Quoted from here:
http://changingminds.org/explanations/theories/side_bet.htm
..................................
We make choices based on assumptions about the world around us and previous decisions we have made. In this we make 'side bets' that are based on a main bet or activity succeeding. If we fail at the main bet then we also lose the side bet. The side bets thus increase commitment to the main bet.
As Becker said:
"Commitments come into being when a person, by making a side-bet, links extraneous interests with a consistent line of activity."
In the same vein a reverse effect occurs in hedging activity. If we make a side bet on which we win if the main bet fails, then our commitment to the main bet fails.
......................................................
Hedge Fund side bets so far exceed the underlaying value of what they are betting on that the commitment to the main bet fails.
If the side bets win there is not enough money (in the world) to pay the side betters. More money has to be created to pay them. Another way to solve the problem is to declare all side bets null and void or proportionally relate the value of the side bets to the underlaying value.
If the holders of the side bets also have some power over the creation of money then what is the obvious thing for the betters to do?
What will creation of enough money to pay off the side bets in full do to the economy?
This seems like a good idea quoted from here:
http://www.star-telegram.com/104/story/1175840.html
.............................................
So: Immediately declare null and void all derivative contracts worldwide where the investor doesn’t have a vested interest in the property that the derivative was purchased for. After all, you can’t buy life insurance on someone you are not financially bound to, so why should someone be able to buy a derivative (insurance) on a mortgage or bond package they don’t own? That’s nothing more than a side bet on someone else’s action, and it leads some individuals to bet on disaster because it makes them rich while everyone else suffers. But our government is covering those side bets now – and it needs to end.
............................................
Then let mortgage failure run its course with some degree of government mortgage assistance to keep those with marginal ability to pay afloat and lessen the impact. Mortgage assistance therefore has to be extended by category to those that it would help the most to survive. Then let those that can't sink. A tough way to solve this problem. Fair only in the macro analysis.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Government Spying Upon Itself
Government spying upon itself as an intelligence gathering function is elegant.
It is so obvious. The National Security Agency is its own best place to record and analyze everything that its own people are communicating. It is the greatest social media test tube ever created. It is exploring social media like NASA is exploring space. It has unbridled funds to do it. The spin off benefits to society of our investment in this area will someday be recognized. Unfortunate that it has to be kept secret today.
NSA has an internal structure to deal with all the information it is pulling in from external sources. An internal communication system, an analysis system. Ultimately its best resource is its people. Its human analyst that compile everything and extract meaning like a very high level structured program.
The beauty of the internal NSA spy system is that NSA can structure it without any limitation to its specific purpose. It can record everything that its own people are saying an mine it. Mine it using social media methods, without restrictions to get in the way. Privacy within NSA is a non issue. The perfect environment to develop social media.
How might it look?
The answer is that it would look like the perfect social media system. At least the best one that money can buy today. It accomplishes all the objectives of a social media system. Those objectives are largely in the realm of genius dreams outside of the secret world of NSA and I am sure that we would marvel at what is being done. Actually, what has to be done to protect our nations security using the best means to protect it: Information, knowledge.
If social media serves up collective intelligence in the most elegant manner and the NSA has to have the best intelligence system then I hope this secret system is applied publicly and soon. Certainly it is as NSA research on information and knowledge systems is escaping control as it leaks out in academic areas. Like controlling the secrets of the atom bomb, the secrets of information and knowledge system creation and application can't be contained. NSA is probably drawing more conceptually in improving thier internal social media structure than they are contributing. What NSA has to contribute is an actual implementation of all the concepts.
Where better to apply proven system of social media application to extract collective intelligence than the public operation of government and governance?
In addition to the intelligence being provided by the NSA and the NSC to President OBAMA that is the product of our best intelligence gathering system, the emerging beauty of the internal system analysis using advanced social media concepts and applications for national security becomes an independent matter of best advice to the president consistent with and contributing to his objective of involving all of us in the government process.
Our space program had substantial spin off benefit to our society at the pinnacle of industrial development and perhaps marked the transition to its greater contribution to the emergence of information age development. Our information age development leadership organization is now the NSA. We don't see the spectacular results of that development in social media application form equal to a blast off preceded by a count down to draw the attention of a nation. It would reveal sources and methods and capabilities of internal systems that are secret.
Keeping implementations of social media concepts applied internally, with probable external extensions to support it, a national secret will not be in the national interest. When President Obama's security advisors reveal the national benefit of the system, independent of what it produces then they will really be contributing to the defense of the nation.
The only problem is that product of a collective intelligence system is by definition an indication of the most intelligent thing to do. It is also supported by structure of logic and reason and analysis that can be examined in detailed range and depth. Such a product may indicate changes to established systems that are not as well supported, or in fact do not have any rational support.
Who would have ever thought that the greatest battle between unsubstantiated faith and its greatest opponent; reason would find its emergence for the NSA? Not surprising if the basis is intelligence and discovery that the best intelligence is found in our collective thought, not the insertion of thought fallacies in individual minds that are in positions of power to force their influence.
