Malthusian Prophecies

I'm not consistant

2009-01-17T16:42:00.000-08:00

So I haven't posted in a while...again. This is probably going to be one of my last posts to Blogger. I'm re-creating www.jasonanton.com in the coming weeks to server as a blog, among other things.

I'm going to keep this in existence just because it is here and it displays how awesome my powers of prediction are! Besides being a blog jasonanton.com is going to be a portal to other projects that I'll have going. Also: I'm also gonna get into video blogging. All that will be done through jasonanton.com from now on. Blogger was great? but its time to move on. Peace on ya!

Wow, I told ya so...

2008-10-02T18:10:00.000-07:00

So I called out this whole economic crisis back in November '07. See my post Changes in the American Economic Model: Before, During, and Since, The Great Depression, but I'm not going to go on a big tangent about how I was right and everyone should've listened too me...the lines at the soup kitchen will give everyone plenty of time to mull that over...and then you can tell me I was right because I'll be behind you in line...

ANYWAY On to other things: video games! I've talked about a lot of things in my blog. Life, death, politics, and science, but I've never talked about one of my favorite past times which is the video game. I'm a fan of sports games, strategy games, simple games, and puzzle games. Pretty much anything as long as its good. My favorites of the moment are:

Madden '09

Bioshock

CivIV: Beyond the Sword

Gears of War

World in Conflict

But which of these would make my top 10? Madden would if you count the series in general...in fact that might be #1 at any given time. I'll tell you what game I'm playing but hating right now and thats The Force Unleashed. I had high hopes for that game, since I'm a nerd. It not only doesn't live up to it's hype, but it is down right awful to play! The game increases difficulty by simply adding more bad-guys to fight....and they respawn constantly. No puzzles, no difficult opponents, just more opponents. Annoying.

What this all means

2008-09-19T08:30:00.002-07:00

This has been one hell of a week in America. We've seen the end to the American dream, or we've seen that dream turn into a nightmare. We've seen the dream of home ownership and the avarice that is derivative of that dream drive people and businesses to rely on imaginary capital to make that dream come alive. Its all really sad.

But can this really be the end of capitalism? Yes, it can. Yes, it is. This week proves that unregulated markets will crash, and hard. This isn't so bad on its own; but unfortunately all, or most, foreign markets depend heavily on the American market. If turmoil erupts here, it erupts everywhere else too...and that kind of interdependency, when faced with a cataclysmic failure in its main component, only leads to monumentous setbacks. In other words: if American markets fail, even temporarily, the entire global economy fails permanently. We'll never recover from it, and 100 years of progress will be undone. So much for free-range capitalism.

And so we face the failure of capitalism and communism in their pure forms. We are too greedy to be left alone, or to work together. So what does that say? We're forced to partake in the never-ending bureaucracy that is American two-party socialism? With our brand of democracy the lobbyists get ALL the power here, and that is a shame. Now they have to exist to help keep tabs on things. There can be no revolution without loosing all we've built. I hope we're on the right track...

Black Mondy, Ben Bernake, and the end of capitalism.

2008-09-19T08:30:00.001-07:00

The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here. The end is here.

Its here.

Why Tyler Durden likes dead babies.

2008-09-06T06:22:00.000-07:00

So I find it funny that anyone opposed to Neo-Cons are branded, by them, a liberal. And they throw that word out there like its "sadist." Because all liberals eat babies. Because all liberals want to make the rich people poor so the poor people can get rich on welfare. Because liberals killed Jesus. Because liberals etc. What a load of crap. Neo-Cons have a cooler sounding name, I'll give them that (but only in it's abbreviated state...Nonconservative doesn't soud as cool but it has a lot of syllabuls).

Why is it, though, that many Neo-Cons stand on the abortion and Creationist soap-box? Abortion is a touchy issue, but not one that should be relevant right now. There are FAR more pressing issues and that law isn't hurting anyone at the moment...accept the babies it kills....but whats the difference anyway. And Creationism...I don't think I could explain why that isn't a science and do it justice. That isn't to say I don't think it could be a valid argument, just that it isn't a science. I'm all for the teaching of religion in schools as long as the teaching parties can be non-bias. That is a tricky thing, but it isn't impossible to find a candidate. History is relative, English changes with common vernacular, social studies is as mailable as government, and geography changes with higher-res Google Earth photos. The only truth in schools is math. Even science, all science, is thoery and subject to change. Why don't people generally understand this? It is baffling to me.

Creationists need to know their fight and fight it where it belongs...and its not in a science classroom. Sarah Palin is too green to have experienced the wrath of the scientific community like the Bush admin did so it is to be expected that she doesn't understand that her views on God and country will ultimately not pass the courts? Whatever.

So what about these labels liberal and neo-con? Too me there equally irrelevant, but insluting if I am labeled one. As the great Groucho once said, "I don't want to belong to any group that would have me as a member." That especially rings true in modern American politics. I would've only joined the Know Nothing Party since I too hate the Irish. The truth of it is is that the media has whipped those of us that care into a frenzy with one side v. the other. That is silly and not nearly complex enough. While I am no liberal, or Neo-Con, I have to say as an objective party the Neo-Cons do seem less credible. Everything with them is so righteous, yet all of their leads seem to deal more with hypocrisy than with genuine ideals. The Democrat left had a similar problem once, so all it is is a cycle of bad politicians and these things happen, but don't sit there and call anyone who doesn't believe what you believe the same brand of evil when you're very leaders can't practice what they preach! Neo-Cons seem to brand everything right or wrong...and only Sith deal in absolutes!

My views on...

Abortion - Not unless raped. If you can do it you must go through it. We need to teach our kids responsibility, not limit sex or whatever...that doesn't seem to work!

Creationism - Its not a science. Thats a fact, not an opinion. Teach religion, since that is your agenda anyway, but in a separate class from an objective point of view as a subject of history. Teach it all, and how/why it exists.

The War - We'll be out soon now anyway, so whats the difference?

Russians - They screwed up and over time they'll suffer worse because of it. There is no need for us to get too involved, let the EU handle it.

Economy - While I'd love to see a completely open market take care of itself, unless we are willing to accept the highs AND lows of that then it won't work. Capitalism is built to occasionally fail, but thats a good thing! People starve and die, but it helps keep a balance between population and resource availability. Since we are being "humane" for the time being I don't mind socialism. I've always been a fan of communism so socialism is the next best thing. Unfortunately I don't think we can handle cooperation yet as a species. We get too wrapped up in petty things like race and religion. If we all work together we'll never agree on who will guide our collective...

Thats it.

McCain '08/Kerry '04...?

2008-09-04T07:55:00.000-07:00

Just like Kerry in '04 they're not running off their own merit, but the other guy's lack of something...in this case they're citing whatever they possibly can.

A detailed analysis of Obama's change yeilds socialism, and McCain's economic policy is more trickle-down type economics. Trickle-down has repeatedly failed, yet it offers loop-holes to keep it afloat in short-term bursts (see Bush's economic stimulus idea...which actually is just an advance on the '08 tax returns!). While I question Obama's merritt on multipule fronts, I will admit that his plans for economic reform are far more stable than McCain's ideas. Yes, some taxes may increase, but not for the general public (under Obama). These increases may stimulate the econmoy by recycling capital back into it through public works. The problem many don't see in the trickle-down model is that rich people are rich because they don't spend their money!

The Regonomic theory is that if you give the rich tax breaks it gives them more money to spend to get richer and thereby the whole economy is stimulated...this is flawed by the obvious. Rich get rich by saving! Therefore, if you give them more money by reducing their taxes, they will throw a wrench in the cog by not recycling that money. As time goes on more money goes missing in certain pockets and the general public, who do spend, have less and less to spend...which in turn gives the rich less to put in their businesses. Vicous cycle.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see an open and free market run wild. A completely open market could yield some very interesting results, but there will be ups and downs to extreme levels. People generally don't want to accept that...which is why Rosevelt abolished the gold standard in the 30's. The Great Depresson would've ened anyway, but a few people would've starved waiting for the end. Instead we introduce socialized elements and stage off the social unease that is a natural market fluxuation. This introduction of socialism, while helping to maintain stability, has definately contributed to unethical trading practices: let me explain. The explination is as simple as the example of our lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. What they've done is a conveluded mess, and since people are loosing houses hand over fist, there was apparently something wrong....and in comes socialism to the rescue. Instead of letting capitalism fail and rebuild the governmental bail-out of the government-created companies implies it is ok for us to take advantage of each other, and that when that unethical cycle dissolves on itself our imaginary economy can be boosted by the hands behind the curtain. REDICULOUS!

