Saturday, October 29, 2022

Democracy

 

Democracy

I'm sentimental, if you know what I mean I love the country but I can't stand the scene And I'm neither left or right I'm just staying home tonight Getting lost in that hopeless little screen But I'm stubborn as those garbage bags That time cannot decay I'm junk but I'm still holding up this little wild bouquet Democracy is coming to the USA To the USA

Elections are not the only indication of a democracy.

The late Leonard Cohen, a member of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, not only wrote such classics as Hallelujah and Suzanne. He also wrote the song. above. To those of us who think that the USA IS already a democracy, it might seem strange to hear that “Democracy is coming to the USA.”  But democracy is NOT just about elections. It is about free and fair elections that mean something.

The Holy Roman Empire, long before the Hapsburgs, was a monarchy that used elections to select its Emperors, so clearly elections alone do not mean a democracy. The recent “elections” at gunpoint by Russian soldiers approving the annexation of Ukraine provinces into the Russian Federation were hardly fair and free. Votes in the Senate to end debate and move votes to the floor, popularly known as the “filibuster”, which are not secret, and where the losing Party may punish that vote, are not free. If the loser of an election refuses to leave office, then the election, was to that loser just another contest of domination and the election itself meant nothing.

Democracy assumes that the will of the people will be expressed and accepted. Let us hope that on October 30th democracy comes to Brazil. And that on November 8th democracy will come to the USA.

Wednesday, October 26, 2022

Vote

 

Everybody’s Cryin’ Mercy

Straight ahead
Knock 'em dead
Pack your kit
Choose your hypocrite

You don't have to go to off-Broadway
To see something plain absurd
Everybody's crying mercy
When they don't know the meaning of the word
Nobody knows the meaning of the word

Vote

In less than two weeks I, like millions of others, will be exercising my vote. I do NOT plan on voting for any Republicans because I am afraid that those Republicans are “rINOs,” "republicans In Name Only.”  I realize that I will be voting for Democrats, but their brand has not been tainted so much that I do not believe that those candidates are “dINOs", "democrats In Name Only". I will be voting only for candidates who believe in democracy, including the representative form that is the US republic.

Democracy is the political system where all decisions are decided by the group. Representative Democracy, a republic, recognizes that each voter may not have the flexibility in time, expense, knowledge, or interest, etc. and the infrastructure may not all of them to participate in each and every decision. As such, the voters may choose a representative to make those decisions for them. That candidate is only a representative, whether that candidate is for town council, state legislature, governor, federal congress, or, while not in this election cycle, President. They may “win” an election, but they are still only a representative. This contrasts with those who believe that the decisions of the group leader ARE the decision of the group. Such a system is called authoritarianism, whether that “leader” is chosen by election, birth, or an act of domination, such as a revolution or a coup. I believe that all voters, whether deplorable or not, have a vote, and the decisions of those voters in a democracy is vital. I will not vote for dINOs or rINOS. They are hypocrites, since they believe in neither a democracy nor a republic, and do NOT deserve my vote.

Sunday, October 23, 2022

Tolerance

 

Crown  of Creation 

In loyalty to their kind They cannot tolerate our minds In loyalty to our kind We cannot tolerate their obstruction 

You should never respond to intolerance with intolerance. 

One on my favorite podcasts, Stuff You Should Know, recently did an episode on Fundamentalism.  While I agree with everything that was said, (like that was a surprise), the best outcome to me is that I got a word to use in place of standard deviation. 

I am a semi-retired engineer and one of the things I have been struggling with is the branding problems created in mathematics, especially statistics, which uses the term standard deviation.  IMHO, standard deviation should be rebranded as the degree of tolerance, which IMHO sounds much better.  The synonyms of deviation are perversion, anomaly, error, aberration, abnormality.  However in statistics what is meant is the only the difference from the mean.  If you are confident that the mean is without error, then having no difference from that mean, truth, is good. 

However having a standard deviation of zero, means that you are absolutely certain that the mean IS the truth.  In this instance statistics has a term that IMHO does NOT need to be rebranded.  If the truth is not yet known, then statistics says that distribution of truth is NORMAL.  Tolerance is normal, it is intolerance that is not.  I wrote a blog post previously on the problem of decreasing the standard deviation.  https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/01/resiliency.html

BTW statistics also shows that for the mean is to increase, grow, standard deviation...errr tolerance, has to increase.

