Currency

 

Slow Hand

‘Cause I got a man with a slow hand
I got a lover with an easy touch
I got somebody who will spend some time
Not come and go in a heated rush’
I found somebody who will understand
When it comes to love, I want a slow hand.

But sometimes you need not just slow but NO.

Slow inflation at 2% APR, is still inflation. It means that each and every year your money is worth less and less.

“The Boiling Frog Syndrome describes the effect on a frog being put into boiling water and being slowly boiled alive. A frog suddenly put into a pot of boiling water, will jump out to save itself.. But if the frog is put in lukewarm water with the temperature slowly rising over time, it will not perceive any danger and will be cooked to death.”

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/lessons-from-a-burnt-out-psychologist/202406/the-boiling-frog-syndrome-a-metaphor-for-burnout

The Nixon Shock of 1971 made the international currency, which was the US Dollar, no longer convertible to gold. Meanwhile the amount of USD in circulation was pegged to the domestic economy, and it effectively ignored the international economy. Nixon made the classic mistake that everything is either/or. It is not. There is a third way which is both.

Prior to 1933, the US dollar, USD, was on the gold standard. But once the ownership of gold was made illegal by US citizens, it became a fiat currency. The problem is that it had already become a bank note currency merely backed by the commodity of gold.  International trade prior to WWII was based on a country’s gold supply. But during WWII so much of the international gold supply was stored in the US to prevent it from being stolen by the Nazis. In addition so much was lent by the US, that the US effectively had most of the gold anyway. The Bretton Woods conference was made to foster international trade, and it eventually made the USD, at a fixed price of gold, the international currency over Keynes's preferred Bancor. The Nixon Shock may have looked like it was returning to an international commodity currency but Bretton Woods had already made the USD the international bank note currency and this only changed it from being fiat bank notes to commodity bank notes. Unfortunately, the supply of US Dollars was fixed not to the needs of both the international AND the domestic economy, the USD in circulation was based ONLY on the domestic economy. The result was too few USDs in circulation for the demands of domestic AND international trade. And the result was major inflation in the 1970s and declining but still persistent inflation since that time.

As long as the USD is the international currency yet the supply of USD is based only on the domestic economy, inflation will be with us. Inflation, even if it is slow, may eventually kill us just like that frog. If we want NO inflation and, the USD is to be the banknote of and  international currency, then the USD in circulation should be by fiat and that should be based on the demand of the domestic economy AND international trade. Let’s not be content with being slow boiling frogs.

Enough

 

Too Marvelous For Words

You're just too marvelous, too marvelous for words
Like glorious, glamorous and that old standby amorous
It's all too wonderful, I'll never find the words
That say enough, tell enough, I mean they just aren't swell enough

How much is enough?

If there is a single absolute, then it is everywhere and is without error. A mathematician would say there is nowhere, 0, that the absolute is not, and the standard error of that absolute is 0. Taken together this would be 0±0. While this seems to be similar to the statement μ±σ, this does NOT mean that the mean, μ, of the absolute is 0 and the variance, σ² of the absolute is 0.

Instead, if the absolute is taken to be infinite series of repeating triangular waves, completely filling the range in which the absolute is defined, then the mean can be considered to be the phase of each wave, and the fact that opposing phases interfere with each other, 0=μ-μ, then this is true for every value of μ and not just μ=0. Similarly the standard error at a point n on the wave has a limit as n approaches infinity of zero, according to n→∞, σ/√n = 0. This is true for every value of σ, not just σ=0.

A group of n individuals can also operate as a single wave. To be consistent with the absolute, that single wave, the derivative of that wave, and the integral of that wave should have an amplitude related to the absolute. The amplitude, A, of  any wave is related to the variance of that wave according to the formula ½A²=σ². If the individuals are viewing the absolute from a hyperbolic surface, this is consistent with the individuals following a logistics, hyperbolic secant squared, distribution. From that hyperbolic surface, the absolute, an infinite series of triangle waves, would appear to have a variance of π/6, its derivative would have a variance of half of that, π/12, and its integral would have a variance of twice of that, π/3. While the period would vary accordingly, the mean/median/phase will repeat and can considered to be π/2 for the wave, its  derivative, and its integral.

However when viewed from a hyperbolic surface, the variance would appear to be 5/6 of the absolute. This makes the range variable, s, of the logistics distribution appear to be ½. From a hyperbolic surface the logistics distribution repeats but only on other imaginary surfaces. This means from the perspective of a real surface where the coefficient of the imaginary dimension is 0, the distribution will not appear to repeat. Also the logistics distribution is only consistent with values on the one of the sheets of the hyperbola ( e.g. only the positive portion of the wave.), the sheet which is being observed.