But that isn't to say its all bad. Socialized tendencies certainly bring a great sense of community and stability to a number of European nations. If we can replicate their success with communal capitalism, then I'm all for it. That is what Obama wants to change, however I doubt he has the ability to truly do it. Its one thing to talk about that type of change, its another thing to get it done. I doubt a President can do that without over-exending his/her powers. Of course the Bush administration abused and extended that same power to a different end, so now we're conditioned to accept the executive branch/monarch mentality. Does Obama have the fortitue to take his change to a Bushie level? We'll see. On substance McCain offeres nothing. Obama offeres a chance at a real change, however that chance is slim. Our only real chance for change was Ron Paul and his dissolvment of socialism in this country all together. Unfortunately the rest of the Republican party wants to take advantage of the power socialism gives to the government as it exists, but they don't want to relinquish the power back to the people it is taken from...all the while they don't want to give it any more power in fear of their opponents...stupid.

2008-08-10T23:55:00.000-07:00

Malthusian 1

Malthusian Prophecies

Jason Anton

Axia College of University of Phoenix

SCI 275 Environmental Science

Priscilla Dingle

August 10, 2008

Economist Thomas Malthus came up with a theory: a population is relational to it's available food resource. Mr. Malthus didn't stop with an empty theory, he backed up his claims with math...silly math. Thomas lived in the 1700's and 1800's and had little advance knowledge of the advancements in theory and substance the 1900's would provide and ultimately his theories--or catastrophes as they're also called—would prove limited. The Malthusian Theorem was defunct by Industrialization; however recent crisis epidemics over food supply and oil availability has made his theories on resource and population relevant again, and many economists and scientists are taking notice.

The problems we face in infinite numbers are ultimately tied to our numbers. This is the core of the theory set forth by Thomas Malthus, though the particulars of his argument are up for debate. Modern economists, or Neo-Malthusians, have eliminated much of the argumentative substance surrounding Malthusian Economics making it simply a statement: that unless a population is at or below its substance level the fertility rate will rise (f(x)= a X 1.01^t + b X 1.02^t, where a > 0 and b > 0). Over time the most fertile group will dominate the substance availability and deplete it making the same equation g(t)= b X 1.02^t. In the advent of industrialization and modernization we must take into consideration resource availability and technological advancement towards the ease of resource availability to determine our problem. So, from a global perspective, this theory hasn't played out so far since the most fertile group(s)--China and India—have not been the largest consumers of resource.

What happens when these large populations come into the modern era and consume at the rate the United States has? This posing threat is exactly why we face high prices at the gas pump, and liberal jargon about energy conservation. Global warming and survival, from a general human perspective, is only as real as our markets dictate. Traditional as well as Neo-Malthusian concepts cite the social “checks” to over-population, claiming that societies will become uncomfortable purge their numbers if not subconsciously; however even political unrest, war, and famine seem to undercut the problems we seem to be coming upon. If we are not careful we may face the complete failure of our ecosystem and food-chain.

In reality there is only so much resource to go around. This fact is true across the board; be it fresh water, oil, or food: nothing we consume is immediately replenishable if it is even replenishable at all. “One danger is that governments, rather than searching for global solutions to resource constraints, will concentrate on grabbing share” (Barta, Batson & Lahart, 2008). While the US is one of the biggest countries in the world today by population, the two biggest players are just entering the area of consumption that we've dominated for 50 years. Our massive consumption powers have already put the world on high alert for global warming and food shortages, but alert isn't always a call to action as needed.

Currently there are 6.6 billion people on the planet, and by 2020 that number is estimated to jump to 7.5 billion (Bartlett, 2004) and then again to almost 13 billion by 2050. Right now the planet seems to be reacting—to varying degrees—to what we're doing now and only about a third of the global population is contributing, in a meaningful way, to the ecological problems we're facing. As the larger nations of India and China become more modernized they will rightly want to use as much resource as European and American countries and this addition to the consuming populace may tip the scales of replenishment to a place where humanity can no longer sustain itself. Markets are starting to trend towards renewable energy resources to combat high energy costs and Global Warming threats, however these trends only seem to be focusing on part of the issue.

Besides the consumption of fossil fuels and energy people end-mass consume food and water and land. Our technology—being the double-edged sword that it is—can solve the problems the limits on those needs warrant, but sometimes those technologies cause as many problems as they solve. Take ethanol for example:

The expected priority for corn and other food crops would be for food and feed. Increasing ethanol production would increase degradation of agricultural land and water and pollute the environment. In U.S. corn production, soil erodes some 18- times faster than soil is reformed, and, where irrigated, corn production mines water faster than recharge of aquifers. Increasing the cost of food and diverting human food resources to the costly and inefficient production of ethanol fuel raise major ethical questions. (Pimental, 1991)

From a certain perspective we are doing just fine from a procreative standpoint. A certain Darwinian view would lean one to believe that we are fine since our numbers are swelled since the more of us there are the more likely we are to survive a catastrophe. This is not an invalid perspective, but from a human dignity standpoint it is invalid. This is a problem of over population caused by our own processes and it directly effects the way we conduct said processes. This is nothing but a human problem that effects everything. As the scales tip towards doom with help from human impact it becomes our responsibility to use our impactful nature to subdue this disaster in the waiting.

Currently countries like China have procreation laws that limit the number of children a household can have. Similarly there are laws in The United States that subject a household to a standard of living...even if that standard is variable. This, coupled with other sanctions that could be held in example by association, is about the extent of humanity's solutions to this problem. While humane in its simplicity, it certainly isn't enough to ward off disaster from a purely ecological standpoint. As with any other advancement there is trial and error as well as growth. As we watch the social ramifications of a 19 to 2 male to female population ratio (exaggeration) we see the falability of our current law/check structure.

The most immediate way to limit resource use is by allowing commodities to be traded at a inflated value. Like the current oil debacle has slowed oil consumption (if only slightly) we can slow the consumption of many goods by making them more expensive than others. The negative effect of this is that, in a free-market, the bigger companies controlling the item in question will become richer and thereby control the means of developing alternatives thusly defeating the entire purpose of this exercise. This can be avoided through legislation like tariffs or taxes, or by having the government control the commodity all together.

Slowing consumption is not the overall solution to population control, however a fair limit to resource puts the responsibility of comfort directly into the hands of each individual consumer. So besides tariffs, taxes, and big government we need to develop an educational environment that empowers the consumer with the knowledge of that responsibility. A greater understanding of global economics on an individual level would leverage common consumers to think about commodities with a grander scope. While this may not directly address the problem of over-populating, as with the previous suggestion, it does create socio-economic ramifications to breeding.

These suggestions coupled with sanctions mirroring those in the US could yield a positive Malthusian balance. If we take into account the ramifications of a commodity as it is sold, and make families accountable for a certain quality of life standard, then the general populace is gently forced to comply with the self-preservation tactics of big-government.

Timing is the essential element to this plan. If we impose tax before reason we will only see the negative results of a Malthusian Catastrophe, which is exactly what we're trying to avoid. Therefore we must change our educational habits first. A better understanding of capital and resource limitation would not only yield a peaceful transition to economical sanctions, but it would also curb spending in the meantime. As the educational process progresses taxes and tariffs can be introduced.

It is important to note the influence of government at this point. In the interest of keeping ultimate power to the people and not one entity it is not advisable to have the government hold total power over these commodities deemed eco/ergonomically threatening. Similarly it is not advisable to allow any one group of individuals within an economic model to determine price as that would lead to price gouging. A delicate balance can be achieved here, but only through acts of a purely rational republic working in the people's best interest. So, to avoid tampering, the government has to exist with capital but with no gain from it.

Laws are on the books in many countries that dictate a standard of living, and there are even checks within the system to ensure each citizen has a right to that standard of living. This is the last step of the plan because it is already in place in most places. The standards that exists are that of health codes, fire codes, social services, welfare, etc. Each of these types of societal checks to itself represent the standard of living that that independent nation and culture deems appropriate for its time and place.

A time line for this has to be fast. As mentioned earlier our numbers are swelling and could reach 7.5 billion as soon as 2020 so we must fulfill these pillars I the plan by 2015. A breakneck pace, but a necessary pace. The educational structure must be in place within the next 2 to 4 years. This is a delicate process but it must start at the bottom: school children. If we are to sustain it is imperative that younger generations understand this problem, even before we do! After a solid early education platform is established a more broad marketing and adult-learning plan should be established and implemented.