 

Friday, October 21, 2022

Alex Jones

 

People Got To Be Free

 Hear the shoutin' from the mountains on out to the sea
No two ways about it, people have to be free
Ask me my opinion, my opinion will be
Natural situation for a man to be free 

Is freedom of speech absolute? 

Charles Dicken was right in his novel Oliver Twist. "The law is an ass—an idiot.". One only has to look at the writing of that “distinguished” lawyer, former New Jersey Superior Court Judge, former professor at the Brooklyn Law School, and current conservative pundit Andrew Napolitano for proof. Writing in the New Jersey Herald on October 20, 2022, https://www.njherald.com/story/opinion/2022/10/20/alex-jones-and-the-freedom-of-speech/69577197007/, Napolitano says that any school child can see that Alex Jones was protected by the Freedom of Speech of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. 

The problem is that Judge Napolitano apparently doesn’t understand the meaning of that protection. It was intended to protect the freedom of an individual to express an opinion. However it does not mean that anything can be expressed as an opinion. It does not supersede legal judgments being rendered for perjury, slander, defamation, etc. It does not protect the speaker from the consequences of expressing an opinion, famously falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater. If a stampede and injury results, the fact that it was only “speech” does not protect the speaker from the consequences of his lie. 

Alex Jones did not merely express his opinion. He stated those opinions as facts, profited by expressing those opinions, and there were deaths threats and other crimes that were the consequences of his “speech.”   If it were merely his opinion and was expressed as opinion then of course it was protected. However an individual must bear the responsibility for the consequences of his words. Just as King Henry II was responsible for the murder of Thomas Becket when he said “"Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?”, so too is Alex Jones guilty for the garbage he spewed. Don’t be misled by Andrew Napolitano’s credentials. He is an ass. Alex Jones was not found guilty for speaking. He was found guilty for the nature and consequences of his “speech.”

Monday, October 17, 2022

Passing II

 

The Great Pretender

Oh yes, I'm the great pretender
Adrift in a world of my own
My need to be all I am not you've seen
And you've left me to dream all alone

Is Passing pretending?

I know that the subject hits close to home when I was torn between using the posted lyrics and Honey  Suckle Rose, “Flowers droop and sigh when you're passing by”,  at the start of this post. Passing sounds so much nicer than pretending. If were to look at me, and hear my name, I could pass for a straight, male, White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant. You would only be correct on only half of those attributes. By appearance I am white, I am a male, by marriage I am straight, and my surname could easily be confused for an Anglo-Saxon Protestant, but unless you know me you might not know that I am an Irish-Polish Catholic and my beloved brother, the godfather of my oldest child and the best man at my wedding, is not straight.  However because many people judge a book by its cover, I am often mistaken for, passing as, one of their "own". As such, I have heard my share of Irish jokes, Polish jokes, Catholic jokes, sexual orientation jokes, etc. And much to my shame I have opted to “grin and bear it". I pretended. I did not stand up for the part of me that was being mocked, much to my shame. Thus while those telling the jokes were acting badly, I was complicit.

And that is the problem with passing. As long as there is an exclusion from certain groups or action against members of those groups, if you are mistaken for a member of the group doing the excluding, but you are a member of the group being excluded, you are denying yourself. The rooster has already crowed three times for me. It will crow no more. Passing to “get by” does not get you ahead, it puts you further behind.

Tuesday, October 11, 2022

Supply-side Economics

 

Fool Me Once, Fool Me Twice

That I’d fallen for a lie?
You were never on my side
Fool me once, fool me twice
Are you death or paradise?
Now you’ll never see me cry
There’s just no time to die

It's nice to fool anyone.

I have posted hypothetically before about not understanding that there is a difference between a median and a mean. https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2018/08/wonderful-world-dont-know-much-about.html, but apparently it is a real problem. The chart below are actual incomes as reported by the US Census Bureau. The dots are the reported mean income at the midpoint of each income quintile, and the midpoint of the top 5%.



