#economist on main

[cicaklah]

Being an economist on main again, soz...

So my last post got reblogged by people but I wanted, in true economist fashion, to really, truly, highlight why the current UK bullshit is so upsetting as a very normie, mainstream, working economist.

Economics is broadly split into two disciplines, microeconomics, which is basically the way the economy and individuals interact, and macroeconomics, which is how the economy as a whole-ass beast works. The main problem between these two disciplines is that a lot of rules of micro don't 'hold' when you get to the macro level, and vice versa. You might remember how economists always say that treating debt at country level the way we think about individual credit card or mortgage debt is wrong, that is a prime example of how micro and macro rules don't hold. Things, generally, are so much more complicated at macro level.

Because of this, most economists specialise in one or the other. I am a microeconomist, specifically a health economist, and while there is some macro stuff, generally we treat health spending as a micro level problem, i.e. we're fairly sure that if we make decisions at an individual level, the macro will look after itself (the pennies will look after the pounds).

(Now, this is a simplification because you can rightly say, cicak, my friend, the NHS is falling apart, to which I will say: you is right, but it is because of 'externalities' rather than the conceptual decision making process inherent to microeconomics, to wit: over a decade of deliberate underfunding, a global pandemic, and Brexit have all led to NHS problems. The solution to all of these problems can be understood in micro terms: more money, applied where it is most needed, as part of a plan, with measurable goals and targets. Ultimately: politics.)

Anyway, tangents aside, microeconomics is pretty ideologically stable. Most mainstream economics is based around social welfare theory, which is that people do things for reasons that bring them the most benefit, and they broadly, mostly, in aggregate, do that to an acceptable level of efficiency. If you would like to argue about this: please proceed to your nearest economics masters course, you'll fit right in.

The main difference between the schools of macro is: do individual changes make differences at the macro level? Or do only governments really make a difference at macro?

This used to be a BIG ARGUMENT back in the 20th century, mostly around what should be done with the Great Depression in 1929. Basically, should you just let the economy burn to the ground, and see what comes out of it? Or should governments stop the economy from collapsing? The Austrian school thought burn it down, Keynes thought: government. Keynes, broadly, won. There was a 2nd world war, and Keynesianism was refined. Then, it went out of fashion. Then it came back into fashion. A lot of this depends on the concept of 'full employment', the 1980s, economic stability, boom and bust, but these days, most macro policy is described as Neo-Keynesian and is considered broadly settled on government finding a balance between price, inflation, employment, growth and stability. This is done through monetary policy and fiscal policy, stuff government does.

But then you've got your Austrians, your Hayekians, your Mises. They think that government should butt out of the market, and that individuals are far more important. Individuals, especially rich individuals, should be allowed to do what they want with their money, and everything will be better if government just stops taking their money and lets the free market solve it. This is why the first thing Truss & friends did was cut the top rate of tax. Less money for government (bad with money) but more money for the people that they believe are already good with money, because they have a lot of it, see?

Modern Austrians believe that individuals are the only thing that matter at macro level. There are no groups of people, only individuals. Credit is bad and the real cause of business failure. Stability can be gained by pegging currencies to gold reserves. Oh and as we can't model all 67 million people in the UK, theres no point even trying. It'd just be chaos. Even model nerds say 'all models are wrong'. So no point. Just do it and be a legend. It'll all work out in the end. Just trust us. OBR? Have a beer. The numbers don't real.

Instead, everyone fucking PANICKED. Because as I said, 99% of economists are in the business of predicting the future. The future suddenly got unpredictable. No one saw the top rate of tax being cut coming. There's no economic justification for it, no 'dont worry, it'll be funded by XYZ'. Just Austrian bullshit of 'here comes freedom lads.' No one is talking to each other. A man credited with keeping all the fiscal, monetary and political systems moving has been fired because it turns out the chancellor didn't like that he worked from South America. The Bank of England are furious. The markets are in peril, but Kwarteng's bezzie mates at his cocktail party bet that the pound would crash, and are rolling in it. Everyone loves a run on the pound, it seems.

So yeah there's some more of why the uks economy kind of exploded this week.

[hella1975]

hella come rescue me from america i don’t like it here anymore

i actually would rather not come over there rn bestie

[blueberry-beanie]

yesterday's Die Anstalt episode got a bit of international fame and still lost against football

Weil viele (2) gefragt haben: Christian Lindner spielen? Wie geht das?! Weiß ich nicht, aber hier, was ich versucht habe: 1️⃣ Für die Stimme: drei Wochen alle Interviews und Podcasts anhören, die es gibt. Dabei lernen, wie sehr er sich konzentriert alles unter Kontrolle zu halten. 2️⃣ Lindners Spezialdisziplin: Ähs werden durch Dehnung von Wörtern vermieden, um sich Zeit zu verschaffen. 3️⃣ Körperhaltung und Gestik sind ebenfalls von Kontrollmaximierung dominiert. Geholfen hat mir allerdings, eine mir sehr vertraute Figur zu „channeln“. Meine absolute (fiktive) Lieblingsfigur: Niles Crane. Bruder von Frasier Crane. David Hyde Pierces brillante Darstellung von Verklemmtheit. (Musste allerdings für Lindner die unterliegende Wärme rausnehmen. Aus Gründen.) Wer Lindner inhaltlich nachvollziehen möchte: die aktuelle #dieAnstalt gucken!

[xtruss]

The U-Bend of Life! Why, Beyond Middle Age, People Get Happier As They Get Older

— December 16th 2010 | Wednesday 16th August 2023 | Christmas Specials | Age and happiness

ASK people how they feel about getting older, and they will probably reply in the same vein as Maurice Chevalier: “Old age isn't so bad when you consider the alternative.” Stiffening joints, weakening muscles, fading eyesight and the clouding of memory, coupled with the modern world's careless contempt for the old, seem a fearful prospect—better than death, perhaps, but not much. Yet mankind is wrong to dread ageing. Life is not a long slow decline from sunlit uplands towards the valley of death. It is, rather, a U-bend.

When people start out on adult life, they are, on average, pretty cheerful. Things go downhill from youth to middle age until they reach a nadir commonly known as the mid-life crisis. So far, so familiar. The surprising part happens after that. Although as people move towards old age they lose things they treasure—vitality, mental sharpness and looks—they also gain what people spend their lives pursuing: happiness.

This curious finding has emerged from a new branch of economics that seeks a more satisfactory measure than money of human well-being. Conventional economics uses money as a proxy for utility—the dismal way in which the discipline talks about happiness. But some economists, unconvinced that there is a direct relationship between money and well-being, have decided to go to the nub of the matter and measure happiness itself.

These ideas have penetrated the policy arena, starting in Bhutan, where the concept of Gross National Happiness shapes the planning process. All new policies have to have a GNH assessment, similar to the environmental-impact assessment common in other countries. In 2008 France's president, Nicolas Sarkozy, asked two Nobel-prize-winning economists, Amartya Sen and Joseph Stiglitz, to come up with a broader measure of national contentedness than GDP. Then last month, in a touchy-feely gesture not typical of Britain, David Cameron announced that the British government would start collecting figures on well-being.

There are already a lot of data on the subject collected by, for instance, America's General Social Survey, Eurobarometer and Gallup. Surveys ask two main sorts of question. One concerns people's assessment of their lives, and the other how they feel at any particular time. The first goes along the lines of: thinking about your life as a whole, how do you feel? The second is something like: yesterday, did you feel happy/contented/angry/anxious? The first sort of question is said to measure global well-being, and the second hedonic or emotional well-being. They do not always elicit the same response: having children, for instance, tends to make people feel better about their life as a whole, but also increases the chance that they felt angry or anxious yesterday.

Statisticians trawl through the vast quantities of data these surveys produce rather as miners panning for gold. They are trying to find the answer to the perennial question: what makes people happy?

Four main factors, it seems: gender, personality, external circumstances and age. Women, by and large, are slightly happier than men. But they are also more susceptible to depression: a fifth to a quarter of women experience depression at some point in their lives, compared with around a tenth of men. Which suggests either that women are more likely to experience more extreme emotions, or that a few women are more miserable than men, while most are more cheerful.

Two personality traits shine through the complexity of economists' regression analyses: neuroticism and extroversion. Neurotic people—those who are prone to guilt, anger and anxiety—tend to be unhappy. This is more than a tautological observation about people's mood when asked about their feelings by pollsters or economists. Studies following people over many years have shown that neuroticism is a stable personality trait and a good predictor of levels of happiness. Neurotic people are not just prone to negative feelings: they also tend to have low emotional intelligence, which makes them bad at forming or managing relationships, and that in turn makes them unhappy.

