Don’t Like: Using Models of Uncertainty to Produce Certainties

While it may seem obvious that doing such would be folly, it’s essentially become the very basis of our current “forecast first” economic model. A long time ago, the stock market was “reactive” and now we’re somehow both “anticipatory” and “reactive”… or maybe just reactive to our anticipations.

This guy makes it a lot more clear.

Here we are, another day, ANOTHER bailout.

Yet at the same time the whole black swan affair isn’t necessarily all that and a side salad. There’s a great mefi quote on the subject: “I’ve got this in the “broken swan is right twice a year” category. If you predict a lot of catastrophic failures, some of them will come true. That doesn’t make you good at predicting catastrophic failures.”

So what’s a national economy to do??? Oy!

Well… first we should re-establish and national infastructure and put cashmoney back into the transporation budget, just right that ship. The market woes? Sheesh. I don’t even know. There’s arguements for the bailouts, against the bailouts, for more regulation, for less regulation. It seems we really just need to find an organic way of curbing out of control prognostication… but how the hell do you do that? It’s become a facet of the system. Add to the fact that the true stability of our economy seems to have nothing to do with the DOW anymore and you got one hell of a situation.

… sigh.

I miss greenspan. He made it all so clear.

Bernake is known to lie just to “fuck with” reporters… Cause yeah, that doesn’t affect the economy or anything… ASS.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: