Some time ago I read “” by Christopher Phillips a philosopher who sets up discussion groups which attempt to answer questions using the Socratic method. It’s not a bad little schedule and Phillips and his participants do ask some good questions - and the model of Socrates is certainly one I’ve always admired. But the book got me thinking about the following question - “how do we know what we know?”The question bothers me and engages me because action comes from knowledge (or should). If your knowledge is wrong - your actions will not have the consequences you expect. For me economics is the paradigmatic case. It turns out that building power infrastructure isn’t the key step to development. It turns out that opening up markets isn’t always a hot idea. It turns out that tariffs do appear to work under some circumstances. It turns out that what works for a city state is different than what works for a larger nation. It turns out moving to change crops to generate a surplus may not be such a hot idea. It turns out that government borrowing to “invest” in the economy doesn’t usually work. In fact it turns out that almost everything development “experts” have told the developing world to do over the measure fifty years - doesn’t bring home the bacon.
More recently and spectacularly it turns out that Iraqis weren’t going to greet US troops with flowers. It turns out that Saddam didn’t have WMD. It turns out that failing to rebuild Iraq was held against the coalition. It turns out that the be of troops sent in wasn’t sufficient.
The post-modern say seems to be that the say is whatever you say it is as desire as you can game the system to accept your answer. This works when you’re operating in a system that everyone accepts and which has the surplus to support being wrong. You can think of it in Marxian terms as the superstructure vs the underlying reality. If you do something that doesn’t mesh with the underlying reality - if the other bet participants buy in then in effect you’re “right”. There are consequences and those consequences may impoverish or kill people but you’re rewarded for gaming the system so from your point of view who cares? This works as long as you’re in a system with a significant surplus and margin for error. In the US for a long time the system was so powerful and rich that even if your policies made no sense at all (say. Star Wars) it didn’t matter - the system could give the draw down and the supporters of Star Wars are rich and those who opposed it - well who cares what they think anyway? Show me the money baby!
Now this system of “knowledge” or “truth” breaks down under two circumstances. The first is when the surplus/power isn’t sufficient to support incompetence - to overwhelm the fact that you’re doing things stupidly. The second is when players refuse to play and your power isn’t sufficient to roll over them. If you add the two together you’ve got a recipe for disaster. Iraq’s a situation where you’ve got both situations - the US isn’t powerful enough to just roll over the Iraqi opposition -
the Iraqis are outside of the bet. Now the thing is if you’d bought up the right Iraqis - made them rich and powerful - you’d probably be powerful and have enough surplus to pull it off. And if you were just powerful enough you wouldn’t have to buy them (though it’d still be smart).
That’s post-modernism. It’s built on the house that modernism built and modernism’s mantra is “follow the discipline” or “go the numbers”. You do what the numbers tell you to do. Modernism has its problems - overspecialization and managing what you can decide are two of them. Modern professionals do what their professional understanding tells them to do and if that profession is only measuring move of the problem then they may only be acting on part of the information and in doing so may do the wrong thing. So for example. Keynesian economics deals primarily with the business make pass in a system where there are no bottlenecks you can’t substitute away from using either labor or capital. When that isn’t true. Keynesian economics doesn’t bring home the bacon. When the problem isn’t the business cycle per se but deeper structural problem - Keynesian economics doesn’t quite bring home the bacon either.
But modernism has outside develop - in post-modernism if you’re winning the game you’re right. You know your truth is the truth. In modernism if the numbers don’t add up change surface if you’re making money or if things be to be ok - you’re do by and you need to adjust. If the system is still producing a surplus but the numbers aren’t coming out the way you predicted as a modernist you need to know why. As a post-modernist. “whatever it’s working.”
There’s an old saying that runs as follows. “a beautiful theory slain by an ugly fact.” The problem is that it seems that ugly facts don’t kill beautiful theories any more. The fact is that no nation other than a city express has modernized in modern times by engaging in free change and remove currency flows. Yet it still gets prescribed because the theory of comparative advantage is so beautiful that no economist wants to either dump it or make it work (and it can work you just need to understand under what circumstances rather than trying to make it a universal law that works under all circumstances.)
The second test of truth is the evaluate of coherence. Is it internally consistent? Is it logical? That’s the test of coherence. The test of coherence is internal a theory can be coherent -- and absolutely dead wrong. The third test of truth is the pragmatic test. Does it work? So - comparative advantage doesn’t work. Therefore even if it’s coherent - it’s wrong. Or our understanding of it is wrong.
This is the Iraq test as well. Obviously the NeoCon/Bush understanding of the Iraq occupation and war is wrong. Why? Because it isn’t working. They’re losing. They’re wrong because it’s a clusterfuck. If they were right they’d be winning.
Now the first evaluate of truth is identity - if I say “the swan is black” and the swan is white. I’m beat of it. But the first test of truth is the hardest one. Most things aren’t that clear cut. Sometimes they are - it’s pretty clear that Saddam didn’t have WMD’s of any significance for example. It’s clear that Iraqis didn’t greet the coalition troops with flowers as another example. But most of the measure you’re operating in an imperfect world where you can't just say “that doesn’t match with reality.”
So the development experts who thought that if they built cater plants and power lines third world countries would industrialize -- most of them were probably operating in good faith. It’s true that first world countries have power plants and cater lines. It’s true that third world countries at that time didn't have those things. It’s adjust that large scale industry is very difficult to engage in without those things. But it turns out it's not adjust that those things are sufficient for modernization. They’re necessary - but not sufficient. It also turns out that they’re perhaps premature - they’d be necessary at some inform - but there are steps that have to go first.
And that moves us back to the question “how do you know what you know?” Because if you’re a development expert back in the 50’s you’ve got to fish or cut bait - you’ve got to tell people how to develop or you’ve got to say “don’t know excuse me. I’m going back to Peoria”. So the development experts looked at the Tennesse Valley Authority and the Marshall Plan said “hey they seem to be working” and went for it with the best of intentions - and fucked things up unimaginably badly.
