Thursday, July 28, 2011

Cambridge Non-commoners

Moral: Wherein we continue a look at the 'chimera' (and its lemons) in terms of an approach that can be sustainable.


Last time, we looked at the Salem Commoners whose use of 'commoner' provides an interesting twist. Yes, many involved were not common, at all.

Fortunately, Fortune now provides another, more usual, twist that deals with the antithesis of common, namely the elite. The topic deals with the Ivies as a route to Wall Street.

As an aside, Cambridge also has MIT (juxtapositions, thereof, are of interest here).


Mind you, this blog has said, from the beginning, that any worldview that puts its epitome on the Wall, rather than the Main, street, is very much suspect from a sustainable sense. Why? It continues the notions that were motivators for aristocratic excesses of ego and ignominious exploitation of the trodden; too, these ones, of the privileged heritage (some, lordly princes) and of a highly un-grounded basis, proliferate mindsets that are seemingly well-founded but that, in actuality, sliver and quake (house of cards).


An appropriate Magna Carta must become part of the discussion.


07/06/2012 -- Today, we have the one-year remembrance of George Edward Kimball III (GEK III)

10/10/2011 -- If the OWS wants specifics, there are plenty to list, such as this one. We can only resolve this with an amendment (like the 13th) for the rights of workers (folks, employment is not unlike indentured servitude in many ways) plus a Magna Carta equivalent to give the big pants (egos) something to think about.

10/09/2011 -- Kings have sovereignty over their dominion however large it may be. There, currently, is no king of the world of this type. CEOs have sovereignty over their companies. Now, many of these have domains that are larger (measured many ways) than geographical types of kingdoms. BUT, each has sovereignty over themselves (or ought to), ideally (constitutionally, if you're in the U.S.A.).

Now, being able to exhibit sovereignty requires talent of various sorts. Throughout history, those who ruled others may or may not have had this talent. From all of the turmoil over the millenia, one has to just marvel at the stupidity of these types, exhibited, in the modern age, by the CEO MVPs.

Our task is to foster that which enhances one's self-sovereignty and diminishes others' influence on oneself. Oh wait. The social media seem to be antithetical to this notion. Also, all of those issues related to mature interactions (of a peaceful manner) must be resolved (philosophers have long been involved with that dilemma).

It is this type of notions that are behind a lot of what motivates the current protests. Those who could (LT 1%) have exploited (and have been allowed to exploit) the rest (GT 99%).

10/07/2011 -- Magna Carta, the celebration thereof.

09/15/2011 -- Henry and George.

08/30/2011 -- Essentially, we have financial piracy.

08/05/2011 -- In case there is a need to be more obvious (the meme: the chicken or the egg -- below), which is the oldest profession: head-butt or mate. Note, if you would, that the latter is usually preceded by the former, in many cases.

08/03/2011 -- There are several ways to ponder economics within an evolutionary framework. However, starting with the two (no, not one) 'oldest' professions might be of interest: head-butting (see Remarks 07/29/2011) and, then, that which is usually cast as the oldest. Which came first (the meme: the chicken or the egg)?

07/29/2011 -- Another nod to GEK III would look at his thinking on the 'sweet science' of mankind (and analogs, thereof). As in, head butting (actually, this is the oldest profession). Rick had a post on his BJJ longevity (to which I commented, as it leads to discussion of the necessity of the sandbox) describing the various benefits of the martial arts. In the large, mayhem has been used by those of the upper realms to control the lower classes, plus they manipulate the energies for the uppers' goals. In the small, we have males trying to establish an illusory dominance (yes, zap your brain out to 1 million miles and think: to what effect?) among themselves while letting the uppers exploit the situation. That is, divisive energies prevent the necessary unity (that which would free the trodden). ... Now, to twist the view a little, can we learn lessons from the efforts at succeeding in these areas (as in, something equivalent to that considered by the ivory-towered minds)? Yes, consider a topsy-turvy change that is experientially (and not abstractly) based, if you would. We'll be getting more into this later.

