I am short small caps via TZA. I'll dump this when:
SoSR HotMeme: Classical Static Optimisms (key disablers of classical science's deign of feign):
We have some clues. One set of clues are what we call Kuhn's "crown jewels of paradigm shifts." They are all classically scientific, conceptually naïve, hubristic, and static optimisms:
When scientists adhere Kuhnian crown jewels like those we list above we can see even more of their classical arrogance. Why? How? N¤ne of those 'jewels' is a valid descriptor of natural reality! For each of those terms we can say and show that reality neither fits n¤r adheres them. For example, natural reality is n¤t, in general: analytic, single event deterministic, conservative, conventional, dichotomous, effective (causal), radically mechanical, objective, quantitative, state-ic, tautological, etc.
Only in an overriding SOM paradigm could any 'scientist' adhere those "jewels" while declaring nature "wrong." Does Kuhn himself reside in that overriding SOM paradigm? We think so. Witness, on page 23, "In science, on the other hand, a paradigm is rarely an object for replication. Instead, like an accepted judicial decision in the common law, it is an object for further articulation and specification under new or more stringent conditions." Kuhn sees paradigms as classical "objects."
To his credit, Kuhn recognizes several of classical science's jewels as equivocal. A great example is his page 146 anti-Popperian, "Nevertheless, anomalous experiences may not be identified with falsifying ones. Indeed, I doubt the latter exist." We take Kuhn's intended semantic as denying Popper's conjecture of general falsifiability by contradiction in nature. We agree.
|United States of America.|
|50+ 'States' being railroaded by a 'federation.' An inept 'federation.'|
|50+ seceded 'states' coherently operating cooperatively as a quanton(coherent,locally-independent) pluralism.|
When I hear 'experts' pushing the market at this point I would be wary.
It only makes sense that if your income is derived from being a trader the trader wants to encourage other people to trade so the market might go up a bit and help him/her all around.
Given we have not seen such a decrease in our markets before in our adult lifetime what a great ploy for traders to entice people to get back in now decrease their losses and then jump out themselves. The traders are trying very hard to make a viable market through their rhetoric. No doubt there is an agenda, and you have to figure out their agenda.
There are experts betting on the -down and experts betting on the -up .
The 'experts' are the sheep herders ...most of the US populace are sheep they love to be herded.
The sheep often forget about the fox who lurks in the dark quietly and without warning. (you know the rest of this story).
I agree with your concern about US' enormous debt, almost too huge for us to take on...quite scary.
I agree with Dugger that society runs on automatic. Very few families run on their standards, instead they run on standards set by extended family, friends, business associates, clergy etc.
When will people learn to be independent thinkers? When will families say, "Hey...we cannot afford that new house with twice the square footage?" When was the last time you heard someone say, "Hey...we cannot afford that new house we want, and still be sure we can pay for food, heat, water, emergencies, education, health care etc.?"
How many people do you hear say, "...we cannot afford?" When will we stop keeping up with the Joneses?
Will the greed stop when there is nothing left? And by the way what is left?...debt? savings? employment?
All of us will probably be facing some very difficult decisions...our thought processes on how to live our lives are now forever altered.
I think you are attempting to be an independent thinker. Good for you, good for your family. Being a sheep can only lead to Sunday dinner of roasted lamb~~
their constituents like those of us who are interested in silver and gold markets.
Added red text bullets 12Mar2009 - Doug.
|Subject: Blueprint for our future|
|From: "David Plouffe, BarackObama.com"
|Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:28:52 -0500|
|To: Doug Renselle|
Yesterday, President Obama submitted his first budget to Congress.
As the President said, the budget isn't just numbers on a page. It establishes our plans and priorities as we confront some of the longest-standing challenges this country has ever faced.
Watch a short video of President Obama introducing his budget and share it with your friends:
With this budget, President Obama is asking Washington to do something it rarely does -- look beyond the next election and take the long-term steps to ensure America's future strength and prosperity.
