This perspective comes from a mix of common sense and a new
understanding of growth systems as made of many kinds of independent agents,
just as it appears. Looking at the world that way violates the scientific principle
of determinism, however, considering all systems as having independent
responses to their environments, something sort of like “free will”.
But hey, that things have “minds of their own” is exactly
what we’re trying to explain, isn’t it? Why not hear out
someone who has studied it carefully from a direction others have passed up for
years?
The economic multiplier, using profits to multiply profits, is
what we should look at. It turns out that if no one makes any of the mistakes
we see as responsible for the current collapse of expectations, maintaining the
multiplier will create conditions where some other ones will emerge. That’s
an important catch. Everyone mistakenly sees the multiplier as a way to
multiply their own rewards, and doesn’t see that it as also multiplies
their neighbor’s risks. The real problem is that there is no way to
turn it off when the risks get out of control.
Best,
Phil
Henshaw ¸¸¸¸.·´ ¯ `·.¸¸¸¸
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
212-795-4844
680 Ft.Washington Ave NY NY 10040 [hidden email]
"it's not finding what people say interesting, but finding the
interest in what they say"
============================================================
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
Locked