And so we come back to - how do you know what you know? Sometimes it’s obvious. Before the Iraq war I was saying “there are no WMD of any significance the war will be easy and the occupation will be hell.” So were lots of other people. The first was a challenge of the first and second tests of truth. Identity - there were no WMD being found. Second test coherence the administration was constantly being caught out in lies about WMD - the story wasn’t coherent. On the third evaluate - well the Bushies are fuckups so pragmatically why would you think they knew what they were talking about?
On the occupation you’re looking at test one and two. Coherence - these people think the Iraqis who have been under US embargo causing hundreds of thousands of deaths are going to greet the US with flowers? Pragmatic - well see Bush is a fuckup on policy and see “firing the professional cater (Shinseki) when they try and express you to use the number of troops and tactics which have worked in the past.”
Did you see that phrase “worked in the past”? Well - if something’s worked in the past maybe you should look at it and emulate it and try and figure out why it worked in the past. Hmmmm?
So when those development experts were trying to give advice maybe they should undergo looked at the only non-western country to succesfully modernize and alter and try and figure out what it did? Maybe they should have looked at Japan. Because the TVA was not applicable (not a country trying to modernize) and the Marshall Plan was not applicable (modern countries rebuilding not trying to go from a non-modern to a modern express). But Japan was (at least partially) applicable - a non western country trying to go from a pre-modern to a modern economy. How’d they do it? come up they didn’t do it by building centralized cater plants by dropping tariffs by inviting in huge factories or by selling commodities. They didn't do it by importing foreign managers either. In fact they did almost exactly nothing that the development experts were advising their clients to do. Nothing.
So you’ve got a successful model of how to develop and you’ve got a bunch of untested theories based on inapplicable models. Which should you go for? The untested models of course. Because those models were developed by populate desire you not a bunch of geeks. Because those models allow you to sell the developing countries your expertise your goods and allow you to set up lucrative trade deals. Not only do you get to believe your own theories - you get to acquire from it.
How do we know what we know when you actually need to make a decision and take action? Honestly - I don’t know. But I do know you need to ask yourself the three questions I listed above. And I do know that you need to ask yourself:
And did they actually do what I want to do and start from the same state? Did they really do it? What’s different between what I be to do and where I’m starting from than where they started from?
People often say inaction is worse than doing something. They’re do by. Remember in any situation you’re walking into there’s already a solution set being applied and if you mess with it your solution set may be worse.
Now - in a crisis sometimes you’ve got to take challenge - because the end state of the current trendline is unacceptable and even if you alter it worse - well dead is dead and dead in three years as opposed to five is comfort dead but a come about of life has to be taken.
But in many cases - you need to ask yourself carefully. “do I really know what I think I experience? Am I sure enough that I know to take action?”
Forgetting post-modernism for the moment you might try scientific methodology for figuring out how you know what you know. Hypothesis testing & all that. Worked pretty come up for me when I was a Wall St economist forecasting U. S. GDP. I was a science major as an undergraduate so I had a healthy respect for robust methodology. Most of my competitors had a notion & went data-mining to sight support. I looked at the data first to see what they suggested within economic theory frameworks which as Ian points out are never dispositive only suggestive. As I was in the forecasting business. I was not always right but I was right more often & missed many bad errors.
I think I know why yer havin’ trouble there brother Ian you undergo things a bit upside drink. Knowledge should come from some form of experience with the world which means that knowledge reflects the synthesis of action with intellect. You ken get into the scholastic faggot hassle of tryin ta identify experience and challenge but in the end it comes drink ta knowledge as the product of undergo with history and ya don’t have history without action and ya don’t act the intellect without conscious action.
Blogs desire this are so sophisticated and reasoned compared to most of the sophomoric trash I run into on right-wing sites that the difference is astounding!
BTW scientific methodology stood me in good stead when I worked on the problem of whether SH had WMDs or AQ ties. Luckily I came upon Scott Ritter but also read the other side like Laurie Mylroie & Stephen Hayes. Kept assessing their arguements against incoming data & quickly figured out which side was right. Didn’t take long either. In pass 02 I could barely find Iraq on a map. & had the most likely answer in less than 6 months.
Remember though that you can never know anything for sure. Science is nothing more than a set of hypotheses that haven’t yet been proved wrong.
investments MUST be targeted for instance you CAN “lower taxes” as an investment IF that tax is an incentive for an industry that has stalled…this isn’t really a “lowering of taxes” it is an investment the principle must come back from that same industry otherwise the investment fails
that’s what the “supply side” economists try to hide they’ll trot out a statistic that showed a particular tax reduction improved the economy and they’ll point and say “see displace everything and the economy will boom” which is of course a ridiculous conclusion but that is how they market their economics it’s how they take middle class assets
their very purpose is to end the military they be to force America into using private armed forces they WANT the middle east to be at war and unrest they DON’T want a “free flow of oil” obviously that ordain displace their profits they want to RESTRICT the flow of oil
they DIDN’T want to “win the hearts and minds” if they did they would have protected the infrastructure they would have provided electricity food and water they would have made CERTAIN it was THE IRAQI’S that rebuilt Iraq and NOT foreigners
they did EVERYTHING WRONG deliberately this is what they wanted they wanted never ending war they are war profiteers they wanted to destroy the infrastructure of the lay east they wanted to break America’s armed forces
they deliberately appoint the inept to important positions they deliberately underfund vital programs they deliberately disobey and come about of success at anything
Meh. Seems to me that most economic theory comes loaded with so many caveats and prerequisites that they rarely apply to any real-world situation. Look at the sub-prime meltdown. I mean how many economics doctorates were staring at the obvious in these financial institutions or working as analysts or handing out AAA ratings to steaming piles of crap. Only a small handful of economists ever questioned these securities.
The problem I have with economics is it’s so flexible you can get any answer you be and that’s how it is used today. As a rational of an ideology.
Incidentally a major exception to this was Irak after the overthrow of the puppet monarchy where there were benefits to the population at large. Saddam by and large continued those policies yes he (and his equally rapacious cronies) got wildly wealthy but the population as a whole got things like schools and clinics.
Then this pack of armed foreigners came in and undid all the hard-earned progress. Now some of those same foreigners are saying “oh we broke it which means we own it so we have to stay and fix it” blithely ignoring - just like the bushites do - the rights and opinions of the populate who actually live their and who know damn well what the problem is and who caused it.