Government doing its best to spy upon itself and reveal the intelligent thing to do might be the solution to the problem when the methodology emerges for public benefit. How will it emerge? By those doing things for us in our best interest without our full knowledge of what is driving their efforts? That is not collective intelligence.
It is so obvious. The National Security Agency is its own best place to record and analyze everything that its own people are communicating. It is the greatest social media test tube ever created. It is exploring social media like NASA is exploring space. It has unbridled funds to do it. The spin off benefits to society of our investment in this area will someday be recognized. Unfortunate that it has to be kept secret today.
NSA has an internal structure to deal with all the information it is pulling in from external sources. An internal communication system, an analysis system. Ultimately its best resource is its people. Its human analyst that compile everything and extract meaning like a very high level structured program.
The beauty of the internal NSA spy system is that NSA can structure it without any limitation to its specific purpose. It can record everything that its own people are saying an mine it. Mine it using social media methods, without restrictions to get in the way. Privacy within NSA is a non issue. The perfect environment to develop social media.
How might it look?
The answer is that it would look like the perfect social media system. At least the best one that money can buy today. It accomplishes all the objectives of a social media system. Those objectives are largely in the realm of genius dreams outside of the secret world of NSA and I am sure that we would marvel at what is being done. Actually, what has to be done to protect our nations security using the best means to protect it: Information, knowledge.
If social media serves up collective intelligence in the most elegant manner and the NSA has to have the best intelligence system then I hope this secret system is applied publicly and soon. Certainly it is as NSA research on information and knowledge systems is escaping control as it leaks out in academic areas. Like controlling the secrets of the atom bomb, the secrets of information and knowledge system creation and application can't be contained. NSA is probably drawing more conceptually in improving thier internal social media structure than they are contributing. What NSA has to contribute is an actual implementation of all the concepts.
Where better to apply proven system of social media application to extract collective intelligence than the public operation of government and governance?
In addition to the intelligence being provided by the NSA and the NSC to President OBAMA that is the product of our best intelligence gathering system, the emerging beauty of the internal system analysis using advanced social media concepts and applications for national security becomes an independent matter of best advice to the president consistent with and contributing to his objective of involving all of us in the government process.
Our space program had substantial spin off benefit to our society at the pinnacle of industrial development and perhaps marked the transition to its greater contribution to the emergence of information age development. Our information age development leadership organization is now the NSA. We don't see the spectacular results of that development in social media application form equal to a blast off preceded by a count down to draw the attention of a nation. It would reveal sources and methods and capabilities of internal systems that are secret.
Keeping implementations of social media concepts applied internally, with probable external extensions to support it, a national secret will not be in the national interest. When President Obama's security advisors reveal the national benefit of the system, independent of what it produces then they will really be contributing to the defense of the nation.
The only problem is that product of a collective intelligence system is by definition an indication of the most intelligent thing to do. It is also supported by structure of logic and reason and analysis that can be examined in detailed range and depth. Such a product may indicate changes to established systems that are not as well supported, or in fact do not have any rational support.
Who would have ever thought that the greatest battle between unsubstantiated faith and its greatest opponent; reason would find its emergence for the NSA? Not surprising if the basis is intelligence and discovery that the best intelligence is found in our collective thought, not the insertion of thought fallacies in individual minds that are in positions of power to force their influence.
Government doing its best to spy upon itself and reveal the intelligent thing to do might be the solution to the problem when the methodology emerges for public benefit. How will it emerge? By those doing things for us in our best interest without our full knowledge of what is driving their efforts? That is not collective intelligence.
Thief Whose Crime Improves the System?
Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd.
Is the story here an example of a thief whose exposure may improve the system? The benefit of exposure of how it was done and made possible greater than the damage done by the thief?
Only if the lesson is learned.
When risk of loss is wrongly manipulated for gain what is more elegant than leveraging the loss to make it hurt far beyond the gain. It only works if the pain of loss bet on risk is administered. Who does the administering?
Isn't RICO leveraged punishment?
http://www.renebol.com/?p=13 extracted quote:
"Given Fairfax’s cds portfolio, it is difficult to imagine a scenario where Fairfax did not understand and try to profit from the corruption in the system. By taking cds positions against MBIA, Ambac, Radian, AIG, etc., Fairfax knew that eventually the evidence against the bond insurers would be so overwhelming that the credit agencies would have to make the downgrades and in turn trigger Fairfax’s windfall. The real exposure in the system was not reflected in the institutions that were suppose to protect investors. Fairfax didn’t so much make a strategic trade that paid off when their vision of the future became reality, as they made a trade against the corruption in the system that paid off when the obsfucation could no longer be tolerated. Smart business or profiting from the corruption of others?"
more quote:
"Fairfax might yet turn out to be a force for good. If its lawsuit against the hedge funds can expose the prevalence of corruption on Wall Street, then the court findings might lead to improved SEC regulations and enforcement. However, what is really needed is a paradigm shift that demands government take on a larger role in our lives. From finance to energy, the environment, climate change, and the Millienium Development Goals, our challenges have to be met by forward thinking governments and people willing to sacrifice profits for ethics."
Give Fairfax the "Economic Equivalent" Of the Bush "Freedom Medal". Tell them "heck of a job Fairfax" Then confiscate everything.
