I get knocked down
(we'll be singing)
But I get up again (pissing the night away)
You are never gonna keep me down (when we're winning)
Getting up again IS winning.
To err is human, to forgive is divine. Humans can aspire to the divine, but we probably
will not achieve it. But we are human
and we can, and will, err, get knocked down.
What is improbable is that humans will never err, get knocked down. That is NOT winning. Getting up again is winning.
Oops I Did It
Again.
Oops, I did it again to
your heart
Got lost in this game, oh baby
Oops, you think that I'm sent from above
I'm not that innocent
Being human
is not being innocent.
To err is human, To forgive is divine. Being divine is being innocent. Since I am human, as are you, I expect there that will be errors. The Standard Error is expressed mathematically as Standard Error= σ /√n, where σ is a statistical measure of the distribution called the variance, and √n is the square root of the number of observations, n. In the real-world n has to be less than infinity so √n also has to be less than infinity. If the variance is real and not zero, then the standard error can NOT be zero. So when we say there is an error, we are saying that the variance has to be greater than 0.
Absolute truth means that there is NO error. If there is
no error then the variance must be zero. If there is error then the variance
has to be greater than zero. For a given variance, one way to reduce the error
is to increase the number of observations. That is why when pollsters want to decrease
their error, they increase the number of observations.
One would think that if there is an absolute there can be no error. Albert Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity answered this apparent contradiction. (Actually Jesus addressed the same thing in that whole “Render unto Caesar” gig.). There can be an absolute truth, e.g. the speed of light, and yet depending on your frame of reference, things like length, weight, time, all depend on your relationship to that absolute. The variance is greater than zero. No matter how many observations you make, if there is an absolute truth, only one observation should be enough and the variance is zero. In a group, if there is no variance, then the mean of the group is equal to the median. However the mean can be equal to the median any time the variance is greater than than zero if the skew is also zero. In fact a normal distribution is any distribution in which the mean and the median are equal. A uniform normal distribution is one in which the variance is 1. If the variance is 1, then the Standard Error has to be greater than zero, even if there is only one observation: Standard Error = 1/ √1. You can make the error smaller if you increase the sample size, increase n, but mathematics says that you can never can eliminate the error. You’re not that innocent.
You May Be Right
You may be
right
I may be crazy
But it just may be a lunatic you’re looking for.
Can’t someone
be both right and crazy?
I have proposed a number of things. They might all be right.
But apparently not everyone is looking for a lunatic.
My career has been in traffic engineering, particularly travel
demand forecasting. One suggested finding is how impedance on a traffic link ( e.g. a road) increases as traffic
volume increases. In trying to address this
issue, since impedance appears to be a function of and travel time, I proposed equations for reliability
and for travel time, only as a mean of
improving the equation for impedance. However
I have been reluctant to network in my career and my reputation, except with those whom I have worked, is admittedly
non-existent. The blog posts for reliability https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/02/reliability.html,
travel time https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/02/traffic-flow.html
and impedance https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/02/time-and-reliabilty.html
were taken from papers submitted to a peer
reviewed conference but rejected.
Since I have been semi-retired, locked down, and bored,
and I have spent most of my career analyzing data, I looked at income and
wealth data. It suggested that the distribution of wealth and income in the
United States is not only anecdotally skewed, it is statistically skewed, not only
over time, but compared to other nations, https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2021/07/inequality.html,
https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/04/distribution-of-wealth.html
This information has been the subject of my blog posts and has been shared with
other, but I have no standing with those others, so I can understand why it has
been apparently been ignored.
I have looked the income data and suggested that the tax
code is responsible for a decline in growth and an increase in inequity https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2020/06/taxman.html
and suggested a revision to the tax code, https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2021/12/georgia-techfight-song-im-ramblinwreck.html.
I have looked at the Consumer Price Index and suggested that international trading
and the use of the US dollar in international trading is responsible for much of
the systemic long-term inflation https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-happening-riding-high-on-top-of.html.
I also suggested that inflation should be divided into currency inflation and supply-demand inflation
and treated separately https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2022/04/inflation-v.html.
And while I have suggested this to others in these fields, I am not an economist,
and since my traffic engineering findings have not been accepted, I am hardly surprised
that my economic suggestions have not been pursued.
I have looked at human behavior and suggested that it can
be example by three characteristics. https://dbeagan.blogspot.com/2021/05/framework-for-human-behavior-ii.html
But again since my background is NOT in social sciences, I have no
standing.
Session One
As soon as I draw, get sent to Allah
Bilinguist don, I kill with the tongue, I'm Atilla the Hun
I'm Genghis Khan, I'm a genius spawn
I pillage your village for fun, an egregious con
A syllable gun, real as they come, Long Beach Saddam!
Slaughterhouse equals swine flu, are South flyin'
Egregious, “Strip-Search Sammy”? Really? Really? Really?
I have suggested to the Presidential Commission on the
Supreme Court that Justices should serve
staggered terms of 16 years. Then except for a death in office,
each President can expect to make only two nominations during his term. That
means that during the one term of the Orange Menace, it should be expected that
only two Justices should have been nominated
to the Supreme Court. We might still have gotten Justices Neil “NOT Merrick Garland”
Gorsuch and Brett “Frat Boy” Kavanaugh, but at least we might have been spared Justice
Amy “Handmaiden” Coney Barrett.
Also Supreme Court decisions should not reflect just a simple
majority. Up until the 1940s, opinions of the Supreme Court were by consensus. The recent majority opinions are a historical aberration. If the opinions are by consensus, then they are by definition supermajority decision. But a consensus as a supermajority can be blocked by a single individual.
The most important decisions for the United States, wars, treaties, amendments,
etc, are made by supermajorities that are NOT 100%. Shouldn’t the opinions of the Supreme Court also be by a
supermajority. Otherwise they are opinions of a simple majority of the SCOTUS, but might reflect a minority of the People they
have sworn to represent. This appears to be the case in the draft opinion on abortions.
Despite the fact that the majority of the county appears to favor abortions in
some cases, the majority of the SCOTUS appears poised to opine that the heck
with that majority, their opinion is the Law. It is the Law. It is not Justice.
“Egregious”, Justice “Strip-Search Sammy” Alito? It would nice
if you knew what that word means. It literally means illustrious, standing out from the flock. Your
usage is its more common ironic use. Even if you intended the ironic meaning, even
if you share that opinion with four other justices, it is not a supermajority of
the Supreme Court. Only supermajority opinions are considered to be those of the People.
I am old enough to remember that when John F. Kennedy ran
for President, he had to convince Southern
Baptists that his Catholic beliefs would not take precedence over his responsibility
as President. Justice Alito can have his beliefs and the “conservative” Justices
endorsed by the Federalist Society can also share those beliefs. However their
beliefs are not those of the People that they have sworn to represent.
And I won't look back, I can go the
distance
And I'll stay on track, no I won't accept defeat
It's an uphill slope
But I won't lose hope, 'till I go the distance
And my journey is complete
If there is any chance of victory, then go
the distance.
The Washington
Generals, also known as the Boston Shamrocks, the New Jersey Reds, the Baltimore
Rockets, the Atlantic City Seagulls, the New York Nationals, the International
Elite, the Global Select and the World All-Stars were the barnstorming opponents
in each Harlem Globetrotters exhibition “game”.
They are supposed to lose. Winning
against the Globetrotters is like killing Santa Claus.
The Generals have
“lost” more than 15,000 games against the Globetrotters but they have won somewhere
between 3 and 6 times. The records are spotty, but they did record wins in 1954, 1958
and 1971. Therefore the “odds” are
more than 3 in 15,000, but they are not zero. A
Tortoise can seldom beat a Hare, but as in Aesop’s Fable, sometimes it happens. The Generals play on even though the odds are
small, they are not zero. Even when the game is rigged, they won’t lose hope.
They have gone the distance.
Trust Me
When you elect someone to represent you, you are placing your trust in them.
The United States is a republic (and tell Ben Franklin, we are planning to keep it). Elections are to select those individuals who will represent you in the actions required by the People of that republic. I will not try to ague what your position should be when electing those individuals, but I will remind you that those who seeking election may be lying to you when they are stating their own positions. I have suggested that individuals can be characterized by three attributes: Individual vs. Team; Nature vs. Nurture, and Fact vs. Fiction.