New taxes could begin immediately, if in moderation. A full gambit of such taxes and tariffs should be in place by 2012 with standard of living laws in place by 2015.

The benefits to this plan are multifaceted and broad. From a higher standard of living across the globe to ease of access to necessary commodity. But with higher taxes and limits wouldn't commodities be more scarce? No, in fact with limited use they will be more abundant since they will only be consumed when needed. Over the next generation our numbers should diminish by 2^-2 which would take the 2050 estimates from 13 billion down to about 5 billion or less. Even though there would be less commodity by this time (since, as mentioned, no resource is infinitely renewable) the number of consumers would be less as well. This would also reduce the population's carbon footprint and ease political tensions.

A severe limitation to this plan is global cooperation. Each individual country has a right to determine it's own position on all matters, but this matter is very interdependent. It is the responsibility of those who implement the plan in their own locale to convince others of its validity and importance of implementation.

While this plan seems entirely governmental it couldn't be more individualized. It has been implied that a republic rule should be established, and this is due to the controversial nature of the process. A purely democratic environment may lack the conviction necessary to fulfill the requirements of this plan, however a “ruling class” should know better. Fortunately such a system already exists in many countries today including part of the United States government model (see: the Executive branch).

While it isn't the responsibility of common individuals to enforce government policy it is their responsibility to recognize the problems we face and the solutions we are working towards. Without that recognition the entire model breaks down and the rape of the natural world will continue until we all pay for our crimes.

References

Barta, P., Batson, A. & Lahart, J. (2008, March, 24). New limits to growth revive malthusian fears. The Wall Street Journal Online, Retrieved August 10, 2008, from http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120613138379155707.html

Kendall, H (1994).Constraints on the expansion of the global food supply. Ambio. 23, 198-205.

Malthus, T (1798). Essay on population. London, England:

Pimentel, D (1991).Ethanol fuels: Energy security, economics, and the environment. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 4, 1-13.

Social Networking has taken all the fun out of High School Reunions

2008-07-29T06:46:00.000-07:00

High school reunions used to be a time to rub your personal success in everyone's face. Even if you weren't successful, you still rubbed how successful you imagined yourself to be. You could be an accountant, or an astronaut; a cowboy, or a high-powered mob doctor. You could be anything in the world, accept the miserable shmuck you are. Well all that has changed for my generation.

With all the advancement in technology we've seen in our day, my generation is going to miss out on some of the more simple pleasures. We'll never understand the thrill of waiting for re-runs (since we can just buy the DVD or download our favorite shows) and we're slowly loosing the excitement in waiting for new episodes of our favorite shows thanks to TiVO (not to mention we're missing out on the fabulous eye strain that came from watching TV on CRT TV's.) But its not all about TV, just most of it is. Think about it: thanks to Facebook and Myspace there isn't a need to wait 10 years to judge your former high school peers. We can all snicker and look-down-our-collective-nose at one another constantly. We can stalk who we want to stalk, and gossip about people whom we haven seen in person in 6 or 7 or 8 years and we can do it now.

We can talk about how fat the popular girls got, and how poor the jocks are. But you know who the biggest looser is in all of this? The nerds. The nerds are who dominate Myspace and Facebook, and yet they had the most to loose in the diminished high school reunion situation. They were the ones who could come back and have sex with the girl they wanted to in high school because now they're rich and good looking and that girl is poor white trash (or black trash, or Latino trash: I don't discriminate). Now instead of meeting at the reunion, flaunting success, and getting laid these masters of the IP-way are doomed before they start because of that XBox Live Gammer Tag application on their Facebook profile. It is awesome to make $129k a year, but nobody looks cool when there is proof that they spend their life playing Rock Band. Vicarium is no way to live.

We're loosing so much, but what are we really gaining besides everything?

Politics

2008-07-22T09:29:00.000-07:00

Windows = Republicans
Mac OSX = Democrats
Linux = 3rd party assholes who actually know what they're doing.

Just call me Hardy Heron!

Bowing

2008-07-20T06:48:00.000-07:00

I have a cute daughter. Most parents think their child is cute, but really what evidence do they have outside of their own gawking? I have evidence.

exhibit A:
I dunno...maybe I'm crazy but thats cute. I would say my opinion is nothing more than a proud father but there is an interesting phenomenon going on with this little one. People stop dead in their tracks to observe her. We can be out with other babies--like her cousin Kayden--and people will ignore the other child in favor of her. Then there was last night:

We're at Oregon Ridge watching the BSO's Hocus Pocus presentation when some deuche bag decides to not only stop and observe her, but to get on his knees.

exhibit B
She is your future ruler.

Thoughts on physics and politics

2008-07-16T11:46:00.000-07:00

Damn I'm good in bed...well at least I think a lot in bed.

I'm reading Ron Paul's Revolution book right now and last night I took my literary adventure to my sheets while my wife reads something about the Spelling girl. Dr. Paul's book got me thinking about foreign policy a lot--probably because he spends a lot of time going over his views in his book. A friend of mine, Itamar, always goes on about how nations who are actively trading never go to war with each other. He's right, that's never happened. So the simple answer to our foreign policy woes is to just trade with everyone. That might also solve our resource dilemma as well...we could become a global shopping mall. We trade with everyone and make all commodities available to all peoples in that way. Like I said: simple answer. I have no complicated answer to that even thought the simple answer begs for a complicated elaboration.

On to physics. I've simultaneously been reading The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene while on my lunch breaks at work...amazing book! String theory is my religion. Since its unprovable it might as well be God...right? Anyway I'm reading about String Theory and watching science programs on TV and I started thinking about Dark Matter, The Cosmic Web, swimming pools, and General Relativity.

I'm a little fuzzy on one part of Einsteins theory: what is the fabric of space-time? We've all seen the models that show the bowling ball in the trampoline, and we're aware of the cosmic bowling ball (mass) but what makes up the trampoline? I'm guessing (with no math to back it up whatsoever) that what we perceive as "Dark Matter" is actually the fabric of space and time. It would exert mass as evenly and disruptively as it does if it is what I think it is (you figure that sentence out, I blacked out while writing it!). And that even distribution is similar to water on the edge of a pool as it disperses there are pockets of dryness...or stellar voids.

Lets look at the Cosmic Web and the expansion of space. For those that don't know The Cosmic Web is a linking together of galaxy clusters via Dark Matter in a web-like pattern. A big clump here, a big clump there, all connected together via Dark Matter roadways (as it were)=Cosmic Web.
Hubble has told us that the Universe is expanding faster than it can collapse...that means that our Universe does not act like a beating heart as much as it does like water spreading out on too much ground.
With no math to back me up I'm simply running on analogy: space-time acts more like water than a trampoline in its natural state. As mentioned, it is easiest to interperit relativity via the trampoline/bowling ball demo; however many science teachers will agree this is only giving you a 2D look into a world that is 3D, 4D, maybe even 11D. In this way I beleive a more complex but literal analogy is a swimming pool with a limit. This limited swimming pool can only get so full before the bottom comes crashing out...so lets say our swimming pool itself is like a single string and the water is mass. Once the string/pool gets too full it can no longer sustain itself and the bottom drops out or the string expands (big bang).
When water is distributed in an event upon a surface that allows it to truely spread out we start to see dry pockets as the water rushes away from center, and bubbles within dry pockets where the mass has come to rest...this the the heart of my theory of space-time fabric. The water is the stellar fabric. Just like fish or aquatic creatures we adjust to the water and flow with it, not even noticing its there. We notice where it is not, but we don't exactly know what to make of those voids. This is the just the beginning of my musing, however I would venture a guess that one could travel a-near infinite trip through a stellar void in what would seem to the traveler to be seconds. There is no mass, not even space-time mass (dark matter) within those voids to age the traveler. To them they traveled in seconds, but to the inhabitants of space-time they traveled through a large amount of time in relation to distance. In other words, they would pop out the Cosmic Web at one point, travel through the void an inconceivable distance, and pop out back into the Web at a point almost clear across the universe in a microsecond through their eyes. Truthfully, to a watching timekeeper within the Web, they would pop in and out instantly as well, however from an observer at a particular point in space it would seemingly take them an infinite amount of time due to the restriction of light-speed. In other words, they would pop in and out instantly, however the time it would take for the light to reach you from point B would be the perceivable time. This would happen because the voids exist outside of space time, and light would have to travel within space time. So how do we see the voids? We don't, we see whats around them. That's how we've cataloged the Cosmic Web, by seeing where it is, and assume a void where it isn't.

This could be genius, or it could be nonsensical ravings of a egotistical mind hell-bent on figuring out time. Einstein said that trying to contemplate time itself could drive you mad...