While mean income has increased from $59,698 in 2019 US Dollars in 1975 to $98,088 in 2019 US Dollars in 2019, an increase of 64%, median income has only increased by 34%, from $51,124 in 2019 US Dollar in 1975 to $68,703 in 2019 US Dollars in 2019.  The problem, is that while the shape of the income distribution curves above are determined by the mean income, the median is what occurs at 50%. Since “supply-side” “Reaganomics” was adopted after 1980, the rich have demonstrably gotten richer, and while the poor may not have gotten poorer, the typical, e.g. median, income has barely changed.  Is it any wonder that the economic markets reacted so badly to UK Prime Minister Liz Truss’ announcements of a return to “supply-side” tax cuts or why then Kansas Governor Sam Brownback’s tax experiment in “supply-side” economics was such a disaster.  I think the figure above shows what is death and what is paradise.  Don’t get fooled again. Twice is more than enough.


Monday, October 10, 2022

Liberals

 

You Don’t Own Me

You don't own me
Don't try to change me in any way
You don't own me
Don't tie me down 'cause I'd never stay

It is NOT being conservative to own the liberals.

My son’s POSSLQ, Person of the Opposite Sex Sharing Living Quarters, says that I am the biggest liberal she has ever met.  I found that shocking because I always thought that I was a conservative.  I believe in government but I think that it should be limited, not because it is evil, but because it is by necessity consists of people and according to Lord Acton’s dictum " power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely".  I also believe that the government has a responsibility to act on behalf of the group, society, but it should carefully consider before undertaking any actions because of the Law of Unintended Consequences.  I also do not understand any exclusions from the group. My math background tells me that any growing society has to increase its variance, whose square root is standard deviation, not decrease deviation.  It also tells me that the future has to be worth less than the past in order for growth and not decay.

That makes me a conservative in the vein of Mitt Romney, not Matt Gaetz.  Like the voters in my home state of Massachusetts, I am most comfortable with a Democratic legislature and a Republican executive.  ( that is real Republicans who favor a republican form of government and not ”republicans  In Name Only” who are really authoritarians.)  If someone knows how to Razzle Dazzle, as much as I enjoy being Razzle Dazzled, I assume that they are using that Razzle Dazzle to distract me, not convince me.  Liberal and conservative alone is not a useful characterization.  It is much more nuanced than that.

Normal

A Wonderful Guy

I'm as corny as Kansas in August,
I'm as normal as blueberry pie.
No more a smart little girl with no heart,
I have found me a wonderful guy!

What does it mean to be normal?

The Cumulative Distribution Function, CDF, of an exponential distribution is an ideal function which has a value of zero at 0 and a value of 1 at infinity. However it is NOT a normal distribution, in that it has a skew of 2, as opposed to a normal distribution which has a skew of 0. An Exponentially Modified Gaussian Distribution has been proposed which combines the exponential and Gaussian (normal) distributions, but which results in a CDF with three parameters: µ, the mean; σ, the standard deviation; and λ, the rate parameter of the exponential distribution. A Gaussian distribution is NOT the only normal distribution, with a skew of 0 and where the mean, median and the mode are equal. Another normal distribution is the Logistics distribution which has two parameters: µ, the mean; and s, the scale parameter. However since s is a constant factor of of σ, s=√3/Ï€ * σ, it effectively has the same parameters as the Gaussian distribution. Reyes et al (Reyes, Venegas, & Gómez, 2018) proposed an Exponentially Modified Logistic distribution which has only two parameters : µ, the mean; and s, the scale parameter where the rate parameter of the exponential distribution is also equal to s.  However it is a solution where s, which is a constant factor of σ, is equal to λ, the rate parameter of an exponential distribution. It could have just as easily solved by setting µ equal to λ.

Figure 1 shows the Cumulative Distribution function, CDF, when σ, µ, and λ are all equal, in this case to 1. The CDF of the exponential function has the desired properties of being 0 when x is 0 and being 1 when x is infinity. Reyes’ Exponentially Modified Logistic distribution is closer to  normal distributions, whose CDFs are not zero when x is 0, but its CDF is closer to zero than that the CDF of a normal distribution such as a Gaussian or Logistic Distribution.

