Showing posts sorted by relevance for query magna. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query magna. Sort by date Show all posts

Saturday, August 21, 2010

New royalty

Moral: Wherein we muse about topics that are old yet always seem to have a new place at the table due to open issues, such as, only the favored (not any more royal than any of the rest) getting a fair (supposedly) deal. Image: King John signs.

---

As Jim at the New Yorker says, the very, very rich (0.01%) are pulling away, in terms of accumulative multiples, from the very rich. What we need to look at is the reality of near-zero (excessive takings, of any type, are lop-sided and are really not much different in character than exorbitant taxings (used to support the leisurely life of the royal set, in many cases) - not arguing against a larger percentage tax for super earners, by the way).

This blog is about the dismal field that is so little understood in practice (yes, theory abounds, that there is a lesson) as to be comical (think Keystone cops) except that the consequences suffered by some is dire, indeed. Those in control are looking at each other wondering how to get things moving; there is real pain at the main parts; and, has anyone seen an end to the mess?


By the way, what is a 'royal' in the discussion here? Anyone with an out-sized sense of entitlement; the 'new kings' are more in the set than the lowly worker trying to make a living (usually subsistence). Again, reminder: those dealing with money, and its control, ought to have taken some equivalent of the vow of poverty (as evidenced by simple living).

Those trying to create a proper economic realm could look at what a Magna Carta for the system's role players might look like. Workers would get more respect and support, perhaps lessening the motives behind unionism.

That focus would help alleviate some of the mania attached to capitalism (yes, Adam's little system, so much mangled). Also, the artificial (as in, that basis which has been allowed to grow under the guise of interloped mathematics) would be constrained. Currently, these systems, and those who ride herd for their daily takings off the top, seem to run things, mostly in an amok manner.

Labor needs respect; those who touch matter are of far more importance than the modelers, and gamers.

---

Each generation seems to try to relearn what was known before. But, were things known, or do we impose notions through historical, and other ex post facto, views?

The question ought to be pondered in the context, as an example, of how change has been the most prevalent component in computational spheres, with deleterious effect.

Ah, is there some type of slate that is wiped clean from time to time? Technology, and its progress, seems to have this type of effect.

Or, is it that we, as a kind, have never been successful, across the board, of inculcating the best into our progeny. Of course, there have been families that have excelled long periods of time. Can this be considered the norm?

Yet, the young folk, starting early, spend a significant part of their year, and each weekday, in a milieu, that does include some element of indoctrination.

What are they learning early of economic realities? How are they attaining knowledge that debt, and perpetual accumulation thereof (oh, yes, like the US currently), leads to the state not unlike that of the indentured servant, of old?

---

'Nothing new under the sun' is the adage. That events of 800+ years ago are still of interest, and utility (capitalism has usurped this notion along with many), will be a continuing theme. The 400+ of those issues being brought to this side of the pond is the motivation.

Remarks:

07/25/2015 -- We're about six weeks after the June look back at 800 years ago (Magna Carta). Too, though, poster boys have popped out of the woodwork, including Zweig.

03/16/2015 -- Let them eat cake.

07/31/2013 -- Ben cannot unwind or taper down; he has too many Doves. We'll have to get back to the king thing (yes, the divine rights of the CEO, new royalty, in other words) and dampening of these types by a new outlook (Magna-Carta'ísh).

03/25/2013 -- The Atlantic had an article about King Abdullah II. Now, he is an example of a doer, from several angles. What I liked when I read it was that while being educated in Massachusetts, he bussed tables. What that means for those who don't know is clean up dirty dishes and such. When I, as a young man, was in the US Army, we had still had KP duty which included such types of things. Another task that ought to be tried once by everyone: cleaning the grease pit.

01/14/2013 -- Jamie, the banker, talked about some running around like children. Worrying about their career, when things fell out with the "whale" deal (remember that?). Well, Jamie, it's the childish stuff that pushes people to be like yourself, attention seeking, et al. How many really wise people rise to that level? Not, as it takes incompetence to even make the first step. Now, these folks are the new princes, princesses, and kings and queens. Yes, indeed. Their may be some necessity for the ilk; playing games is one of them. The more I read on the type (as epitomized in the royals of Europe -- elsewhere, to boot, but, let's just keep to one continent), I see fratricide, maniacal maneuvering, and more. Gosh, are we doomed from the get go, a cynic (which I'm not) might say.

01/13/2012 -- We'll go more into why the need for the Magna Charta, this year.

10/20/2011 -- The spawn'er of the new royals.

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

09/21/2011 -- On Wealth and the CEO MVP.

05/25/2011 -- Lemons problem, dark pools, ... Oh, so much to look at!

05/09/2011 -- This needs to be looked at in terms of doers.

04/04/2011 -- Need to look at some background.
01/03/2011 -- Ah yes, now there are demands. The question remains: what growth other than the pockets of these types?

12/05/2010 -- Raj Patel has the proper grasp on the 'financial madness' that is threatening us.

11/01/2010 -- von Mises' thinking applies here.

09/21/2010 -- Facebook, as metaphor.

09/02/2010-- The FED just had their hoe-down.

08/31/2010 -- The chimera needs to be dismantled and rebuilt. Those running the money systems need to take a vow of poverty and simple living (period).

