Quantitative Easing Explained in Six Minutes

[loosecannon]

i think the world's better off with voluntarily-informed constituents. i've never been a fan of half-assed informed people. there's plenty enough of those.

But you consider indoctrination to be necessary to a successful society. Why not at least give the American public a half assed, half true education about macro finance just like we served them half assed, half true explanations of physics, most sciences and history?

It is somewhat better than no knowledge at all.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

i think the world's better off with voluntarily-informed constituents. i've never been a fan of half-assed informed people. there's plenty enough of those.

Depends on the subject.
I think you would agree that only perhaps 5% of the population will ever take the time or have the faculties to have a decent or operative grasp on economics. Hell, mots people don't even understand the tiny economy they have in their own household.
Therefore, it is necessary to only given them "bits" that they can understand. Otherwise you will bore them - and they will go back to watching American Idol and not give economics another thought - which is a very big part of the problem - a mushroom farm as a public.
I think the cartoon figures and the computer generated voices makes it entertaining...an unfortunate prerequisite to engaging the general population.

 

[antagon]

i want americans indoctrinated on principals and skills of microeconomic participation, foremost. i wish folks would know more about what they're talking about when the decide to, but i'm not so enthusiastic about forcing complex concepts on people rocking an 8th grade average comprehension level. the reaction is chicken-little grade. better they just watch CSI.

 

[loosecannon]

That's all cool, Antagon, but the smartest people are actually the most dangerous people and when they **** up they **** up on much grander scales.

Even when they succeed the world's smartest people end up bringing us things like nuclear weapons, depressions, debt slavery, genetically modified organisms, carbon sequestration schemes, energy platforms reliant on rare earth minerals that we don't have, budget deficits we can't repay, monstrous ponzi schemes and QEII.

I think that even stupid people should get a chance to make decisions that impact their world, if for no other reason than to save us from the catastrophe of letting smart people play god with our economy and planet.

 

[antagon]

i think the world's better off with voluntarily-informed constituents. i've never been a fan of half-assed informed people. there's plenty enough of those.

Depends on the subject.
I think you would agree that only perhaps 5% of the population will ever take the time or have the faculties to have a decent or operative grasp on economics. Hell, mots people don't even understand the tiny economy they have in their own household.
Therefore, it is necessary to only given them "bits" that they can understand. Otherwise you will bore them - and they will go back to watching American Idol and not give economics another thought - which is a very big part of the problem - a mushroom farm as a public.
I think the cartoon figures and the computer generated voices makes it entertaining...an unfortunate prerequisite to engaging the general population.

i'm probably getting a bit cynical. to counter that, i offer that politicians should be subject to better education on these matters and that they have the biggest onus to inform the electorate rather than merely exploit their ignorance and fear.

i'd be skeptical of the potential for mass-information to be tainted for political ends. just a little unbalanced, any you've misinformed folks. so much easier to do with folks whose backgrounds seasoned with considering serious issues whatsoever, moreover in front of a TV.

 

[antagon]

That's all cool, Antagon, but the smartest people are actually the most dangerous people and when they **** up they **** up on much grander scales.

Even when they succeed the world's smartest people end up bringing us things like nuclear weapons, depressions, debt slavery, genetically modified organisms, carbon sequestration schemes, energy platforms reliant on rare earth minerals that we don't have, budget deficits we can't repay, monstrous ponzi schemes and QEII.

I think that even stupid people should get a chance to make decisions that impact their world, if for no other reason than to save us from the catastrophe of letting smart people play god with our economy and planet.

not to be mistaken for an endorsement of smarty-pants or a characterization of 'stupid'. i think people have a capacity to be well informed about stuff through a surprisingly wide range of IQs, but the amount of effort which people voluntarily put out is what i respect. intellectual laziness + half-assed information is not a good combo IMO.

if i tell you half-assed information, however, it would likely be a platform for you to investigate and voluntarily apply independent thought in an effort to be fully informed. this makes a big difference. can intellectual ambition be indoctrinated?

 

[loosecannon]

not to be mistaken for an endorsement of smarty-pants or a characterization of 'stupid'. i think people have a capacity to be well informed about stuff through a surprisingly wide range of IQs, but the amount of effort which people voluntarily put out is what i respect. intellectual laziness + half-assed information is not a good combo IMO.

if i tell you half-assed information, however, it would likely be a platform for you to investigate and voluntarily apply independent thought in an effort to be fully informed. this makes a big difference. can intellectual ambition be indoctrinated?

OK, people already are indoctrinated:

>to uncritically accept what authority figures say
>into versions of science, history and economics that are less true than the video we are discussing
>into hocus pocus religions
>into class ideologies
>into conformity to a system they are not encouraged, but in fact discouraged from understanding

And this applies to all but the best educated people.

On the other hand if you attend the military academies, an Ivy league school, the most elite private schools and prep schools you will be trained to be critical, and to assume an eventual leadership position from a very young age. And they won't teach you physics models which have been proven false for 50 years because they think you will never be smart enough to understand the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

They will still indoctrinate you into class ideology, teach you a completely bias version of history etc.

