Friam

Next Dictator

Classic

List

Threaded

18 messages Options

Alfredo Covaleda Vélez

Next Dictator

After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.

--
Alfredo

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Owen Densmore

Re: Next Dictator

Administrator

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:

After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.

--
Alfredo

I certainly agree with the sentiment. And I do believe the core signal in our noise is the lack of a robust middle class, thus I find very troubling the divide between the wealthy and the "rest of us" and our immense struggle just to get by nowadays.

But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.

I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.

The financial sector is "different". It makes money by manipulating money. Sometimes that's fine, for example futures markets help stabilize the price of components of products we buy. Hedge is not a bad word here. Even lending is important when it too relates to real things like houses and companies building products.

I think the disconnect is when real products and people are abstracted out of the financial world, when we're building bundles of loans, slicing and dicing, and nothing real in sight. Or when we are trading in currencies.

Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.

As much as we hate them, regulations are important. But they are very hard to manage, and with the global economy, they need to be balanced world wide. And we don't really know which ones will really build the right incentives.

We have, however, just learned by experiments gone wrong, that letting banks also be insurers is a mistake. And that banks and companies are too large, they distort the economy, and worse, need rescuing when they err.

So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!

-- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Nick Thompson

Re: Next Dictator

Everybody,

Anybody who studies the history of the American south is led to wonder why the many non-slaveholders in the south were led to defend slavery with such ferocity. (The inability of a population to see and act on its own best interest is not a new phenomenon) So why did we in the middle class been so stalwart in our defense of wall street for the last 40 years?

The answer, it seems to me, is that we are all stockholders. I am a member of a pension plan for academics called TIAA-CREF. Why the hyphen? Because it started as a pension plan, TIAA, with a partially defined benefit; sometime along the way it added a stock fund, CREF. CREF had no defined benefit, but it tracked the SandP very closely. You could decide, whether you wanted to put your money in a place with a certain outcome, or whether you wanted to gamble it. We were advised to start out in CREF and shift our investment over to TIAA as we got older. But many of us forgot to make the shift and got SCREWED in the .com bust. Over the years CREF, which started out as a sturdy conservative fund, became a “family of funds”, and you could invest your retirement money in any crap you felt like. In short, many academics lost a large proportion of their retirement.

Thus, the gradual erosion of our retirement institutions in the 50’s into INVESTMENT institutions has turned us all from people trying to guarantee a minimum dignified retirement income to people trying to make a stock-market killing. I am as guilty as anybody else. I could go out tomorrow and buy an annuity that would pay most of my last salary, inflation adjusted, for the rest of my life. But there is no upside! Something in me is unwilling to give up the upside for the safety of avoiding the downside.

So, even though I am solidly in the middle of the 99%, I have the psychology of the one percent. I am coopted. As Pogo used to say, “We have seen the enemy, and they is us!” (Does anybody on this list even KNOW who Pogo was?)

I wonder what would happen to Wall Street if every one of us who has a pension took the annuity option. The market would crash in a day, right?

Don’t all rush for the door at once!

Nick

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 9:56 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:

After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.

--
Alfredo

But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.

I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.

Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.

So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!

-- Owen

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Next Dictator

On 10/22/2011 10:45 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:

So why did we in the middle class been so stalwart in our defense of wall street for the last 40 years?

The answer, it seems to me, is that we are all stockholders.

[..]

Over the years CREF, which started out as a sturdy conservative fund, became a “family of funds”, and you could invest your retirement money in any crap you felt like. In short, many academics lost a large proportion of their retirement.

Thus, the gradual erosion of our retirement institutions in the 50’s into INVESTMENT institutions has turned us all from people trying to guarantee a minimum dignified retirement income to people trying to make a stock-market killing.

As Doug has pointed out many times, a large chunk of the `99%' create the problem and won't take responsibility for it.

