Showing posts with label Luddites. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Luddites. Show all posts

Monday, February 16, 2015

Yet Another Civil War Between Capital and Adaptive Culture?

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)


How many times must we needlessly repeat this war?

As long as the blind business of extraction - vs evolution - promotes Roll-Up strategies?

For Pete's sake! Gov is NOT akin to a household, any more than components are akin to a system, or teammates are akin to a team. Scale presents entirely novel options. It IS different to be a whole which is greater than the sum of it's separate parts.

Yet on this point, macro economics teaching is clearly and nearly universally broken.

Do university physics programs teach students that Quantum Mechanics & Relativity are akin to Newton's physics? Of course not!

Yet economics essentially does. It's a rare economist who's learned the simplest aspects of fiat currency operations.

How can anyone moral teach economics without teaching currency operations? By acquiescing to the banking lobby? THAT'S not pedagogy. It's cowardice.

And it's also not ...
How We Ended The Last Civil War Between Capital and Adaptive Culture.

We can't end a civil war by having both sides improve technique. Adaptive change requires improving training methods available to pre-combatants, until they recognize and start exploring better options than repeating the same, stupid war with no resolution. Teach emerging context, not just existing data?

Orthodox macroeconomics is a long-running sick joke, which never was funny. Why did the Ignorant Electorate KEEP hitting it's collective head with Civil War? (And who said we're not supposed to ask?)

There is a better way. Make progress, not frictions.

For the case of endlessly competing roll-up strategies, it's all a question of who's chasing whom. Rather than running from corruption on a treadmill .....


it's better to be trampling Luddites, on an ascending spiral.

Every time I think of this general topic, Joshua Chamberlain's words come to mind.
"We know not of the future and cannot plan for it much. ... But we can ... determine ... what manner of men we will be, whenever and wherever the hour strikes and calls to noble action."
To paraphrase Joshua Chamberlain for today's civil war: 
We cannot know what specific contexts the future may bring, and therefore cannot much prepare for them. 
We can, however, determine what sort of Adaptive Rates our aggregate can muster when those contexts strike. 
To better determine those capabilities, we can practice continuously re-mapping & RE-VISUALIZING all of our emerging cultural processes, so that we can maintain practice at making Rapid Adaptive Transitions throughout our own culture.


Sunday, January 11, 2015

Gut Private Financial Savings By Neutering the Fiat? Why Voluntarily Go Under The Knife Of Deranged Fiscal Surgeons?

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)

Excised. Cut off. Snipped. Removed.

Is this really what you want for your private, financial savings?

Yet that is EXACTLY what the Committee to Neuter the Fiat is relentlessly advising.

For any relation between a CURRENCY ISSUER and the aggregate of all CURRENCY USERS, the accumulating currency held (for distributed liquidity) by a growing population and economy is (for purely sophist reasons, aka, an oddity of history) called the currency issuer's "debt."

For an analogy, as YOU grew from an egg-cell to an adult did you accumulate a runaway "debt" to yourself, for all the growth you issued to yourself?

And did it matter how that "debt" was denominated (i.e., in kg or pounds, cell number, hemoglobin molecules, ATP molecules, calories distributed, etc, etc, etc)? 

Accountants could argue yes to both, purely based on the invented rules of Double-Entry Bookkeeping. 

Yet that still doesn't mean that you have to pay back to yourself every calorie (or atp molecule) of "debt" to yourself, simply because double-entry bookkeeping has no way to account for the simple act of creation. Pity. 

So such arguments about national "debt" are purely semantic, and ignored by logical people, who've continuously evolved more human culture for tens of thousands of years, despite that runaway "Debt."

Yet these pathetically misguided dimwits at the CNF cleverly argue that the average national wage rises as "private savings falls" - and use that claimed correlation to argue for national austerity.

Like an OCD Luddite, they just won't stop.

Yes, their argument is EXACTLY equivalent to claiming that average cellular nourishment rises during your childhood development & growth spurts if net caloric intake falls. Doh!

