This post does a pretty good job, and in acceptable English, in explaining the origin of the shitrain that has fallen on the economy in the last two years. Interestingly enough, the terminology used here can be directly substituted for text like "buying on margin," "margin calls," etc., which were employed 80 years ago, when the stock market collapsed in October 1929 following years of speculation.
The object of our current malaise is real estate, of course, rather than stock certificates. Lots of people assumed it couldn't happen with real estate, because the collapse that resulted in the Great Depression of the 1930's was based on "paper profits" that resulted in worthless stock certificates, and the current imbroglio has tangible material assets behind it. Yep, but there was supposedly "real" assets behind RCA stock in 1929, too, but those assets were impossibly overvalued. Rather like some termite-riddled shack in Southern California being valued at an absurdly inflation million bucks before the bottom fell out this time. Some animated corpse in a suit once said that "An item is worth exactly what someone is willing to pay," or something to that effect.
Up to a certain time, the willingness of people who are ignorant of history, or the context of their own times, or just plain ignorant will persuade them to pay hugely inflated prices for something. Suddenly one morning it all looks like fantasy. Consult the great Dutch tulip bubble of the 17th century; it's only different because the subject was tulips, instead of stocks, real estate, gold, or baseball cards, or the armshells of the Trobriand Islands.
But this will simply recur as long as the human race exists, because it is based on what people want to believe.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
It's All Right There.....
....in the media following the murders at UAH.
The relentless Monday-morning quarterbacks (even though they mention the fallacy) imply that something ought to have been done back in the day when the woman killed her brother. This, flying in the face of a lack of any details, and that every official (the officials whose job it is) declined to pursue charges in the case. Somehow, the enormity of what this person has done last week appears to mean she should be retroactively charged with her brother's murder....and the fallacy involved in this is not discussed further, of course.
Some elderly official, maybe the DA or sheriff, is interviewed and pressured to say he thinks "-maybe it should have been followed up more." Did he think so at the time? Interview doesn't ask that question. Why does he think so now? Ditto. This trails off into a series of nulls.
Now an assault case from the interim has been unearthed, in which our UAH shooter pled guilty to a simple assault (Note: no shooting or murder involved here!), and which immediately segues into the presumed failure (and thus presumption of a liablity) of UAH in not pursuing a detailed background search on the woman.
Even more interesting is the talking heads nibbling around the edges of the notion that this individual's whole life formed a pattern. What kind of pattern? We can only assume that the discovery of her previous life would have kept her out of UAH, so that she never would have gunned down her tenure committee.
But what if she were condemned by her record to wiping merchandise across a laser at Dollar General? What if, one day, being unable to get 40 hours and benefits, she brings in a box of poison donuts and feeds them to her coworkers? Presumably the death of people with only high school diplomas would not be as devastating a loss to society as the profs at UAH. Backward reasoning is called "backward" for a reason.
It can be taken even further. Such a pattern is clearly grounds for segregating this individual from society. Think of the children, for God's sake!
The media has already stirred up enough nonsense in this case that I'll allow only a 50% chance that she'll get the needle, even though it's in Alabama, and it's what her actions merit. A judgment of non compos mentis or some other mental disability, hauled from the turgid pages of DSMV-IV-TR, is much more likely. Then the blame can always be placed on some shrink for not diagnosing her, or for her not going to a shrink in the first place.....
The relentless Monday-morning quarterbacks (even though they mention the fallacy) imply that something ought to have been done back in the day when the woman killed her brother. This, flying in the face of a lack of any details, and that every official (the officials whose job it is) declined to pursue charges in the case. Somehow, the enormity of what this person has done last week appears to mean she should be retroactively charged with her brother's murder....and the fallacy involved in this is not discussed further, of course.
Some elderly official, maybe the DA or sheriff, is interviewed and pressured to say he thinks "-maybe it should have been followed up more." Did he think so at the time? Interview doesn't ask that question. Why does he think so now? Ditto. This trails off into a series of nulls.
Now an assault case from the interim has been unearthed, in which our UAH shooter pled guilty to a simple assault (Note: no shooting or murder involved here!), and which immediately segues into the presumed failure (and thus presumption of a liablity) of UAH in not pursuing a detailed background search on the woman.
Even more interesting is the talking heads nibbling around the edges of the notion that this individual's whole life formed a pattern. What kind of pattern? We can only assume that the discovery of her previous life would have kept her out of UAH, so that she never would have gunned down her tenure committee.
But what if she were condemned by her record to wiping merchandise across a laser at Dollar General? What if, one day, being unable to get 40 hours and benefits, she brings in a box of poison donuts and feeds them to her coworkers? Presumably the death of people with only high school diplomas would not be as devastating a loss to society as the profs at UAH. Backward reasoning is called "backward" for a reason.
It can be taken even further. Such a pattern is clearly grounds for segregating this individual from society. Think of the children, for God's sake!
The media has already stirred up enough nonsense in this case that I'll allow only a 50% chance that she'll get the needle, even though it's in Alabama, and it's what her actions merit. A judgment of non compos mentis or some other mental disability, hauled from the turgid pages of DSMV-IV-TR, is much more likely. Then the blame can always be placed on some shrink for not diagnosing her, or for her not going to a shrink in the first place.....
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
An Honest Politician?
Setting aside my great reluctance to post the name of a politician, hats off to Senator Evan Bayh for jumping ship. I don't even know which party he's affiliated with, but he knows the system is broken.
Can politicians who just quit (Bayh had never been defeated in an election, and was considered the choice for re-election) force reform? In my opinion, no, because it's the career-obsessed that remain who will have to vote it in. Stalemate.
Can politicians who just quit (Bayh had never been defeated in an election, and was considered the choice for re-election) force reform? In my opinion, no, because it's the career-obsessed that remain who will have to vote it in. Stalemate.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Comics as the new communication
As I was reading this comic, it occurred to me that it was going to be the second time in three posts that I would be employing the medium. On the other hand, it contains the best brief explanation of cancer I've read, along with the rationale for why research will continue.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)