Anybody want to predict whether Dow Jones Industrials will reach 8000 this month?
Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t
where the global currency will be labor-time rather than some
national currency such as US$. One of the major parts of this
economy will be a "futures truth market" whereby anyone who wants
can post their estimate of low/high probability of some statement
turning out to be true at some particular time in the future, and
state how much of their labor-time assets they are willing to risk
taking bets at each end of the range. The best-estimate of the
probability at any time is then the narrowest bounds whose funds
haven't already been exhausted.
As a starter, to demonstrate how my idea works, I submit the
following proposition: The closing Dow Jones Industrials average at
the end of trading day 2009.March.31 will be 8000 or higher. What
do you-all think is the probability that this will come to pass?
Don't post your estimates here, because without taking a risk if
you are wrong, your estimates are worthless. Instead, go to
TinyURL.Com/FilJob and pass the Turing test, which will earn you
fifteen seconds of labor credit, and reveal to you one of my
first-contact e-mail addresses, then use that address to e-mail me
your estimate, together with how much of your fifteen seconds you
will be willing to risk taking bets (buy[back]/sell[short] orders)
at each end of your range-of-probabilities. All probabilities must
be in whole percent, and for this exercise with very limited funds
available all probabilities must in fact be multiples of ten
percent in order to make each whole transaction come out to whole
seconds. For example, tell me you estimate between 50% and 70%
chance of DJ 2009.Mar.31 closing 8000 or above, with 10 seconds
support for anyone else to buy from you (you sell short) at the
high end, and 5 seconds support for anyone else to sell short (you
buy) at the low end. Or you can "overbook" your range, whereby
whoever places an order first gets your funds. Thus you can offer
15 seconds at *each* end, first-come first-serve.
I'll collect the first several estimates, produce a report of what
bets can be placed at each end of the various ranges, and post that
report. Any of you, seeing my report, can then buy a future at the
"ask" price (high end), or sell-short a future at the "bid" price
(low end), by sending me e-mail again with statement of what
purchase/sale you wish to make and how much of your funds you're
willing to use for that purpose, and I'll check if bets are still
available at or better than the price you specify, and if you have
enough funds in your account to make at least a minimal bet, and if
so I'll execute your purchase or sale. For the moment, I'll do this
all almost manually, but if lots of people join this experiment
then I might automate parts of the process.
Note that if you make some profit during early trading, by buying
low then selling high, or selling-short high then buying-back low,
you will then have more labor-time in your account, and therefore
can cover larger orders at each end of your range as the contract
due date approaches. If DJ is below 8000 but very close to it late
in Mar.31 trading day, you could make huge profits if you are
smart!
Note:
- If you buy, you pay full price, i.e. the maximum you might lose
if the final value turns out to be 0 (if DJ<8000).
(No buying on margin. No margin calls. No going into debt.)
- If you sell-short, you must put into escroll the maximum you
might lose if the final value is 1 (if DJ>=8000). (No short-cover calls.
No going into debt.)
- If you sell something you previously bought, you collect the sale
price immediately.
- If you buy back something you previously shorted, escroll goes to
zero, with some of it used to pay for the buy back and the rest
going back to your account.
Hurry, only 4 more shopping days until end of month!
Note: In your initial e-mail, please tell me whether you want your
current account-balance and escroll-balance reported along with the
probability ranges, or keep your balances confidential. Also
whether you want your probability ranges to be named or anonymous.
As March 31 approaches, I expect probability ranges to drift upward
towards 1 if DJ has already passed 8000 temporarily during trading
or is getting really close to 8000 with trend upward, and I expect
probability ranges to drift downward towards 0 if DJ stays well
below 8000 as end-of-month approaches. At the end of Mar.31 I'll
try to check three sources to verify I got the final result
correct, then I'll pay off all holdings per the result and report
everyone's final account balance (these will *not* be confidential,
only interim balances etc. have option of confidential).