TIAA-CREF has a number of funds and lets one move between them with the latency of a few days. It's not like a retiree's financial security is held hostage to a particular fund. For example, there's this option:

http://www.tiaa-cref.org/public/about/how-we-invest/sri/social-screening/

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

Two thoughts,
1) This is also part of the magic that happens when companies "match" retirement investments, rather than simply paying you more money. The idea of a proper savings account went out the door, and instead money that should have been saved went into artificially inflating stock prices. I have more than a few friends who have started referring to the movement not as "Occupy Wall Street", but as "The War On my Retirement". The fact that the people using the latter term are right simply emphasizes how screwed up the current economic model is. People can't tell the difference between saving, investing, and gambling, and they are forced by government regulations and employer incentives to gamble instead of investing or saving! No wonder we are in trouble.

2) As for crashing the stock market, that is related to the centerpiece of Camejo's running platform when he was trying to become Governor of California. (Others might vaguely remember him as Ralph Nader's 2004 running mate.) The idea was that most major corporations had leveraged their retirement plans so much that they were, for all intents and purposes, employee-owned companies. If a large enough group of employees could believably threaten to take out their retirements at the same time, even with penalty, they could usurp control of their companies. To take that principle to the current situation: If you want major corporations to change, or wall street in general to change, withdraw all your money from the market. Or at least get a lot of people to make a believable threat of doing so. As an added incentive, whoever withdraws their money first gets to keep more of it ; - )

Eric

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 12:45 PM, "Nicholas Thompson" <[hidden email]> wrote:

Everybody,

Anybody who studies the history of the American south is led to wonder why the many non-slaveholders in the south were led to defend slavery with such ferocity. (The inability of a population to see and act on its own best interest is not a new phenomenon) So why did we in the middle class been so stalwart in our defense of wall street for the last 40 years?

The answer, it seems to me, is that we are all stockholders. I am a member of a pension plan for academics called TIAA-CREF. Why the hyphen? Because it started as a pension plan, TIAA, with a partially defined benefit; sometime along the way it added a stock fund, CREF. CREF had no defined benefit, but it tracked the SandP very closely. You could decide, whether you wanted to put your money in a place with a certain outcome, or whether you wanted to gamble it. We were advised to start out in CREF and shift our investment over to TIAA as we got older. But many of us forgot to make the shift and got SCREWED in the .com bust. Over the years CREF, which started out as a sturdy conservative fund, became a “family of funds”, and you could invest your retirement money in any crap you felt like. In short, many academics lost a large proportion of their retirement.

Thus, the gradual erosion of our retirement institutions in the 50’s into INVESTMENT institutions has turned us all from people trying to guarantee a minimum dignified retirement income to people trying to make a stock-market killing. I am as guilty as anybody else. I could go out tomorrow and buy an annuity that would pay most of my last salary, inflation adjusted, for the rest of my life. But there is no upside! Something in me is unwilling to give up the upside for the safety of avoiding the downside.

So, even though I am solidly in the middle of the 99%, I have the psychology of the one percent. I am coopted. As Pogo used to say, “We have seen the enemy, and they is us!” (Does anybody on this list even KNOW who Pogo was?)

I wonder what would happen to Wall Street if every one of us who has a pension took the annuity option. The market would crash in a day, right?

Don’t all rush for the door at once!

Nick

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 9:56 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <alfredocovaleda@...> wrote:

After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.

--
Alfredo

I certainly agree with the sentiment. And I do believe the core signal in our noise is the lack of a robust middle class, thus I find very troubling the divide between the wealthy and the "rest of us" and our immense struggle just to get by nowadays.

But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.

I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.

The financial sector is "different". It makes money by manipulating money. Sometimes that's fine, for example futures markets help stabilize the price of components of products we buy. Hedge is not a bad word here. Even lending is important when it too relates to real things like houses and companies building products.

I think the disconnect is when real products and people are abstracted out of the financial world, when we're building bundles of loans, slicing and dicing, and nothing real in sight. Or when we are trading in currencies.

Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.

As much as we hate them, regulations are important. But they are very hard to manage, and with the global economy, they need to be balanced world wide. And we don't really know which ones will really build the right incentives.

