Chimera

Context: Undecidableness

---

Note the recap for 2014 which sets the basis for the re-organization (chimera and capitalism).

---

Basically, our money comes from convention, controlled, usually, by government agents (under the auspices of, okay?). Then, we have the whole bunch of issues to resolve: wide world, many people of different moralities and talents, all sorts of activity, and such. Big subject, as anyone who looks at economics and finance and accounting will see.

Now, given that the world has gotten away from money of substance (as in, based upon something "real" - to defined) and that the computer has become our pal and boss, we see predicaments that were unknown to prior generations (and little understood by the current ones). Firstly, with money having no 'grounded' state, we see game theory as the fall-back position (to our detriment, collectively). Secondly, even if we had things under control, computation is not our friend, necessarily. And, I am not even considering the thoughts about singularity (ain't gonna happen, folks - we will look at that) so much as the shaky basis upon which the whole thing is built (yes, much to discuss).

---

Leaping ahead (we will fill in the trail/track the logic), fancy presentation devices and methods have surrounded our assets, moving us far away from our money and any meaning that might be attributed thereto. Of course, the old me would say that the noisy distractions are meant to allow pocket picking, but the new me would slap that old thing silly (even if it is true - ah, yes). No, the real problem is that our abstractions run away from us. Again, though, there are plenty who contrive to make this happen (truth engineering is the key here).

The consequence is that our money'd self needs (selves need) to rely upon the system even though we know, or sense, that it is faulty. That this is so is very much a shame (do to shams - wait!, perhaps, I ought to put the old guy's uncouth remarks in parentheses - so, we would then have more than a soliloquy).

Besides the machinations aspects (fool and his money parting sort of thing), we have that the game, as played now, inflates across the board as buyers keep lining up to be taken. You see, those who are the later buyers are guaranteed losers (if we look at it properly). This inflation (known by many names, multipliers, leverage'rs, ...) makes it very difficult to know the real basis at any point.

Oh, yes, "look at your 401K balance" (and salivate - as a slight taste is the most likely result for many) people are told.  Dream of your future reward (would you not be better to dream of your after-life? after all, we can show the chimera with money).

---

Irrespective of the nature of the shell game (and there are variations without end, it seems), those who run and support the system are a minor set of the populace. Lucky ones? Not. The remainder? Those who contribute things of substance (and, folks, dribbling out code is not such in many, many cases). We are talking those who touch, as in, material, products, patients, ... what have you. That is, the real economy players. And, it is to the benefit of this large set to which definition of a sustainable economy ought to be directed.

Some might think that this group is the middle class. Not. We will get to better definitions.

Fat cats (let them work, with their hands - naturally, many are incapable of doing something real)? We will be discussing this under the framework of Lords/Serfs.

---

Note: (01/11/15 - This will split out of chimera. We'll change this to talk how chimera comes out of charades (of various sources - see Remarks 01/10) that are allowed due to a "normative" imbalance). By way of introduction, the blogger is academically versed as an economist (mathematically and computationally oriented) who has framed the expressed viewpoint from tutelage (professors from MIT, Princeton, etc.) and from effort (autodidact, by choice - felt it was sufficient to only complete PhD class requirements). Too, though, his career involved problem solving in real world situations, such as the engineering computing (a whole bunch of acronyms come into play here). ... The telling thing is that the blogger worked a variety of jobs prior to becoming of the "white collar" rolls: soldier (cohorts were WWII and Korean veterans - role was surgical assistant - in my late teens), construction work, railroad crewman (as in, out on the rails - back in the old days of little to no power tooling), truck driver (local), and such, even while doing his academic work. Too, he has worked for the himself, government, large business, and small enterprises. ... One might ask, why economics? Well, I was a student later than my peers; by the time I got started, I was looking for something that bridged the technical (applied mathematics) and business, implying computational frameworks, of course. ... An interest in cybernetics led to opportunities in artificial intelligence in the context of advanced engineering systems. From that experience, truth engineering was born. Until 2007, I mostly left those running the economy to their own devices (as long as they stayed out of my way). But, then, I became aware of the silliness (baffled at the stupidity - oh yes, many pockets were filled to the bursting size - however, the downturn was made worse due to the poor thinking and choosing). Sure enough, times became dire for many (the effect lingers). And, we are now in a state that is so full of unknowns that any sign of progress is hidden under the dangers that lurk everywhere.

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.  Too, my Rip van Winkle experience plays a heavy part.

---

... Poor Janet, is she afraid to be as normative as she could be because the guys (we'll have a say or two about this) will think some gender-based garbage? To wit, look at this page (sheesh). Objective versus subjective (notice who is defined on which side)? Again, sheesh. I expected better from this site. However, as a quasi-empiricist, rather than casting stones, I will demonstrate how "normative" approaches (and not mathematics which is so sorely abused and weeping) are the way out of the quagmire.  ...