By that logic we should rush to starve our developing embryos, fetuses & children - not just impose austerity on our still-growing electorate and national culture!!!

Didn't we start giving up on quack doctors and leeches back in the Dark Ages? Apparently not completely. The last bastion of Quackery is in political lobbies and the orthodox economists they hire.

Could it be that the "average" wage rises during austerity or recession precisely because those who can hoard everything possible during times of panic, when human cultures unleash the quack Luddites, the always-outmoded cultural analogue of an autonomic nervous system? In physiology, we call that "shock" - or when the circulatory system arbitrarily & preferentially shuts down delivery of assets to "peripheral" extremities in order to preferentially preserve supposed "critical organs."

The NET wages certainly can't fall as "National Debt" falls, because those 2 figures are - by the rules of Double-Entry Bookkeeping - equal to the penny. So the stark reality is that the Luddites at the CNF are playing games with the definition of "wages," precisely to confuse their victims.

Yes, Maud, it's true. In large human cultures struggling to retain affinity despite never-before confronted population numbers, any OCD dimwit uncontrollably hoarding static assets still tends to assume that they are therefore more important than citizens who are instead developing dynamic assets, like teamwork (i.e., return-on-coordination).


Not just how, but for what purpose or goal.

Yet the OCD Luddites persist, even though their view has long been known to be exactly ass-backwards, by every tribal culture in history, plus the members of our own DoD, who argue that survival tracks the quality (including tempo) of distributed decision-making (i.e., teamwork). That's right, the most basic axiom of teamwork, and of every social species, recognizes the primal importance of adequately provisioning every team member as well as possible, so that increasingly large strings of static assets can be used in novel permutations, as dynamic assets.

Yet here is the Committee to Neuter the Fiat outright advising that average soldier provisioning actually increases, and improves the Army, when the Generals hoard all the weapons. Were they born in a barn?

Admittedly, they sometimes alter their tune, and advise that when teams sense opportunity, that ever team member takes whatever provisions they can grab, and go home with it. As if that helps, or hurts less.

Why don't they just just make their message more blunt, and promote treason?

Ok, lets ignore the CNF, and instead re-orient to logic and reality.

The reality is that organized teams can do amazing things, by organizing aggregate or Public Initiative.

Public Initiative is otherwise known as national fiat.

And national fiat is denominated, on-demand, as fiat currency - a freely floating indicator denominating the coincidental outcomes of team accomplishments. 

Therefore the volume of fiat currency coincidentally corresponds to the volume of private financial savings, which tracks net national success. More precisely, it is the distributed, private savings of the US Middle Class that counts.

Distributed private financial savings is analogous to the fat reserves of the average human. That's what provides the freedom and ability to express distributed innovation, audacity and invention. It's what allowed American Ingenuity, off and on, for 200 years.

And here's an actual committee dead set on Neutering the Fiat (i.e., reducing the volume AND distribution of private financial savings, which they happen to call a "national debt").

Why is this all occurring? Simply because they are feeble-minded sophists either not capable of dissociating semantic diversity from specifically maladaptive sophism, or not willing to bother to stop and actually think? Either that, or they're actively mis-using semantic diversity as propaganda.

Yes, it's exactly as though large segments of our national policy apparatus - supposedly our nation's "brains" - have been incapacitated by a cultural stroke. Luckily, a human culture, unlike a discrete human CNS, is capable of continuous, unlimited regeneration. Yet regenerative capability doesn't help unless we actually implement it. Let's get on with clearing out these dead, wooden-heads, before our country falls over and fractures something more real than their private savings!

The solution is simple. Don't be too lazy to try one of the following suggestions.

1) Stop and actually think for yourself.

2) Or at least quit listening to and voting for gullible erbils asking you to run in cages for them.

3) Or actively speak out against their willful or possibly Innocent Fraud propaganda.




"Most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all." Michael Rivero



Wednesday, May 28, 2014

The Rentier Empire Strikes Back?

