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.