We have, however, just learned by experiments gone wrong, that letting banks also be insurers is a mistake. And that banks and companies are too large, they distort the economy, and worse, need rescuing when they err.

So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!

-- Owen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Eric Charles

Professional Student and
Assistant Professor of Psychology
Penn State University
Altoona, PA 16601

Nick Thompson

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Marcus G. Daniels

Good point! And any academics on this list should think hard about where their TIAA-CREF money actually IS.

There’s a “social responsibility” fund, for instance. But my point was a psychological one, right.

Should we be lobbying TIAA to stop buying bonds issued by the likes of Bank of America, if, indeed, they do?

Nick

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 11:11 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator

On 10/22/2011 10:45 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:

So why did we in the middle class been so stalwart in our defense of wall street for the last 40 years?

The answer, it seems to me, is that we are all stockholders.

[..]

Over the years CREF, which started out as a sturdy conservative fund, became a “family of funds”, and you could invest your retirement money in any crap you felt like. In short, many academics lost a large proportion of their retirement.

Douglas Roberts-2

Re: Next Dictator

That might possibly be one of those questions that if you have to ask, the answer would be meaningless.

The real issue, which, with the exception of Marcus, keeps being conveniently ignored here, is that we have placed our elected officials into office every year. And then we have collectively looked in the other direction as these fine public servants have allowed the corrupting influences of big corporate money to do its special magic, year after year.

Politicians are paid for. We allow that. It's our fault. It always has been.

--Doug

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Should we be lobbying TIAA to stop buying bonds issued by the likes of Bank of America, if, indeed, they do?

Nick

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 11:11 AM
To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator

On 10/22/2011 10:45 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
So why did we in the middle class been so stalwart in our defense of wall street for the last 40 years?

The answer, it seems to me, is that we are all stockholders.

[..]

Over the years CREF, which started out as a sturdy conservative fund, became a “family of funds”, and you could invest your retirement money in any crap you felt like. In short, many academics lost a large proportion of their retirement.

Thus, the gradual erosion of our retirement institutions in the 50’s into INVESTMENT institutions has turned us all from people trying to guarantee a minimum dignified retirement income to people trying to make a stock-market killing.

As Doug has pointed out many times, a large chunk of the `99%' create the problem and won't take responsibility for it.

TIAA-CREF has a number of funds and lets one move between them with the latency of a few days. It's not like a retiree's financial security is held hostage to a particular fund. For example, there's this option:

http://www.tiaa-cref.org/public/about/how-we-invest/sri/social-screening/

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

--
Doug Roberts
[hidden email]
[hidden email]

http://parrot-farm.net/Second-Cousins

505-455-7333 - Office
505-670-8195 - Cell

Roger Critchlow-2

Re: Next Dictator

From http://howconservativesdrovemeaway.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-vs-tea-party.html

-- rec --

Alfredo Covaleda Vélez

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

I think current model has some sinister and wicked rules:

1. To make of each one of us an stockholder. We can't choose if we want or not to gamble. The fact of opening a retirement account makes you an stockholder. ¿Where is it the freedom of western culture? You must decide the level of risk of the investment you are constrained to do. In the same sense, at the end profits belongs to the bank but losses belongs to the owner of the retirement account. Banks use our money to increase their profits. For example, last trimester I lost more than twice the amount I saved during the same period (check your accounts).

2. Labor flexibilization: is an excuse to impel private inversion. Theoretically, reducing the cost of production gives more jobs. Unfortunately to reduce cost of production means reduce all kind of benefits for workers and creates labor instability but the worst thing is that it is false about creation of more jobs.

3. Health care privatization: has made life a merchandise and level of corruption in this kind of private companies is amazingly big (at least in my country).

4. To allow companies to growth without limit. The tiny company will extinct, monopoly will get strong and more poor people will "emerge". Years ago I read that the value of Microsoft was equivalent to the economy of Spain and my Country of the size of Yahoo. It is ridiculous.

At the end of the day, real discussion is the weak paper of the governments.