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)



The decades from 1970-2000 are looming as an abject failure of situational awareness and assessment. The class war Luddites were just waiting for faintly plausible excuses to continue old ideology?

200 years of Revolution, writing a Constitution, reinventing democracy, waging civil war, trust busting, Square Deals, New Deals & 2 world wars .... and then we go back to idiotic, class-based NeoLiberalism?

How pathetic. Where's the Greatest Generation, and how do we get them back?
Ignore aggregate demand & general welfare of the people, & return to previously discredited ideas? Werks fer mi!
And subsequently also throw out any attempt at regulating our own frauds?
Madness Posing as Hyper-Rationality: OMB's Assault on Effective Regulation



Monday, August 19, 2013

Balanced Fiat Is A Euphemism For Class Warfare.

In response to the mini-essay on PK's "Moment of Dumb Questioness" one new reader wrote in an email:

"You may want to always provide a explanation which is as simple - but as correct - as possible for why there is essentially no such thing as "deficit" with our fiat economy for the broad population. Then, use that concept to point out why the fiat economy is essential to national well-being. For me such commentaries are strongest when they point out whatever is not perfect. In this case, what (far less important) downside effects occur, and when they occur, as a result of our fiat economy 'printing' it's own currency on-demand."

This is progress. One more down. Minimum of another 15 million US citizens to go! (~10% of adult population)

This reader makes a good point. I will try to always add an opening cue for new audiences. Here's a stab. It may already be thinking too far ahead. If so, please offer your own version of a system primer:

"See Jane. See Dick. See Jane provision the country, using decimal notation for tracking all transaction chains, no matter how complex. See Dick try to run off with all the decimal notation, i.e., the 'fiat.' "

The simple issue is that most of this whole, embarrassing debate results from twisted semantics. A "deficit" formally means less of something than was previously present. Can one have a virtual deficit in a dimensionless, virtual concept - regardless of whether or not you write virtual symbols for those dimensionless concepts in double-entry accounting logs? Of course. It all depends on the semantics chosen for the context being discussed. What happens of people try to mix metaphors across non-overlapping contexts? Then you have sophism. Note that sophism isn't a problem unless a conversation occurs between any combination of the unscrupulous and/or slow witted.

Sophism 300BC: "Is that YOUR dog?" [Yes.] "Is THAT dog a mother?" [Yes.] "Therefore THAT dog is YOUR mother. Ha. Ha." [??]

Sophism 2013 AD: "Does our growing population and economy need more virtual units to track the increasing number of transactions uses this year, vs last  year?" [Yes.]  "So we have a deficit in calculating units to be used this year, vs last year?" [Yes.] "Those charged with making up that 'deficit' therefore have a 'debt'." [Well ... Ok.] "You're a citizen. Therefore, YOU have a debt to pay. Pay up!" [Huh? .. well ... ok. Here. ... Hey! Whaddya mean, I no longer have a job, or pension, or civil rights?]

Endless numbers of anthropologists & historians have explained this ... in countless ways. Even Wallace & Darwin. Here's the gist of the story.

In reality, all adaptive systems are always on a fiat currency system, i.e., no limit to self-bookkeeping. Just use the noise thrown off by the system components currently in operation. Our only internal system restraint is avoiding the confusion of either inflation or deflation. An electorate may pretend otherwise, but it was always just a pretension. Fiat = guaranteed denomination of any & all public initiative. It's just system bookkeeping. Can you imagine any cell-biology system that wasn't resource restrained, voluntarily running out of ATP? That's like a nation which isn't resource constrained running out of hammers - or a blonde running out of signals to breathe in and breathe out. No reason for it to occur ... other than internal disorganization.

Hence, a balanced fiat currency budget means balanced public fiat, which means balanced public initiative? So, what the heck does that mean? It means no NET public initiative this year that exceeds what's clawed back from last year's public initiative? What sense does that make? None whatsoever. Just sophism.

Stop coordinating so we can focus on infighting? The only avenue for local advancement which that policy leaves is class warfare!

