Increased xenophobia/racism

[Lordship 516]

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> One of the problems of the vertical 'Phillips'

> curve we are about to ascend is that it is a

> one-way street: every time we have had stagflation

> before, the 'natural rate' of unemployment has

> shifted out (further attempts to move back just

> shifting it further). So you get an increase in

> unemployment of 1.5m, then the policy response

> shifts that to 3m. That is because when you get to

> the top (inflation in double digits) interest rate

> panic ensues (Carney sacked, Treasury takes back

> control, interest rates in double digits). This

> time I fear the financial fragility is such that

> it could be rather more than 3m (of course you can

> then take the Zimbabwe route if you want).

At last someone sensible - I concur with Jaywalker on the scale. My numbers are a bit different but not so far apart. I think the Treasury will know this as will Carney. To sack Carney would be an act of vandalism and only cause more mayhem. Carney didn't cause the problem but the MPC could make a big mistake and he would be blamed. The biggest problem for now is political uncertainty.

Stagflation is a dangerous condition - a bit like a rogue rocket; if you try to steer it it usually ricochets off in a direction you don't anticipate or want.

[????]

I think you and Jaywalker should be on the MPC forthwith - your talents are wasted on the EDF.

In other news, two blokes with a spreadsheet and "The Dummy's Guide to Economics" get very excited.

[jaywalker]

I thought the EDF was a place in which we could express our views? Why is this a 'dummy' thing to do here? Having lived through previous episodes of stagflation (Barber, Healey, Lawson) I really don't want to go there again. But it seems quite likely that there is now a path dependency to exactly that outcome. Is it not worth discussing that possibility?

Is your assumption that ALL modelling of the UK economy is a waste of time? If so, how can you be so sure you know where we are headed?

[????]

Anyway, see the other thread. I don't understand how you've done any modelling on 11 days data on which the only hard data you have is the exchange rate. It's a bullshit model or has massive heroic assumptions - what are your inputs? Just your assumptions I'm presuming as we've no hard datA yet on anything ( other than the ?)

[Lordship 516]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think you and Jaywalker should be on the MPC

> forthwith - your talents are wasted on the EDF.

>

> In other news, two blokes with a spreadsheet and

> "The Dummy's Guide to Economics" get very excited.

Now who is the patronizer.

I haven't used a spreadsheet since the 90s, very rarely get excited about economics & have access to a SPARC T4 midrange computer [64 bit] linked to a SPARC M7 minicluster [256 bit] running customized software.

Our group can outgun any university except for MIT. Sorry to boast a little but you provoked that.

What does get me excited are incompetant, unfeeling & negligent politicians and those that run with them. People are not statistics but bad statistics can ruin people's lives.

[rendelharris]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I haven't used a spreadsheet since the 90s, very

> rarely get excited about economics & have access

> to a SPARC T4 midrange computer [64 bit] linked to

> a SPARC M7 minicluster [256 bit] running

> customized software.

>

> Our group can outgun any university except for

> MIT. Sorry to boast a little but you provoked

> that.

Oh I think that's forgiveable...???? got owned!

[Lordship 516]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anyway, see the other thread. I don't understand

> how you've done any modelling on 11 days data on

> which the only hard data you have is the exchange

> rate. It's a bullshit model or has massive heroic

> assumptions - what are your inputs? Just your

> assumptions I'm presuming as we've no hard datA

> yet on anything ( other than the ?)

There is a plethora of data - no point in discussing this with you in detail & besides this is how I make my living so why would I display my data sources or hard analysis.

All I suggest is that we are heading for a very, very hard landing if we continue with Brexit & should be more accommodating in regard to our attitude to negotiating with the EU.

Best option for me is to break out of the Brexit straight-jacket. Parliament vote to stay in and let The Brexiteers squeal. Some MPs will lose their seats but they will have fulfilled their oath of office and patriotic duty to defend the UK - history will applaud them.

[Blah Blah]

I'm with you Lordship. What we need is someone with the balls in government to say the price will be too high, and send it to parliament for a deciding vote for the good of the economy. I am also pretty sure this is why there is all the talk of agreeing a plan with the EU before triggering article 50 (even though the EU are not so keen on that). But people like Gove have wind in their sails and are determined to take us down this road to who knows what. And note, that yet again, contenders for the Tory leadership are making promises about how Brexit will go, without any evidence to support that.

