This two year old video of Newt Gingrich illustrates the variance in human institutions. Between what people are capable of, and what other people are not capable of. Since the time the video was made, some members of the public may have come to doubt that the “world that works” is all it is cracked up to be. The world may not be as simple as Newt describes it. But that doesn’t change his essential point: which is that huge gaps in performance can exist between institutions made up of the same technological and human raw material. It is the culture between them that matters.
embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt
At a time when people talk about the “end of capitalism” and new government led ‘global bargains’, it is useful to consider that the performance of each ideological system has a mean and a variance. There is a variance within the “the world that works”: badly run companies; entrepreneurs that fail. There is also a mean and variance in the world that doesn’t work as efficiently. But maybe the bureaucracies are broadly similar, while in the ‘world that works’ the differences are more stark. In times of upheaval, it is tempting to retreat from the variable ‘world that sort of works’ to the apparent safety of a mediocre system that accomplishes very little, but does it consistently.
Yet risk is not always bad. In the ‘world that works’ the exception sometimes becomes the rule. While it may be counter-intuitive, the really significant information within many systems is to be found in the outlier rather than in the average. Imagine you were a time traveler transported back to a primeval beach when life was just crawling out of the water. If you dismissed the outliers you would be throwing away some of the most valuable bits of information. The future of life lay in the mutants. The average slime was always going to crawl on the beach; it was variants who were eventually going to grow legs, lungs, and a brain. It was the mutants who were eventually going to build a computer and go to the moon.
Naseem Taleb tried to express this idea in his book, the Black Swan when he argued that the significant information was often encapsulated in the new, disturbing signal rather than in underlying carrier wave. We can either listen to the hum on the receiver or strain to decipher the message imprinted on it. Sometimes it’s easier to listen to the hum.
But from one point of view, nothing could be more dangerous. Mediocre systems are not only incapable: they are sterile. They have self-reinforcing dampening systems. It is no coincidence that many failing systems eventually impose a speech-code in which all events, however disparate, eventually become indistinguishable. George Orwell observed that one of the objectives of Newspeak, the state language of 1984, was to make it actually impossible to say anything by draining all words of meaning. Totalitarianisms have the remarkable property of resembling each other. Timothy Garton Ash recalled how, when he visited Eastern Europe, “all over communist-ruled Europe, people would show me their dog-eared, samizdat copies of Animal Farm or Nineteen Eighty-Four and ask, ‘How did he [Orwell] know?’”
He heard the hum.
Admittedly I can not view the video at this time but I liked that Newt was all about trying to get done what everyone could agree on in the 90% range from both Democrats and Republicans. You’d think that that would be a smart way for politicians but no they must work on the issues to incubate discord from one side of the isle to the other. Oh and by the way, you’d be amazed that the things that both Republicans and Democrats agree on. But one must divide and conquer to rule I guess.
Remember the first 100 days of 1996? Oh the caterwauling.
Wretchard:
You make an excellent point about the importance of examining both the averages and outliers in a system.
Wisdom lies in discerning which is relevant for a given situation at a given time.
One of the core problems in the global financial crisis (GFC) is that Obamassiah and his administration appear to be ignorant about the driving carrier frequency, or averages, of socialism / statism. Socialism, always leads to economic disaster in either the short or long term, or both in many cases.
For different flavored examples of socialisms results, examine the U.S.S.R., the eastern block nations under Soviet dominance, the U.K. before Thatcher, North Korea or Venezuela today.
To examine an outlier, look at Sweden, or New Zealand. Both nations are fairly successful, but this is the result of less than full implementation of socialist ideals. Both also exist in perpetual childhood, sheltered by the protection of U.S. and allied military might. Both have sacrificed the ability to defend themselves effectively in order for socialism to be more successful than would be possible if a “grown up” percentage of their economies went to defense instead of government backed industry and social benefits.
On the other hand, Obamassiah and his apparatchiks are ignoring the average results (the carrier frequency) of capitalism and have instead chosen to focus on the outliers. The average results speak for themselves: Rising health, education, wealth, standard of living and greater personal liberty, in a nearly unbroken run for over a century. This has been repeated time and again when nations put aside overbearing government control and allow entrepreneurs and the market to flourish under rule of law. Yes, there have been setbacks (outliers) that have caused real pain, but to focus on these and ignore the obvious superiority of capitalism as an economic system is either a great folly or unconscionably malicious.
Fedex has never provided anything less than optimum service for me.
Actually, the advantage of “The World That Works” is that it’s also “The World That Fails.” Government programs don’t fail; they just keep going along, draining more resources until THE WHOLE SYSTEM fails.
