Deficit spending on infrastructure that produces returns, and is somehow quantifiable, doesn’t seem to be a problem. I don’t see a problem borrowing against the future for the purposes of production (capital increases). In fact, history is very optimistic about both research investment, infrastructure investment, export market investment, and trade route investment (including conquest). It’s just very pessimistic about funding rents, subsidies, and vote-bribes. OTOH, Destruction of intergenerational lending, is informationally destructive. Distortion of the interest rate is informationally destructive. Flooding the economy with money is informationally destructive. And cumulatively that destruction appears to be more than even the combination of innovation and productivity can compensate for, even in a period of gold rush created by the technology booms. I mean, if it isn’t working from 1990 to the present, it’s not going to work in more common periods. Interest is necessary for the purposes of measurement, and to make use of information by those with demonstrated ability to make judgements. I don’t understand why we pay interest on borrowing from ourselves (the treasury). I don’t understand why we care about our status as a reserve currency except as a means of financing the military empire. And I no longer see much advantage to the preservation of the empire (power projection), only our defense of territory and trade. In fact, the empire has dominated our domestic policy for a century now. Lets take it further: I would see no problem in distributing liquidity (dilution of the money supply) if distributed annually or quarterly to consumers on debit cards – other than the moral hazard it would create. This causes industry to fight for consumer dollars, and gives consumers the option to consume or reduce debt. Right now the distortion by financialization (gambling) rather than capitalization is so …. vast … no one has any idea how to measure it. Other than we can see that ‘something isn’t right here’ and we cant find a target that will correct whatever is wrong. (productivity). Targets are pretty simple really: how many hours to the 66% of people on either side of the median have to work to pay for all non-signal private goods? As far as I know, all interest on consumption of non-signal private goods is money lost from the treasury and capital-producing industry. And that looks like trillions to me.
Theme: Measurement
-
We Can Improve Our Individual Senses and Not Improve Actionability or We Can Improve Our Environmental Information and Improve Actionability
We process what we can act upon nearly all of the texture, tasted, smell, temperature, physical vibration, sound vibration, electromagnetic ‘vibration’ we can act upon. Like most animals we evolved a distributed ability to ‘sense’ through our physical distribution, communication and territorial monitoring. Evolution was ‘smart’ in the sense that we cannot sense information we cannot act upon. There was little value to us in increased precision of any of our senses, because it would interfere with decidability, and decidability is limited to to that which is actionable. Conversely, we can augment our senses mechanically and we are able to generalize almost infinitely, and so with sound, smell, vibration, taste, sight, and speed enhancements there is no evidence that we could not process the information. All it would do is reduce our need for numbers to distribute the acts of perception over distance. So I’m hinting here at the error of individualism when judging our senses, perceptions, calculations, and decisions. And that ones judgement of our senses is determined by ones preference for social and political order. And ones preference of social and political order, is a reflection of one’s experiential, reproductive, cooperative, strategy. So if one is hopeful for liberty in a heterogeneous order one sees the limits of senses being the individual. If one sees homogenous kinship order at scale, one sees the limit of the senses being the band, tribe, polity, or nation. If one desires to circumvent an order, or to dominate an order, he may desire additional senses beyond that which he can act upon, and which others can act upon. But if one desires to operate within that order, he desires only to ensure the quality of information within that order. Ergo, I would seek to improve the quality of information within that order. Now, as to ‘illusion’ we can find very little evidence of this. What we find instead is that because of heterogeneous strategies, heterogeneous interests, heterogeneous values, heterogenous information, and outright disinformation, and lack of ability to deflate this heterogeneity, we IMAGINE that we sense and perceive falsely, and we IMAGINE many relations between events, and this CONFUSION may convince us that see very little. But this problem can be solved either by expanding the quality of the information available to an individual despite its in-actionabilty, or we can expand quality of information available to members of the group for both individual and group actionability. Since liberty is only existential when actionable, and actionable only possible in a polity, then the answer is rather obvious… So I want to improve the quality of information in an increasing division of perception, cognition, action knowledge, and advocacy; And given that we cannot know what is true, only what is false; And as far as I know, given the wide variation of cognitive ability, Then, this can only be achieved through providing in environmental context (Institution, tradition, norm, environment and information) that which prohibits DISINFORMATION. Ergo. Natural law in all things. If one has the power to change the narrative (contextual information) and and the metaphysics(assumptions) within it, and the general rules within it, one can choose the degree of truthfulness (deflation) existential in the method of narrative. The only question then is whether one possesses the knowledge to do so, and is willing to pay the higher cost of imposing truthful and deflationary rather than untruthful and conflationary models. -
We Can Improve Our Individual Senses and Not Improve Actionability or We Can Improve Our Environmental Information and Improve Actionability
