This is related to what Hegel called "concrete universal, and Marx defined as "concrete abstraction." This is the basis of the dialect for Hegel and Marx's adoption and adaptation of it.
A Philosopher's Take
Causes in Real Life – How Organizations Perform a Root Cause Analyses (RCA)
A Philosopher's Take
Causes in Real Life – How Organizations Perform a Root Cause Analyses (RCA)
Mike Steiner | Strategic Initiative Specialist at TransCanada
40 comments:
Aviation has broad RCA: CAA Root Cause Analysis
They also have a very specific language and terms - no mistakes in the communication. I guess 40,000 ft sharpens the mind. Whereas economics is an armchair discussion even though the effects can be just as devastating. Maybe if the politicians and economists faced the same consequences personally ....
Right. Nothing like RCA took place in the wake of the global financial crisis. The world has not yet fully recovered from the huge social, political and economic impact. Zero accountability, and no rigorous analysis of what the causal factors were and how they can be addressed.
jr bad analogy, according to Tom, aviation is legally regulated so it is not a technical field... need more lawyers...
Anything with legal aspects associated with it is thus not technical...
"Nothing like RCA took place in the wake of the global financial crisis."
Pocahontas is not qualified... trained via inappropriate methods...
Anything with legal aspects associated with it is thus not technical...
There is a lot of technical stuff in fields that are not "material systems" in the sense you seem to be using the term.
For instance, law is a highly technical field and many aspects of law require scientific and engineering expertise, as well. Patent law is an obvious example. Many lawyers in these fields have double degrees and the training is highly rigorous.
Generally speaking, all law grads that enter a big firm are in training for about five years before before being regarded as fully qualified. This can be compared with apprenticeship.
Same with accounting, where a CPA degree is evidence of competence. A great deal of the accounting done by CPA (versus bookkeeping) involves tax law, which changes rapidly.
"Nothing like RCA took place in the wake of the global financial crisis."
Pocahontas is not qualified... trained via inappropriate methods...
I mean at the institutions involved, at least according to Bill Black.
Nothing was addressed.
Nothing like RCA took place in the wake of the global financial crisis. Tom Hickey
I'd say sham liabilities toward the non-bank private sector are the root cause. Or does accounting not matter wrt finance, Tom?
Nothing much to do with accounting, AA.
Much to do with predatory lending, mortgage fraud perpetrated by mortgage brokers, underwriters, and appraisers, securitization dodgy loans, and reckless use of derivatives, followed by a massive fraud in falsifying documents. It was a feeding frenzy and they mostly got away with it. Bill Black documented all of this, and books were written about it.
Nothing much to do with accounting, AA. Tom Hickey
Nothing much?
What about the dis-employment of the public with automation financed with what is, in essence, the public's credit but for private gain?
It was a feeding frenzy and they mostly got away with it. Tom Hickey
Because the payment system, which must work through the banks or not at all, would have been disrupted? Because the banks thereby held the economy hostage? Because the bank's liabilities toward the non-bank private sector are largely a sham?
It has everything to do with sham accounting as a consequence and cause of unequal protection under the law wrt fiat use.
The accounting record tells what happened and careful analysis reveals some of the why.
But accounting was only peripherally causal, if at all.
The actual causes resulted in what's shown in the accounting record.
It's like a ship's log. When there is an collision, the investigator's examine the ship's log to assist them in determining blame. The log is a record of what transpired on the respective bridges, not a cause of the collision.
I'm not talking about a record of what happened but why banks are able to create vast amounts of purchasing power (deposits/liabilities) in the first place - those liabilities toward the non-bank private sector are largely a sham.
Or does it escape your notice that the banks are a government privileged CARTEL?
Has nothing to do accounting. It's the institutional arrangements, which in modern society are legal and therefore political.
Has nothing to do accounting. Tom Hickey
Actually, the accounting between the banks is no sham at all since the banks may safely and conveniently use a Nation's fiat via accounts at the Central Bank, unlike the citizens who must work through the banking cartel or be limited to mere physical fiat, aka "cash".
Don't blame that on accounting. Those things are due to institutional arrangements that are essentially legal and therefore politically determined. One of the legal requirements is keeping accounting records ex post.
Don't blame that on accounting. Tom Hickey
I don't blame accounting; I blame sham accounting and those who defend it.