Work. Fail. Observe. Orient. Decide. Act. Repeat. It’s the OODA loop, stupid.
“self-reinforcing dampening systems”
Had to laugh at that… reminded me of the self-licking ice cream cone.
Sounds more and more like our current national economic theories; kind of self-contradictory.
“the state language of 1984, was to make it actually impossible to say anything by draining all words of meaning. ”
If you have a contravailing belief you are a racist and the GOP convention looks like Nazi Germany. (reductum ad hitlerium)
That ought to stifle all speech. Now, those who are designated oppressors, please sit down and shut up while the designated victims filibuster.
Armeggedon Rex,
It’s possible to defend a given level of welfare within society that may be higher than the US supports if done in a market-friendly way.
For instance, removing all barriers to housing, getting rid of Section 8 Vouchers, and just letting welfare recipients rent housing on the open market would be much more efficient than our current system. This efficiency gain could be divided between the taxpayer and the welfare recipient in a win-win manner, thus allowing both lower taxes and higher welfare. This is what Sweden and New Zealand do: I call it Non-Stupid Welfare. Sadly “Welfare” is unpopular with Republicans and “Non-Stupid” is unpopular with Democrats, so we never get it in the USA.
But New Zealand and Sweden could lower their welfare payments by 2-3% of GDP, be “grown ups” in the Defense sense, and still be ahead of the USA.
On another note, the fact that the USA provides global defense gratis (and that some nations take advantage of this) shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who has studied welfare incentives.
Obama Hails Market’s “Profit to Earnings Ratio” – Then Crash
Yesterday, Obama suggested that the time was right for the average American to buy stock, claiming that the
“Profit to Earnings Ratio” was improving.
You just can’t make this stuff up!
Obama lied, people’s finances died.
His words were: Profit and Earnings Ratio… which is universally understood to mean that he’s never bought stock in his life, and can’t even read the quotes.
IMHO we are in waterfall decline territory. BHO’s cap and kill taxes are a huge reason why GE is tanking.
At every turn BHO’s tax notions are pure poison. Our oil and gas industry went deep into the Gulf strictly on the premise of no royalties. Extraction taxes are lethal for marginal fields: and the deep Gulf has marginal economics.
Timmy is completely gutting the viability of any additional deep water rigs.
Obama is absolutely nuking the markets.
Brock #6:
One of the reasons it’s so tempting for smaller first world nations to just let Uncle Sam take care of global defense is because modern war toys are very expensive. Back when B-17s and T-34 85s were state of the art, a small nation could afford to purchase or produce, and maintain a large enough number of these relatively conventional devices to deter local thugs and contribute significantly to major wars. Since the end of WWII, it has been increasingly difficult for 2nd tier powers to stay competitive with the big boys in quality of equipment. Stealth fighters, nuclear powered war ships, tanks using jet engines and exotic metal or ceramic armor, armed robots controlled from the other side of the planet. The price tag for any of this stuff adds up fast.
My point is that it would take a lot more than 2-3% of GDP for most 2nd tier powers to really provide for their own defense without relying on a much larger more powerful allied nation for backup. With the exception of Israel, Britain, France to a substantially lesser degree, and perhaps Japan, no other counties have even tried. Truth be told, a lot of the cost to even those countries has been underwritten by Uncle Sam, since we’ve paid for much of the R & D, and then sold or given U.S. technology to our allies.
Here’s a nice exposition on GE and her CDS situation.
http://www.acredittrader.com/
Socialism in smaller countries with relatively homogeneous populations can work, sort of, if they don’t get eaten by a larger neighbor, if they compete in world markets, if the economy was built on a free market foundation and the major industries are run like a family owned conglomerate.
In the US we’ll get trade protection and officially sponsored Cartels (in energy, transportation, finance, health care, education and the media). Cartels transfer wealth from consumers to producers with the government cutting itself in. There will be high unemployment for the out groups (concealed for a time with “make work” and training schemes). This will produce Marx’s reserve army of unemployed to help keep those with their unionized jobs in line. It will take a decade or two to become obvious (they will still be blaming Bush for our problems in twenty years). But it’s lose-lose for all of us — with most of us meekly trying to hold onto what little remains. That’s the Left’s plan and they don’t have to conceal it. All the investigative reporters have their heads up their rectums, so they cannot see what is going on.
hdgreene…
Shades of Rollerball…
Hdgreene #11:
That was an extensive list of “ifs.” The era conducive to those ifs existence may be drawing to a close along with the end of Pax Americana.