The limitation of 5/6 of the variance of the absolute is also referred to a Nash Equilibrium. When viewed from the perspective of the individual, it should be limited to 5/6 of the value of the absolute. Thus an individual’s contributions to the group should be on average 1/6, 16.7%, of the total, while each individual should try for no more than 83.3% of the total. If any individual tries to achieve 100% of the absolute, other individuals can also try to achieve 100% of the absolute and they will block each other. If a user also assumes that the median is also zero, this is a User Optimal and is not a stable equilibrium for a group. If an individual assumes that that the median is π/2 but the variance is that of the absolute then this is a System Optimal and it is also not a stable equilibrium for the group. Only the Nash Equilibrium, a mean/median of half of the absolute and a variance of 5/6 of the absolute, is stable for individuals forming a group. So if individuals set a goal of 5/6 of the variance of the absolute, what happens to the other 1/6?

It is suggested that 5/6, 83.3%, is why many building and engineering codes are set as between 80% and 85% of the maximum, and that taxation of individuals for the group should on average not exceed 16.7% of the Gross Domestic Product. (NOTE this does NOT mean that the effective rate for all individuals can not be higher than 16.7%, just than on average across all individuals in a group it should not exceed this value).  The current tax code appears to confuse marginal with effective rates, but has effective rates on average from the group close to this amount, although its median seems to be $0, not 50% of the absolute total.  A previous blog post proposed a Nash Equilibrium of tax brackets, https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/08/laffer-curve.html, although the brackets cited in that post should obviously increase as the absolute total of the economy also increases. So in answer to what is enough, 5/6 of the total is enough.

Focus

 

Hit the Road Jack

Hit the road Jack and don't you come back
No more, no more, no more, no more
Hit the road Jack and don't you come back no more
What you say?
Hit the road Jack and don't you come back
No more, no more, no more, no more
Hit the road Jack and don't you come back no more

Should Travis Kelce hit the road just like Jack?

Popular wisdom is that all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  NFL players should NOT be dull.  That means that if their work is football, they better have other interests for play.  Rodney Harrison opinioned that Kelce Travis was not 100% focused on football. https://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/for-petes-sake/article292897164.html.

Travis, like Jack, should NOT be 100% focused on football.  If he is not performing as hoped, that should be attributed only to football and NOT to how focused he is on football.  It is expected, and hoped, that he, like Jack, has interests other than work, football. LOL! I wonder what childless cat lady  interest Rodney is afraid is distracting him?  Swifties unite!

Perception

 

If They Could See Her Through My Eyes

Yet when we're walking together
They sneer if I'm holding her hand
But if they could see her through my eyes
Maybe they'd all understand

Let’s not forget that there is a difference between your and my eyes.

Perception, what you see through your eyes, is important.

If you think that you are the only thing that matters, the surface of the Earth may appear flat. You would be wrong, the earth is a sphere, NOT flat, and you can circumnavigate that sphere, globe.

If you think that you are the center of the universe, then the sun may appear to  revolve around you. You be wrong, the Earth revolves around the sun, and this has been known since Copernicus. 

If you may think that everyone sees the same stars as you, you would be wrong. Many of the stars visible in Perth, Australia are different from those visible in New York City.

Thus it is not surprising that our human perception of the absolute may NOT be the absolute’s perception of itself.  Einstein showed that perspective matters when viewing an absolute.  That is the basis of his Theory of Relativity which deals which different frames of reference by observers of the absolute speed of light.

However Einstein solved his equations assuming that space was Euclidean, flat.  If space is instead hyperbolic, that also makes a difference. What may be assumed to have imaginary solutions, for faster than light speeds, might instead only be a difference in perception. Instead, two solutions with NO imaginary solutions, may only be different solutions on sheets of the same surface. (A hyperbolic surface has two sheets, with opposite signs).

On a flat space, transformation of a complex number from polar coordinates, r*e^ix, to complex coordinates is r*cos(x) + r*sin(x)*i, where r is r=cos^-1(cos(cos²(x) * cos(sin²(x))) which because of the circular identity cos²+sin²=1 is identical to r=√(r²*(cos²(x)+sin²(x))) or r=r.  But this does not consider that r² can be either (r)² or (-r)². By contrast on a hyperbolic surface, the solution  is always                     r=cosh^-1(cosh(r*cos(x))*cosh(r*sin(x))). Because of:

1) the hyperbolic identity, cosh²-sinh²=1, 

2) the inverse of the function cosh, cosh^‑1(u),  which has two solutions, ln(u±√(u²-1)), and

 3) the sin(0) is equal to 0, 

if the coefficient of the imaginary axis is 0,  then the solution is

r=ln(cosh(√(a²+b²)) ± sinh(√(a²+b²))), where √(a²+b²) is the real coefficient, r.