Figure 1 Cumulative Distribution functions, CDFs where µ=σ=λ


Figure 2 shows the CDFs when µ and λ are equal at 0.5, but the standard deviation σ, is twice that amount at 1.0. Also shown is the Exponentially Modified Gaussian CDF if the mean of an exponential distribution, 1/λ, is the equal to the mean of the Gaussian distribution, µ, as well as the Exponentially Modified Gaussian distribution if the standard deviation of an exponential distribution, 1/λ, is equal to the standard deviation of a Gaussian distribution, σ.


Figure 2 Cumulative Distribution functions, CDFs where µ=λ and σ=2*µ


Figure 3 shows the CDFs when σ and λ are equal at 0.5, but the mean µ is twice that amount at 1.0. Also shown is the Exponentially Modified Gaussian distribution CDF if the mean of an exponential distribution, 1/λ, is the equal to the mean of the Gaussian distribution, and the Exponentially Modified Gaussian distribution CDF if the standard deviation of an exponential distribution, 1/λ, is the equal to the standard deviation of the Gaussian distribution, σ.

Figure 3 Cumulative Distribution functions, CDFs where µ=λ and σ=2*µ



In all three figures, Reyes’ Exponentially Modified Logistics Distribution is closer to the shape of the CDF of normal distributions than the Exponentially Modified Gaussian distribution. When the parameters of the distributions are not equal, then the Exponentially Modified Gaussian Distribution does has a lower CDF when x is 0, but its does so by being less “normal” and closer to the shape of a skewed exponential distribution.

If a distribution is expected to be normal, then for its CDF to be close to the ideal function, it is suggested that Reyes’ Exponentially Modified Logistics Distribution be used. For this function to be normal, it appears to be more important that the standard deviation, σ, be equal to the inverse of the rate parameter of an exponential distribution, λ, than for the mean, µ, to be equal to the inverse of the rate parameter of an exponential distribution, λ.

 Reyes, J., Venegas, O., & Gómez, H. W. (2018). Exponentially-modified logistic distribution with application to mining and nutrition data. Appl. Math 12.6, 1109-1116.

  






Saturday, October 8, 2022

Functions

 

Walkin' on the Sun

And it ain't no joke when our mama's handkerchief is soaked With her tears because her baby's life has been revoked The bond is broke up, so choke up and focus on the close up Mr. Wizard can't perform, no God-like hocus-pocus

Where is Mr. Wizard when you need him? Perhaps I can invoke his memory in this blog post.

A function which has the value of zero at zero, and a value of 1 at infinity, describes a whole family of functions.  But if the inverse of that function should also have the value of 1 at zero and a value of zero at infinity, then that narrows it down considerably. And by that, it is meant an actual value of zero, not a discontinuity that is merely being defined as zero.  For example, the limit of f(x)=x as x approaches infinity is infinity, which means that the limit of 1/f(x) as x approaches infinity is zero, but this is a limit, NOT the actual value.  Thus, at x=0, there is a discontinuity for 1/f(x), i.e. 1/0, that is often defined as zero.  The function where there is no discontinuity will be a form of an exponential function.  The integral, Cumulative Distribution Function, of an exponential distribution,  f(x)=λ*exp(-λ*x), has a value of zero at zero and a value of 1 at infinity.  The integral of that distribution is an exponential association, 1‑exp(‑λ*x)

The exponential distribution does not allow values of x less than zero (and by that it is meant ABSOLUTE ZERO, not a relative zero which is merely a translation from absolute zero. E.g.  Centigrade/Celsius is a relative temperature scale where 0 degrees C is 273.15 degrees Kelvin, an absolute scale.).  An exponential distribution is NOT normal.  It has skew of 2 compared to a normal distribution with a skew of 0.  One combination of an exponential and Gaussian normal distribution which approaches normal is an exponentially modified Gaussian distribution.  It is defined by the exponential rate parameter, λ, AND the normal distribution parameters, σ, the standard deviation where the variance is the square of σ, and the mean, µ. 

