Tuesday 16 December 2008

On the Rhys Jones case and sentence in case anyone has any comments.

post office privatisation

labour are still using game theory as policy ie there is no such thing as the common good only private interest where the logical act is betrayal of everyone else to get what you want. [see The Trap series of films on ytube]

So in their acts Labour have for the last 10 years been saying 'there is no such thing as society'.

instead of the common good they parade metrics that they say are proof for their method. Yet the metrics are being gamed and no one believes the numbers.

once again the game theorists left the trojan horse of privatisation outside the city walls and the idiots are dragging it in.

what do the metrics say about the nature of the uk energy market? It is 3 times higher than the level for a competitive market. Is that why prices haven't come down? what does that tell you about privatisation? who benefits?

who benefits from post office privatisation?

If you have people on to discuss the dumbing down of Christmas, please can the following points be aired.

1/ A lot of the people whingeing in the Torygraph about 'PC' Carols [which are silly, I admit] having words changed, so making people feel foolish when they sing from memory, rarely trouble to attend church other than at Christmas or for 'hatching, matching or despatching'. Much as I feel sympathy with them - really the answer lies in 'voting with your feet' by going a bit more often. It is like people who want to preserve the village pub or post office or church or phone box, because they look nice, but rarely bother using those services either. 'Use it or lose it'.

2/ Whilst the Bishop of Rochester makes a good point, the fact remains that before we really celebrated Christmas, there was a bacchanalian orgy of eating and drinking and making merry to get us through the long and lonely winter. I agree, it seems very unfair to the Church to conflate the 'peace on earth and goodwill to all men' message with all the hedonism.

But as Charles Dickens points out in 'A Christmas Carol', the two festivals are not as diametrically opposed as the Church might like to make out. Indeed scarcely do I need to point out that it was a religious organisation, the Puritans, that sought to ban Christmas - and indeed Christmas was not celebrated properly in Scotland until 1958.

If this is the Bishop of Rochester's agenda, let him put his cards on the table right now.

bookhimdano (#2) "who benefits from post office privatisation?"

To statethe obvious: the taxpayer, as they don't have to pay the salaries and most important of all in this ageing and ever dumbing down population, their pensions. That's the main argument for PFI/PPP and privatisation, the counter-argument being that one loses public services and the ethos which goes with it. Is a large state affordabe any more? Without state managed population/family planning as in the PRC, can the state survive?

lordBeddGelert (#3) "I need to point out that it was a religious organisation, the Puritans, that sought to ban Christmas"

Ah, yes, but those early Cromwellian 'Trots' were allegedly funded by 'Dutch' types, banished From England in 1290 and from Spain in 1492. Not really Christians at all.

Its the Economy Stupid, or is it the Stupid running the Economy Stupid

Loadsa Munay and warnings in the last 10 years.
Blind Faith/Blind Greed

Cut off my Groin but give me that Coin
Keep your hands off my Stash
Lovely Lolly rubbing against the thigh with rough Familiarity

Broken Britain I do Agree
Who BROKE it
It wasna Me
The bank or the building society
Maybe

Or was it as I do tend 2 Agree
A twit who was a NO 2 for Ten who dosent work or agree with/for FREE


Ok ok I wont give up the day job (if I had one)

#2 Bookhimdano

"'there is no such thing as society'."

I think that was Margaret Thatcher. It was unfortunate. I'm inclined to believe she meant something like..."society is not a real thing, it is abstract and imaginary."

You cannot touch, see, feel, hear, smell or talk to society. Society cannot think, it cannot make choices. It cannot experience pleasure or pain. People think, make choices and feel pleasure and pain. It does not have an existence beyond out imaginations.

Common Good? There can be things good for us all (in principle at least) . There can be things good for some and bad for others but with the potential to be good for all (Kaldor/Hicks*) but good can only be experienced by individuals (ALF may disagree).

I'd be interested to know what you mean by game theory. It seems different from the version I studied.


(*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaldor-Hicks_efficiency%29

4. To state the obvious: the taxpayer

who has been milking the royal mail and so starving it of investment. people pay through stamps. the royal mail was making money till the govt trashed it by selling of the profitable parts to their mates in the golf club.

will we benefit in the same way post office closure has benefited us?

or energy privatisation?

or pension payment privatisation?

or hospital cleaning/food privatisation

or pfi?

with so many of labours benefits the uk must be a paradise on earth?

"The dumbing down of Christmas..."

Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester.


Is real people having a good time dumber than believing in the omniscience and omnipotence of spooky-wookies?

The arrogance of the fool is staggering

ANYONE REMEMBER THE KOGI? (The Elder Brothers.)

Viewed from 'outside' I suggest 'Western culture' looks pretty foul - I don't need to write the list . . .

The Kogi warned us against our ways, as any right thinking, compassionate people would, and then withdrew to their mountains.

The Kogi knew better than to blow up a few of us to try to drive home the point, but I suspect those who DO try to blow us up, see us in the same light.

When will some high-profile figurehead of the Christian West, in the light of yet another manifestation of cultural turpitude, show some recognition of the ordure we have become and move to 'atone'?

While we continue to worship Mammon, underwritten by churches with wealth that would make a needle's eye water, who would want to be nice to us?

Our troops are missionaries from the Church of Mammon; like the missionaries of old, they impose 'good' by force. It ended in tears before . . .

I'm tempted to watch tonight. I tend to boycott Newsnight when the issues cover affairs of the wider world.
{ Month's of USA presidency elections and other countries woe's, but ignoring ours, has done this to me! }
Silly as it may seem - it is my personal protest, in much the same way that a growing number of the electorate feel when screwing up their ballot papers, it feels justifiable, not petty. I also think it's sad that the only statesman to stand up and be counted is Dr. Michael Nazir-Ali.
Other church leaders and politicians should support Christianity.

All this, let's ban religious stamps or children's nativity or the sight of a crucifix, Incase it offends anyone, must be stopped. Offending this country is just, if not more important, since it's the culture and identity of this nation. I personally do not attend church but feel protective of my heritage and angry at attacks on our traditions.
Now that is offensive.

bookhimdano (#9) "who has been milking the royal mail and so starving it of investment. people pay through stamps. the royal mail was making money till the govt trashed it by selling of the profitable parts to their mates in the golf club."

I'm not defending any of the last three decades of anarchism/Trotskyism - I'm (allegedly) a jack-booted, goose-stepping, statist with licence to invade who thought our Civil Service was exemplary! It's just that nobody seems to want to support that kind of 'nazism'/'Stalinisim' anymore. We've just had another dose of anti-state propaganda served up 'Behind Closed Doors' - teh BBC is getting just like UK History etc on Satellite..

I blame all this on emoting late C19th/early C20th century migrants from Central Europe! They're the ones who were behind free-market 'Liberal-Democratic' light-touch regulation etc and anti-statism.

Oh, and re: the demise of the POs... there's the Internet.

#12

"politicians should support Christianity."

Now that is offensive; ******* offensive. Not with my ******* taxes.

If people choose to be Christians, that is their business. Just like playing golf or darts. But NOT with my taxes.

WOT no mention of the proposed part privatisation of Royal Mail, its all part of the " Corporate Nazi " ideology where large corporations lobby government to make everything as inefficient ( difficult ) and expensive as possible, especially for people living in rural areas. Give it five years and its possible that those living in outlying areas will be forced to get a PO Box in the nearest town.

