Aswad
Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Might I suggest a solution, give me control of ALL the money currently in circulation and in private holdings, I will keep 50% as a handling fee, and then divide the remainder among every living soul on the planet and all the governments. Absolutely not. I've seen nothing to suggest you would divide it in a manner that wouldn't wreak havoc with the global economy and thus devaluate all the currency to the point where we spend a century just undoing the damage. Same goes for most schemes involving rapid relocation of funds, whoever implements them. There's a neat trick to stability: incremental changes with a well defined scope and a reasonably well characterized risk profile. If you're looking to get radical, there's other ideas that are way more attractive, like (a) not putting all the eggs in one basket, (b) comparing how the eggs are doing between baskets subjected to different conditions, (c) defining metrics for the goals we have, (d) checking to find out what strategies actually improve those metrics, (e) doing more of what works, (f) doing less of what doesn't work, (g) deriving political theories from actual models, ideally ones with some predictive power, or at least agreeing with past data. A nice post from /. commented (approximately): Genious is leaping from A to C, then going back to fill in B. Insanity is leaping from A to C, when B doesn't connect them. The vast majority of political thought falls into the latter category. I can only nod my head in agreement. IWYW, — Aswad.
< Message edited by Aswad -- 12/2/2012 10:19:06 PM >
_____________________________
"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind. From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way. We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.
|