---
One question: Is greed mostly a New Testament concept? Well, there are some who use the Torah as the basis for discussing this human trait.
---
This could be considered Some Background II as we look how the smarties have packaged trash with the intent of selling it to us as being of value.
---
Why the question? I heard it said that 'greed' is largely running rampant, thereby causing havoc. I beg to differ, somewhat. Greed is always there.
So, what is different? Besides, of course, the idiocy that claims that 'greed is good' and the best and brightest are allowed to be greedy, without any limit.
---
Let's look at Kaku's opinion on the future. Or, we can discuss the opinions that he collected from talking to a bunch of scientists (see book).
By the way, he's the string theory guy. He makes some broad claims. And, he did this despite knowing how afar from the target have been almost all prognostications since the beginning of time.
---
However, Dr Michio does mention two trends. Now, remember that these are not new, in any sense, except for how we look at them.
There is the trend to peace and health (ergodic theory applies here). Then, there is that which is chaotic (which is behind the risk management mania as well as a new type of engineering).
Now, to use the Biblical thought, would that not be the angelic and demonic principles in their eternal conflict? Is it not nice that one convergence is toward worldviews that show how true are those old concepts?
---
One difference? As mentioned many times, mathematics and computation. And, remember that we have essentially dumbed ourselves down in order for these tools to work.
But, is not the zombie state of those entranced with the LED-lit (or other) screen not unlike some type of state of spiritual rapture? Except, we know how to quiesce this (remove the power from the device enabling the enrapture - yes, as in pull the plug).
----
By the way, Big Ben, all this is because of the season for both (of course, there are more than two) of the major worldviews that revolve around the Bible.
---
We're, today, in day three of the five gaming days. Every week, it continues. Winners and losers. Yes, people, where is the discussion of the basic truth of near zero? In fact, Big Ben's largess to the fat cats which is sacking/soaking the savers is one big example.
---
But, what can Big Ben do? I mentioned before that he's heavy into the equity index game. And, to think that he is expected to be independent in thinking. Anyone remember when he ran scared (yes, 2008/9 time frame) and loosened the book of our beans for the fat cats to feed on without any constraint (or, does anyone even care?).
---
Is it not remarkable that in 2011, we're still arguing age-old problems? Well, considering that each generation learns anew (and parents know the travails that can come from their kids -- examples abound -- some kids even exalting in trashing the past -- but, we did that as a country here (in a sense) in the revolutionary times (ah, how many atrocities could be attributed to the patriots), if we only knew?), what else can we do? Now, given the question, we'll now have to venture into these realms. You know? Big Ben does not have to care. Like King Alan, keeping those in power, and in the money, happy is sufficient for the guy.
Remarks:
07/22/2015 -- Some of these are, now, poster boys.
09/19/2013 -- All's not lost. Some accountants see a change that is problematic. But, first, savers are more than just risk averse; they put their actions where their mouth is by being prudent. Now, that was once considered a virtue; in fact, one could argue that it was expected for fiscal responsibility. However, some claim that accounting has removed prudence in lieu of theoretical nonsense leading to annual reports that are incomprehensible. Actually, the computer can make things such, too, so the whole bit that underpins our world seems to have been given a shaky basis (on purpose, to allow rooking the people? - or, through stupidity?). Of course, the side that argues that prudence is quaint (well, it seems to be for quants) is vocal, too. But, we have China asking prudence of Ben and the Fed?
02/12/2013 -- We ought to have nationalized these guys' playground.
09/19/2013 -- All's not lost. Some accountants see a change that is problematic. But, first, savers are more than just risk averse; they put their actions where their mouth is by being prudent. Now, that was once considered a virtue; in fact, one could argue that it was expected for fiscal responsibility. However, some claim that accounting has removed prudence in lieu of theoretical nonsense leading to annual reports that are incomprehensible. Actually, the computer can make things such, too, so the whole bit that underpins our world seems to have been given a shaky basis (on purpose, to allow rooking the people? - or, through stupidity?). Of course, the side that argues that prudence is quaint (well, it seems to be for quants) is vocal, too. But, we have China asking prudence of Ben and the Fed?
02/12/2013 -- We ought to have nationalized these guys' playground.
10/11/2011 -- If the OWS wants specifics, there are plenty to list, such as this one. Can we only resolve the grabby-ness problem with an amendment (like the 13th) for the rights of workers (folks, employment is not unlike indentured servitude (you sign over your rights when you agree to the onerous nondisclosure rules) in many ways as it is now defined) plus a Magna Carta equivalent to give the big pants (egos) something to think about? Why is finance about greed? Rhetorical, in part, but only because those with money have defined the game. We can show how smart/non-greedy peoples can run this show, no matter how complicated some might think that it is. And, it would demonstrate what 'markets' are meant to show.
09/20/2011 -- This will be used in our constructive effort.
05/29/2011 -- Fair dealing, can that be brought back? Was it ever?
05/17/2011 -- Golden sacks (leftmost mug of the rogue table), by Rolling Stone and Daily Ticker.
05/09/2011 -- Savers are suckers?
04/21/2011 -- When 250K isn't enough? Flimflam & swindle.
04/19/2011 -- That systems thinking has led us awry is obvious. Answering why this is so is the task.
04/15/2011 -- Daily Ticker quotes the New Yorker on the wealth gap: the top 1% of Americans own 1/3rd of the country's wealth. That is, 99% share the remainder.
04/15/2011 -- The IEEE Spectrum has an article that talks game theory in an accessible manner. The example starts with the failure of Steve Jobs' demo of the new IPhone, last year, which was attributable to the many mobile hot-spots that were collected in the room. Essentially, selfish action is expected. We see this in finance where the best-and-brightest are allowed a favored spot at the trough with the result that they become fat cats. There will be a post soon on this. As these related blogs have argued for a concept which could be characterized as 'simple living' (which takes note of near zero) as that need to bring the dismal realm of the economy into a more humanly oriented state. Yes, indeed. The antithesis of the fat cat is what we need to run our markets and to care for our beans. And, those who grow to be huge giants ought not, in most ways, be honored or emulated. Lesson: for any of those who have accumulated hugely, how many bodies were left in their wake? Then, is there any amount of retribution that they could offer (yes, the philanthropist's dilemma - recompense) that would account for those who were thusly sacrificed.
04/14/2011 -- Golden sacks. Where to start on these people?
04/14/2011 -- We ought to have nationalized the bunch. Cowtowing to them (thanks, little Timmy) reinforces their egotistical notions of their necessity and worth.
04/14/2011 -- We ought to have nationalized the bunch. Cowtowing to them (thanks, little Timmy) reinforces their egotistical notions of their necessity and worth.
Modified 07/22/2015
No comments:
Post a Comment