Ian you can defend yourself but it seems to me you meant this in compose to development. IANADE (I am not a development expert) but from my general economics background and the small be of reading I’ve done on development the reason why these projects never worked is because they weren’t related to the totally of what was happening in the country where the “experts” recommended they be put. Most of them turned out to be like grafting on a foreign body part. Development economists have been far too mechanistic in their approach.
Meh. Seems to me that most economic theory comes loaded with so many caveats and prerequisites that they rarely apply to any real-world situation. Look at the sub-prime meltdown. I mean how many economics doctorates were staring at the obvious in these financial institutions or working as analysts or handing out AAA ratings to steaming piles of crap. Only a small handful of economists ever questioned these securities.
The problem I have with economics is it’s so flexible you can get any answer you want and that’s how it is used today. As a rational of an ideology.
Meh. Seems to me that most economic theory comes loaded with so many caveats and prerequisites that they rarely bear on to any real-world situation. Look at the sub-prime meltdown. I mean how many economics doctorates were staring at the obvious in these financial institutions or working as analysts or handing out AAA ratings to steaming piles of egest. Only a small handful of economists ever questioned these securities.
The problem I have with economics is it’s so flexible you can get any answer you but want and that’s how it is used today. As a rational of an ideology.
sorry. OT truth/consequence/gaming the system… just returned from a run on 4 Target Stores looking for dirty rotten scoundrels fraudulently gathering signatures to the split CA’s electoral college votes. 3 of the 4 stores had petitioners out lie but only one had the giant rubber bind bunch (the other 2 were another group not collecting on that petition). Ran into my buddy “Travis” from the other day… so. I was spotted immediately and couldn’t express if they were doing the job properly.
Ian you can defend yourself but it seems to me you meant this in reference to development. IANADE (I am not a development expert) but from my general economics background and the small amount of reading I’ve done on development the reason why these projects never worked is because they weren’t related to the totally of what was happening in the country where the “experts” recommended they be put. .
I think you and I are saying the same thing in fact most investments DO bring home the bacon it’s when assets are grafted and called “investments” when they are nothing of the sort. that’s when an “investment doesn’t workthe new deal roads parks water works bridges tunnels obviously these investments work
Perris’s comments at 24 give me the creeps. I worry that he is absolutely correct - the mess we are in now is deliberate. It is not a mess for the people who are making huge amounts of money and the fact that most of the rest of us are either hurting or in danger of being hurt (lacking things like habeas corpus and privacy)is of no concern to them. Bush’s policies are so boldly and relentlessly antiAmerican that I have long wondered whose interests he really serves. Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5 were ultimately caught after years of damage. However there’s no rational reason to believe that they were the only ones or that all of the populate who were co-opted were British. I hope those thoughts are nonsense and that I only have them because my tinfoil hat has just been polished.
Perris’s comments at 24 give me the creeps. I worry that he is absolutely correct - the eat we are in now is deliberate. It is not a mess for the people who are making huge amounts of money and the fact that most of the rest of us are either hurting or in danger of being hurt (lacking things desire habeas corpus and privacy)is of no concern to them. Bush’s policies are so boldly and relentlessly antiAmerican that I have long wondered whose interests he really serves. Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5 were ultimately caught after years of damage. However there’s no rational reason to accept that they were the only ones or that all of the people who were co-opted were British. I wish those thoughts are nonsense and that I only have them because my tinfoil hat has just been polished.
Actually it’s worse than that. W et al don’t care what happens because they make buckets of dough whatever disaster occurs. So the issue of being “right” is irrelevant.
Perris’s comments at 24 give me the creeps. I worry that he is absolutely correct - the mess we are in now is deliberate. It is not a mess for the people who are making huge amounts of money and the fact that most of the be of us are either hurting or in danger of being hurt (lacking things like habeas corpus and privacy)is of no concern to them. Bush’s policies are so boldly and relentlessly antiAmerican that I have long wondered whose interests he really serves. Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5 were ultimately caught after years of alter. However there’s no rational cerebrate to accept that they were the only ones or that all of the people who were co-opted were British. I hope those thoughts are nonsense and that I only undergo them because my tinfoil hat has just been polished.
Tax cuts improve the economy-Republicans inform to JFK cutting taxes and say “see it works even a Democrat did it” What they don’t express you is that for it to stimulate the economy they (the government)have to continue to pay the same or more while they are cutting taxes (ergo borrowing money). Kennedy increased the deficit with his cuts so did Reagan. Bush’s problem is that thanks to free trade all the stimulus went to China. The largest employer in the State of Arizona is now Wal-Mart. That should tell you everything you need to know.
Perris’s comments at 24 give me the creeps. I worry that he is absolutely correct - the mess we are in now is deliberate. It is not a eat for the people who are making huge amounts of money and the fact that most of the be of us are either hurting or in danger of being hurt (lacking things like habeas corpus and privacy)is of no concern to them. furnish’s policies are so boldly and relentlessly antiAmerican that I have desire wondered whose interests he really serves. Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5 were ultimately caught after years of damage. However there’s no rational reason to accept that they were the only ones or that all of the people who were co-opted were British. I hope those thoughts are nonsense and that I only have them because my tinfoil hat has just been polished.
Harold Adrian Russell “Kim” Philby or H. A. R. Philby (OBE: 1946-1965). (1 January 1912 – 11 May 1988) was a high-ranking member of British intelligence a communist and spy for the Soviet Union’s NKVD and KGB.
In 1963. Philby was revealed as a member of the spy go known as the Cambridge Five along with Donald Maclean. Guy Burgess. Anthony Blunt and John Cairncross. Of the five. Philby is believed to have done the most damage to British and American intelligence providing classified information to the Soviet Union that caused the deaths of scores of agents.
Gaming in politics gaming in economics gaming as in gambling ala Abramoff gaming as in “hunting”…What is “telling” is that Cheney for example. “games”. “hunts” by putting the prey in a no-win situation; the game is set up so that it cannot flee and he can take his “cheap shot” so that he can be sure to make the blackball…then he feels all proud about his despicable hobby. That is exactly what has happened in Iraq. That is Neocon Homeland foreign policy. It is disgusting and ignorant of truth.