It would appear to be a convenient excuse for the government to indirectly give the stock market parasites 7.5 Bn quid to fill the alleged pensions black hole. Perhaps also for our puppet politicians to appease Murdock, the once owner of TNT who would appear to be the favorites to invest. ( not sure whether Murdock still owns TNT or at least a large shareholding )

The only problem with Royal Mail at present is bad management, postmen told to start their rounds at least an hour later when anyone who has been in the front line of distribution knows that an hour in the morning is worth two in the afternoon.

Perhaps if they are loosing money the cost of a first class stamp should go up significantly, even for a quid its good value for next day delivery anywhere in the UK.

barrie (#11) "While we continue to worship Mammon, underwritten by churches with wealth that would make a needle's eye water, who would want to be nice to us?"

I reckon some might be scared that more might 'Makeoff' with their pension funds if they say what they really think!

Isn't it all painfully obvious by now? Such people have no 'Scruples', they're just as happy to exploit their own...

Err...Scruples...

shrinkingviole (#12) "Other church leaders and politicians should support Christianity."

Hmm....Israel (and 'the war on terror') or Christianity...Israel (and the free-market) or Christianity...

Hmmmm.......... that must be a tough call if one is a politician.

13th

for game theory as used by the political class see the films on ytube called the Trap. there are three of them.

and yes thatcher brought in game theory as govt policy john major pumped it up and tony blair made it endemic.

jj

you can't post packets via the internet. you have to go somewhere and hand it in?

A TALE OF ROOSTED CHICKENS (#16)

Holy Whitehouse JJ that link
https://www.savethemales.ca/
is beyond price in any imaginary currency.

When it was trumpeted that Golden Obama had got 50% of his donations in 'small bills' I wondered about the rest. The article linked says: "Robert Rubin's son Jamie was Obama's main Wall Street fundraiser and is now one of his principal advisers."
Hallelujah

The dumbing down of Christmas
13Man[#14]

We are talking about different things.

I'm talking about standing up for Britain's National Heritage.
I used the term 'Support' in the respect that statesmen stand by while our traditions are attacked. Some individual's don't think I have the right to celebrate my Western values, but would quickly tell me to respect their's. Our traditions are dumbed down, so not to offend others.
So much for Religious tolerance.
I never mentioned Cash. I'm a pagan if you must know.
You seemed to think my use of the word 'support' meant financially. I won't begin to start on that issue or I'd need to use a lot of asterisks also.

"shooting of an 11 year old boy"

does anyone really believe that a Conservative government will change anything about youth culture? I think that to suggest that its a political problem is pretty stupid, 10 years of one government couldn't possibly change a culture that much.

REGULATION NE GAS CHAMBERS

Barrie (#19) Not much new if you look back, but it's good to see it's sinking in for some others.

None of this is personal, it's just group dynamics/politics.

But maybe it's time for a change as there are far more 'good' people out there than many 'beautiful minds' out there than many appreciate - (incidentally, Nash (Game Theory) and his son were schizophenic).

Excerpt from website linked to in post #16:

At the same time, we need to ask ourselves whether there is some flaw in Jewish culture that makes so many Jews sacrifice personal integrity for financial success and power.

The implication is obvious, and made regularly here. It's sad to see it endorsed by the BBC.

Been too busy working again to spend time blogging on Newsnight which I still watch. Still the usual suspects contributing roughly on the same topics since my last blog some 3-4 weeks ago. One or two new names i see-welcome!

I have been dealing at the sharp end of what is really happening out in the world far from the interest of Newsnight.

Now if Newsnight really wants to research a topic how about PFI and Building Schools for the Future money, from where does it come especially when another quango "Partnership for Schools" (an arm of the DCSF) wants high schools to pay for its Academy projects by robbing their budgets for the next 25 years? (Called an Outline Business Case)
As I said at the beginning of this blackmail of local Authorities, there is no such thing as a free lunch! How will the financial situation affect this seemingly never ending source of cash, which is currently Privitising our schools and under a Labour Government?

This appears to be a "money-mill"?

SOLSTICE GREETINGS (#20)

Shrink no more viole! I have asterisks to spare and they are yours in furtherance of Paganism!

A glance at any breakdown of religious adherence, across the globe, shows that NO ONE FAITH has a majority-following. As it is a 'given', where religious beliefs are concerned, that NOT ONE will bow to the greater truth of another, no coalition will EVER be formed. Hence, in a democratic world, no one faith should tell any non-adherent what to think. UN please note. Perhaps evangelism should be proscribed by a UN Resolution?

I'll get me toasting fork.

#20 Shrinking---

"The dumbing down of Christmas
13Man[#14]"

Support with cash? I didn't mention cash. I (and you and many others) pay their wages through taxes.

I do not pay them to support Christianity (or any other religion). Nor for that matter, any non-religion (I'm atheist, though I'm not sure it needs a name since it is the natural state.).

I suspect we are close in many ways. I would say to all people who visit Rome, whilst there, behave in a way acceptable to the Romans.

(#23) "FliegelIt's sad to see it endorsed by the BBC."

Sincerely, I'm not sure that is true.

I suspect the BBC tries to be neutral.

But what if what is said is true. Is that not more importat than whether what is said is endored, and by whom?

How would one decide? Isn't THAT the question one shouldd ask? (Tough though it is).

A Joke for Gavin. BBC Newsnight 16/12/08

An American tourist traveling from London to Wolverhampton leaves the M5 Motorway and heads in the direction of Dudley.
Not quite sure if he’s on the correct route he espies two laborers
working on the side of the road and decides to ask.

American: Tell me guy’s is this the right way to Wolverhampton?

Aynuk…….: Ah bist wea yo Acummin from Cocker.

American: I’m from Texas.

Ayli………..: Yo am on the rite road it’s over fower miles

American.: What are you working on?

Aynuk…….: Weem layin flag stones “ very acrate work”

American: I work for NASA and work to 1/10000 “of an inch.

Ayli………..: that’s Bostin but no good here, Bin as ow the gaffer
Sez these of gora be spot –on.

Colin Davies Solihull and Walsall

Judeo Christian Assessment

Much debate in environmental subjects (70s onwards) was initiated from the meaning of Genesis 1:28.

Say as opposed to a Native American Indian, Pagan, Celtic, Jains etc ideology.

"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

This from King James

Re Nash as I have posted before, I maintained his work was only compatible with theoretical infinite resources. hence why 'hidden' Ponzi schemes collapse.

The physics of the derivative schemes in the article is symptomatic of economics. It is trying to operate against laws of thermodynamics.

https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/paulmason/2008/10/this_is_an_economic_krakatoa.html


Which is why I knew 2 months ago nothing Governments, banks etc would do would solve the situation. Correct datums have to be established for assessment. Basic fundamental engineering.

Celtic Lion

#28 Coilin Davies

1/10,000 of inch in engineering terms is so so. It's the +/- tolerance on someting like a bearing boss on a gearbox layshaft.

To start the calibration process so the machinists could achieve that I would start from 1/100,000,000 of inch (National Physics Laboratory datums).

I can also lay slabs. (They are bob on).

Celtic Lion

QUOTE FOR THE DAY

to gavin...a very interesting quote and very understanding item...

ECONOMY

Since, the time of your recording--the Federal Reserve dropped the interest rate to 0%

Is it just me, or is there more than a passing resemblance between Fractional Reserve Banking and Ponzi schemes?

Time for a phased withdrawl?