Whereas neuroticism tends to make for gloomy types, extroversion does the opposite. Those who like working in teams and who relish parties tend to be happier than those who shut their office doors in the daytime and hole up at home in the evenings. This personality trait may help explain some cross-cultural differences: a study comparing similar groups of British, Chinese and Japanese people found that the British were, on average, both more extrovert and happier than the Chinese and Japanese.

Then there is the role of circumstance. All sorts of things in people's lives, such as relationships, education, income and health, shape the way they feel. Being married gives people a considerable uplift, but not as big as the gloom that springs from being unemployed. In America, being black used to be associated with lower levels of happiness—though the most recent figures suggest that being black or Hispanic is nowadays associated with greater happiness. People with children in the house are less happy than those without. More educated people are happier, but that effect disappears once income is controlled for. Education, in other words, seems to make people happy because it makes them richer. And richer people are happier than poor ones—though just how much is a source of argument.

The View From Winter

Lastly, there is age. Ask a bunch of 30-year-olds and another of 70-year-olds (as Peter Ubel, of the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University, did with two colleagues, Heather Lacey and Dylan Smith, in 2006) which group they think is likely to be happier, and both lots point to the 30-year-olds. Ask them to rate their own well-being, and the 70-year-olds are the happier bunch. The academics quoted lyrics written by Pete Townshend of The Who when he was 20: “Things they do look awful cold / Hope I die before I get old”. They pointed out that Mr Townshend, having passed his 60th birthday, was writing a blog that glowed with good humour.

Mr Townshend may have thought of himself as a youthful radical, but this view is ancient and conventional. The “seven ages of man”—the dominant image of the life-course in the 16th and 17th centuries—was almost invariably conceived as a rise in stature and contentedness to middle age, followed by a sharp decline towards the grave. Inverting the rise and fall is a recent idea. “A few of us noticed the U-bend in the early 1990s,” says Andrew Oswald, professor of economics at Warwick Business School. “We ran a conference about it, but nobody came.”

Since then, interest in the U-bend has been growing. Its effect on happiness is significant—about half as much, from the nadir of middle age to the elderly peak, as that of unemployment. It appears all over the world. David Blanchflower, professor of economics at Dartmouth College, and Mr Oswald looked at the figures for 72 countries. The nadir varies among countries—Ukrainians, at the top of the range, are at their most miserable at 62, and Swiss, at the bottom, at 35—but in the great majority of countries people are at their unhappiest in their 40s and early 50s. The global average is 46.

The U-bend shows up in studies not just of global well-being but also of hedonic or emotional well-being. One paper, published this year by Arthur Stone, Joseph Schwartz and Joan Broderick of Stony Brook University, and Angus Deaton of Princeton, breaks well-being down into positive and negative feelings and looks at how the experience of those emotions varies through life. Enjoyment and happiness dip in middle age, then pick up; stress rises during the early 20s, then falls sharply; worry peaks in middle age, and falls sharply thereafter; anger declines throughout life; sadness rises slightly in middle age, and falls thereafter.

Turn the question upside down, and the pattern still appears. When the British Labour Force Survey asks people whether they are depressed, the U-bend becomes an arc, peaking at 46.

Happier, No Matter What

There is always a possibility that variations are the result not of changes during the life-course, but of differences between cohorts. A 70-year-old European may feel different to a 30-year-old not because he is older, but because he grew up during the second world war and was thus formed by different experiences. But the accumulation of data undermines the idea of a cohort effect. Americans and Zimbabweans have not been formed by similar experiences, yet the U-bend appears in both their countries. And if a cohort effect were responsible, the U-bend would not show up consistently in 40 years' worth of data.

Another possible explanation is that unhappy people die early. It is hard to establish whether that is true or not; but, given that death in middle age is fairly rare, it would explain only a little of the phenomenon. Perhaps the U-bend is merely an expression of the effect of external circumstances. After all, common factors affect people at different stages of the life-cycle. People in their 40s, for instance, often have teenage children. Could the misery of the middle-aged be the consequence of sharing space with angry adolescents? And older people tend to be richer. Could their relative contentment be the result of their piles of cash?

The answer, it turns out, is no: control for cash, employment status and children, and the U-bend is still there. So the growing happiness that follows middle-aged misery must be the result not of external circumstances but of internal changes.

People, studies show, behave differently at different ages. Older people have fewer rows and come up with better solutions to conflict. They are better at controlling their emotions, better at accepting misfortune and less prone to anger. In one study, for instance, subjects were asked to listen to recordings of people supposedly saying disparaging things about them. Older and younger people were similarly saddened, but older people less angry and less inclined to pass judgment, taking the view, as one put it, that “you can't please all the people all the time.”

There are various theories as to why this might be so. Laura Carstensen, professor of psychology at Stanford University, talks of “the uniquely human ability to recognise our own mortality and monitor our own time horizons”. Because the old know they are closer to death, she argues, they grow better at living for the present. They come to focus on things that matter now—such as feelings—and less on long-term goals. “When young people look at older people, they think how terrifying it must be to be nearing the end of your life. But older people know what matters most.” For instance, she says, “young people will go to cocktail parties because they might meet somebody who will be useful to them in the future, even though nobody I know actually likes going to cocktail parties.”

Death of Ambition, Birth of Acceptance

There are other possible explanations. Maybe the sight of contemporaries keeling over infuses survivors with a determination to make the most of their remaining years. Maybe people come to accept their strengths and weaknesses, give up hoping to become chief executive or have a picture shown in the Royal Academy, and learn to be satisfied as assistant branch manager, with their watercolour on display at the church fete. “Being an old maid”, says one of the characters in a story by Edna Ferber, an (unmarried) American novelist, was “like death by drowning—a really delightful sensation when you ceased struggling.” Perhaps acceptance of ageing itself is a source of relief. “How pleasant is the day”, observed William James, an American philosopher, “when we give up striving to be young—or slender.”

Whatever the causes of the U-bend, it has consequences beyond the emotional. Happiness doesn't just make people happy—it also makes them healthier. John Weinman, professor of psychiatry at King's College London, monitored the stress levels of a group of volunteers and then inflicted small wounds on them. The wounds of the least stressed healed twice as fast as those of the most stressed. At Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Sheldon Cohen infected people with cold and flu viruses. He found that happier types were less likely to catch the virus, and showed fewer symptoms of illness when they did. So although old people tend to be less healthy than younger ones, their cheerfulness may help counteract their crumbliness.

Happier people are more productive, too. Mr Oswald and two colleagues, Eugenio Proto and Daniel Sgroi, cheered up a bunch of volunteers by showing them a funny film, then set them mental tests and compared their performance to groups that had seen a neutral film, or no film at all. The ones who had seen the funny film performed 12% better. This leads to two conclusions. First, if you are going to volunteer for a study, choose the economists' experiment rather than the psychologists' or psychiatrists'. Second, the cheerfulness of the old should help counteract their loss of productivity through declining cognitive skills—a point worth remembering as the world works out how to deal with an ageing workforce.

The ageing of the rich world is normally seen as a burden on the economy and a problem to be solved. The U-bend argues for a more positive view of the matter. The greyer the world gets, the brighter it becomes—a prospect which should be especially encouraging to Economist readers (average age 47).

— This article appeared in the Christmas Specials section of the print edition under the headline "The U-Bend of Life"

[zvaigzdelasas]

The Communist Party’s main theoretical journal has laid out a new ideological framework for the financial system that emphasizes the primacy of China’s top leader and Marxist principles. [...]

The Communist Party issued a detailed ideological statement on Friday in Qiushi, the party’s main official theoretical journal, that made clear that it expected banks, pension funds, insurers and other financial organizations in China to follow Marxist principles [...]

The Qiushi paper, which was being closely studied by bankers and economists in China, could cut against efforts by Beijing to show that the economy is open to investment even as it places a heavier hand on business.

Barry Naughton, an economist at the University of California at San Diego who has long studied China’s transition to a market economy, said that the document signaled that the finance sector would be subject to ever-tighter oversight and forced to serve government policies more actively.

“The financial sector will not be expected to push for market-oriented reforms or even necessarily maximize profit,” he said. “As a program for the financial sector, it is ambitious, disappointing and somewhat ominous.”[...]

“Politics will for sure further dictate China’s finance, effectively moving China even closer to how it was before the reforms started in 1978,” said Chen Zhiwu, a finance professor at the University of Hong Kong.