If the absolute is an infinite number of triangular waves, just one of its waves might be perceived by an observer on a hyperbolic surface as a normal logistics distribution with s=.5 and μ=π/2 and there would be no solution on the other hyperbolic sheet which is only the negative (e.g. π to 2π ) portion of that wave which can not be perceived. This means that Pythagoras’ Theorem, which is also the CDF of a triangular wave from 0 to π, is only a matter of perception, as are hypotenuse of any triangle. Thus a logistic distribution, and all sum of squares, may only be the perception of a single wave of the absolute as a logistics distribution from an observer on one sheet of a surface with two hyperbolic sheets.

PDF of Triangular wave versus Logistics Distribution on hyperbolic surface.

CDF of Triangular wave versus Logistics Distribution on a hyperbolic surface.

The absolute may feature straight lines and sharp corners, discontinuities, but from the perspective of an observer on a hyperbolic surface, these might look like curved lines and smooth corners.  Know your place.

Republicans VIII

 

The Party’s Over

The party's over
It's time to call it a day
They've burst your pretty balloon
And taken the moon away
It's time to wind up the masquerade
Just make your mind up the piper must be paid.

Is the Republican Party over?

A Venn Diagram is the perfect way to illustrate the Goldilocks principle, “Just Right”, when there are three outcomes from two diametrically opposed positions. The maximum condition is when the two positions intersect, overlap, and this creates three outcomes from the total of all conditions.  The first position that does not overlap is 1/3 of the total. The area of the overlap, intersection of the first and second positions is 1/3 of the total. The area of the second position that does not overlap is 1/3 of the total. The total is thus always 1/3+1/3+1/3. The intersecting position might go by the name of Reagan Democrats or Rockefeller Republicans, etc. It is in this bi-partisan area that politics is most effective.

If one side becomes obsessed with ideological purity and refuses membership to those who would work with the other party, the total will not change. In fact the excluded members may join with the other party. In this case the first position has 1/3 of the total. The second position has 2/3 of the total; the 1/3 that did not intersect with the other position PLUS the 1/3 that did previously intersect. Excluding members because they were primaried out; were “RINOs”; spoke ill of other Republicans, etc. ........ or other tests to ensure ideological purity becomes a self defeating effort.

Why has this become a problem for the  Republican Party? It goes back to its very beginnings. No individual party member can be expected to have exactly the same position on every issue. If party membership is defined by only one issue, then there is the probability that membership would be offered to those with no other commonalities among its members. In the 1850s, the issue was the expansion of slavery into federal territories. The no-tax Whigs and the no-immigrant Know Nothings who may have had nothing in common with others who held anti-slavery positions were welcomed into the Republican Party. When slavery was abolished then the ideological position of the Party could become no-tax or no-immigrant, and those who were anti-slavery but low-tax or pro-immigrant may be excluded from the party which they founded. It has taken almost two lifetimes, but the exclusion appears to have been accomplished. A party that excludes Richard Cheney, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger and Mitt Romney and vilifies John McCain may be "ideological pure", but it is guaranteeing its own defeat.

Lawrence O’Donnell remarked that today’s Republican Party has become a cult of personality. He observed that the policies espoused by the current Republican nominee for President whether it is by JD Vance, Ron Desantis, or even Donald Trump, Jr. are widely deplored, and yet those same policies espoused by Donald Trump, Sr. are admired by many of those same people.  He concluded that it is the personality, not the policies, that are being endorsed. And since personalities have a limited lifespan, one has to ask when Donald Trump, Sr. is no more, is the Republican Party over?

Absolute

 

All in One

One love (hear my plea)
One heart
Let's join together and I'll feel alright
Let's join together (thanks and Praise to the Lord)
And I'll feel alright (and I will feel alright)

Is there also only One Absolute?

If there is an absolute and its absence, for example absolute zero, then the question becomes how many absolutes are there?

While it is true that life=ln(0 ± (sinh(x)+cosh(x))), if an absolute can be approached but not obtained, then the behavior approaching that absolute is said to be exponential. Since both sinh and cosh can be stated as exponentials, the two solutions are x and ‑x. https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/09/sides.html

It is also true that while sinh(x) and cosh(x) are repeating functions,  they repeat only in imaginary planes every 2πi. These are also wave functions with positive and negative parts. They are positive during odd repeats of n*πi and are negative during the next following even repeat of n*πi. Since it has already been said that the coefficient of the imaginary axis must confined to 0 in order to be real, this coefficient must be a relative zero not an absolute zero. Therefore x must practically be between 0 and π to be meaningful. Thus while it is true that one solution is x and one solution is -x, both solutions must have a coefficient of zero for the imaginary part in order to be real. That means that rather than a parabolic solution where the solution CAN be imaginary, this is more probably moving from one sheet of a two sheeted hyperboloid to the other sheet. The solution of x, and -x, therefore must also be between 0 and π. In that case, if the universe is one sheet of a two sheeted hyperboloid, then for  Pythagoras' Theorem to be true, then  π must be the size of the universe. If c, a, and b are much less than the size of the universe then they are also much less than π. Then Pythagoras’ Theorem is c=√(a²+b²) is because the universe is locally flat while universally hyperbolic.

If the three dimensions of that hyperboloid are space, time and imagination, and imagination is confined to be zero in order to be real, this can also be stated that  negative coefficients of i are worse than real,  and positive coefficients of i are better than real. Time also can be defined as the past is negative, and the future is positive, if the present reality is 0. This means that both time and i, imagination, must also be infinite. This means that only space can be constrained to zero and real values and thus be absolute. If there is an absolute, for example absolute zero temperature, then the question becomes how many absolutes are there? Temperature is directly proportional to velocity, and velocity is merely the derivative of space with respect to time. This means that temperature and space are effectively the same thing. This suggests that if there is an absolute zero of temperature, this means that space has the same absolute zero. If the dimensions of time and i must NOT be absolute,  and the dimension of space has to be an absolute, then there is no such thing as negative space. What is from our flat perspective perceived as negative space is merely one sheet of a two sheeted hyperboloid and thus there is only one absolute, just as there is only one volume. The three dimensions of this volume are space, time, and imagination, and only space is absolute. Again, temperature is merely the derivative of space with respect to time. Absolute zero temperature means space is absolute. If neither time not i, imagination, can be absolute, then there is only one remaining dimension that can be absolute.

Beliefs

 

I Believe

I believe for every drop of rain that falls
A flower grows
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night
A candle glows
I believe for everyone who goes astray, someone will come
To show the way
I believe, I believe

What do you believe?

Must  followers of Science, Technology, Engineering and Math, STEM, disciplines be atheists? When I was first working, a co-worker said that someday since I was an engineer, I would stop believing in God and become an atheist.  Now almost 45 years later, it still has not happened.  I have instead realized that the position that was being put forward is merely one of nomenclature. Scientists believe in an absolute and the absence of an absolute.  For example they believe in a temperature of absolute zero. Theists believe in God and the absence of God.  Exchange absolute for God, and they are both saying the same thing. Technologists believe in an absolute, even though technologists have never obtained either an absolute or an absolute zero. Theists believe in God, even though theists have not seen God or the absence of God.

Instead what scientists and other technologists believe is that through research and study they can discover  how the absolute/God works, NOT that there is no absolute/God. If there are rules, those rules are the mind of God. The problem is the belief that understanding how rules works means that if you follow those same rules that YOU are then God. It does not mean that studying the rules, or personally testing those rules, means you don’t believe in the rules.  In the New Testament of the Christian Bible, when the Apostle Thomas doubts that the others have seen the Risen Christ he is not saying that there is no Risen Christ, only that he personally needs the proof that there is a Risen Christ. He won’t accept the word of others that there is a Risen Christ. Christ himself does NOT chastise Thomas for this doubt.  Christ instead appears before Thomas, and asks Thomas to inspect his wounds.  But Thomas did not say that by inspecting those wounds he had become the Risen Christ, only that he believed in the Risen Christ.

If the rules are those of the absolute/God, knowing those rules means that you believe in the rules, not that you ARE the rules.

Ceilings II

 

O Death

Well I am death, none can excel
I'll open the door to heaven or hell
Whoa, death someone would pray
Could you wait to call me another day

If life is a building, then birth is the floor and death is the ceiling.

The Bill of Rights to the US Constitution concentrates on establishing rights (ceilings and floors) on individuals beyond which the state can not operate. The Constitution itself also set some floors for its officers, but unfortunately did NOT set ceilings. This was done because the life expectancy at the time of writing of the Constitution was such that any ceilings that needed to exist would be beyond the limits that death already imposed. Thus a minimum age for as President as 35 years was written into the constitution, but no maximum age was established. At the time, life expectancy was only 40 years. Admittedly that was skewed by death in childhood but even a 35 year old might on average only be expected to live an additional 30 years in 1796. Thus setting a ceiling of 75 years for taking the oath of the presidency could be considered to be an unnecessary ceiling when death might come earlier.

However life expectancies have changed. It is now conceivable to live to 100 or more years. So if there is a floor, we can no longer count on death imposing a cut-off before a ceiling is needed. By never acknowledging that the People as individuals were giving to die, no ceilings were set. If instead the People collectively are expecting to live forever, then ceilings shouldn’t be ignored.

There should be ceilings on how old its officers could be in order to take their oaths. There should also be term limits on each of those offices, NOT lifetime appointments. Those terms can be long enough that they are generational, not as nominated by the present voters. If the adult voting age is 18 years, then an 18 year term limit is consistent with being a regent for most wards of the state before they achieve full voting status. The nomination of most federal officers is by the President. If a President is limited to two term, then most federal officers should also be limited to two terms, unless otherwise specified. Not acknowledging death, allows death to win.

Branding

 

You Don’t Know Me

You give your hand to me
And then you say hello
And I can hardly speak
My heart is beating so
And anyone can tell
You think you know me well
Well, you don't know me

Maybe to be known, you need better branding!

When I was  a young engineer, I was working on what became known in Boston on I-93, the South East Expressway as the Zipper lane. That was NOT what it was called by us engineers.  We called it the SEXway ( South East eXpressway) Reversible Movable Barrier Separated High Occupancy Vehicle Lane.  Rolls trippingly off the tongue doesn’t it! 😉

The basic concept is that connected, concrete Jersey barriers are stored against the median on both sides of the South East Expressway and moved as needed.  The traffic was highly directional during peak hours, northbound in the morning and southbound in the afternoon.  While the traffic was such that it warranted an additional lane during the peak hour in the peak direction, there was not the right of way to add an additional lane. But there was an extra lane in the reverse direction.  But that traffic was already going at expressway speeds in the opposite, off peak, direction so it could not be safely taken.  A lane could be taken if that lane was separated by a physical barrier, but then that barrier would be needed to be removed, and switched to the opposite side only hours later each day.  If only there was a physical barrier that could be moved twice a day when needed, and thus the concept of movable barriers was developed.  The barriers could be moved to create the lane in the early morning, and stored against the median in the afternoon.  In the afternoon, the process would need to be reversed in the opposite direction.  Once the kinks were worked out, a design was developed, and the barriers were put in place.  Because there was only a single lane, to entice and reward drivers to use this lane, and to prevent it from being overloaded upon opening, entry would be restricted to High Occupancy Vehicles (e.g. carpools and buses).  But there was still that name.

The branding of the lane was taken care of by the newspaper headline writers.  The machine that moved the connected barriers appeared like it was opening a big Zipper, when it was stored it appeared to be closing a Zipper, and the lane that it created allow you to Zip into Boston from the suburbs. Would it have been as successful under the original name?  Maybe.  But the Zipper lane by which it is known is MUCH better branding.  There is an article by Parker Molloy dealing with another example.  What is formally known as  “coherence bias” by journalists might be better branded as “sane-washing”. The intent is cleaning up a speech by journalists which informs only about the policies, but does not convey about the character, of the speaker.  The intent is good and is informative on policy but is depriving any information about character.  Knowing it is “coherence bias” is interesting.  Calling it “sane-washing” is not only better branding, ... it gives the reader the proper information.

Electoral College II

 
Alma Mater

Alma Mater, we hail thee
With loyal devotion
And bring to thine altar
Our off 'ring of praise

We love our college, but do we love the Electoral College?

The Electoral College was created  because the Slave States wanted to include slaves among the population that determines federal voting strength, but still wanted to control the vote of their slaves. The compromise was that federal voting strength was based an enslaved person being counted as 3/5 of a person, and the establishment of the Electoral College. Given that history, and the fact that slavery was abolished, does the  Electoral College serve any purpose today?

The Electoral College is also a reminder that the winner of a Presidential election also represents those states from which the winning candidate for President received no votes.The President represents not only all of the people, but he must represent ALL of the States as well. A President needs to be backed not only by a plurality of voters, but by a plurality of States as well.

The Electoral College membership is set as equal to the number of Congressional (House and Senate) seats,  plus a few electoral votes for federal districts and territories. It is arguable that the number of seats in the House, the largest share of Electoral College votes is out of whack, but that is a different matter and can and should be solved by a different process. https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/04/zero-sum.html. 

