Have you even looked into Henry George’s Land Value Tax theory, or the critiques made of that theory? If not might be worth skimming or checking out the cliff notes or other summary.
Also, I’m not entirely sure I understand the problem being solved. Is this about a more accurate or efficient taxing?
Here is a recipe that might be helpful, as either a ritual approach or by looking at the different ingredients and then at what they might be doing chemically and structurally.
Egg whites are proteins and so are gluten in wheat and both will provide some degree or structural rigidity.
Since we don’t know your recipe I would make a rather wild guess that perhaps the use of cream of tartar. This suggests “A pinch of cream of tartar also helps stabilize whipped cream to prevent it from deflating”, so perhaps as well as functioning as a leavening agent with the baking soda it is also adding some strength.
Here is one more link. A quick scan of some sections suggests you won’t need a chemistry background but it does talk about how the ingredients work at the level. For instance, I never new salt worked to act as a strengthener for gluten during baking.
Put a little differently, there is a reason why we have Betty Crocker cake mixes and Aunt Jamima or Bisquick pancake mixes for people. It provides a ritual they can blindly follow and get repeatedly good results.
However, it they try deviating from the ritual (the defined recipes on the box) the results will start getting unpredictable with the underlying knowledge. In worst case scenarios (not sure baking gets us there but perhaps) people start thinking the world in that area is just random outcomes or is unpredictable.
Yes, I would say baking is the most complicated form of cooking to understand because it is chemically the most complex.
I think the general point of the OP is you cannot easily violate the ritual (ad lib with the recipe in baking). I suspect most people don’t grasp the difference between baking and other cooking (which is also rather chemical reaction driven). I would suggest the different is widths of the error bands. Baking has really narrow bands, other cooking has relatively wide ones.
I think the post gets to a much deeper question. Just when should someone be a ritual follower and when is that not so important. I think part of that answer related to the error band concept. It also related to knowledge of the gears.
this recession will be different, because (among other things) we will simultaneously have a labor shortage and a lot of people out of work. That’s really weird, and there’s almost no historical precedent
Labor shortage and recession. It strikes me that perhaps WWII offers a similar setting. Massive labor shortage since many men were off fighting. A recession setting by a lot of metrics from a consumer demand and supply perspective—so lots of rationing and the like.
Maybe some insights from analysis of those times?
Probably not as relevant to this specific post as the general sequence on aging but have you seen and read Lifespan by Sinclair & LaPlante? If so what is your assessment. I’ve just started reading.
I am pretty sure that the price of all goods started to fall relative to gold after the USA moved to a pure fiat money regime. If so do the gold price of oil itself informative or should one look to the relative price of oil (in what ever money units) to other goods or baskets of other goods.
Put a bit different, how was oil performing in the inflationary world?
Imported japanese toothpaste that has hydroxyapatite. It’s under patent dispute in the USA. Remineralizes teeth.
+ 1 on this one. Hope the availability does not disappear. But it also seems hydroxypatite is available on its own so one might be able to just add to any toothpaste.
Thanks. Interesting. Seems that the term I want is “viral vector”.
Clearly some bugs still to work out (bad pun, sorry) but seems like a very promising approach though I think eventually the fix should be something that is also present in off-spring (which currently is probably illegal so and will change the risk assessment needed)
We’d have to look into the specific rules here. The only thing I do know is limit orders trade before market orders do and orders are time stamped. In other words, the current institutional structure is more about managing order flow than establishing the clearing price when supply and demand are considered in the larger context—such as buyers and sellers who want to participate today but will be sending the orders at much different times during the period the market is open.
Draw a simply Supply and Demand picture, and assume those curves do represent the true price quantities of the market participants that exist during the given period. The intersections would then be the standard economic model clearing prices. Let those curves represent one day.
Currently, under the order flow regime, the when ever the orders come in at attempt to find a matching order on the other side occurs. But that would allow a supplier that has a price in the supply curve that is above the intersection to be pairs with buyer on the demand curve that is at or above the ask price.
The difference between the transaction price and that implied market clearing price when considering the days actual supply and demand characteristics seems to represent the loss of value the buyer would have saved if they could have bought at the theoretical market clearing price, which is only known when the day closes. This also represents a transfer to the seller with the above market price. This seller, on some pretty standard market logic, really should not have been able to get that trade as the price asked was too high.
Changing the rule about matching trades (supply and demand) at the end of the day rather than as the orders come in prevents that type of inefficient pairing of buyer and seller.