Of all the interviews given the morning after the result, Mark Carney looked the most troubled - and there's very good reason for that.

[Lordship 516]

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm with you Lordship. What we need is someone

> with the balls in government to say the price will

> be too high, and send it to parliament for a

> deciding vote for the good of the economy. I am

> also pretty sure this is why there is all the talk

> of agreeing a plan with the EU before triggering

> article 50 (even though the EU are not so keen on

> that). But people like Gove have wind in their

> sails and are determined to take us down this road

> to who knows what. And note, that yet again,

> contenders for the Tory leadership are making

> promises about how Brexit will go, without any

> evidence to support that.

>

> Of all the interviews given the morning after the

> result, Mark Carney looked the most troubled - and

> there's very good reason for that.

We all know that a politician's promise is as sincere as a kiss from a lady of the night. They will promise anything to get the vote and turn later "after serious consideration & wide consultation" HAH !

Carney does look troubled, said little of substance & besides the weather here is pretty lousy. During the last global meltdown he anticipated the difficulties & engaged in a dual expansionary policy of low interest rates with increased liquidity in the system and outperformed all the G7 with Canada returning to pre-crisis levels before any other G7 country.

This will not work here under the conditions that currently exist in the UK. Maybe the best bet would be to distribute a Citizen's Dividend where the quantitative easing money would be distributed evenly to all citizens/residents with NI numbers. This would be a direct injection into the economy but the weakness would be if most people would just save it.

Strange times ahead.

[Loz]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I haven't used a spreadsheet since the 90s, very rarely get excited about economics & have access

> to a SPARC T4 midrange computer [64 bit] linked to a SPARC M7 minicluster [256 bit] running

> customized software.

You bought servers with a 256 bit processors? That would be special. Like the only ones in the world...

[Blah Blah]

The problem with stimulus packages are that once the money is spent, the stimulus disappears, and then what?

I suspect a citizens dividend would be used for consumption on the whole, rather than investment, and would have little effect.

[????]

Still amazed that your models and analysis can do so much on now 12 days data ( including none on economic growth, employment, inflation, consumer spending at an aggregate etc etc) on a scenario, Brexit, of which we have no precedent and your modelling is based on no assumptions. Mmmmmmmm.

[????]

Of course the data you have there is no point in discussing with me , MM, yes, that's handy.

[Lordship 516]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lordship 516 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I haven't used a spreadsheet since the 90s, very

> rarely get excited about economics & have access

> > to a SPARC T4 midrange computer [64 bit] linked

> to a SPARC M7 minicluster [256 bit] running

> > customized software.

>

> You bought servers with a 256 bit processors?

> That would be special. Like the only ones in the

> world...

Not bought - that would be silly & a waste of good money - access, read the post.

Actual 64 bit per processor in a cluster that performs at 256 bits. All I care

about is results that are fast &reliable.

& yes it is special - even the highest performing PCs couldn't run data near fast enough to produce

output that is meaningful

[WorkingMummy]

To anyone really "feeling it" - the shock and dislocation of last week, you are not alone. Many feel it with you.

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2016/jul/01/susie-orbach-in-therapy-everyone-wants-to-talk-about-brexit

[WorkingMummy]

"wrong belief that everyone is going to be deported".

Yesterday, May confirmed that the status of EU citizens in this country is not guaranteed and it is one of the things that will need to be negotiated.

[Lordship 516]

WorkingMummy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "wrong belief that everyone is going to be

> deported".

>

> Yesterday, May confirmed that the status of EU

> citizens in this country is not guaranteed and it

> is one of the things that will need to be

> negotiated.

Contrast this with Angela Merkel's deputy...

Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel suggested that Germany could offer citizenship to young Britons, saying they shouldn?t be punished by the majority that voted to leave the European Union in the U.K. referendum.

?They wanted to stay in Europe because they know the world is changing and the U.K. can?t go it alone", Gabriel said in a speech to a Social Democratic Party conference in Berlin on Saturday. ?So it?s a good sign that young people in Britain are smarter than their strange political elite.?

