Complexity as a curtain for fraud

“Whoever knows he is deep, strives for clarity; whoever would like to appear deep to the crowd, strives for obscurity. For the crowd considers anything deep if only it cannot see to the bottom: the crowd is so timid and afraid of going into the water.”

Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, The Gay Science (1882).

“. . . using financial complexity allegedly to deceive and then using so-called independent experts to validate the deception (lawyers, accountants, credit rating agencies, "portfolio selection agents," etc etc ) . . .”

"Now we know the truth. The financial meltdown wasn't a mistake – it was a con"

Why are many human systems complex? If we’ve learned anything over the past few years, it’s that there are two reasons—there are two kinds of complexity. Sometimes, complexity is required to get the job done. I think of this as “parsimonious complexity.” For instance, the Mars Rovers are extremely complex robots, but every part of these magnificent robots has a specific function that furthers a clearly and publicly defined mission. There are also instances where complexity is purposely injected into a system. I think of these as instances of “gratuitous complexity.” It’s important to keep in mind that all forms of complexity serve as entry barriers to activities, due to the limited attentional capabilities of humans. Very few of us have the stamina or intellect to thoroughly understand all of the artificial systems people create; many of us don't have the stamina to thoroughly understand even simple systems. When an activity is more complex, it is more difficult to understand and more daunting to those wishing to participate. Activities that are more complex are thus accessible to fewer people. For instance, chess is more complex than checkers, in that the state space of possible moves is larger in chess than in checkers. Checkers is easy to learn and play. But many checkers players don’t graduate to chess due to the increased complexity. Some systems are so incredibly complex that only the chosen few are able to participate.

Continue ReadingComplexity as a curtain for fraud

Woody Tasch discusses destructive economics

In this three-minute video, author Woody Tasch compellingly illustrates that "Economic growth is not synonymous with well being." In fact, much of what we call "economic growth" is destructive. Woody concludes: "We can't just continue to grow our way out of our problem. In fact, 'economic growth' is often destructive.'" My strategy is to disparage the ubiquitous media reports that applaud when the GDP is "up," or when the "economy" is humming along. Those numbers assume that strip mining is better for the economy than conservation measures. They assume that rampant crime is better for the economy than fixing many of the root causes of crime-- e.g., the "war on drugs," injects violence into drug use and "allows" us to hire a lot more police officers, whereas decriminalizing drugs might cause the loss of law enforcement jobs. The many commentators who fetishize the GDP embrace a principle that prefers a violence-ridden police state. We need to dramatically shift our focus from measuring numbers of dollars flowing through the system to (admittedly more difficult task of) measuring the real quality of life.

Continue ReadingWoody Tasch discusses destructive economics

Garrison Keillor: Put them to work.

Garrison Keillor, not known for his conservatism, wonders why the government is not putting people to work:

It's the conservative in me that wishes we had an old-fashioned government jobs program, such as FDR's Works Progress Administration, which hired unemployed people to work to build roads, libraries, public toilets, hiking trails, tens of thousands of small useful projects. (When my dad saw the initials WPA on the cornerstone of a building, he said it stood for "We Poke Along," but he could afford to be disdainful since he'd been hired after high school by his uncle Lew to pump gas at Lew's Pure Oil station.) My inner conservative thinks unemployment is wasteful and damaging to the spirit -- 15 million unemployed, many more underemployed -- a disaster, a blight upon the land. Intolerable. Work is redemptive.

I often wonder why we are paying out unemployment benefits without asking recipients to do something in return. There a lot of work that the government needs done; can't some of this work be done in return for unemployment benefits? How about cleaning up vacant lots and parks? How about tutoring children how to read? How about helping the military with some of the non-combat related tasks that it needs to get done domestically? I realize that many jobs are specialized, and that you can't just throw anyone into many types of jobs, especially for short periods of a few weeks or months. And I despise the idea of make-work, forcing people do things that aren't productive in return for a check. But can't the taxpayers get something in return for some of those unemployment benefits, at least in some cities, some of the time? I do agree with Keillor that at least some kinds of work can be redemptive--and most adults I know are out there dragging themselves out of their cozy houses to do some sort of work. I don't think of meaningful work as punishment, but perhaps that's where I differ with those who think that Keillor's idea is cruel.

Continue ReadingGarrison Keillor: Put them to work.

Dylan Ratigan’s three strikes against the pending financial services legislation

Dylan Ratigan put on a "Family Fued Show" to illustrate the three major failures of the pending financial services legislation. Seems like this bill is not for any meaningful reform. It's only a dog and pony show.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Continue ReadingDylan Ratigan’s three strikes against the pending financial services legislation