Some of the policy targets set forth in the essay would not be unusual as regulatory goals in the West. For example, it calls for banks to emphasize financial services for the “real economy,” which the party has long interpreted to include ample financing for the country’s industrial base.

But it also calls for a strong role in finance for [...] Marxist ideology generally. That follows a pattern that emerged for other sectors during the national congress of China’s Communist Party a year ago, but has been less apparent in finance — until now. [...]

Moody’s, the credit rating agency, announced on Tuesday that it was lowering its credit outlook for the Chinese government to negative. It had previously assigned a stable outlook for the country’s credit rating, which remains at A1, near the top of the ratings scale. [...]

Qiushi is the main journal providing pronouncements on China’s current ideology, which is known as Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era. The statement on Friday said that Mr. Xi’s speech to the financial conference, “is a valuable ideological crystallization formed by our party’s unremitting exploration of the path of financial development with Chinese characteristics.” [...]

“Politics affects all important areas, and economic or financial issues are themselves political issues,” he said. Indeed, Communist Party control over finance comes up repeatedly in the Qiushi statement. “We must unswervingly adhere to the centralized and unified leadership of the party Central Committee over financial work, uphold and strengthen the party’s overall leadership over financial work,” it said.

5 Dec 23

[jadagul]

I started wondering how the Greeks and Romans developed monogamy norms, in contrast to the harem systems you see in e.g. classical China. And I did some random googling and I have not learned anything I consider super reasonable but I did discover this marvelous abstract by Mara Squicciarini and Jo Swinnen:

Intriguingly, across the world the main social groups which practice polygyny do not consume alcohol. We investigate whether there is a correlation between alcohol consumption and polygynous/monogamous arrangements, both over time and across cultures. Historically, we find a correlation between the shift from polygyny to monogamy and the growth of alcohol consumption. Cross-culturally we also find that monogamous societies consume more alcohol than polygynous societies in the preindustrial world. We provide a series of possible explanations to explain the positive correlation between monogamy and alcohol consumption over time and across societies.

A working paper circulated to the American Association of Wine Economists, so you know it's legit.

[netherworldpost]

I made a comment about monster economies on a math post. Here are some notes!

ELVES Elven economies are measured in millennia, so investing advice gets skewed over glacial periods. The main benefit is the power of compounding interest, the drawback is a fear to begin.

Decades, centuries, pass and fortunes are eroded due to inflation or outright literal rot, elves preferring flora-based money over gems and metal coins, in many communities.

Incredibly fertile farmland is available and considered a safe investment, though there are always concerns from overfarming.

DWARVES Dwarven economies work differently. If you have it, use it to build. If you don't have it, work harder.

The latter is actually terrible advice and many economists are trying to help dwarven communities open up when there are needs.

To be clear: any dwarf who needs help can get it, the community would rather collectively shave their beards off than one of their own go hungry or cold in the elements. The "asking for help" is the poisoned thing.

DRAGONS Given their long lives, incredible might, and well-stocked well-trapped lairs, dragons are often seen as an economy themselves.

Clever dragons use this to their advantage and offer financial services to local realms, adding to their hoard and offering protective services (for a fee, of course).

Withdraw requests are difficult to negotiate.

HALFLINGS A delicious economy difficult to quantify, as it is largely seasonal. Fruit and vegetables in warm months, grown and harvested. Firewood, pies, and pipe fill in the cold months, relished and enjoyed.

Most produce most of what they, themselves and their homes, need.

Spare time is spent relaxing, toasting drinks, telling stories, dancing. Spare supplies are traded about each other, so the talented brewer (whom is a bit sparse in the ways of potato farming) and the candlestick maker (whom themselves is a bit wary of the work necessary to harvest firewood), and the forester (keen and quick with an axe to a dead tree or overgrowth) all have larders stocked fully.

[earlgreytea68]

I listened to this podcast episode today on my way to work and it was very interesting. You should listen to her, because I am no economist, but the tl;dr is that the main reason the gender pay gap exists is because women often choose jobs for their greater flexibility because they often have caregiving responsibilities (either with children or with their own parents, because that also falls disproportionately on women) and so they value the flexibility more than men do, who can select jobs based on things like pay, not flexibility. That is simplified but basically the issue, and then there are all kinds of repercussions around that, like, people who value work flexibility so that they can tend to other responsibilities tend to be perceived as not dedicated enough to their jobs, so they don't get the most important assignments, don't get the most important promotions, etc.

Anyway, I was struck by the fact that toward the end the host asks the Nobel laureate what can be done to address this ongoing inequity, and she proposes sending children to school year-round and until 6pm every day.

......

Okay, look, #1 - I COMPLETELY understand, which is the Nobel laureate's point, that finding that childcare to fill in the gap around when school is out of session but the mom is still at work is a major problem that is part of the reason why women desire more flexibility; and also #2 - I also do not intend this to be about educational theory, but----

I was really struck that the solution to the problem would be TO MAKE CHILDREN WORK JUST AS HARD AS GROWN-UPS. Like, I can't help but think that the REAL problem here is that the expectations of jobs for the level of dedication they want from employees is UNREALISTIC AND UNSUSTAINABLE and can only be supported if one-half of the workforce is abandoned to DO THE ACTUAL WORK OF BEING HUMAN, and the solution to that is not MAKE EVEN THE TINIEST OF HUMANS LEARN HOW TO WORK HARDER AND LONGER. Idk, that just really rubbed me the wrong way, the idea that we solve this problem we created by making kids work forty-hour work weeks with no vacations the way the rest of us do. Like, the problem is the forty-hour work week with no vacations, let's not compound that problem.

To be fair to the Nobel laureate, she says she's trying to find a realistic solution, and that overhauling societal expectations around caregiving responsibilities and flexible workers is probably not going to happen but she thinks expanding the school day and year is attainable. But.....no, I think we should work on overhauling societal expectations so that none of us are expected to work so much at the sacrifice of the rest of our lives. Idk, I don't think we should entertain any solution other than that, because I'm tired of giving in on that point.

END RANT OF A THING I KNOW BASICALLY NOTHING ABOUT

[sgiandubh]

A different public

Via tireless @luckydogsgroove - thanks a LOT, chica!- my morning back in Athens starts with this, freshly out:

The mythical NYT, to which this stupid shipper is subscribed since at least the beginning of her mission abroad - along with Le Monde, The Economist and the local best I Kathimerini (The Daily News) these are indispensable work tools.

Lo and behold, it's a completely different vibe in here, far far away from BBC shitty innuendo or the rehashed, diluted Waypoints hogwash in recent interviews. Time to play it seriously and create significant content, not timeline fodder.

Things like this, for example:

I note the slight error - it's 43, not 42 years old - but also the use of 'heartthrob' instead of 'hunk': in the highly formulaic universe of press jargon, this is a -notable- notch up the respectability scale.

And before the Disgruntled Tumblrettes harpies start their grotesque, gratuitous and incompetent bickering again, NYT played by the strike rules and I doubt they would host a strike saboteur in their pages. Stick it way up where you know, duckies:

Of course he had to include her, he always does. And I bet the journo is always nicely asked (also bet he did it personally, not the publicist) to do so in print. And by the way, where did the old, pretzel contorted explanation of " Sassenach means foreigner and I am a foreigner too, and we are all foreigners in a very inclusive Scotland" (not verbatim, just the gist of it) go?

Heh. Thought so. We're back to the good basics and I would take the Sassenach/C association any day. Counting small blessings, here.

Of course, the main info is the SS gin launching: this confirms my theory of a new, younger, urban and more sophisticated crowd for his alcohol. Eat your socks, Mordor. This is how everybody begins to shift gears, when changing marketing and branding strategies: what your hatred and stupidity didn't let you see, is that the mommies were the readily available sandbox for things obviously designed for a greater scale.

I will not comment the 5 GLA highlighted recommendations, that include the Kelvingrove Park, a cheesemonger and a seafood place (I'd try both in a heartbeat), because I have to start my working day and you do not need me to read all this. I will, however, keep readily available a word copy of this article for anyone without a NYT subscription who wants to read it, exactly as I did for C's essay when I commented it at length.

Judging by the three available comments (it is, after all, very fresh), it has been very well received, by a completely different, well-traveled, epicurean urbanite audience. And that is a BIG plus:

I see change. I see different. I see exactly what I needed to see. Unlike LAX, which seems reserved for silly shenanigans, New York is their real US port of call and the place they use when they want to go relevant about something they really care about.

I am back. And I didn't forget I promised you something about Tehran. I think it's feasible, very soon.

Onwards.

