How can you deliberatley practice business. Especially for the 10000 hours needed for mastery?
HBS interjected: OldGuy-
What are your thoughts on a one-world currency? Good, bad, other? Just curious as to your opinions on it.
- MoonyMarch 16th, 2009
All:
I just got back from a 2-week cruise (18 days away) today. I’ll answer both of the previous questions in the next two days. Sorry for the delay… but I was sans electronics for a long and glorious period of time!
Meanwhile: I see that North Carolina is in the final…
NCAA Men’s Basketball. It’ll be easier to pick one next week, when the bracket is set.
- HBSMarch 14th, 2009
For this, I had to ask my expert.
His immediate choice: North Carolina.
Since he’s rarely wrong, I’d bet on it!
OldGuy-
It’s March, which means it’s tourney time!!. Who’s your pick for the Div. 1 Men’s title?
-J
- HBSMarch 12th, 2009
Uh… what league are you talking about?
For the Div 1 Men’s league at Excellent Ice (3 on 3 hockey), I’m picking the Chiefs. But I bet that’s not the league you’re thinking of.
Old Guy,
Do you think the American people could honestly follow Ron Paul? Here’s a quote from his web site:
We believe that freedom is an indivisible whole, and that it includes not only economic liberty but civil liberties and privacy rights as well, all of which are historic rights that our civilization has cherished from time immemorial
This very notion is challenged every day and is currently being challenged in court in San Francisco (one example). American’s are a nosey breed and I don’t think that’s even possible to break.
- disinforMarch 6th, 2009
You’re right — they couldn’t.
Ron Paul is actually more of a Libertarian than a Conservative, in a lot of ways (and that’s why some of what he says appeals to me). Libertarians want freedom and privacy and generally have a “mind your own business and I’ll mind mine” attitude. It’s a great idea… just like Communism…
You see, Libertarianism would work if people really did ALL mind their own business without adversely affecting others. Just like Communism would work if people really did ALL work hard and share. But there’s always some asshole that wants to “play the system” and get the benefits without doing the work (so Communism, while a fine theoretical idea doesn’t work well in practice). And there’s always some other asshole who’s idea of being free to do what he wants involves stealing your stuff or shooting you for fun (so much for Libertarianism).
Maybe we should see if Jigme Singye Wangchuck wants to run the country; he’s retired from being King of Bhutan and is still only 53… though to be fair, he’s more of a Democrat.
Who’s gonna lead the Republicans? Rush won’t do it, Steele and/or Jindahl can’t do it (IMO they’re both morons of the highest order), and no one else is stepping up.
And another question, since you’re bored – with all that’s going on with the Republican party, and politics in general, is Conservatism dead? Are we liberal now, whether we want to be or not?
- HBSMarch 5th, 2009
A bit of history for the American readers: Canada used to have essentially 3 parties: NDP (far left), Liberal (slightly left of center) and Conservative (slightly center of the far right). Yes, there were some fringe parties too, but they don’t really count. Most governments were formed by the Liberals with a few by the Conservatives because Canadians like a bit of variety. Anyway, about a decade ago, the Canadian Conservative party self-destructed and were replaced by the Reform party (which was about as close to Republican as you can get). The renamed themselves the Conservatives (after the real Conservative party self destructed) and are the current Canadian government.
The lesson: do NOT think that the American Republican party will necessarily live forever. They could easily be replaced by a party (perhaps in name, perhaps from within) that’s even wackier than the current Republicans. That’s my prediction, actually… Ron Paul (who in many ways I actually admire!)
Now back to our regularly scheduled answer:
The trouble with democrats is that in the extreme, they like to think the absolute best of people. So they want to give everybody a break (regardless of whether or not they deserve it), knowing that “it’s not really their fault that they’re (a) on drugs (b) poor (c) a small and poor country, etc.”.
Naturally, they are prone to throwing good money at problems they shouldn’t even be trying to solve.
The trouble with republicans is that they are narrow-minded in the extreme. Why, just the other day I heard an interview with a woman who strongly believed that any stimulus package was unAmerican and that people should be responsible for themselves only. Funny thing was: her husband was unemployed and was dying (uninsured) of lung cancer. See a “cut off her nose to spite her face” issue here?