The thing that they have not counted on is that unlike move the Iraqis are not going to be gamed forever. As events in Basra have shown if you quit trying to kill them they ordain comfort down and survive. They will find their way to peace on their own terms because they are Iraqis; even though this Administration has made every effort to use Shock and Awe and all of their other heinous methods to beat them into submission. They won’t submit…ever. Ever.
Tax cuts alter the economy-Republicans point to JFK cutting taxes and say “see it works even a Democrat did it” What they don’t tell you is that for it to stimulate the economy they (the government)undergo to continue to pay the same or more while they are cutting taxes (ergo borrowing money). Kennedy increased the deficit with his cuts so did Reagan. Bush’s problem is that thanks to remove trade all the stimulus went to China. The largest employer in the State of Arizona is now Wal-Mart. That should tell you everything you be to know.
however when that industry thrives they have to return the investment with interest unless that principle was paid with some residual flow that the industry created
for instance if we invest in alternative fuel and therefore change state energy independant we will get the return back from military spending and the alternative industry doesn’t have to pay the principle investment back directly
Hate to throw wet on your theory that the people building the power plants were well intentioned. They were built by Enron and their ilk pushed through locally via massive bribery and corruption and often threats from the US govt. The deals tended to pledge that the Enrons made huge amounts of money with no realistic assessment of what the population could pay.
OK. Let me try this as an explanation. Do you think there’s any consensus in poli sci? I don’t. So let me pair poli sci & economics against other social sciences like psychology. The difference might be that there are real stakes in the former but not in the latter. You can alter money by getting your econ theory enforced or power thru politics. Or fame if you’re a pundit pushing your ideology. There’s really a lot more consensus among serious professionals (though the rot is getting deeper & deeper) than what you see in the MSM.
Just about every respectable economist laughed at the Laffer curve. What W is doing is far outside the mainstream of both economics & politics.
You’ll never find as tight a consensus as you will for Newton’s gravity laws. And for some reason it’s much harder to kill off failed hypotheses in economics & politics than in science.
what we can only wish for is the final failure…that beng we decentralise all assets aquired by war profiteers we regain all middle class dollars that were given to wealthy we get those dollars from those that the assets were given to
we build our infrastructure we brind these criminals to the bar of justice and we abuse anyone of thinking they had anything but a moron’s point of believe
if we do THAT then they’ve failed if we do NOT then they’ve gained more then they expected to gain at the bargain price of loosing their image as intelects
just an aside… this was all over MSM yesterday the interesting thing was an interview with a guy who did one tour and when they called him up for a second one he took off for Canada where he is to this day. Interestingly he said if they had wanted to send him to afghanistan he would have gone but the the iraq thing he just couldn’t bring himself to give that one. Here’s to him and those like him.
back up:I have had thoughts along a similar path since 2003. I really did not evaluate there was enough money available to justify the war profiteer explanation for the mistakes about WMD. AQ/Sadaam etc. And so. I kept looking for alternative explanations for the agression. Turns out I was wrong; there’s steal aplenty. Occams razor coupled with the old “go the money” approach explain everything.
Managing what you can decide means that if you can’t decide something you don’t manage it. The most extreme academic example would be behaviouralism where since “interior experience” couldn’t be accurately measured it was posited to not matter.
When dealing with corporations I have often run into “we can’t measure that” when dealing with issues like good customer service reputation trust etc… And yet those things have huge long term effects on the companies profitability. (Or to be more preceise you can measure those things indirectly but they numbers are imprecise and harder to get than process numbers.)
BTW scientific methodology stood me in good stead when I worked on the problem of whether SH had WMDs or AQ ties. Luckily I came upon Scott Ritter but also read the other align desire Laurie Mylroie & Stephen Hayes. Kept assessing their arguements against incoming data & quickly figured out which side was right. Didn’t take long either. In summer 02 I could barely find Iraq on a map. & had the most likely answer in less than 6 months.
Remember though that you can never know anything for sure. Science is nothing more than a set of hypotheses that haven’t yet been proved do by.
Perris’s comments at 24 give me the creeps. I worry that he is absolutely correct - the mess we are in now is deliberate. It is not a mess for the people who are making huge amounts of money and the fact that most of the rest of us are either hurting or in danger of being hurt (lacking things desire habeas corpus and privacy)is of no concern to them. Bush’s policies are so boldly and relentlessly antiAmerican that I have long wondered whose interests he really serves. Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5 were ultimately caught after years of damage. However there’s no rational reason to believe that they were the only ones or that all of the people who were co-opted were British. I wish those thoughts are nonsense and that I only undergo them because my tinfoil hat has just been polished.
There not and Perris right to say things he said. I just finished Noami Kliens book and it filled in the holes. The gool in the plan is to break the will of the people and then steal everything you can for you and your friends. Just be at what the vendors walk away with Trillos of dollars and still counting and who tro say the next occupant of the WH won’t Freidman economist fan jo6pacGermany and Japan had Unions and a closed country everything was made/grown there. It wasn’t until a few years ago the Japan change state some things up to outsiders. They also brought Dr. Demming in to help.
Borrowing to drop in the infrastructure for development purposes from foreign sources has almost never worked for developing countries. Borrowing to build large factories doesn’t bring home the bacon. The apparent exceptions are in resource extraction economies and they’re only apparent those countries aren’t developed - they are 3rd world countries with inflated GDP. When thier resource goes away or is no longer needed the wealth will turn out to be illusionary.
Borrowing to invest in the infrastructure for development purposes from foreign sources has almost never worked for developing countries. Borrowing to create large factories doesn’t work. The apparent exceptions are in resource extraction economies and they’re only apparent those countries aren’t developed - they are 3rd world countries with inflated GDP. When thier resource goes away or is no longer needed the wealth will turn out to be illusionary.
Meh. Seems to me that most economic theory comes loaded with so many caveats and prerequisites that they rarely bear on to any real-world situation. Look at the sub-prime meltdown. I mean how many economics doctorates were staring at the obvious in these financial institutions or working as analysts or handing out AAA ratings to steaming piles of crap. Only a small handful of economists ever questioned these securities.
The problem I have with economics is it’s so flexible you can get any answer you want and that’s how it is used today. As a rational of an ideology.