Modified: 07/25/2015

Monday, June 14, 2010

The new kings

Moral: Wherein we consider that the sirens related to the big chimera do not have hold on all minds and that there is work related to the real backbone of the economy which is both refreshing to behold and necessary for our future.

----

Since so much effort and resource goes into the daily gaming, as the continual onslaught from all media reminds us, one might consider succumbing to the notion that "capital is king" or some such nonsense.

Well, from time to time, we ought to be reminded that not all economics is oriented to that which results in accumulations of most by the few and in the impoverishment of the many. A recent New Yorker article on Professor Duflo was one such reminder.

The focus is development economics. And, I might add, development of people for more than just making them available to be exploited by the new kings.

Who are this new royalty? Those in power in the multi-national companies who are the supposed epitome of capitalism. Kings in the past were geographically local and were a focal point for power and control. That is, the realm was framed upon portions of the planet and had an emphasis that was political in nature.

The new kings are not tied to any country, have now the global internet as a resource, and enrich a few (even if shareholders are included, their take pales when compared to that grabbed by the stars of the show - CEOs and their ilk).

The new kings are about acquisition: more capital, more glory, ... A recent Supreme Court ruling giving them an unlimited political voice reinforces the company as person myth and leads us to the situation where the largest bank account holder can then bully the rest of the populace.

The new kings are more about entrapment of the work force and customers into continual enslavement than development. The new kings move work to where they can most exploit (colonization). The new kings, and their thinking, have led the supposedly developed nations to a standstill where the developed ones are to buy only (from whence the means? unfathomable debt?) and to sit idly while savings diminish (thanks, Big Ben, saver sacker that you are) to nothing (oh, wait, we could go beyond zero to a negative interest).

We can be thankful that there are people who work on the issues related to economic development, yet the underlying threat is that the main effect will be more resources who can then be seen as fodder for those who are wont to exploit.

Remarks:

07/25/2015 -- We're about six weeks after the June look back at 800 years ago (Magna Carta). Too, though, poster boys have popped out of the woodwork, including Zweig.

07/31/2013 -- Ben cannot unwind or taper down; he has too many Doves. We'll have to get back to the king thing (yes, the divine rights of the CEO) and dampening of these types by a new outlook (Magna-Carta'ísh).

03/25/2013 -- The Atlantic had an article about King Abdullah II. Now, he is an example of a doer, from several angles. What I liked when I read it was that while being educated in Massachusetts, he bussed tables. What that means for those who don't know is clean up dirty dishes and such. When I, as a young man, was in the US Army, we had still had KP duty which included such types of things. Another task that ought to be tried once by everyone: cleaning the grease pit.

01/13/2012 -- We'll go more into why the need for the Magna Charta, this year.

09/21/2011 -- On Wealth and the CEO MVP.

05/09/2011 -- This needs to be look at in terms of doers.

01/03/2011 -- Ah yes, now there are demands. The question remains: what growth other than the pockets of these types?

09/25/2010 -- Capitalism was defined within a classist's framework. We can improve on that.

08/21/2010 -- The new kings are not 'royal' by any means; they're mainly takers (exploiters) extra-ordinaire. We need a Magna Carta, for business (local and global) in which rights of the workers (how else a consumer economy?), and more, are addressed. What would this look like?

07/27/2010 -- The Boston Globe had an interesting op-ed, recently, about these types. Of course, there are several types of best and brightest, including the quants. We'll need to address this topic again using what we know of the new kings. Ah, such confidence when underdetermination reigns.

07/21/2010 -- That we let systems run wild says a lot about us. That economics requires systems means that issues of control, truth, and related are of utmost interest to any attempt at founding a better basis. We'll get there, folks, by taming several speculative thrusts that were emboldened by theory, game and otherwise.

07/21/2010 -- Kings of the past had the peerage, in societies that allowed such. Some of these new kings do not have such, with ineffective Boards in some cases. Of interest to this work will be a new look at what roles the peerage had in the US and what this might mean to an improved economic basis.

07/10/2010 -- The machines rule (actually systems going wild). Perhaps, we'll learn from the China experiment.

07/06/2010 -- The real Founders are turning over in their graves.

07/02/2010 -- There are real kings.

06/17/2010 -- Need to collect discussions on development. Trickle down says that letting the big guys grow lifts the waters (hah!). More like the fat arses displace (and, perhaps, squash). What is needed is sustainability (even DAVOS talked this in 2010) that allows the most to reach some sort of potential (unlike the current in which about all is held by the few whilst the rest (most) hold nickles and dimes) .

06/16/2010 --In the past, we had only one king per geographic locale, with numerous henchmen (plus the bullies, would-be kings, that they are). Now, we have a growing set of kings (how many royal arses can we all kiss?) of this ephemeral type (that is, not kings to us in our daily lives, yet they have more than a delusion - just count the benes - boundless inflows of bucks and more). These kings reign in a realm that encompasses an increasingly enervated workforce (which appears to them to be infinite given colonization). Again, the questions arises: whence the means to found a proper economy which does have a large component in the equation, called the consumer? Somehow, we need to get these new kings roped in.

Is the answer a computational framework that replaces these hunks of idiocy with something that we can all appreciate? CEO apps?