I hope the U.S. public will not grovel meekly while the shackles of serfdom are locked in place. As the economic and political situation continues to deteriorate the pressure on the government / citizen relationship will increase. Eventually it will only take a spark to ignite the beginning of the end of socialism in America. Obama is a rookie politician, and is certainly no firefighter.
We have not yet begun to fight!
I really like Newt. He’s smart. He can think 8 or 10 moves ahead. He can complete a difficult sentence in a public forum. He knows how the game is played. He knows his history. He’s sharp as a tack.
But it’s too bad he’s not more photogenic.
One of my regrets is that televised politics has subordinated smarts to looks. Sad fact is, if Newt looked like Rock Hudson he’d be President by now.
“From McAuleys’w World:
Isn’t it time we demand an open an honest intellectual debate on Global Warming before Trillions of dollars are misspent and 10’s of thousands of workers lose their jobs because Politicians are pursuing alternatives that are not justified on the basis of a dubious connection between Global Warming and so called “man-made” Green House gases.
The costs of Cap and Trade “taxes” on the poor, the old and those on fixed incomes will be catastrophic. The “Green Agenda” is being driven by those with a financial interest in the ”Alternative Energy Platforms”. “
An honest intellectual debate? With a bunch of thuggish cretins who managed to get that way by fixating on fantasies and rejecting all contradictory information for several decades?
Good God, is this the stupidest intellectual elite in history or what?
” Sad fact is, if Newt looked like Rock Hudson he’d be President by now.
”
Aren’t women voters great?
So the danger is if we end up with a handsome Hitler were screwed then. Frightening.
This link suggests the answer is “yes.”
Obama – Floundering Fast
I am with Armeggedon Rex on this. I just have not lost that much faith in Americans yet. Let us wait a half a year before we go down the dhgreene;s path. I just do not think that the Democrats can get way with that scenario.
Having said that, Obama may well bring and end to the Pax Americana.
Armageddon Rex:
In the Sweden and New Zealand examples, do not forget the people who forged those ultimately socialist societies were made of pretty tough stuff. In the Book Eat the Rich, P.J. O’Rourke describes his visit to Sweden and asks them how they can make it all work. The Swedes pointed outside and said “We had to learn to be industrious. Our climate tries to kill us every year.”
Similarly, consider what the people who colonized New Zealand – and for that matter Australia – had to do to live and prosper. By the standards of the day it was like colonizing a new planet.
So, socialism in those circumstances has the enormous advantage of having people with a bred-in predilection toward working for a living. I don’t know whether the socialism then arises under the basic assumption that everyone will work his ass off anyway as in the past or as a result of importation of people less inclined to be industrious looking for an easy out. Clearly, once established it kills the innate industriousness and attracts people who are disinclined to get their brows sweaty.
Many of the immigrants to Sweden have come from – guess where – Muslim countries, where people have learned not to work too hard over the centuries.
Now, start socialism in an area where most people don’t think work is a innately good thing – like the typical inner city – and you have a rapidly progressing disaster.
RWE: EU socialism is coming apart at the seams. A depression will rip it completely asunder.
This is the most idiotic mistake of Obama. He thinks he can have 1970;s style socialism in the middle of a depression. It will not work in the EU, it will not work here.
He is is adrift in is vanities, hatred and “ideology.
I do not actually think that he believes in socialism, it is just a vessel for his pathologies. He may not even be aware of this himself.
V-22 – Scary Osprey Story –
RWE #20:
I agree with your points entirely.
The question then is how long Sweden can continue in it’s deteriorating situation before collapse or revolution?
Likewise, how long will the U.S. population continue with a failed experiment before collapse or revolution, or will elections occur first so we can throw the bums out? In some areas, California comes to mind, we may find out rather quickly.
Doug: this guy is very anti V22.
It is a fine craft and it is working out well for the Corp. There is a lot of dem agitprop going around about this. I would be very cautions about this website.
It would be a shame if they canned it.
Armegeddon –
You forget nukes. Nukes are the great equalizer. With nukes plus ICBMS, Pakistan can and does what it wants against India. Even though India is far larger and more capable. With nukes, Czech Republic and Poland can fend off Russia. No Russian leader will order an invasion at the cost of Moscow and St. Petersburg. With nukes, Iran and Syria and Saudi Araba and even YEMEN can extort money from the world. With nukes North Korea already extorts money from us and South Korea.