2011/10/22 Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]>

Good point! And any academics on this list should think hard about where their TIAA-CREF money actually IS.

There’s a “social responsibility” fund, for instance. But my point was a psychological one, right.

Should we be lobbying TIAA to stop buying bonds issued by the likes of Bank of America, if, indeed, they do?

Nick

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus G. Daniels
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 11:11 AM
To: [hidden email]

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator

On 10/22/2011 10:45 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
So why did we in the middle class been so stalwart in our defense of wall street for the last 40 years?

The answer, it seems to me, is that we are all stockholders.

[..]

Over the years CREF, which started out as a sturdy conservative fund, became a “family of funds”, and you could invest your retirement money in any crap you felt like. In short, many academics lost a large proportion of their retirement.

Thus, the gradual erosion of our retirement institutions in the 50’s into INVESTMENT institutions has turned us all from people trying to guarantee a minimum dignified retirement income to people trying to make a stock-market killing.

As Doug has pointed out many times, a large chunk of the `99%' create the problem and won't take responsibility for it.

TIAA-CREF has a number of funds and lets one move between them with the latency of a few days. It's not like a retiree's financial security is held hostage to a particular fund. For example, there's this option:

http://www.tiaa-cref.org/public/about/how-we-invest/sri/social-screening/

Marcus

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

--
Alfredo

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Joe Spinden

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

I think the problem is incentives -- not simply on Wall Street, but in the broader world as well: In general, people act to maximize their own individual rewards. As long as the system provides individuals with opportunities for large rewards with little personal risk, people will act to maximize their own individual rewards. If they are right, they earn big rewards. If wrong, others pay.

Joe

On 10/22/11 9:55 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:

After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.

--
Alfredo

I certainly agree with the sentiment. And I do believe the core signal in our noise is the lack of a robust middle class, thus I find very troubling the divide between the wealthy and the "rest of us" and our immense struggle just to get by nowadays.

But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.

I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.

The financial sector is "different". It makes money by manipulating money. Sometimes that's fine, for example futures markets help stabilize the price of components of products we buy. Hedge is not a bad word here. Even lending is important when it too relates to real things like houses and companies building products.

I think the disconnect is when real products and people are abstracted out of the financial world, when we're building bundles of loans, slicing and dicing, and nothing real in sight. Or when we are trading in currencies.

Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.

As much as we hate them, regulations are important. But they are very hard to manage, and with the global economy, they need to be balanced world wide. And we don't really know which ones will really build the right incentives.

We have, however, just learned by experiments gone wrong, that letting banks also be insurers is a mistake. And that banks and companies are too large, they distort the economy, and worse, need rescuing when they err.

So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!

-- Owen
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
-- 

"Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

  -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913.

Douglas Roberts-2

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Roger Critchlow-2

Thanks, Roger. That was concise and to the point. Decidedly un-FRIAMish.

Sent from Android.

On Oct 22, 2011 2:48 PM, "Roger Critchlow" <[hidden email]> wrote:

From http://howconservativesdrovemeaway.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-street-vs-tea-party.html

-- rec --

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Nick Thompson

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Joe Spinden

The idea that people maximize their individual interests is one of those crazy ideas that economists have to postulate in order to make their crazy theories work. In fact, people sometimes maximize their personal interests, sometimes their family interests, and sometimes, with great ferocity, their group interests, at the expense both to group and family. I have no general opinion which of these is better. They all can be terrifying.

From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of joseph spinden
Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 3:07 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator

On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:

After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.

--
Alfredo

But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.

I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.

Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.

So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!

-- Owen

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College

lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

--

"Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

  -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913.

Owen Densmore

Re: Next Dictator

Administrator

OK, I liked Roger's so much as to send the killer Venn diagram from the post:

I really like the stories all over the place about the Tea Party working it out w/ the Occupy* world.

-- Owen

Patrick Reilly

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Nick Thompson

Only psychopaths have the sole criteria of maximizing perceived self-interest in making decisions.