07/28/2011 -- This is the second of the G.E.K. III, defender of justice, series. As one comment to the Fortune article notes: (bern 3922) Actually, I think we're becoming more like the feudalistic classist dumps our ancestors fled here to escape. Hopefully we'll realize we're making the mistakes of the past and change course. What we need is for elite education to be allocated to those most intelligent and capable instead of those whose parents have the most money. We also need legislation that will make nepotism a form of employment discrimination.

Modified: 07/06/2012

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Salem Commoners

Moral: Wherein we start a look at the 'chimera' (and its lemons) in terms of an approach that is sustainable.


Perhaps, Big Ben and Jamie can learn something. Little Timmy, too?

We'll use the context of the recently passed Fourth of July.


I have been reviewing European and American history, using a genealogical framework, for the past couple of years. Somehow, putting flesh on the thing can create a whole new look.

And, it seems obvious to me that we have gone astray from the ideals of the early entrants (and those across the millennial span who may have wished that things were better) . Why?

Many reasons. We'll get to that. But, the thing to look at is how to recapture some of that 'spirit' (and, politicos, you are not 'it') that was behind 1776.

Adam Smith would have loved this, it is my opinion. So, would have Samuelson.


What we are starting here will be a constructive viewpoint which has the intent of showing how to tame the chimera, to establish a more fair approach, and to do so without breaking the bank.

The series will be dedicated to George Edward Kimball, III (1943-2011) whom I first met 46 years ago in the central part of the U.S.A., who was continuation of a line from the early entrants to the 21st century, and who was for the 'little' people as many have said in their remembrances of him.


In my research, I had earlier run across a book with 'Salem Commoners' in the title and finally decided to read the thing. George's ancestor settled in Watertown, MA (later, moving to Ipswich, MA), but that is a mere stone's throw away (at least, to those of us from the wider-expanses of the western US).

Aside: in the past two years, I've been trolling the Internet's ever-growing database (thank you, Internet Archive, for instance) and collecting material related to several genealogical trees, including material related to the milieu and the times (to understand motivations, etc.). Of course, some material I read (or scanned). A lot of it is there waiting for attention.

So I opened the book (use 'Read online' for a wonderful GUI presentation). The title can give pause; is it exalting in not having any royal or aristocratic blood and more? Mind you, no one is in power, ever, without some exploitation of situations (yes, unfortunately, John Dalberg was right -- even though he knew not of situational ethics). Too, there is noone from any time who does not have something in their past that people cannot harp about (should they choose to do so).

Yet, we know that many people want to know of their royal gateways, if they have any. We didn't continue the traditions here, yet we can find these things interesting (aren't Kate and William just great, for instance? -- by the way, she has royal blood -- it took an American to do the proper research) since it is the past for a whole lot of Americans.


The above-mentioned book is a record of meetings that started in 1713. To put it in context, this would be about 90 years past the first group coming into the Salem area. What we see is a group of people who decided that they needed to organize efforts at maintaining the commonweal (we've mentioned that before). The attendee list consists of many stellar families.

Aside: a mere 50 years later, similar meetings had the role of 'shadow' government.

Now, one might ask in the context of the meeting, as opposed to what? Royal rule. Remember, George III stumbled here because he failed to see that 150-plus years of self-governance (despite royal overseers) led the American people to desire freedom sufficiently to risk their lives, health and wealth. You see, England had just gotten over decades of civil war. So, George III decided that he wanted to reign in those over here who had blossomed under the lack of constraint.

By the way, what were the British troops fighting for, in comparison? Oppression?

Aside: Because of the sweep of time here, we really need to look at the Crusades' influence on some modern dilemmas. Too, bottom-up (self-governance) versus top-down (aristocratic -- many, many types -- intelligence being the most insidious) is an age-old theme.

Ah, the allure of ergodics.


So, this is the first of a series. 'Constructive' will be looked at next time. You see, the chimera is the result of mis-used mathematics and computation, pure and simple. 'How to show this?' is the problem. Of course, we'll try to be other than PTIME in the development.


