INTRACTABLE - Part Two

INTRACTABLE - Part Two

As if any mental model really corresponds to reality, like when the debates in politics finds everyone trying to second guess how everyone else will act, what they want, what they will do and so forth, when everything anyone says depends on how the world looks from his own point of view, if he is rich then the world appears differently than if he is poor, the rich want less taxes, the poor more to sponge off the rich and so forth, but both think that their model is general, is valid universally when the model is 100 % dependent on the interests of the person assuming the model, and in fact there are no universals at all, only a never ending array of (point like disjoint and independent imaginary models with no truth or connection between them whatsoever) contrasting interests, contrasting agendas, contrasting situations and personal economic situations pretending to be the same for everyone when in all truth there is nothing at all (it is all subjective now, nothing is in common with anything), only millions of random subjective impulses, desires and make believe models all the economists and politicians and everyone chants, as if their personal situation is the same for everyone and so forth. And we want to force things (force the world to be like we imagine it to be, but really want it to be, we pretend the world coincides with our imaginary mental model of the world, but especially what desires we want hiding behind fake "objective" mental models) to abide to our mental model and think that our personal situation (the poor that rants against the rich and such and the unemployed that rants against the unemployment numbers improving) is the truth, the universal truth, must be the truth and everyone else is wrong and lying when in all truth no model is the truth, everything is random and even if the unemployment numbers improve it is mostly a random quirk that doesn't mean anything and can always change in a jiffy.

Decisions and choices depend on the random will power of a person, and as such can change in any direction from moment to moment, in second one he may want to buy 10 houses and the next second decide to do nothing and the next second decide to buy stocks and the next second anything else imaginable and in such a way in five seconds the individual having cash (any amount of cash) changed his mind 5 times, now multiply this by millions of people worldwide and everywhere and banks and organizations, and then you can see how intractable and meaningless all the numbers are, how the numbers don't even exist, how so many millions of disjoint random decisions can't add up to any pattern or any meaning and even if they did it would always be just a temporary random quirk, a trend or pattern or meaning that is always one instant away from being completely contradicted and demolished and changed (even because people like to oppose others, like to do the opposite of what others do, like to think they are better and smarter, when they are all stupid useless turds, you say black I say white and such).

And all of the numbers don't even exists: even if you knew how much cash everyone had, how much money was where and who had it and so forth, it wouldn't mean a thing since the cash depends on random individual choices of how to allocate it, and since these can change randomly from moment to moment, since the very person even having the cash doesn't even know what he will do with it himself, doesn't even know what he can decide from moment to moment, can't even predict his own choices and changes, how his man brain will react to all of the casual and random inputs to his mind, can't even predict his own behavior and next moves, then how can any economic theory predict anything at all and have any validity at all since all movements of money depend on all of these wild and random choices the actors themselves have no idea what they will choose ?

Just like the idea that small private start ups will hire people and such: what an idiotic idea, private actors hire if only they can make a profit, a gain, and will always hire the least amount of people possible, anyone would do this, you wouldn't hire 10 people and make less profit if you can hire 3 that will do the work of 10 and hence gain more profit would you ? (although, given the random nature of all ideas and choices, some startups would, and some would hire thousands just to give out free cash, as nothing makes any sense and nothing has any real logic in it and so). And so the myth of tax cuts improving the economy and making private companies hire people and such: it is anyone's guess if it is true, false, in between, or if the thing doesn't even exist and such.

But mostly, everyone wants to find a "moral fault" of someone else to blame why the economy isn't doing good (and no one even knows what an economy is supposed to do anyways, what is good and bad anyways, it is all so vague and removed and intractable, an imaginary world having imaginary debates when then what happens on the ground in real life has almost no connection to all of the theories, debates and ideas, everything just chugs along the same way as it has been doing in the last 50 yeas or so), workers are lazy, they don't have the right skill set, they need more education, we need more innovation and research, the unions killed the economy, unions are bad, the capitalists are bad because they want too much of a profit, the banks are bad, there are too many public workers, but in all truth there is no moral fault of anyone: morality has nothing to do with a "Technological Economy" (another moral fault of people saying that kids should study engineering instead of english in college and such, when in all truth, this economic system doesn't need either, has loads of people of all kinds in all endeavors, there is no "moral fault" of anyone compared to anyone else, although people love to always chant what morality fault everyone else has and such). The moral guilt of workers and others, someone is always wrong.

And another myth is the myth of "Investments", the myth that someone can invest in something and "Hire People" and such: nothing further from the truth, there are trillions of dollars worldwide not knowing what to so, but also there are so few real investments possible, that can give any real profit, that the rich just keep their cash, don't invest in anything, since nothing is worth investing in as the future profit of almost all endeavors is so little and so small (even if there is a profit) that it is not even worth wasting time on investing on anything, let alone hiring people: another myth, the idea that investments correspond to "hiring people": in a "Technological Economy" investments have very little to almost nothing to do with hiring people, people are always a pain in the ass, a liability, cash wants freedom, wants to multiply itself by itself (or sometimes may hire people to then fire them later (inventing all kinds of "objective reasons" why to fire) having fun hiring and firing and exercising power on others as so much cash gets them all bored, at least cruelty upon others is a way to have fun and such), and doesn't need any more workers, the system is choke full of workers worldwide, is saturated with workers, the very use of the word Investment is completely off the mark and wrong, we don't need Investments (which imply a profit, a future increase in cash, but if you hire people you already start losing the cash to pay them and they are mostly useless anyways, layabouts, idle, lazy, not skilled and you name it and it doesn't even matter if it is true or false, things on the ground will simply go their own way no matter what anyone thinks or wants, no matter what laws are passed, no matter how many debates and economic theories are invented and no matter how much information is thrown at problems with the expectation that ideas can change the behaviors of millions of disjoint people doing whatever they want outside of any models and truths), we should kill this word Investment: we need free handouts, we need governments to hire millions and cheap rents, we need free cash, there are no private corporations that need so many people working for them anymore (and when they do need it, they look like superstar heroes, when according to the Standard Economic Model, it should be normal when today nothing is normal anyone).

But then at this point we get back to public economy versus private economy, socialism versus capitalism: if you give free handouts to all the economy will die since there is no incentive to do anything, if you let the economy be run by private clowns, they will hog up as much cash as possible and become a super rich minority class: hence we need both public and private, a bit of both systems, and huge public - private projects hiring millions to build skyscrapers, rockets to mars, high speed trains and so forth (and millions to do proudly and bluntly nothing at all and be idle, but beware the devil loves idle hands), and cheap rents and free handouts, I want free cash, I want to be a layabout watching TV all day, I like being lazy and sponging off the system I have "no morality" can care less about "morality" and such, I want my free lunch, please all you rich just give the money out for free, you aren't doing anything with it anyways...


THUS SPOKE THE TOBOR