The problem is the size of the Electoral College, not the College itself.  Arguably, the Electoral College still serves a purpose and let us  bring "our off'ring of praise", and not call for its abolishment. 

Election 2024

 

Centerfield

Oh, put me in, coach

I'm ready to play today

Put me in, coach

I'm ready to play today

Look at me, I can be centerfield

How does a coach decide who will play?

It has been said that over a baseball season you will win 1/3 of your games and lose 1/3 of your games and it is what happens in that remaining 1/3 that determines the success of your season. In a season of 162 games, then you should lose no more than 2/3 of 162, or 108 games. Tell that to the 2024 Chicago White Sox! This statement should be in REGULATION games, those NOT going to extra innings, you will win 1/3, etc. Losses in extra innings only prove the point and tie breakers should be deducted from the total of 162 games played.

The reason is that there are three outcomes to every game win, loss, AND tie. The games that end in a tie after regulation are NOT being counted as ties. It is the same in any contest such as an election, but in elections policies AND character are being considered. 2/3 will chose policy, and 1/3 will chose character as the tie breaker because they can’t decide on policy alone. There are those elections that are only about policies. Arguably the 1972 election of Richard Nixon vs, George McGovern was on policy ( Nixon’s character was not widely known until AFTER the election.)  And the 1964 election of Lyndon Johnson vs, Barry Goldwater was on character. This means that unless the opinion on policies and character changed between 1964 and 1972, that 60% of the population prefer Republican policies and 60% of the voters will choose on character.

If we start with the premise that 2/3 will choose Republican policies, then that means that the Republican base is 60% of the 2/3 electorate. Similarly 40% of 2.3 of the electorate will chose Democrat policies. This means that one-third will of the voters will be unwilling or unable to decide on policies alone and will revert to character as a tiebreaker. If 60% of those voters think that Kamala Harris has the better character, then she  should receive 60% of that 1/3, or an additional 19.8%, for a total of 52.8% while  Donald Trump will only receive 40% of that 1/3 or an additional 13.3% for a total of 46.2%. A larger difference than that indicates that the character is more than an 60/40 split. But it must be remembered that a Harris victory does NOT mean a victory of Democratic policies. It only means that Harris won on character.

Debates and elections are illustrative of character, not policies. How you debate is more important than what you debate. Does this mean that the election has been decided?  It might be. (Pennsylvania started early voting on Sept 11^th. November 5^th is just the finish line.) But electoral college voting strength is not the popular vote. Play ball!

Listen

 

Joy to the World

Singin' joy to the world
All the boys and girls now
Joy to the fishes in the deep blue sea
Joy to you and me

Did you watch the Hariis-Trump debate last night!

James Carville was wrong. " It is the economy, stupid" only if you are concerned with policies.  But if a voter is also concerned with who is going to represent him, IT'S CHARACTER, STUPID. And I am so relieved that Kamala concentrated on her character and not her policies. 

You might chose on history, but you are counting on that history being a trend to indicate the future, because elections are about the future, not the past.  Picking only on the past is like being the MLB Yankees in their free-agent binging mode.  How has that worked out for them?  The Yankees need to remember that you play Old Timers Games before the real game, not during the real game.  When you are voting, will you remember?

Discontinuity II

 

Crossroads

I went down to the crossroads
Fell down on my knees
Down to the crossroads
Fell down on my knees
Asked the Lord above for mercy
Take me, if you please

A discontinuity is a crossroads.

I have suggested that there is a discontinuity that is formed when a function crosses its inverse. When this happens at a physical surface it is a physical discontinuity. But there are instances when it is NOT a physical discontinuity but only an apparent discontinuity.
https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/09/rebound.html

At this crossroads there is the decision of  to whether to continue, or take the road which turns back, because the inverse goes in the opposite direction so one of its legs is in the direction from which the original function came. I have suggested that when this is the situation, such as occurs for example when the capacity of a road is reached, or the capacity of a water channel is reached, this crossroads is also the intersection between what is observable and that which is unobservable. At the crossroads there is the option of continuing into the unobservable or changing to the path at that takes you back to the observable. Lord, take me please into the unobservable.

Ceilings

 

One Man’s Ceiling is Another Man’s Floor

I was walking with my dogs
And the night was black with smog
When I thought I heard somebody call my name
Remember: one man's ceiling is another man's floor, goddamn
One man's ceiling is another man's floor

It’s just apartment house rules.

A Nash Equilibrium says that to ensure that 95.8% of the individuals will join the group, that 4.2% have to be blocked from achieving their User Optimal. It does not say that those 4.2% are being punished, only that they are being capped at the mean/median of the group plus two Standard Deviations. So those 4.2% are being capped at 45.8% MORE than the median. This includes anyone among that 95.8% who might have otherwise been among that 4.2%.