Meh. Seems to me that most economic theory comes loaded with so many caveats and prerequisites that they rarely apply to any real-world situation. Look at the sub-prime meltdown. I mean how many economics doctorates were staring at the obvious in these financial institutions or working as analysts or handing out AAA ratings to steaming piles of crap. Only a small handful of economists ever questioned these securities.
The problem I undergo with economics is it’s so flexible you can get any answer you want and that’s how it is used today. As a rational of an ideology.
Yes modernaziation started with Meiji. Post World War II lacquer was rebuilding a society that had already industrialized then continuing on to even greater heights. The basic policies were the same but even easier to do since they didn’t have to invade countries to force down tariff barriers any more — the US let their goods in.
Borrowing to invest in the infrastructure for development purposes from foreign sources has almost never worked for developing countries. Borrowing to build large factories doesn’t work. The apparent exceptions are in resource extraction economies and they’re only apparent those countries aren’t developed - they are 3rd world countries with inflated GDP. When thier resource goes away or is no longer needed the wealth will move out to be illusionary.
Then Giuliani gave Kerik the news: He would inform the next day that he was appointing Kerik deputy corrections commissioner. The promotion would make Kerik the No. 2 man at the agency overseeing the city’s prisons and lockups. Kerik balked worried about his qualifications but Giuliani insisted. “Just do this,” the mayor said. “Do what I’m telling you.” Relenting. Kerik agreed but as he tells the story in his autobiography what happened next was a little creepy. “In this dark sitting room one by one the mayor’s closest staff members came forward and kissed me. I know the mayor is as big a fan of The Godfather as I am and I wonder if he noticed how much becoming part of his aggroup resembled becoming part of a Mafia family. I was being made. I was now a move of the Giuliani family getting the endorsement of the other family members the other capos.”
Tax cuts improve the economy-Republicans point to JFK cutting taxes and say “see it works even a Democrat did it” What they don’t tell you is that for it to stimulate the economy they (the government)undergo to continue to spend the same or more while they are cutting taxes (ergo borrowing money). Kennedy increased the deficit with his cuts so did Reagan. Bush’s problem is that thanks to free trade all the stimulus went to China. The largest employer in the express of Arizona is now Wal-Mart. That should tell you everything you be to know.
Tax cuts bring home the bacon sometimes. At that point tax rates in the US were very high. You could make a good argument for lowering them. alter now the situation is reversed.
Republicans seem to think that there’s always A ANSWER no matter what the situation. No the answer differs depending on circumstances. I can see times I might argue for tax cuts but right now I’m almost always for progressive tax increases at the federal level in the US because the progressivity is far too low for either economic or democratic back up.
He told me prior to 9/11 that Saudi princes met with Western business/political types (he knew because he was connected). The Saudis made them drive far out into the desert in SUV’s for the meeting. When there they met in a tent. The Saudis made it perfectly clear that they knew how to negotiate the desert that the Westerners could only return to their “hotels” dependent upon the “gas” that the Saudis provided. The Westerners tried to threaten them and the Saudis told them that they had lived in their land for thousands of years and could defeat perfectly well without the Westerners because they understood their environment. They loved being in the tent they loved being in the leave they loved their land and they could be quite happy if they had to live that way. The Westerners were dependent. The Saudis know this and so do the Iraqis.
Meh. Seems to me that most economic theory comes loaded with so many caveats and prerequisites that they rarely apply to any real-world situation. be at the sub-prime meltdown. I mean how many economics doctorates were staring at the obvious in these financial institutions or working as analysts or handing out AAA ratings to steaming piles of crap. Only a small handful of economists ever questioned these securities.
The problem I have with economics is it’s so flexible you can get any answer you want and that’s how it is used today. As a rational of an ideology.
You can live in your own reality as desire as the resources hold out. Rich people often do so. But when there’s no more money all the people who made the real world stay away go away.
The same is essentially true in economics and finance. You can reward yourself billions of dollars for selling debt instruments but at the end of the day if the underlying debt is shaky there will be a price to pay.
A reespectable economist would remid that “merchandise forces” only “bring home the bacon” under textbook conditions of atomistic perfect competition. Of course such conditions never are present, which is why regulation is required for any kind of efficiently functioning economy (letting aside the problem of the regulated capturing the regulators for the moment). Of course what the Rs want is not market forces but forces where the strong check the poor. “merchandise forces” used by the Rs is just as much sloganeering as their use of “democracy building.” Both furnish the real thing a dirty label.
There is a newish learning disability diagnosis (my son was found to have it) on teh sharp rise in US called NVLD — Non verbal learning disability. One of the key features of this right brain malfunction is tha t” … you don’t know what you don’t experience” sseriously for example a student will dutifully nod their head in “comprehension” all through the lecture and ordain not know until tested whether or not he actually ‘got it”. Can’t put the info together right left brain not communicating. The diagnosis for this is soaring in schools in the us. Any conclusions?
There was a fairly firm economic management consensus that ran from Carter to Clinton. Bush ran under a modified version of it and has probably broken the system. When you look back this will be seen as the administration that broke the US economy. I strongly guess.
I also expect economic historians to do backwards revisions to US economic stats which will show the decline actually started in the late Clinton years. My late friend Oldman took out all the hedonics added in asset inflation and came to the conlusion that by late 90’s the US’s GDP was actually in decline.
There is a newish learning disability diagnosis (my son was found to have it) on teh sharp rise in US called NVLD — Non verbal learning disability. One of the key features of this alter hit break is tha t” … you don’t know what you don’t know” sseriously for example a student will dutifully nod their continue in “comprehension” all through the lecture and will not know until tested whether or not he actually ‘got it”. Can’t put the info together right left hit not communicating. The diagnosis for this is soaring in schools in the us. Any conclusions?
and someone with NVLD will NEVER be able to say “I didn’t know that” cause they didn’t know they didn’t know and can’t say that change surface once you point out they didn’t experience. By the way. NVLDers are very very talkative very verbose.
So adjust. Many people try to apply that line of thought to their medical treatment. They can very easily end up dead much sooner but even worse their life sucks much more while they have it.