[WorkingMummy]

Unfortunately apples to Britons in Germany. Nothing like that has been said by any main player here.

[Loz]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> > Lordship 516 Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

> > > I haven't used a spreadsheet since the 90s, very rarely get excited about economics & have access

> > > to a SPARC T4 midrange computer [64 bit] linked to a SPARC M7 minicluster [256 bit] running

> > > customized software.

> >

> > You bought servers with a 256 bit processors?

> > That would be special. Like the only ones in the

> > world...

>

> Not bought - that would be silly & a waste of good money - access, read the post.

> Actual 64 bit per processor in a cluster that performs at 256 bits.

Word sizes really don't work like that. And anyway, would be entirely unnecessary (and very wasteful) unless you are dealing with more than 16.8 million terabytes of RAM.

> & yes it is special - even the highest performing PCs couldn't run data near fast

> enough to produce output that is meaningful

No, it's a pretty bog-standard, off-the-shelf piece of kit. Yes, it will be much faster than a PC, but most servers are. Reuters, for instance, would have kit that makes that look like a development rig.

The software is probably more impressive than the hardware, but you have said little about that.

[Lordship 516]

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lordship 516 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Loz Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > > Lordship 516 Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > > > I haven't used a spreadsheet since the 90s,

> very rarely get excited about economics & have

> access

> > > > to a SPARC T4 midrange computer [64 bit]

> linked to a SPARC M7 minicluster [256 bit]

> running

> > > > customized software.

> > >

> > > You bought servers with a 256 bit processors?

>

> > > That would be special. Like the only ones in

> the

> > > world...

> >

> > Not bought - that would be silly & a waste of

> good money - access, read the post.

> > Actual 64 bit per processor in a cluster that

> performs at 256 bits.

>

> Word sizes really don't work like that. And

> anyway, would be entirely unnecessary (and very

> wasteful) unless you are dealing with more than

> 16.8 million terabytes of RAM.

>

> > & yes it is special - even the highest

> performing PCs couldn't run data near fast

> > enough to produce output that is meaningful

>

> No, it's a pretty bog-standard, off-the-shelf

> piece of kit. Yes, it will be much faster than a

> PC, but most servers are. Reuters, for instance,

> would have kit that makes that look like a

> development rig.

>

> The software is probably more impressive than the

> hardware, but you have said little about that.

My hardware guys are very happy with the kit, it is specifically set up to crunch numbers & large datasets - it runs 24/7/365 with a lot of redundancy to ensure virtual 100% uptime. We switched from UNIX to Linux years ago and are always refining that. We looked at leasing time on a Cray but it didn't offer any advantage except parallel processing & eats up money. We now have parallel processing available within Fortran 2008 using extensions.

Of course Reuters & any enterprise would have much more robust kit but ours is very dedicated - lean & mean. We use many suites of software, some of them doing specialised work but all feed into a customized program that we have developed over 40 years in FORTRAN. We use Fortran 2008, C++11, Julia, Matlab, Mathematica & Python; if we were starting out again we would probably still commit to Fortran 2008 but that is mainly based on the fact that we are older guys who program in Fortran like it is our mother tongue - sometimes we strip out redundant lines of code or insert routines of our own. We are looking at Trilinos as a possibility for specialized work in the future but that's a decision for younger guys & girls. It also depends on what you are modelling. Macro models require many inputs & blocks that might be resolved using a different program - our approach is incremental & modular; we generally use naive programming strategies but will also use a preprocessor to generate some FORTRAN statements[repetitive or complicated]. For corporate work we would use a different approach as might suit the circumstances.

Thats enough technical rubbish - too boring for EDF readers.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I have an ipad with a cracked screen

[Lordship 516]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Still amazed that your models and analysis can do

> so much on now 12 days data ( including none on

> economic growth, employment, inflation, consumer

> spending at an aggregate etc etc) on a scenario,

> Brexit, of which we have no precedent and your

> modelling is based on no assumptions. Mmmmmmmm.

You continue to misunderstand what modelling is - it is not a model like a mathematical or scientific proposition; there is no final result as the criteria are being refined continually. Sometimes all we have available are interpolation [Matlab] & extrapolation [different from assumptions] that are very sophisticated tools in the right hands but these are further interrogated & refined.

