More China Doom

Ah... the stupidity of a bridge to nowhere.  The graphic used in the following story to illustrate the height of stupidity.  I would call it art and well worth its price as an artistic expression.  Just like the empty bowl is an artistic expression of unfilled space.

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2012/11/imf-discovers-chinese-over-investment/

Some people see art, others see what they want to see.



We dig holes but then we fill them up again leaving nothing.  It is called a bail out.  We, however, are so advanced compared to the Chinese that we do not even have to pay real people real money to dig holes in the ground so they can spend the money they make doing it to buy stuff that others produce.  We just made it more efficient and dump money in a hole in the ground.

If the bridge to nowhere is a Chinese expression of money as art then ours would be a hole in the ground filled with money.  A bridge to nowhere ending at a hill on the other side is perhaps a Chinese statement that their bridges are being built today it to go through the mountain tomorrow.  Infra structure planning.  Putting money into the hands of those that built it today so they can buy cars to go through the tunnel to be built to the other side.

Meanwhile, back on the home front we are facing a Fiscal Cliff.


Chinese built a tunnel to nowhere near Ashland, Oregon, USA. Nothing ever connected to it.   It is a very interesting story:



This is an original newspaper story clipping here. 

And a recent story written about it here

By BILL MILLER

for the Mail Tribune

They put some holes in a mountain nearby, called it a tunnel, and then they walked away.

It was the end of a 30-year dream and two years of surveyors scrambling through the Siskiyou Mountains.

If you go

A visit to the Buck Rock Tunnel's west entrance is best done in late summer or early autumn when the grass is low and the trail easier to find. If you can, it's best to go with someone who's been there before.

From Interstate 5, Ashland Exit 14, drive east on the Greensprings Highway (Highway 66) to Buckhorn Springs Road (just past mile marker 9). Turn right. Continue three-tenths of a mile straight onto Forest Service Road 39-2E-34. After climbing 2.3 miles, look for the parking area on your left.

The trail begins beyond the yellow barrier, opposite the parking area. It requires some effort. You walk mostly uphill for just over 1.75 miles. Do not take any of the side roads branching to the left.

Shortly after passing a shallow, greenish, spring-filled pool that covers the trail, you'll see a matted-down grass trail in a small open area to your left. Follow the trail a few yards uphill until you see a wider dirt and stone trail to your left. Follow this trail .15 mile to the tunnel and a metal commemorative sign placed in 1977 by the Southern Oregon Historical Society.

No one could have been more disappointed than Joe "Shorty" Neal, who had just set up a restaurant and saloon near the construction site. Stocked with the "best wines, liquors and cigars available in the market" and offering "guaranteed good treatment and a square meal," Neal had expected months of money rolling out of the pockets of the rough-and-tumble railroad workers.

In 1882, nearly a decade after the southbound construction of the Oregon and California Railroad had stopped in Roseburg, rails were again being laid, mile by mile, to Jackson County.

John Quincy Adams Hurlburt, a highly respected, self-taught surveyor, had been with the railroad almost from the day the first tie was laid in Portland. In early September 1881, headquarters ordered him to immediately stop survey work southwest of Roseburg and, as quickly as possible, get his crew into the Siskiyou Mountains.

It would be more than 21/2; years before the railroad would reach Ashland, but before it did a way had to be found to cross over the mountains and meet up with the railroad already being built northward from Redding, Calif.

The engineering obstacles were overwhelming for Hurlburt. The rail line would climb from Ashland to the summit in such a steep grade that well over a dozen switchbacks might be required, and the tunnel at the top would have to be more than 4,000 feet long. That would cost the railroad a small fortune, a fortune they weren't willing or able to pay.

The solution was to send the tracks on a long, gradually climbing, nearly 9-mile curve to the east, then cut a 1,600-foot tunnel through Buck Rock Mountain before returning to the summit, where a shorter tunnel of about 3,000 feet would be dug. It was quicker and safer to blast out two tunnels instead of one long one, and because of the lower grade, once the line was in service operating expenses would be less.

In September 1883, a gang of Chinese workers was transferred down from the summit tunnel to begin working with railroad crews on construction of the Buck Rock Tunnel.

They started simultaneously at each end and began blasting toward each other, using the latest technology, the compressed-air-powered Burleigh Drill that could bore dozens of holes simultaneously into rock. Each hole was packed with powder, a fuse was lit, and the shattered rock was mucked out of the tunnel and dumped.

Winter snow brought water into the tunnel and slowed work. Then, in February 1884 and without warning, all work on the uncompleted tunnel stopped and speculation began. It was the fault of Congress, some said. The railroad was up for sale, said others. The survey was flawed. Maybe it was the weather. Things will be fine in the summer, right?

In fact, the railroad was out of money. The tracks ended at Ashland, just a few dozen miles and a mountain away from the California rail line.

With two unfinished holes on each side of a mountain, the Buck Rock Tunnel would never see a train pass through.

Writer Bill Miller lives in Shady Cove. Reach him at newsmiller@live.com.

This is what I ask:  Exactly what is it that the Chinese may have learned from us about digging holes in the ground that they took back to China.  What is their story view of the hole in the ground that they dug for us here?

Dig us into a hole.  Dig a hole for us to fall into by building a bridge to nowhere?

Who is stupid and who is sly?

Personal Wiki In My Head

Everybody has a personal wiki in their head.  Their own definitions of what they believe and the unique relationships among the things they believe.  Somehow what each person believes is related to what others believe, at least at some level.  How high up any personal belief has to go to find a common parent belief shared with another person and how many people share that same belief at that level is a statistical quantitative and relatively qualitative measure of value.

Some beliefs are bat-shit crazy alternative realities.  At some higher level in a rational world that admits to irrational things there has to be some rational meeting of minds.  Those that can't connect to any other human at a conscious level are by definition "beyond the pale" existing in a world of their own.  Institutionalized if they are harmful, or out of mercy, because they are human but could not otherwise exist outside of institutional care.

Excluding the institutionalized, there is a meeting of the minds someplace in the structure of higher level thought, if you go far enough.  Some just refuse to go that far or simply say the earth is flat and that is all there is to say on the matter.

Wikipedia is an open source collective definition, explanation and thought structure relationship of conceptual things.  It is a living document subject to change and expansion, refinement, improvement.  In a graphic depiction it is an animated PacMan, gobbling up and giving a home to more concepts as they emerge as extensions built on older defined concepts as well as refining existing concepts in view of new revised clearer perception of them.  It is premised on the fact that old Parent Concept ideas can change as we expand them to lower level new ideas.  Not often, but when the real world of "child" new ideas emerge, sometimes they have to be recognized as being owned by different "parents".  It is not so much that the Owning Parent Concept has to be changed.  It still has its own children.  What changes is assigning the child to a different Owning Parent Concept.

Parents that love their own children find it hard to acknowledge the fact that they share the child with a parent having logical relationship to the child equal to their own.  They are co-equal in sharing the child.  If there is conflict in the sharing there is a higher level parent/child relationship that they are both subject to and it may resolve any conflict in who has what sharing characteristics.