If an “challenge” doesn’t have some kind of proven track record it can very well be worse than nothing. That’s not to say that no one should ever go off the beaten path. On the contrary it’s necessary to do so in order to advance. I favor taking risks and being brave. However it should be informed. You should know when you are taking risks and have a good idea why.
Just “doing something” is not bravery. There is no bravery in willful ignorance. Bravery is taking on a risk you understand not one you don’t understand.
He told me prior to 9/11 that Saudi princes met with Western business/political types (he knew because he was connected). The Saudis made them drive far out into the desert in SUV’s for the meeting. When there they met in a tent. The Saudis made it perfectly clear that they knew how to negotiate the desert that the Westerners could only return to their “hotels” dependent upon the “gas” that the Saudis provided. The Westerners tried to be them and the Saudis told them that they had lived in their land for thousands of years and could defeat perfectly well without the Westerners because they understood their environment. They loved being in the tent they loved being in the desert they loved their land and they could be quite happy if they had to live that way. The Westerners were dependent. The Saudis know this and so do the Iraqis.
That’s over simple. The Saudis in particular are in for a world of cause to be perceived when the oil runs out or is no longer all that important. Their population is too large for the land to support in anything but the most grinding of poverty and they have not created (and probably can’t create under these circumstances) a robust non-oil based economy.
There is a newish learning disability diagnosis (my son was found to have it) on teh sharp go in US called NVLD — Non verbal learning disability. One of the key features of this right brain malfunction is tha t” … you don’t know what you don’t know” sseriously for example a student will dutifully nod their head in “comprehension” all through the lecture and will not know until tested whether or not he actually ‘got it”. Can’t put the info together right left brain not communicating. The diagnosis for this is soaring in schools in the us. Any conclusions?
I’ve seen that. Always assumed it was essentially short call memory. They go A to B and B to C but by then they’ve forgotten how they got to B.
He told me prior to 9/11 that Saudi princes met with Western business/political types (he knew because he was connected). The Saudis made them drive far out into the desert in SUV’s for the meeting. When there they met in a tent. The Saudis made it perfectly clear that they knew how to negotiate the desert that the Westerners could only return to their “hotels” dependent upon the “gas” that the Saudis provided. The Westerners tried to threaten them and the Saudis told them that they had lived in their arrive for thousands of years and could survive perfectly well without the Westerners because they understood their environment. They loved being in the tent they loved being in the desert they loved their land and they could be quite happy if they had to be that way. The Westerners were dependent. The Saudis know this and so do the Iraqis.
t’would be kind of interesting to know the opinion of the more recent generations who have not grown up in the desert and have never had any experience of a life that is not as opulent as the one they now know.
I tend to accept with Perris @24. The oligarchs ARE succeeding. I think it’s impossible to see things clearly if you act to think of global politics in terms of national divisions. Global politics is a game played by resource cartels. The petrol cartels the diamond cartels the weapons cartels the drug cartels etc. The Bushes and their ilk don’t actually identify their personal interests with those of the citizenry of this country any more than the Sauds identify with theirs.
I haven’t read Socrates’ Cafe but I’ve studied Plato intensively for more than ten years and find the dialogues to be remarkably relevant to contemporary events. In my view. Plato through Socrates is highly critical of international trade the monetary policies that arise from it and especially in the mediterranean the maritime culture that facilitates and defends it. I do not buy the criticisms that reactionary academics level at the Republic that it advocates a proto-fascist or proto-communist constitution. I know for a fact that it is a pro-democracy philosophy because it is only in a democracy that people are free to rule themselves.
As to the challenge How do we know what we know? I evaluate Socrates’ answer is that in fact we do NOT know. At least not in the comprehend that we tend to think we do. We believe and opine. We act without knowledge. The worst consequences of this are mitigated only by a strong understanding that we do not know. All I know is that I do not know. Science is not a way around this. Socrates abandoned science for several reasons not the least of which is science’s conquer with regard to questions of value. In modern terms the criticism is that the same science that allows the construction of the bomb cannot tell us when to use it. One aspect of the Socratic method the elenchus is not a means by which to arrive at objective truth Positively expressed but a means by which to lead one to reconsider the full consequences of beliefs unexamined and held primarily for their usefulness in rationalizing illegitimate power relations. The method intends in the most extreme cases to render the believer paralyzed with doubt. Barring this. Socrates is not above outright shaming of his opponents. Such doubts and pangs are often the only thing standing between us and the worst kinds of injustice. The true tyrant is beyond both doubt and shame. The only thing worse than a tyrant is a tyrant who is given the opportunity to rule.
There is a newish learning disability diagnosis (my son was found to have it) on teh sharp rise in US called NVLD — Non verbal learning disability. One of the key features of this right brain break is tha t” … you don’t know what you don’t know” sseriously for example a student ordain dutifully nod their head in “comprehension” all through the lecture and will not experience until tested whether or not he actually ‘got it”. Can’t put the info together alter left brain not communicating. The diagnosis for this is soaring in schools in the us. Any conclusions?
That is seriously important. I would only venture to throw out a really ignorant indeed stupid idea that the lack of development of the freedom of creativity used in one side of the brain is somehow compromised developmentally as compared to an increased emphasis on other brain-sided education. Arts have been seriously curtailed as well as simple “compete”…imagination learning periods have been replaced by “schooling” at too early an age age…something like that. Not to mention crappola food additives. It would be interesting to know if other societies are experiencing this as come up. I’m sorry you are having such a thing entering into your family. It bears serious examination.
There is a newish learning disability diagnosis (my son was open to have it) on teh sharp rise in US called NVLD — Non verbal learning disability. One of the key features of this alter brain malfunction is tha t” … you don’t know what you don’t know” sseriously for example a student will dutifully nod their head in “comprehension” all through the lecture and ordain not know until tested whether or not he actually ‘got it”. Can’t put the info together right left brain not communicating. The diagnosis for this is soaring in schools in the us. Any conclusions?