Modified 07/25/2015


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.

Remarks

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, October 4, 2011

The public's heart

Moral: Wherein we mention a couple of items related to the public's view (that is, the other 99%).

---

Protests about the best-and-brightests' gaming? This emerging scene is reminiscent of several that the blogger has seen personally, including early civil rights sit-ins, anti-war demonstrations, and even the be-ins from four decades ago.

---

In reading about the Wall Street event, I ran across a news source that is of the new media and seems to have a fairly broad coverage (alternet.org), though the Kochs think that it is 'subversive.'

Aside: Yes, though it might seem beyond belief, the blogger just ran across this site a couple of days ago.

Another thing about the protests is that the abstracted views of theory (economics, political, ...) do not consider the 'heart' of the people. Who looks at that large source of power?

---

We'll have to go back to discussing the need for a Magna Carta equivalent for busyness, among other things.

Remarks

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

06/25/2012 -- Washington Post on Congressional non-ethics.

11/30/2011 -- Need to respect the bottom up. Will the computer finally let that come about?

11/29/2011 -- Ah, Big Ben helped his friends more than he said, at the time.

11/04/2011 -- Tech Ticker asks a good questions about the darker side of Apple. Are any of the other tech companies any better? The OWS can find all sorts of examples like this to use.

10/18/2011 -- Hopefully, the OWS will bring this type of thing to public awareness.

10/15/2011 -- The recognition goes global. Banking ought to be handled by those whose greed is close to nil.

10/14/2011 -- One thing that has always concerned the blogger was the trickery that finance did with student loans which ought to be as straightforward as mortgages. Yet, some play games with those needing the support and, in doing so, made oodles (atrocious, in essence). Some of have this in mind as they join in the protest. Yes, it was turned over to bankers of whom there are many types; and, do not bankers exist for the purpose of filling their pockets?

10/13/2011 -- It is our economy.

10/11/2011 -- Topics related to this theme have been addressed here from the beginning. One example: shattered dreams. Busyness has stunk to the high heavens for some time now.

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.

10/10/2011 -- The new media in action. The best-and-brightest who are behind the faults that trashed the financial world (early 2008 finger pointing) were good at playing the issues (exuberance plus fairy dusting) seemingly without any repercussions (where were the clawbacks? -- zombie, indeed).

10/09/2011 -- Kings (and Lords) 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 -- See Remarks, this day, about innumeracy. Those who are numerant think that they are the smarter (smartest) -- even science has trended toward reinforcing this notion. But, the jury is still out, folks. We'll go into that. Go, protesters! Keep it legal, though.

10/07/2011 -- Magna Carta, the celebration thereof. We need one of these for business. What would it look like?

Heard, from others, that the Wall Streeters jeer: we cannot help that we are good at what we do, find a job you lazy protesters. Oh, yes, Wall Streeters, you are good at what, exactly? Oh, yes, having defined the shell game, then you keep it running so that monies are sucked out of the pockets (no fair deal) of the hapless.

10/06/2011 -- It seems like old times, almost reminiscent of the late 60s and early 70s. Notice that the tea party seems to be the favorite of the rightmost (Republican) minds. Labor and the left seem to be on board with the Wall Street protests. Great play on the major stage; ought to produce a whole lot of material.

10/05/2011-- We need to appreciate the dedication of the protesters and their supporters. The site in NY has an infrastructural basis, in a sense, with its medical, legal, and other support. Now, who would have thought that the requirements for, and recognition of, 'morals' related to money would play out in this type of fashion? Somehow, there seems to be a different tone about the whole thing.

10/04/2011 -- Dedicated to GEK III.

Modified: 07/06/2012


Thursday, September 16, 2010

The ideological errors of capitalism, VI -- classism

Moral: Wherein we consider that the ideological problems, namely, ill cultured-ness, abounding of absconders, prevalence of shell games, unconscionable exploitation of Adam Smith, and the Ca-pital-sino are not sufficient. We need to look at its classist's basis. Image: see Carnot on Motive Power (capitalism's view of labor?).

---

Ideological errors:
---

And, how do we address such a complicated subject? Well, let's start with a few remarks that are disjoint, yet potentially coherent, looks at themes which can then be discussed more later.

---


It was almost inevitable given the framework in which the ideas developed. At the time, there was little relationships between the upper and lower classes. In fact, the middle class was always squeezed.

Oh wait, the lowers had no rights (until the Magna Carta) and were basically exploited. That continues to this day.

Too, those who might have been lucky to ascend from out of the lower realms mostly quickly forgot, by design, their origins. Looking at this might be interesting but distracting.

---

The modern conceptual frameworks, that were not available at the time of Adam Smith, can refresh the capitalistic outlook. For one, rather than class, there would be roles as the focus. That is, take labor. The current situation allows serious exploitation of those in this role, as we've seen with the colonization that outsourcing is.

Jobs? Ah, many are without. How can there be offerings of roles that would allow people to take care of themselves and their families? Consumerism, in the sense of 'c' being the largest part of the macro equation, demands this.

---

'capital' itself needs to have another look. Now, it seems to be more analogous to crown jewels than not (to be discussed). Ah, how many kings can this poor world, and its miserable masses (nope, not Marxist), support?