It will involve sacrifices and difficult decisions. But it will also boldly invest in the three areas most critical to our economic future: energy, health care, and education.
Investing in a clean energy future will put America at the forefront of industry in the 21st century and create the jobs that will form a new foundation for the middle class.
Confronting the mounting cost of health care will put America back on a solid foundation so businesses can thrive and families can prosper.
Reforming and strengthening our education system will ensure American innovation and competitiveness well into the next century.
Watch the brief video now:
This budget isn't just a reflection of President Obama's priorities. It's a reflection of yours.
This is the change you worked for and Americans demanded. But to make sure it succeeds, the President will need your help.
In the coming weeks, we'll be asking you to talk directly to people in your community, to build momentum and demonstrate the broad support President Obama has for this new direction.
Thank you for your continued commitment,
Obama for America
This email was sent to: $$$NoFlamedpellesner$$$at$$$indy$$$dot$$$rr$$$dot$$$com
|What are SOM, CR, and MoQ?"|
|What are topos' three levels: hylic, psychic, pneumatic?"|
|What is essence of SOM?"|
|How could SOM evolve to CR?"|
|What is essence of CR?"|
|How could CR evolve to MoQ?"|
|What is essence of MoQ?"|
|How could MoQ evolve to its own quantum~essence?"|
I do not want to beat an old horse to death here, but... We are at an historic moment now re Dow to Gold ratio. (If you are interested, www search on Dow to Gold ratio.) That ratio now is about 10. And 10 is a kind of magic number. When we drop below that it marks a transition into an economic phase (Kondratieff) which has lasted previously from 1930 to 1956 (great depression unwinding and rewinding), and 1973 to 1996 (last major recession unwinding and rewinding). First interval was 26 years long; about half unwinding and rest rewinding. Second interval was 23 years long; about one third unwinding and rest rewinding. D/G ratio bottoms out in both of those intervals at about 2.5 and 1.5 respectively. Staying near and slightly above those levels is what Doug means by unwinding, and strong moves up out of those levels is what Doug means by rewinding (sort of early stages of recovery, some alerts may be false though). Clearly both take decades, at least. That is what we 'likely' have ahead of us. What is very interesting about this ratio is how it favors Gold in terms of real Value. Say at a D/G ratio level of 3, parametrically imagine a range of values for Dow vis-à-vis Gold. It could be Dow 3000, Gold 1000. It could be Dow 6000, Gold 2000, It could be Dow 8000, Gold 2667. What we see is that Gold keeps its value pretty well relative to Dow, especially at D/G ratios below 10. Of course we could use other extremes like 600 and 200, but on a relative basis, prices would have to drop a huge amount for Dow to go that low. E.g., our house would probably be worth $5-10k in that range of Dow pricing. So $200 Gold still looks pretty good, relatively, even then. But we would be killed on loss of value in our homes. My point is that gold now even at 800 is a bargain if that cycle repeats as it has twice prior. And, if it goes down, its relative value will hold since prices will decline relative to it. (Gasoline is good example here; 800 gold would buy about 250 gallons about a year ago; now it will buy about 600-700 gallons; does that amaze you? Same analogy works for our home but ratio is only about two to one...) Fiat paper cannot do this! (Watch US' Dollar Index...) And that is how people lose large paper fortunes almost overnight. If history approximately repeats, gold is a good place to be for about next 10 years. If I am right, you'll be able to get back into significantly more paper in 10-15 years if you then feel confident in paper again. I am not a certified counselor-broker! I am sharing what I think as an amateur with individual confidence to follow-do what has been described above. Take all of this with a grain of salt. I could be entirely wrong. But you can think for yourselves and make choices. Good choices are always better when they have more information and ideas to consider them. Ockham would recommend minimalism. Doug recommends more wisdom, not less and thinks Ockham got it all wrong. Like "global warming," all the TARPapering in the world isn't going to significantly mitigate long-term D/G ratio behaviors... Kondratieff is to Ockham as Quantonics is to Einstein. Oh joy... 15Jan2009