Class warfare is just jostling within the ranks - which just brings us back to another definition of inflation vs deflation. Cultural inflation = too little internal adaptive pressure. Cultural deflation = too much internal adaptive pressure. Either can weaken the resiliency of a culture, and voluntarily limit it's adaptive rate.

Once infighting breaks out, guess which "class" of people always promotes balanced fiat? You guessed it. Whomever gets a leg up in any family/clan/class struggle naturally seeks to stick it to their former adversary - and keep 'em down - by under-funding and over-taxing everyone in their erstwhile competitor class. Minimal jostling for position keeps distributed adaptive rate at rates dictated by context. The knack is to know how to not go too far. A culture under-provisioning an entire class of it's own citizens is exactly like a person shooting their own foot, or brain. If you have an asset, it's better to maximally employ it rather than waste it. In any complex system, the highest return - by far - is the return-on-coordination. The alternatives are all different degrees of playing with failure.

USUALLY, these internal-competition cycles are broken only when some worse crisis forces the infighters to instead team up, coordinate, and optimally provision the entire country. Any lack of outside adaptive pressure, however, allows the knuckledraggers to again lobby for Ludditism and "balanced fiat." If that gets out of hand, the whole system usually falls behind some other culture maintaining a higher adaptive rate.

ps: "Balanced Fiat" has become a CFC euphemism for class warfare. Where CFC means "control-fraud correct" .. i.e., endless semantic Sophism











Tuesday, April 30, 2013

How to Discuss Fiat Currency Supply With Luddites, Small Children and Non-Initiates (like Politicians)

Commentary by Roger Erickson

Luddites (and/or petty crooks and sophisticated Control Frauds) are constantly heard discussing fiat currency supply in panicky tones and fearful terms.

It's as though they live in constant fear that we will run out of fiat. (Although I've never heard a definition of how such an abstract condition could ever actually occur. Maybe among the severely ill, depressed or lethargic? Perhaps in patients with advanced Parkinson's Disease - bereft of the neural ability to trigger even volitional thoughts, let alone motor actions?)

Even most of those trying to help Luddites understand fiat currency don't help. The "helpers" often complain that Luddites just won't listen.

Yet what is it that they won't listen to?

Semantics always seems to be a big part of the problem. Please stop sloppily calling net fiat currency creation a "debt," or even a deficit - at least with novices. Without defining terms, semantics lapses into useless sophistry - a perennial tool used by crooks to separate fools from their resources.

Nearly every word in every language has multiple meanings, based on context. That's the price we pay for having lean, dynamic linguistics. Don't argue over it. Just define your terms, and the context they're used in!

Imagine 50 people meeting at the Tower of Babel and discovering to their joy that they all use the same alphabet, script and words! Happy coincidence! They're problems are half over - but only half. Imagine their horror to discover that all 50 assign different meanings to the exact same spoken and written words. Worse, they all have multiple meanings for every shared word, based on the particular context discussed using their particular grammar and phraseology. To be exactly sure of the meaning of a given sentence, you could easily have a 50x50 matrix of possible meaning options to parse! Actually, this situation applies to everyone's daily experiences. So how do humans manage this nightmare scenario? Easily, it turns out. Everyone simply defines their terms whenever initiating a discussion - everyone except priests and economists! Those two professions are wont to chant long strings of incantations mixing in just enough familiar words to be mesmerizing, but perverting them with such a jumble of ambiguity and archaic expressions so as to render them unintelligible for pragmatic use. 

Please. When discussing the topic of fiat currency supply with Luddites - or simply the uninitiated - respect your audience, and take care to talk about bonds, banking reserves, return on coordination, interest rates, inflation or deflation levels, currency supply, Output Gap, jobs, national capabilities ... anything but confusing sophistry.

You don't convince many people to be atheists ONLY by repeatedly telling them that there is no God, there is no devil, there is no hell and that they're NOT going to heaven. The ONLY thing they'll know is what you're telling them not to pay attention to. FAIL! Losing strategy.