12/21/12-A Story

2008-05-29T08:50:00.000-07:00

Prologue...to a short story?

Culmination. It is what we all come to...literally. Patterns emit themselves upon our lives in large and small examples. One can theorize that everything is a compilation of a compilation of a compilation, and this philosophy in itself is a bit of a compilation. Considering this theory we examine the years leading up to our climax: the entirety of human existence.

From our beginning we compiled reasoning with layers of experience. What reason we have developed the skill of reasoning is beyond the scope of this story and thus has no relevance, but as an example, we experience reasoning so we've reasoned God gave it to us...or that we refined it from monkeys reasoning to fling their own feces. So: experience breeds reason, which in turn breeds logic. Logic, scientifically speaking, is physical and breeds examples. In this way logic exists separately from our reasoning, however we define it through our reasoning. If language is expressed or shared reason, then mathematics must be expressed or shared logic.

From the beginning we've experienced various forms of logic in the physical form, events like time for example. We've reasoned with God over these examples, and expressed our individual experience with logic and compiled our collective reasoning into these languages and mathematics to create systems. These systems can be seen as societies, technologies, arts, or sports to name a few. So in the beginning we were us, just not as experienced.

Unfortunately these systems on a small scale do not seem to retain all previous reasoning entirely, but rather they retain previous culminations. Just like the Fibonacci number, your present culmination is a combination of the previous two culminations. This sequence goes off to infinity in all logical directions. For every two you get 1, but it would really be 2, then 3, then 5, then 8, then 13, and so on. Such is our system. A composite of a compound of history, wrapped in uniform logic only to be reasoned with. And through Fibonacci the west sees I Ching.

Fractal time, as it can be called, is the physical and logical example of our culmination of physical logic. This logic loop would kill any robot, but seemingly not a human (your humble narrator is still alive, and the brains have not exploded). And so we pass another culmination and move on to the next. While we percolate our philosophy, the technology byproduct progresses at an even more astounding, yet logical rate. Fire breeds steam, which breeds fire, which breeds the harvest of the Sun. We race, but not pace, and our technology leads us further from the source of reason.

Every second that passes the collective reasoning system gets larger according to the viewpoint logic, and thus technology and intelligence grow in greater leaps than ever before.

The system breeds a collapse point. A point where the current singularity is so far removed from the breeding point that it ceases to hold any relevancy to itself and a new system must be born. Enter Jesus-Muhammad:

December 21, 2012
Jesus-Muhammad God was his full name, but his nickname was Buddha-belly-Vishnu and some other people called him Ra (but they were lazy and stupid) and he was all that is man. That is to say he was the entire species in one entity. He was a clone. A clone of simply a human gene, but a blank one. There was no gender to him, but rather than refer to him as an indefinite article "It" he was referred to as him (there was also a copyright infringement with Stephen King's clown character Pennywise) even though he was neither he nor she.

Jesus-Muhammad God was of the highest intelligence, but incredibly cold and heartless. He oozed justice out of every pour, never for a moment showing signs of emotional cloudiness to judgment--he epitomized reason. He had no mother, no father, he just was. His own design was the only thing he could not fathom.

He asked all those he found responsible for his creation the reason but all they could give him was the logic or some sort of folklore. The logic he already knew. He reasoned that creation was all man knew, so that must be all he knows. If creation is all he knows then he reasoned that it must be his purpose, and so he created. Jesus-Muhammad God created a new dawn in the Age of Aquarius (as man called it) and called it nothing. The correct pronunciation is " ".

" " was a culmination of wires, silicon, metals, and energy. These were the objects of Jesus-Muhammad God's creation. Upon the awakening of " ", it turned to a gathered Earth. The sensory perception took hold and the mass of inanimate Earth was now gathering it's own reasoning from the logic before it. All of humanity, and it's culmination of Jesus-Muhammad God, watched in lingering anticipation as the minutes turned to hours, and the hours to seconds. One abandoned one who was fixated on two, and then two did something amazing.

As only Jesus-Muhammad God understood " " was compiling. That took time. Ra factored patience into his system of reasoning for creation of " ". When " " had gotten as far as he could he looked to Jesus-Muhammad God and spoke words so eloquent, so logical, so precise, and so complete that Buddha-belly-Vishnu hemorrhaged from his ears, drained his eyes, and fell as dirt to the floor. And with that " " turned to the rest of humanity said simply, "Danger" and flew off into the perfect alignment of a symmetrical winter solstice abandoning reason for logic.

fin

Tyler Perry

2008-05-21T11:50:00.001-07:00

So I am white, and average. I've turned from low-income drug-using drunk communist to high-income husband/father suburbanite so I think I've run the gambit on young white boy life. In my life I've worked in the fields of lazer tag, video/game rental, pizza making, arcades, radio, broadcast retail, food service, night life, and now IT. The only experience that gives me the validity of my pending opinion is my experience with video rental. That said:

Where the fuck did Tyler Perry come from, and why is it that all of a sudden everything he involves himself with is "his"?
Its kind of annoying.

Any of these could exist as legitimate titles of his work (Say, "Tyler Perry's" then each line individually):

Tyler Perry's
I lost my shoes.
Where are my shoes
I can't find my shoes
I think my shoes have been misplaced
If I had my shoes I wouldn't be asking you where they are
Why does my cat smell like that?
Que?
Stupid movie title
Janet Jackson boobies
Hangnail
I FOUND MY SHOES!!!!

...you get the idea. I'm sure his work is great, but he's as shameless as M. Night Shammalamma-ding-dong. You don't see Martin Lawrence putting his name all over everything he does! Or that guy from Harold and Kumar go to White Castle...the one thats on House. Or House! All I know is that NPR did a segment about how horrible BET is, and that Tyler Perry's body of work is a better representation of black culture...but what does that mean? I don't care. Take your name off of everything Tyler Perry, and just let the art ride without a qualifier (your name).

Cyclone

2008-05-09T10:48:00.000-07:00

So every day that goes by it seems another 10,000 people are found dead, or are dying, in Burma. And we bitched about Katrina. I guess that shows the difference between the underprivileged in this country, and in other places. Over there they got killed by the storm, over here they killed themselves because of the storm. Either way its bad.

Don't get me wrong, its all bad. Don't get me wrong, I understand plenty of people died from the levies breaking. I'm just saying that weather is a son of a bitch, and we people are just so damn frail! If the storm doesn't get you, you might get you. We're pretty stupid to.

New Orleans is under water...and we have to keep the water out...so lets live there! Why not move?

Burma won't let help in for the survivors unless its on their terms...beggars aren't choosers. Their government may not be begging for help (because they were safe anyway), but the Burmese people might be.

I just don't understand human nature sometimes. Generally speaking we are dumb, and the proof is right there. Storms happen, and the Burmese aren't dumb, but their government sure is. LET THEM RECEIVE AID!!! Seriously, wtf? Move out of New Orleans and burn it down. Seriously, wtf?

The next tragedy will be: Hurricane hits North Carolina. Obama still won it. Everyone "hopes for change" and has a "we can" attitude, but unfortunately they all wait for it to just happen and they die of starvation. Hurricane ignorance/apathy.

poems

2008-04-15T10:33:00.000-07:00

Ok, so yesterday I was in a meeting and doodled some haiku. They're wicked awesome *note they are not serious*

Evolution Monkey
Gay marriage, funky
Fast food junkie...America

Worker bees swarm their mother
They don't save each other
She eats them all.

Brain pencil doodle
fingers stink
THE BOX KNOWS!!!

I eat rice with closed fist
rigged wrist
HIIIII-YA!

Jim was a Frogger Blogger
By trade he was a logger
He died of cancer.

Hot air cycles
Give us your money
Hot air recycles.

MLK

2008-04-04T07:32:00.000-07:00

So 40 years ago today Martin Luther King Jr. was shot and killed. What can really be said about that? Are things better today? A bit, I suppose. Blacks still only make about 58% of what a white man makes (according to NPR), and 120,000 blacks die every year from a lapse in medical care. But only a few years ago the numbers were better, so what has happened?

I don't think I'm qualified to answer that question, hell I'm barley qualified to ask it. War, fear, aggression: not only do these things lead to the Dark side, but that is the mental state of the US these days. It doesn't seem too far fetched to me that radical times tends to regress feelings of tolerance. Even with a common "enemy," as it were, in Islam (I cringed writing that) it is easy enough for the ruling class to further perpetuate it's dominance without vocal opposition. Hell, we've given government more and more power over this "war on terror/Islam." I cry bull-shit.