I still don't think you get it; ever hear of negative feedback and the necessity of it for system stability? Or for that matter, Assets = Equity + Liabilities? And how the Liabilities function as negative feedback with regard to deposit creation?
And how the Liabilities function as negative feedback with regard to deposit creation? aa
Then, connecting the dots for you, what happens to system stability with Liabilities that are largely a sham rather than genuine?
That is not an accounting problem. It doesn't result from accounting, which is ex post.
It's institutional, legal, and political.
If you don't like the arrangements, lobby politicians that will change it to something more acceptable to you, and if they won't, then campaign for those that will.
Changing the accounting (to what?) won't affect anything without changing the system.
Changing the accounting (to what?) won't affect anything without changing the system. Tom Hickey
Who's talking about changing the accounting? Not me! Rather, I'm pointing out that accounting's natural function of enforcing honesty has been subverted via government privileges for the banks which have the effect of rendering the Liabilities in Assets = Equity + Liabilities largely a sham wrt the non-bank private sector.
And what's this ex post business? Accounting is a real-time activity whereby banks create new deposits/Liabilities in exchange for loan agreements as new Assets when they "lend."
AA, I am suggesting you are barking up the wrong tree talking about accounting when the problem doesn't lie with the accounting. Talk about the issues in terms of causal factors and what you think needs to be changed, why and how.
I'm telling you that the accounting is useless as a means to enforce honesty and thus enhance stability with sham liabilities.
What part of the need for genuine as opposed to sham honesty in accounting don't you get?
Oh, I know what needs to be done - deprivilege the banks in a responsible manner so that they no longer hold the economy hostage.
Write up your proposals for change and pump them, or join a group you agree with.
You are a broken record here.
No, I think not. If I can't convince an otherwise intelligent person of something so obvious as the need for equal protection under the law wrt fiat use then the problem is likely spiritual blindness.
Btw, what seminary did you attend to learn so little about justice?
This venue promotes MMT as the most feasible next step in reform.
I have concluded that more radical reforms will have to wait for more interaction and incrementation.
Unless there is a global depression.
Then anything is possible, so all options should be on the table in case of that eventuality.
To me, the fundamental problem is capitalism, although I think the Catholic social teaching is pretty good interim proposal within that the present framework since it is a combination of capitalism and socialism, combining favorable aspects of both.
What I especially like about it is the notion of distributivism and subsidiarity.
The chief alternatives along these lines at present is the Chinese system, based on technocracy and paternalism, and Islamic social teaching, which in my view is too traditional and backward looking.
India could also generate some solutions along traditional lines, too. PROUT (Progressive Utilization Theory) is an example.
In in the US, MMT is to the fore, and there is a good chance of it becoming the next big thing. That would a huge step forward from neoliberalism.
Thanks for the links.
To me, the fundamental problem is capitalism, ... Tom Hickey
If you mean private property, then how much would you allow?
In in the US, MMT is to the fore, and there is a good chance of it becoming the next big thing. That would a huge step forward from neoliberalism. Tom Hickey
If you mean Warren Mosler's Proposals they are:
1) Increased privileges for the usury cartel.
2) Wage slavery to government to supplement wage slavery to the rich for the victims of the usury cartel.
I have concluded that more radical reforms will have to wait for more interaction and incrementation.
Unless there is a global depression. Tom Hickey
It is easily fatal to assume justice can wait. Otoh, God is reluctant to judge if signs of repentance are shown.
If you mean private property, then how much would you allow?
At the earliest convenience I would tax away what is now inheritance, and let people accumulate as much as they wish.
Then, I would work toward public control of the commanding heights of the economy.
That way there could be incentive and more normal distribution.
If you mean Warren Mosler's Proposals they are:
1) Increased privileges for the usury cartel.
2) Wage slavery to government to supplement wage slavery to the rich for the victims of the usury cartel.
Wage slavery will continue to exist until capitalism disappears. The issue is to reduce it as much as possible interactively and incrementally.
Rapid change generates more risk than gradual change. That's why I recommend an iterative and incremental approach.
It is easily fatal to assume justice can wait. Otoh, God is reluctant to judge if signs of repentance are shown.
Assuming that an omniscient and omnipotent God can intervene, everything is always perfect all the time, and everything is proceeding on course. God needs help?
Arnold Kling, The New Commanding Heights, Cato Institute 2011.
Wage slavery will continue to exist until capitalism disappears. Tom Hickey
Not so since those with independent means need not work for anyone else but themselves and their families.