I am parent to my own children thoughts.  They are shared in general with Wikipedia.  The common parent of thought through which I can relate to most everyone else in the country and their thinking.....at some level.  Meshing my thoughts with Wikipedia general conceptual thought through a personal wiki when my idea concept is not covered by Wikipedia is my Personal Wiki.

My Personal Wiki thoughts tell me that at a higher conceptual level in Wikipedia the concept of Money must be elevated above a sharing of two distinct exclusive parent characteristics of debit and credit to recognized a higher level parent of Money characteristics that these two objects called debit and credit both share.

While that is the purpose statement of the Personal Wiki I am creating, I have not yet endowed that wiki with a defined population of descriptive contents composed of my unique thoughts.  Those unique thoughts exist in what I have been writing in this blog.

As I continue to blog I will also develop my Personal Wiki which already has a private Google site that I will eventually make public in association with this blog.

Personal Wiki For My Structured Thought

Recently I have recognized the progressive frequency with which I am using Wikipedia as the source description reference for more precise meaning of the general terms I use.  Building block concepts that I am developing have pointed out the obvious need to more precisely define and explain them and their structure.   Establish them as a frame of reference for my own ideas that as an extension of the generally accepted common concepts explained by Wikipedia.  Then I do not have to repeat the explanation of my basic unique ideas over and over each time I talk about them.  For example:  Uniquely Serialized Digital Dollars. 

Just in time to support my need to organize reference to my own ideas:  The Google Personal Wiki!  This talks about it and how to do it.

In the scheme of things, a Google Personal Wiki is a child of Google Sites.  A child that inherits all the traits of general site web pages offered by Google but having unique characteristics of "Wiki" that makes it different from the other "children" of the parent "Google Sites"


I have started my own Personal Wiki!

It is not accessible yet but I am working on it.

Open Source Credit Rating

Yves Smith is a financial oriented news aggregator who publishes at Naked Capitalism.  In addition to presenting a quality selection of the most insightful stuff in the financial world she adds her comments on top of the things she selects.  Often she offers her own stand alone comments on a variety of topics.  Her comments and her site are my favorite "go to" site for all the financial matters I am interested in.  In addition to her own comments, a number of exceptionally good comments are added by regulars on the site that are excellent informed discussions of various facts and opinions.

Yves Smith is an intelligent person whose ability I admire as much as the quality of what she offers at her site.

Today she commented on Open Source Credit Rating:
Can Open Source Ratings Break the Ratings Agency Oligopoly?

Read more at http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/11/can-open-source-ratings-break-the-ratings-agency-oligopoly.html#1SC5HtojiQClB6Kw.99

Yves comments were based on the analysis of  Professor Krassimir Petrov, who has taught economics and finance in the U.S., Ireland, Bulgaria, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Taiwan, and Macau.  He concludes with a solution to the problems he analyzed:  

The Open Source Solution to Credit Ratings
The open-source movement has proven to be a powerful force in our modern technological world. It began in the software industry and rose to prominence with the success of Linux. It is steadily spreading in other areas. Open-Source Credit Rating Models provide a superior platform that effectively resolves all of the above problems. One leading example in the field is Public Sector Credit Solutions, which published in May 2012 an open-source sovereign and municipal rating tool called the Public Sector Credit Framework.

My google search on Open Source Credit Ratings returned this hit.  Mathbabe (Cathy O'Neil) commented on it here so it must be good!  Her comment (I'm excited!) is here.  She made another prior comment on the idea here.  She included in that comment a link to this Are We Witnessing the Start of a Ratings Revolution? Published Tue, May 8th, 2012   Matthew Weinschenk, Senior Analyst.  This was good press for the idea of Marc Joffe that Mathbabe describes:

 Specifically, he has a model which, if you add the relevant data, can give ratings to city, state, or government bonds. I’ve been interested in this idea for a while now, although more at the level of publicly traded companies to start; see this post or this post for example.
His webpage is here, and you will note that his code is available on github, which is very cool, because it means it’s truly open source. From the webpage:
"The framework allows an analyst to set up and run a budget simulation model in an Excel workbook. The analyst also specifies a default point in terms of a fiscal ratio. The framework calculates annual default probabilities as the the proportion of simulation trials that surpass the default point in a given year." 

 

Mathbabe is an application oriented math genius.  The nature of her applications can be seen in her participation in the banking aspects of Occupy Wall Street.  She gets to the short and curlies of where Wall Street operates:  I describe that place this way: It is all about the math stupid!  Which means complicated math models.  Far beyond me to understand but her models are not a product of unfounded thoughts about anything her thoughts are a product of what the math says.  She is good at math.  If I had her as a math teacher I might be too.

Today Mathbabe wrote about the application of another model but at the core, (contrary to the way she makes the title statement) it is the need for applying a model that cannot be gamed (an Open Source Designed model to credit rating agencies:) 

How to build a model that will be gamed

November 30, 2012 Cathy O'Neil, mathbabe Leave a comment Go to comments

I can’t help but think that the new Medicare readmissions penalty, as described by the New York Times, is going to lead to wide-spread gaming. It has all the elements of a perfect gaming storm. First of all, a clear economic incentive:

Medicare last month began levying financial penalties against 2,217 hospitals it says have had too many readmissions. Of those hospitals, 307 will receive the maximum punishment, a 1 percent reduction in Medicare’s regular payments for every patient over the next year, federal records show.

It also has the element of unfairness:

“Many of us have been working on this for other reasons than a penalty for many years, and we’ve found it’s very hard to move,” Dr. Lynch said. He said the penalties were unfair to hospitals with the double burden of caring for very sick and very poor patients.

“For us, it’s not a readmissions penalty,” he said. “It’s a mission penalty.”

And the smell of politics:

In some ways, the debate parallels the one on education — specifically, whether educators should be held accountable for lower rates of progress among children from poor families.

“Just blaming the patients or saying ‘it’s destiny’ or ‘we can’t do any better’ is a premature conclusion and is likely to be wrong,” said Dr. Harlan Krumholz, director of the Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation at Yale-New Haven Hospital, which prepared the study for Medicare. “I’ve got to believe we can do much, much better.”

Maybe we need an Open Source Medicare Model!

Maybe we need an open source Money Model.

My bottom line conclusion to wrap up this blog entry:

Open Source:  Created by the Public for the Public, maintained by the Public.  Created, used and maintained at the best price in terms of money:  Free.  Free labor expended for the common good, the public good.  Free from the motivation of monetary profit gained by monopoly ownership.  Nobody can "own" freedom, freedom of expression.  It is a right.  Open Source is a right to create model systems that defies the "rights" to sub-optimizing monopoly system at the expense of the common good.

Wikipedia is Open Source.

More China Has To Collapse Thinking

A sterling example of "China Has To Collapse" thinking.  It must. There Is No  alternative!  (TINA)  Binary thinking at its best.  It must happen because that is the rule of debt and bubbles and stupid fiscal policy!  It is the rules of money!