PS: I will be completely relieved and happy the second I read something at least similar in The New Yorker. For relevance, primarily: they need that knowledgeable, disposable cash crowd like there's no tomorrow.

[drdemonprince]

Your blog is like a breath of fresh air. Thank you for all the wonderful thoughts and writing.

That said I actually have a question. I am pro-palestine(it feels stupid to call it that, as if it should even be a debate) and in a very left leaning friend group. But also a very white academic one. You know the type, read Marx, dream of the revolution but continue studying to end up in 9 to 5s instead of doing anything(I am guilty of it too, this isn't meant as insult just a description)

Anyways, as you can imagine they have been extremely hesitant when it comes to having any opinion on Israel or Palestine. That wouldn't be a problem in itself, I know how to start topics with them and get them thinking usually but in this case there is an additional problem. Whenever I try to broach the topic I get shutdown with "Look at all the shit that is going on here, our country is falling into fascism, I just don't have the energy to deal with this conflict. Please don't talk about it because it's triggering". And I have zero clue what to do. Forget getting them to go on protests with me, I can't even speak to them about it and feel really guilty. Its me bringing up a heavily triggering topic after all. It feels wrong to feel guilty though. I know at the end of the day it's not important if I could convince some people to give a fuck but do you have any advice? How to get over this guilt or maybe how to broach a topic with that considered?

My main problem is my fear of losing my friends because I have been ill for some time(as in physically unable to leave the house for more than a short grocery run, or my visits to the doctor, because of pain and my friends are what keep me alive) and losing their help would be not good.

My exact situation aside, do you have advice for someone to broach a topic that others describe as unpleasant/triggering without causing a huge rift in the group?

Thanks for your kind words and your question, Anon.

I think your friends suck and that you can do better than them. I think you should get out there and find yourself some Black, brown, working class anarchist and anarco-communist buds (and Marxists who show up for others in a real, observable way in their regular lives) as soon as you can.

I know that wasn't the answer you were looking for. But I have seen this kind of entirely theoretical, jaded, self-superior, passive, white well-off Marxist type a thousand times before, and I've failed to ever see them show up for other people in any kind of consistent way.

And it's not only the people systematically crushed beneath the wheel of Capital half a world away that they neglect, either. They tend to be pretty shitty friends and neighbors when it all comes down to it on the micro-level, too. Their smug over-intellectualism and dispassionate cynicism allows them to justify remaining disengaged and going along with the status quo in a way that ultimately serves capitalism very well.

There is a theoretical basis to this selfishness and disengagement, I will admit. This type of overly academic Marxist typically believes that the fall of capitalism is inevitable, that humans lack free will and only behave as befits their obvious material interests, and that there is nothing that one can do on a personal level to hasten any kind of Revolution, so there is nothing left to do but wait, and take care of oneself, and allow the future to unfold.

This is a perspective explicitly advocated for by people like the Chapo Trap House guys, and among academic white boy communist types, it is incredibly popular. I remember hearing Matt Christman saying on his vlogs that he essentially does not believe the conditions allowing capitalism to fall will happen in his lifetime, and so his only responsibility is to just take care of himself and his family and be comfortable.

Ultimately, these types wind up sounding and behaving exactly like capitalist economists who believe that everyone is rationally motivated only by increasing their personal wealth. They are disengaged from politics except insofar as they like to make snide jokes about current events for their own entertainment and enrichment, and they don't see themselves as having the capacity to exert a positive influence on the world, nor any obligation to. It's bleak shit.

At the same time, if your friends are in the circles that tend to read and listen to and promote this kind of stuff, surely they have also been exposed to popular leftist voices advocating loudly for the Palestinian cause. And yet still they have done nothing.

Hasan Piker has been vocally pro-Palestine his entire career, and his Twitch channel has been providing near constant coverage of Palestinian issues since October 7th. True Anon has had multiple episodes on the Israel Lobby, the suppression of pro-Palestinian activism and journalistic coverage, and has aired interviews with Normal Finkelstein. Palestine is the central topic of nearly every Trillbilly Worker's Party podcast for months now.

These are widely popular voices among the very types of Marxists that you say that your friends are, and many of these creators are close friends with the Chapo Trap House guys, whom your friends almost certainly are taking notes from. So it's nearly impossible to imagine that your friends have not encountered the near constant coverage of the struggle of the Palestinians that all the rest of us have. And yet still your friends do nothing. Still they do not care, and dismiss you when you share with them how despairing you feel.

Your friends have turned off an essential part of their hearts, I think. And I don't mean they lack empathy. Not having empathy is fine, I don't have it either -- but I make the conscious choice to care about the Palestinian cause and to advocate for it, because it aligns with my values. I give a fuck. My giving a fuck is conveyed through my actions, not through what I think about or how I feel.

Your friends are showing no interest in learning more about this genocide or doing anything about it. Perhaps some degree of ignorance or hesitancy could be justified early on because the Israeli apologist propaganda is so far reaching, but we're well past the point of that explaining away inaction by now. Over 100,000 people are missing and over 30,000 are known to be dead and little girls are being shot by snipers while seeking medical care while babies are left to rot in their NICU beds.

Your friends know this. Maybe not everyone in the world does, but if they're so well-read about leftist issues, your friends do. And they have chosen, for some reason, not to care. They've disconnected from the pain the Palestinian people are in, unplugged from the steady stream of upsetting information, sought comfort in a politics that says all too conveniently that nothing they do matters, and when you try to share with them how much anguish you are feeling about the mass deaths happening throughout the world, they're dismissive toward you.

Your friends suck. If acknowleding reality and confronting the horrors of a genocide is too tough and triggering for them, then a lot of horrors here at home will be too much for their fragile egos too. There are so many leftists you could be surrounding yourself with instead, I promise -- people who give back to their communities, people who are in the streets doing the tough work of feeding and housing and fighting for the release from prison of people every day, instead of using those local struggles as a shield for their inaction on a more global scale.

Fuck these people for real. This is a big glaring red flag and it will be relevant to your friendship and your life. One day many of them might see you and your problems and your human needs as too much of a distraction from their dry academic jerk-off sessions too. I've seen it a dozen times. Sorry to be so blunt. But you seem like a person who is putting their attention in all the right places and I don't want to see that compassion squandered on people who won't ever show you the same consideration. You can find people who actually walk the walk, they're everywhere.

[cicaklah]

Like not to be an economist on main but realising that the Tory party handed control of the economy to a bunch of Austrian school weirdos is so shocking I can't even understand how it happened???

Basically in mainstream economics we apply the scientific method, so you have a theory, you test it, gather data and learn from it. but Austrians are like vibes only. They have a theory but because all the evidence says that the theory is wrong...they throw out the scientific method. They're like...creationists. but for really nerdy, almost entirely government level money things.

I get very annoyed about how pop culture and especially Tumblr talks about economics because it's almost entirely wrong or misunderstands what economics is, or sort of assumes that economics flows from economists to the economy, rather than us being more like any other scientist who observe something broadly natural and tries to understand it, but like, the people who have done the mini budget and tanked the pound are not economists? They're politicians who believe that the economy is a plaything they can project their wills onto and they don't believe in evidence. They're idiots.

I feel like I'm going mad. Genuinely I read in the times that truss and kwarteg are Austrian school adherents and my blood ran cold.

[alpaca-clouds]

Why AI sucks so much

(And why it doesn't have to.)

AI sucks right now. Because it was never to be used, like it is used right now. Because the way AI is currently employed, it does the one thing, that was always meant to be human.

Look. AI has a ton of technological problems. I wrote about it before. Whenever you have some "AI Writer" or "AI Art", there is no intelligence there. There is only a probability algorithm that does some math. It is like the auto-complete on your phone, just a bit more complex, because it has been fed with basically the entire internet's worth of words and pictures. So, when the AI writes a story, it just knows that there is a high likelyhood that if it has been asked to write a fantasy story it might feature swords, magic and dragons. And then puts out a collection of words that is basically every fantasy story ever thrown into a blender. Same when it "draws". Why does it struggle so much with teeth and fingers? Well, because it just goes by likelihood. If it has drawn a finger, it knows there is a high likelihood that next to the finger is going to be another finger. So it draws one. Simple as that. Because it does not know, what a finger is. Only what it looks like.

And of course it does not fact check.

But all of that is not really the main problem. Because the main culture actually just is the general work culture, the capitalist economy and how we modelled it.

See, once upon a time there was this economist named Kaynes. And while he was a capitalist, he did in fact have quite a few good ideas and understood some things very well - like the fact that people are actually working better, if their basic needs have been taken care for. And he was very certain that in the future (he lived a hundred years ago) a lot of work could be done by automation, with the people still being paid for what the machines were doing. Hence having the people work for like 15 hours a week, but getting paid for a fulltime job - or even more.