On the Bishop and Christmas: The Feast of the Nativity: on December 25th. was invented sometime at the end third century AD after 250AD and became general in the Church around 300AD. Incidentally as the Pope pointed out last year the ox and ass were added to the crib scene by St Francis. 1000 year later.

It is of course for the Church to proclaim celebrate and invite people to its festival. Those who don't want to come should stop moaning about it "Render under to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the thing that are God." is the text.

The Puritans did not abolish the Feast, just the winter festival of twelve days boozing and mayhem ( and royal command performances of Shakespeare's latest "Twelth Night" )

Rationalists and Humanists should really be more concerned about the myth of Father Christmas/ Santa Clause, since you can be sacked for denying its truth.

Blame Prince Albert and Dickens for the sentimental family nonsense we have today with its massive commercialisation of gift (gizmo) giving.

Bah Humbug!

ROWAN WILLIAMS BELIEVES THE THREE KINGS EXISTED.

I enjoyed the narrative joke @28 but I think the one above, from Archie, is more Christmassy.
He will be expressing belief in spirit impregnation and even a talking box next, and where might that lead?
It's funny (!) how Christianity majors on humility, and then goes round being certain about the most unlikely details of folklore.
Doesn't that amount to arrogance?

Ah well - when it comes to jokes: "It's the way you tell them" and NO ONE can beat that honed, ecclesiastical diction, with its scintillating sibilance, for a delivering a good gag.

Sock it to 'em Arch!

#33

"
Is it just me, or is there more than a passing resemblance between Fractional Reserve Banking and Ponzi schemes?"

Just you. No resemblance whatsoever.

MOST CONDITIONING IS SUBLIMINAL

Hawkeye_pierce (#33) "Is it just me, or is there more than a passing resemblance between Fractional Reserve Banking and Ponzi schemes?"

No, it isn't just you But don't let the association trouble you ;-)

#18 Bookhimdano


After watching the first part I gave up. I assume the final words are similar to those of Johnny Rotten when the Sex Pistols ended:

"Ever get the feeling you've been cheated? Good night"

Cheated of the time I spent listening to the snake oil selling charlatan.

Curtis ranks up there with Tracey Emin and Damien Hurst. You can fool some of the people ...enough to make a living.

In response to the linked excerpt:

At the same time, we need to ask ourselves whether there is some flaw in Jewish culture that makes so many Jews sacrifice personal integrity for financial success and power.

The poster replies:

But what if what is said is true. Is that not more important than whether what is said is endorsed, and by whom?

Is that not an outright admission of prejudice? No one who has read this blog since it began is under any illusion about this poster's beliefs on this subject. They often dominate the debate, and have in my view driven other posters away.

I don't support the BNP, and I don't agree with David Irving, but I believe they're entitled to express their opinions. They may do so in fora of their choice. You wouldn't have either of them on Newsnight every day of the week, yet you let your blog, a BBC space made available for public use, be dominated by views which are far outside the mainstream and potentially offensive to many.

Speaking as a Jew who does not believe that my culture is any more or less flawed than any other, I find your attitude disappointing.

SCOTOMA, NARCISSISM AND CHUTZPAH

Fliegel (#39) "Speaking as a Jew who does not believe that my culture is any more or less flawed than any other, I find your attitude disappointing"

What do your beliefs and sensitivities have to do with it? Those are intensional and may be false. What if it IS more flawed than others? That's not a blanket criticism of all, just of some. If one looks at the frequency of offensive behaviours the figures are revealing are they not? What accounts for this disproproportionate impact of dishonesty? Is it other people's prejudice or might it be something else? Is it impossible that it might be something else? If so, why? Why the frequent, desperate, efforts to stifle criticism and iinduce guilt in others rather than clear cries of 'mea culpa'?

You are tacitly reinforcing offensive behaviour. I'm just highlighting what should be more obvious.

38. 13th

parts 2 and 3 are better. they show why Bill Clinton on the basis of this theory removed the riules controlling the financial markets set up in the 1930s that has led directly to where we are. the biggest financial situation in western civilisation.

in part 3 they tie the theory into how blair used it and how insidious it is in uk govt policy and why the numbers are being gamed.

Fliegel #39

"potentially offensive"

We are rapidly becoming cowed by cultural Marxism (PC). It is not a good thing. As Shrinking Viole said at 12 "All this, let's ban religious stamps or children's nativity or the sight of a crucifix, Incase it offends anyone, must be stopped. Offending this country is just, if not more important, since it's the culture and identity of this nation."

I read the other day of someone commanded by their local council to remove festive lights from the front of their house in case it 'offended' passing Muslims. (I believe it was on the grounds of religion rather than good taste).

If something offends you, either reply or keep quiet, don't plead that they should not be allowed to have their views in the same arena as yours.

Fliegel (#39) Ironically, the author of the linked piece (Henry Makow (the originator of Scruples no less) is Jewish.

Censuring truth, is, I suggest, one of the main reasons why regulators have been so toothless. You and others might like to think on that, as might blogdog. The article by Kevin MacDonald towards the end is worth a look too, as it's sadly all too true.

The longer this beaviour is censored the worse it will get for all. See #40.

finance

the enforced liquidation in the markets has reached 50% and is now hovering at that level. 50% was the amount financed by short term debt so its done its worst and markets are likely to recover as will the pound.

investment for new business has picked up.

Main street is probably about half way through its 50% correction and demand destruction. Given house prices were fueled by 50% short term credit we can expect a 50% correction. Enforced house auctions are going close to that now. Some houses are going for 20 grand. for anyone with cash to speculate its bargain time.

not sure we should be complacent about the unemployment figure. 10 percent was the level when Hitler came to power.

to say 92% of people are still in work is a false picture given only say 50% of the population works and 50% of them work in the State that produces no wealth .

so 25% of the uk population actually create wealth that supports everyone else.

Any reduction in those who make up the wealth generators [no mass sacking in the State sector] has an exponential impact upon society.

which is why it is important to focus on markets with growth potential like a feed in tariff that has proven to create hundreds of thousands of jobs and generate billions in income. something the govt refuses to do on political grounds. What do we get? more debt to be paid off by a shrinking pool of wealth creators.

38. 13th ...

i agree the style is gimicky. no need for the visual psycho drama.

it could have been demonstrated in an hour with a plan like

this is game theory
this is why people began to believe it
here are some examples of its use in the political world
here are the outcomes
conclusion

SNAKES IN SUITS

13thMan (#36) "Just you. No resemblance whatsoever"

It isn't you know. There are a few others who have remarked on a resemblence. Not that this makes any of them right of course....

But what if that's just a matter of many not seeing (which is intensional) it for what it really is?

Both look crooked only when they take a 'downturn', until then, the perpetrators are revered as charismatic heroes.

Psychopathy and Narcissistic Personality Disorder share half their factor structure. These people take risks.

#41 Gaming game theory

Not seen the Trap yet, so will stay out of that discussion for the moment.

I certainly agree that there has been a recent emphasis amongst Gvt to evangelise and enforce a target and inspection regime within the public sector. Alas, the private sector is also guilty too (is targets for salesmen to sell mortgages a sensible strategy?).

Not sure whether Game Theory is the sole cause of this problem, but warning signs have been around for a while. Below are two key pieces of work on this subject, but regrettably their voice falls on deaf ears:

John Seddon - Freedom from Command and Control - shows the folly of trying to implement manufacturing style target and inspection processes to a service industry.

Robert Simons - Levers of control - reveals how this is merely a manifestation of "Diagnostic control systems"; the tendency among middle and senior management to mandate explicit outcomes from sub-ordinates in a quantitative manner (pretty much by ignoring whether or not the concept is nebulous or even more damning, ignoring how it is done). This is enforced by rewarding achievement and punishing failure, all the while condoning "by whatever means necessary". The net result is gaming - or rather the polite but ignorant description of "unintended consequences".

- Patients should be seen within 2 hours
- 50% of people in the UK should go to University
- Postmen should walk at 4mph

The quants are taking over. If it moves - measure it! Worse still, Goodharts Law states that when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.

Alas we are drowning in a sea of meaningless measurements and targets.

Data data everywhere, but not a jot can think.

Hawkeye_Pierce (#47) "Alas we are drowning in a sea of meaningless measurements and targets.
Data data everywhere, but not a jot can think."

The thing is, we know how to manage what can be measured, and these days management means computerisation. The truth is that we don't really know what 'thinking' is (other than sloppy, second rate effectivity), so it should come as no surprise that most of us don't seem to be able to manage it.

Extensionality is indeed devoid of meaning as meaning is intensional.

The bit about 50% going to university is, however, not just daft, it's self-destructive/seditious.

Ponzi Schemes

Basically pyramid selling. New resource input layer added at the bottom to continually support rest of pyramid.

Critique of Game Theory, only works with infinite resources.

Understand Tropic Pyramids from ecology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trophic_pyramid

Contemporary economics basically a Ponzi scheme, relying on inputs at the bottom layer coming from the inputs from the planets ecological system. A parasitic relationship.

When the global economic system has destabilised the planet's ecological system. The whole lot will collapse.

6 billion+ dead to total extinction of human race. (No one to maintain nuclear reactors, toxic chemical and other dumps. Poisoning of the planets ecological life support system, all higher life forms extinct.)

https://celticlion.wordpress.com/2008/11/17/g20-and-the-global-ecological-imperative/

Game Over.
We are now experiencing the beginnings of the process.

Solution
Love and understand the planet you're on.


Celtic Lion

I hope there will be a piece on the state of Pakistan post-Mumbai soon.

If there have been outrages inside Pakistan, transit depots attacked and the supply route to Afghanistan seriously affected then the political stability there seems to be under reported.

There seems to be a strong case that the ISI either knew on some level - or should have known - about Lashka-e-Taiba activities - if the survivor does prove to be connected to that group and to be from Pakistan it must then be odd that the ISI have not as yet confirmed his identity? Al Qaeda moles in ISI?

What about a piece on Obama Afghanistan/Pakistan strategy and counter one of his advisers with say Tariq Ali or maybe Imran Khan. It does sound as though Khan and Biden see eye to eye already so maybe that would not tease out anything new.

#48 JadedJean

You are somebody who often cites meaningless statistics about Jewish survival rates of the 30's as though this flawed analysis undermines the overwhelmingly proven case that the holocaust occurred. You don't deny the holocaust but you don't affirm. Very confused.

So you have no grasp of history let alone data and information. And no I don't think that you do manage 'thinking' hence your dislike of democracy and anti-fascists and freedom.

Much easier to goose step in front of the mirror huh! Resistance is futile!?

Thanks for making me laugh!

thegangofone (#51) " the overwhelmingly proven case that the holocaust occurred."

Sadly, not forensic evidence based. That's the problem. The trials were clearly political.

It was convenient that the evidence came from behind the Iron Curtain - which some conjecture may be where most of the missing deportees went.

I take it you enjoyed 'Behind Closed Doors' on BBC2, especially the fabrications of the Soviets?

Go1 #51

You might be interested to know that the figures JJ quotes are all readily available on www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org.

Very kosher.

KingCelticLion (#49).

One couldn't make it up.

"The government’s rescue of Citi in 2008 provided a reminder of Rubin’s attempt earlier in the decade to prop up Enron, then a Citi client, by asking a Treasury official to lean on credit rating agencies to maintain a more positive rating than Enron deserved".

#46 JadeJean

Re: FRB/Ponzi

"Both look crooked only when they take a 'downturn', until then, the perpetrators are revered as charismatic heroes."

I wonder if you understand either? Banking merely creates intermediated credit. Instead of Tom lending to Dick directly, Tom lends to the bank and the bank lends to Dick (though when credit is created the transaction sequence is the reverse of that; the end result is the same...Dick owes money to the bank and the bank owes money to Tom). The Fractional reserve need sets a limit to credit expansion (though there are ways round it). Ponzi schemes are entirely different. In principle, banks could call in all loans and repay all customers (as long as there was enough Bank money to cover any open positions between Tom and Dick etc. ). Ponzi schemes can only be ended when they go bust (and that is inevitable).

#41 Bookhimdano

"why the numbers are being gamed."


For you to believe that makes sense implies either:

You have misunderstood game theory or

You use the English language in a peculiar way.

It just does not make sense.

( I note also, neither did Curtis's explanation of the Prisoners' Dilemma; real life is not always a one shot game. In fact most of it is not).

#54

Thanks JJ, it sort of made me smile.

You can have all the 'theortical' physicists you want working on quantum loop derivatives.

If you omit 'practica'l thermodynamics then you get this:

https://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=bNssIhS7ATc

Celtic Lion

UNDERSTANDING MONEY CREATION

13thMan (#55) It hasn't quite worked out that way in practice though has it? They've been rather keen on making assets out of all sorts.

#58

I think that confirms my point at #55.

#55 13th man

There are two things that might undermine your description of the way the banking system works.

Firstly, owing to FRB, the banks have the ability to iterate the lending, leading to typically upwards of 7 to 9 times the amount actually held in the form of "real" desposits. Therefore it is not as simple as Dick's money covering Tom's (instead, every Tom, Dick and Harry is implicated).

Secondly, Dick may have spent his money on purchasing a large market priced asset such as a house. In order to settle the score as you describe, Dick will have to liquidate his house. If Dick is in negative equity, then we have a fracture in the chain.

I certainly don't claim to be clever enough to prove that FRB is a form of pyramid selling / Ponzi scheme, but it would be sensible to keep an open mind. Remember, lack of evidence that there is a link, is not the same as clear evidence of no link.

I'm starting to get an inkling that there is definitely something afoot, and that we need something akin to a major public inquiry into the banking crisis to at least try and poke a few searching questions in the right direction.

I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know the answer, but I'm certainly not naive enough to avoid asking the question.

WISHFUL AND CROOKED THINKING

13thMan (#58) "I think that confirms my point at #55."

No doubt you do (or presumably you wouldn't have made the point), but does that make you correct?

I take it you read the beginning of the 2003 Treasury Committee Hansard transcript? Did you appreciate back then just how predatory this deregulated system was becoming? It has its roots in the USA's changing demographics and a 'feature' of self-control known as 'hyperbolic discounting'. I don't believe this bit of behavioural economics escaped the notice of opportunists in financial sevices.

It will be interesting to see how Rubin fares and how the SEC explains itself with respect to Madoff.

It's all so believable on the way up, especially as the population gets genetically dumber an dumber (a point even Rubin alluded to in the above).

56 13th

..why the numbers are being gamed."..

if you had stuck with the show it does explain exactly what that means and gives examples.

it is of relevance to newsnight because one of the people in the 2nd episode who was part of clinton's team promoting this model is often still used as a commentator on why the market is as it is although no one challenges him on why the market model of society philosophy they adopted has led to this. he was on last night.

HIGH LEVERAGE/GEARING

Hawkeye_Pierce (#60) "I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know the answer, but I'm certainly not naive enough to avoid asking the question."

Pretty much my position too, and I've said so before. When neocon Irwin Stelzer said at the end of the Newsnight Special on the credit crunch that the bankers were not venal, what they do is legal, how many appreciated that it was at the end of Rubin's watch that the key regulatory legislation put in place after the crisis of 1929 and it's aftermath, was finally repealed Glass-Steagall in 1999? It may well have made what happened afterwards legal, but does that make it any less venal than a Ponzi Scheme?

#60 Hawkeye

"If Dick is in negative equity, then we have a fracture in the chain.

I certainly don't claim to be clever enough to prove that FRB is a form of pyramid selling / Ponzi scheme, but it would be sensible to keep an open mind. Remember, lack of evidence that there is a link, is not the same as clear evidence of no link."


Your point about the fracture is valid if Dick has no other means and the bank capital is inadequate to cover the shortfall. If Dick doesn't cover his own loss, the risk capital holders take it. Even under "normal" circumstances It is not uncommon for banks to suffer loan defaults.

I said "in principle" i.e liabilities are more than matched by assets*. That is not so in a Ponzi scheme. Liabilities exceed assets and so there is no possibility of full repayment.

The idea that FRB could be a form of Ponzi scheme completely baffles me. It just isn't. No more than my left ear is.

*Until asset values collapse to the point capital cannot cover losses.

13thMan (#64) Perhaps you should take the fact that you're baffled by the comparison as indicative of your not having understood the comparison instead of refusing to accept that there are grounds for comparison?

Similarly, that others aren't reducing your bafflement shouldn't be taken as evidence that they are incorrect and that you're correct.

That would be arrogance.

BAFFLEMENT AND MISUNDERSTANDING

A few examples of others who lack understanding?

Just Google "Fractional Reserve Banking Ponzi Scheme" for more 'misunderstandings'.

#66

Again thanks JJ

I got this from Web of Debt

“Exponential economic growth required by the mathematics of compound interest on a money supply based on money as debt must always run up eventually against the finite nature of Earth’s resources.”

The parasite has finally run out of its food source


I refer back to my post #49

Have to admit I know nothing about economics. Never had any interest.

I know how this works. (Too well for comfort)

https://celticlion.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/earth-from-moon2.jpg

This has been working for 4500 billion years so it is a good datum to assess other complex systems.


Quantum Loops and FRB.

10 construction workers get invited to a party. They sit in a circle and play pass the parcel with a brick very quickly.

Every time it is passed they have to say "heres a brick".

They are told to count how many bricks they have had.

At the end of the hour the host returns. "How many bricks have you had?"

Each worker replies "360".

"Good" says the Host, "Bring the 3600 bricks we're going to build a house".

Celtic Lion

KingCelticLion (#67) Just remember, 13thMan MIGHT be right....

One thing we can be sure of is that banks are no longer operating as they did up to deregulation, and regardless of what anyone says, the maths that's applicable in physics depends on measurement scales (usually interval level at least) which allow precision and thus testing/refutation. These do not exist in the social sciences, including economics. The abuse of clever looking maths in these areas is little more than spin, as elsewhere in marketing. It's designed to make money out of the vulnerable/naive, nothing more.

Science is painfully transparent and critical. Business is egregiously opaque and predatory.

#68 JJ

SCIENCE is big business.

As someone whose career is spent conducting quantitative analysis of marketing data, I am often (quite rightly) slapped back into place by the following quote:

" ..much of post-war marketing scholarship has proved to be a complete waste of time and effort, an heroic but utterly wrongheaded attempt to acquire the unnecessary trappings of 'science', a self-abusive orgy of mathematical masturbation which has rendered us philosophically blind, intellectually deaf and spiritually debilitated." - Stephen Brown (2001) Art or science? 50 years of marketing debate

And if you read the likes of Nassim Taleb, you get a very real sense that economics, finance & banking have all followed the same piper.

I agree that the social sciences are trying too hard to court the mathematicians, but I'm also wary of Physics and other "real" sciences. What are we doing spending 6 billion Euros for some chaps in lab coats to muck about in a man made Swiss cave?

More like Large Hardon Collider to me.

Hawkeye #69

I've worked on the advertising side of things all my life and I learnt in the 90s that if some guy from marketing said that, by putting a tick right next to the empty tick box in a coupon, I would increase the chances of a response by 0.01% then i had to do it even if I did think it looked silly. Actually, I think the fun going out of advertising was spookily close to the rise in marketing 'science'. (Nothing personal you understand.)

What I am hoping for from the LHC is that they might find out where all that missing energy gets to. If they do, and figure out how to get it back, there is a chance that we could throw away all those batteries full of heavy metal, tanks full of fossil fuels, central heating boilers burning gas and use instead the small, cooly glowing little orbs the boffins came up with. They would cost next to nothing, last damn near forever and supply all the power we need for our daily lives. Now THAT would change the world. I wonder if it would be for the better?

#49 CelticLion

"Critique of Game Theory, only works with infinite resources."

Can you explain that by reference to one of the most well known of games "The prisoner's dilemma" please?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

Game theory is sometimes called "theory of competitive strategies". Where is the need for infinite resources?


"Contemporary economics basically a Ponzi scheme, relying on inputs at the bottom layer coming from the inputs from the planets ecological system. A parasitic relationship."

No, contemporary physics teaches us all processes are irreversible*. Economics simply recognises that; "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

The relationship seems parasitic only if you place the earth (universe) at the center of discussion. If you place people at the centre that is no longer so. (And although I'm atheist, I learn from religious friends even their guide book tells them to do that; something about making the animals for men, sometime during the first week.).

*2nd Law/ Increasing entropy--> global warming, since all energy degenerates to "heat". It' irreversible. AND INEVITABLE. All efforts to stop it are, quite literally, hot air generators.

#69

"And if you read the likes of Nassim Taleb, you get a very real sense that economics, finance & banking have all followed the same piper."


May I recommend Ormerod's book, "The death of economics". Ormerod was a leading economic forecaster. The book is more rounded than Taleb's (judging from what he says about it).

Sadly it takes very able people to manipulate ill founded models. Some of our most able people spend their lives deriving meaningless conclusions from such models of spurious precision, apparently preferring to be precisely wrong than to be roughly right.

#72 13th Man

I have mentioned Death of Economics on this blog before, good recommendation.

#73

I am a bit pushed for time at the moment, cooking dinner than have some work needs doing. So give me some time to get back.

Quickly the Prisoners dilemma is playing against two people teach trying to get the best over the other. Self interest.

In the planet ecology/ economic equivalent. The person put their self interest over the planet.

But the difference is the person is also part of the planet. So by acting in what they believe to be self interest, they will also betray something they are part of.

All your questions are well thought out, relevant and connected.

Needs more time than I have now, got to go dinner to serve. Catch you later.

Celtic Lion

#48 JJ

"The thing is, we know how to manage what can be measured, and these days management means computerisation.....



The bit about 50% going to university is, however, not just daft, it's self-destructive/seditious."

I don't see any justification for the first part. In fact prima-facie evidence suggests it is nonsense. (e.g. we can measure economic and financial variables but is seems we cannot manage the economy. We can measure crime but it seems we cannot manage it*). Management does NOT mean computerisation. although computers have been extensively (mis?) used.