Indebted Dragon: The Ponzi Scheme Driving China's Construction Economy

In Indebted Dragon, Professor Lynette Ong from the University of Toronto discusses how the Chinese economy relies on land as collateral to borrow money while paying the interest on the loans by selling and leasing the land.

Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/11/indebted-dragon-ponzi-scheme-driving.html#1XPF0yeCoiA5LDem.99

China's rules are not our rules.  What our rules are do not dictate the outcome of China playing by its rules, its Logic with its Language to produce its Social/Political/Economic structures.

By our rules China is doomed!  Doomed I say!  They do not know how to pay the game of money!  Losers!  Big Ponzi will all fall down!

By their rules perhaps we are doomed.  Big Ponzi all fall down!

The better Logic, Language and Structure (LLS) prevails.  There sure are a lot of Chinese.  Even more people in India. Whose LLS will India follow?

The author is a professor and what do I know anyhow?

Good Question.

Oh, those vacant cities!  Oh, how stupid to build them!

What did we get for all of our money????  How many workers did the bailout employ?

Ghost Malls, Ghost Cities, Infrastructure Malinvestment

As noted by Ong, and on numerous occasions by me, China is home to numerous vacant cities. For a discussion, please see World's Biggest Property Bubble: China's Ghost Cities Revisited; 64 Million Vacant Properties

The Video of Ghost Cities is a must see eye-opener for those overly bullish on China.

China is also home to the world's largest shopping mall and it sits empty. For a discussion and video, please see How Will China Handle The Yuan?

A week ago I reported Sky City: China to Build World's Tallest Building, 220 Stories, in 90 Days


The commenter on the story says:

Unlike Ong, I see no realistic way China can "muddle through" for much longer given the bubble is busting in China right now, but that is my only objection to a very well written article.

Read more at http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2012/11/indebted-dragon-ponzi-scheme-driving.html#1XPF0yeCoiA5LDem.99

China has been around for 4,000 years.  Doomed and we will see it crash!  Like the Great Wall it will be such a big crash that it can be seen from space.

Even bigger than our Fiscal Cliff!

Red Light Cameras and the Fiscal Cliff

5 Ways Speeding and Red Lights Cameras Are Causing Political Outrage

Story Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021899806

What has happened here is interesting.

What changed?

It was matter of judgement by a driver concerning the general degree of safety to either go through or stop on the caution light change from red to green.  Also judgment and decision by any observing police officer.

Poor (or no) judgment (unaware inattention) by drivers will still result in running red lights.

 Observation is the thing that changed.

A constant observation with binary decision applied to every car entering the intersection.  Failure of drivers to make the best decision might result in horn honking or a crash. 

Driving behavior changed.  Social sanctions like horn honking and other indications of displeasure for violation (in the degree of judgment exercised by the honkers) became traffic infractions with fine penaties.

The risk of a fine became the more important consideration that caused irrational behavior to slam on brakes that would likely cause rear end collision if the driver thought twice.

Binary risk outcome counter productively influenced the intuitive beneficial objective.

Set up a binary risk situation and behavior based on best judgment and associated action will be influenced.  Perhaps even manipulated.

Fiscal Cliff Red Light Camera?

Austerity one way or the other?  http://www.democraticunderground.com/101782885

DeFazio is using a degree of judgment that will not be influenced by binary proposition thinking:  http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021896121 DeFazio goes on MSNBC, says 'Fuck the fiscal cliff!' Grand Bargain Express wobbles, heads explode!

DeFazio: Sure. Well, first, off the 'cliff' is an unbelievable exaggeration. There's no cliff. In fact, the only tax rate that changes on January 1st is we do away with the Social Security/FICA holiday. The other tax rates we would have ample time to deal with, and we would be then bargaining from a position of strength.

Rep. Peter Defazio, D-Ore., says Congress should wait until after the new year to deal with the severe cuts and tax increases that will automatically take effect. Defazio insists says it’s a lame duck session and the most radical members of the Tea Party are still here, so it’s better to wait until the next Congress is in office.

I say:  Yes, indeed.  There will also be fewer binary thinkers in the next Congress! 

What Kind of Money Pays Income Tax?

Theory:

All Income Tax is paid in real money!

Real Money is the the Money Supply of the USA.

The Money Supply of the USA is the M2 Money Supply.

Proof that contradicts the Theory:

Fact:  Income Tax can be paid with a credit card.

Analysis:

Wikipedia describes a Credit Card as:

.....a payment card issued to users as a system of payment. It allows the cardholder to pay for goods and services based on the holder's promise to pay for them.^[1] The issuer of the card creates a revolving account and grants a line of credit to the consumer (or the user) from which the user can borrow money for payment to a merchant or as a cash advance to the user.

Using a credit card to pay Income Tax is no essentially no different than taking out a loan from anyone, putting the loan in your checking account and then writing out a check to the IRS that draws from an positive on hand M2 money balance. 

Credit spends like real money!  While you, the credit card holder, don't have to pay back the credit card loan until some later date depending on the terms and conditions of the credit card, the government gets its payment from the credit card company immediately.  Payment made by the credit card company is out of the M2 money supply.

As we all know, credit cards are as good as (actually better and more readily accepted as payment)a check.  I think that a credit card has even most preferred by the payee rather than cash dollars and coins that have to physically processed in some way after the sale.  Brinks is going out of business.

IRS rules and regulations specify which credit card companies are approved for payment of Income Tax.

A credit card payment draws on a revolving credit account.  Credit spends like real money, credit is real money because in the debt money system every credit amount must have a debit amount.

A debit card draws on a revolving debit account. A savings account.  A savings account is unspent money in the bank.

Both spend like real money!  Both are real money!  All money is debt money!

Wait,, wait,,,don't tell me!  See if I can figure this out!

A debit card spends debt money?  How can my money in the bank be debt money?  It is my money.  I earned it.  It is my asset, I own it.  Where is the debt if it is mine?

The debt money account that balances the money we all have in our collective savings account is the National Debt.  It balances to the penny.  It, like a credit card is a revolving line of credit.  A line of credit funded by those that financed it by buying government debt.

What kind of money was used by those that financed the government debt (line of credit revolving fund) called "National Debt" use to loan to the government?

M2 money?

The same kind of money we use to pay Income Tax?

Wait....Wait...don't tell me!   I can figure this out....but it is going to take some time!

Until I do figure it out, let's just say that M2 money is used to pay both Income Tax and make loans to the government that in sum total is the National Debt.

M2 looks like that narrowly defined door that all other forms of money have to go through as they flow from one place to another.  The "real" money form that "far money" "unreal" money "funny money in any form other than M2 money that people can be convinced is money in the broadest of terms because it has some connection to being converted into something (perhaps in many steps of conversion) that will pass through the M2 money door.  The kind of money that pays taxes, pays payroll, pays for food and clothing and all the other things that the medium of exchange can buy.

Among the things that the medium of exchange can buy are "far money" or even "funny money" financial paper.  Financial paper bought with real M2 money in hopes that what was paid for it can eventually be turned back into M2 money in a greater amount than what was initially paid for it.