And here is the thing: We could have that. Right now. Because we did in fact automate a lot of jobs and really a ton of jobs we have right now are just endless busywork. Instead of actually being productive, it only exists to keep up the appearance of productivity.

We already know that reducing the workdays to four a week or the workload to 30 or even 25 hours a week does not really decrease productivity. Especially with office jobs. Because the fact is that many, many jobs are not that much work and rather just involve people sitting in an office working like two hours a day and spending the rest with coffee kitchen talk or surfing the internet.

And there are tons of boring jobs we can already automate. I mean, with what I am working right now - analyzing surveying data - most I do is just put some parameters into an algorith and let the algorith do the work. While also part time training another algorithm, that basically automatically reads contracts to make notes what data a certain contract involves. (And contrary to what you might believe: No, it is not complicated. Especially those text analysis tasks are actually super simple to construct, once you get the hang of it.)

Which also means, that half of my workday usually is spend of just sitting here and watching a bar fill up. Especially with the surveying data, because it is large, large image files that at times take six to ten hours to process. And hint: Often I will end up letting the computer run over night to finish the task.

But that brings me to the question: What am I even doing here? Most of the time it takes like two hours to put the data in, run a small sample size for checking it and then letting it run afterwards. I do not need to be here for that. Yet, I do have to sit down for my seven and a half hours a day to collect my paycheck. And... It is kinda silly, right?

And of course there is the fact that we technically do have the technology to automate more and more menial tasks. Which would make a lot of sense, especially with the very dangerous kinda tasks, like within mining operations. Like, sure, that is a lot more work to automate, given that we would need robots that are actually able to navigate over all sorts of terrain, but... You know, it would probably save countless lives.

Same goes for many, many other areas. We could in fact automate a lot. Not everything (for example fruit picking is surprisingly hard to automate, it turns out), but a lot. Like a real lot.

And instead... they decided to automate art. One of the things that is the most human, because art for the most part depends on emotions and experience. Art is individual for the most part. It is formed by experience and reflection of the experience. And instead of seeing that, they decided to... create a probability generator for words and pixels.

So, why?

Well, first and foremost, because they (= the owner class) do want to keep us working. And with that I mean those menial, exhausting, mind-numbing jobs that we are forced to have right now. And they want us to keep working, because the more free time we have, the more time we have to organize and, well, rise up against the system, upon realizing how we are exploited. Work itself is used as a tool of oppression. Which is why, no matter how many studies show that the 30 hour week or 4 day week is actually good, that UBI actually helps people and what not, the companies are so against it. It is also why in some countries, like the US, the companies are so against paid sick leave, something that is scientifically speaking bonkers, because it actually harms the productivity of the company. And yes, it is also why still in the midth of a pandemic, we act as if everything is normal, because they found out that in the early pandemic under lock down and less people working, people actually fucking organized.

And that... also kinda is, why they hate art. Because art is something that is a reflection upon a world - and it can be an inspiration for people, something that gives them hope and something worth working towards to. So, artists are kinda dangerous. Hence something has to be done to keep them from working. In this case: Devaluing their work.

And no, I do not even think that the people programming those original algorithms were thinking this. They were not like "Yes, we need to do this to uphold the capitalist systems", nor do most of the AI bros, who are hyping it right now. But there are some people in there, who see it just like that. Who know the dangers of actual art and what it can mean for the system that keeps them powerful.

So, yeah... We could have some great stuff with AI and automation... If used in other areas.

I mean, just imagine what AIs could do under communism...

[pol-ski]

Nicolaus Copernicus (Konstanty Laszczka, Polish sculptor)

Happy birthday, Nicolaus Copernicus!

Nicolaus Copernicus (February 19, 1473 — May 24, 1543) is primarily known as an exceptional astronomer who formulated the true model of the solar system, which led to an unprecedented change in the human perception of Earth’s place in the universe. This great Pole, who is rightly included among the greatest minds of the European Renaissance, was also a clergyman, a mathematician, a physician, a lawyer and a translator. He also proved himself as an effective strategist and military commander, leading the defence of Olsztyn against the attack of the German Monastic Order of the Teutonic Knights. Later on, he exhibited great organizational skills, quickly rebuilding and relaunching the economy of the areas devastated by the invasion of the Teutonic Knights. He also served in diplomacy and participated in the works of the Polish Sejm.

Copernicus’ scientific achievements in the field of economics were equally significant, and place him among the greatest authors of the world economic thought. In 1517 Copernicus wrote a treatise on the phenomenon of bad money driving out good money. He noted that the“debasement of coin” was one of the main reasons for the collapse of states. He was therefore one of the first advocates of modern monetary policy based on the unification of the currency in circulation, constant care for its value and the prevention of inflation, which ruins the economy. In money he distinguished the ore value (valor) and the estimated value (estimatio), determined by the issuer. According to Copernicus, the ore value of a good coin should correspond to its estimated value. This was not synonymous, however, with the reduction of the coin to a piece of metal being the subject of trade in goods. The ore contained in the money was supposed to be the guarantee of its price, and the value of the legal tender was assigned to it by special symbols proving its relationship with a given country and ruler. Although such views are nothing new today, in his time they constituted a milestone in the development of economic thought.

Additionally Copernicus was not only a theorist of finance, but he was also the co-author of a successful monetary reform, later also implemented in other countries. It was Copernicus, the first of the great Polish economists, who in 1519 proposed to King Sigismund I the Old to unify the monetary system of the Polish Crown with that of its subordinate Royal Prussia. The principles described in the treatise published in 1517 were decades later repeated by the English financier Thomas Gresham and are currently most often referred to around the world as Gresham’s law. Historical truth, however, requires us to restore the authorship of this principle to its creator, for example through the popularization of knowledge about the Copernicus-Gresham Law. (© NBP - We protect the value of money).

[it-was-funeral-grey]

And away (Al Haitham x F!Reader)

Prequel Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Extra 1 Masterlist

Summary: now that all that's settled, it's time to head back to vimara village. (all hail imaginary kaveh)

Warnings: mentions of medicine, the meat industry and its processes, economics macro and micro, boat travel, awkwardness, denial, internal battles, vulgarities, mild injuries (sprained ankle), carrying, mentions of sanitary pads, ect, spying on friends .

Word count: <4.3k words

Inspired by: Telephone - Waterparks

"I know we only just met, so why do I feel invested?"

Author's note: i had to dig out all my economics knowledge for this lol. i still almost failed econs so just pretend that i make total sense for the sake of the story pls. Also, i may come back and mass re edit this.

Thank you for all the lovely comments for part 3! it really made my day! i'm sorry if this part isnt as good as the rest! I tried

Please give criticism! Also, if i missed any warnings, do tell me so i can add them!

Out of all the issues Al Haitham has to deal with, Port Ormos is the most pressing and the source of many other problems.

No trade means no business. No business means no jobs. No jobs mean no work, which means no income for both Sumeru and the people. And especially since Port Ormos is Sumeru's main port, national income has taken a hard hit. Akademiya economists have been sending him report after report about their concerns about Sumeru's economic forecast. It does not look good.

In addition, no trade means that Sumeru doesn't get new resources anymore. While Sumeru is mostly self-sufficient food-wise, many resources still cannot be obtained locally- or are mostly imported. And since Port Ormos is both Sumeru's largest and main port, lots of imports are not coming in anymore.

For example, there's currently a national shortage of cold medicines, which Sumeru usually imports from Snezhnaya. Particularly during monsoon seasons, cases of colds, dengue fever and the flu increase amongst the population. But Snezhnayan traders and businesses have pulled away from Sumeru after the Akademiya scandal. Bimarstan had gotten so desperate for cold medicine that it had begun asking locals to donate their leftover medicine. To ease the burden on the Bimarstan, Al Haitham had ordered Amurta to help mass manufacture medicines. However, this is only a stopgap measure. He needs to find a way to solve the root cause of the problem.

Furthermore, inflation has been a growing issue. The situation isn't so bad in Sumeru city, as its tiny port is still running- albeit not as smoothly or vibrantly as it used to. But in other parts of Sumeru, it's a whole different story. 

Everything is connected in a way. Just because Sumeru isn't reliant on imports for food doesn't mean food prices are not affected by the lack of other resources. For example, to produce fowl meat, you'll need a few things:

Either machinery (mostly from Fontaine) or workers to slaughter the fowl.