Is the story here an example of a thief whose exposure may improve the system? The benefit of exposure of how it was done and made possible greater than the damage done by the thief?
Only if the lesson is learned.
When risk of loss is wrongly manipulated for gain what is more elegant than leveraging the loss to make it hurt far beyond the gain. It only works if the pain of loss bet on risk is administered. Who does the administering?
Isn't RICO leveraged punishment?
http://www.renebol.com/?p=13 extracted quote:
"Given Fairfax’s cds portfolio, it is difficult to imagine a scenario where Fairfax did not understand and try to profit from the corruption in the system. By taking cds positions against MBIA, Ambac, Radian, AIG, etc., Fairfax knew that eventually the evidence against the bond insurers would be so overwhelming that the credit agencies would have to make the downgrades and in turn trigger Fairfax’s windfall. The real exposure in the system was not reflected in the institutions that were suppose to protect investors. Fairfax didn’t so much make a strategic trade that paid off when their vision of the future became reality, as they made a trade against the corruption in the system that paid off when the obsfucation could no longer be tolerated. Smart business or profiting from the corruption of others?"
more quote:
"Fairfax might yet turn out to be a force for good. If its lawsuit against the hedge funds can expose the prevalence of corruption on Wall Street, then the court findings might lead to improved SEC regulations and enforcement. However, what is really needed is a paradigm shift that demands government take on a larger role in our lives. From finance to energy, the environment, climate change, and the Millienium Development Goals, our challenges have to be met by forward thinking governments and people willing to sacrifice profits for ethics."
Give Fairfax the "Economic Equivalent" Of the Bush "Freedom Medal". Tell them "heck of a job Fairfax" Then confiscate everything.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Theft Should be Rewarded
The title defies the moral of honesty. Theft is an elegant way to test the system. A friend recently told me her feelings about travel in strange places. She said her belief was that if she lost her wallet anywhere in the world 9 out of ten people would return it to her if they found it. She has traveled extensively because she was not afraid to travel. Once her camera was stolen but it was stolen in such an ingenious manner that her recognition of the skill of the person that took it was greater than the feeling of personal loss.
Testing the system for personal gain not permitted by the rules of the system benefits the system by exposing its weakness. Any system always has a weakness. The dangerous thief is the one that kills the goose to get the golden eggs.
The thieves of our economic system test it to expose failures. Correcting failures improves the system. The economic system thieves have collapsed the system. They not only killed the goose but will choke on the last golden egg they got from it. A catastrophic event for them, maybe good for us. An opportunity but 9/11 was also. To do what is another matter.
The wise thieves that always stole golden eggs from the system are desperate to keep that system going. They did not have enough control of the crooks that worked for them. All the crooks and thieves have served their purpose to expose the failure of the economic system. If we do not change the system we are fools to be preyed upon again.
A system that makes money on money without adding value, creates money out of nothing to make more money on money without adding value is a thief skinning the cat in the most elegant manner. It is however a system that cannot grow exponentially forever and therefore will not. We all take a haircut in the end but the thieves and their opportunity to continue to steal must come to an end as a function of the system correcting itself.
The system is to big to fail. We should not confuse the system with an institution that only seems to represent it and claims to be to big to fail by claiming to be the system. It is not. We are the system. The system that makes money on money bets has to be made to go away in an elegant manner that puts the sting on them.
When all the money in the world is debt money have we got to the point where everything in the world has been gained at the cost of going into debt for losing it all?
That is the same situation that faces us in the natural world.
Will we in the end skin ourselves in the most elegant manner by gleefully jumping out of our own skin much to the amusement of the only Thing left after we are gone? The big joke would be that there is no Thing left to enjoy this ultimate elegance and It was never there in the first place. The most elegant skinning in all time and eternity and Nobody to enjoy its beauty?
Testing the system for personal gain not permitted by the rules of the system benefits the system by exposing its weakness. Any system always has a weakness. The dangerous thief is the one that kills the goose to get the golden eggs.
The thieves of our economic system test it to expose failures. Correcting failures improves the system. The economic system thieves have collapsed the system. They not only killed the goose but will choke on the last golden egg they got from it. A catastrophic event for them, maybe good for us. An opportunity but 9/11 was also. To do what is another matter.
The wise thieves that always stole golden eggs from the system are desperate to keep that system going. They did not have enough control of the crooks that worked for them. All the crooks and thieves have served their purpose to expose the failure of the economic system. If we do not change the system we are fools to be preyed upon again.
A system that makes money on money without adding value, creates money out of nothing to make more money on money without adding value is a thief skinning the cat in the most elegant manner. It is however a system that cannot grow exponentially forever and therefore will not. We all take a haircut in the end but the thieves and their opportunity to continue to steal must come to an end as a function of the system correcting itself.
The system is to big to fail. We should not confuse the system with an institution that only seems to represent it and claims to be to big to fail by claiming to be the system. It is not. We are the system. The system that makes money on money bets has to be made to go away in an elegant manner that puts the sting on them.
When all the money in the world is debt money have we got to the point where everything in the world has been gained at the cost of going into debt for losing it all?