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> In the very near future, I'll be setting up a new kind of economy
> where the global currency will be labor-time rather than some
> national currency such as US$.
Good luck with that.
What will you do with the guys who stand around with their thumbs up their
asses? Or have no skills, and can only work as a weak little "laborer"?
Will the hard workers, who can output triple the average work be content
to bust their asses with no extra pay? Or will they slack off?
Marx had the idea first. Stalin realized how to make it happen.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russell
Strabo
> In misc.survivalism Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t <seeWeb...@rem.intarweb.org> wrote:
>
>> In the very near future, I'll be setting up a new kind of economy
>> where the global currency will be labor-time rather than some
>> national currency such as US$.
>
> Good luck with that.
>
> What will you do with the guys who stand around with their thumbs up their
> asses? Or have no skills, and can only work as a weak little "laborer"?
> Will the hard workers, who can output triple the average work be content
> to bust their asses with no extra pay? Or will they slack off?
>
Apparently you've not read of Siberian labor camps.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
Apparently you didn't read where I said "Stalin realized hw to make it
happen".
Dan
Or AIG's annual report.
Dan
Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t
> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 07:12:24 -0700
> ... "futures truth market" whereby anyone who wants
> can post their estimate of low/high probability of some statement
> turning out to be true at some particular time in the future, and
> state how much of their labor-time assets they are willing to risk
> taking bets at each end of the range. The best-estimate of the
> probability at any time is then the narrowest bounds whose funds
> haven't already been exhausted.
> As a starter, to demonstrate how my idea works, I submit the
> following proposition: The closing Dow Jones Industrials average at
> the end of trading day 2009.March.31 will be 8000 or higher. What
> do you-all think is the probability that this will come to pass?
..
> Hurry, only 4 more shopping days until end of month!
Update: That time has now passed and the commodity has now closed.
AFAIK DJ didn't get to 8000 during March, so the value of the future is zero.
More update: Today (Apr.02) after G20 summit produced an 8-point
plan for rescuing the economy, including 1 trillion US$ (most to
IMF) and strict rules about safe havens for hedge funds, the market
rallied, and briefly passed 8000 before closing below 8000.
I therefore propose two new truth-futures:
- Will DJIA close 8000 or above Friday this week (Apr.03)?
- Will DJIA close 8000 or above Friday next week (Apr.10)?
See original article in this thread for how to submit your estimate
of these futures and offers to put up labor-capital to support
bid/ask on your estimates.
hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com
http://tinyurl.com/uh3t) wrote:
> > From: seeWebInst...@rem.intarweb.org (Robert Maas,http://tinyurl.com/uh3t)
No $1T to the IMF. Is Obama sniffing white powder again?
Pers3id
news:cec6e2d5-b567-4f81...@b16g2000yqb.googlegroups.com:
He must be. The only buyer for that much toxic US Gov't debt
would be the US Federal Reserve Bank (and they'd hafta print).
--
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the
issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation,
the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will
deprive the people of all property until their children wake up
homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe
that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties
than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from
the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly
belongs."
--Thomas Jefferson
Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t
> > where the global currency will be labor-time rather than some
> > national currency such as US$.
> Good luck with that.
> What will you do with the guys who stand around with their thumbs
> up their asses?
They won't be able to complete a contract regardless of how much
time they say they will require, so even if nobody else bids and
they get the contract for a ridiculously high price they won't get
paid. Of course if they stand stand around with their thumbs up
their asses only 90% of the time, and spend the remaining 10% of
the time getting work done, they might be able to complete the
contract during that 10% of the contract time, so then I hope
somebody else bids lower to take the contract away from the
ass-thumber at a more reasonable bid-price.
> Or have no skills, and can only work as a weak little "laborer"?
Everyone has *some* skills. Somebody as you describe would get (and
complete) a contract only on rare occasion, so my system would give
them a chance to work on improving their skills, while giving them
some tiny income in addition to their public assistance, rather
than provide them with a good source of income.