That is exactly what the government does when it turns the M2 money it receives in Tax into more M2 money than it initially paid for it when it pays off the National Debt loans.  More money went out than came in.  The revolving nature of the National Debt is merely a time buffer between the loan and its repayment.

 Am I getting it???

The big idea here is that money, regardless of how far away from M2 Money anything called by the generic term (little "m") money actually is, its "value" depends on its perceived ability to pass through the narrow door that confers the blessing of M2 money upon it.

Anything can be monetized!

What launched me on this blog entry this morning?

This Link:
Six American families paid no income taxes in 2009 while making on the order of $200 million each

Income Tax is an M2 money payment.  That narrow door through which all things that are far money or so far away from money as labor and materials that can be turned into money or, likewise, financial paper as a raw material far form of money to be turned into M2 money by some form of labor applied to it (or hocus pocus schemes).

The tax form is the vehicle that converts the far money financial paper in a reduction process to taxable income.

Six families went through a far money conversion process (certainly they made enough money to spend on something more than most of us might be able to afford if they made $200 million each.  They went through it so successfully that when it came time to write down the taxable income that would be the portion of that $200 million that would pass through the M2 door payable to the US government IRS called taxable income there was nothing left to pass through that door!

What happened?  How dey do dat???

None of that far money was turned into spendable M2 money?  Somehow it did.  They have cars and houses, each probably having many.  They paid a sales tax I hope.  Somehow all that spendable money was subject to Income Tax but after all the figuring was not taxable.  

I conclude that they spent a lot of M2 money buying financial paper on which there was no sales tax and somehow was used in the process of figuring up the tax return to offset anything that could have made it to the taxable income bottom line on which some M2 money would have to be paid in a specified amount to the government.

Where, if anywhere, did they pay any tax on converting far money financial paper to M2 money that gave them an M2 money starting point of $200 million annual gross earnings that was then somehow figured down to no taxable income liability to paid in M2 dollars.

That is why they are rich, maybe.  They know how to do that.

The choke point is M2 money.  Get a hold on M2 money by definition as serialized unit digital dollars and the structure is created to manage money matters so that we all play on a level playing field.  

 

de Touqueville - Letter To My Sister

This letter to my younger sister has the idea that I wanted to enter into my blog so I will just copy and paste it here because it says all I wanted to say.
...................................................

ME

De Tocqueville was first term ATL, (American Thought and Language if you have forgotten) at MSU for me and probably for you too.

I know that you were interested in the French Revolution and this analysis is interesting in that regard but also in its application  to the situation in China.  The USA too.

If I could have written this as my ATL blue book exam, (remember blue books?) I could have rested on my laurels in ATL for the next two terms saying anything about anything and it would have been regarded as brilliant even if it was nothing  because I once said something brilliant about de Tocqueville.  Maybe that is the secret to success….??

I found this to be exceptionally interesting:

http://econintersect.com/b2evolution/blog2.php/2012/11/27/de-tocqueville-in-china?page=3

If something I say is brilliant and nobody hears the tree fall then was it brilliant?  Maybe time will tell.  The speed of sound might not be so fast after all.  Maybe the brilliance of what de Toqueville said is only reaching our ears (or China's ears) now.  The speed of sound crawling through time from then to now.  Really slooooo.....w!

Hey, did you just hear a tree fall in France?  I think I might have heard something like it back in 1961 but I did not know it was a tree.  Didn't know what it was, that is why I only got a C in ATL.  Not knowing was average then.  Anything changed in college since then?

Funny how all three nations, France then, USA and China now all seem to be in the same political/social/economic situation???

Maybe not funny.

Remember the guillotine.

A pertinent or prescient quote from the latter part of the link where it gets down to conclusion applying to today:

"China is proving that wealth can be generated by fostering economic liberty within a politically unfree system, and that social stability can be maintained by retaining government ownership of their macroeconomic control system, their money system.
Meanwhile large swaths of the American and European "people", the politically powerless peasantry, are being evicted from their mortgaged homes and cast into unemployment exacerbated by an official policy of "austerity", all for the sake of trying to salvage the insolvent ruin of their arithmetically impossible privately owned money systems (a for profit money system that issues all its money as loan principal, but charges debt as principal + interest, systematically creates more monetary debt than it creates money to pay that debt; the process culminates in systemic debt default and banking system insolvency as we see today in Europe and America)."

"So it is not clear that these modern Western roadkills of elite-serving political policy enjoy any more real political liberty than did 18^th century French peasants.  Whereas the Chinese government has been taking significant steps towards improving the lot of their peasantry, including job creating economic and fiscal policies, and provision of government health care and pensions.  Who serves the people, is ruled by the people's interests.  Actions and outcomes, not vacuous democratic platitudes or empty political forms, are the true test of "responsible" government."

"As increasing numbers of modern Western middle class citizens fall into the ranks of dispossessed peasants, blithely unrelieved by government policy of bailing out banks rather than bailing out bank debtors, while the ranks of wealthy elites get richer, the conditions are germinated for revolt against unrepresentative government."

"China's Choice
I don't think China is going to choose democracy.  I don't think they should.  The people can see and know who their communist rulers are, who has power to mold the broad outlines, and at the local level impose the narrow confines, of Chinese economic life, to open or close opportunity to them.  They know exactly who to blame for injustices they suffer at the hands of power, and if there is equality before the law, they can get recourse.

Here is my take on the situation:

We think that China is headed for a big cliff because of its debt.  We think that because we apply our rules defining debt in a debt money system.  There is no crash coming for China, they have a different system.

We think China is headed for freedom because it is on a course of capitalism where the people will demand more from a restrictive government system.  Once again I emphasize they have a different system.

We are applying our game, our rules, our thinking to China believing that they must play the same game.  If that premise is true then yes, China will crash.  The premise is false!  They are playing a different money game, different debt rules and a different political game and rules.  

We are in for a big surprise that says:  "Our way is not the best way".

How about that for the contrarian view of American Exceptionalism.  

When will  we hear that tree fall?


  

Preparing for the Future of Money

http://www.chinese-tools.com/learn/chinese

Maybe there is still time before we go over the fiscal cliff?

We need a new logic base to replace credit and debit, presence/absence

We liked Chinese food....................

Will we like the new Reserve Currency?

A cliff is a presence/absence binary concept. 

Solid ground has either a presence or an absence.

The Chinese might look at it another way?

The Chinese character for crises also means opportunity.

It is a matter of degree.

Did some Chinese guy say:  Big crises make Big opportunity

Rock Paper Scissors

Can you see Logic, Language and Structure foundation in this concept:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning.Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

Logic gave birth to the language, the language was used to produce the structure.

There are many forms of fundamental logic relationships.  Binary presence/absence is one.  God is present/absent in our lives.  To be present some have to accept Christ or He is not present.  That Structural thought is a product of the Language which is an expression of the Logic. 

Change the Logic to Presence/degrees of presence and all that follows changes (Language and Structure)

Presence/degree-of-presence is thinking in terms of Seen/unseen…Known/not-yet-known and all the other equal forms of thinking where there something more on the other side of Presence than Non-presence, non-existence that exists as an idea in our mind. 