Your comment about 50% at university is almost certainly true.

*Unless you subscribe to a David Ickean conspiracy theory. Remember, there 12 disciples and another, the 13th man.

13thMan (#74) "I don't see any justification for the first part. In fact prima-facie evidence suggests it is nonsense."

It's a tacit reference to Quine, 'effectivity' and science being extensional.

Incidentally, have you come across The Principle of Charity? It was used by Quine and Davidson in acknowledgement that given that Natural Language is intensional, one must make an effort to allow for inevitable indeterminacies. ) We live in a Liberal-Democracy where policy is not to manage the economy, but to leave it largely to market forces. Much of our legislation is designed to ensure just that. We have a pretty good idea why crime is on the rise but we don't manage the causes for the same reason that we don't manage the economy.

The reality is that we do manage through computerisation. We now train professionals to base judgement on actuarial rather than clincial judgement. It's what risk assessment and management is all about. What's measured is still problematic, but in some area (CJS) it's better than it was, and that's about all one can expect in this type of democracy.

As to the flooding of universities with anyone with an IQ of 100 and above, there are still far too many who don't/won't appreciate precisely why it's such a disaster that more of that 50% are females. As time goes by, the proportion of uncomprehending objectors will, sadly, just increase. That's an actuarially based assertion.

For what it's worth, I reckon Game Theory was useful in focusing people's attention on the dyanamics of dyadic interaction, but people forget that individual differences come into this too making generalisations rather difficult. One can make useful generalisations about what will happen to populations as IQ changes though.

#66 Jade Jean

The fundamental difference is with FRB there are assets to back the liabilities. With a Ponzi scheme there are not*.

With a Ponzi scheme there is little possibility of repayment of liabilities*. With a bank (in FRB) the assets exist, just not in a liquid form. Of course, a bank can go bust if the value of its assets declines by more than its capital.

(* unless the fund got lucky with investments).

#75 "policy is not to manage the economy"

Policy is to let business (and other) managers manage, with varying amounts of central intervention, and to let individuals make choices.

#73 KCL

"....the Prisoners dilemma is playing against two people teach trying to get the best over the other. Self interest.

In the planet ecology/ economic equivalent. The person put their self interest over the planet.

But the difference is the person is also part of the planet. So by acting in what they believe to be self interest, they will also betray something they are part of."

-->
In PD the prisoners are not trying to beat each other but to maximise self interest. If that means maximising the interest of the other prisoner, each will do it. They cannot communicate and act only in self interest. If they could communicate AND trust each other to cooperate both could achieve a better outcome than the standard. It would still be open for either to renege and do better. For fun, have a look at Jasper Carrot's Golden Balls (just the last 5 mins. if you can't stand him). Not sure when its on or channel). Not the PD but similar payoff structure. (Big difference is they players communicate so it depends on agreement and trust)

Why shouldn't I put myself ahead of the planet? Am I part of it? I'm me. That is all.I am willing to use the planet for my own ends.

Now I'm not completely selfish (not very at all, I think) and I do care about (most) other people. But if it hasn't been born (possibly conceived or somewhere in the 9 months) it isn't a person. We might imagine there will be people in (say) 1000 years time but imaginary people don't count. If the world ends in 200 years the imaginary people after that will never be realised. "They" will never exist and I can't waste my life on something that will never exist. It matters not at all to me if the last human dies in 200 years' or 2,000 years'. I hope humans last at least 120 years. I shall not be here for the finale, but there might be some who make it.
Might be unpleasant for those who are in the finale but if you accept the world has a finite life, somebody will have to be on stage when it happens.

Can I be sure the end is inevitable, that there will be an end? As sure as I can be about anything. Can I help to delay it? A little. Should I? No reason I can think of. Saving the planet uses up resources. Those resources would be better used helping people than an imagined future.

13thman (#77) "and to let individuals make choices"

You're doing it again. The assumption is that people and other animals) freely, and rationally, make choices. All that we've had over recent decades is asset-stripping and anarchism where a cynical, predatory minority benefit/profit at the expense of an ever more naive, growing, dysgenic majority.

#71 13th Man

I am also trying to do some work for the Tax man so can only briefly answer your questions

"Critique of Game Theory, only works with infinite resources."

Can you explain that by reference to one of the most well known of games "The prisoner's dilemma" please?

You will appreciate it is a game with special considerations ans assumptions.

https://celticlion.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/earth-from-moon2.jpg

This our planet it is finite in size it can only grow so much food, the bioshere can only tolerate so much pollution or resources taken from it etc.

If we do as Game Theory, or Government says, spend spend spend to increase consumption to stabilise economy. We are told to act in our self interest. But if we all do this we collapse the cological life support system of the planet and we all die.

You are on a spaceship to Mars. You are uncomfortable in your bed and want a bigger/ better on. You cant find any spare metal. So you rip a hole in the hull, and use metal to improve your bed which you are very pleaded with. You have acted in your self interest. Though the atmosphere of the ship is leaking the hole isn't big enough to lose all of it by the time you get to mars.

Someone else sees your bed, want one and do the same, the hole is now bigger. The next person does same, hole bigger.

There comes a point where the hole will be big enough for the atmoshpere to escape before you get to Mars, so everyone sufforcates.

Even though you have a good bed, there comes a point where, it is in the self interest of those without a good bed, not to have one, to ensure you all get to Mars alive.

Even though they have a poor bed. It is in their self interest and yours for them to stay will the poor one. What is self interest changes. Your survival, with a good bed, depends on someone else being altruistic, keeping a poor bed, so you all survive.

if the ship was infinitly big, with infinite air supply you could all have a big bed. The ship and the earth are not infinite.

I quote from the game rules you supplies "In this game, as in all game theory, the only concern of each individual player ("prisoner") is maximizing his/her own payoff, without any concern for the other player's payoff"

Even though you have a good bed, someone else has to decide not to have a good one. The pay off is they and you will survive.

If everyone took the payoff (better bed) everyone ulimately dies. This is only a simple over view. I could sit here all night and incorporate short and long terms benefits. Knowledge of the what the other person does, collective working together etc. These are not included in the prisoners dilemma.

"Contemporary economics basically a Ponzi scheme, relying on inputs at the bottom layer coming from the inputs from the planets ecological system. A parasitic relationship."

No, contemporary physics teaches us all processes are irreversible*. Economics simply recognises that; "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

Economics hasn't bothered with "no such thing as a free lunch". We are paying for it now. You can defer paying, but thermodynamically it catches up.

Contemporary physics teaches all prcesses are irreversable. Not quite true but I know I think what you mean. If a process reaction is exothermic (gives out energy) you can reverse it by putting the energy back in. (endothermic)

I don't know how you can say no 'to' my paragraph then support what I say.

If we collapse the planets ecological system, then as you say we cannot reverse the process we die.

"The relationship seems parasitic only if you place the earth (universe) at the center of discussion. If you place people at the centre that is no longer so."

https://celticlion.wordpress.com/2008/11/17/g20-and-the-global-ecological-imperative/

Simplify. Put yourself at the centre of it. So either we take you into space outside of the Earths atmosphere or we take away, the earth ( everything that isnt you.

How long will you survive? So do you depend for your survival on the earth. If you put nothing back. Cleaning up all your pollution, replanting forests for timber energy you have used etc.