What is the historic-genealogical connection? Well, it'll unfold. But, Naisbitt was right in drawing parallels with our times of 400 years ago. We'll do the same drawing from a collection of individuals (including Richard Kimball) whose progeny continue to play out the 'American dream' (as it ought to be).
  • 01/19/2010 -- ... Anyway, how do we get a new look at Adam Smith? We'll use US history. In particular, we're going to go back to Massachusetts Bay Colony and look at a few economic realities. We'll focus on several people, such as families of settlers, blowhards (like John White), and others, at first. Then, we'll expand it to other developments that were congruent in time. Note please, these things pre-date our friend Adam. ... Why do this? To honor Adam, for one. Also, Naisbitt, the futurist, is at it, again. His comparison of China with the U.S. two hundred years ago motivated me to look at his example's basis. Well, then we have to go back further than that (old planters). And, we expect to see that his paralleling example is not as well-founded as he may think. This look will be Economic History and Philosophy rolled into one.


07/24/2012 -- Chompsky on the Magna Carta and our rights to Commons.

07/06/2012 -- Today, we have the one-year remembrance of George Edward Kimball III (GEK III)

09/15/2011 -- Henry and George.

07/28/2011 -- Cambridge non-commoners.

07/12/2011 -- Posts here evolve, but they eventually settle down. GEK III is quoted as saying that life would be better without editors. However, they do slough through a lot. Unfortunately, bloggers (assuming that the person cares) have to do that work themselves (as we all know, multitudes do not).

07/12/2011 -- Big Ben wants to ease for the fat cats, as if they will create jobs. Guy, you know that you've trashed the heart of the economy, the savers, for several years now? Answer this: do you run your household economy by debt (I already know the answer, no; somehow you are enthralled by equity's sirens)? That is, are you indentured up to your eyeballs (wait, what political pull are you trying to buildup for the future?)?

Modified: 07/24/2012

Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Chimera, explained

Moral: Wherein we stop to consider why 'chimera' has been used in reference to that which gets more of Big Ben's attention than is warranted.


Oh, some have benefited from the chimera's increasing heftiness. This is not unlike the house raking in the dough due to how odds are set.

For some reason, Big Ben has not pulled his head out of the '30s and seems to think that the ca-pital-sino is it. Sheesh, big guy. Will you learn?


Most people's lives are in the crapper. Many get by on scraps. The fat cats (less than 10%, the new aristocracy -- where is our Magna Carta?) are gaining more weight. Those same fat cats are raking in over 80% of the takings (will not use profits, as stock rising in prices means nothing of value, folks, let's get that straight - future topic -- for now, recall near zero, please).


Well, Big Ben's two targets (for which he has controls that supposedly help him aim) relate to unemployment (ah, that is one rub) and inflation. The first we all know is problematic (even, though Big Ben panicked early, supposedly worried all along, and wants to help), so we'll ignore that for now. Taking the second one, he has removed the chance of deflation. How? He trashed the savers, essentially junked the US Bonds (gosh, again, Big Ben, where is your head?), floated his QEs, and more. Liquidity, it's called.

From where I sit, looks like the banks got impacted (yes, think hose: high, hot, and hell of a lot -- old timers ought to know what this means) due to their improper diet.

Aside: Jamie? My jaw fell when I heard that some think that he ought to replace little Timmy.


Big Ben has another thing going against him. Fake money. Yes, he's been allowed to print without restraint (oh wait! that's little Timmy whose presses have been running overtime). Big Ben's role in this is that he determines what is the balance that is related to money (how much, of each type, etc.).

Big Ben and little Timmy are two peas in a pod.


What is this all about? Well, that which is termed 'chimera' has tenuous links to the bulk of the economy. How did this come to be? And, in a sustainable economy (yes, with an global focus) to what extent would the gaming called the market have a gambling flair? That is the question, folks. Mind you, there are many suited, lobbyists who do not want the game to be fair.


Of course, what would be fair? After all, it has been interminable that we have the upper class (a small set) and then the masses who are there mainly to be exploited. Even the phenomenon of those who may be meritorious and who arise from the teeming-ness of the masses, forget their past real quickly. Human nature, 'tis.