So since this is the norm already, why not teach "Muppet's" level econ even in gradeschool?

The answer is self evident: economics has invested a great deal of energy and "greenspeak" into making economics incomprehensible to mask the fact that it is a completely disingenuous "science" crafted in service to a bankster class that is too big to fail, or jail.

The less that we the people know about their world the safer they are and the more freedom they enjoy at our expense.

IN that light a few little videos here and there that explain the true meaning of money can be more powerful than a life's education in public schools. At least to a few bright students who are inspired by the revelations therein.

 

[Paulie]

Even when they succeed the world's smartest people end up bringing us things like nuclear weapons, depressions, debt slavery, genetically modified organisms, carbon sequestration schemes, energy platforms reliant on rare earth minerals that we don't have, budget deficits we can't repay, monstrous ponzi schemes and QEII.

After a certain point you have to start looking past the idea that they're just screwing up that many times.

When do you finally start wondering if it's being done on purpose?

 

[antagon]

Even when they succeed the world's smartest people end up bringing us things like nuclear weapons, depressions, debt slavery, genetically modified organisms, carbon sequestration schemes, energy platforms reliant on rare earth minerals that we don't have, budget deficits we can't repay, monstrous ponzi schemes and QEII.

After a certain point you have to start looking past the idea that they're just screwing up that many times.

When do you finally start wondering if it's being done on purpose?

some time after your best-laid plans come together as expected consistently. i've not got there quite.

 

[Paulie]

Even when they succeed the world's smartest people end up bringing us things like nuclear weapons, depressions, debt slavery, genetically modified organisms, carbon sequestration schemes, energy platforms reliant on rare earth minerals that we don't have, budget deficits we can't repay, monstrous ponzi schemes and QEII.

After a certain point you have to start looking past the idea that they're just screwing up that many times.

When do you finally start wondering if it's being done on purpose?

some time after your best-laid plans come together as expected consistently. i've not got there quite.

Well one of my best laid plans was gold, and i stuck with it the last couple years even through the big corrections and the periods of a "strong dollar", because I suspected that the Dollar was ultimately going to be purposely shat on.

Perhaps I was on to something...

 

[loosecannon]

Even when they succeed the world's smartest people end up bringing us things like nuclear weapons, depressions, debt slavery, genetically modified organisms, carbon sequestration schemes, energy platforms reliant on rare earth minerals that we don't have, budget deficits we can't repay, monstrous ponzi schemes and QEII.

After a certain point you have to start looking past the idea that they're just screwing up that many times.

When do you finally start wondering if it's being done on purpose?

Smart people get rewarded with a lot of positive feedback and affirmation. They have a lot of intellectual curiosity and they dream big dreams like moon missions and atomic weapons and rewriting the code inside DNA.

If you let them the best and brightest would consume the entire surplus of the world on boondoggles like particle accelerators that serve no useful purpose. I know people who are just crushed because we are terminating much of our space mission due to budget constraints. They can't imagine a world in which 300 billion dollar projects that serve no purpose beyond playthings for supernerds are not funded.

Meanwhile these same people are often among the least grounded and most prone to flights of fancy of any of us. They can rewrite the bible of physics but they can't comb their own hair, tie their shoes and they get lost two blocks from home.

They believe in quantum mechanics!

They write scientific papers based on crazy ideas like "black holes MUST exist because the amount of measurable matter in the known universe is far less than the amount their theory du jour of big bangies demands MUST exist".

Or my personal favorite that "there must be an alternate universe because there is a spot in the observable universe that contains fewer stars than their computer models deem possible".

And these are ideas presented in formal scientific papers by credible scientists!

The best and brightest are as often as not completely off their rockers.

Einstein was grounded. And he compromised his entire life's work to settle for what he could prove mathematically. And because he could prove it mathematically the entire scientific community accepted his theory of R as God's word, even tho only two people alive could understand it.

Meanwhile Tesla shot it down in a day and was ignored and if you really understood the basis of math you would know that a purely mathematical proof is not a proof of anything beyond that math itself.

You can't prove anything mathematically except a mathematical concept. Math is a universe of abstractions unto itself. All interface between reality and math is illusory.

 

[antagon]

After a certain point you have to start looking past the idea that they're just screwing up that many times.

When do you finally start wondering if it's being done on purpose?

some time after your best-laid plans come together as expected consistently. i've not got there quite.

Well one of my best laid plans was gold, and i stuck with it the last couple years even through the big corrections and the periods of a "strong dollar", because I suspected that the Dollar was ultimately going to be purposely shat on.

Perhaps I was on to something...

could be, man. i've missed the value of gold for its poor utility. i've known my dollars to vastly, vastly outrun my gold in any given time. not for everyone, perhaps, but neither is commodity hoarding. the latter is certainly not for me.