So, remind novices entering every topic unfamiliar to them that there are these concepts called semantics, sophistry and linguistic redundancy.  Then stick to talking about concepts that ARE adaptive for that particular conversation. Define terms and context, and then talk about desired outcomes. Nothing more & nothing less.



Sunday, November 11, 2012

Alexander the Weight-of-Logic vs the Guardian Knotheads


There is infinite trivia to uselessly argue about in every situation, but only one adaptive group survival path to extend.  What's orthodox is simply an instantaneous tangent to unpredictably unfolding adaptive paths.  Our job is simply to avoid staying on orthodox tangents too long.  Capiche?

How?  Well, what's eventually obvious in any situation is simply an operational result left after cutting through what's discovered to be irrelevant in our current tangent. In practice, that means asking "what part of what we KNOW has to be discarded first?" That can always be determined fastest by exploring all the options with the fastest parsing strategy (aka, natural selection). [ps: If you're uncomfortable with certain uncertainty, just drop out and wait for the truck described below to pick you up. You won't feel a thing.]

So far, accelerating adaptive rate involves the 2-stage strategic combination of expanding the diversity of feedback AND monitoring all inter-dependencies between feedback channels. That's the simple reason why evolving systems always expand in order to win adaptive races. If we ever run out of Adaptive Space in our universe, we'll know it's time to change some fundamental limit on the selection tempo. When that happens, we'll presumably trigger another Big Probability Event (aka, a Little Whimper). Succeeding generations of Luddites will only perceive it - eventually - as yet another Big Bang (i.e., the last truck to hit 'em; they never do get the license plate #, because such trucks scavenge the road kill & throw it in back of the truck).  Luddites only wake up on the next iteration of endlessly nested rides.  Face it.  In the long run, we're all Luddites waiting to happen.

Currency Operations (MMT) is just one example of diverse operations accelerating net Adaptive Rate, dragging Luddite theorists along, kicking and screaming irrelevant inanities.

Ongoing politics provides countless other examples of theory trying to triumph over real operations.  Here's another informative example where credentialism fell off the wagon.

Good Riddance Petraeus

"If only Petraeus and his colleague generals remembered the smaller -- but far more relevant -- ideas inculcated in all of us Army officers in Infantry School at Fort Benning in the early Sixties. This is what I recall from memory regarding what an infantry officer needed to do before launching an operation -- big or small -- division or squad size.

Corny (and gratuitous) as it may sound, we were taught that the absolute requirement was to do an "Estimate of the Situation" that included the following key factors: Enemy strength, numbers and weapons; Enemy disposition, where are they?; Terrain; Weather; and Lines of communication and supply (LOCS). In other words, we were trained to take into account those "little ideas," like facts and feasibility that, if ignored, could turn the "big ideas" into a March of Folly that would get a lot of people killed for no good reason.

Could it be that they stopped teaching these fundamentals as Petraeus went through West Point and Benning several years later? Did military history no longer include the futile efforts of imperial armies to avoid falling into the "graveyard of empires" in Afghanistan?

What about those LOCS? When you can't get there from here, is it really a good idea to send troops and armaments the length of Pakistan and then over the Hindu Kush? And does anyone know how much that kind of adventure might end up costing?

To Army officers schooled in the basics, it was VERY hard to understand why the top Army leadership persuaded President Barack Obama to double down, twice, in reinforcing troops for a fool's errand. And let's face it, unless you posit that the generals and the neoconservative strategic "experts" at Brookings and AEI were clueless, the doubling down was not only dumb but unconscionable.
[highlight mine]

Here's a suggestion. Let's add the following as part of every Oath of Public Office, from local towns up to Federal elected officials.

"Do you swear to adjust to the Situation, the Whole Situation, and nothing but the honest Situation - so help you Reality?" That's one suggestion for how we could continuously select better ways to cut through the Guardian Knotheads of Ludditeville. Simply hew them with the weight of logic, and quickly move on.