If in your life you take more from the earth than you put back you are a parasite. If the economy does the same. Are species extinctions increasing, is defrestation increasing, is marine pollution inreasing etc? Then the economy is a parasite in the host.

We can add questions such as what is the purpose of humans, what are our goals, why cannot we incorporate the proection of the planet which gives us survival in these.

At present we are destabilising the planets ecosystem. When it crashes we die, just like you in space, because at present we cannot survive without it.

If the economic system is not returning investment to the planets ecological system, it is no more than a Ponzi scheme relying on continued inputs from the ecological system to sustain it.

"The relationship seems parasitic only if you place the earth (universe) at the center of discussion. If you place people at the centre that is no longer so. (And although I'm atheist, I learn from religious friends even their guide book tells them to do that; something about making the animals for men, sometime during the first week.)."

Not sure what you mean. You are part of the earth system. All you eat, breathe and drink comes from it.
There is no centre or either or. I have touched on this on Tuesday.

https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2008/12/tuesday_16_december_2008.html

Go back to the Prisoner Dilemma. You have to put the planet (which you are part of) first, in your own self interest. Everyone does. All we all die.

*2nd Law/ Increasing entropy--> global warming, since all energy degenerates to "heat". It' irreversible. AND INEVITABLE. All efforts to stop it are, quite literally, hot air generators.

This is a massive subject. better to understand thermodynamics as order/disorder. I have 25,000 words on this alone and haven't even finished it for a general reader. This does link to the 'heat death of the universe' but to go further we need to look at eschatology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eschatology

or listen to this

https://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FAQVkEI2VrY&feature=related

Though I recommend this,

https://celticlion.wordpress.com/our-option/


Celtic Lion

13th man

you are way off the mark with your 120 years, 200 years, 1000 years, 2000 years.

Wake up for your own sake.

Can you not see world governments couldn't manage something as simple as an economy. Do you really think they can manage something as complex as this.

https://celticlion.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/earth-from-moon2.jpg

Click on it, blow it up in your browser. Look at it. This is all we have, there is not another one. Without it we die.

The seas are being poisoned, the forests are burning, children if they are not hanging themselves are stabbing or shooting each other in a nihilistic orgy of destruction, there is no future echos from the 70's punks.

Armies fight each other while children starve, and billions of years of evolution is being made extinct.

Brown clouds of pollution spread across the sky. People riot for food. Wars are planned over water. Populations of people are increasing exponentially, resource use is increasing exponentially, destruction of the ecology is increasing exponentially.

What solution are we given, print more money so we can shop more. Can you not see the joke we are living?

What are we told, if we stop increasing a little invisible gas by 2050 everything will be OK, or some similar guff. Joke I hope you are laughing and find that as funny as me.

Anarchy and chaos are endemic everywhere.

We have to turn the whole thing round in 4 years otherwise as you say "some processes are irreversible".

Hawkeye wrote about the Large Hadron Collider. These little particles that pop in and out of existence.

On a cosmic scale that is all life is. Life on this little tiny planet, around a little star in a spiral arm of a small galaxy can do just the same.

Pop in and out of existence.

If you think Flash, the saviour of the world and his friends can stop that by telling us to go shopping. you are welcome to your beliefs.

Personally I don't mind sorting the mess out. Give me the resources and a team and the authority and we will do it. I happen to love this little planet and all the funny creatures on it, they make me smile.

https://celticlion.wordpress.com/

13th man 4 years.


Celtic Lion

KingCelticLion (#80) When the author of 'The Black Swan' graced Newsnight, some thought he was more than a little eccentric.

Were they wrong?

Some people use science and philosophy as a great big Woollies 'pix and mix'.

It's never a good idea, even if it is getting more popular......

Just remember, science and logic is very tedious/boring, if you find yourself making it 'interesting' you're probably not doing it.

#82 JJ

eccentric: deviating from an established or usual pattern or style b: deviating from conventional or accepted usage or conduct

perhaps if what is 'normal' is not working then perhaps eccentric is what we need. The eccentric will become the new normal.

Science and parts of philosophy can be pretty close. Sometimes they have to be mixed to move a paradigm on.


eg Darwin I suppose.

We have to make it interesting. If there is a common interest in understanding.

Wave particle duality.

Am I an individual or part of a planet.

I was doing something when the Black Swan was on. He didn't grab me. I think he could have been 'sharper' and would put my work against his. Not part of the media set I find getting an agent difficult.

I'd go on Newsnight or speak anytime anywhere. Then I can be judged.

We have a situation where the media when something about the environment crops up, they then describe it as 'tightening our belts'.

How can the evolution of life and it's continuance, the marvels, beauty. It's experience and understanding be always be dismissed in such a context.

The reporters only seem happy within Westminster so just degrade life as some miserable unimportant hindrance.

I cannot grasp the logic of how their brains work.

Celtic Lion

#82 JJ

perhaps if what is 'normal' is not working then perhaps eccentric is what we need. The eccentric will become the new normal.

Science and parts of philosophy can be pretty close. Sometimes they have to be mixed to move a paradigm on.


eg Darwin I suppose.

We have to make it interesting. If there is a common interest in understanding.

Wave particle duality.

Am I an individual or part of a planet.

I was doing something when the Black Swan was on. He didn't grab me. I think he could have been 'sharper' and would put my work against his. Not part of the media set I find getting an agent difficult.

I'd go on Newsnight or speak anytime anywhere. Then I can be judged.

We have a situation where the media when something about the environment crops up, they then describe it as 'tightening our belts'.

How can the evolution of life and it's continuance, the marvels, beauty. It's experience and understanding be always be dismissed in such a context.

The reporters only seem happy within Westminster so just degrade life as some miserable unimportant hindrance.

I cannot grasp the logic of how their brains work.

Celtic Lion

#64

"The idea that FRB could be a form of Ponzi scheme completely baffles me. It just isn't. No more than my left ear is."

I've just stumbled across this posting:

https://kennysideshow.blogspot.com/2008/12/federal-reserves-ponzi-scheme.html

Conspiracy theory, or genuine concern? I think the jury is still out. Having only just dabbled in this murky area the last few months, I'm in no position to arrive at a judgement one way or the other.

Hence my desire for a public inquiry into the current crisis. Although quoting from the last paragraph of the link:

"Let’s remember what Henry Ford once said: It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."

KingCelticLion (#84) "perhaps if what is 'normal' is not working then perhaps eccentric is what we need. The eccentric will become the new normal."

There's a fine line here and I fear you're most definitely venturing to the wrong side of it. Over the past three decades many think there's been an assault on our intelligentsia for political reasons (see Lenin's caustic remark). This anarchistic/Trotskyite anti-elitism has been exacerbated of late by education x 3. Don't contribute to it, it's bad enough as it is.

Game Theory?

...........or willing to collapse the ecological life support system of the planet if told?

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7791278.stm

Celtic Lion

KingCelticLion (#87) Your associations are far too loose.

#88 JJ

No I don't believe they are. We are starting with an hypothesis.

Celtic Lion

LA-LA LOGIC

KingCelticLion (#89)

"No I don't believe they are."

YOU wouldn't.

The problem is that hypotheses have to be testable, i.e refutable. Your's is/are not. Not respecting/fearing that puts one on the road to madness.

Mind you, there seems to be an awful lot of it about. Much of the media/entertainment industry seems to make a very good living out of it.

Not exploring it or associated ideas can put us on the road to extinction.