NUKES are the great equalizer. They are relatively cheap and getting cheaper all the time. They require 1940′s technology, the Manhattan Project and the V-2. They are well understood and can be used “on launch” by even small powers.
Nukes allow ANY power to play with the big boys, eventually nukes will allow even a fifth rate player like Yemen to threaten DC or NYC, and with impunity too.
If Sam Colt made all men equal, nukes makes failing states and people equal to the most productive. Its why EVERYONE wants them and will have them.
Even a failed state and people can stage what amounts to a hold-up for as much money as possible. What will happen of course is eventually a nation will pull the trigger and “shoot” and we will see then the forced response of the US in survival mode.
>Good God, is this the stupidest intellectual elite in history or what?
No, just the most influential. Intellectuals have always been a mix of stupid, destructive and brilliant. Most of the time there were gatekeepers, people who asked questions. There isn’t any now. Anyone who is opposed to Obama is wondering how to cater to the craven journalists who kissed his shoes, instead of stating clearly and fearlessly that he has no clothes. Because he doesn’t. There is no one who has spent their way out of a recession all the while attacking the engines of economic growth.
The economy will improve when Obama is out of power.
Derek
Derek…
So, up from nothing, then ?
Jonah Goldberg (seeing through the Newspeak):
“”shared sacrifice” really means taking other people’s money, while “greed” is not wanting to give it up, and “responsibility” is when the government takes it away.”
Whiskey #25:
No, I’m not forgetting nukes. I spent a long time worrying about first Soviet nukes, then possible Iraqi nukes, then Russian & Chinese nukes, then Indian & Paki nukes, and lately Iranian nuke technology.
I agree with you about nuclear weapon and ICBM technologies being the colt peacemaker of the 21st century. As you pointed out, these technologies are now four generations old. It’s possible there are children out there whose great, great, great, grandfather worked on the V-2 project or Manhattan project. (Boy I feel old now!)
Yes, with both in hand, a third world country with an axe to grind can threaten any (or every) nation on earth.
That is why the U.S. and its allies, to a lesser degree, have tried so long and with such great effort to severely limit access to these technologies. Most of the world played along. During the cold war, the superpowers controlled these technologies with a rather heavy hand. The only really independent efforts to succeed during the cold war were the Chinese, and the South Africans. The Israelis also developed their own nukes, but with a good deal of American assistance, some willing, and some through espionage.
The reason I don’t factor nukes and ICBMs into the equation yet is because there have been no new members of the nuclear weapon & ICBM club for quite a while.
Several nations we would rather not see with either technology are rapidly expanding their capabilities in both, but although some have developed SRBM (short range ballistic missiles) or MRBM technology, none have developed true ICBMs capable of carrying a nuclear warhead yet! In addition, several of the most threatening nations have very limited capacity. Iran has enough fissile material for one or at most two bombs, and probably not in a weapon ready state. North Korea is even more threatening, but they only have one launch site for their MRBM / experimental ICBMs. The liquid fueled missiles they use must be fueled on their one launch pad, so we know hours, days or weeks in advance before they can launch anything capable of hitting U.S. soil. The Pakis and Indians both have nukes and SRBMs / MRBMs, and both have been doing expensive work with cruise missiles. Again, neither can hit U.S. soil from their launch areas.
I don’t mean to downplay the threat from nukes. There are still lots of scenarios where we can be badly hurt. If for example North Korea were to nuke our base at Kunsan and the port of Pusan at the opening of an invasion, we would be severely limited in how we could respond. Also, nukes used against a carrier battle group are a serious threat. A third world enemy could kill thousands of sailors, disable hundreds of billions of dollars of our war fighting equipment, all without fear that we would respond in kind. We aren’t going to nuke an enemy capital over strictly military targets being attacked. There are lots of other scenarios.
The really nasty scenarios deal with Israel, who is within MRBM range of Iran, and South Korea, who are within range of scores of nuclear capable North Korean SRBMs. Then there is the RAND corporation study of the atom bomb in a cargo container detonated in Long Beach Harbor scenario to consider. When I worry about nukes that is the scenario at the top of my list!
All these are excellent reasons to continue to pursue anti-ballistic missile technology from ground launched, sea launched, airborne, and space based platforms.
And now Obamassiah is preparing to scrap the few advances we’ve made toward ballistic missile defense.
As someone asked in a thread yesterday, “Who sent this guy?”
And the answer: “Yuri Andropov.” As crazy as that seems to be, I’m beginning to wonder if it may be true.
Sweden is a politically correct totalitarian state whose leaders are replacing the population with foreigners. I would not want to live there, especially if I had daughters.