Everything Is Fine In A Parallel Universe
- This topic has 11 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Maurer Miss Universe June 1928 3rd International Pageant of Pulchritude and 9th Annual Bathing Girl Revue, Galveston, Texas Last week, I was reading p
[See the full post at: Everything Is Fine In A Parallel Universe]Apologies for the mishaps in publishing an earlier version of this article. We’re working hard to correct a number of errors that occurred during the conversion from Joomla to WordPress.
Thanks for delineating these discrepancies so well. I too notice the inconsistencies in many economic articles. It leaves one puzzled when the title/opening paragraph talks about improvement, then further down are statistics that totally belie that (like rising unemployment numbers). Often only a couple data points are used from distant points in time with nothing in-between (i.e. a 0.3% recent increase that is “up” from a 0.4% decrease “last year” in some quarter???). Seriously.
As a scientist I want to chide them for not providing a complete set of data points, arranged in a graph, covering the whole timeline (even 5 or 10 years!) so that readers may judge “trend” for themselves. Bloomberg is guilty of this daily. If I tried to publish a paper with figures like that it would be rejected instantly.
Do most people only read the first paragraph? Am I too OCD? Parallel universe is good description. This comes under “Things That Make You Go HUH?”
“So I’m left with just one possible conclusion: that we live in parallel universes. ”
Very true; and if I may add the view from my Antarean anthropologist friends; one of the (many) differences between them is: in your Universe, the function of public essays is to communicate “Truth”, from the point of view of the writer; in the Japanese banker’s Universe, the function of public essays is to influence human behavior, and “Truth”, from any perspective, is not on the list of ingredients. 🙂
“Everything Is Fine In A Parallel Universe”
Yes.
All of the worldly troubles are in another parallel universe.
I hear reports that many other people are experiencing one step forward and two steps back.
Unusual and unexpected weather events, revolts, repression, starvation, loss of income burdensome debts.
Things are changing and getting more difficult for many people.
Parallel universes are the individual future projections of the present.
From perspective of the US elites, the language of large banks who are Fed Primary Dealers, the apparent disconnect is an illusion born of what isn’t said. What isn’t said is that a large lower class and a small very wealthy upper class is the ideal society. Such is a conservative society.
It is a liberal idea that the majority of people can live in relative prosperity. This worms its way into the AE narrative in interesting ways. We know that prosperity for the majority on the traditional model is going to be impossible. Now we may not like the shape of the Conservative narrative but in general it is more realistic. If what passes for liberals now were more honest they would argue that we are still very wealthy and there is enough to go around to reverse the slide of the middle and lower classes but they can’t say that because it means redistribution, never mind that the wealth has already been redistributed to the top, so they cling to growth. For the most part ‘growth’ spurred by monetary means. Which of course leads to more unequal distribution, in a vicious circle.
Meanwhile Conservatives revel in thoughts of real suffering for the lower class for they believe that the fear of loss of everything will make people more conservative.
In the Conservative ideal people know their place. They know their class and expect to stay there. De Tocqueville addressed this in his Democracy in America from the perspective of a noble, a Conservative. He thought people would be happier and better served if they accepted their class and did not strive so much. Isn’t this how all those seeking a more sustainable simpler maybe debt free life embracing?
In general the political economy in the US is now prepared to abandon, as Mitt Romney identified 47% but let’s say half. For the 5th to 7th decile things will be OK and for the rest on up they will be great. This is the Nomura perspective.
It needs mention that in the US this embrace of a lower class in insuperable from race. Recall that non whites are approaching a majority here. It is no coincidence that this is the number now embraced.
“When Worlds Collide” might be the follow-on to “Parallel Universe”, but when will those worlds collide?
Hugh Hendry has been a perma-bear, and he’s right, and we all know it, but what is he seeing, which makes him publicly and overtly change his tack completely?
This is an investing tactical change, not a strategic change of view, as I take it.
This is, as I read his twisted-tongue-in-cheek, a limited-term capitulation to the ability of central bankers to blow one more big asset bubble for a couple more years.
The other option is that they can’t, and we get collapse sooner, much sooner. YMMV.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-12-06/hugh-hendry-throws-bearish-towel-his-full-must-read-letterRapier, Jon Stewart is in agreement with what you say here. He lets the “conservative” elites paint the background, while he provides the accents, and takes the pope’s side, too.
He’s at his deflationary best here.
Hi Folks
Long long time no post.
However….. Everyone MUST check out the chart posted at john ward’s “the slog” this morning, absolutely incredible, and enough to drag me out of hibernation.
Still following TAE faithfully as always.
Back to slumber.
ZYeah Ilargi sorry, haha I never DID learn how to do that it’s :
CRASH2: ARE ALL BETS OFF AFTER SPRING 2014?It’s the first chart at the top of the post not the Rydex money market one later on.
The correlation is jaw dropping.Z
Rapier, and other folks- one of the consistent problems in all dialogues on “poverty” is the lack of any consensus definition of what “poverty” IS. Arguments go on for decades- with parties unaware they’re not even talking about the same thing.
I’m not going to suggest a good universal definition- that would be pointless at the moment, no one is listening. But by chance I ran into a stellar example of the problem last night. It was my 8 year old daughter’s turn to choose a movie- and she chose “Fiddler On The Roof”, which she’s seen before. I liked that; her taste is improving.
Early in the movie is the long complaint from Tevye “If I were a rich man”. He makes it clear that in his mind, he lives in grinding, desolate, poverty. This while he is putting away his horse, in his barn, feeding his chickens, then delivering with his wagon- his milk, butter, and cheese from his cows to his village, and returning home to his house.
Um, excuse me? By any rational standards, I would contend that defines great wealth, right there. But his perception is that he is enormously oppressed by inescapable desperate poverty- and in general, audiences easily share that assessment, believe it, and sympathize greatly with this poor, poor man.
Anyone who has seen poverty in China or India or Bangladesh – necessarily has a completely different definition of what poverty is.
I realize that it’s often a cheap tactic to say “ok, define that term!” in a debate- but in this case, I think no useful conversations can go on without SOME agreements on what we’re talking about. The UN has been trying to work on < $1/day and <$2/day measurements (about 1 Billion people live between $1.25 and $2; another billion live below $1.25; statistics vary). I think that’s a good attempt. But virtually NO one in the USA has any concept at all of what living on that kind of money means.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.