Appropriate packaging to pack the fowl meat.

Transport to carry your produce to marketplaces throughout Sumeru.

In this case, most issues lie with step one. Most farmers in Sumeru had taken to using Fontaine machinery to mass slaughter poultry. It was much cheaper than hiring workers and way more efficient. The only trade-off was that these machines ran on a specific type of oil that only is sold in Fontaine. So, manufacturers would sell the oil alongside it. 

But now, Fontaine traders and businesses are gradually pulling away from Sumeru. That means a lesser supply of oil, which means a decrease in the supply of fowl since machines are not able or cost more to run. A shortage means that prices go up. People buy less or cannot afford fowl at all. Farmers make less money, which prevents them from hiring more workers (or results in them letting go of workers if they don't use machinery) to increase the fowl supply. A case of cost-push inflation, similar to other case studies Al Haitham has read up on.

This is just one example out of many. The inflation and unemployment rate are growing. Adding everything up, including the current political climate, Sumeru is becoming less and less attractive to traders and businesses, causing them to pull away, worsening the Sumeru economy. It's a vicious cycle that Al Haitham needs to break.

If Al Haitham had to list all the issues Port Ormos has caused him, he'd be able to write himself all the way to an economic degree. Which he'll be able to sign off, now that he thinks about it. He's the Acting Grand Sage. He'll announce his own name. Present the degree to himself. Shake his own hand.

But anyway, the main point is that if he's able to revitalise Port Ormos, many other issues will resolve themselves. He had finally had a lucky break that Thursday and was free to head to Port Ormos to speak to the trade supervisors. But then, of course, stuff happened, and he wasn't able to do all that.

Which is why he's heading back to Vimara village again today. He specifically worked through the entire night in his cold office, wet clothes clinging uncomfortably on his body just so he could make time today for this. This time, he's going to make sure he speaks to the trade supervisors and settle this once and for all. He's ready to negotiate to hell and back to ensure the port reopens.

No surprises today, he'll make sure of it.

"Oh! You're heading back to Vimara Village?"

Well. Never mind, then.

The rising heat only hits the moment he walks out of the tavern. 

Treasures Street is empty tonight because of the heavy rain. Shops have closed early- the only exception being the tavern. But even so, Al Haitham feels too exposed. He doesn't feel cold anymore. The heat blooming in his cheeks and all over him makes sure of that.

Al Haitham quickens his pace. There's still a long walk to the Akademiya. The faster he gets there, the more time he'll have to finish whatever he has to do. 

The faster he gets there, the less time he'll have to think about what just happened.

Let's review. 

First of all, he fainted. Presumably right in front or around her house- so that's how she found him. Fine. He can't fault himself for that. He had been running on less than three hours of sleep that week. The cherry on top had been that four-hour trek he had to do on top of that. He was exhausted. The human body has its limits. 

But then he woke up and bawled his eyes out like a baby. In front of her. A total stranger. She pushed a bowl of the best meal he ever had (and his only meal in two days) into his face, and he cried. He cried so much that he passed out. Again. Until the following evening. 

It takes a lot of willpower from Al Haitham to not squat down and cringe in the middle of the street. 

Archons, he's pathetic. 

His cheeks burn, and he instinctively moves a hand to cover his face. The movement is accompanied by a crumpling sound, which reminds him of the snack he was given before he left the tavern. 

Taking cover under Menakeri's Treasure Shop, he removes the neatly bundled wrap from its paper bag. The rain isn't letting up. He couldn't be more drenched, but thankfully, the wrap is still dry- courtesy of the paper bag he took from Lambad's counter.

The wrap is still warm, and he curses when the rainwater on his hand seeps into the napkins. Removing it quickly, he holds the wrap in his hands. 

Wait. What's he going to do with the wrap?

He should throw it away. It's a terrible waste of food, but he can't afford to eat and feel sleepy later. He has to finish everything and then some, so he'll be free to head back to Vimara village tomorrow.

She held out the bundle with trembling hands.

The wrap suddenly feels heavy. Looking around, he spots a rubbish bin just a step away outside the shop.

She had left her warm, comfortable spot just to make sure he had something to eat.

He should really get going. Throw it away. And then leave for the Akademiya. But his feet refuse to move.

"They're worried about you, you know?"

Why don't you worry about yourself instead?

"Oh! You're heading back to Vimara Village?"

You weren't expecting to see the Acting Grand Sage again. Much less on the ferry Cyno had arranged to bring you back to Vimara village. 

If the Acting Grand Sage was surprised, he hid it well. Slowly turning to face you, he coolly leans against the railings of the small, wooden ferry. But the piercing sound of creaking wood jolts him back up almost immediately.

"Yes." he hastily answers, turning around to check on the railing, pushing it back and forth, then squatting down and repeating the action.

A curt answer. What are you supposed to say to that? You can't even hum in agreement or find an opening to make small talk before you politely excuse yourself to take a seat inside. 

The only sound filling the air now is the creaking of wood as he scrutinises the railing. You're not sure what he's checking for- it's just a loose railing, but you admire the dedication nonetheless. A minute passes. 

An alternative course of action is to simply walk towards the seating area without saying anything else. But he's blocking the entrance. Taking a step forward, you shift closer to gauge how much space you have to move through it.

Nope. No way to pass through at all. His large build completely obstructs the entrance. There's no way to pass without saying anything, and you're not sure what you can say that isn't awkward. 

"Uh, excuse me. I'm just going to pass- yeah, oh- you don't need to stand, just- sorry."

Yeah, say that, and proceed to simmer in uncomfortable silence with him in the seating area for the next hour and a half. 

"...You're also heading back to the village?" there's another creak of wood as he shifts it from left to right now.

"Ah! Yes," you reply, eager to stave off the growing awkwardness. "I, uh, live there." 

He stiffens at your answer and brushes a hand over his face. You see his shoulders slacken as he sighs.

Did...you say something wrong?

If you did, he doesn't comment on it. Finally standing up, he's turning around and-

"I'm just going to head in first!" you blurt out, taking the opportunity to rush past him into the seating area.

But of course, just as you finally get into the seating area, the ship suddenly rocks, throwing you off balance and onto the hard floor.

Al Haitham's face is on fire. It must be because of the new soap he used this morning. Kaveh had pestered him for money to buy that brand, and he had finally caved. Yes, this is all Kaveh's fault.

No, he is not blushing. Why would he be? He isn't ill or feverish. Neither is he embarrassed.

It's just the soap. A mild allergic reaction, perhaps. But he isn't allergic to anything. Perhaps he should book an appointment at Bimarstan to confirm that. Allergies are dangerous.

Why can't he turn around?

There's a loud, rhythmic pulsing in his ear, which strangely is in phase with the beating of his heart. Is that his heartbeat he's hearing? Why is it so loud? And so fast? Also, why is his heart beating so hard?

He knows the answer. He just doesn't want to admit it.

Al Haitham is not embarrassed. Why should he be? It matters not what she thinks of him. She isn't causing him any trouble. She isn't someone he needs to work with. If anything, she is just another person now. She doesn't affect him or his life. To think about her is meaningless. It serves no purpose.

He doesn't care about her. She means nothing. She's just another stranger. 

Oh, so this is about her, Kaveh's voice rings in his head. You're too embarrassed to face her! 

Great. Now imaginary Kaveh is here. But, thankfully, logic is Kaveh's worst enemy. 

And Al Haitham has a lot of logic.

Ok then, Kaveh, Al Haitham shifts the railing with more vigour. Let's say I am embarrassed. 

You are!

Then what would I be embarrassed about?

Well, about the whole fainting incident! You made a fool of yourself right in front of a total stranger!

So? I'm only a human being. My body has limits that I'm not ashamed of.

You know that's not what I'm talking about.

Oh? Whatever do you mean?

About the whole crying and-

Nope. Al Haitham immediately cuts his internal debate with imaginary Kaveh short. He is not going to think about that now. But of course, you can never stop racing thoughts. Particularly ones provided by imaginary Kaveh.

Don't wanna think about it?

I've already gone through that with myself yesterday.

And what did you find out? That you-

That it was simply tears of relief, Al Haitham lies. In regards to getting good food and rest. A natural human response.

Ha! Yeah right-

Imaginary Kaveh is interrupted once again by the sound of shifting behind Al Haitham. It must be her. Waiting for him to say something back.

Well? Turn around and talk to her!

Why should I?

Unbelievable! Not even going to thank her for helping you?

He knows he should. He wants to. But his voice isn't working. Plus, he can't even turn to face her.

I wonder why.