Perhaps this is why Republicans seem to be dying out… maybe they really are dying.
Republicans all want to be rich beyond their wildest dreams. Even the poorest of the poor (if they’re Republicans) don’t want to upset “big business” because they feel they’re going to make it there someday. In this way, they are as delusional as Democrats.
Politicians are hypocrites. I read yesterday that over a dozen Repubican governors who voted against the stimulus package have turned around and bragged about the great things the money is going to do for their state — trying to get some of the credit with the voters. To say I have no respect for this kind of behavior is probably needless.
So now that I’ve insulted both ends of the political spectrum, here’s the thing: maybe the new leader of the Republicans will be Ron Paul. He, almost uniquely among politicians, seems to at least understand what money really is and how it really works. I’ve got to say, though, the medicine would be brutal! So he’d have to get it all done in 4 years because there wouldn’t be any second term.
One more thing: tax breaks. The Republicans really like tax breaks as a way to stimulate the economy. In normal circumstances, tax breaks do have that effect. But right now, they wouldn’t. Why? Because people are taking every spare dollar and trying to pay off debt. In other words: tax breaks end up being almost exactly the same as bailing out the financial institutions in that the money goes straight to the financial institution in both cases. That’s why paying people to fix America’s infrastructure is a more sane approach. It puts money in that hands of normal people while at the same time improving the country.
So to reiterate: Ron Paul, if they have any hope at all. At least he’ll have a plan and if there’s one thing people all over the world cherish, it’s a leader with a plan. Say what you will about Obama, he has a plan and is respected for it.
I decided to peek in and see if the board was doing anything in between rounds of trying to squash peeps in pseudo-politics, and lo and behold the old guy writing interesting things, ah is good to be back…
Magnus.
Magnus Thornwood interjected: So old guy, how do I get my old PMs?
I see the notice but can’t get to them.
Thanks,
Magnus.
Allen interjected: That’s a good question! They still exist, but the way phpBB works is that if you disable sending them, you disable seeing them. Since I want to enable sending them, I guess the answer is, bug Allen to upgrade phpBB so he can enable them. This would also fix the comment border problems. Yes, I am a bad person.
Magnus Thornwood interjected: Thanks for the info!
And as far as bad person, naw, you let us live out our not so nice, maybe sides. I mean “Enabling Act”, Allen? Really? Oh yeah, I get it. Still I play in hopes of passing it, so what does that say about me? Plus the playing a god offering you have. 
Magnus.
- Magnus ThornwoodMarch 3rd, 2009
I need a question.
Old Guy,
As the U.S. stimulus package looks to clear both the house and the senate for sign off by Obama, do you think the Keynesian economic approach will work? They say that the economy is $1 trillion short, so using the Keynesian approach, if they inject the $786 (I believe that’s the number) then spending will go up and thus the input (stimulus) will, in fact, create more output (spending).
Obviously, the Keynesian approach is being looked at differently than in the 30’s and 40’s. I’m hoping it works and to my limited economics knowledge and what I’ve heard on NPR, it seems like the stimulus package will help keep the U.S. and our trade partners out of a serious depression.
- disinforFebruary 12th, 2009
Sorry for the long wait, but I’ve been sick. And I had to think REALLY HARD about your question.
First, let’s answer the question: “do bailouts like the one for the Auto companies ever work?”
The answer appears to be: they always work, unless the government is bailing out a financial institution in which case they seem to always fail. At least that’s what’s happened with a series of bailouts from 1970 to 2001.
http://www.propublica.org/special/government-bailouts
Now, let’s ask ourselves: “why?”. My personal opinion is that people involved in “high finance” seem to be more interested in money than in doing the right thing. Money-oriented people are often characterized as being soulless, money-grubbing bastards that don’t even know what the right thing to do might be! Contrast this to people in the rail industry, automotive industry, aerospace industry, etc. that may make big and sometimes fatal mistakes, but who are more likely to “go down with the ship”. The bankers, frankly, always take care of themselves first.
