ZAMBIA LIMERICK
Reply
Category Archives: Economics
PROMPT: Cities
I suspect cities are on the way to becoming passé. They worked great for an economy built around humans exchanging time and effort for a salary, but in an economy in which machines do virtually all productive tasks better, faster, and more efficiently than humans, the benefits seem less clear.
Plus, there’s a lot of discussion of an epidemic of loneliness, and so it seems — as a basic organizational structure — cities (admittedly ironically) don’t serve humanity well. People are adapted for families and tribes — more close-knit communities.
Furthermore, Asia is already beginning to see the problem of downward scalability of cities, as many cities shrink less elegantly than they grew. Birth rates are declining everywhere as humanity reaches its upper limit for this planet.
Maybe the future is artist colonies.
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
The End of the World as We Know It [Free Verse]
Humans have been hunters,
gatherers,
farmers,
machines,
thinkers,
and creators,
And have no idea what we'll next be.
I think that people will next be
-- simply --
Human Beings,
Full-time Human Beings --
More Human,
More Being...
And many will fail spectacularly.
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
PROMPT: Harmony
My wonkish need to analyze the train wreck that is our present state of governance and social discourse.
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
“Epigram for Wall Street” by Edgar Allan Poe [w/ Audio]
I'll tell you a plan for gaining wealth,
Better than banking, trade or leases —
Take a bank note and fold it up,
And then you will find your money in creases!
This wonderful plan, without danger or loss,
Keeps your cash in your hands, where nothing can trouble it;
And every time that you fold it across,
'Tis as plain as the light of the day that you double it!
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
PROMPT: Disagree
These days? Trump — hands down. Beyond a few of his stated policy objectives, there is more and more I disagree with every day. (I emphasize “stated” because there is so little that’s coherent in his actions to prove he is really interested in advancing said objectives.) For example, I do agree that the swelling deficits (budget and trade) are something that should be treated as unsustainable. I’m not of the “a current account deficit is just a capital account surplus, so turn that frown upside-down” ilk. However, erratic and untargeted tariff policies that hurt successful sectors (e.g. agriculture and services) and which will only put the toothpaste back in the tube (bring [human] factory labor back to the US on a huge scale) by crashing the US into Third World status are not the way.
I disagree with this inexplicable monomaniacal obsession with heavy industry, while injuring those sectors that have done well in recent decades.
I agree with… Powell, that there is a high chance of stagflation if the Fed takes a loose money stance. The problem is… Trump. Ordinarily, it would be good to dump some money on an economy that is struggling. But the problem is that Trump is like a salesperson that would like to sell customers something, but he also enjoys chasing them around the store with an axe. The problem is that people and companies don’t make big purchases when they are afraid and the future is uncertain. (This is why even getting investment in robotic factories isn’t happening.) There’s uncertainty because of the tariffs. There’s uncertainty about whether companies will have to pay bribes to Trump, personally. There’s uncertainty about whether the legal and institutional frameworks that have so long made America an appealing place to invest and innovate will survive. So, if the Fed injects money but consumer confidence and investment are flat because of said uncertainty, then that money will be purely inflationary. [Remember, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods. More money needs to meet more demand for stuff.]
I disagree that one can have one’s cake and eat it, too. Specifically, tariffs need to be either for revenue generation or for policy negotiations, they can’t be both, but Trump talks like he doesn’t understand this. If tariffs are going to be the new primary source of government income, they need to bring in money sustainably. If they are a negotiating tool to lever policy, you need to be ready to negotiate them away in return for your own objective wins.
I definitely disagree with the ignoring of Supreme Court decisions. It’s particularly disconcerting to see him ignore 9 – 0 decisions, which means that even his own appointees could not find a hairsbreadth of wiggle room in the law by which his actions could be viewed as lawful.
I disagree with picking a raft of pretty-idiots / talking-heads for positions that require high levels of emotional intelligence and — you know — intelligence intelligence. If it weren’t for the fact that America has the most awesome and professional military in the world, I’d be especially afraid that Hegseth was going to destroy it. But while I think the US Military will be around long after he’s gone, I’m suspect he will have done damage to morale and operational efficiency.
I disagree with favoring dictators over longtime allies. [While I would agree that it’s good that Europe is taking on more of the burden of their own defense, I’m concerned that trashing relations to do so will not prove a sound approach.]
I disagree with all the attempts to play from the Putin-Orban Populist Dictators’ Playbook.
While I’m not at all averse to seeing cuts to the Federal bureaucracy, I do disagree with — you know — firing people before you understand what they do and whether it’s critical to health and safety, the necessary conduct of governance, or oversight against fraud and abuse.
I disagree that one should talk about making loophole end-runs around Constitutional prohibitions.
But, I ramble on…
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
PROMPT: Productive
Uhh… when I’m being most productive, which is to say when I’m producing something in an efficient manner. (Not sure if it’s a trick question.) Obviously, if I’ve felt the need to check my phone, social media, etc. it’s not a highly productive time because I’m not engaged with what I’m producing. Also, I have lots of time when I’m intensely engaged with an activity, but I’m not producing anything, and so that isn’t being productive per se — though it may be highly beneficial and essential to well-being. (Although, my dictionary / thesaurus have definitions of “productive” that equate it with “constructive” which changes everything. Though it also equates “intelligence,” “erudition,” and “wisdom,” which is a highly suspect understanding of wisdom.)
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
PROMPT: Discuss
Virtually anything but myself. Philosophy, literature, science, economics, public policy, meditation, martial arts, health / well-being, travel, nature, culture, food, the end of the world as we know it, etc.
I do have some blind spots where I could not speak intelligently (e.g. large swathes of history, sports, and pop culture.)
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
PROMPT: First Thing
We’re all screwed. Embrace the chaos or head for the hills.
There is a class of problems that brute force solutions, even when they nudge the needle in the desired direction, always end in devastation.
One can’t drive an aircraft carrier like a jet-ski and expect anything other than a bunch of drowned sailors and destroyed planes.
[Guess who’s been reading the news.]
Share on Facebook, Twitter, Email, etc.
BOOKS: “The Cultural Revolution: A Very Short Introduction” by Richard Curt Kraus
The Cultural Revolution: A Very Short Introduction by Richard Curt KrausMy rating: 4 of 5 stars
Publisher Site – OUP
The decade-long Cultural Revolution in China is generally looked upon as a bleak time and place to be alive. This brief guide reflects on the political, economic, and cultural dimensions of Mao’s attempt to root out capitalist and middle-class influence from Chinese society. The book also reflects upon other events in China during the period (e.g. detente) and how they related to the Cultural Revolution. It also explores how China came out of the Cultural Revolution.
The author makes efforts to be diplomatic and evenhanded about the event. Some readers will find this beneficial to their purposes and may even see the occasional glimmer of a bright side to a dismal period in human history. However, one should not expect to gain any visceral insight into the sadness and chaos of the era. While there was discussion of not only the end of the Cultural Revolution but what China’s continued path looked like, it didn’t get much into whether there was a long shadow to the revolution and what that shadow might look like.
I found the book informative though there were dimensions into which I would have liked to gain more insight (e.g. it doesn’t go much into the influence on religion, nor on more peripheral arts,) but that’s the challenge of such a concise guide. Also, the author is of a political science background, and this informs what elements are given more or less discussion.
View all my reviews
Tiger Riding for Beginners 