Hypothesis is just a proposal for further testing, exploration etc. It is not Theory or Law.

We are living in La La land now, are you not following the same news as me? All I am doing is introducing an analogy, simile etc to introduce another perspective.

I have not put Celtic Lion's Law of Suicide Consumerism.

When we are told on one hand to cut consumerism. When we are told of climate change, or pollution of the biosphere, of food shortages, of species extinction etc, and the need to reduce our resource drain on the carrying capacity of the planet.

Why are we then told to increase consumerism to support 'an economy'.

At the simplest face value level, the sets of instruction are incompatible with each other.

That is La La logic.

Celtic Lion

KingCelticLion (#91) "At the simplest face value level, the sets of instruction are incompatible with each other."

Which bit of 'we live in a Liberal-Democracy which means minimal government' don't you understand?

THEY don't dictate. They are not allowed to. Liberal-Democratic governments 'air' views on behalf of the many lobbyists who court them (and they hope to rewarded for the 'airing' they do). When in power they commission reports, draft green and white papers, and if lucky, ultimately legislate, which often doesn't effect much dramatic change either.

That's why there are so many 'crazy' mixed messages. There are a lot of corporate people out there with special interests. I'm not sure other people's interests matter all that much, except at around election time, and even then it's a load of nonsense as Barrie keeps pointing out.

That's Liberal-Demoratic freedom though. That's what some peole here say is so worthy of protection. If only they thought about it more (or followed what MPs spend most of their time doing in Parliament) - but that's too tedious for most people.

I know JJ.

In 2002 I was recommended by DEFRA to advise the Cabinet Office on the sustainable development aspects of Regulatory Impact Assessment, (RIA), the datum for UK legislation.

What I was confronted with was 80 pages of good intention. Administrators, civil servants, had obviously tried to incorporate 'scientific' concepts into law.

This is what you were writing about a few weeks ago. Natural language and 'scientific'. They were trying to use words, without really defining what they meant.

#82 "Just remember, science and logic is very tedious/boring".

I went through the document word by word, line by line. Every time I found some woolly use of key words or phrases, I defined them in terms and with respect to the brief I was given.

This wasn't some backwater never to be seen again document. It was the datum to which all UK legislation had to be tested against. I was meticulous.

We had had still born twins, my girlfriend in hospital, I am looking after the kids who don't know why their mum was therel, my uncle dies and my father was critically ill in hospital 400 miles away. I had a day job plus working on a UN report and preparing for a conference to set up the next generation of UK climate models.

In my spare time I worked until my forehead bleed. Every second a waste of time. Politicians when they speak don't refer to the work.

The words have been evolved back into natural language, just for a nice sounding adjective. Something that sounds 'good'. With absolutely no attempt to reference the word to a defined meaning of how it should be used in that context.

One of the criteria supplied to me by the Cabinet Office was making Government and legislation 'joined up'.

So where did that 'key' criteria go.

This is just one page, more or less concerned with the inclusion of the word 'now'.

https://celticlion.wordpress.com/2008/01/21/sd-and-the-legislative-process/

I had already informed other departments catastrophic flooding was imminent, but they never reacted. So I just used it as an example to try and alter legislation to prevent a known situation occurring.

The CAP was revised but the rest was a waste of time, apart from I can put it on a CV.

Celtic Lion

KingCelticLion (#93) It seems to me that you're using the NN blog to self-advertise/promote, but I'm not sure you're doing a good PR job.

Advertising: This IS the BBC you know ;-)

#85

It amuses me when people support such ideas they do so with reference to articles from the loony bin.

For anyone with a serious interest in Ponzi/Madoff here is a serious article written by a non-idiot.

The first two are there because some of the idiots have written a lot of nonsense about oil speculation in many places.

Oil speculation:


https://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,556519,00.html

https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/more-on-oil-and-speculation/


Madoff/Ponzi

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/business/19ponzi.html?em

The crucial point is the schemes run out of people to con.

#80 "If we do as Game Theory, or Government says, spend spend spend to increase consumption to stabilise economy. We are told to act in our self interest. But if we all do this we collapse the cological life support system of the planet and we all die."

In whose interest should we act? If R.Crusoe didn't act in his own interest he would have to act for Friday. Similar for Friday. Each acting in the interest of the other but not himself? That doesn't seem sensible (except sex!)?

Game theory does not tell us to spend, spend,spend. I think you have confused it with something else.
__>
"And we all die". Yes. It seems inevitable. It is not "if" but "when"? (In fact the only way to reduce deaths is to reduce births. An early end to the world may be the only way to reduce the all time death count. All the imaginary people who had not been born would not have to die. And they wouldn't give tinker's. )

-->
"you are way off the mark with your 120 years, 200 years, 1000 years, 2000 years."

Off the mark? With exception of 120 there was no mark to aim for. The 120 was simply a guess at how long it will be before there are no people still alive (and please remember I take people to refer to entities at least conceived as of now. Nothing not yet conceived can possibly have worth now). Make it 150 or 200 if you like, I'm not fussy.

As far as your points on economic* waste I think we are very much in agreement. The idea of shopping as a hobby seems absurd to me. Most of the advertising industry seems vile and worthless. Consumerism seems senseless. But in the interests of people, not the planet (which is important as a life support system and source of pleasure for people; it has no intrinsic value.) I reckon we could do better on a 3 day week, spending the extra free time appreciating the planet.

* I take economic to mean having (ability to generate) value for people.

#80 KCL

The story of the flight to Mars misses at least one important point.



Mars (or anywhere else we know of) is afinite distance from where we are at any time. (At least in an everyday sense, as implied in the story.) So if the ship were sufficiently well equipped we could get there. If that were the only objective, shared by all, we could do it.( If we didn't all share the objective we would have problems. That is a massive issue in the world. ) What would happen next? Would that be the end? Crash into mars and kiss your elbow good bye? Or keep right on 'til the end of the world?

You implicitly assume the objective is attainable. What is the objective of our existence beyond our individual desires? There isn't one. What is more, the world will come to an end one day. (Of course, I cannot prove that but it is the best working assumption I have). Why does it matter if it ends in 1000 years', 2000 years' or 11 billion years' (when, I believe, best science suggests even brass polar bears will fell the chill and global warming a dimly remembered luxury). Will there be more suffering if it ends in 1000 rather than 2000? Probably not and there is no reason to believe it would depend on the number of years.


*(Please note, I reject all ideas of gods and other spookie-wookie things).

#"If a process reaction is exothermic (gives out energy) you can reverse it by putting the energy back in. (endothermic)"

No. It may be possible to reverse heat transfers, and perhaps some other measurable properties of a narrowly defined system. But there will be environmental changes NOT reversed. So if you look at the wider system the process will be seen not to have been reversed. The very action of trying to reverse the process will itself be an energy using process. Just as if you leave the fridge door open the fridge works overtime and it warms the kitchen.

That is the second law. The first law says if it gets too hot, open the window and warm up the air outside. At today's electricity prices, better to shut the fridge. And the window.

BLOOMBERG SUES GREEN LIZARD RABBINATE FOR LACK OF TRANSPARENCY

"Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke is basing hundreds of billions in emergency lending on credit ratings from companies that gave AAA grades to toxic securities."
Bloomberg 18 Dec 2008

But they're allowed to be opaque, it's a reptilian thing.

It's a strange world.

#79

"You're doing it again. The assumption is that people and other animals) freely, and rationally, make choices."

I make no assumption of rationality.