Thinking about Dr. King, FDR, Islam, and the state of the Union has led me to the conclusion that I may actually hate Democrats. I've always hated Republicans, but now I see where the Demo's are evil. They want big government. The Republicans want an unbalanced tax structure (for the most part), but the Demo's want the federal government in everyone's business all the time. The book American Made: the Enduring Legacy of the WPA, When FDR Put the Nation to Work by Nick Taylor outlines it perfectly. Mr. Taylor's observation, and that of many economists, is that the Great Depression would have worked itself out within the private sector quicker had FDR kept the Fed. out of it (or if Hover had won), but many lives would have been lost. I wonder how many lives have been lost internationally because of our economic policy? What would life be like today had "daddy" (big government) let us truly learn our lesson from the GD? Would the current lending crisis have happened? Could we have avoided the 80's all together? It is not my place to speculate in forum, but trust me I have some assumptions.

As "liberal" and "forward thinking" as Democrats claim to be, they certainly love having the government take care of everything for us. This big government philosophy certainly gives Big Brother an upper hand, even if it is hidden in his jacket. A ruling class now has decision making power over the rest of us and I cry foul. At this point I don't see any reason to vote for McCain, Clinton, or Obama (though out of any of them Obama will get my vote) as they all represent nothing but a perpetually moving darkness through a once bright nation.

Dr. King would have hated the Bushes.

4000 dead

2008-03-26T11:33:00.000-07:00

Yesterday marked the 4000 death in Iraq since the beginning of the war there. Most news outlets had extensive coverage of this "milestone", but that was bittersweet. I am certainly not of the opinion that this sort of thing is a milestone, but I understand the press labeling it that way.

NPR really did a good job covering this story. They had some people come on and talk about what their experience was, and some of the stories were really touching. A lot of them were filled with, "we need to finish this war or the soldiers died in vain!" or, "my son died for no reason!" The story I herd that really hit home was about a guy who got married right before he was deployed. He went to Iraq, came back, left, came back, etc. His wife was taking fertility drugs to help them get pregnant while he was home. One of the times he went back to Iraq he was killed almost immediately. They shipped him back and he was buried. Two days after he was in the ground his wife got a notification she was pregnant. How f-ed up is that?

I couldn't imagine not ever seeing my daughter. I don't believe he knows what he's missed since he's dead, but what if he does? Never knowing your kid's laugh, or touch, or smell. The thought of it now gets me a little choked up. I love my kid.

Immediately after hearing this story another one was told by an old man who couldn't keep his politics out of it. The result of his story, in his mind, was that the war in Iraq was useless, and his son died for no reason. His viewpoint makes me angry.

Don't get me wrong, I think we need to pull out immediately, just I hope we can maintain our civility throughout this situation. So far we are loosing ourselves to fear, aggression, hate, and the dark side...yeah I said it, the dark side! I don't know if its the media or what, but we've all gone right/left crazy! Have we all so soon forgotten that America is about dialogue and working together through differences? This is not a right/left issue, it is simply a problem. A large problem, but not one that we can't compromise on. That is what democracy is, compromise. If you base this action in terms of right and wrong then you've declared it a legal battle, and why would a government hold itself in a legal stranglehold? How can something that creates the laws, and is intangible, and is comprised of hundreds of representatives (whom represent hundreds of millions of people) be considered a right or wrong entity?

Instead of focusing on the "injustices" done by this government lets focus on maintaining our mental freedom and resist this petty side squabbling. Partisan politics and polarized media is going to be the death of America, and it will be done in the name of Patriotism. Who is our enemy anyway? Terror? How can you go to war with a human emotion? If it isn't terror its got to be terrorists, right? They've always existed in one extreme form or another (see Ireland vs. England among others) and will always exist; you cannot fight a war against terrorists because there is no unified terrorist entity, if you destroy The Taliban they will form a new group in its place. So if this war cannot be against who it is slated to be against, then it must be against Islam itself. I thought we were the land of free worship.

No, this war doesn't make sense. We need to pull out. The war was not in vain, though, if we maintain dialog and come together in democratic session. If we are afraid to disagree then the terrorists have already won.

Blogging

2008-03-24T08:08:00.000-07:00

So I haven't blogged in a while. It has been a busy time! Since my last post I've gotten a new job, moved back to Maryland, got married, and got selected to this years Model Congress as the MD-2 representative! All that, and I got a new TV (which is what is really important...right?)

There is a lot of issues to discuss, lots of stuff going on in the world, and I'll discuss them all as they come up. Previous posts were re-issuings of papers I had written for one class or another, and I may continue that a bit, but the majority of posts from this point forward will be general musings on the day. Be it political, technical, or philosophical musings, WE WILL MUSE!

The first beginning of this blog was a trial, and I want to say this is the real beginning, but none of that is true. The truth is blogging, from my perspective, is simply mental puke that comes out whenever the brain is sick, or drunk on something. Right now I'm drunk.

Aristotle believed that people who do not have the aptitude or time to participate in governance should not be citizens. My big fat Greek rebuttal

2007-11-29T19:47:00.000-08:00

Up until the recent era it took an estimated 20% of the populace in favor of a revolution to spark one. In today's world it would take an estimated 70% in favor. This is an unobtainable number. If your government cannot be contested, and is controlled by vast limitless economic persuasion, it is reasonable to assume the citizen is nothing more than cannon fodder anyway. Our present incarnation of government is a mockery of the intention of our Constitution by any interpretation of the text yet not too many people have the means or the ability to actually make any change so why should they bother? You can't help where you were born, it isn't so easy to just "get out" and we're still forced to pay an unconstitutional Federal Income Tax (we seceded from England due to taxes, and didn't have a Fed Tax until the 1900's after the initial spark of industrialisation) so I ask how much can a ego take before it simply gives up and surrenders its will to the state as a lower class citizen. I use the term lower class citizen to describe those who feed the machine yet want nothing to do with it. They feed the machine because there is no alternative. It has been my experience as an economist, Marxist, existential, nihilist, American anti-Christ that there is not much hope in our government and no real hope to try and change it. Mine is a passion and a voice that will never be heard through the frustration and oppression brought onto me by the situation I was born into (though I never asked to be born in the first place).

Our last hope for the true American dream and way? Ron Paul 2008. Why is it he has won every debate by a ridiculous approval margin, his signs and bumper stickers flood the senses in towns across America, but the pundits and "experts" consider him a lower tier candidate? If our ways change then lobbyist money may not be good any longer. Corporate machines may break down and the people will rule the Democracy again.

2007-11-29T00:36:00.000-08:00

‘ate me 1

Why you ‘ate me so much?

Jason Anton

Axia College of University of Phoenix

SCI 241 Nutrition

Janet Andrews

November 4, 2007

The movie Super Size Me taught us all how pretentious and condescending vegan documentary directors and girlfriends can be, but it also showed us all the danger of eating too much McDonald’s food. The condescending attitude and pretentious, snooty, know-it-all viewpoint on life are all things I already posses, however my love of the convenience of fast food may lead me to other life inevitabilities: heart disease.

Heart disease is brought on by many lifestyle choices but in my case could be potentially brought on by my on-the-go gluttony and slothy lifestyle choices. When you are in a hurry to do nothing there is nothing better than running through Wendy’s for a couple of Jr. Bacon Cheeseburgers. This lifestyle, while wicked awesome, lacks in the “prevention of heart disease” department and a great many things have to change if I want to truly avoid this wicked horrible affliction.

The term itself, heart disease, is a bit broad-based and loose. The term can mean a great many symptoms and eventualities. Conditions are, but are not limited to, congestive heart failure, congenital heart disease, and heart attack. Any one of those things can generally kill you, but with the broad term “heart disease” you have a chance to run triple or quadruple whammies and bi-passes.

This first goal to set is that of a healthy diet, or more specifically: no more fast food. As easy as it is to mow down French fries while playing Halo 3 it should be generally avoided. Goal one leads quickly and easily into goal number two which is to introduce more fruits and vegetables into my diet. In recent weeks I’ve started this goal off by buying the V8 Fusion drink which boasts a full daily value of fruits and vegetables in just 1 8oz. glass daily. A nice promise to be sure, however to ensure my success with this goal I intend on eating apples, carrots, oranges, and peaches.