That is the same situation that faces us in the natural world.
Will we in the end skin ourselves in the most elegant manner by gleefully jumping out of our own skin much to the amusement of the only Thing left after we are gone? The big joke would be that there is no Thing left to enjoy this ultimate elegance and It was never there in the first place. The most elegant skinning in all time and eternity and Nobody to enjoy its beauty?
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Executive Skinning
The elegance of a thing is the effectiveness that lies hidden behind the obvious surface.
Limiting executive pay for firms receiving the bail out. For those that like punishment as a tool it sounds great. They would like skinning cats with knives while still alive. If they view it as punishment then they are happy. These kind of people like teeth in the bailout to bite.
What pay limit does is create incentive on the part of the executives not to receive bailout money. To keep the company from the position in which a bailout would be required. It also induces an executive to quit and go where the money might be better. That may open the job to someone that is not entirely interested in what the job will pay in money but in recognition, accomplishment, the value contribution to solutions. Non Monetary status. The cover of Rolling Stone. American Idol.
The ones that like the screams of the live cats being skinned will like enforcement of pay caps. The ones that would be capped in the future, which is probably far greater, will avoid the situation at all costs and do their job well to avoid it. That is elegant. Perhaps they will evade being capped by hiring lawyers to avoid getting caught.
Suggestion: Extend the pay caps to corporate lawyers.
Limiting executive pay for firms receiving the bail out. For those that like punishment as a tool it sounds great. They would like skinning cats with knives while still alive. If they view it as punishment then they are happy. These kind of people like teeth in the bailout to bite.
What pay limit does is create incentive on the part of the executives not to receive bailout money. To keep the company from the position in which a bailout would be required. It also induces an executive to quit and go where the money might be better. That may open the job to someone that is not entirely interested in what the job will pay in money but in recognition, accomplishment, the value contribution to solutions. Non Monetary status. The cover of Rolling Stone. American Idol.
The ones that like the screams of the live cats being skinned will like enforcement of pay caps. The ones that would be capped in the future, which is probably far greater, will avoid the situation at all costs and do their job well to avoid it. That is elegant. Perhaps they will evade being capped by hiring lawyers to avoid getting caught.
Suggestion: Extend the pay caps to corporate lawyers.
The Other Edge
Recent attention has been given to the exceptions to the rule for hiring lobbyists. This is just one example.
If and when it is necessary for the administration to fire anyone that serves at the pleasure of the president, restrictions on their ability to lobby, out of the office they occupied, matters related to that office becomes a very powerful incentive not to incur the displeasure of the president.
"Your fired" is a powerful statement that gains increasing power with application. Previously it might have drawn the response "Throw me in that brier patch" or "Hurt me, hurt me, I will make more as a lobbyist". If there are restrictions on post government employment use of connections with government then it can and should hurt. What use is anyone without influence in Washington? Their value becomes only what they know not who they know. Which is more important?
If and when it is necessary for the administration to fire anyone that serves at the pleasure of the president, restrictions on their ability to lobby, out of the office they occupied, matters related to that office becomes a very powerful incentive not to incur the displeasure of the president.
"Your fired" is a powerful statement that gains increasing power with application. Previously it might have drawn the response "Throw me in that brier patch" or "Hurt me, hurt me, I will make more as a lobbyist". If there are restrictions on post government employment use of connections with government then it can and should hurt. What use is anyone without influence in Washington? Their value becomes only what they know not who they know. Which is more important?
Monday, February 2, 2009
Skin 'em With Flowers
Let a hundred flowers blossom. (This is a link. One of my sisters does not know that) What an elegant way to skin a cat with flowers.
In an atmosphere of open invitation to thoughts for change perhaps senior military officers are making the greatest all time mistake in judgment. Good judgment is what an officer is paid for. Bad judgment is what he dies for.
Having forgotten their role and perhaps misjudging President Obama's open invitation for people to take their seat at the table of government and governance, maybe these guys think they have an equally open invitation to the party.
This looks like they are eager to make their own thoughts publicly known and only slightly veiled as presented through their retired surrogates.
Bad judgment will be reflected on their fitness report. Along with a comment that they are unfit to serve. Go ahead, make a third party to inflate your retirement income.
Ever heard of a general named MacArthur?
Some senior officers displayed their lack of judgment in the last administration. Are they so arrogant to think they will not be evaluated in the current one?
Admiral Rickover had a policy that an officer stayed in their position long enough for their mistakes to catch up with them. Then they were required to stay and fix them if they honestly could. To determine which ones could and would they were simply asked: Is that the best you could do? That is the hardest question to ask a truly dedicated person. Those that are not skin themselves with the arrogant answer.
Has President Obama stuck a flower in their gun barrel? One that will cause a backfire when they pull the trigger.
Shooting someone with their own rifle when it is pointed at you is the flip side of disposing of them by inducing them to fall upon their own sword. Neither is nice nor is any weapon that we live by when used for other than defense.
That is as elegant as it gets with the military.
In an atmosphere of open invitation to thoughts for change perhaps senior military officers are making the greatest all time mistake in judgment. Good judgment is what an officer is paid for. Bad judgment is what he dies for.