> Will the hard workers, who can output triple the average work be
> content to bust their asses with no extra pay?
If they're currently unemployed, my system will give them practice
working for other people, plus some small amount of income, and
give them something to put on their resumes, so that when the
recession is over they can show recent work and get a job. If they
already have a good job, they won't join my system.
Also, any time there is a shortage of labor in their speciality,
they can bid more hours than they would really require for the job,
and nobody will under-bid them, so they can get paid more than they
actually require to do the job, and because of the slack time in
their contracts they don't have to worry about contingencies
causing them to fail to complete the contract.
> Or will they slack off?
Not if they want to get paid for completing each contract. I would
guess that anyone three times as productive per unit time compared
to a true minimum-wage worker will bid on contracts that fill time
24/7, spending 1/3 of the time actually doing the work, and the
rest of the time as slack in case a task takes longer than
expected, time to bid on new contracts to start as soon as the
current contract is done, and to allow time for sleep and
recreation. Thus such a person would get paid the equivalent of
$8/hr 24/7 i.e. $8*24*7=$1344/week which is pretty good pay during
a recession.
Alternately, somebody worth 3*minWage could get two accounts on my
system, and contract 24/7 on each account, getting the equivalent
of $2688/week, if they were willing to *really* work 16 hours per
day. Somebody worth ten times minimum wage could inflate bids by a
factor of ten, if nobody else could do the same work in less time
than the bids, and thus get the equivalent of $80/hr for the actual
work, for $1344/week per account, and use multiple accounts to fit
in as many hours as the person wanted to work at $80/hr. But there
are very few jobs where nobody else can also do the work and is
willing to arrange inflated hours less than factor of 10 i.e.
$80/hr, so most people who have been expecting such high wages
under the old economic system will quickly discover there *are*
others who can do the same work and are willing to do it for less
pay, so with competition for lowest bid, inflated wages under the
current system will drop to a fair price for that skilled labor.
> Marx had the idea first. Stalin realized how to make it happen.
No, Marx had a completely different idea, a safety net in the form
of direct handouts of cash for anyone who was needy but couldn't
work and slavery for anyone who was able to do useful work. My
sustem would offer handouts of jobs for anyone who wants them, but
pay only if they complete the work, everyone working at the same
minimum wage (except where labor is scarce compared to jobs, where
bidding more than the actual needed time would still get contracts,
such as the example in the previous paragraph).
> The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are
> always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of
> doubts. -- Bertrand Russell
I take it he wasn't aware of Albert Einstein and his photo-electric
theory and his special relativity and his general relativity, where
AE was quite sure of himself and he was also correct? Or did BR
intend that remark to refer only to *most* people, not to those
rare exceptions such as AE?
On the one hand, over recent months I've become more and more
confident that my proposed new economic system will be really good
for the world, and my only major doubt is whether others will like
the idea enough to join my system to make it actually work, but
still I am not certain that it's a good idea in the first place,
just that I can't see anything wrong with it yet, and all the
quibbles stated by others so-far have been answered by me to show
the quibbles are mistaken and my idea is right after all. At the
moment, I am treating my NewEco as an "experiment" which I believe
will "work" until and unless I discover it doesn't "work". Would
you like to lay a wager as to whether my NewEco, if implmented,
will or will not "work"?
By the way, I've updated <tinyurl.com/NewEco> and I've started my
entry portal for creating user accounts and then logging in
<tinyurl.com/Portl1>, so in a few more days perhaps it'll be
possible for you to at least log into my system, even if the rest
of it isn't yet written. Right now at least you can see the general
framework for passing a Turing test at each level of menu prior to
being logged in, which should offer reasonable protection from dDOS
floods from botnets. It takes only about 1 millisecond to
completely execute my PHP script, so it would take a awfully large
dDOS flood to overwealm the server so much that legitimate users
couldn't get service to allow them to log in. And once a particular
user is logged in, he'd be redirected to a new PHP-script URL that
nobody else knows about, basically a per-user-session "disposable
URL", that is a clone of a master script that *nobody* knows about,
so that any user who gives his personal session URL to a botnet
hurts only himself.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> > > where the global currency will be labor-time rather than some
> > > national currency such as US$.