It's because I'm inspecting the railing. Boats in Sumeru must pass the Sumeru Maritime Port Authorities' safety check, and one of the basic-

It's just a loose railing, and you know it! You're fiddling with it as an excuse to not-

More shifting behind him. What is she trying to do? A quick glance to his left tells him the answer.

Hey, you idiot fungus. You're blocking the entrance to the seating area!

Shit, Kaveh is right. Imaginary Kaveh, that is.

Stand up and move!

Wait. But wouldn't it be weird to just stand up and move? Without saying anything else? That would imply that Al Haitham was paying attention to her but not speaking back. Wouldn't that be strange? Rude, even?

Oh, worrying about weirding her out? And since when have you ever cared about niceties?

Shit, imaginary Kaveh is right. Again. This isn't like him. At all.

Ugh! If you're not going to move, at least say something! You're making her feel uncomfortable!

Say what?! Why don't you suggest something helpful for once?

I don't know? It's your conversation! Not mine! Just ask something! Anything! Before this whole situation becomes too awkward beyond repair!

In a haste, much to imaginary Kaveh and Al Haitham's absolute horror, Al Haitham's mouth decides to go off on its own and ask the most stupid, brain-dead question.

"...You're also heading back to the village?" 

Oh, Archons.

Al Haitham shifts the railing from left to right. Maybe if he does that enough, by some scientific principle that he has not come across yet, it'll be like a lever, and time would rewind and-

When I said to ask anything, I meant something like "Slept well last night?" or "Were the toiletries I bought for you sufficient?" not whatever you just asked.

"Ah! Yes," she replies. "I, uh, live there." 

Great. Now she thinks you're an idiot, you idiot.

What kind of question is that? The answer is obvious. So obvious, that Al Haitham feels the need to redeem himself. A prickling sensation on his face spreads from his cheeks all the way up to the tips of his ears, and Al Haitham uses a hand to try to rub it away.

Archons, even asking what her name is would have been a better question than that!

Enough yapping! How can I fix this?

Al Haitham can't believe he's asking Kaveh, even if in imaginary form, for help. But desperate times call for desperate measures. And Kaveh-like problems require Kaveh-like solutions.

Well, start off by actually turning around to talk to her! Even imaginary Kaveh is surprised by his request for advice. Ask her what her name is! That sounds like a good way to kick-start a less awkward conversation. And save this whole interaction.

But I don't want a conversation. I-

Do you want her to feel even more uncomfortable than she probably already is?

With a deep sigh, Al Haitham tries to compose himself. Willing away the heat in his face, he stands back up. His knees ache a little, but he ignores the pain as he turns to face her but-

"I'm just going to head in first!"

And there she goes, bolting towards the now unobstructed entrance, leaving Al Haitham alone on the deck, momentarily stunned by her sudden departure.

She's barely two steps into the seating area when the ship rocks. Al Haitham catches his balance with practised elegance, but unfortunately, the same could not be said for her.

With a loud thud, she crashes into the ground as the boat begins to turn.

"Are you alright?" all earlier thoughts disappear from Al Haitham's mind as worry fills the gaps. Rushing over, he kneels at her side, watching her as she turns around with a hiss.

"It's fine." she winces, turning over before extending both legs.

"Your left ankle is starting to swell," Al Haitham mutters, comparing the size of her ankles through the straps of her sandals. "A sprained ankle."

"Well," She shifts to sit upwards. Leaning over, she takes a closer look at her ankle. "It doesn't look as bad as it feels."

"It may soon if we don't take care of it," Al Haitham shifts closer to her ankle. "May I?"

When she nods, he gently removes her footwear. Looking around the seating area, he frowns as he realises the absence of a first aid kit. That means no cold compresses or bandages.

"We'll have to elevate it," Al Haitham mutters. "Let's move closer to the benches."

"Ah, ok," she kicks her right leg inwards she pushes her weight onto it as she tries to stand. "Well-"

The boat wobbles, and she nearly falls again. , Al Haitham catches hold of her arm, steadying her.

"That isn't going to work," Al Haitham states before she could thank him. "Sit back down."

She does so, giving him a questioning look. Gently moving her legs so that her knees are outstretched and bent, he hooks an arm under her knee and uses the other to support her back as he stands.

"Woah!" her arms begin to flail.

"Calm down," Al Haitham moves his face away from a hand that nearly hits him. "Just- put that arm here."

"Where?"

"Shoulder," he huffs as he bounces her to secure his hold around her. "Hold on."

The boat rocks, but the Acting Grand Sage doesn't seem worried about falling. In fact, he walks on as if he's on flat ground. All while carrying you.

He gently places you down on the floor next to the nearest metal bench before kneeling next to you again.

"I'm just going to put your leg up here," he assists your ankle up on the bench. "Leave your ankle like this."

"Thank you," you murmur. "I'm sorry for the trouble."

He sighs, heading back towards the entrance to retrieve your sandals. You can't look at him as he walks back to you.

This is so embarrassing.

It was bad enough that things were already so awkward. Oh, Archons. You've already made a faux pas earlier at the deck. Now with this? He must be furious.

Then, in a move that proceeded to stun you- and honestly scare you a little he sits down.

On the floor.

All the benches around, and he chooses to sit on the floor with you.

"No need to thank me." the Acting Grand Sage releases another sigh as he relaxes his shoulders, leaning on the side of the bench beside yours.

He then pulls out a book from somewhere behind his cape and begins to read.

"Would you…prefer to sit on the bench? I'm sure it's much more comfortable there."

"It's a metal bench. It'll feel just as hard as the floor."

Again, another curt response.

Biting your lip in shame, you feel a heat roll up your cheek.

"Acting Grand Sage, I just want to apologise for-"

"Al Haitham."

"I'm sorry, what?"

"My name," he shuts his book, turning his head to face you now. "It's less of a mouthful compared to that. And you are?"

Name. Yes. You can give that.

You tell him your name, trying your hardest to keep your voice as stable as possible. You really don't want to embarrass yourself further.

He repeats your name with an almost contemplative tone. He said it softly, compared to the surrounding noises of the ship. But it's the only sound that fills your ears.

"You have nothing to apologise for," the Acting Grand Sage- no, Al Haitham says. With yet another sigh, he continues. "It's actually me who has to apologise."

"What do you mean?" you frown. You don't recall him doing anything wrong.

"I," he pauses, placing his book aside as his hand rubs against the back of his neck. "I'm sorry if I've made you feel uncomfortable."

He shifts slightly, fidgeting with the ends of his cape.

"I also have to apologise for getting you into this mess," he goes on. "And for not thanking you for helping me back then."

"There's no need to thank me for that!" you answer. "And there's no need to apologise as well. Everyone has been kind to me. This was all a misunderstanding."

And just like that, the awkwardness is gone. Instead, a soothing silence envelopes the space between the two of you. You finally get the courage to glance at him, and now that you're relaxed, you notice something a little strange about his attire.

He isn't wearing anything different than yesterday. But the cape-

His cape!

"I passed your cape to Cyno when I got to the hostel," you say, voice laced with worry. "Did you get it?"

That cape looked expensive. But more importantly, you don't think you'd be able to show your face to anyone ever again if you lost the Acting Grand Sage's cape.

"I did," you let out a sigh of relief. "Cyno passed it to me yesterday."

"Did you work through the night?" you ask.

"Yes. I managed to finish everything by dawn, so I went back home to rest before heading out again."

"At dawn? So you did work through the night then!" you huff. "You have to take care of yourself! If not, you'll pass out again."

"I was well rested after I fell asleep at your place."

"You did not fall asleep. You passed out!"

"Well, it was rest either way."

"Then, did you at least eat the wrap we gave you?"

He stills. Suddenly, the chatty vibe between the two of you had disappeared.

"I," he breaks the stillness. "I ate a little bit of it. On the way back to the Akademiya."

He looks a little guilty, but you let it go.

"I'll take your word for it."

Another silence fills the air. You wiggle the toes on your left foot. It aches, but not as much as before, thankfully. But it'll still be a pain to deal with on the walk back home.

"Did you rest well last night?" he asks, breaking the silence again.

"I did," you recall, thinking about that room you were given. "Do all Akademiya students live in rooms like that? Everything was provided!"

You had thought a student hostel would have only the bare essentials, like a bed, wardrobe and a desk. But in the room you were led to, everything you could have possibly needed was there. Soaps, room slippers, sanitary pads and tampons, and even snacks!

"…Yes," he stretches his neck. "I'm glad you got a good night's rest."

"You should get one too, you know?" you say, turning to face him. "Your friends are worried about you."