Having forgotten their role and perhaps misjudging President Obama's open invitation for people to take their seat at the table of government and governance, maybe these guys think they have an equally open invitation to the party.
This looks like they are eager to make their own thoughts publicly known and only slightly veiled as presented through their retired surrogates.
Bad judgment will be reflected on their fitness report. Along with a comment that they are unfit to serve. Go ahead, make a third party to inflate your retirement income.
Ever heard of a general named MacArthur?
Some senior officers displayed their lack of judgment in the last administration. Are they so arrogant to think they will not be evaluated in the current one?
Admiral Rickover had a policy that an officer stayed in their position long enough for their mistakes to catch up with them. Then they were required to stay and fix them if they honestly could. To determine which ones could and would they were simply asked: Is that the best you could do? That is the hardest question to ask a truly dedicated person. Those that are not skin themselves with the arrogant answer.
Has President Obama stuck a flower in their gun barrel? One that will cause a backfire when they pull the trigger.
Shooting someone with their own rifle when it is pointed at you is the flip side of disposing of them by inducing them to fall upon their own sword. Neither is nice nor is any weapon that we live by when used for other than defense.
That is as elegant as it gets with the military.
Can Ya Skin Griz?
How will President Obama skin cats?
Bear Claw Chris Lapp: Can you skin Griz?
Jeremiah Johnson: I can skin' em as fast as you can catch' em.
[Bear Claw runs through the cabin with a huge grizzly bear close behind and jumps out the back window]
Bear Claw Chris Lapp: Skin that one, pilgrim, and I'll get you another! ---Jeremiah Johnson
Mountain man elegance! Skin griz by leading it to the skinner for the skinning because it is chasing the one that wants it skinned. (And who jumps out the rear window) There was true beauty in that scene. Mike the Marine and I laughed so hard about it walking on a mountain trail in Tucson. Then he quoted a long passage from the same movie and did it better than Bear Claw. Mike was Leadership Officer at the Academy.
Bush put idiots and bumblers in positions of power. His pathetic stupidity was that he did not do it by intent. Perhaps President Obama's genius is that he does the same thing with intent.
I question some of the president's choices. Looking beyond the tactic to the strategy there might be some skinning skill that I sincerely hope to see. Some people need to be selected to fill some positions because they have a constituency that needs to be satisfied by immediate expediency. Their constituency however is the cat to be skinned. It is a set up maneuver if you know exactly what a selectee will do.
Ray McGovern points out the rather poor selection made by President Obama here:
One of our senators with fascist tendencies, Kit Bond of Missouri, currently vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has spoken out with special venom against whistleblowers.
At last week's confirmation hearings for Dennis Blair, nominated by President Barack Obama to the most senior intelligence post (director of national intelligence), Bond pressed the nominee on whether he would try to prosecute leakers of classified information.
Falling in nicely with Bond's proclivities, Blair did not disguise his repugnance toward whistleblowers: "If I could ever catch one of those [leakers], it would be very good to prosecute them. We need to make sure that people who leak are held accountable."
Ray also points out that:
On Jan. 29, the House of Representatives voted to strengthen whistleblower protections for federal employees, including those working in national security agencies. The bill's sponsors believe that, if the Senate also approves, President Obama will sign it into law.
Fair warning: the likes of Dennis Blair can be counted on to lobby the Senate strongly against approving this legislation.
A scorpion is gonna do what a scorpion is gonna do. (This is a link)
In this case the scorpion is riding on the back of a constituency.
The whistle blower legislation gets strengthened. People come forward telling truth. Dennis Blair can be counted on to do what Dennis Blair does. Do stupid people ever get the beauty of the movie "The Sting"? Clue: The movie takes place in Chicago.
Ready and waiting for Dennis Blair is a rope that he really wants to grab. The rope has a loop on the end. The execution is swift, extremely public and he twists in the wind. President Obama says:
"I just had to do what I had to do. The law protects whistle blowers. Dennis Blair did not break the law in terms that he can be prosecuted for but neither did he support the law and its intent by his actions. That cannot be tolerated. I therefore announce his immediate replacement: (the person I really intended to fill the position but had to skin two cats with the same stroke to do it)."
Lesson to all scorpions! Scorpions don't learn lessons. They gotta do what they gotta do. In my opinion he appointed a few for a purpose. It does not matter which one grabs the rope first. There are a few at the top that will see the lesson. It is unlikely that one at the top will grab the rope first unless they are incredibly stupid or arrogant.
Can ya skin griz Mr. President?
How did you manipulate the selection of Steele?
Bear Claw Chris Lapp: Can you skin Griz?
Jeremiah Johnson: I can skin' em as fast as you can catch' em.
[Bear Claw runs through the cabin with a huge grizzly bear close behind and jumps out the back window]
Bear Claw Chris Lapp: Skin that one, pilgrim, and I'll get you another! ---Jeremiah Johnson
Mountain man elegance! Skin griz by leading it to the skinner for the skinning because it is chasing the one that wants it skinned. (And who jumps out the rear window) There was true beauty in that scene. Mike the Marine and I laughed so hard about it walking on a mountain trail in Tucson. Then he quoted a long passage from the same movie and did it better than Bear Claw. Mike was Leadership Officer at the Academy.