---

Private ownership? We need to look at this in a more enlightened fashion. Given the current vogue, one could very well imagine someone 'thinking' that they own the planet. Oh wait! Was not a lot of the conflict on the poor suffering earth just to show who was boss?

As well, given the advent of mutli-national firms, especially those who have a heavy footprint on the cyber part of our cyber-physical existence, we see ownership that does encompass something that is world-wide.

Ownership, in terms of roles, denotes responsibilities. Unfortunately, what we have seen has been efforts, albeit successful to some extent, to shirk responsibility.

Mind you, did we not just see, up close, privatization of gain and socialization of loss running rampant? Those dynamics still exist, and in more than just the issues related to the toxic assets that we have laying around like mines in a field.

---

What is private? Ought what is a 'pubic good' (a long list, arbitrage, etc.) be put out to the private realm (whatever it is?)?

Many roles, that are not of necessity (we can drive an equitable economy with those who live a simple life and who do not succumb to piggishness), currently milk the system filling the pockets of a small set. It has to be small, as only a few can exploit the situation.

And, any glorification of the role as being the essence of capitalism really ought to wake up the the ca-pital-sino and its emergence. Yes, this was accelerated with improved computational prowess.

---

Management. Ah, the lords and their royal-ness. Consider that computational frameworks could provide 90% of what is required by that role. However, that said, there would still need to be sufficient human involvement to cover undecidable issues (below).

---

One almost hears rings of empiricism (realism) as a major attribute of the capitalistic heart. That is, science and capitalism go together. Somewhat.

Actually, we could probably scientifically show that 'greed' is the larger essence.

Why did evolution produce these types except to support the first wave of capitalism? Is it not time to re-address this issue?

---

Too, innovation has been associated with capitalism. Yes. But, have we not seen bad effects of this along with the good? Science, and its reality, would help temper this, folks.

We could start by putting the markets on a more sound basis.

---

The way that finance, and markets, exist now, there is no science. Rather, we see real-time experimentation and recovery. Oops following oops.

That undecidability is not a prevalent notion needs to be addressed. In short, this notion could be said to just denote that no one has perfect foresight. The truth? Who has perfect hindsight?

How did you answer? Well, do not forget underdetermination, please. What we see in economic affairs is that capitalism handles these issues a little better than do other ways.

Yet, there are many downfalls that we need to fix for sustainability.

Remarks:

01/08/2019 -- Added in the index of posts on this subject.

09/01/2015 -- This was written five years ago. That was before QE infinity. Back then, any one who had gone through this before was looking for an unwind. But, that did not happen. The Fed doubled down, then tripled, down, then ... So, the addicts ran things to an inflated state (yes, appropriate usage). When Ben did mention some taper, they had a tantrum. ... So, here we are, in a corner, into which we have been painted. What will be the end result? Meaning, when things finally unwind? ... What we know is that Main Street did not benefit to the extent as did the pampered of Wall Street. Too, we see that computation is being exploited by idiots. The WSJ, on Saturday, mentioned one area. But, who is talking anything about moral hazards, these days? Well, you did read it here and ought to know that we have not forgotten its meaning.

05/11/2012 -- Rick getting grief from quoting Marx.

01/13/2012 -- We'll go more into why the need for the Magna Charta, this year.

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

09/27/2011 -- Recover the image.

03/16/2011 -- On the rise of the professional politician (will there ever be the citizen polico? that is, those who do not salivate when a buck is passed beneath the nose) toward robber barony. The M & Ms are apropos. As well, need to bring in Schervish's viewpoint.

03/11/2011 -- Wired asks, ought we care? About I-Phone suicides

.01/03/2011 -- Ah yes, now there are demands. The question remains: what growth other than the pockets of these types

?12/05/2010 -- Raj Patel has the proper grasp on the 'financial madness' that is threatening us.

10/28/2010 -- Warning, train wreck ahead. What train, I had asked? Yes, there is already a wreck, despite the inflated market (those who lost big are still behind). Adam knew the failings of 'free markets' quite well.

10/22/2010 -- We need more Orwells and Tolstoys and Perelmans.

10/14/2010 -- Capitalism, as known now, requires an endless supply of suckers.

09/24/2010 -- Capitalism is for the good of us, let's bring that forward.

09/19/2010 -- England is in the dumper due to its assumption of the aristocratic notion that people who do are not of any use. Hah! God, how many royal pabodies are we expected to kiss what with these people who wander after abstraction (error) or who somehow think that they are the best class (and worthy? - ah, please give us a break)?

Modified: 01/08/2019

Friday, January 15, 2010

Ill-begotten gains

Moral: Wherein we consider the gains of capitalists as more ill-begotten than otherwise (and jaw-bone a little).

---

Ill-begotten, in what sense? We'll get to that. Last time, we looked at ideological issues related to capitalism. Let's continue along one vein.

Given the concept of near-zero, we can see that gains, such as many on Wall Street and their hanger-ons have made the past year (supported by Ben's largess), do not have any rational support. These have come at the expense of the taxpayers and Main Street.

We have been hollowed out, said one author (Harold Meyerson, Wash Post). Actually, is it not more that we lost our backbone? Somehow, our best-and-brightest have been given the leeway to lead us to paths of perdition, along which most happily went. To where? To our demise, leaving China, and others, with the upper hand.