To my knowledge that is what happens in the morning for all trades, and why sometimes when unusual events occur the opening for a security is delayed while the market or market makers try to figure out just where the open clearing price really is.
Large institutional and large investors will also use some slightly different orders and pay something or an weighted average price for the shares they sell on a give day. This appears similar to my suggestion and I would suggest lends support to the underlying thought.
You are correct that the duration of the period might matter and a day may not be the right one. I picked that because generally information is fairly consistent over a day so revision to orders places should me small.
People like talking more than listening. If we participated in conversations primarily to gain information, then you’d expect people to want to listen more than they speak. People almost always show the opposite behaviour.
This seems to shift the line a bit. If the goal of conversations exchange of information I don’t think we can really say who will do the most talking so should not try to draw any conclusion about conversation as info exchange based on people liking to talk more than listen. (It is perhaps interesting that is seems a lot of communication theory agrees that people who don’t actively listen tend not to be good at communication or conversation.) That said, I suspect one might use the signaling view to explain why more want to talk than listen. Knowledge is power. Power is status. People like status. Therefore people want to talk more than listen.
But that behavior is fully consistent with the idea conversation is largely about info exchange.
I did enjoy reading and appreciate that your wrote up your thoughts and summaries from reading the book. So don’t take my selecting one point to question as a signal otherwise ;-)
This seems related to the post on Pointing to a flower. Do you seem the two lines of thinking/inquiry as complementary?
Their 5+ year lead in autonomous driving is, by itself, a really exciting thing to bet on
I”m not exactly how to assess this but probably worth mentioning that Buick, GM and Ford were conducting testing for self driving cars back in the early 1990s. To be sure, they were a lot different and how the entire system would need to come together to be successful is different.
However, it is also not clear, to me at least, that the best next generation small vehicle transportation system will simply be the same network of roads and control systems with “smart” cars. In other words, Tesla may well be a great stepping stone to the next level of transportation but not really where that is going and perhaps not even positioning it well for a better system/infrastructure setting.
Exciting yes but I think history has a pretty good number or first innovators that ended up getting sidelined for various reasons—all I suspect relating to network type effects as they relate to the larger economic nexus in which they need to fit.
I wonder if some of the discussion in the posts related to Moral Mazes might offer any insights.
It really is surprising just how much you can get from a very little amount of time. When I quit smoking (and even some of the times I unsuccessfully tried) one simple trick I used when I felt the urge was to simply say “I’ll go in 5 minutes” and resume whatever I was doing.
Every single time it was 30 minutes, an hour, a couple of hours later that the next urge for a smoke returned. Moreover, I never really felt I was waiting in anticipation of that 5 minutes to expire.
Now, I don’t think that is what ultimately accomplished the quitting but it did address one of the problems that will lead to not quitting.
I don’t understand either of these points.
Stop-loss is merely a special form of limit price and would certainly fit into a end of day clearing/settlement process for supply and demand. Here I don’t see where the multiple clearing prices can emerge due to stop-loss orders but not from other limit orders. And, even if there is a spread between the limit bid/offers that might produce a gap, so indeterminate price in that range, it would be rare where the market price orders were insufficient to close the gap.
The fact that the end of day price might be above or below the price you will trade at is not different if it’s end of day only or tick-by-tick. If no one was willing to sell at your bid or buy at your offer you are not part of the market in that period of time. That is now we think markets should work. The concern here seems related to my next paragraph.
One thing that has motivated my musing here is the market argument about maximizing surplus generated by markets—the area between the supply and demand curves. End of day trading allows those two curves to be known and match the trades that allows that maximum surplus to emerge. Random trades as they show up throughout the day does not. Some of the trades my well be pure transfers generating zero surplus.
I do think it’s fair to ask is the lost of surplus is meaningful and I’m not 100% sure. But if not then there is a lot of welfare economics that needs to be rethought and a certain amount of market philosophy to reconsider. Is a society just as well of under the standard free market outcome with producer and consumer surplus as it is under a regime of perfect price discrimination (i.e., only producer surplus)?
I’m pretty sure there is an entire literature (but cannot know think of the term) regarding the problem if everyone were to be index investors. Basically, if no one is investing in the underlying assets, in the extreme, we don’t get pricing for those assets and ultimately cannot even price the indexes well. In short, the market implodes on itself without all those individual market interactions.