In Yin and Yang the concept of zero, non-existence as a "thing that exists" is just not there.  Nor is one.  It is everything between  zero and one that exists. 

Everything between zero and one is by definition a duality.  A combination of two things to a certain degree between unity (one) and true nothing (zero).

Is this a conceptual discovery?????

A personal one and I have found it.  I have accepted degrees of presence to be my personal saviour. 

This is the concept I intend to apply to money.  Actually the concept that has been applied but applied by those that see money in degrees (finance) but conceived by the public to be either in the pocket or not.  Owned or owed.  Debit or Credit.  Present or absent.

We ain't got no money!

There is no debt crises cliff!  That is what those that see money in degrees (they have more, we have less) would like people to think.

All people who think in binary Present/Absent terms are subject to manipulation by those that think in terms of degrees.

Few people really think in predominantly (fewer think exclusively) in terms of degrees.  Our Western, religious oriented culture is not fundamentally predisposed to that manner of thinking. 

That's the problem!

Eastern thinking is more degree of existence oriented.  Fuzzy Thinking is Yin an Yang and was only born and applied to computer science in the 60's.  Fuzzy thinking is application to information.

The great challenge is to apply "thinking in degrees" logic to re-structure our Knowledge.  Our "Knowledge Base" what we "know" as a culture and society is a legacy system based on Presence/Absence logic.

Chinese seem to have the advantage of a better legacy system that has thought this way for a long time.

This is a test:

What happens when we change the Logic?

then

What happens when we change the Language?

then

What happens when we change the Structure?

Answer:  Life changes

What can be concluded:  Structure changes in degrees to the extent we change Language and Logic.

Changes in Language have a degree of power to change structure but it is much less than the degree of power that Logic has to make changes to Language and the Structure.

Rock --- Paper ----Scissors…..Is China the origin of that game?

Yes!  Indeed it was!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rock-paper-scissors

Saint Timothy Encouraged To Preach The Word

What I say in this post must be viewed outside of the frame of the the Bible and God but in the frame of Truth as we know it in the frame of Computational Trinitarinism concept of Logic, Language and Structure.  That is my view of the world.

God of the bible of religious truth is the ultimate Superclass Parent Object above which there is no Parent Object Class of which it is a Child.  In my view their ultimate Parent Object is a Child of a higher level Parent.  No need to express or explain the nature of that Parent here but if all references to God in what Timothy says are extracted, (I like extracted better than the word deleted) then what is left is the higher level Parent Object (your own variable name for that Object here.

What Timothy says is good stuff made even better for me by my extraction of the word "God" and words he uses in reference to that word.  Conceptually, he Jefferson bible did a similar thing.  Extracted, and deleted words, phrases, segments, that simply did not pertain or were of lesser significance in the scheme of things....as he saw it.  What was left was better stuff.

This website is a remarkable collection of links to the various translations of what Timothy said in his famous "..fought the good fight" passage in the New Testament.  They are words of wisdom worthy of a newer age testament.  The testament of the Age of Information and Knowledge.  That testament is structured on older and progressively newer revisions of the Same Old Story.

The Same Old Story is a book more fundamental than the bible (Language and Structure) written about Logic.  The Same Old Story is the one written in our sub-conscious.  The unseen part of the seen and Known world.

The Same Old Story is a Garth Brooks song  The song he sings is a Child of a high level abstraction of the ultimate Object Super Class Parent: Same Old Story.  The story that one person holds on to something.  The other person lets it go.  One person believes in a Logic Proposition, the other lets it go for a new Logic Relationship.  If you are going to the links I am embedding in these comments the last one asks a very interesting question about what is being searched for!


The Same Old Story is one person holding on to a Structure defined by a Language that applied a Logic

While :

The other person goes to a new Language that changes the Structure.

Or the other person:

Goes to a new Logic with a new Language used to express it resulting in a new Structure.

It is a Trinity:  Logic (noun-subject), Language (means to express in the sense that Language is a verb), Structure (noun-object product of Language).

Change is constant.  "Not Change" is also constant?  That of course is non-presence binary thinking that does not jive with my thinking in terms of Yin and Yang.  Longing lingers.  Longing is the Yin thing in a relationship between Yin and Yang.  Yin is the unseen thing.  The seen thing?  Change.

Same Old Story

While they dance
How she holds him
Pulls him close
And loves him so
While he dreams of another
and counts the days
Until he lets her go

Same old story
That everybody knows
It's one heart holdin' on
One letting go

While they ride
Lord, he tells her
How they two
Will settle down
But she only hears the highway
And a voice
In some other town

And the harder
He holds her
The more she slips away

Same old story
That everybody knows
It's one heart holdin' on
One letting go

This in a very roundabout fashion brings me back to Timothy.  I am following his preaching in my journey to discover what Money is and does to find a new Logic, Language and Structure of Money

St. Timothy in the bible: Timothy/4:

Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. 3For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.

6For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time has come for my departure. 7I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. 8Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.

Occupy Economy: The Case For Soft Money

This is a carry over extension of the prior blog entry to focus on the ideas that it presents here about money, Yin and Yang and Fuzzy Logic.

The above link contains this video which is at a different link which I will jump to at this point because it is...well... beautiful thinking expressed in a medium that totally does what a medium should do: Enhance the clarity and effectiveness of  communication.  This video is a production of Sacred Economics  The website of gift to us from Charles Eisenstein.  Thank you, Charles.

MMT Economic Philosophy, Debt And Yin and Yang

What Stephanie Kelton is up against in presenting the MMT position on National Debt is not just a change in economic thinking but a change at a higher conceptual frame of reference that is woven into the fabric of our society

The magnitude of the the challenge she faces is not only comparable to changing the way we think from Western philosophy of binary thinking duality to an Eastern oriented philosophy of Yin and Yang......That is the challenge she faces!

The opposing duality nature of our binary thinking to polar opposite conceptual logic of Presence/Absence is woven into all our social structures from religion to politics to education and economics.  It is the foundation of our computer system logic as well as the machines that process that logic.  While social values of Good and Evil (absence of Good) are deeply entrenched in religion they are perhaps least entrenched in computer science.  Money and Economics are heavily and historically influenced by religious social values embodied in the Social Science of economics.  

Yin and Yang school of thought is described by Wikipedia:

The concept of Yin-Yang which is often referred to in the West as "yin and yang," literally meaning "shadow and light," is used to describe how polar opposites or seemingly contrary forces are interconnected and interdependent in the natural world, and how they give rise to each other in turn in relation to each other.

There is a perception (especially in the West) that yin and yang correspond to evil and good. However, in Daoist metaphysics, good/bad distinctions and other dichotomous moral judgments are perceptual and not real, and yin-yang is an indivisible whole.

This is the symbolic representation of Yin and Yang:

 

This is the graph used by Stephanie Kelton to illustrate the relationship of Sector Financial Balances

Chart and following comment is from this source:

What the chart demonstrates beautifully is the symmetry that applies to the balances of a centrally controlled credit system.
That’s to say, for the US domestic private sector to carry a positive balance, the government must in effect carry a negative balance.