Thanks, you jerks (yes, as in the third-derivative). Okay, let's change the tone to that which is more mature.

Earlier, we said that no train was leaving the station. Of course, since then, some have continued to find what they call 'gains' via equity. Let's forget commodities, at the moment, as many of those have real substance behind them, albeit that interlopers abound across many levels who stack cards in their favor.

Charlatans have been allowed to sustain a casino that sucks us dry. Gosh, thanks, politicos. By the way, where are the term limits that we really need to get the Main streeters their chance to serve the country? Most of the politicos actually just like to salivate when a buck is passed beneath their nose.

Except, Mr Obama seems to be coming around, finally. We ought to have nationalized the banks last year, kicked out the best-and-brightest, and allowed Main streeters to have more say. We'll see how much success Mr Obama can have, since the Ayn Rand'ers seem to have ad infinitum ways to continue to muck things up.

Bonuses, from a game funded by taxpayers, many of whom have been economically enslaved this past decade, are not ill begotten?


Remarks:

07/22/2015 -- Some of these are, now, poster boys.

12/05/2013 -- If only Ben would put a shot across the bow.

01/20/2013 -- What ought to be the spirit of the thing?

12/13/2012 -- Don't know how long this page will be there, Daily Ticker. But, when I looked, 69% had said 'no' (hurt rather than helped) as to whether Ben has helped.

03/29/2012 -- Ben is doing a series of four lectures on his, and the FED's, role.

01/13/2012 -- We'll go more into why the need for the Magna Charta, this year.

10/12/2011 -- 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. 09/20/2011 -- This will be used in our constructive effort.

05/17/2011 -- Golden sacks (leftmost mug of the rogue table), by Rolling Stone and Daily Ticker. 

05/09/2011 -- Savers are suckers?

04/03/2011 -- Need to look at some background. Too, tranche and trash. 04/01/2011 -- The last man wants the old days back. 02/01/2011 -- The chimera shines.

10/28/2010 -- Warning, train wreck ahead. What train, I had asked? Yes, there is already a wreck, despite the inflated market (those who lost big are still behind).

04/27/2010 -- Need to add the political set of truths, such as cat and mouse.

04/16/2010 -- Rotten to the core. Does not have to be!!

01/22/2010 -- Bankers IV. Plus, Lordly Prince.

01/19/2010 -- Gosh, Ben, why did you have to sack the savers? Oh, I know, the banks (and their supposed best-and-brightest) mean more to you than do we, the lowly citizens and taxpayers. Have you considered our lot? I go into the bank (it's a big one whose big guy is on the list of rogues -your friends?) to see what they will give me for some money. Oh! Less than 1%. Who would have thunk it, Ben? Look, at the same time, they've made oodles and are looking to payout big bucks to their workers. What? Ought not some of that go to account holders? Others say to pay the shareholders. Well, that is a balance that your position is supposed to help. From the looks of it, your bias is toward those who want the train to nowhere. From where I sit, your stance is not only one-sided, it's actually counter to the benefit of those who are dependent upon your actions (the larger group (cardinality), big guy, not those (larger in the fat cat sense) of the ilk who think that their money gaming is the essence of reality). Solution? Look at the problem of fiat money, argue for your position to be modified, then work for some realness behind things that are valued by what is called 'money' (many meanings, I know).

01/17/2010 -- Simon Johnson has it right.

Modified: 07/22/2015

Monday, January 3, 2011

Roadmap for Growth

Moral: Wherein we stop to look at what's being offered by the Business Roundtable in order to better continue discussion of the ideological basis for capitalism and to try to introduce what is necessary - a Magna Carta equivalent to dampen these people's enthusiasm for exploitation.

---

In particular, a good place to start is the recent Roadmap for Growth (see commentary by The Economist). They're actually talking 'better-paying jobs for American workers' as if that is of prime concern to them.

Well, let's see, they do talk ethics (under the guise of Public Trust). A search on the site brought up 100 hits. I'll have to poke around and see if this effort was mostly a 'paper tiger' over the past 3 decades. A whole lot of negative business stuff has passed under the bridges during the their time. I don't recall any hand slaps by these guys/gals (mutual admiration society?) on those who are malfeasant.

Too, these are those who run things (the set that takes oodles of pay as given). But, they do deserve an unbiased reading of their material. Also, they exemplify the top-down view. As we all know, truth is middle-out with a heavy taste of the bottom.

Anyway, it'll be fun to look further at all of this stuff.

---

The Economist says that these are the big boys of the conservative bent. There is the Chamber of Commerce, too, who collects those of the more normal size. We need to consider their take, to boot.

---

Needless to say, the point here is that there are those of sufficient talent, with appropriate aptitudes (and probably better attitude) about simple living, and with deep concerns for business ethics and for the well-being of the planet (and its inhabitants), and so forth who can do as well as (perhaps, even better than) this favored crowd in all matters except for a few. For instance, preening, being catered to, etc. seems to be a necessity for the position. Why (rhetorically presented, of course, as we'll discuss this more fully as things unfold)?

Remarks:

05/17/2011 -- Golden sacks (leftmost mug), by Rolling Stone and Daily Ticker.

01/06/2011 -- It is interesting that Jim M, whose company makes oodles off of the taxpayers' money, would be in the line of those with the gall to tell us, via our representatives, what they think is what we ought to do. Jim M? What were you thinking?

01/03/2011 -- Two years ago, a collective mug shot like on this page was labelled rogue table. What is different now? Oh yes, these are the New Kings. Their reign? Those virtual entities that have no boundaries in the geographic, or traditional, sense. That is why we need the Magna Carta. Their quandary? Within any political bounded state, they are princes (if that) and feel that they need to protect their turfs, and remuneration. What are the rest of us? Mere resources to be exploited. Ah, they ought to consider that many have more brains in one head (sorry, Grigori, only using you as an example and, perhaps, a metaphor that we need to understand) than they have in their collective lot.

01/03/2011 -- When one looks at the tone of the plan given to the government, and the demands, it's like these people forget that their idiocy created the recent downturn (not just the finance people, folks, as many pushed for book cooking, financial wizardry, etc.). Talk lack of humility. Somehow, business is equated with crap; is that what you American companies want? Why don't you lead the world in ethical business practices, being green, etc.?

Modified: 05/17/2011

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

America and its roles

Moral: Wherein we start anew, with a fresh slate, and cover the bases (congrats, SF) after admitting that there is no jealousy.

Harvard is mentioned several times in this blog (22 posts). Too, though, there have been references to related themes (Harvard, supposed spawning point for world leaders) of American history (14 times - as well, use of "America" is not chauvinism - we're talking way before 1770s) and of civilized notions (20 times - albeit, Brit, as in Magna Charta). You see, the manias related to the chimera (in all of its variations) are very much counter to proper thinking.

So, since we can leave things in the capable hands of Janet and crew, we will be able to get back to considering the issues, as necessary.

--

Now, before we go further, let me make something clear. Look around now at the turmoil. For the most part, we see that youngsters are the ones who are providing the energetics. What has been interesting of late is how many places on the planet are seeing this phenomenon. Say, use the past 10 years to make the count. Astounding.

Over the past few decades, we have seen this time and again. And, the first occurrence, here, can be placed in the 60s. Having started, there were all types (which are well known) that followed over the years. Actually, we could put Berkeley first. But, coincident would be the activities related to Civil Rights.

We are talking more than civil disobedience, in a sense. We have to talk about conventions and such. Yes, it relates to business (in oh so many ways). For one, the bifurcation, so well documented as being so extreme, comes about from the human dynamics that we will explore (essentially, feudal lords ruling over their abstract'd entities seemingly without any constraints - not even from their stockholders).

And, the lord/serf theme is recurrent, to boot (40 times). The modern work environment is so much worse than what our remote ancestors faced (how do we get those supposed smart folk to wise up to the fact? -- let's take them down to the trenches so that they can see/smell the reality).

---

Right now, we will talk about the beginnings of Harvard. There are plenty of stories that tie into the event. Then, there is the long history. For now, we will only be looking at that early point.

It is said that the students rule there. Now, let's see. If that were true, then, it would have been the first occurrence of such a thing. Anywhere. Is that our legacy? Are we now paying the price in terms of the interminable power grabs of the best and brightest? Does thinking about this help us see why the stalemate continues at the top (supposed top - it was to be a government of the people, etc. -- remember?).

And, recall, too, that we started off talking about the youngsters being behind the revolutions. That was not true for the Spirit of 1776. No, it was not.

Old and young (just look at the wide range of ages in the large collection of patriots in the Massachusetts) cast in their lot. Female and male. All the race/cultural types were represented. Except, for the jolly old English (called royalists).

Disclosure: As we go through the analysis/discussion, there is a personal note in the sense of familial relationship with the players of the early days. Foremost, though, is the first instructor: Nathaniel Eaton. But, there are ties, too, with the whole lot of the players: motivators, payers, students, ... Hence, we can make that the central focus (where did we go wrong?).

--

We are doing this exercise for several reasons. Firstly, things are awry. One reason is mathematics being misused (a little knowledge is dangerous - albeit, we have supreme modes of abstracted nonsense nowadays). What has helped make this worse is computation with its inevitable culmination in big data. Secondly, we just had the 200th in a gaga mode. But, look around. Do you really see an American spirit anywhere? How did this happen? Of note, next year is the 800th of King John's first coerced signing (sealing) of the Magna Charta. This whole thing is seminal and will be more so (until the energy peters out - let's hope that it does not).

Thirdly, how did we get so bound into the chimera (personally, I like to keep my distance)? It entraps (the whole game and the potential payoffs - silly for mature thinkers, really). Too, though, go back to the first reason. We are overlaying ourselves (allowing ourselves to be entrapped) in a very strong web - let's wake up and smell the roses now - it's the right of the people). The proper view is not tightly considerate of what Janet (before her Ben and so forth) is doing. And, bemoaning the abstract'd views ought not be misconstrued. We need mathematics. ... But, consider that the metaphor of plumbing and plumbers is more strong for money/finance than the current set of brainy types will allow (add to those, the greedy, etc.). Fourthly, we have been at this for awhile and got off the track. But, not really, Janet and the Fed have put us in an unknown situation. We have been experimented on real time. By cowboys and cowgirls. Why did this happen? Because they could. Yet, Janet is talking data as if that is some silver bullet. The real deal is that the oracle could be more in tune with what is needed if the views were lifted. Harvard is not a lifter (is that the implication?)? We shall see. As we get back on track and start anew.