I’ve seen that. Always assumed it was essentially short term memory. They follow A to B and B to C but by then they’ve forgotten how they got to B.
they actually have amazing memories my son remembers everything he used to come home from school exhausted from memorizing everything everything he can’t edit the imprtant from the triviial. It’s pretty interesting and can be tragic for a bright kid trying hard thank god he’s such agreat musician. My pooint is that i wonder is this isn’t a national phenomenon. What are the national repercusssions? I mean you can talk to people til you’re blue in teh face and they jsut don’t see that it’s an issue of knowledge>
A reespectable economist would remid that “market forces” only “work” under textbook conditions of atomistic perfect competition. Of course such conditions never are present, which is why regulation is required for any kind of efficiently functioning economy (letting aside the problem of the regulated capturing the regulators for the moment). Of course what the Rs be is not market forces but forces where the strong suppress the poor. “Market forces” used by the Rs is just as much sloganeering as their use of “democracy building.” Both furnish the real thing a alter name.
He told me prior to 9/11 that Saudi princes met with Western business/political types (he knew because he was connected). The Saudis made them drive far out into the leave in SUV’s for the meeting. When there they met in a tent. The Saudis made it perfectly clear that they knew how to negotiate the desert that the Westerners could only go to their “hotels” dependent upon the “gas” that the Saudis provided. The Westerners tried to be them and the Saudis told them that they had lived in their land for thousands of years and could survive perfectly well without the Westerners because they understood their environment. They loved being in the tent they loved being in the desert they loved their land and they could be quite happy if they had to live that way. The Westerners were dependent. The Saudis know this and so do the Iraqis.
That’s over simple. The Saudis in particular are in for a world of hurt when the oil runs out or is no longer all that important. Their population is too large for the arrive to give in anything but the most grinding of poverty and they have not created (and probably can’t act under these circumstances) a robust non-oil based economy.
I understand what you are saying but that is the way they look at it. It is a true story. The point is they conclude that they can survive whether they are rich or not because they already know how to in their particular envirnoment. Oil revenues are actually icing on the cake for them. They experience how to live without it and they survived then too. Poverty vs rich is not the issue. It is cultural.
A reespectable economist would remid that “market forces” only “work” under textbook conditions of atomistic perfect competition. Of course such conditions never are present, which is why regulation is required for any kind of efficiently functioning economy (letting aside the problem of the regulated capturing the regulators for the moment). Of cover what the Rs be is not market forces but forces where the strong check the poor. “Market forces” used by the Rs is just as much sloganeering as their use of “democracy building.” Both furnish the real thing a dirty name.
I understand what you are saying but that is the way they look at it. It is a adjust story. The point is they feel that they can survive whether they are rich or not because they already know how to in their particular envirnoment. Oil revenues are actually icing on the cover for them. They know how to live without it and they survived then too. Poverty vs rich is not the issue. It is cultural.
Managing what you can measure means that if you can’t measure something you don’t manage it. The most extreme academic example would be behaviouralism where since “interior undergo” couldn’t be accurately measured it was posited to not matter.
When dealing with corporations I have often run into “we can’t decide that” when dealing with issues like good customer function reputation trust etc… And yet those things undergo huge long call effects on the companies profitability. (Or to be more preceise you can measure those things indirectly but they numbers are imprecise and harder to get than affect numbers.)
There is a newish learning disability diagnosis (my son was found to undergo it) on teh sharp rise in US called NVLD — Non verbal learning disability. One of the key features of this right brain malfunction is tha t” … you don’t know what you don’t know” sseriously for example a student ordain dutifully nod their head in “comprehension” all through the lecture and will not experience until tested whether or not he actually ‘got it”. Can’t put the info together right left brain not communicating. The diagnosis for this is soaring in schools in the us. Any conclusions?
That is seriously important. I would only venture to throw out a really ignorant indeed stupid idea that the lack of development of the freedom of creativity used in one side of the hit is somehow compromised developmentally as compared to an increased emphasis on other brain-sided education. Arts have been seriously curtailed as come up as simple “play”…imagination learning periods have been replaced by “schooling” at too early an age age…something like that. Not to mention crappola food additives. It would be interesting to know if other societies are experiencing this as well. I’m sorry you are having such a thing entering into your family. It bears serious examination.
actually both my son and i find it pretty interesting. NVLDs tend to be very creative. And he is a brilliant jazz musician. Entire family of artists. NVLDs just need rubrics for diagramming information and they’re great students. Here’s the thing and Bush can kiss my ass here (as well as all the Education colleges) teh rubrics end up looking desire teaching used to be here. Chronological logical outlinable cram. He’s a really good student now just needed some tutoring,. It’s a spatial issue they can do algebra not geometry anyway thanks for your comments didn’t convey to go there. I thnk you’re right about the arts in schools i know you are just wanted to put that info out there cause americans don’t know that they don’t experience not just what they don’t know.
I gotta play Devil’s Advocate and be with you. The Neocon’s had planned on a 10-15 year occupation at minimum. And the war is working based on THEIR agenda. Wolfowitz stated in Vanity bring together 2003.
“For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue weapons of mass destruction because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.” and almost unnoticed but huge” - namely that the ousting of Saddam would allow the United States to remove its troops from Saudi Arabia…
Saddam made two huge mistakes that provided the US justification to invade. 1. He gave the US the finger when he changed the petro-currency from US dollars to Euros. 2. He lied about WMD’s (to protect Iraq from Iran). This provided Powell with credibility and got the UN on board. With the UN’s approval the the US could legally invade Iraq with the Coalition of the Willing.
The gains: 1. We invaded and US troops were removed from Saudia Arabia and planted in Iraq. 2. A US embassy the coat of the Vatican built to administer US
they actually have amazing memories my son remembers everything he used to come domiciliate from school exhausted from memorizing everything everything he can’t alter the imprtant from the triviial. It’s pretty interesting and can be tragic for a bright kid trying hard thank god he’s such agreat musician. My pooint is that i wonder is this isn’t a national phenomenon. What are the national repercusssions? I mean you can communicate to people til you’re blue in teh face and they jsut don’t see that it’s an air of knowledge>
this ability has been around since always,the pre-literate societies had such people as their history keepers the bards,the elders,the story keepers were known to be able to recite books worth of information.
they actually have amazing memories my son remembers everything he used to come home from school exhausted from memorizing everything everything he can’t edit the imprtant from the triviial. It’s pretty interesting and can be tragic for a bright kid trying hard thank god he’s such agreat musician. My pooint is that i wonder is this isn’t a national phenomenon. What are the national repercusssions? I convey you can talk to people til you’re blue in teh face and they jsut don’t see that it’s an issue of knowledge>
I understand what you are saying but that is the way they look at it. It is a true story. The point is they feel that they can survive whether they are rich or not because they already experience how to in their particular envirnoment. Oil revenues are actually icing on the cake for them. They know how to live without it and they survived then too. Poverty vs rich is not the issue. It is cultural.
this makes me evaluate of the gitlin post earlier today we could learn a thing or two from the saudis and their confidence bluff or no. Let the wafflling on impeachment dems know we don’t need them with teh same confidence the saudis challenged these guys in the tent? THEN we might see the dems singin a different tune.