Comments that follow this presentation at FT reflect to various degrees the predisposition to thing in Binary True and False terms of opposition rather than Yin and Yang interdependence.  This comment by vlade "kinda" starts to get it but then decides that the MMT theory just has to reach a break point where it does not work anymore.  I can see the same struggle to "get it" in other comments attempting to overcome established thought.  Hard to do when socially we are conditioned in that mode by our logic premise choice.

Good luck Stefanie Kelton in overcoming ideas so deeply entrenched in our society by our cultural choice of fundamental logic based on perception of binary opposition rather than interdependent and interconnected relationships between two objects at the most fundamental level of logic, the point at which one exists and the other being the non-existence of that same thing.

In Yin and Yang both objects exist, one of which is not the absence of the other.

At least that is my perception of Yin and Yang, my person school of thought in a single room school house where I am the only pupil and only teacher in the room.

I believe that Yin and Yang are an Object Oriented philosophy aligned with the Object  Oriented Paradigm of computing.  Historically it came first as the foundational logic of relationships in the Computational Trinitarianism of Logic, Language and Structure.

In contrast, our Western logic basis was more functionally oriented approach based on the relationship between True and False to produce a binary value product result.

If we are what we eat, we are also what we think.

This leads me to Fuzzy Logic.  That concept appeared on the scene at approximately the same time (1960's) as the nascent ideas of Object Oriented Computing.  Fuzzy Logic seems to be more closely related to Yin and Yang that True and False.  It is based more on the premise of the seen and unseen (but there to be seen as something, not nothing).  Fuzzy Logic deals in degrees of truth which seemed fascinating to me when I learned about the concept in the 70's.  It was more like the way I looked at things.  After all this time perhaps it deserves some re-examination and updating.  Times have changed, maybe I can perceive better.

Very interesting (said in Chinese  accented English as I stroke my Fu Man Chu beard)  that the names of the authors of the paper that follows seem to be more Chinese than American.  That however is not a bi-polar true or false conclusion, just a fuzzy thinking approximation.  Am I thinking like a Chinese or just eating too much Chinese take-out?

This paper examines the comparison:  YinYang bipolar logic and bipolar fuzzy logic Wen-Ran Zhang^{a, ,} ,Lulu Zhang<sup>b

Good thing there are smarter people that me to come up with this stuff!  

Do you think that this paper was easy for them to write simply because they culturally think this way?

We are doomed!  Is that what Kruschev's wife said when she visited an American supermarket?</sup>

Abstract

It is observed that equilibrium (including quasi- or non-equilibrium) is natural reality or bipolar truth. It is asserted that a multiple valued logic is a finite-valued extension of Boolean logic; a fuzzy logic is a real-valued extension of Boolean logic; Boolean logic and its extensions are unipolar systems that cannot be directly used to represent bipolar truth for visualization. To circumvent the representational limitations of unipolar systems, a zero-order (propositional) bipolar combinational logic BCL₁ in the bipolar space B₁={−1,0}×{0,1} is upgraded to a first-order (predicate) bipolar logic. BCL₁ is then extended to an (n+1)²-valued crisp bipolar combinational logic BCL_n in the bipolar space B_n={−n,…,−2,−1,0}×{0,1,2,…,n} and a real-valued bipolar fuzzy logic BCL_F in the bipolar space B_F=[−1,0]×[0,1]. A bipolar counterpart of unipolar axioms and rules of inference is introduced with the addition of bipolar augmentation. First-order consistency and completeness are proved. Depolarization functions are identified for the recovery of BCL₁, BCL_n, and BCL_F to Boolean logic, a (n+1)-valued logic, and fuzzy logic, respectively. Thus, BCL₁, BCL_n, and BCL_F are bipolar generalizations or fusions of Boolean logic, multiple valued logic, and fuzzy logic, respectively. The bipolar family of systems provides a unique representation for bipolar knowledge fusion and visualization in an equilibrium world. The semantics of the bipolar systems are established, justified, and compared with unipolar systems. A redress is presented for the ancient paradox of the liar that leads to a few comments on Gödel's incompleteness theorem.

This might seem like arcane Chinese medicine until you get down to the mathematical  inference rules of Ying and Yang Fuzzy Logic.  The medicine my or may not work but the thinking does, I think.

This is more food for thought but more than I can digest at one sitting:

Chapter 2: Either/Or Logic and Beyond
Most people perceive and interpret reality in terms of either/or: someone is either good or bad, friendly or unfriendly, intelligent or stupid, loving or unloving—and the list could be continued indefinitely, not only for qualities of people but also for anything else. Thus, reality is perceived in terms of mutually exclusive opposites. But is reality really like that? Or is this opposition our creation due to our conscious or unconscious use of either/or logic? And what are the consequences of using either/or logic for our relationships, society, the world, and ourselves?

^{In Yin and Yang terms of Fuzzy Logic it looks to me like money is more of a Fuzzy logic problem domain in the broadest sense that there are cumulative degrees of money ranging from M0 to M3.} Nevertheless, we treat these various degrees in terms of debt binary rather than a fuzzy range.  Things come out of that fuzzy range to be settled at the M2 level.  The level where real world goods and services are traded with the medium of exchange rather than valued in terms of the medium of the medium of exchange at abstract financial paper levels beyond M2.

This presents ideas of hard and soft money in terms of Yin and Yang.  Very interesting.. I do not feel so all alone.....

Title: Occupy Economy.  The case for soft money.
 
Money follows, like everything else here on this physical plane, the principles of yin and yang. There is "hard" (yang) money and there is "soft" (yin) money. At this time, the world is dominated by yang money. My purpose with this article is to convince you that we need to find a better balance in matters of exchange and economics.

It presents the idea that Money is a placeholder in the business of exchange.  I like it!

^{This entry is getting long...too long.  The last ling that I included above is something to focus up by itself so I am going to carry it over to a new next entry in this blog.}

 

Chinese Are Taking Over!

An after-action thought on my way to bed that caused me to laugh!

Yin and Yang money.........the Chinese are taking over our money supply!

This will make Tea Party heads explode!  It must be Godless Communism!

Extending Yin and Yang to our political parties puts them in the perspective of Static and Changing.  Conservative and Progressive.  Not the established way vs the new way but a complimentary cooperation between the two.  A cooperation that could really be incorporated in a singe party or at least a unification of a single objective of the common good. 

The People's party.  All we need is one!  With a Muslim at the helm!  Yin Yang money as the national currency.

Exploding heads! 

If we do not do Yin Yang money then it will become the world's reserve currency of another country.  The reserve currency is the most trusted currency.

To bed laughing.....

Yin Yang Money

My best conceptual concept clarity usually seems to down on me Sunday mornings. Early.  Waking at 2 am with an idea that I have to start writing about.  It is Sunday and I woke at 1 am with this idea.  It must be a powerful one.

Ying Yang money!