Finally (not), things will crash. We want to be able to explain the cheshire multiple in terms that are understandable. For now, everyone, please, know that markets (the chimera-typical thing currently in vogue) are set up to guarantee losers. What is annoying is that the loser set is more than 50%. Yes, our task? Describe this and make it clear. After that reality sinks in, then we can start to talk about better ways and means (also, enjoying old Marx's comments about fictitious capital).

Remarks:  Modified: 01/15/2015

12/30/2014 -- Working on using pages to organize the material - as in, the message depends upon the medium.

01/15/2015 -- At last, a series that will establish the basis and extensions, as required. We are going to go back to some simple and come forward to the modern, complicated economy. Why? My long chain of ancestors (inherited via Prof. Lucio Arteaga) is one motivation.


Monday, July 26, 2010

Fair deal

Moral: Wherein we consider that the big chimera is more shell-game than fair deal.

---

We all know that the basis for an economy to be just is the imperative of the 'fair' deal. Generally, we also include that the deal is 'fair' for all concerned. Now, the reality of near-zero would suggest that those 'concerned' is a much larger set than usually considered so far. Most business deals do not have a proper accounting (to be defined).

For one, the old polluters did not bring the denizens of the earth into their thinking. Too, those at the top, fat cats essentially, play havoc with the common weal with results as we have seen of late. That is, they still got their bonuses even though the majority suffered. There are people working three jobs just to stay afloat; fat cats who think that they work hard need to wake up.

Open challenge: There is no CEO of a large corporation who could stomach the stress, endure the terror of bad managers, perform with any sort of efficacy in the tasks that have been imposed, or even bear the life and the work situation of their workers. The caveat: I have to be involved in seeing that they 'fairly' have the proper experiential event (perhaps, there would be some existential realization on their part at undergoing such -- to wit, embedded boss show of the past summer did suggest some of this) in all the angst raising detail.

For the capitalist who runs around the world trying to extend the number of potential people that he or she can exploit, the 'fair' deal would include what labor needs for survival and for future security. Henry Ford knew that 100 years ago. Consumers need to make money to spend; where the 'hell' is this supposed to come from, folks, if not from wages and earnings?

It is a truism that gains on the pseudo-markets (stock, derivatives, ...) are not 'real' in that for every gain by one (or the few) there is loss by the many (if not the most).

Today, Irving Picard, the righter of the unbalances of the Made-off affair, is quoted in the WSJ as saying that he is after those who made money at the expense of others. Oh? Irving, do you not know that American business has descended to that which is doing other than 'fair' in order to line one's pocket? And, we've allowed this! That is, we as a society have allowed this, forgetting for the moment those politicos who salivate at the thought of money and downright slobber at the touch of the buck to their hand.

And, we did it under the guise that Adam Smith was the Prophet. Give me and him a break, people. Interlopers have taken over the economy of the west (however, defined - we'll get to that). And, China now has inroads to manipulate as they may and will to do so. Perhaps, we'll all learn.

Remarks:

01/20/2013 -- The bad spirit of the thing.

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

10/07/2011 -- Magna Carta, the celebration thereof. We need one of these for business. What would it look like?

Heard, from others, that the Wall Streeters jeer: we cannot help that we are good at what we do, find a job you lazy protesters. Oh, yes, Wall Streeters, you are good at what, exactly? Oh, yes, having defined the shell game, then you keep it running so that monies are sucked out of the pockets of the hapless.

09/21/2011 -- On Wealth and the CEO MVP.

04/03/2011 -- Need to look at some background. Too, tranche and trash.

03/17/2011 -- On the rise of the professional politician (will there ever be the citizen polico? that is, those who do not salivate when a buck is passed beneath the nose) toward robber barony. The M & Ms are apropos. As well, need to bring in Schervish's viewpoint.

10/14/2010 -- Capitalism, as known now, requires an endless supply of suckers.

09/27/2010 -- Capitalism is for the good of us, let's bring that forward.

08/21/2010 -- The new kings are not 'royal' by any means; they're mainly takers (exploiters) extra-ordinaire. We need a Magna Carta, for business (local and global) in which rights of the workers (how else a consumer economy?), and more, are addressed. What would this look like?

07/27/2010 -- The Boston Globe had an interesting op-ed, recently, about these types. Of course, there are several types of best and brightest, including the quants. We'll need to address this topic again using what we know of the new kings. Ah, such confidence when underdetermination reigns.

Modified: 01/20/2013


Wednesday, September 14, 2011

Wealth

Moral: Wherein we stop to look at a basic theme and leave Big Ben and Little Timmy alone, for awhile.

---

The theme is? Wealth.

Those of the libertarian bent like to say that Obama's position on the far left does not appreciate how 'wealth' is created. This points to the main issue. What is wealth? To whom does it go? Etc.

The 'right' sees all wealth as personally owned (with multitude of thugs to protect the few rich). The 'left' talks as if wealth were a commonweal yet, in truth, let it be controlled by thugs (to wit, USSR, et al). Whose thugs are worse? The right or the left?