And they really are. To the rest of Sumeru, he may just be a temporary authority figure. But to Kaveh, he's his housemate and closest friend. And to Cyno, he's his rival and fellow comrade.

"I know they are," he shares. "But we all have jobs to do."

He looks up, out of the window, far out into the blue sky. It's a sunny day today.

"We should be back at the village in about an hour's time."

"Well, why don't you go get some rest then? I'll wake you when we arrive."

"Thank you." He gives your ankle one last look, making sure nothing got worse. Leaning his head back onto the side of the metal bench, he closes his eyes.

You pray to the Dendro Archon to make his dreams sweet as you watch sleep take him away.

"Did you get it?"

"I think so?"

"Oh, it's blurry! Let me try!"

"Kaveh, wait! Don't lean on that or-"

For an architect, Kaveh is surprisingly terrible at guessing the relative structural integrity of objects. This is why the boxes Kaveh thought were stable (and then proceeded to lean on) come falling down, much to Cyno's dismay.

Naturally, the shopkeeper was furious about Kaveh destroying a whole batch of new wares. Kaveh had racked up quite the bill (which Cyno feels will end up being paid for by Al Haitham), but-

"But it's all worth it. Look!" he gloats, showing Cyno the printed picture.

"Well, would you look at that? Told you this was a good idea!" Kaveh continues.

Well, Archons be damned.

Cyno isn't one who would usually follow Kaveh's pranks or ploys. But if it's going to keep producing results like this, he may consider calling Tighnari to join in on the fun.

"Told you I would be able to get them on the same boat," Cyno smirks, handing the photo back to Kaveh for safekeeping. "What now?"

"Now, we wait," Kaveh takes one last look at the photo, admiring their handiwork before shutting it together with the kamera inside his briefcase. "And when he comes back, oh, it will be fun."

Little did these two know what they have started.

Join the Taglist!

[probablyasocialecologist]

The main goal of degrowth can be best described as making the necessary transition to an environmentally-friendly and sustainable economy in a way that is smart, social, and democratic. Ecological economics, political economics, geography, biology, and political ecology are just some academic disciplines that contribute to the expanding body of knowledge that shapes the discipline of degrowth. Like Keynes and Friedman before them, degrowth economists are keen on not staying in some ivory tower but having a real impact on society. Supporters of the degrowth approach rely on the growing body of scientific evidence suggesting that continued economic growth dependency leads to gradual collective destruction and impoverishment through the detour of its environmental impact.  Degrowth is in opposition to the idea of “green growth”. Green growth supporters promote environmental awareness and care for humanity but cling to the belief that growth and the damages caused by growth can be decoupled in a timely and sufficient manner. However, multiple studies in top academic journals, such as Nature and Science, have refuted this core assumption thoroughly. Since 2019, when the EEB published its groundbreaking and much-cited report titled “Decoupling Debunked”, the burden of proof concerning decoupling prospects arguably lies with green growthers. As explained in the “Decoupling Debunked” report, the economy’s carbon intensity should fall 100 times faster than now – an unrealistic number –  for green growth to work. In turn, degrowth as a physical necessity is an inconvenient truth that frequently encounters populist resistance and disinformation. As long as we only add renewable energy and do not phase out fossil energy, our existential problem will continue to grow.

[...]

The best available scientific synthesis is increasingly pointing to degrowth as a necessity, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for the climate to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) for biodiversity. A rapid reduction in the most harmful extraction and production is a scientifically proven prerequisite for achieving global sustainability, social justice, and well-being.

[tomorrowusa]

In 2016 we had But Her Emails. In 2024 we have Biden Is Too Old. The sources of these two lines haven't changed: the flailing GOP with an assist by bothsiderist news media.

Yes, it's the same old distraction technique to draw attention away from the leader of the Republican Party who is an adjudicated sex offender who just lost a gigantic lawsuit based on his past use of fraud.

It's time to push back and aggressively. And successful messaging is repetitious messaging – get used to repeating things if you wish to cut through the noise.

But the main thing is not to freak out and to play offense instead of being defensive. For example: Why are so few people on our side bringing up Trump's unhealthy lifestyle? Drinking 12 Diet Cokes® a day and copious chomping of double cheeseburgers wouldn't be recommended for somebody half his age. And what kind of drugs is he being prescribed?

[A]ll of the #BidenTooOld coverage is about as new and revelatory as #ButHerEmails. If nothing else, it proves that a scandal holding that the president forgets things is always going to go down smoother than a scandal in which a special counsel flagrantly violated a long-standing Justice Department practice and protocol not to “criticize uncharged conduct.” As Sullivan was quick to point out, CNN and the New York Times and every U.S. corporate media entity and its cousin jumped onto the bandwagon. [ ... ] Perhaps one way to navigate yourself through this seemingly insoluble morass would be to ask yourself why Biden, who is stipulated #Old, has managed to helm the most successful presidency in modern history. Booming economy, eye-popping jobs reports, first gun violence reduction bill in decades, $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan plus COVID relief, Inflation Reduction Act, infrastructure prioritized, judges seated. Pick your metric—there have been a lot of wins. And the reason this old man who sometimes forgets things like dates has gotten all this done? He has, for the most part, surrounded himself with experts, genuine scientists, respected economists, and effective governmental actors and advisers. Governance is not an action film. There is no minute-to-minute psychodrama involving someone in a tight black T-shirt mincing along the outdoor ledge of a skyscraper, ninja-kicking his lonely way down to the stairwell, where he karate-chops the well-armed baddies and then commando crawls his way into an empty vault with the glass chest where the nuclear reactor sits. No. Despite our fascination with the Great Man theory of American lawmaking, the presidency is an office that largely turns on superb staffing, visionary planning, deft political negotiation, and artful execution. Joe Biden doesn’t actually have to remember every single detail himself—he has to use his judgment to employ and empower a large contingent of skilled experts to execute upon their agreed-upon vision. If you are unconvinced, the best evidence that we keep falling for Great Man fantasy propaganda is the unmitigated failure of the first Donald Trump presidency. Here we had a self-described loner literally trumpeting his I-alone-can-fix-it worldview, all embodied in Great Man megalomania. He managed to accomplish virtually nothing: Almost none of his promises for single-handed economic revitalization, world domination, or intrepid urban crime-solving panned out. His great dreams were either strangled in infancy by staffers or halted by courts. And whether you believe that this happened because Donald Trump surrounded himself with incompetent yes men or steely adults in the room, both versions serve to offer proof of concept: Donald Trump accomplished close to nothing because the people around him were either too inept to put his vision into practice or too skillful at blocking him to allow him to put his vision into practice. Put another way, if you or anyone you know finds themselves reacting to the Biden Is Old revelations with the thought that, sure, Donald Trump is a 91-indictments-richer, adjudicated sexual abuser, defamer, liar, violator of national security, self-enriching, fascist-boosting insurrectionist, but it’s OK because he will surround himself with people who might check those impulses—well, doesn’t it rather intuitively make more sense to instead vote for the highly effective, internationally respected, but yes, sometimes forgetty guy who is surrounded by people with day planners?

A president is a lot closer to being a CEO than a superhero. And when it does come to being businesslike, Trump has declared bankruptcy six times – approximately six more times than Biden. Trump's business "skills" lean heavily towards fraud, deceit, and bullying.

The real reason we all keep falling for Great Man horse race stories is because they are good for fueling fantasies of all-powerful big daddy presidents who control every tiny aspect of governance in their tiny wee hands. If that is your jam, well, it would make sense to vote for the only candidate who believes in the same dream. If it’s not, the question is reducible to rather simple stakes: Do you want the Big Daddy who surrounds himself with sycophants and nutters and people with shared last names, or the one who surrounds himself with competence and expertise? This doesn’t seem, on balance, like a really tricky call. Do we prefer presidents who can backflip and ninja-kick their way to total world dominion? Perhaps. To my knowledge, nobody ever made a Tom Cruise movie about listening and learning and compromising. But if you still believe governance to be a sober and serious enterprise, vote like the alternative is chilling, because it is.

Trump flatters himself as a "stable genius". But it is Biden who brought stable governance back to the US. Being a constantly ranting gasbag is not an indicator of competence.

Very little attention is being paid to psychological age. Trump is just 42 months chronologically younger than Biden, but Trump acts like a toddler who is not yet 42 months old.

Parents with kids who were constantly having temper tantrums and being frequently disruptive would consider taking those kids to a child psychologist. Being a disruptive narcissist in his late 70s does not make Trump seem youthful but instead more like a case study for arrested development as a toddler.