Thanks to mar@physics.usyd.edu.au for the explanation of their Haifu Programming Language concept which I briefly mentioned in the preceding post to my blog.  The language is based on this logic:

The restrictive Western notions of true and false are not used. Instead, Haifu programmers must be aware of Yin and Yang. The programmer must concern him or herself with balancing Yin and Yang values throughout the program to achieve balance, since without balance the program will not run. Of course, if the programmer is one with the Tao balance will come effortlessly. 

The Yin Yang logic is as binary as the conceptual True and False logic representing the physical state of a computer circuit being on or off.   That is the  "Presence and Absence of a Thing"  binary proposition that computer science, the logic of the science and the combined structure of both the logic and the machine created for it to operate on are founded.  In this True and False proposition the Absence of a Thing's State of being is in fact a thing.

Yin and Yang and True and False are both binary but are perceived in different way.

Wikipedia describes them as follows:

Yin and yang are not opposing forces (dualities), but complementary forces, unseen (hidden, feminine) and seen (manifest, masculine), that interact to form a greater whole, as part of a dynamic system.

The nature of the logical difference between the two is:  Presence/Absence of a thing vs the Seen and Unseen thing.  In Presence/Absence the "Absent" thing has conceptual existence as a thing because it is not in existence it is in a state of non-being.  In Yin Yang there is no concept of absence creating existence but existence that is merely unseen by us.  While this might seem to be a subtle difference it is like a fork in the road and the road taken is chosen as a perception of reality determines where the road takes us as we diverge based on application of a chosen fundamental point of view.

The Presence/Absence thinking frame leads naturally to Asset/Liability thinking implementations where there is general preference to choose "Presence" as a positive state of being to be in as expressed by "Asset" and "Liability" a negative state to be avoided.  The conundrum of this mode of thinking is one cannot exist without the other and they are opposing conflicts taking on Right/Wrong characteristics in the social domain that attaches social value to the meaning of Asset and Liability.  Money Owned and Owed.  Creditor and Debtor.  Have and Have Not.

The Wikipedia description of Yin and Yang:

There is a perception (especially in the West) that yin and yang correspond to evil and good. However, in Daoist metaphysics, good/bad distinctions and other dichotomous moral judgments are perceptual and not real, and yin-yang is an indivisible whole.

Applying Yin and Yang thinking to money develops perceptions of money that interacts to form a greater whole.  That greater whole is seen as National Debt based on our way of thinking.  National Debt as seen by application of Yin and Yang perception is the complementary forces of National Debt equal to National Savings.  The view presented presented by Stephanie Kelton expressing MMT theories of money as I examined and discussed in this post.

How does this newly perceived idea of Yin and Yang apply to my concepts of money?

My concept is a structure of money based on the digital dollar.  A conceptual unit of money existing as a computer record assigned a unique serial number for every dollar and these dollars exist forever "owned" by whatever financial entity has their identity associated with it.  The aggregation of all unit dollars associated with a single "owning" entity is equal to the sum of dollars expressed by the money account of the owner as the on hand balance.

The Yin and Yang aspects of my digital dollar monetary system are:

 Digital dollars existing on one hand as unique serialized units each with a value of one dollar that sum up to all digital dollars in the medium of exchange money supply.

and:

The sum of digital dollars in each owner's cash account the total of all account sums equaling all the digital dollars in the medium of exchange money supply.

The relatively unseen aspect of the digital dollar is its existence of a unique serialized dollar unit.  The seen aspect is the total sum of digital dollars in the cash account of an owner.

These two "complementary forces, unseen (hidden, feminine) and seen (manifest, masculine), that interact to form a greater whole, as part of a dynamic system."

Two hours to produce this....back to bed! I got it written before I forget what I was ging to write.

Logic Language and Structure

In recent previous blogs I have examined the elegant concept of computational trinitarianism which is explained here.

About 8 years ago I became interested in natural language as an aspect of knowledge.  Through search and examination I learned about linguistics an became an admirer of Noam Chomsky. I learned much about linguistics.  At one point I thought that if I could do my college eduction all over again I would study linguistics.

A conceptual scheme of objects, their relationships to other objects and the action that relates them explained in an extremely well structured natural language by a subject matter expert is the first step in expressing that fundamental concept is a computer language.  That is true.  All that is needed is a translation of what was originally said in a natural language to a machine language.  The narrative of the natural language expression/description of the concept must be crafted in accordance with rules of logic in order to produce the structure of objects and their relationships in whatever problem domain happens to be the focus of attention.  That natural language narrative draws ideas out of the logic universe as if pulling a rabbit out of a hat from nowhere and the narrative is constructed using the syntax of the natural language rules.  A operating system structure of language syntax rules dictate the application use of words and contribute to a reduction in ambiguity of meaning.  On the flip side of that coin, they enhance precision of meaning.

Translation of an idea that came out of the blue expressed in a natural language is only the beginning of a progression in degree of precision to a machine language where the same idea is implemented in a repeatable pattern (at some level) in a highly defined computer operating system.  As machine intelligence grows the product of processing outcome increasingly becomes a higher level logic function of the operating system and application program and less a specific lower level outcome dictated by rigid design of the application program to simply do a magnitude of computations faster.  Program decision making ability and quality increases as well as quantity of decisions made.

It all begins with the best possible natural language expression of an idea.  Isn't that what the quality of effective communication is all about?  Setting up (structuring) the idea so well that little is lost in the communication and the same idea can easily be assembled in the mind of the receiver?

Speak well and you speak effectively.

My intuition tells me that some natural languages may be predisposed to be a better choice as the means of expressing concepts as the first step in formulating a description of a system that will progress through stages of development to implementation in the computer application domain.  Our own natural language, English,  does the job of formalizing ideas fairly well in general.  It depends on the skill of the user as well as the quality of the tool.  Legal language, medical language, plumbing language, etc. not only use words more precisely but assemble them to convey meaning within a more structured system governing what is said and how it is said.  English is a place where we, the English speakers start.  Maybe it is a relatively poor start that we overcome.  Some do not and communicate at the "you know" level.  "You know" means nothing when it is a stand alone phrase.  A subject with no specific or implied object.  The space between two thoughts that the mouth has to fill up with some sound while the slow brain is assembling the next idea.

A nation with a common natural language that in its common use among the average people of that nation that by its rules of structure enhances the relative quality and effectiveness of higher level conceptual communication has an advantage over other natural languages.  That advantage is doing better what natural language does.

What might that natural language be?

English becomes a better tool for expressing concepts in the hands of a few experts that are exceptionally skilled at using it to initially describe complex conceptual things clearly (and to the greatest extent possible, simply) in a fashion that can be passed to experts in translating that description through progressive steps to computer implementation.  There is a problem when the general population lacks the ability to understand the nature of the concept at any iteration of development beyond the first step, and maybe not even the first step at all.  Populations that use a natural language that facilitates communication and understanding broadly among its people to at least 2nd degree translations toward ultimate computer application and overall among a comparatively greater percentage of the population can also comprehend each subsequent degree of progressive development toward the end stage application have an advantage over populations with a natural language that either has an intrinsic ability to do this and/or has been enhances to do this by education.