---

In either case, wealth is created through work (of all sorts). Throughout history, there have been those who create (builders (city, nation, et al), artists, agrarians, et al), those who steal (marauders et al), and those who destroy (how do you name these?).

In almost every case, those who do the 'work' have not enjoyed the benefits of their efforts. The sole exceptions are little islands that have occurred in the unfolding of the American dream. These will be looked at, in time.

---

The urge to wealth is universal. How to control excesses that might accrue to the urge has always been problematic. What determines excess is even more of an issue.

---

One fact is: wealth does not come from nothing (related to this is much more than TANSTAAFL). Neither is it solely due to the efforts of some John Galt type.

The truth: 'wealth' is due to some type of transformation. For whatever we do to get to the 'wealth' state, plenty is consumed.

---

Off-shoring, in many cases, is the attempt to keep the 'true' cost from being realized. In fact, the whole regimen of the top-down is the same thing. Sacrifice is always done from bottom-up.

---

Even if John Galt did dream of the creation of the wealth, he will have used innumerable energies from his large cadre of exploited workers in order to make it a reality.

To those masses goes what?

---

Now, the transformation, mentioned above, is using material (essentially, substance) and energy (a lot of which is human in origin) given to us by nature (in the case of the former) or by the culture (in terms of how a valuable resource is seen, for the latter).

We are not adding anything. In fact, if we looked closely, we'll see the near-zero-ness of the whole framework here.

---

Somehow in terms of wealth, notions that are predominately associated with the immature (pointing to life changes that we all experience) continue into adulthood (yeah you, arrogant CEOs) as if this is okay. Topsy-turvy, indeed. There have been plenty of experience obtained about this, endless thoughts and words on the subject, yet 'the thing' remains hard to handle.

---

That, of course, begs the question of what is 'mature' in these contexts. Is the blogger of such mind that he knows how to discuss this? Absolutely, as they say.

---

We need to continue this theme and will. For now, consider what an analyst said about Roubini's remark about Marx (remember, he has been mentioned a few times). Yes, we've bantered around the term 'capitalism' (with an update of ca-pital-sino). I agree that we probably need some new terminology.

But, the whole discussion needs to respect that labor/laborers are human (and consumers), that we need sustainable/equitable economics, and that exploited resources are not owned by those who do the exploitation (yes, oil companies (and much more, especially those related to the taking of 'natural' resources) need a little humility - don't we all?).

What to expect here, next? A start of a coherent, foundational approach, from real first principles (to be updated), is the goal. The timeline? Unknown. Besides, it's the journey, not the end result, that is of importance (in other words, re-traceable by any with some rational effort).

Remarks

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


01/01/2012 -- Recently ran across the work of Kazimierz Dabrowski. We need to pay more attention to his theory on development. Yes, CEOs (and other takers) as immature (seriously, so).

12/13/2011 -- McKinsey report shows that households hold over 40% of the world's wealth. Hence, the consumer as the major influence on the economy. Now, consider that the household wealth collection (using income in the U.S. as a proxy) is skewed to a very small bunch.

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%).

09/29/2011 -- The question remains. Even with 'financial engineering' what is the science behind finance? Gaming, only? Who has the basic ontology (other than wealth for the few)?

09/21/2011 -- Another piece of the constructive pie.

09/21/2011 -- Way to go, Fortune! The MVP CEO. These people (and they are imitated) pilfer pockets prolifically; is that not enough?

09/20/2011 -- Any look at wealth would have to consider its opposite, peasantry. Methinks that the whole best-and-brightest concept is no more than an attempt to let those with the talent (the few --- too, though, those without conscience) grab the lion's share of the goods. It's an age-old dynamic that needs to be reviewed using a sustainability eye. Again, we also need to re-look at the spirit of the Magna Carta and at the necessity of a modern re-mix. And, a lesson: 'simple living' does not imply any inclination to 'peasant' leanings (for the jerks who may think that this is so).

09/19/2011 -- It has occurred to me that some reading this might throw labels of sophistry, idealism (love Berkeley), and such (perhaps, even naivete). Not! Since time is not of the essence, we, probably, ought to stop and review the background (and truth) issues again and in more depth.

09/18/201 -- We will use this example from sports. Would you believe that the NCAA (albeit, inadvertently) offers itself as a proxy for all the issues (and related parties) that we need to discuss:
  • rhetoric's influence - taking the student-athlete notion; application to wealth? what we have is largely seen through rhetorical eyes; the negative effects of 'potemkin' events are more real to those at the bottom than those at the top (or, no safety net for the most); the chimera is more 'real' to those at the top (gravy train - plus socialization of losses), the bottom-up view sees (up close and personal) the failings of the underpinnings.
  • markets - so essential, so misunderstood, and so misused; yes, the pay of coaches versus professors (yet, does not the institution head now pull in major bucks?).
  • sportsmanship -- is it about this? if so, things would look different; perhaps, players will one day get their say; too, the success of player efforts in this matter will have direct association with the larger economy's exploitation of those who labor.
  • ...
09/15/2011 -- Partly motivated by Bookstaber; a dedication.

Modified: 07/06/2012