Assuming that an omniscient and omnipotent God can intervene, everything is always perfect all the time, and everything is proceeding on course. God needs help? Tom Hickey
Who says God knows everything? Not the Bible, e.g. God appointed Saul but later rejected him as king. And why does God need to search hearts and test minds (Jeremiah 17:10) if He already knows all hearts and minds?
You deserve a refund from whatever seminary you attended to be so ignorant of the Bible.
Who says God knows everything?
Better tell Wikipedia
In monotheistic thought, God is conceived of as the Supreme Being and the principal object of faith.[3] The concept of God, as described by theologians, commonly includes the attributes of omniscience (all-knowing), omnipotence (unlimited power), omnipresence (present everywhere), and as having an eternal and necessary existence. Depending on one’s kind of theism, these attributes are used either in way of analogy, or in a literal sense as distinct properties of the God.
13 Bible Verses about God's Omniscience
Ten Bible Verses: God is Omniscient
It is also possible to list verses that apparently assert or imply that God is not omniscient.
That leads to the conclusion that the scripture contradicts itself.
One then has to account for this dialectically as paradox rather than contradiction, or else accept that the bible contains nonsense.
and [God] as having an eternal and necessary existence. Wiki via Tom Hickey
If "eternal" is meant to mean "without beginning" that is also not supported by the Bible. Instead, that God Himself formed is implied by:
“You are My witnesses,” declares the Lord,
“And My servant whom I have chosen,
So that you may know and believe Me
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
And there will be none after Me." Isaiah 43:10 New American Standard Bible (NASB) [bold added]
God is certainly everlasting which means He shall have no end but that does not mean He had no beginning.
Selective quoting of scripture is not logically compelling when there are verses of opposite meaning.
This means that there are contradictory views with the opposing parties holding onto different horns of the dilemma. Many would conclude that this is just nonsense not worth listening to.
That leads to the conclusion that the scripture contradicts itself. Tom Hickey
It does if one insists, for example, that a word always means the exact same thing regardless of context. Or, for another example, if one insists that even human speakers in the Bible must speak without error.
I haven't solved every paradox in the Bible but so many that I know longer doubt it.
Selective quoting of scripture is not logically compelling when there are verses of opposite meaning. Tom Hickey
You shall seek Me and you shall find Me when you search for Me with all your heart Jeremiah 29:13
Many would conclude that this is just nonsense not worth listening to. Tom Hickey
Would you prefer the Bible to be such that no one could disbelieve? Not even the most wicked? So that God would have to admit them to Heaven too? And never be able to turn His back on them?
You shall seek Me and you shall find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. Jeremiah 29:13
“Ask, and it will be given you; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you. MT 7:7 (NRSV)
Sums it up. Understanding is not needed and can confuse.
It's a matter of the heart and not of the mind.
Sums it up. Understanding is not needed and can confuse. Tom Hickey
How can one ask if one does not believe in the one she/he is asking of?
Likewise with search and knock.
Your mistake is not to differentiate between those preached to. E.g. Jesus waited until Judas had left (to betray Him) before speaking further to His disciples at the Last Supper.
Again, you are reading selectively and forming a possible interpretation. Which is fine. But don't expect others to see it that way.
You are also generalizing from your own experience, while the experience of others may be quite different.
There are literally hundreds of thousands of books and papers written arguing for and against different points of view in Christianity alone.
People come to their own conclusions for their own reasons and they may also change their minds — several times.
I don't see this as helping your case about public finance anymore than focusing on accounting.
My view is that is strategically superior to present cases based on what most people can relate to and potentially agree upon, leaving aside other matters that may not be relevant to this, even though I may prioritize them them highly myself.
I haven't solved every paradox in the Bible ... aa
Let me retract my boasting: In my experience, the Bible itself, if one continues to read and practice what it says, resolves its own paradoxes and mysteries.
You argue your way, Tom, and I'll argue my way.
But so far you seem immune to entirely secular arguments such as:
1) The need for equal protection under the law wrt fiat use.
2) The need for honest as opposed to sham accounting wrt the non-bank private sector.
3) The need for honest as opposed to sham negative feedback wrt the non-bank private sector.
4) The need for a risk-free, always liquid payment system in addition to the one that must work through the banks.
Instead you opt for more privileges for the banks and wage-slavery for their victims. Is it any wonder I suspect spiritual blindness?
Post a Comment