We process what we can act upon nearly all of the texture, tasted, smell, temperature, physical vibration, sound vibration, electromagnetic ‘vibration’ we can act upon. Like most animals we evolved a distributed ability to ‘sense’ through our physical distribution, communication and territorial monitoring. Evolution was ‘smart’ in the sense that we cannot sense information we cannot act upon. There was little value to us in increased precision of any of our senses, because it would interfere with decidability, and decidability is limited to to that which is actionable. Conversely, we can augment our senses mechanically and we are able to generalize almost infinitely, and so with sound, smell, vibration, taste, sight, and speed enhancements there is no evidence that we could not process the information. All it would do is reduce our need for numbers to distribute the acts of perception over distance. So I’m hinting here at the error of individualism when judging our senses, perceptions, calculations, and decisions. And that ones judgement of our senses is determined by ones preference for social and political order. And ones preference of social and political order, is a reflection of one’s experiential, reproductive, cooperative, strategy. So if one is hopeful for liberty in a heterogeneous order one sees the limits of senses being the individual. If one sees homogenous kinship order at scale, one sees the limit of the senses being the band, tribe, polity, or nation. If one desires to circumvent an order, or to dominate an order, he may desire additional senses beyond that which he can act upon, and which others can act upon. But if one desires to operate within that order, he desires only to ensure the quality of information within that order. Ergo, I would seek to improve the quality of information within that order. Now, as to ‘illusion’ we can find very little evidence of this. What we find instead is that because of heterogeneous strategies, heterogeneous interests, heterogeneous values, heterogenous information, and outright disinformation, and lack of ability to deflate this heterogeneity, we IMAGINE that we sense and perceive falsely, and we IMAGINE many relations between events, and this CONFUSION may convince us that see very little. But this problem can be solved either by expanding the quality of the information available to an individual despite its in-actionabilty, or we can expand quality of information available to members of the group for both individual and group actionability. Since liberty is only existential when actionable, and actionable only possible in a polity, then the answer is rather obvious… So I want to improve the quality of information in an increasing division of perception, cognition, action knowledge, and advocacy; And given that we cannot know what is true, only what is false; And as far as I know, given the wide variation of cognitive ability, Then, this can only be achieved through providing in environmental context (Institution, tradition, norm, environment and information) that which prohibits DISINFORMATION. Ergo. Natural law in all things. If one has the power to change the narrative (contextual information) and and the metaphysics(assumptions) within it, and the general rules within it, one can choose the degree of truthfulness (deflation) existential in the method of narrative. The only question then is whether one possesses the knowledge to do so, and is willing to pay the higher cost of imposing truthful and deflationary rather than untruthful and conflationary models. -
Another Leap in Progress
Over the past week or so I’ve had another significant insight on language and measurement. This as simplified the epistemology significantly.
-
Another Leap in Progress
Over the past week or so I’ve had another significant insight on language and measurement. This as simplified the epistemology significantly.
-
It’s Not That Hard…
IT’S NOT THAT HARD. Nearly all my arguments are constructed by definitions, use of sequences to de-conflate those definitions, and fullaccounting of the fully chain of actions and consequences. I rarely have to resort to operational grammar except in those definitions. If you use full accounting you will skew to operational gammar out of necessity of simply trying to write cogent sentences. I cant keep track of all of you any longer. There are simply too many. But I do see property in toto, operational language and full accounting creeping into all sorts of your posts and comments. It’s infectious. It will change you forever – for the better.
-
It’s Not That Hard…
IT’S NOT THAT HARD. Nearly all my arguments are constructed by definitions, use of sequences to de-conflate those definitions, and fullaccounting of the fully chain of actions and consequences. I rarely have to resort to operational grammar except in those definitions. If you use full accounting you will skew to operational gammar out of necessity of simply trying to write cogent sentences. I cant keep track of all of you any longer. There are simply too many. But I do see property in toto, operational language and full accounting creeping into all sorts of your posts and comments. It’s infectious. It will change you forever – for the better.
-
Lolz: Comprehension requires similar units of measure… Your tape is too short.
—“All your statuses make you seem like you are drunk whenever i read them i hear a drunk man rambling”— Anon I understand. Comprehension can only exist as a contract requiring specific performance by both parties. You cannot provide specific performance required of you. This merely means you are too stupid to understand. But do not feel bad. You are not special. There are a lot of stupid people.
-
Lolz: Comprehension requires similar units of measure… Your tape is too short.
—“All your statuses make you seem like you are drunk whenever i read them i hear a drunk man rambling”— Anon I understand. Comprehension can only exist as a contract requiring specific performance by both parties. You cannot provide specific performance required of you. This merely means you are too stupid to understand. But do not feel bad. You are not special. There are a lot of stupid people.
-
Information, Measurement, Negotiation
Man as the measure of all things man Actually, the concept I am working on is whether we have everything backwards, and language consists entirely of measurements of different degrees of precision, and mathematics and operations are merely more precise measurements than we are familiar with speaking of. What does it mean to measure? Man is the unit of measure for all he measures. The limits of his existence, perception, action, and comprehension, provides him with units of measure. Measurements provide us with constant relations. All our other methods of measurement merely extend the constant relations provided by the limits constraining the existence, perception, action, and comprehension of man. This appears to be the correct model.