Another normal distribution is the Logistic distribution.  That distribution is based on the probability of an individual member of a group, a distribution, selecting an alternative.  That probability itself is based on the mean, µ, of all probabilities, as well as the scale, s, range, over which that probability changes.  The scale, s, over which the probability changes is directly proportional to the standard deviation, σ.  Like other normal distributions, the mean of a logistic distribution is equal to its median. If the exponential distribution parameter, λ, is chosen to be equal to the scale parameter, s, and the exponential distribution is combined with the Logistic distribution then the result is as proposed by Reyes.  (Reyes, Venegas, & Gómez, 2018)  The exponentially modified Gaussian distribution and the exponentially modified Logistic distribution both also do not have the desired feature of zero at zero and infinity at infinity, but they are a step in that direction.

Figure 1 Cumulative Distribution Functions. 


The optimal desired function would also be one that is normal, e.g., has a skew close to zero as in the Gaussian or Logistics distribution, but allows for any value of x including negative values of x, unlike the exponential distribution, which appears to be a continuation of the exponential function on the y-axis with a limitation of x>0.  The desirable function is thus most probably a combination of a normal distribution and the exponential distribution.  While a feature of a normal distribution is that the mean is equal to the median, another feature of a normal distribution is that it follows the 68/95/99.7 rule; in other words,

68% of the values fall between the mean plus or minus 1 standard deviation, +/-σ;

95% of the values fall between the mean plus or minus 2 standard deviations, +/-2σ; and

99.7% of the values fall between the mean plus or minus 3 standard deviations,+/- 3σ. 

Thus, if the skew is zero, 49.5% of the values, which is close to the median, 50% of the values, must fall between 0 and 3 standard deviations,- 3σ, from the mean, μ.  If the standard deviation, σ, is the square root of the variance and the skew is zero then, according to Pearson’s Second Coefficient of Skewness, the mean, μ, divided by 3 must be σ.  Thus, to be normal, have a skew of zero, the mean, μ, can not be more than 1.5 times the median. The exponential distribution, even though it has a skew of 2 compared to a normal distribution’s skew of zero, has a ratio of its mean to median of 1.44.  If the ratio of the mean to the median exceeds 1.5, the distribution is not only not normal, its observations can not consist of a single distribution.  Also, as the mean, μ, increases the variance, σ2, must also increase in order to be a normal distribution.  An exponentially modified Gaussian distribution has a range of the variance depending on the values, of μ, σ, and λ.  Within the valid ranges of the variance, the ratio of the mean to the median can not exceed 1.15.  An exponentially modified Logistics distribution has a range depending on the values, of μ, and s.  Within the valid ranges, the ratio of the mean to the median can not exceed 1.5.

If the observations are expected to represent a distribution of a phase change, i.e.  going from a cumulative probability of zero to a cumulative probability of 1, and the resulting equation is NOT required to be normal, then the regression equation should be expected to be the Cumulative Distribution Function of an exponential distribution, in other words, an exponential association. (i.e., the black line in Figure 1).  This requires only regressing, solving, for one parameter. That is, solving for the parameter λ by regressing the data to fit

y=1-e-λx

If the ideal equation is also expected to also be normally distributed, i.e., the equation should have a skew as close to zero as possible, then the cumulative Exponentially Modified Logistic Distribution should be used as the basis of the regression.  (i.e., the red line in Figure 1). This will require solving for two parameters: solving for µ and s, where s = √3/ Ï€ *σ, by regressing the data to fit

y=(1−e(μ-x) /s)*ln(e(x−μ) /s+1).

The ideal equation will be somewhere between the black line and the red line. 

It is noted that both regressions are of non-linear equations.  Linear regression is a more common technique.  It is possible through logarithmic transformation of the dependent, y, or independent, x, data to create some non-linear functions.

·        Linear-linear, where neither the y nor x data are transformed, under linear regression solves for

y = m*x +b; Linear

·        Log- linear, where the independent data, x, is transformed to be its natural logarithm and the dependent data, y, is not transformed, under linear regression solves for

y=b+m*ln(x); Logarithmic

·        Linear -Log where the independent data, x, is not transformed and the dependent data, y, is transformed to be its natural logarithm, under linear regression solves for

y= eb+m*x; Exponential

·        Log-Log, where both the y and x data are transformed to be their natural logarithm, under linear regression solves for