Collective allegiance to the weight of adaptive logic is always more important than any few Truths, no matter how artfully selected.

Selecting too few truths from many constitutes perversion, in the form of Selection Strategy gone awry.

"EVERY process is too important to be left to the presumed process owners." Without that full-group review of all relevant feedback, we have doomed mob, not a democracy.

Thursday, November 8, 2012

Fixing Bayonets, and Charging Toward the Next Adaptive Permutation of Our Own Electorate


Feels like time to buy equities in general? - Warren Mosler.

It's the adaptive permutations, silly.

Warren Mosler's forecasts now make perfect sense to me. He's really changed my life, by illuminating a path through one particularly hard to recognize adaptive window, a conceptual bottleneck. I can extrapolate from that path, to clarify the path to other tough windows as well.  Twenty years back I might have thought Mosler was lost in left field. Yet there's always a steady trickle of people (Socrates, Wallace, Tesla, Shewhart, Deming, Boyd, etc), who sense that orthodoxy never makes enough sense past yesterday, and are already looking for a better paradigm. Improving our National Adaptive Rate means turning that trickle into a stream.  As a nation, we need a faster CAR (Cultural Adaptive Rate).

Every culture faces tasks in dimensions beyond it's training.  We now have thousands of distinct, new professions that didn't even exist when most current adults were born, and a steady trickle of revolutionary innovators in each & every one of those professions. Yet we're grossly neglecting how to continuously explore & select optimal, revolutionary permutations of all these mini-paradigm changers. We're simply ignoring our own, multi-level selection. Our diversity is growing faster than our organizational methods, so that we're actually losing net agility.  That's ironic, since multi-variable calculus is a 400-yr old topic taught in introductory math, but not practiced outside the classroom by 99% of those who've passed a calculus class!

Methods drive results, and we are (mostly) what we practice, not what we say. Therefore, our bigger problem, really, is that even while we're desperately looking for new paradigms, we're simultaneously practicing the opposite, by conditioning most students to either not look, not recognize better ways even when they see 'em, or actively oppose anyone saying a better way is possible (or desired) - i.e., the insidious evil of Credentialism. We need a better underlying paradigm for dynamically addressing our paradigm progression! Our present approach ain't scaling. [Pirsig might say that we're personally dynamic ... yet socially static & self-suicidal, and that we're furiously training static-value thinkers in an obviously and increasingly dynamic-value world.  Hence, our methods momentum, as a vector, is carrying us away from, not closer to, our avowed goals, where we want to go. What happens when methods-momentum & goal-momentum are orthogonal? Ya got a really sick organization approaching an inflection point where survival & failure are equally probable options.]

It turns out that the rate limiting task for all social species - & now cultures - is how, exactly, to scavenge net diversity as a reserve, and drag it - kicking & screaming - through the sequence of rare windows that define an unpredictable survival path through "Adaptation Space." Forget banking reserves.  We need to be operating on an entirely different level - just to survive ourselves.

Unfortunately, we don't drive that situational awareness home at the beginning of training, even in biology 101, let alone in economics or political science or our 2000+ other training diciplines. We always have far, far more capabilities than we need, but always lag in developing the agility to use what we already have. Couch potato culture, indeed! It's actually much worse than even the most pessimistic among us imagine - but never hopeless. If we're a nation, Wall St. & the 1% are the bulk of the expanding duff we're sitting on, while our electorate falls ill exactly because of it! What's the economic metaphor for type-2 diabetes? The self-induced, runaway methods triggering maldistribution of incomes & assets?  What's the simplest prevention AND cure?  Coordinated, economic exercise?  That means simply unleashing public initiative, to feverishly explore, analyze and select from our exponentially expanding group options!  Why are we making this anything except insanely great fun?  What's the next scale beyond individual sociopaths?  Culturopaths?  Is that what we're slipping into? A Rush Limbaugh culture?  The smell is already noticeable, and a cleansing bath is needed - pronto.

