special, please. Easy on the reality; I have to go back to work.”

The sad irony is that this strip four years old, and still relevant.I guess as long as there are elections…

Fox “news” have already got this market segment well covered…..

“And the hallmark of this strip – smugness – resurfaces.”

Yeah don’t want it to go all “elitey” on you…….heaven help those with actual knowledge get in the way of “belief” and “Heritage”…….

Jim in CT said, about 1 hour agoThe sad irony is that this strip four years old, and still relevant.I guess as long as there are elections…

As long as there are politics, politicians, and pundits !

Has Wiley stopped being funny and started being part of the problem

They told us to only use cash flow statements because balance statements, income statements, and owners equity were all corporate garbage. That was 25 years ago in the M.B.A. program in finance intro. It was already in textbooks as a classic case. The textbook taught the algorithms to transform financial statements into cash flow statements. And cash flow statements are simplistic. Simplistic was the correct way to uncover the corruption.I figure corporations have two sets of books, and the real books are what you would keep if the corporation was a sole proprietorship.Complicated economists are covering up their ignorance or corruption, If you can not dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullsh**, like the derivatives market, duh.

So what econ theories not simplistic? Or is that a formula for the au jus, which is what?

I thought that the Non Sequitur commenters would have questions about the repetitions that started up yesterday in the comments. Well, I have a theory: My theory is that some employee was enjoined to remove the "Find a comic/SEARCH’ section at the top of the page, but to leave it at the bottom so that to get to it, we would have to see all the ads from top to bottom. In the process he/she inadvertently fired up the “repeat” function and made it so that we can’t do replies to other commenters’ statements. (No telling what other devastation might have ensued.) This individual (or committee) may have been escapees from Amazon, still in a state of shock.

BTW, I’ve been sending this prerecorded message to all the sites I read:News flash: For the second day, the doppelgänger hacker is on the prowl! Whatever you post will be repeated. Just delete one of the posts, and all will be well.

Warmed over ideas….

Just oozing smarm = smarm au jooze.

In India, where the word originated, it’s spelled ‘pandits’, and still pronounces as ‘pundits’.

Lies under glass…