On Saturday, October 22, 2011, Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The idea that people maximize their individual interests is one of those crazy ideas that economists have to postulate in order to make their crazy theories work. In fact, people sometimes maximize their personal interests, sometimes their family interests, and sometimes, with great ferocity, their group interests, at the expense both to group and family. I have no general opinion which of these is better. They all can be terrifying.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of joseph spinden
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 3:07 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator
>
>
>
> I think the problem is incentives -- not simply on Wall Street, but in the broader world as well: In general, people act to maximize their own individual rewards. As long as the system provides individuals with opportunities for large rewards with little personal risk, people will act to maximize their own individual rewards. If they are right, they earn big rewards. If wrong, others pay.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> On 10/22/11 9:55 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.
>
> --
> Alfredo
>
>
>
> I certainly agree with the sentiment. And I do believe the core signal in our noise is the lack of a robust middle class, thus I find very troubling the divide between the wealthy and the "rest of us" and our immense struggle just to get by nowadays.
>
>
>
> But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.
>
>
>
> I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.
>
>
>
> The financial sector is "different". It makes money by manipulating money. Sometimes that's fine, for example futures markets help stabilize the price of components of products we buy. Hedge is not a bad word here. Even lending is important when it too relates to real things like houses and companies building products.
>
>
>
> I think the disconnect is when real products and people are abstracted out of the financial world, when we're building bundles of loans, slicing and dicing, and nothing real in sight. Or when we are trading in currencies.
>
>
>
> Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.
>
>
>
> As much as we hate them, regulations are important. But they are very hard to manage, and with the global economy, they need to be balanced world wide. And we don't really know which ones will really build the right incentives.
>
>
>
> We have, however, just learned by experiments gone wrong, that letting banks also be insurers is a mistake. And that banks and companies are too large, they distort the economy, and worse, need rescuing when they err.
>

>
>
> So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!
>
>
>
> -- Owen
>
>
> ============================================================

Marcus G. Daniels

Re: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Owen Densmore

On 10/22/2011 7:07 PM, Owen Densmore wrote:

I really like the stories all over the place about the Tea Party working it out w/ the Occupy* world.

http://movieclips.com/T824-planet-of-the-apes-movie-youre-so-damned-ugly/

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Patrick Reilly

Fwd: Next Dictator

In reply to this post by Patrick Reilly

Sole criterion. (embarrassed laugh)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Patrick Reilly
Date: Saturday, October 22, 2011
Subject: [FRIAM] Next Dictator
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Only psychopaths have the sole criteria of maximizing perceived self-interest in making decisions.

On Saturday, October 22, 2011, Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The idea that people maximize their individual interests is one of those crazy ideas that economists have to postulate in order to make their crazy theories work. In fact, people sometimes maximize their personal interests, sometimes their family interests, and sometimes, with great ferocity, their group interests, at the expense both to group and family. I have no general opinion which of these is better. They all can be terrifying.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of joseph spinden
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 3:07 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator
>
>
>
> I think the problem is incentives -- not simply on Wall Street, but in the broader world as well: In general, people act to maximize their own individual rewards. As long as the system provides individuals with opportunities for large rewards with little personal risk, people will act to maximize their own individual rewards. If they are right, they earn big rewards. If wrong, others pay.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> On 10/22/11 9:55 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.
>
> --
> Alfredo
>
>
>
> I certainly agree with the sentiment. And I do believe the core signal in our noise is the lack of a robust middle class, thus I find very troubling the divide between the wealthy and the "rest of us" and our immense struggle just to get by nowadays.
>
>
>
> But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.
>
>
>
> I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.
>
>
>
> The financial sector is "different". It makes money by manipulating money. Sometimes that's fine, for example futures markets help stabilize the price of components of products we buy. Hedge is not a bad word here. Even lending is important when it too relates to real things like houses and companies building products.
>
>
>
> I think the disconnect is when real products and people are abstracted out of the financial world, when we're building bundles of loans, slicing and dicing, and nothing real in sight. Or when we are trading in currencies.
>
>
>
> Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.
>
>
>
> As much as we hate them, regulations are important. But they are very hard to manage, and with the global economy, they need to be balanced world wide. And we don't really know which ones will really build the right incentives.
>
>
>
> We have, however, just learned by experiments gone wrong, that letting banks also be insurers is a mistake. And that banks and companies are too large, they distort the economy, and worse, need rescuing when they err.
>

>
>
> So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!
>
>
>
> -- Owen
>
>
> ============================================================

>
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
> --
>
>
>
> "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."
>
>
>
> -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913.

