An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
Bannon should invest some of his own money (or better, have one of his Chinese friends pay for it) in a wide-brim hat. And he needs to get those those skin lesions on his temple checked.
The scientific approach is technical. Politics is "practical" (read propagandistic in the sense of saying that which is advantageous regardless of truth-value, even if one knows the truth).
Determining whether politicians know the truth and are laying or are just ignorant is often difficult to tell.
I rather doubt Steve Bannon has read up on MMT. As a politician, most of the time he is talking his book, like most of the rest of them. He is just more cavalier about it, and now he has plenty of company.
As always, follow the power and money.
Naturally, when these people win office or are appointed to it, they follow the same principles as they do in politics, since they see no difference between politics and governing.
So it is no wonder that things don't work.
Actually, I have a friend that who is a theoretical physicist that ran for high office. As a result he got to talk to lot of people in politics. His position was that most of the issues the country faces have already been determined scientifically or could be solved scientifically. He said many agreed with him privately and told him that that approach doesn't fly politically.
It's baked into the design of the current system of representative democracy.
This is just normal for a dialogic method Tom… paradox, etc… Technical accuracy (truth?) is not the priority… “What is truth?” Pontius Pilate c. 33 AD…. Always looking for a synthesis…. Unless we adjust over to a more technocratic republic it’s going to remain like this… Just have to deal with it..
There is a clear distinction between dialogic and sophistry.
The aim of dialectic in the sense of dialogic as Socrates/Plato used it is the quest for truth through open inquiry. This became the basis of philosophical liberalism (vs. dogmatism), and it is also the basis of science. That inquiry takes place in science largely through professional publications.
This is somewhat different from dialectic as the the search for consensus based on opposing positions by synthesizing them.
For example, in the Dialogues, it is normal for Socrates to show his opponents that they don't know what they are talking about through pointed questioning. The dialogue often ends with the issues unresolved but with the participants understanding the argument better than they did before the inquiry began.
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman
But if both people are instead technically trained accuracy/truth seekers then they just have a 15 to 30 minute meeting and figure it out and make the proper adjustment…
SpaceX just crashed 2 of those heavies and then succeeded in the 3rd… nobody there was arguing to keep doing what didn’t work … those people are not invited to the meetings…
We’re not “out of money!” you can’t run out of abstract units..
These people should be ridiculed and expelled from the process…
But if both people are instead technically trained accuracy/truth seekers then they just have a 15 to 30 minute meeting and figure it out and make the proper adjustment…
In certain cases, like materials science and engineering, that is, areas that highly quantifiable and good data is available.
Those are special cases in problem solving and not representative of the range of problems that individuals, groups, a society, or the global society faces.
Bannon is pushing his narrative, and perhaps describing the strategy of forces opposed to the Biden regime. He ain't going to do a flip-flop until it's advantageous to do so.
11 comments:
Steve Bannon understands MMT. He understands that it ain't worth shit in terms of political narrative.
AOC's "Green" New Deal includes rights-of-way for more pipelines.
GND = Same Old Pork
Bannon should invest some of his own money (or better, have one of his Chinese friends pay for it) in a wide-brim hat. And he needs to get those those skin lesions on his temple checked.
“ Steve Bannon understands MMT. He understands that it ain't worth shit in terms of political narrative.”
It’s rather paradox Pete…. these people can be against deficits and then for deficits depending on the situation… it’s normal..
It’s a non-technical approach to economic policy…
It’s a non-technical approach to economic policy…
Non-technical or just plain ol' lying?
The scientific approach is technical. Politics is "practical" (read propagandistic in the sense of saying that which is advantageous regardless of truth-value, even if one knows the truth).
Determining whether politicians know the truth and are laying or are just ignorant is often difficult to tell.
I rather doubt Steve Bannon has read up on MMT. As a politician, most of the time he is talking his book, like most of the rest of them. He is just more cavalier about it, and now he has plenty of company.
As always, follow the power and money.
Naturally, when these people win office or are appointed to it, they follow the same principles as they do in politics, since they see no difference between politics and governing.
So it is no wonder that things don't work.
Actually, I have a friend that who is a theoretical physicist that ran for high office. As a result he got to talk to lot of people in politics. His position was that most of the issues the country faces have already been determined scientifically or could be solved scientifically. He said many agreed with him privately and told him that that approach doesn't fly politically.
It's baked into the design of the current system of representative democracy.
This is just normal for a dialogic method Tom… paradox, etc…
Technical accuracy (truth?) is not the priority…
“What is truth?” Pontius Pilate c. 33 AD….
Always looking for a synthesis….
Unless we adjust over to a more technocratic republic it’s going to remain like this…
Just have to deal with it..
Look at mikes tag line above , excerpt:
“ …We seek the truth, … ”
That is NOT what these people are doing…
Doesn’t mean they are “seeking the false” either…
They don’t value truth and accuracy as paramount… they are (trying) to go about things a different way… seeking compromise/synthesis…
I’m biased towards the technical so ofc it looks like a big circle jerk to me… but not everyone is trained to operate the same way…
They are going to have to keep failing for now until we can somehow get rid of these people…
This is just normal for a dialogic method Tom… paradox, etc… Technical accuracy (truth?) is not the priority… “What is truth?” Pontius Pilate c. 33 AD…. Always looking for a synthesis…. Unless we adjust over to a more technocratic republic it’s going to remain like this… Just have to deal with it..
There is a clear distinction between dialogic and sophistry.
The aim of dialectic in the sense of dialogic as Socrates/Plato used it is the quest for truth through open inquiry. This became the basis of philosophical liberalism (vs. dogmatism), and it is also the basis of science. That inquiry takes place in science largely through professional publications.
This is somewhat different from dialectic as the the search for consensus based on opposing positions by synthesizing them.
For example, in the Dialogues, it is normal for Socrates to show his opponents that they don't know what they are talking about through pointed questioning. The dialogue often ends with the issues unresolved but with the participants understanding the argument better than they did before the inquiry began.
“I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” ― Richard Feynman
But if both people are instead technically trained accuracy/truth seekers then they just have a 15 to 30 minute meeting and figure it out and make the proper adjustment…
SpaceX just crashed 2 of those heavies and then succeeded in the 3rd… nobody there was arguing to keep doing what didn’t work … those people are not invited to the meetings…
We’re not “out of money!” you can’t run out of abstract units..
These people should be ridiculed and expelled from the process…
But if both people are instead technically trained accuracy/truth seekers then they just have a 15 to 30 minute meeting and figure it out and make the proper adjustment…
In certain cases, like materials science and engineering, that is, areas that highly quantifiable and good data is available.
Those are special cases in problem solving and not representative of the range of problems that individuals, groups, a society, or the global society faces.
Bannon is pushing his narrative, and perhaps describing the strategy of forces opposed to the Biden regime. He ain't going to do a flip-flop until it's advantageous to do so.
“ highly quantifiable and good data is available. ”
You don’t need that to understand you can’t run out of scientific abstractions… please…
This is opposite the MMT people using their stupid figurative language “points on a scoreboard!” analogy… it doesn’t work…
Post a Comment