What might that natural language be?

What natural language is intrinsically better, more predisposed to think and express logic concepts that facilitate the creation of conceptual structures to serve their society.  The language that has the head start on the education of its general users to become a better tool used by a greater number of people with a higher degree of literacy.

We appear to be a nation that is dumbing down because we are becoming increasingly illiterate at first stage fundamental conceptual expression and understanding and increasingly fewer people get beyond that level to understand second or subsequent levels of abstraction in languages that are beyond them.  Dumbing down is a race to the bottom.

The race to the top is not to be won by the nation that produces the greatest superstars of translating natural language concepts to machine language in our information age but the broadest number of people that can follow and understand the development of our social structure systems through progressions of development that are increasingly becoming formalized to computer applications.

All concepts that we choose as worthwhile begin a progress toward implementation to some ultimate level where rubber meets the road.  Where they do something, where they operate.  Our fundamental concepts are a work in progress.  Progress is a constant state of change somewhere at lower levels beneath the fundamental concept or some lower level supporting concept defined and accepted to be so structurally important that it cannot be changed unless the foundational concept is changed.

Another way to look at the effectiveness and efficiency of a natural language to serve us in its use is its ability to not only be able to follow the development of conceptual structures from the top concept down to where it meets the road but to see what it does where it meets the road and be able to go back up the chain to the parent concept.  To validate the implementation at the lowest level by tracing the structure of the concept back to its origin.

Adding up at the lowest level of what a general concept produces as a real world application result is an accounting control audit "cross footing".  The cross check at the bottom that has to equal the grand total at the top.  A proof of the validity of the entire system. The sum of things at the lowest granular level of measurement units to equal the logic of the the foundational proof.  In the language of math this is precise.  In the language we call natural it is precise to the extent that our natural language is intrinsically capable of precision and the extent we have made it more precise through refining it and educating users to be more skilled in its use.

If the majority of general users can or cannot add up what they experience at the producing level of a concept to prove the basic truth of the establishing concept then the opportunity for sub-version of the entire system to serve another purpose is great. 

The best way to subvert a logic process cross footing validation check to assure that the basic idea logic is in fact working is to shift the bottom up logic analysis to an alternate domain of logic structured on feeling rather than thinking.  There is a logic process to the analysis of feeling.  However, if the feeling is good then the rule in the domain of feeling is don't analyze it just enjoy it.

Junk food feels good.  That is all the analysis required by the common consumer where the Big Mac meets the mouth.  Our natural language, our society that uses it has been framed to produce that result.  A few are beginning to read labels.

If we vote on acceptance of systemic outcome based on what feels good or right at the bottom line level that an intuitive way to validate the system must be valid and working as intended.  Follow the actual structure of the system far enough back up the progression of logic, expression of logic in language and structure that supports a higher level combination to do something in support of the top level concept trinity of these three things would take a genius.  If we trust a true genius that can follow it all the way from bottom to top and top to bottom and tells us it works, trust me, then we better pick a true genius instead of a flim flam artist that will take advantage of feelings of trust in their "truth" rather than proving the truth by our own ability to follow its structure to the source.

Know the truth............

Are all natural languages intrinsically equal in their inherent ability to know the truth and follow it through conceptual structures from a top down breakdown and bottom up assembly design and cross check of operating results vs founding concept objectives?

Those societies that:

Are given a head start advantage by being fortunate to have a natural language that is predisposed to structural precision in the expression and refinement of abstract concepts to applications that serve them.

and (or if they do not get this automatic head start)

are most effective at producing through education a general population that is adept at following logic through structure using its natural language plus more precise language of math and science, specifically computer science that is the means to apply logic through language to structure.........

Rules......

We are not as a society very good at it I think.    We have had time, opportunity and resources to become good at it among a relatively very small percentage of the population that serves (or feeds upon as we are served up to) the greater percentage of the population.

Emerging societies have not have time, resources, or opportunity that we have.  All men are created equal.  That is a self evident truth meaning it does have to be true, it is true.  In the old days of west the Colt .45 is what made all men equal.  Out of luck if you lnly had a knife in a gun fight.  Information was  the new Colt .45.  Then knowledge made information the knife in a gun fight.  The same truth however applies.  Those that use it quicker as well as more accurately win. 

The idea that the general population of an emerging nation may have a leg up in getting ahead to some degree due to its natural language in the modern information/knowledge world is interesting.  If natural languages are equal then I think it is a true fact that the nation(s) that has a general population that broadly understands the complexities of its society as well as the rest of the world will dominate because it takes the majority of the population understanding their society structure to a sufficient degree to control it, otherwise it is controlled for them.

Math and science as understood and used by the general population of a society is a metric measurement of highly structured thought based on natural truths and proofs of truth.

Who is ahead on that score?

Math and science is a language in our society like any other.  Its associated frame of conceptual thinking in complex systems are the domain of subject matter experts in our society, not our society in general.  There are few who can interpret that language to natural language we, the general public can understand.  We either don't care, were not equipped by our education to understand or in fact find the truths of math and science contradictory to beliefs held by a large segment of our society and therefore rejected.

Wealth is in what we know and understand about the structure of our society that can be expressed in a language from natural to scientific we all can understand describing and defining the truth we all can know or at least state to be self evident without need for a proof.

It is my intuitive guess that any natural language that tends to focus on the objects of its structure for meaning rather than the action that implements the relationship between the objects at the sentence/phrase level has an advantage in building conceptual object structures.

Chinese are stereotypically said to be clever.  Might there be some basis to that in that they use a clever natural language with fewer verbs and de-emphasizing at least the quantative emphasis on verbs in their language if not the qualitative emphasis in expressing a thought.  A thought that is more object oriented than action oriented?  Perhaps the use of a character system of written thought contributes to this object oriented approach?

What if Chinese thought at the general population cultural level is more focused on what money is rather than what it does.

Conversely, what if western thought at the general population level is more focused on money does rather than what it is.

Both views are within the domain of Language (Logic, Language, Structure)

Two different monetary systems might result from this fundamental conceptual approach in the domain of Language?

Something else to think about is that our computer system programming is object structure oriented while our natural language is action (function) oriented.

Chinese Python programming language comments here are very interesting.

This also relates to Chinese programming

The potential point being that programming, which is complex at the lowest level, is an extension of the structure of thought at a higher abstract level of design.  If Chinese think more in terms of objects rather than actions this is not a difficult translation for the general population to follow a line of thought at the higher levels of conceptual explanation????

The worldwide supremacy of Chinese programmers is noted here:

The site is a problem-solving platform for some of the world’s elite programmers. It provides coding challenges and helps corporations like Facebook and Microsoft to identify the talent.

Gild, a social networking and skills sharing site for programmers, did a study in October, 2011, examining the core skills of almost half a million programmers via more than one million tests. The study showed that Chinese programmers outscored their American counterparts in logic and math by 20 percent, although they lagged behind in core programming languages.

Logic is the first thing in the  Computational Trinity, then Language and Structure.  They all work together but Logic seems more equal than the other two.. It is the Subject initiator of the relationship.