A minimum wage, standard deduction, earned income credit, poverty line, etc. is a floor below which individuals in the group should not be allowed to fall. In order for the group to have decent shelter, shouldn’t there also be a ceiling. A ceiling is neither good nor bad. It can prevent you from climbing, but it also can provide you with protection. A ceiling that is imposed only on a selected group, like a Glass Ceiling on women, is bad. But a ceiling that is imposed by the group, for the good of the group, as long as it applies to all members of that group, can be good.

Groups

 

United We Stand

For united we stand, divided we fall
And if our backs should ever be against the wall
We'll be together, together, you and I

We will hang together, or we will  hang separately.

Anything that increases the size of the group, unites us, is good. Anything that decreases the size of the group, divides us, is bad. This includes :

Voter suppression

The group making decisions should be as large as possible. Anything that limits voting in the group, when only voters make decisions for the group, including those excluded from voting, is bad.

Discriminatory laws or any segregation.

There always will be wards of the state. If the state is the people, then wards are the children who have not yet become the people. But excluding anyone from the group, making them wards, on the basis of race, sex, income, sexual orientation, immigration status, ethnicity, caste, etc. has the same impact as voter suppression.

Opposing Anti-trust

Monopolies (only one seller) and monopsonies (only one buyer) are bad for a reason. They decrease competition, choices, of the group. That is why mergers are looked at askance. They are a first step on the road towards monopolies/ monopsonies. 

Anti Union Activities

This includes right to work, firing union organizers, opposing the minimum wage,child labor, OHSA, etc.  The people uniting is good.  Their organizing does not make you bad.  If it offends you, but does not effect you, try to remember this is about the other guy.

Stock-buy backs

They only increase the value per existing investors, they do NOT increase the number of investors.

Market Segmentation

Market segmentation that directs advertising towards certain markets is good. It offers more choices to those markets as buyers. Market segmentation that only offers price differentiation by market when the product has no reason to be segmented, is bad.

Eliminating Competition

Actions to buy up competitors to put then out of business, pricing at a loss to drive competitors our of business, or anything that decreases the number of competitors. It may be good for you , but it is bad not only for that competitor, but anyone working for that competitor as well as your existing and potential customers.

Focusing on the short term and not the long term

The future, long term is where growth of the group will occur.  The short term is only the current group, with no increase. Since members of the group will be  constantly dying, focusing on the short term is accepting that the group will get smaller.

Solutions

 

1, 2, 3

1-2-3, oh, that's how elementary it's going to be
C'mon, let's fall in love, it's easy
Like takin' candy from a baby

1-2-3 is elementary, NOT deterministic.

I am a fan of three. For example https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/02/three.html. A system  has three part: 1) an input; 2) a process; and 3) an output. Just because an input is deterministic, it does NOT mean that the process has to be deterministic, or the output has to be deterministic. For example take a coin. It has only two sides. What could be more deterministic than that. Flipping that coin is random NOT deterministic. The outcome is NOT deterministic either. It is 50% the coin is heads AND 50% that the coin is tails. So while the input was 100%, a coin,  the output AND the process are random.

When the input and process are combined into a scenario,  that also does not mean that the scenario has therefore become deterministic and therefore the output is deterministic. It still depends on the process. If the process was not deterministic, the output won’t be deterministic because the scenario can’t be deterministic. If a process is random, then it has a variance of more than zero. Goldilocks is a solution when the process is deterministic: not too hot, and not too cold; not too hard, and not too soft; just right, halfway between the two extremes. But if a process is random, its variance is NOT zero, then the output can not be Goldilocks, and Nash Equilibriums govern. At equilibrium the solution is 5/6 of the variance, σ², which is identical to the mean, μ, plus two times the square root of the variance, σ. Only when the variance is zero, will the solution be the mean, just right.

Sides

 

Both Sides Now 

I've looked at life from both sides now
From win and lose and still somehow
It's life's illusions I recall
I really don't know life at all 

You don’t need to pick a side, or repeat both sides.  Life IS both sides. 