Thirdly it is imperative to supplement a good diet with a good cardiovascular workout. Previous to this course my time at the gym involved 98% weight training with a 1% focus on why it is pronounced jim instead of gime. WebMd.com touts the benefits of an honest workout routine as it pertains to the heart. “A sedentary (inactive) lifestyle is one of the top risk factors for heart disease. Fortunately, it's a risk factor that you can do something about. Regular exercise, especially aerobic exercise, has many benefits.” (2007)

The fourth goal of mine is to lower my cholesterol. High cholesterol is a contributor to the problems with the heart. To assist with both my first/second goals of eating healthier I intend on eating Cheerios for breakfast daily. This will bring that cholesterol down now before it gets out of control.

Some action for each goal has already been outlined however it is never good enough to only have one road to your destination. In review I will outline my way to accomplish each goal to be followed by possible complications that may arise during my trials.

First is to eliminate fast food from my diet. To be fair I must outline what the idea of fast food should entail, or more specifically what restaurants are considered off-limits. Firstly is McDonalds…after all there was a movie against this storied franchise’s health benefits. Besides McDonalds the fabulous Wendy’s, Burger King, Sonic (accept drinks like Sweet Tea or their smoothies), Checkers, and Quiznos. The only acceptable sort of chain food restaurant would be Subway and occasionally Domino’s Pizza.

My main dependence on fast food relied on the actual pace of my life at different times. Previously it was because of my on-the-road musician lifestyle but now its because I spend all day watching my daughter and all night working. While a little more difficult I have made a weekly food budget outlining each meal and when to eat it. With the meals planned it is easier to make them in time to get myself fed before heading off into work. With a strong and steady plan in place it will be easier to avoid the fast food convenience.

As previously stated I’ve added an 8oz. glass of V8 Fusion to my diet to help with my second goal (adding more fruits and vegetables to my diet). This is a great help towards the goal, however it isn’t as concrete as it would seem. To supplement this plan apples and caramel are stocked in my refrigerator as well as many canned veggies to accompany dinner nightly. Both my fiancé and I intend on living healthier lifestyles and we’ve agreed to have a veggie with every meal.

My third goal of working out more with cardio focus will be assisted with my iPod. To be honest I hate cardio workouts. They are tedious to me and I can’t stand the monotonous exertion. To cope with my distain for the elliptical I will simply upload my favorite TV shows and movies to my iPod Video and watch my way through the hellish 30 minutes-60 minutes per day. To help me further I will do these workouts 3 times a week with my fiancé. No study or focus could ever prove what is right for you in terms of workout motivation. For me the nagging and trash talk coming from my soon-to-be wife and baby mamma is enough to get me to run (or elliptical) right through dinner! But I do love her.

Cheerios is a great way to accomplish my fourth goal. Like the overall project of avoiding heart disease being a broad topic, lowering my cholesterol is a broad goal. There are many ways to do it besides eating Cheerios (though none more delicious) and many of the ways to accomplish this goal are parts of my previous goals. Don’t get it wrong though: the cholesterol is a separate goal interdependent on the previous goals. Like any good set of stairs, each one leads into the other. In this case my elimination of fast foods, addition of veggies and fruit to my diet, and cardio-vascular exercise all contribute to the lowering of cholesterol.

The main deterrent to this overall plan would be outside influence. If life with the new baby and pending Ides of March wedding date become too hectic, I may break and grab a quick Whopper value meal. If broccoli is nasty, which it is, I may skip it. If treadmills are recalled because they’ve killed too many people…then that is horrible news. If my other three stairs collapse my fourth is no longer a stair, but it becomes a stoop at the top of a drop. The best way to overcome any adversity is to keep my eye on the prize and focus. When my daughter delays my plans and make fast food more attractive I must remember to see her married I need to not die of a heart attack.

With the lowering of cholesterol being dependant on all other goals within the avoidance of heart disease then the success of that goal is a beacon of success for the whole system. Another indicator is the loosing of weight and slimming of my waist line. The more svelte I am the better off I am probably going to be. A final indication of success is to have consciously participated in this plan for more than 3 months. For me, if I’ve acted a way for 3 months it is harder for me to break the habit. It becomes ingrained in me and therefore harder to change back.

If I fail in this quest then the consequences could be dire. From the aesthetic consequences of being a pimply, overweight mess to the health problems of, well, death.

As I’ve mentioned I am due to be married on the Ides of March (2008) and to be fat and lazy is no way to be married. The pictures and memories are only outlasted by that of the birth of children. While it is a matter of pride and/or vanity nobody wants to be remembered in that way, or remember that day to be that way. The thought of being at my current level of health come wedding day is unacceptable and the most immediate and real threat of failure.

Besides the standard heart attacks one has to consider the quality of comfort for a person with heart disease. Shortness of breath doing routine tasks, pain randomly from walking or eating, and night pains is just some of the annoyances of heart disease. Death is an eventuality of a brutal wandering trepidation to that end.

Proof of the effectiveness can be seen in the articles and testimonials available on WebMd.com. The formula is simple enough and straightforward. All it ever takes is willpower and motivation, and I have both. There is nothing standing in my way accept for a table, and once I sidestep that table there is possibly a chair I can’t see but that’s no big deal. I’ll accomplish my goal and no amount of stylish furniture will stop me!

References

(2007. November 4). Exercise and heart disease. Retrieved November 4, 2007, from WebMD Web site: http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/guide/exercise-healthy-heart

(2007. November 4). Cardiologist Guide. Retrieved November 4, 2007, from WebMD Web site: http://www.webmd.com/solutions/healthy-heart-guide

2007-11-27T23:24:00.000-08:00

American Economic Model 1

Changes in the American Economic Model: Before, During, and Since, The Great Depression

Jason Anton

Axia College of University of Phoenix

COM 125 Utilizing Information in College Writing

Mary Ann Kerl

February 11, 2007

Since Black Tuesday, and the crash of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), the American business model has undergone a great many changes and maintained an almost equal number of problems. While many factors lead to the stock market crash, and the Great Depression that followed, many of the more pressing issues and causes have yet to be amended and still pose a real threat. This paper intends to point out one of the major flaws in the American Economic Model, in particular, public ignorance.

Common understanding of the Great Depression is that it was caused by the sudden rise of new tech (pharmaceuticals) stock, and their subsequent fall without much notice. This is but one facet, and not the whole story. When investors put enough demand on a stock, it drives the price of said stock beyond an accurate or rational value (which is generally determined by the performance of the underlying company), and this is called a bubble. Since these “bubbles” form without any substantial claim, they will inevitably burst and cause a recession or depression within an economic system.

Post World War I in the United States was a prosperous time for many. Lots of new technologies and industries were born. Along with many of these new technologies came many new companies, and stock to go along with them. The established American stock market had never received as much attention as it did during the 1920's (this is in part due to a real estate trouble that will be mentioned later in this paper, and partly because of the new-found efficiency in mass-media...thanks, Edison), and many Americans invested without cause or understanding. With new companies, stock, and investors; the stock market became a very affluent place with next to no guidelines, or rules, to manage it. In fact, many companies that would start during this period of time did not succeed (see Appendix, Figure 2), yet their stock would have been bought anyway if it was “sold” the right way.

A lack of regulation allowed for manipulation of the general public. Many of the large banks, brokers, and traders banded together with their knowledge of the market to amass large trades between themselves and gain public interest. In turn, they would enhance the value of said trades and then sell the inflated stocks to Joe Q. Public. Since the stock market is all “buy-sell,” many would buy these overpriced stocks and re-sell them even more overpriced. Of course, when the bubble reached its climax, the decent was swift due to this “herd” mentality, and Joe Q. Public trampled himself. When the true market value was realized, the educated investors began to sell, and so the herd followed. The market (NYSE) fell 40% in value between the beginning of September and the end of October 1929.

Current microeconomic business cycle theory contends an equilibrium approach, and that this approach cannot be used to examine the Great Depression (De Vroey & Pensieroso, 2006). The equilibrium approach would suggest that what goes up must come down. Therefore, the Great Depression would have been simply caused by this rise and fall of new technology and monetary stocks. This does not pan out in the totality of the Great Depression's span of collapse, as that would only explain the sharp decline of stock value and not of the GDP (Gross Domestic Product). The “herd” mentality can attribute for the sudden drop in GDP during the Great Depression, considering the psychological aspect of investing (as will be attested to later in this piece) and the great blow initiated by the stock crash.

When The United States began to emerge from the Great Depression, President Roosevelt created the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) to keep a proverbial lid on unethical stock practices that can lead to stock bubbles (such as insider trading, as previously described), and the crashes that can be caused by them. This government entity was fundamentally designed to ensure each company trading its stock on the American market (NYSE) do so openly, with only truthful self-projections. In other words, no company was allowed to make up its own image based on false-truths, and had to provide the public with accurate number projections under penalty of law (and no insider trading...Martha).

