Random Walk & Business

Here's a speculation: Proponents of the efficient market hypothosis are bright but unsucsessful busimessmen.

They have be bright in order to understand the theory behind it. However, business suceed when there is a discrepancy between the theory and the actual. Business thrives on finding inefficiency, and taking advantage of it.

That's how the financial world makes its money as well. 

Someone who doesn't belive that there is a discrepancy between the theory and the actual must not be able to detect it well, and therefore can't do well in business.

Corporate vs. Gov't Services.

Many government services are being replaced by private corporations. For example, security firms, private schools, and insurance companies are taking over where the government leaves off.

In the future, the domain of private corporations will expand, as the scale and power of those corporations increase. The gov't services will be minimized.

Public Participation In Gov't Decision Making

Why do we have reprisentatives in government?

In the old days, it was impractical to ask every citizen what they thought about the issue. However, modern technology renders this reason void.

The assumption is that the reprisentative knows better than you. Howver, many citizens are well informed about the issues at hand. Much more so than in the "old days"

I suggest that citizens be given a greater part in government decision making, in correlation with the ease of communication, and greater knowledge of citizens.

Ecomomic Efficiency And Size

Businesses make money by filling inefficiencies in the market.

That's how stock traders make money, and all businesses follow the same basic path. They identify some gap between supply and demand (an inefficiency) and they bridge that gap, making the economy flow.

The greater the size of the inefficieny, the grater the prospects of the business. 

That's why small countries with small economies are at a disadvantage. Because the ecomomy is smaller, the size of the inefficiency must be greater to make a living solving it. Hence, small economies are destined to be more inefficient. That means, it's harder to do business, and the quality of life is also reduced.

The solotion for such small economies is to form solid alliances with other countries.

Government Accomodation = Encouragement.

The title pretty much says it all. Often governments wish to accomodate for situations that shouldn't be there in the first place. However, government accomodation is tantamount to support. 

For example, when a government helps flooded communities near the mississipi, they are actually supporting development there. Similarly, when it bails out banks, it's encouraging risky investement.

However, without addressing the long term "encouragement" issue, the government is doing more harm than help.

Systematic Palestinian / Israeli Solution

Any long term solution for the Palestinian / Israeli Problem must be systematic. In other words, the solution must be to alter the current system in a way that the natural forces at play support the solution.

The reason is simple: the strength of a basic national system is greater than the power of the government, because the government is a part of that system. If the system fights against the solution, it will prevail with time.

Hence, reliance of constant military enforcement cannot be a part of the solution. Also, economic and social systems must support the solution.

These ideas imply that a two state solution can only be short term, for the following reasons:

1. As long as the nations are still hostile toward each other, constant military enforcement is necessary.
2. The West Bank and Gaza are dependent on Israel for it's electricity, water, employment, transportation, and many commodities. That is a part of a system which promotes the unity and integration of the two territories.
3. There are many Arabs in Israel, and many Israelis in the West Bank. This also is part of a cultural system which promotes integration, and thwarts separation.
4. Many Arab and Israeli powers with public support fight for a one state solution, they only disagree on it's nature.
   

Any solution must either accommodate for or change the cultural, security oriented, and practical systems on the ground.

The puzzle is not how to divide the land, but how to create one stable country grounded solidly in basic existing systems.

Terrorism as a Zero Sum Game

Negotiation has no place in a zero sum game. Here is why.

The basis for real negotiations, excluding manipulation and trickery, is finding the best win-win situation. In a zero sum game, any one player's gain is the other's loss, so there can be no win-win situation.

In a friendly chess game, the scope is defined, so negotiations outside the game make sense. However, in a game with no limit to it's scope, even those topics which seem to have no direct pertinence to the fight, are non-negotiable.

Hence, any party playing a zero-sum game that initiates negotiations of any sort should be suspect.

Terrorist organizations who's sole mission is the elimination of their targets are playing a zero sum game with their targets. This definition excludes terror-supporting countries or organizations that use terrorist methods, but have other goals besides the elimination of their targets.

That is why negotiation or "talks" of any sort with terror organizations should be avoided.