If a surface is hyperbolic then there is a hyperbolic, non-Euclidean solution for the hypotenuse of a triangle on that surface. If life is a complex number, x + y*i, and we are living in reality, y=0, then that solution is cosh(life)=cosh(x)*cosh(y), which is life=ln(cosh(x) ± sinh(x)) because cosh(0)=1. By subtracting cosh(x) from each solution, and because cosh(x) is symmetrical, that is cosh(-x) is equal to -cosh(x), this can also be stated as life=ln(0 ± (sinh(x)+cosh(x))). If an absolute can be approached but not obtained, then the behavior approaching that absolute is said to be exponential. Since both sinh and cosh can be stated as exponentials, the two solutions are x and -x. This, and the surface being hyperbolic, is consistent with the two sheets of a hyperboloid. If our universe is one of those sheets, then it has the opposite sign of the other sheet. If our universe is observable, then there must exist an unobservable universe that has the opposite sign of any value in our universe. 

Or to put it in New Testament terms, “The first shall be last, and the last shall be first.”  And life always has both a certain term, cosh(x) and an uncertainty term, sinh(x), which means that uncertainty is a consequence of being on a hyperbolic surface. Any value from an absolute will have two solutions, the value and its opposite. Or from an absolute, again in New Testament terms Galatians 3:28, “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus”. In other words, remember on Election Day, there is neither liberal nor conservative, neither Democrat nor Republican, for you are all one in America.

Affirmative Action III

 

I’m Sorry

I'm sorry, so sorry
Please accept my apology
But love was blind
And I was too blind to see

Oops I made a mistake, but IMHO so did the Supreme Court!

I took the position that Affirmative Action is always a good thing in a previous blog post,  https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/08/affirmative-action.html, while the US Supreme Court overturned Affirmative Action in its 2024 opinion on college admissions.  IMHO, we were both guilty of being false. I was being a false positive. I was saying that Affirmative Action was always being used for good, and therefore the decision was wrong. The Supreme Court was saving that Affirmative Action is always bad, and IMHO that is a false negative. As it turns out MIT and other elite schools are finding that the racial constitution of the incoming freshman classes is less diverse racially, but is more diverse economically.  Huh?

There is a wealth inequality in the United States that has a racial component. On average Whites are wealthier than Blacks and Hispanics.  But that doesn’t mean that some Blacks and Hispanics aren’t wealthier than some Whites. What the elite colleges were apparently doing is admitting the wealthiest minorities. In that fashion they could be more racially diverse, but NOT more economically diverse. If they had used NO bias, the incoming class should be just like the overall society. By only admitting wealthy minorities, those colleges could be more diverse racially, while being not being economically diverse. The lack of Affirmative Action, as it was being used in admissions, just  might have highlighted the fact that colleges were being less diverse than the general population when it comes to wealth, even if they appeared to be closer to the general position for minority status. In the words of Martin Luther King Jr., the goal is to judge on “the content of one’s character, not the color of one’s skin.”  

So is the goal of Affirmative Action wrong? IMHO, not in the least. 

Was the way in which it was being administered producing a false positive? Apparently.

Division?

 

Born Free

Stay free
Where no walls divide you
You're free as a roaring tide
 So there's no need to hide
Born free
And life is worth living
But only worth living
'Cause you're born free

Walls ARE meant to divide you.

The opposite of freedom is to have walls.  The phrase after all is “Divide and Conquer.”  If you accept walls, then you are accepting being conquered.  If life is a Zero-Sum game with walls, then when you win, you take something from others.  If life is a game of growth, not Zero-Sum,  then everyone could have more at the end than at the beginning.

A motto of the United States is “E pluribus unum.  Out of many, one” .  It is the United States, NOT the Divided States. Don’t build or accept walls.

Confused

 

Dazed and Confused

Been dazed and confused for so long it's not true
Wanted a woman, never bargained for you
Lots of people talk and few of them know
Soul of a woman was created below, yeah

Are you confused?

Many of the problems of the world are that some very basic concepts are being confused.

Mean and median.  Mixing up these terms, which sound similar, can lead to unintended things. https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2018/08/wonderful-world-dont-know-much-about.html

Effective and Marginal.  The US Tax Code changed in the 1980s because people did not understand the difference between effective (e.g. first derivative) and marginal ( e.g. second derivative) and that has led to more than 40 years of extra income for high income taxpayers.  https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/08/laffer-curve.html

Dominance and Certainty.  The ruling of a panel of judges should be certain.  It should not merely be dominant. A unanimous jury approaches certainty.  A 5-4 panel of judges is merely dominant.  https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2024/06/dominance.html

If we have dazed and confused ourselves, shame on us.  If others have taken advantage of us because they are dazing and confusing us, shame on them. And shame on us.  Don’t be confused.  The first thing a stage magician learns is to distract the audience so they can't tell they are being tricked.  If you don’t know, take the time to find out before you act, you are effectively letting others act for, and possibly trick, you.