What we get is not a best guess of a model of the economy but a set of options or brackets that can be used for further discussion & analysis. If you look for a finite result it is rarely available but policy makers might opt for a set of assumptions that are then inputted into the model for simulation - this informs them of the likely consequences of their policy decisions - people often blame modelers but the old adage obtains - rubbish in, rubbish out. Companies will opt for their own assumptions with the resultant being options that they can use as a reference when implementing their policies or decisions. Unintended consequences can also rear their ugly head if the wrong questions or inputs are utilized. This is where the experience comes into play.

As to sharing data - this is confidential commercial information but there are lots of data coming out every day & plenty of statements that can be quantified, not in an accurate finite manner but we can put a cap & collar on them; so that is good data that can later be refined, narrowing our interpretation. None of the current statements being made by candidates are reliable as they are making statements for purposes that are not relevant to the real economy.

The point I would make is that the Treasury & BoE have as much data [& more] and they can see exactly what I can see. I can guarantee it scares the poop out of them. When all these party shenanigans are over, you will hear the harsh truths & the language will change.

[jaywalker]

I think the problem of not wanting to know about models is deeply symptomatic of what we are going through.

All school children should be taught

1. about the discovery of blood circulation. To paraphrase Bourdieu, before Harvey the ruling metaphor was of blood flow as an irrigation system. Empirically obvious because arteries and veins don't connect visibly. And you can put your arm up in the air and see the irrigation fluid drain back to the heart. So bleeding an excess of fluid perfectly rational in an attempt to cure people, but significantly, a model of retention that spills over to other ways of seeing the world. It took a SWITCH OF METAPHOR (not new observation) to see blood flow as circular. Until that moment modern medicine was impossible.

2. the same move was made by Keynes in the 1930s. Indeed, you can go to the science museum and see the 'circular flow' model of the UK economy in a machine invented by Phillips that encapsulated a basic Keynesian model with (it is said) red wine flowing through plastic tubes and reservoirs. Yet vestiges of the 'irrigation' model of the economy still abound, not least in public understanding.

The full horror of the lock-in to an irrigation understanding was Mercantilism. The economy (heart) produces gold (or we can grab it from the Spanish and French) and it flows through the national economy creating wealth. It is still probably the commonplace self-evidence - as few people have been taught to switch the metaphor. AT ALL COSTS do not let gold escape the economy, as that would mean less wealth. Economics as pure accumulation. So restrict imports - each time we buy some, wealth flows away. Don't let foreign workers earn money here as they will take it back home. Those who don't earn will just consume our gold (benefits, the nhs etc). These people will take our jobs. Enclose our country (lets have it back) so that we can accumulate more gold. We don't need models - we already have one! Studies that show that net immigration is positive for UK wealth are simply wrong (usual stupidity of experts).

Yet as soon as one switches to a circulation model all this is reconfigured as absolute nonsense. Wealth is accumulated through TRANSACTION with others. National currency that is acquired elsewhere RETURNS (else why did they want it?). Migrant workers are resources, adding to the potential of the economy (they also tend to be young and more dedicated workers).

So the stupidity of the referendum vote was partly (there are other, more worrying reasons) that the education system in the UK is so bad that few people step back to consider the importance of metaphors in their own and the public's understanding.

[miga]

Lordship 516 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> who program in Fortran

> like it is our mother tongue - sometimes we strip

> out redundant lines of code or insert routines of

> our own.

This made me chuckle....that's kind of what programming is.

[DaveR]

The definition of a model that I'm familiar with is:

"A representation of some aspect of the world which is based

on simplifying assumptions. A model is defined by a specification that describes the

matters that should be represented and the inputs and the

relationships between them, implemented through a set of

mathematical formulae and algorithms, and realised by using

an implementation to produce a set of outputs from inputs in

the form of data and parameters"

with the added caution that models are:

"inevitably simplifications of reality, and whose specifications,

implementations and realisations must be fit for purpose for the

information to be relied on"

So it's a fair question to ask what your data is and more pertinently what your assumptions are when you are confidently predicting doom and gloom and smugly patronising everyone else.

After all, it was f*cking quants and their models that got us into this mess in the first place.

Edited to add - I note on another thread you've said "Oh but our models are much better now". Well, maybe.