Mind's Eye Re: turning the world Greek

Maybe. I'll admit spreadsheets are a mystery- my notion is changing
the bed linens.

England lost most of a generation in WWI and her empire at the end of
WWII. How does this impact your theory? Your losses were America's
gain.

92,000 people are a leap forward from past controls and ownership.

Taxation has never been "fair", has it? The best I can do is consider
them a form of charity at best and human corruption at worst.

Economics cannot be approached without considering the social demands/
changes- particularly of the 20th C.

And who is buying the abandoned vast estates? Setting the socio-
economic markers?

Yes- it's alchemy- another branch of fantastic belief systems with its
own language and methods similar to a liturgy.

And tecnology has become so user friendly it's like we have been
lulled away by the Pied Pipers of Silicon Valley.

On Sep 1, 5:20 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For once rigsy I don't think you grasp any of the point.  I certainly
> don't want to see the public sector running the private sector.  We
> mostly nationalised over here because the private sector wasn't
> working and it's difficult to find evidence that privatisation has
> worked.  I use Andrew's 'Monopoly'  to explain the focus on finance.
> Most of it is unnecessary and at odds with the cost-cutting of
> efficient business. It's also a form of taxation without
> representation.  About 92,000 people own most of the Earth.  You are
> right, of course, that democracy is something we have wrong.
>
> Pr[T < 1 T < 1] = O, O - 1 (F (1), O -1 (F(1), y would be the Gaussian
> copula derivatives trading is based on if I had the right symbols.  It
> was produced by Dr Li who is back in China.  It's nonsense as science
> - what we call a scalar in maths.  Joseph Farrell even suggests it
> might be a red plot in 'Babylon's Banksters'.  The maths is churned
> out like religious liturgy and yet is as flawed as working out our
> weekly budgets using income we make up rather than receive.     It's
> alchemy.
>
> On 1 Sep, 21:36, rigsy03 <rigs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > What makes you think the public sector can run the private sector? As
> > in the past, the two are often in oppostion. Again, just make some
> > historical substitutions.
>
> > There are systems of meritocracy that work. The military is one
> > example but there are others. Merit is not always measured by
> > financial gain.
>
> > Wealth can only buy "so much" of an advantage- the rest is up to
> > character.
>
> > The private sector probably works harder because they can see/use the
> > rewards whereas the public sector is hamstrung and dependent on others/
> > policy/elections. (Rat/mouse experiments.)
>
> > What is misunderstood is the concept of Democracy- which was a very
> > controlled system in ancient Greece. America has become the symbol of
> > Democracy but there is much misunderstanding about individual and
> > group rights. We offer the opportunity to suceed which is not the same
> > as a free ride.
>
> > Who has set up the systems that control personal/national finances?
> > Sometimes individuals but usually with the permission and regulation
> > of the government- which was once controlled by the Papacy, for
> > instance, and some may now be controlled by Islam or other strict
> > "isms".
>
> > "Rents" are the price one pays to live in a society. (Even apps are
> > leased and cannot be transferred.)
>
> > At any rate, few systems survive with an empty treasury/debts that
> > soar above GDP.
>
> > If voters want to be dazzled rather than directed they will continue
> > to vote for entertainers rather than managers.
>
> > On Sep 1, 7:35 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > A common phrase in my childhood when we couldn't understand something
> > > was 'it's all Greek to me'.  Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy are all
> > > Euro periphery nations now on the brink of collapse.  I've been trying
> > > to explain what's going on in a series of lectures recently.  I start
> > > from the premise that economics is all Greek to me.  This is some
> > > combination of me not understanding the muck and my belief that what
> > > it's all about is a politburo imposing the Greek fate on us all.
> > > Michael Hudson has written extensively on this.
>
> > > Most of us can't debate economics because we can't get our attitudes
> > > out of the Idols that generate our 'understanding'. I usually start
> > > with a few questions about debt and what money is.  It's rare anyone
> > > has much sensible to say on either, let alone knowledge of the history
> > > on might find in, say, David Graeber's 'Debt: the first 5000 years' or
> > > Paul Ormerod's 'Dr Strangelove's Game'.  I veer off a little and
> > > explain that when I started university teaching, you could base a
> > > course on text like this aiming at truth than than quantitative
> > > manipulation.  These days, education has shifted towards producing
> > > technocrats with instantly transferable job skills.  Teaching doesn't
> > > get much further than compiling and manipulating spreadsheets.
>
> > > Ask yourself who owns the debt, what is its size in comparison with
> > > the productive economy.  The answers are startling, but less so than
> > > the general ignorance in which we have been educated not to know.  I
> > > test the latter with a bit of computerised button-pushing before I
> > > start.
>
> > > The debt is several times the productive economy - or rather the
> > > consuming economy.  It's owned, in the main, by a small number of
> > > people through stock markets and bonds (bonds are much bigger than
> > > shares these days).  As few as 92,000 people own most of it around the
> > > world.  These are the politburo or alien lizards who run the show.
>
> > > I venture off into some Thorstein Veblen and a book on Germany and the
> > > world wars by an Italian - 'Conjuring Hitler'.  This is really to show
> > > that current economics isn't new at all.  I run through some economic
> > > modelling and then ask what results we'd get if we designed our
> > > spreadsheets from history rather than theory, including a turn on
> > > delta, gamma and Poisson leap hedging.
>
> > > My last question is 'where did the money go'?  You see, all the
> > > spreadsheets work, but they don't show what money is or where it ends
> > > up.  Something called the Cantillon effect helps here.  Money is
> > > effectively 'radioactive'  and the plan worldwide Greek.  We cut
> > > schools, police and welfare services and the money goes to a rich
> > > oligarchy who fund our politics, destroying the hope of democracy.
> > > Viewed as a physical system, economics is a control system that uses
> > > more resources in control than in production.  We don't go for this in
> > > science, except in highly complex experiments as at CERN and
> > > Fermilab.  The essence of economics is a plot by a government of he
> > > rich to own everything and rent it back to us.  This is the essential
> > > Greek model.
>
> > > It's easy enough to get to this stage.  The arguments can be made very
> > > accurately.  This is only stage one.  Underlying the argument are the
> > > Idols - complex soaked-up collective ignorance that actually prevent
> > > economics as a science and our recognition that finance is a
> > > complicated, religious control fraud (Veblen comes free on the Net).
>
> > > Lecture two starts with the question 'what is our evidence that
> > > private sector disciplines work better than the public sector and if
> > > so, why is the private sector so interested in running the public
> > > sector rather than producing radical, innovative, better
> > > alternatives'?  This is something of a Wittgensteinian turn as I think
> > > organisation itself is misunderstood in private versus public sector
> > > debate.  Underlying this is the ideology of meritocracy and its
> > > contradictions that money buys unfair advantage and wealth results in
> > > rents the rest of us pay.
>
> > > Is your country turning Greek?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--