Here's our Catch-22 dilemma [where's Joshua Chamberlain when we need millions like him?]:
We can't afford to leave the unmotivated behind, and we can't learn how to motivate their growing ranks fast enough - which means there's a better way.

[Continuously tweak & subtly alter the edu/training production process? Start practicing cheap prevention vs expensive repair in the way we continuously replenish our own electorate? Is it ALWAYS time to "fix-bayonets" in policy battle? We're in continuous war with our own bureacracy.  We don't want to destroy it, and we don't want to dismantle it.  Hence, we must fix emerging tactical bayonets and run circles around, under & through those parts of credentialism and bureaucracy that are always becoming obsolete - so we can take leaner/faster/better bureaucracy with us wherever we all need to go. We need continuously faster national, not just local, OODA loops, and national statistical process adaptation, not control (dynamic SPA, not SPC).]

To do that, we need a bias to action.  We need to trick the Luddites into rapidly enjoying what they don't understand, and make it fun for kids to try insanely novel exploration - WHILE always practicing agile, full-group feedback.  We need methods for continuously improving our quality of distributed decision-making.

We need Master Ooda and the Klaxon Klone Army ("Ooooda! Ooooda!").
We also need theme songs.  "Ooda loop loop, loop .. loop, loop."
   MMTcat stew?  Toughest paradigm alive?

Regarding personal investments, Warren's saying that the few in the know might as well spend more time playing golf, but take their AK-47s with them? :) As usual? That's good advice for those in the know, but also a way for the unpracticed & unprepared to have a heart attack on the golf course!

[And what about the rest of the electorate? We need to rethink more than just currency operations in order to address that growing topic. Personal investing is only treading water for an electorate. We need to figure out which metaphorical bayonets to fix, and which internal obstacles to charge. So far, we've only visualized some of our important goals, NOT how adaptive permutations of domain-specific revolutionaries can self-recognize and mobilize to win a policy maneuver battle and drag the Luddites with them.  That's a new ballgame, on a whole new level and dimension.]

Comically, neither economics nor accounting classes bother to tell most paying students that ignorance is still bliss. We'd be better off starting Econ 101 out with reviews of both Valhalla and CargoCult paradigms! That way more capitalists could at least be conditioned to heartily enjoy whatever time they have on or off the golf course, while audaciously thinking about inventing new games on a greater scale.

To practice, and increase agility at multi-level adaptation, we need to embrace agile use of cargo-cult tricks on on ourselves.  For example, constant battle with every one of our own existing methods - since they constitute our own cargo-cults.  A culture with infinite agility is one where audience participation runs the Kabuki show, knows it, embraces the fun of doing it, makes joke about themselves, and can laugh at themselves.  That takes practice, and preparation.  It's not for the faint of heart, but no harder than watching a toddler enjoying the new risk of learning how to walk.  Our kids - and even the "7th culture yet unspawned" - will do this, whether we try to shield them from the risk or not.  Better to enjoy the hell out of it while we can.


Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Can We Transition From Hoarding Static Assets, To Hoarding of Coordination Capabilities?

commentary by Roger Erickson

How do people like this get tenure at the Princeton Economics department?

Beyond Our Means: Why America Spends While the World Saves

For Pete's sake!  With orthodoxy like this, who needs Luddites?

How do we further accelerate the transition from inefficient hoarding of static assets, to hoarding of coordination capabilities? Is another world war the only way to demonstrate the return on coordination ... once again? Are we still that dumb?  Given the transition to a fiat currency, what fool would persist in trying to hoard fiat?  ??  Does the concept of "use it or lose it" exist in economics?  Especially when applied to dynamic vs static value?

What part of dynamic, scalable "teamwork" in a social species, and among citizens of an organized nation-state does the Fed not understand? Which part of that does the typical orthodox economist also not understand?

How about we at least stage Rhyme of the Ancient Marriner Eccles as a play, in every highschool in America? I'd pay just to NOT have to see Music Man ever again, or Death of a Traveling Economist.