--
The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email].

--
The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email].

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Robert J. Cordingley

Re: Fwd: Next Dictator

Didn't the 2003 documentary The Corporation make the point that corporations are psychopaths based on some WHO criteria?
Thanks
Robert C

On 10/22/11 10:33 PM, Patrick Reilly wrote:

Sole criterion. (embarrassed laugh)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Patrick Reilly
Date: Saturday, October 22, 2011
Subject: [FRIAM] Next Dictator
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Only psychopaths have the sole criteria of maximizing perceived self-interest in making decisions.

On Saturday, October 22, 2011, Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The idea that people maximize their individual interests is one of those crazy ideas that economists have to postulate in order to make their crazy theories work. In fact, people sometimes maximize their personal interests, sometimes their family interests, and sometimes, with great ferocity, their group interests, at the expense both to group and family. I have no general opinion which of these is better. They all can be terrifying.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of joseph spinden
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 3:07 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator
>
>
>
> I think the problem is incentives -- not simply on Wall Street, but in the broader world as well: In general, people act to maximize their own individual rewards. As long as the system provides individuals with opportunities for large rewards with little personal risk, people will act to maximize their own individual rewards. If they are right, they earn big rewards. If wrong, others pay.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> On 10/22/11 9:55 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.
>
> --
> Alfredo
>
>
>
> I certainly agree with the sentiment. And I do believe the core signal in our noise is the lack of a robust middle class, thus I find very troubling the divide between the wealthy and the "rest of us" and our immense struggle just to get by nowadays.
>
>
>
> But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.
>
>
>
> I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.
>
>
>
> The financial sector is "different". It makes money by manipulating money. Sometimes that's fine, for example futures markets help stabilize the price of components of products we buy. Hedge is not a bad word here. Even lending is important when it too relates to real things like houses and companies building products.
>
>
>
> I think the disconnect is when real products and people are abstracted out of the financial world, when we're building bundles of loans, slicing and dicing, and nothing real in sight. Or when we are trading in currencies.
>
>
>
> Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.
>
>
>
> As much as we hate them, regulations are important. But they are very hard to manage, and with the global economy, they need to be balanced world wide. And we don't really know which ones will really build the right incentives.
>
>
>
> We have, however, just learned by experiments gone wrong, that letting banks also be insurers is a mistake. And that banks and companies are too large, they distort the economy, and worse, need rescuing when they err.
>
>
>
> So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!
>
>
>
> -- Owen
>
>
> ============================================================
>
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
> --
>
>
>
> "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."
>
>
>
> -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913.

--
The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email].

--
The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email].
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

-- 
Cirrillian
Web Development
cirrillian.com
505-471-4569 (office)
281-989-6272 (cell)

Roger Critchlow-2

Re: Fwd: Next Dictator

I keep thinking that the next big dictator isn't new.

Das Kapital is an artificial life form which by a process of natural selection pursues its own preservation and growth. It doesn't care which individuals or institutions survive or perish in the process, it just moves and grows where the return on investment takes it. It has no ethics, no morality, and no sense of humor.

Daniel Kahneman in http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/magazine/dont-blink-the-hazards-of-confidence.html mentions analyzing 8 years of investment results for 25 successful investment advisers. Though these were all experienced and confident men, the average year to year correlation in their results was 0.01. The highly rewarded experts of finance have no real idea what they're doing, they are highly rewarded for an "illusion of skill", they play roulette with style and their clients buy them expensive clothes to do it in. The news didn't faze them a bit; that they can do what they do and get rewarded for it is all the affirmation they need.