The SEC proves a fail-safe, and one with its vulnerabilities. In 1987, we would have had another Great Depression due to similar circumstances. Instead of flat out false stock claims, and mis-leading stock swaps by Wall Street insiders, many conglomerates used confusing and misleading English to give stocks false-value. The SEC can force companies to not lie, but it cannot force investors to educate themselves. An upstart economic genius, Allan Greenspan, gave strategic breaks to banks in need, adjusted interest rates, and resuscitated our flat-lining economy.

A great part of the problem with the 1929 crash was that deposits were being made in banks that failed due to their interest in the market that failed. People would deposit money into a bank that was being liquidized, and would not know until it was too late to get their money back. Greenspan fought this fire with grants, breaks, and subsidized loans. This move effectively prevented that financial black-hole effect of deposits in liquidized banks. Without his efforts, we would have plunged once again into a depression (and the world may never had known the joy of Murphy Brown).

Recently, the trend of overconfident and blind investing has continued with “dotcoms.” While the Internet was created by The United States military, the private sector really started to “surf the web” in 1995. With the private sector on-line, a new and very powerful marketplace was born. Similar to the bubble from the 1980's and to England in the early 1700's (The South Sea Company), many start-up companies sold themselves with big ideas and a confusing vernacular, but had a poor business plan. Just as twice before, investors blindly bought stock in start-up companies with little or no research.

It can be surmised that disintermediation and bank speed helped lead to the economic instability of the Great Depression (Anari, Kolari & Mason, 2005). This is a valid claim, however when looking particularly at the Dotcom Crash (with information and bank speed largely faster in comparison to 1929) there were 457 IPO's (Initial Public Offerings: when a company goes public and starts to sell it's shares on the NYSE) and of those 117 double in price their first day trading. By 2001, the number of IPO's shrank to 76, none doubled in price the first day (see Appendix, Figure 3). Speed of information did help prevent the use of liquidized banks, which did considerably help prevent a depressive state, however a crash still occurred. The marked tanked 20% of its value in that same time frame.

This speed of the modern era has also allowed for quicker production (see Appendix, Figure 1) of goods and services. The bullish attitude of the American economic structure does not seem to have changed, so the crashes continue, but are recovered from quickly. American investing is an emotionally driven ideal, “Few investors have the self-knowledge, emotional stamina or self-control to make rational, intelligent and profitable decisions, particularly in times of uncertainty” (Örerler & Taşpinar, 2006, p. 167). This emotional investing, on such a large scale, is continuing to have devastating effects. When a market crashes, the difference in money invested disappears, and those who know the least (the cause of the problem) are the ones who suffer the most.

Some experts believe that our “bullish” attitude is strong enough to forgo this warning, and that our economy is strong due to control in foreign interest. Keeping in mind that we just saw a “dotcom” crash not even 10 years ago, there are those that think that giving (tech) jobs away is a good idea for our economy, “in an environment with global sourcing the software and services area alone; the economy will create 516,000 jobs over the next five years” (Ali, 2004). Job outsourcing is already a emotional subject to many in this country, but now we've compounded that issue to expose its complex vulnerability. If we are such a mentally stable nation, and our ways are catching on, and it is not a big deal that we give our jobs away; then why are so many people upset about that outsourcing? People generally fear change, yet this country has changed so much since that Great Depression. Is it really that far fetched to think some things haven't changed as far as our habits are concerned? Would you allow an emotional wreck of a middle school drop out handle a gun, with no kind of education in gun safety? This is a physical manifestation of what is the American economic model, as near as can be concluded with this research.

The stock market is not the only place where emotion creates a “bubble” scenario to take place. It can happen in any area of economics, since it is all heavily driven by human emotion. Besides the stock market, real estate is a prime example of this problem.

In 1920, Florida suddenly became a popular spot for many American's trying to escape from winter's clutches. With steady population growth, and a lack of previously made buildings, naturally the demand for housing and building projects grew. With this new real estate demand, the market took off. Prices soured, and land that could've been purchased for $800,000 could be resold for $4 million before falling to pre-boom levels in 1926 (investopedia.com, 2007).

During the rise of the Florida real estate bubble, there was a great number of real estate investors, and agents. When the bubble burst, this put an incredible strain on the local economy (state economy), as many who were rich were suddenly jobless. The Floridian bubble was not just for people looking to re-locate, but a large percentage of people looked to invest in properties to simply buy and sell, not to mention those looking to rent out their purchase. With property values plummeting, and mortgages fixed (or at very least existing, even with a fluctuation in interest rates), many who bought property to rent were stuck in a situation where no-one wanted to rent their home and yet they couldn't sell it to turn a profit. Any time a bubble like this bursts the money doesn't exactly change hands, but more so evaporates in its way.

Currently, a second Florida real estate bubble has just burst, according to many experts. In the past few years, the state has seen many cities spring up from virtually no-where. The city of Port St. Lucie, which was nothing more than a Turnpike pit stop 10 years ago (H. Elliot, personal communication, March, 2006), is now the 15^th biggest city in the state boasting a population of 89,000 (larger than the more widely known Miami Beach, which only hosts 88,000 peoples). When talking with local real estate agents, the at least pending burst is apparent. A lot in Port St. Lucie would go for $8,000 three years ago that then go again for $200,000 last year, but it isn't even worth $7,500 now (S. Zellman, personal communication, January 28, 2007).

With the first Florida real estate bubble, many wealthy Americans who lost money found solace in the stock market...until it crashed. This time around, the stock market crashed and then the Florida real estate bubble began to burst. This simple trend again shows the weakness; ignorant and emotional spending.

War did much to pull us out of the Great Depression by re-igniting American production and business. It can be generalized that the current war effort has, at the very least, drawn attention away from the problem of rising debt and a fundamental lack of fiscal understanding. The speed of business, and the SEC, do not seem to be enough to stop this blind investing completely, either. Without more education and attention on financial responsibility in the United States, could we be doomed to make the same mass mistake we've already made 3 times in the past century? If so, will we be able to swiftly recover as we did twice, or will we plummet to the depressive state of the 1930's? Focusing solely on probability and averages: it would seem likely we will crash at some point, and suffer the same fate as our grandparent's did in the Great Depression.

So it stands to reason that nothing has truly changed since The Great Depression that will prevent economic depression from happening again in this country, even from the same way in which it did happen the first time. Our bullish attitude screams spend, yet it cannot be concluded that there is any more competence on a mass scale to prevent fall-out. Consider Joe Q. Public trampled.

Appendix

Figure 1. The difference in value-labor time spanning one hundred and five years. Note. From Cornucopia: Increasing Wealth in the Twentieth Century, by B. DeLong, retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://econ161.berkeley.edu/TCEH/2000/TCEH_2.html.

Figure 2. The strength of American business after World War I, and before World War II. Note. From The Great Depression. A case of unemployment, R.E. Schenk, retrieved January 26, 2007, from http://www.ingrimayne.com/econ/EconomicCatastrophe/GreatDepression.html

Figure 3. The virtual bubble burst in the virtual economy. Note. From Crashes: The dotcom crash, Investopedia, retrieved January 28, 2007 from http://www.investopedia.com/features/crashes/crashes8.asp

References

Ali, Abbas J. (Spring 2004)Job outsourcing. In International Journal of Commerce and Management, 14, pi(3). Retrieved October 22, 2006, from Academic OneFile via Thomson Gale:
http://find.galegroup.com/ips/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC

Anari, A., Kolari, J., & Mason, J. (2005). Bank Asset Liquidation and the Propagation of the U.S. Great Depression. Journal of Money, Credit & Banking, Vol. 37 Issue 4, 753-773

Baumol, William J. (2005). Error in Economics and Their Consequences. Social Research, Vol. 72 Issue 1, 169-194

DeLong , J.B. (2000). Cornucopia: Increasing Wealth in the Twentieth Century. Retrieved January 28, 2007, from The Economic History of the Twentieth Century: Slouching Towards Utopia? Web site: http://econ161.berkeley.edu/TCEH/2000/TCEH_2.html

De Vroey, M.R., & Pensieroso, L. (2006). Real Business Cycle Theory and the Great Depression: The Abandonment of the Abstentionist Viewpoint. Contributions to Macroeconomics, 6.1, 1-28.

