Comments on: Antibiotics and Debt: Sources of Weakness http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/ Self-Experimentation, Scientific Method, the Shangri-La Diet, etc. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:28:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: justin http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324271 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 20:52:56 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324271 To some extent, I have to wonder if the mistake here is hubris: the belief that we *can* control complex systems with simple solutions. And in the case of the financial system, there are powerful interests that benefit from a credit/debt-based monetary system: banks and bureaucrats. Just look at Goldman Sachs' earnings today. How does a bank that quite nearly imploded nine months ago manage to blow out earnings in the worst recession in decades? Perhaps it is because they profit off of volatility in the system. The make money when the bubble is blown and place bets to profit when the bubble ultimately bursts. And in the meantime, they have a direct line to the U.S. government to bail them out or change the rules (And by direct line, I mean they have ex-employees running the show. ::cough:: Hank Paulson). To some extent, I have to wonder if the mistake here is hubris: the belief that we *can* control complex systems with simple solutions.

And in the case of the financial system, there are powerful interests that benefit from a credit/debt-based monetary system: banks and bureaucrats. Just look at Goldman Sachs’ earnings today. How does a bank that quite nearly imploded nine months ago manage to blow out earnings in the worst recession in decades?

Perhaps it is because they profit off of volatility in the system. The make money when the bubble is blown and place bets to profit when the bubble ultimately bursts. And in the meantime, they have a direct line to the U.S. government to bail them out or change the rules (And by direct line, I mean they have ex-employees running the show. ::cough:: Hank Paulson).

]]> by: seth http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324225 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:59:59 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324225 It's a good question why the same sort of mistake -- failure to make the system more robust -- was made in two different areas. Maybe because demonization (bubbles are bad! bacteria are bad!) is easy while its opposite is hard? Or maybe because it is harder to understand what makes a system weak or strong than to notice the immediate source of the problem. That was certainly Barry Marshall's problem: It was easier to notice that a certain bacterium was associated with ulcers and kill it than to notice that low immunity was associated with ulcers and boost it. It’s a good question why the same sort of mistake — failure to make the system more robust — was made in two different areas. Maybe because demonization (bubbles are bad! bacteria are bad!) is easy while its opposite is hard? Or maybe because it is harder to understand what makes a system weak or strong than to notice the immediate source of the problem. That was certainly Barry Marshall’s problem: It was easier to notice that a certain bacterium was associated with ulcers and kill it than to notice that low immunity was associated with ulcers and boost it.

]]> by: Nathan Myers http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324128 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 06:25:53 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324128 Sorry, Eric, all cars can do 9000 miles between oil changes these days. It's because the oil is better now, and the gasoline isn't full of the corrosive chemicals that used to be needed to keep all that tetraethyl lead in solution. That's also why engines last longer -- besides being more precisely machined, for less wear. The only thing that will affect greenhouse gases appreciably will be a source of power substantially cheaper than coal. (Extra points if it can produce high-pressure gases or vapor to drive existing coal plants.) Once a source cheaper than coal exists, coal will instantly become too expensive to dig up. Sorry, Eric, all cars can do 9000 miles between oil changes these days. It’s because the oil is better now, and the gasoline isn’t full of the corrosive chemicals that used to be needed to keep all that tetraethyl lead in solution. That’s also why engines last longer — besides being more precisely machined, for less wear.

The only thing that will affect greenhouse gases appreciably will be a source of power substantially cheaper than coal. (Extra points if it can produce high-pressure gases or vapor to drive existing coal plants.) Once a source cheaper than coal exists, coal will instantly become too expensive to dig up.

]]> by: Eric Arias http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324114 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:39:06 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324114 If I'm understanding you correctly the typical logic for both the 'fixing' the economy and health is like: A perceived harmful thing (bacteria, less money changing hands) causes a problem in some entity (the economy and personal health). So the problem with both Greenspan and the medical establishment's approach is they ignore the aspect of some problems. In both cases the problem is better read as: the entity cannot defend itself the harmful things, how to help the entity defend itself (yogurt and less debt/more businesses and innovation)? If that's roughly how you meant it it seems fun. It's saying things happen all the time which can have harmful effects but those effects can or will be mitigated by keeping whatever entity (the economy, your health, culture) robust. This makes me think of my wife bragging about how Volvo engines are built to last 5,000 - 6,000 miles per oil change instead of the usual 3,000 on most cars because they can handle a little sludge. This seems to reflect the Shangri-la diet as well. Instead of trying to remove the so-called bad calories as most diets do, SLD makes one's system more robust to the need for calories. I wonder how this problem solving orientation can be applies to other areas such as personal productivity, greenhouse gases and the like. If I’m understanding you correctly the typical logic for both the ‘fixing’ the economy and health is like:

A perceived harmful thing (bacteria, less money changing hands) causes a problem in some entity (the economy and personal health).

So the problem with both Greenspan and the medical establishment’s approach is they ignore the aspect of some problems.

In both cases the problem is better read as: the entity cannot defend itself the harmful things, how to help the entity defend itself (yogurt and less debt/more businesses and innovation)?

If that’s roughly how you meant it it seems fun. It’s saying things happen all the time which can have harmful effects but those effects can or will be mitigated by keeping whatever entity (the economy, your health, culture) robust.

This makes me think of my wife bragging about how Volvo engines are built to last 5,000 - 6,000 miles per oil change instead of the usual 3,000 on most cars because they can handle a little sludge.

This seems to reflect the Shangri-la diet as well. Instead of trying to remove the so-called bad calories as most diets do, SLD makes one’s system more robust to the need for calories.

I wonder how this problem solving orientation can be applies to other areas such as personal productivity, greenhouse gases and the like.

]]> by: justin http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324089 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 02:29:03 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2009/07/13/antibiotics-and-debt-sources-of-weakness/#comment-324089 I couldn't agree more. And the blind spot with regard to our financial system is all-encompassing. Even many of the more "clear-eyed" pundits fail to see the problem, prescribing more and more policies in a misguided attempt to change reality (and force human beings to be virtuous). Incidentally, the most obvious solution is not more control, it's more decentralized money because only a massively decentralized system can escape the systemic risk of central control. And more decentralized money requires money to have more behind it than a promise by some debtor to pay you back (as with fiat currency or other forms of credit). I couldn’t agree more. And the blind spot with regard to our financial system is all-encompassing. Even many of the more “clear-eyed” pundits fail to see the problem, prescribing more and more policies in a misguided attempt to change reality (and force human beings to be virtuous).

Incidentally, the most obvious solution is not more control, it’s more decentralized money because only a massively decentralized system can escape the systemic risk of central control. And more decentralized money requires money to have more behind it than a promise by some debtor to pay you back (as with fiat currency or other forms of credit).

]]>