Given that we're just past the Fourth of July, let's, at least, not be pretentious that those ideals mean anything to the few who make the decisions. Oh yes, they mean a lot to those who need to think that things will get better. Or, to the idealist. ... Or, to the saint (yes, there are those).

There is a firm (not to be mentioned by name) that is so much an example. It in part deals with jetting, that bailiwick used by the rich to keep their little selves out of the fray. Oh yes, by using private means of transportation (that is subsidized by our monies -- oh, if this were not true, why do you not see the masses lining up for fractional jet time? -- that is, let the rich pay for the 'real cost' of their chosen method (to keep from rubbing elbows with those who fly first class using their earned miles or to keep from hobnobbing with the working class who might also be million milers) ... oh yes, this is equivalent to costing out the expenses of a private suite -- how many day-to-day work traveler can do that?), these types can work faster to keep those teeming masses in chains. Well, there was a sell-out from public to private that left oodles of debt on the books. Oh yes, monies flowed to a few pockets. That debt's service cost has been just debilitating on the company. Yet, who pays? They cut people, move (or try to move) to places of cheaper (more exploitable workers), trash worker benefits (of many types), get the local community to belly up with tax breaks, and so forth.

Why are they in this state? Well, it isn't that Obama questions why tax breaks are necessary for the rich's flying toys. No. There is the fact of the deal (in which, golden sacks made oodles -- set up the details, reinforced the notions - yes, they're the best), plus there was a downturn. You see, the firm was not able to IPO yet. It had a sister company that did partly get to IPO (enriching a few pockets), yet it has debt, to boot.


Well, that firm may have been of a sustainable mode for years. But, it's current turmoil ought to be studied very closely. For many lessons, such as leveraging's pitfalls, worker exploitation, limitations of pursuing the luxury market (except, what will be the reality of personal jets - strap on - equivalent to the flying bike?), and more.


So, 'chimera' it is whose sirens seem to strongly allure. Even Big Ben has been seduced. What is the way out of this debacle?


12/22/2012 -- Fair and open actually used in a WSJ article.

10/05/2012 -- Yes, yes, chimera it is.

08/04/2012 -- I can hear it: with the DOW over 13K, what are you talking about using 'chimera'? Well, look at the dire warnings, for one. Are you looking at FB as a poster boy? We'll get technical and explain the problem. Do we have a solution, at this time? Yes, essentially.

03/11/2012 -- We'll use Alan more this year. 

08/10/2011 -- Weird stock market. Removes all arguments for the legitimacy/sustainability of this financial mechanism; that is, how ought this be done in a civilized, sane manner?

08/08/2011 -- Oh well, Little Timmy is staying. Anyone for a DOW of 8K?

08/03/2011 -- Today, the DOW is at 11.7K (hey, let it go to 8K) at mid-morning. Ah, what irrationality lurks? Yet, Big Ben wants to continue to sack the savers while being ultra-charitable to bankers (like Jamie).

07/13/2011 -- QE3? Sheesh, Big guy. The article says that stocks went up 6% during QE2. Let's see. How did the pockets of the savers diminish? More than that, it seems.

07/12/2011 -- See Salem Commoners for a continuation of the theme. Also, changed 'Jaime' to 'Jamie' (oh yes).

07/07/2011 -- Oh yes, Jaime probably wants a 0.01& reserve so that he can take even more due to supposed income from churning. Have to give Big Ben credit to standing up to the guy's rant. Let's put Washington Irving's theme to use.

07/06/2011 -- Yes, to get monies to service the debt, without the opportunity to sell more, what does the firm do? Take it from the workers, squeezing out the last drop of blood, selling assets, and such. How could they then be nimble enough to actually be effective in the future? Why is it that cuts seem to take on some equivalence with an anorexic drive? For all this, consider that no amount of cuts would come close to servicing the debt (where did that type of thinking become the paragon to which we all are supposed to bow?). Could they even sell all of their assets and pay the debt? Yet, when they do push out an IPO, it's supposed to be a great investment?

Modified: 12/22/2012