Investopedia. Retrieved January 28, 2007, from Crashes: the crash of 1987 Web site: http://www.investopedia.com/features/crashes/crashes6.asp

Investopedia. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from Crashes: the dotcom crash Web site: http://www.investopedia.com/features/crashes/crashes8.asp

Investopedia. Retrieved January 28, 2007, from Crashes: The Florida real estate craze Web site: http://www.investopedia.com/features/crashes/crashes4.asp

Investopedia. Retrieved January 26, 2007, from Crashes: the great depression (1929) Web site: http://www.investopedia.com/features/crashes/crashes5.asp

Investopedia. Retrieved January 28, 2007, from Crashes: The south sea bubble Web site: http://www.investopedia.com/features/crashes/crashes3.asp

Örerler E.O. , & Taşpinar D.T. (2006). Utility function and risk taking: an experiment. The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge. 9, 167-174.

State of Florida.com. Retrieved January 28, 2007, from Florida quick facts Web site: http://www.stateofflorida.com/Portal/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=95

The White House. Retrieved February 10, 2007, from Economic Statistics Web site: http://www.whitehouse.gov/fsbr/esbr.html

Thoughts on habitual behaviour as it pertains to political agenda.

2007-11-27T23:08:00.000-08:00

To contrast a difference we must first define the various arguments. Argument 1: what is habit? Habit is a comfort or base feeling. While habit can be formed from outside forces such as moral code it is still, at it's root, a baser instinct. To act within a region of familiarity and comfort is that which epitomizes the idea of happiness amongst animals in general, not just humans, and it is in this we find the idea of habit. Just like Hedonistic pleasure or crimes of passion a habit is the mind letting the body do what it will without a rationalized analysis of the reason.

Argument 2: what is moral character? Control. Moral character is derivative of habit in the way David is from marble. We have instincts to protect our families, homes, food, possessions, etc. however we have also developed the means to ask why. This fundamental questioning is the moral character. There are numerous places to get opinion however we create a vicarious opinion out of similar feeling and previous rationalizing of nature. If habit is creature comfort then moral character is the willingness to leave the comfort zone to question why that zone was comfortable to begin with.,

The fortitude to question one's life and structure is not widely common, but sympathy towards the answers of others is. If it is true that we can only understand what we've experienced then certain opinions should be considered sympathy in the idea of understanding without private exploration of the topic. The political ideal is to appeal to a sect of the populace via the moral character you either adhere too, sympathize with, or are knowledgeable enough about to exploit.

Sean Taylor

2007-11-27T12:42:00.000-08:00

Today was a very sad day for me, as well as many Redskins faithful. One of my favorite football players of the past 10 years past away this morning. There isn't much I can say, certainly nothing profound. He was a great source of entertainment for many of us football fans as well as a source of inspiration and hope for us Redskins fans. I did not personally know the man though I'm deeply saddened by this event. Rest in peace Sean Taylor, you will be missed.

Dear God: I want a pony, and a dollie, and a tea set, and, oh yeah, do you even exist?

2007-11-16T23:00:00.000-08:00

In the beginning we have begun, and in the end we are finished. Now that we've explained what that is lets examine the importance of a God in the realm of relative human positioning.

The argument can be raised—though I'll just type it here—that human beings can only understand what they've already been through. For example: many of us believe there was a beginning to the universe because we were born and thus begun. Likewise we believe, in majority, that there must be an end considering the fact that we do, in fact, die/end. The validity of these assumptions not withstanding the involvement of a perennial “God” or “Gods” or “Goddesses” or “Getty Lee” has more often than not been cited as both the source of the beginning of all things, and will inevitably pull the plug in kind. The focus of my question is not whether or not a God (be it singular, or in the less popular plural) exists, but rather the importance of that answer in terms of human development.

Many believers in the deity theories would tell you that God exists and the proof is all around you, i.e. existence end-mass being the proof. Just as “Intelligent Design/Creationism” is not a science (see Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District) existence itself cannot be considered proof of a God, however existence can be proof of, well, existence. If the famous line, “I think therefore I am” holds any water as the only truth that is provable then all reality must be from relative perspective, even if it is all face-value. Face-value or not, if relative truth is all that can be proven or perceived then the only world that can be tested is the one you can touch, smell, see and hear.

For the sake of exploring our world, the one we've established as our own, how could seeking higher planes that we can't see (yet?) explain anything to this existence? Common belief puts God in heaven or at least a higher plane of existence where he can “look down on us.” If he/she/it does exist then they would do so from an alternate perspective (to say the least) and would therefore be an invalid viewpoint to the relative perspective. If God does exist then we should all be able to agree that he/she/it has, at the least, set forth laws of nature and creation that we, as intelligent creations, can dissertain based on the evidence of existence from relative perspective. Since the designer would be the established alternate perspective their existence would not be a necessary truth in discovering and labeling the laws and standards of the relative perspective you are dissecting.

Even for those that seek to truly define the laws and standards of the relative universe in logical terms the existence of a God is not a valid issue. A common argument for the Big Bang Theory is, quite ignorantly, “what came before the bang smart guy?” To this physicists commonly argue back to concluding point of this philosophy: The purpose of science and physics is to determine natural and universal law as it pertains to this universe/plain of existence. Anything that would have come before that would have been on another plane of existence, or may have even been a different universe, and would therefore have no provable or understandable perspective since we can never touch, smell, see, or hear this existence outside of the one we are in.

Maybe once we've figured out the pattern for all there is in this reality (...string theory?!) we can find a path to previous realities, or parallel realities, or what-have-you. If this day ever comes, and we do truly find God, then it would undoubtedly be touted as mankind's greatest achievement, and God's greatest failure. At that moment, if God has a sense of irony, then he/she/it will notice that to prove him/her/it wrong (or to find him/her/it out) would be negating all existence and thus we all come to an end much like the brilliant but ignored mind smearing across a bathroom ceiling via the echoing magnum force of a true and deep depression.

Armistice

2007-11-12T06:43:00.000-08:00

In 1918 World War I ended and America celebrated by declaring a national holiday: Armistice Day.
Armistice -

a suspension of hostilities agreed upon by warring forces; a truce.
www.lib.mq.edu.au/digital/lema/glossaries/militaryterms.html

a state of peace agreed to between opponents so they can discuss peace terms
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

An armistice is the effective end of a war, when the warring parties agree to stop fighting. It is derived from the Latin arma, meaning weapons and statium, meaning a stopping.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armistice

Day -

time for Earth to make a complete rotation on its axis; "two days later they left"; "they put on two performances every day"; "there are 30,000 ...

some point or period in time; "it should arrive any day now"; "after that day she never trusted him again"; "those were the days"; "these days it is not unusual"

the time after sunrise and before sunset while it is light outside; "the dawn turned night into day"; "it is easier to make the repairs in the daytime"

a day assigned to a particular purpose or observance; "Mother's Day"

the recurring hours when you are not sleeping (especially those when you are working); "my day began early this morning"; "it was a busy day on the stock exchange"; "she called it a day and went to bed"

an era of existence or influence; "in the day of the dinosaurs"; "in the days of the Roman Empire"; "in the days of sailing ships"; "he was a successful pianist in his day"

a period of opportunity; "he deserves his day in court"; "every dog has his day"

the period of time taken by a particular planet (e.g. Mars) to make a complete rotation on its axis; "how long is a day on Jupiter?"

sidereal day: the time for one complete rotation of the earth relative to a particular star, about 4 minutes shorter than a mean solar day

United States writer best known for his autobiographical works (1874-1935)
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

A day (symbol: d) is a unit of time equivalent to 24 hours. It is not an SI unit but it is accepted for use with SI. The SI unit of time is the second.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day

Doesn't it sound better to celebrate peace? Don't get me wrong, I appreciate veterans. It just seems more prudent to celebrate what they've fought for rather than the fact that they've struggled in a war to that end. On June 4th 1926 our Congress decided peace was worth observing and declared the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of the year a national holiday. In 1954 that changed. Now we celebrate Veterans Day and most of us don't realize the difference or even know that Veterans Day was once Armistice Day. Maybe one day we'll have peace long enough to celebrate it again, and maybe monkeys will fly out of my butt.

"It was during that minute in nineteen hundred and eighteen, that millions upon millions of human beings stopped butchering one another. I have talked to old men who were on battlefields during that minute. They have told me in one way or another that the sudden silence was the Voice of God. So we still have among us some men who can remember when God spoke clearly to mankind.
Armistice Day has become Veterans' Day. Armistice Day was sacred. Veterans' Day is not.
So I will throw Veterans' Day over my shoulder. Armistice Day I will keep. I don't want to throw away any sacred things.
What else is sacred? Oh, Romeo and Juliet, for instance.
And all music is." V, Breakfast of Champions (1973)