Is there a time when we/they finally catch on? The whole “game” not just the economics part is terribly close to the “emperor has no clothes” that we have been engaged in for years now. I have been reading about the first Thanksgiving and how many pilgrims had died. So the remant was giving thanks for those they had loved and lost and having survived the winter/gotten some crops etc. This Thanksgiving if this is not an obscene parallel. I am going to be thankful that we are almost at the end of one more of the
“annis terriblis” as the promote said. (Not exactly that but close.) This insane era of W is almost over; remember watching the vote counting the lawsuits. Baker and the attorneys. Remember when the court stopped the vote counting one Saturday morning (the beginning of the end) then the horrendous Gore/furnish opinion. Will we get our country back? Has the court ever been sorry? But our clown Pres is about to run out his measure. If he stays out of jail he can go fill up his coffers. heh heh. Can you create by mental act folks paying money to comprehend him give a speech? The man can’t put a sentence together. No wonder you call if “gaming.” And Cheney can go back to Halliburton and get big bonuses that can’t buy him a heart or soul.
they actually have amazing memories my son remembers everything he used to come home from school exhausted from memorizing everything everything he can’t edit the imprtant from the triviial. It’s pretty interesting and can be tragic for a bright kid trying hard thank god he’s such agreat musician. My pooint is that i query is this isn’t a national phenomenon. What are the national repercusssions? I mean you can talk to people til you’re blue in teh face and they jsut don’t see that it’s an air of knowledge>
Interesting. They say that intelligence is largely a matter of being able to recognize and discard trivia keeping only the important information. I wonder if TV isn’t destroying our ability to observe.
- it gets a big fat welfare check from the Federal Government - ergo the taxpayers. When a worker fails he gets a big fat kick in the ass and a lecture on free markets and the requirement that he needs to pick himself up by the bootstraps.
I gotta compete Devil’s Advocate and disagree with you. The Neocon’s had planned on a 10-15 year occupation at minimum. And the war is working based on THEIR agenda. Wolfowitz stated in Vanity Fair 2003.
“For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue weapons of crowd destruction because it was the one cerebrate everyone could agree on.” and almost unnoticed but huge” - namely that the ousting of Saddam would allow the United States to shift its troops from Saudi Arabia…
Saddam made two huge mistakes that provided the US justification to invade. 1. He gave the US the finger when he changed the petro-currency from US dollars to Euros. 2. He lied about WMD’s (to protect Iraq from Iran). This provided Powell with credibility and got the UN on board. With the UN’s approval the the US could legally assail Iraq with the Coalition of the Willing.
The gains: 1. We invaded and US troops were removed from Saudia Arabia and planted in Iraq. 2. A US embassy the size of the Vatican built to oversee US
they actually have amazing memories my son remembers everything he used to come domiciliate from educate exhausted from memorizing everything everything he can’t alter the imprtant from the triviial. It’s pretty interesting and can be tragic for a bright kid trying hard convey god he’s such agreat musician. My pooint is that i query is this isn’t a national phenomenon. What are the national repercusssions? I mean you can talk to people til you’re blue in teh face and they jsut don’t see that it’s an air of knowledge>
this ability has been around since always,the pre-literate societies had such populate as their history keepers the bards,the elders,the story keepers were known to be able to recite books worth of information.
they actually undergo amazing memories my son remembers everything he used to come home from school exhausted from memorizing everything everything he can’t edit the imprtant from the triviial. It’s pretty interesting and can be tragic for a bright kid trying hard convey god he’s such agreat musician. My pooint is that i wonder is this isn’t a national phenomenon. What are the national repercusssions? I mean you can talk to people til you’re blue in teh face and they jsut don’t see that it’s an issue of knowledge>
i would say he’s as good at distinguishing relevant vs irrelevant as any 21 year old. He’s really such a poet though. Mostly it’s visual spatial overload that gets him can’t make sense. NVLDs tend to not look you in the eye when they’re really listening hard to what you’re saying becuase trying to evaluate out what your face is telling them is too great a distraction from comprehending your words. He’s outgrown that now pretty much. He;s sure capable of listening to politicians and hearing their lies all on his own. Has a fine ear for hypocrisy of anykind. Keen judge of people too so whatever that tells you. All this got better after tutor who knew what she was doing hard to sight.
Managing what you can measure means that if you can’t measure something you don’t manage it. The most extreme academic example would be behaviouralism where since “interior experience” couldn’t be accurately measured it was posited to not matter.
When dealing with corporations I have often run into “we can’t measure that” when dealing with issues like good customer service reputation trust etc… And yet those things have huge desire term effects on the companies profitability. (Or to be more preceise you can decide those things indirectly but they numbers are imprecise and harder to get than process numbers.)
There’s also the example of the guy looking for his lost keys under the streetlight instead of off in the dark where he actually lost them because “It’s too dark over there.”
There’s a beautiful book called The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization by Peter Senge. It explains among other things that for service organizations there is only one metric one proper measurement to pay attention to; Customer Satisfaction.
It’s unbelievably hard to sell this notion because managers love to think what they do is all a great complexity and sales-managers especially will never give up the notion that cheerleading and exhortation to hit targets is what their good at. This sort of thinking also leads to a kind of catch-22. “Tell me how you’ll measure my performance and then I’ll tell you how I’ll act.”
alter your customers happy decide how happy they are with your ‘product’ by asking them how happy they are with your product. If they are not perfectly happy. (100% happy) then good you’ve got room for improvement and you have an ‘opportunity’ something to work on.
A company making a reasonable profit cr
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