I, of course, apologize to any of you who are bankers, are married to bankers and or are the progeny of bankers. And bear in mind that this is a broad generalization… but also realize that the higher a person gets in the financial system, the more likely they are to love money above all else. They tend to take the cash, make sure they’re “okay” (i.e. rich beyond belief) and then let their company tank because it’s not worth the effort and with all that money they can go do it again somewhere.
The fact that so much of the bailout money is going and has gone to financial institutions is therefore worrisome. Bailing out banks will NOT solve the problem. What it WILL do is maybe make some people believe that the government is doing something and therefore distract them for awhile so that the real solution can get some traction. I think that the higher-ups in government know that the banking things are a diversion so that they can get the public works program up and running properly.
One little tidbit that shows me the banks don’t care: the get a bailout and then turn around and INCREASE interest rates, further damaging over-extended small people.
I do believe that spending Federal money on infrastructure is a VERY good idea. Have you driven on an American road lately? They are sorely maintained and this money won’t be wasted. Since it goes to the Average Joe in the form of wages, it’s a good thing. My fear is that the public works program is NOT BIG ENOUGH. More on that in a moment.
Now, just how big IS the bailout and stimulus package? Well… if you really want to be scared, do a google search for “total bailout cost” or “total bailout cost Faber”. Here’s one of the links that’s high on the list:
http://news.kontentkonsult.com/2009/01/ … -wars.html
As you can tell from the URL, the bailout cost now exceeds the cost of all American wars (after adjusting the war costs for inflation, of course).
8.7 Trillion dollars is now being bandied about. A bit of math:
A dollar bill is 0.0043 inches thick.
A pile of 8,700,000,000,000 dollar bills is therefore 37,410,000,000 inches high.
That would be 3,117,500,000 feet
Which is 590,436 miles.
The moon is about 240,000 miles from earth…
Okay, how about this: let’s say the bailout is only $4 Trillion.
If you could get 5% interest on a deposit that size, you’d earn $200 billion per year.
Which is $547,945,205 per day — and that’s just INTEREST
Which is $22,831,050 per hour, or $6,342 per second!
Okay, so maybe you want to keep the money and put it under your mattress because you don’t trust banks (which is wise). If you spend $1,000,000 each and every day (and get NO INTEREST) then the $4 Trillion would last you some 4 million days.
Which is 10,959 years.
This post is getting long, so I’m going to stop for awhile. Stay tuned, though.
(2 parter…)
How long do you think the judicial process will drag out from here (until he’s convicted/ aquitted)?
Do you really think, as the FBI would have us believe, that they’ve got much more incriminating and/ or damning evidence on the guy than what has so far been released?
- HBSJanuary 31st, 2009
I’ve been waiting and… Blago seems to like the spotlight, so maybe he won’t do the sensible thing and fade into obscurity after all.
Do the Feds have more on him than they’ve released? Absolutely. When they go after a politician, they don’t ever want to lose, so they amass overwhelming evidence just in case.
Will the judicial process drag out? Probably — they always do, right? Justice moves slowly.
OldGuy: Will Blagojevich go away now? Is it wrong for me to wish he’d crawl into a hole and die (and I mean that in the most literal sense you can imagine)?
- HBSJanuary 30th, 2009
Well, he might try to stay in the public eye (because he seems to like the attention). I mean, if he had any sense, he’d have already left; but he didn’t, so he doesn’t. Blagojevich is the slimiest of politicians, so I think that people will stay as far away from him as possible to minimize contamination. He’s a pariah in the USA.
No, your wishes make sense. Unless you want to view the spectacle, because about all he’s good for now is morbid entertainment.
Since you brought up the subject dont you think the whole video game violence bit kinda resembles the same kind of claims that were made about D&D and rock music.
- olstar18January 20th, 2009
There are similarities in the claims, but my thinking is that so much of our brain is dedicated to vision that the video games probably have a much bigger impact than music.
And make no mistake — music DOES have an impact on behavior. Not a huge effect, but an effect nonetheless. Some songs make you happy and some do the opposite. And then there’s Weird Al…
Continual application of a small force can have a huge effect over time. Dripping water can wear away solid rock.