Bush put idiots and bumblers in positions of power. His pathetic stupidity was that he did not do it by intent. Perhaps President Obama's genius is that he does the same thing with intent.
I question some of the president's choices. Looking beyond the tactic to the strategy there might be some skinning skill that I sincerely hope to see. Some people need to be selected to fill some positions because they have a constituency that needs to be satisfied by immediate expediency. Their constituency however is the cat to be skinned. It is a set up maneuver if you know exactly what a selectee will do.
Ray McGovern points out the rather poor selection made by President Obama here:
One of our senators with fascist tendencies, Kit Bond of Missouri, currently vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, has spoken out with special venom against whistleblowers.
At last week's confirmation hearings for Dennis Blair, nominated by President Barack Obama to the most senior intelligence post (director of national intelligence), Bond pressed the nominee on whether he would try to prosecute leakers of classified information.
Falling in nicely with Bond's proclivities, Blair did not disguise his repugnance toward whistleblowers: "If I could ever catch one of those [leakers], it would be very good to prosecute them. We need to make sure that people who leak are held accountable."
Ray also points out that:
On Jan. 29, the House of Representatives voted to strengthen whistleblower protections for federal employees, including those working in national security agencies. The bill's sponsors believe that, if the Senate also approves, President Obama will sign it into law.
Fair warning: the likes of Dennis Blair can be counted on to lobby the Senate strongly against approving this legislation.
A scorpion is gonna do what a scorpion is gonna do. (This is a link)
In this case the scorpion is riding on the back of a constituency.
The whistle blower legislation gets strengthened. People come forward telling truth. Dennis Blair can be counted on to do what Dennis Blair does. Do stupid people ever get the beauty of the movie "The Sting"? Clue: The movie takes place in Chicago.
Ready and waiting for Dennis Blair is a rope that he really wants to grab. The rope has a loop on the end. The execution is swift, extremely public and he twists in the wind. President Obama says:
"I just had to do what I had to do. The law protects whistle blowers. Dennis Blair did not break the law in terms that he can be prosecuted for but neither did he support the law and its intent by his actions. That cannot be tolerated. I therefore announce his immediate replacement: (the person I really intended to fill the position but had to skin two cats with the same stroke to do it)."
Lesson to all scorpions! Scorpions don't learn lessons. They gotta do what they gotta do. In my opinion he appointed a few for a purpose. It does not matter which one grabs the rope first. There are a few at the top that will see the lesson. It is unlikely that one at the top will grab the rope first unless they are incredibly stupid or arrogant.
Can ya skin griz Mr. President?
How did you manipulate the selection of Steele?
Skinning the King
Skinning the cat, elegantly, is a point of view or point of entry to the problem. Once taken, elegant ways are more apparent. Like the old story about the king and the invisible clothes. Old but good. That is why it got so old. Ray McGovern tells it again here
Maybe a good story is so good because each time it is told there is new meaning or depth in the message. Therefore it never gets old? Or gets old only to those that can't see it with new eyes? I look forward to seeing the greater depth of this old story. Perhaps president Obama will be the one to show me by how he skins cats.
It was a truly elegant way to skin the king. It skinned him by inducing him to believe that he had something over his skin when he in fact did not. He knew that he did not, but had to agree that he did because only a fool would say he did not.
He jumped out of something that he did not even have on.
Elegant.
Why are people butchered to accomplish intent? Using a rusty dull knife or a laser guided missile lacks imagination. Even the Federal Reserve Bank is a better example of how it should be done. Why is the butcher or torturer always the cliche of a hulking brute? The image of ignorance. All muscle, no mind.
Ray McGovern is what intelligence is all about. Frank Grevil is what intelligence is all about. I salute Frank and the prior recipient, Katherine Gun and all their associates that recognized them with the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) Award. They also honored Ray McGovern who presented the award so eloquently.
Eloquence is skinning the cat with words.
Maybe a good story is so good because each time it is told there is new meaning or depth in the message. Therefore it never gets old? Or gets old only to those that can't see it with new eyes? I look forward to seeing the greater depth of this old story. Perhaps president Obama will be the one to show me by how he skins cats.
It was a truly elegant way to skin the king. It skinned him by inducing him to believe that he had something over his skin when he in fact did not. He knew that he did not, but had to agree that he did because only a fool would say he did not.
He jumped out of something that he did not even have on.
Elegant.
Why are people butchered to accomplish intent? Using a rusty dull knife or a laser guided missile lacks imagination. Even the Federal Reserve Bank is a better example of how it should be done. Why is the butcher or torturer always the cliche of a hulking brute? The image of ignorance. All muscle, no mind.
Ray McGovern is what intelligence is all about. Frank Grevil is what intelligence is all about. I salute Frank and the prior recipient, Katherine Gun and all their associates that recognized them with the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) Award. They also honored Ray McGovern who presented the award so eloquently.
Eloquence is skinning the cat with words.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Making Money On Those That Don't Have It
In the progression of elegant ways to skin the problem of making money, making money from those that do not have it is a good trick.