y=eb * xm; Power

While all but the first bullet are also non-linear equations, none of these bulleted equations are the non-linear equations shown in Figure 1.  This does not mean that if nonlinear regression software is not available, that linear regression can not be used.  It is only necessary to find the x observation at which the y data is 99.7% of the maximum value, and separate the data into buckets of equal intervals of the independent variable, x between 0 and that point.  In electrical engineering, the voltage of a resistor‑capacitor, RC, circuit over time follows an exponential association.   It has also been shown that segregating the data into six buckets and doing a linear regression on each bucket, can yield results which are linear regressions that approximate the nonlinear curve.  The same segregation and use of linear regression can be used in any application of exponential associations.  And as noted above, most group, distribution, behavior should be expected to be similar to that of an exponential association.  If that behavior is also expected to follow a normal distribution, it is a little more work to identify the parameters, but not insurmountable.

References

Reyes, J., Venegas, O., & Gómez, H. W. (2018). Exponentially-modified logistic distribution with application to mining and nutrition data. Appl. Math 12.6, 1109-1116.

 

 

 

 

 



Abortion II

 

Gimme Shelter

Rape, murder, it's just a shot away
It's just a shot away

Mmm, a flood is threatening
My very life today
Gimme, gimme shelter
Or I'm gonna fade away

Is abortion murder?

Abortion is the death of a life, that of the fetus.  But the fact that it is death does not mean that it is murder.  There are various causes of death, including murder.  When death is due to accident, disease or natural causes, we do not call it murder.  When a prisoner is executed by the state,  we call it Capital Punishment, not murder.  Even if the death is caused by another it may be ruled accidental, involuntary manslaughter, etc.  To be murder there has to be the intent to cause the death of another by an illegal means.

Being anti-abortion does not mean that one is pro-life.  If one is pro-life then any ending of life should be opposed, whether that death is from famine, war, pestilence or any of the other ills of the Four Horsemen, whose leader is Death and who fights on the side of evil in the Apocalypse.  Abortion may be death, but that does not make it Murder, any more than every copulation is Rape.  Gimme shelter.

Thursday, October 6, 2022

Love is Life

 

My Blue Heaven

There's a smilin' face, a fireplace, a cozy room
And a little nest that's nestled where the roses bloom;
Just Molly and me, and baby makes three,
We're happy in my Blue Heaven

Is three then the minimum number for Heaven?

I have argued in early posts that three is a special number, https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/09/triads.html and https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/09/third-parties.html.  In the same blog posts I noted that in game theory there are separate strategies for playing a two-person game by assuming the worst of the other player, while in three or more person games there are rules for continuing the game. It is not just in the political arena that this lesson might need to be learned. In order to make a baby it takes two, or at least that is what I think both religion and science say.

However, that two can be in a two-player game, and the act of conception is a dominance game, e.g. rape, incest, etc.; or it can be an act of love, e.g. Stevie Wonder’s marvelous song about the birth of his daughter…  isn't she lovely, made from love. Stevie Wonder in that same song goes on to say Life and love are the same. If you agree, and I hope that you do, this was a three-person game: Man, Woman and Life. If it is instead a two-person, dominance, game without love, then isn’t it death. So those approving of conception based not on love must be favoring death and forsaking Heaven, of any shade including Blue.

Monday, October 3, 2022

400 Posts

 

400 Years

Look how long four hundred years (four hundred years, four hundred years)
Way too long! (wo-o-o-o)
That's the reason my people (wo-o-o-o) my people can't see
Said, it's four hundred long years (four hundred years, four hundred years. wo-o-o-o)
Give me patience (wo-o-o-o) same philosophy

It hasn’t been 400 years, but it has been 400 posts

As I prepare for my 50th College anniversary,  and also looking over my blog posts, I am very grateful that 50 years ago I pursued a major which required 24 of the 28 courses needed for graduation. Given my blog posts, I might have  instead taken courses in:

In reality, I probably would have been like my senior year college roommate who had to, at the last minute, come up with a major that matched the courses that he had already taken. Too much variety is not always a good thing.

 

 

Student Loan Forgiveness

 

Busted.

I went to my brother to ask for a loan I was busted
I hate to beg like a dog for a bone but I'm busted
My brother said there ain't a thing I can do
My wife and my kids are all down with the flu
And I was just thinking of calling on you I'm busted!