In dealing with Das Kapital, I think we're pretty much all in the same boat. No one knows where the slime mold will choose to extend its pseudopodia, or which of the pseudopodia will thrive or wither, or what the novel beneficial or lamentable consequences will be. Some of us worry about the suffering caused by the gold-goo-excrement, others worry about not killing the beast that makes the gold-goo, many just fight for the largest share they can get, and most of us could care less until the bucket of gold-goo-excrement lands in our neighborhood or the gold-goo pseudopod feeding our investments dries up.

--rec --

On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Robert J. Cordingley <[hidden email]> wrote:

Didn't the 2003 documentary The Corporation make the point that corporations are psychopaths based on some WHO criteria?
Thanks
Robert C
On 10/22/11 10:33 PM, Patrick Reilly wrote:
Sole criterion. (embarrassed laugh)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Patrick Reilly
Date: Saturday, October 22, 2011
Subject: [FRIAM] Next Dictator
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>

Only psychopaths have the sole criteria of maximizing perceived self-interest in making decisions.

On Saturday, October 22, 2011, Nicholas Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The idea that people maximize their individual interests is one of those crazy ideas that economists have to postulate in order to make their crazy theories work. In fact, people sometimes maximize their personal interests, sometimes their family interests, and sometimes, with great ferocity, their group interests, at the expense both to group and family. I have no general opinion which of these is better. They all can be terrifying.
>
>
>
> N
>
>
>
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of joseph spinden
> Sent: Saturday, October 22, 2011 3:07 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Next Dictator
>
>
>
> I think the problem is incentives -- not simply on Wall Street, but in the broader world as well: In general, people act to maximize their own individual rewards. As long as the system provides individuals with opportunities for large rewards with little personal risk, people will act to maximize their own individual rewards. If they are right, they earn big rewards. If wrong, others pay.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
> On 10/22/11 9:55 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Alfredo Covaleda <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> After Gadaffi's death a local newspaper wrote : "who is going to be the next dictator to fall?". Well, my answer is: Wall Street.
>
> --
> Alfredo
>
>
>
> I certainly agree with the sentiment. And I do believe the core signal in our noise is the lack of a robust middle class, thus I find very troubling the divide between the wealthy and the "rest of us" and our immense struggle just to get by nowadays.
>
>
>
> But I don't think the problem is wall street per se. After all, wall street funds companies who build things that are useful.
>
>
>
> I think the problems are 1) in the financial sector 2) caused by too-big-to-fail, including monopolies.
>
>
>
> The financial sector is "different". It makes money by manipulating money. Sometimes that's fine, for example futures markets help stabilize the price of components of products we buy. Hedge is not a bad word here. Even lending is important when it too relates to real things like houses and companies building products.
>
>
>
> I think the disconnect is when real products and people are abstracted out of the financial world, when we're building bundles of loans, slicing and dicing, and nothing real in sight. Or when we are trading in currencies.
>
>
>
> Big is different too, distorting markets and dangerous if they fail.
>
>
>
> As much as we hate them, regulations are important. But they are very hard to manage, and with the global economy, they need to be balanced world wide. And we don't really know which ones will really build the right incentives.
>
>
>
> We have, however, just learned by experiments gone wrong, that letting banks also be insurers is a mistake. And that banks and companies are too large, they distort the economy, and worse, need rescuing when they err.
>
>
>
> So yes, let the financial dictator fail next. Now lets figure out how!
>
>
>
> -- Owen
>
>
> ============================================================
>
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>
> lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
>
> --
>
>
>
> "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."
>
>
>
> -- Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1913.

--
The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email].

--
The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to [hidden email].
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
-- Cirrillian Web Development cirrillian.com <a href="tel:505-471-4569" value="+15054714569" target="_blank">505-471-4569 (office) <a href="tel:281-989-6272" value="+12819896272" target="_blank">281-989-6272 (cell)
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org