Loaning money to buy a house someone can't eventually pay for brings debt money into existence. Private gain as long as the poor pay so maybe they were not so poor after all even when interest goes up and they have less to spend elsewhere. Public loss when they don't.
Make side bets on whether or not the loan will be repaid.
Bucket Shop?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket_shop_(stock_market)
Rachel Maddow: Can you find somebody to talk me down on this? Maybe that guy behind the curtain?
It was not the mortgage loan that caused the problem but the bucket shop bets it enabled and the winners of the bets now want to be paid?
Paid in bailout money?
Loaning money to buy a house someone can't eventually pay for brings debt money into existence. Private gain as long as the poor pay so maybe they were not so poor after all even when interest goes up and they have less to spend elsewhere. Public loss when they don't.
Make side bets on whether or not the loan will be repaid.
Bucket Shop?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bucket_shop_(stock_market)
Rachel Maddow: Can you find somebody to talk me down on this? Maybe that guy behind the curtain?
It was not the mortgage loan that caused the problem but the bucket shop bets it enabled and the winners of the bets now want to be paid?
Paid in bailout money?
Elegant Money Making
There are various degrees of elegance in how to make money.
The old fashioned way is to work for it. Not very elegant but honest production of something of value.
Gaining it by taking it from someone that already has it is really a no brainer approach to making it. That is why bank robbers rob banks and Bernie Madoff robs the rich. It is where the money is at. This method doesn't display much imagination and has some risk.
Pan Handling: Some guy on the street in Key West had a rather slick way of getting people to give him quarters. The problem was that he only got quarters but did it in a rather ingenious manner. I appreciated the manner and commented on it to a guy standing next to me watching the artist part people from their quarters for nothing really in return except for his appeal. We talked about the technique but then I finally said: He's good at it but his problem is his low aspiration level. He couldn't get more than a quarter at a time and once gotten there was no more getting from the same giver.
Maybe that guy now has beach front property if he discovered that the way to tap millions with his method was through the internet. TipJar?
Making money by giving away things for free rises on the scale of making it elegantly. Razors and razor blades. Cameras and film. Printers and printer ink. I got my last printer free. Google and.....nobody has figured that out yet. Google has the secret locked in a vault like the formula for coke. I know the google secret.
Finding money: That is just luck, no skill unless it involves an ingenious method of finding it that that no one else has thought of yet. Otherwise winning the lottery is low on the elegant scale unless there is a truly ingenious way found to make the right numbers come up. Finding money is therefore not elegant. Finding a surefire way to make it look like the money found was lucky money is elegant to the extent that anyone but the finder doesn't know it was luck. Otherwise it is money made by hard work to find the way to find it. That is simply variation on the old fashion way.
Making money out of nothing has got to be the most elegant way to make it. The holy grail of making money. One step better than the midas touch that turns things into gold. Midas needed a thing to start with. Making money out of nothing is the purest elegant way to make it. It is like God making the world. How'd he do dat? Pretty elegant.
Bankers make money out of nothing and are the elegant money making masters of the universe. Their greatest elegance is gilded by the fact that people do not know they make it out of nothing, let alone how they do it, even when the secret is no secret.
How they do it is explained in video form here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4020719354420953428&hl=en
and here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
There are some fine quotes contained in one of the videos that are extracted here:
http://paulgrignon.netfirms.com/MoneyasDebt/references.htm
And more pertinent quotes here:
http://www.barefootsworld.net/banking-fed-quotes.html
Look at who made the quotes and when they were made in our history.
These are famous people saying things at critical points in our economic history. Some are the very ones that so elegantly conjured money up from nothing. What they describe is no secret yet as far as common knowledge goes it is because it is so simply.......unbelievable.
Making money out of sheer nothing.
Most Elegant.
Doing it and nobody sees it is pure elegance when the secret is no secret.
Causing catastrophe as a result of making money out of nothing and getting more money to solve the problem is pure elegant genius.
It is as if the guy panhandling so slickly for quarters on the street in Key West with a low aspiration level suddenly raised his aspiration level to infinity and became a Central Banker.
It is not "Plastics, my boy". Its the Federal Reserve Bank.
The old fashioned way is to work for it. Not very elegant but honest production of something of value.
Gaining it by taking it from someone that already has it is really a no brainer approach to making it. That is why bank robbers rob banks and Bernie Madoff robs the rich. It is where the money is at. This method doesn't display much imagination and has some risk.
Pan Handling: Some guy on the street in Key West had a rather slick way of getting people to give him quarters. The problem was that he only got quarters but did it in a rather ingenious manner. I appreciated the manner and commented on it to a guy standing next to me watching the artist part people from their quarters for nothing really in return except for his appeal. We talked about the technique but then I finally said: He's good at it but his problem is his low aspiration level. He couldn't get more than a quarter at a time and once gotten there was no more getting from the same giver.
Maybe that guy now has beach front property if he discovered that the way to tap millions with his method was through the internet. TipJar?
Making money by giving away things for free rises on the scale of making it elegantly. Razors and razor blades. Cameras and film. Printers and printer ink. I got my last printer free. Google and.....nobody has figured that out yet. Google has the secret locked in a vault like the formula for coke. I know the google secret.