Are you too busted to make or forgive a loan?

I received a Pell Grant to attend college and my household income is below the White House's threshold so I should be eligible for student debt relief.  But I have no dog in this hunt. My own student loans have long ago been repaid, which is hardly surprising because back in the 1970s, tuition at the Ivy League college I attended was only $1600 per semester, not the current over $25,000 per semester. However my children’s student loans have also been repaid.

An educated work force is an unpriced raw material that is required by most producers in a society. Public education has long been considered a public, government, function. Exceptions have been when religious or racial discrimination made public education not available to all members of society. This is why there are the parochial schools I attended before college or Historically Black Colleges and Universities. But, in general, public education has long been considered a proper government function. The fact that any of this education occurred after high school, does not make it any less a public unpriced  good. If it is an unpriced public good, there is no reason why there should have ever been any debt incurred by individuals to acquire this public good.

To those, including Evangelicals, who are disputing the wisdom of forgiving a mere portion of this debt, remember Jesus’s teachings

For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius for the day, he sent them into his vineyard. When he went out about nine o’clock, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace, and he said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.’ So they went. When he went out again about noon and about three o’clock, he did the same. And about five o’clock he went out and found others standing around, and he said to them, ‘Why are you standing here idle all day?’ They said to him, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard.’ When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his manager, ‘Call the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and then going to the first.’ When those hired about five o’clock came, each of them received a denarius. Now when the first came, they thought they would receive more; but each of them also received a denarius. And when they received it, they grumbled against the landowner, saying, ‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you and go; I choose to give to this last the same as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?’ So the last will be first, and the first will be last.

I am planning on asking to be last myself. How about you?

 

.

 

 

 

Saturday, October 1, 2022

Rejection

 

All I Really Want To Do

Now I don't want to meet your kin
Make you spin or do you in
Or select you or dissect you
Or inspect you or reject you
All I really want to do
Is baby, be friends with you
Baby, be friends with you

Rejection can be a good thing

24 years ago I joined the consulting firm, Cambridge Systematics. I applied for a position not only because I was impressed with the firm, but also because it was founded in 1972 by MIT professors. It was primarily to promote on research on how choices were made, particularly in my chosen field of transportation. I had applied to MIT as my first choice as an undergraduate in 1969 and for  graduate school in 1974. I was turned down both times and had to settle for my second-place school each time. (Since those second places worked out well for me, I thank MIT for turning me down,) 

Julius Henry “Groucho” Marx once said, “I don’t want to belong to any club that would accept me as one of its members.” I subsequently learned that the decision to hire me at Cambridge Systematics was hardly unanimous. After several years, I was considered for promotion to principal. On my first consideration, I was rejected. This was consistent with  the narrative that I had developed for myself.  I only want to belong to a club that would reject me as one of its members.

Odds


Chances Are

Chances are 'cause I wear a silly grin
The moment you come into view
Chances are you think that I'm in love with you

What is the chance of observing the mean?

What is the probability of observing the mean in a normal distribution. You have a 68% chance of observing the mean plus or minus one standard deviation from the mean. ONLY 68%! What if I want to improve my chances to 100%. Can I decrease the standard deviation?

This is the problem with a normal distribution. Decreasing the standard deviation does NOT increase this probability. You can decrease the standard deviation to almost zero, but that does not change that probability. That is why a campaign to reduce deviation, like the Spanish Inquisition or book banning will never work. It is like the old math puzzle.

Think of a number, double it, add six, divide it in half, and subtract the number you started with. The answer is three. “ 

The math is such that the answer will always be three, because what you are effectively doing is dividing six by two. All of the rest is a distraction, an obfuscation. The effort to decrease the standard deviation is an obfuscation.  You can’t increase the odds of observing the mean unless you can accept something other than a normal distribution. However since any distribution can be expressed as the sum of normal distributions, what you are effectively doing is saying by not being normal, you are creating more than one normal distribution within the total group distribution. And each of those other normal distributions will only have a 68% change of observing their own, not the group, mean. Is it any wonder that those who try to reduce deviation are also trying to exclude others from their group?  That is not how the Force math works.  That is NOT playing the odds, that is BEING odd, abnormal.