The first attribute is whether User Optimal or System (i.e. Group) Optimal decisions will be chosen. If a person prefers User Optimization, you should elected someone whose System Optimal preferences are close to your User Optimal preferences. Selecting someone who has User Optimal preferences means that your representative might seek to advance his own interest rather than your interest. They may lie that this is their System Optimal position in order for you to elect them.
The Nature vs Nurture attribute has to do with who you consider to be in the group, excluded because of their nature, or included if they are nurtured to change their nature. A person may state that they are excluding the same individuals from the group that you are excluding, but they may be lying about who they are really excluding ( for example, they may be excluding you from their group).
The Fact vs. Fiction attribute has to do with your preference for facts. Some people may believe in astrology, the earth is flat, WWE wrestling is real, etc. A person seeking your vote may pretend to accept your beliefs when they really believe those beliefs are folly.
Political parties used to vet candidates for you. Primaries mean that you are vetting candidates for yourself. A political party may be lying in their vetting. My rule of thumb is that if someone had distinguished military service, then they have demonstrated their Team (Group) position. For example Dwight Eisenhower, John McCain. The heir of a wealthy family is less likely to seek to advance his own interests ( in the belief that he already has it all, he probably does not need more). For example, the Roosevelts, the Kennedys, etc. Storytellers are proven to, and trained in, tricking people. My rule of thumb is to assume that actors, authors, TV personalities, etc. are lying until proven otherwise. My eldest son is a visual effects artist at Warner Brothers Media, so sorry Ryan, I guess this means I don't trust you.
If you are lied to then, regardless of your position, your representative
may not be representing your position.
That hurts not only you, but those with other positions as well as you. I need you to trust those who you elect.
So
long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, goodbye
Goodbye, goodbye, goodbye
Goodbye!
With
the draft US Supreme Court opinion on abortion…
It has been a long, strange trip, but apparently
“Government of the People, by the People, and for the People” will be perishing
from the earth. The official death
notice (opinion) has not yet been released by the Supreme Court, but it is only
a matter of time. The pall bearers will
be Justice “Strip Search Sammy” Alito, Justice Neil “NOT Merrick Garland”
Gorsuch, Justice “Long Dong Silver” Thomas, Justice Brett “I LIKE Beer” Kavanaugh
and, Justice Amy “Handmaiden” Coney Barrett.
It is not clear yet if Chief Justice Roberts will join the pall bearers.
The pall bearers have been characterized as Republicans
. That is unfair to Republicans who believe in the Rule of Law and Limited Government,
such as Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, Everett Dirksen, George
Romney, John McCain, and many others. The pall
bears were appointed by the “Great Mis-communicator”, “Read my lips”, and “Don
the Con” but were either the appointers or the appointees real Republicans?
The pall bearers have also been characterized
as conservatives, which is an insult to conservatives who believe in an individual’s
rights and historical precedent. Activist
judges, who in D.C. v. Heller, invented a constitutional
right of self-defense to expand the Second Amendment beyond its regulation of militias;
who in Citizens United v FEC granted Corporations the right to free speech because
their shareholders have the right to free speech, even if all other property of
those shareholders is shielded from suits against the Corporation, are not
conservative.
It is a personal belief that life begins at conception. Even if it were a scientifically proven fact
and not a matter of belief, the question must be what are the Constitutional rights of fetuses. The Supreme Court opines when a law
conflicts with the constitutionally protected rights of the People. Even if fetuses are persons, according to the Constitution,
they are not People. They are not enumerated
in each Constitutionally required decennial census. They are People
upon birth, but not before then. The question
then becomes does a government have the right to seize the property of the People, i.e. a women’s body, until the fetus is viable
and becomes one of the People. The US Constitution
clearly states that a person’s property
can NOT be seized without compensation.
I agree that Roe v. Wade was improperly decided
in that it used an unstated right to privacy to justify its opinion. But even if the reasoning was faulty, the opinion
was not. Right church, wrong pew. Overturning Roe v. Wade is probably the final death sentence for the
US Constitution. Auf Wiedersehen, good bye.