Finding money: That is just luck, no skill unless it involves an ingenious method of finding it that that no one else has thought of yet. Otherwise winning the lottery is low on the elegant scale unless there is a truly ingenious way found to make the right numbers come up. Finding money is therefore not elegant. Finding a surefire way to make it look like the money found was lucky money is elegant to the extent that anyone but the finder doesn't know it was luck. Otherwise it is money made by hard work to find the way to find it. That is simply variation on the old fashion way.
Making money out of nothing has got to be the most elegant way to make it. The holy grail of making money. One step better than the midas touch that turns things into gold. Midas needed a thing to start with. Making money out of nothing is the purest elegant way to make it. It is like God making the world. How'd he do dat? Pretty elegant.
Bankers make money out of nothing and are the elegant money making masters of the universe. Their greatest elegance is gilded by the fact that people do not know they make it out of nothing, let alone how they do it, even when the secret is no secret.
How they do it is explained in video form here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4020719354420953428&hl=en
and here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
There are some fine quotes contained in one of the videos that are extracted here:
http://paulgrignon.netfirms.com/MoneyasDebt/references.htm
And more pertinent quotes here:
http://www.barefootsworld.net/banking-fed-quotes.html
Look at who made the quotes and when they were made in our history.
These are famous people saying things at critical points in our economic history. Some are the very ones that so elegantly conjured money up from nothing. What they describe is no secret yet as far as common knowledge goes it is because it is so simply.......unbelievable.
Making money out of sheer nothing.
Most Elegant.
Doing it and nobody sees it is pure elegance when the secret is no secret.
Causing catastrophe as a result of making money out of nothing and getting more money to solve the problem is pure elegant genius.
It is as if the guy panhandling so slickly for quarters on the street in Key West with a low aspiration level suddenly raised his aspiration level to infinity and became a Central Banker.
It is not "Plastics, my boy". Its the Federal Reserve Bank.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
WarandPiece is the first of 8 sites I go to each morning to start my information day. Today, Laura Rozen links to a new site: Progressive Realist . It is a metablog that is about American foreign policy. It explains itself as an edited aggregator that selectively presents posts from a number of blog sources on the subject.
While Laura does an individual aggregation of links on her own "War an Piece" site as well as add comment, Progressive realist is a collaboration of editors to do essentially the same. Laura recently joined another collaboration of editors at ForeignPolicy.com with her own seat at that table called The Cable.
Self organizing systems and stigmergy are at work in this example of collaboration effort. It is the manner in which things are increasingly coming together and doing so with increasing speed.
Aggregated collaborative thought as a product of a self organizing system is the manner in which our problems will be solved. It is the means and process by which change will be accomplish in the new system.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Football and Basketball
One way to look at the change in presidential leadership is to consider the change of game. Essentially, football is a contact sport. Basketball is a non contact sport. Football is play by play. Each play based on a plan with implementation modified to some extent in execution. Basketball is continuous with play implementation based on the situation as it develops. A game that more or less plays itself.
Bush style was contact football. President Obama style is non contact basketball. In Cat Skinning terms, Bush style uses a an instrument, the bigger the better, to skin the cat where Obama style is to skin it without touching it. The more elegant style.
A more abstract way of looking at the difference in styles is to compare them to life and computing. This linked here: "Both life and computing have evolved two forms of complex information media: the meaning of one is what happens when it is 'executed' and the meaning of the other is up to the receiver to decide."
Bush style was contact football. President Obama style is non contact basketball. In Cat Skinning terms, Bush style uses a an instrument, the bigger the better, to skin the cat where Obama style is to skin it without touching it. The more elegant style.
A more abstract way of looking at the difference in styles is to compare them to life and computing. This linked here: "Both life and computing have evolved two forms of complex information media: the meaning of one is what happens when it is 'executed' and the meaning of the other is up to the receiver to decide."
Monday, January 26, 2009
The Juice Wasn't Worth The Squeeze
Karen Greenberg writes in the Post on Guantanamo's beginnings.
Marine Brig. Gen. Michael Lehnert demonstrates his honor by his actions. The lack of action to do the right thing stains the honor of many senior military officers. Those who are shamed by their inaction or wrong actions will read about Gen. Lehnert and hopefully be inspired. Those that are not should not be in a position of authority.
Marine Brig. Gen. Michael Lehnert demonstrates his honor by his actions. The lack of action to do the right thing stains the honor of many senior military officers. Those who are shamed by their inaction or wrong actions will read about Gen. Lehnert and hopefully be inspired. Those that are not should not be in a position of authority.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Cat Skinning
The most elegant way to skin a cat is to induce it to jump out of its own skin.
How is that done?
Cause it to be so full of fear, so afraid that all that is necessary is to sneak up behind it and say:
Boo!
Much more elegant than separating it from its skin than with a bloody butcher knife.
How is that done?
Cause it to be so full of fear, so afraid that all that is necessary is to sneak up behind it and say:
Boo!
Much more elegant than separating it from its skin than with a bloody butcher knife.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)