> > From: EskWI...@spamblock.panix.com
> > Good luck with that.
> > What will you do with the guys who stand around with their thumbs
> > up their asses?
> They won't be able to complete a contract
What contract?
regardless of how much
> time they say they will require, so even if nobody else bids and
> they get the contract for a ridiculously high price they won't get
> paid. Of course if they stand stand around with their thumbs up
> their asses only 90% of the time, and spend the remaining 10% of
> the time getting work done, they might be able to complete the
> contract during that 10% of the contract time, so then I hope
> somebody else bids lower to take the contract away from the
> ass-thumber at a more reasonable bid-price.
How does this "bid" and "contract" system work?
> > Or have no skills, and can only work as a weak little "laborer"?
> Everyone has *some* skills. Somebody as you describe would get (and
> complete) a contract only on rare occasion, so my system would give
> them a chance to work on improving their skills,
Who pays for free schools?
while giving them
> some tiny income in addition to their public assistance, rather
> than provide them with a good source of income.
> > Will the hard workers, who can output triple the average work be
> > content to bust their asses with no extra pay?
> If they're currently unemployed, my system will give them practice
> working for other people, plus some small amount of income, and
> give them something to put on their resumes, so that when the
> recession is over they can show recent work and get a job. If they
> already have a good job, they won't join my system.
So your system is totally voluntary? How does it differ from what is
already in pace?
> Also, any time there is a shortage of labor in their speciality,
> they can bid more hours than they would really require for the job,
> and nobody will under-bid them, so they can get paid more than they
> actually require to do the job, and because of the slack time in
> their contracts they don't have to worry about contingencies
> causing them to fail to complete the contract.
So the higher skilled folks get paid more for same time expenditure? How
is that different from what we do today?
> > Or will they slack off?
> Not if they want to get paid for completing each contract. I would
> guess that anyone three times as productive per unit time compared
> to a true minimum-wage worker will bid on contracts that fill time
> 24/7, spending 1/3 of the time actually doing the work, and the
> rest of the time as slack in case a task takes longer than
> expected, time to bid on new contracts to start as soon as the
> current contract is done, and to allow time for sleep and
> recreation. Thus such a person would get paid the equivalent of
> $8/hr 24/7 i.e. $8*24*7=$1344/week which is pretty good pay during
> a recession.
How does that differ from the way some independent contractors do things
today?
> Alternately, somebody worth 3*minWage could get two accounts on my
> system, and contract 24/7 on each account, getting the equivalent
> of $2688/week, if they were willing to *really* work 16 hours per
> day. Somebody worth ten times minimum wage could inflate bids by a
> factor of ten, if nobody else could do the same work in less time
> than the bids, and thus get the equivalent of $80/hr for the actual
> work, for $1344/week per account, and use multiple accounts to fit
> in as many hours as the person wanted to work at $80/hr.
But I thought the unit of currency was "hours worked". What you just
ssaid seems to be the same as what we do now. How is it different?
But there
> are very few jobs where nobody else can also do the work and is
> willing to arrange inflated hours less than factor of 10 i.e.
> $80/hr, so most people who have been expecting such high wages
> under the old economic system will quickly discover there *are*
> others who can do the same work and are willing to do it for less
> pay, so with competition for lowest bid, inflated wages under the
> current system will drop to a fair price for that skilled labor.
Why doesn't that happen now? Why would any employer pay $80/hour when
they can get skilled help for less?
> > Marx had the idea first. Stalin realized how to make it happen.
> No, Marx had a completely different idea, a safety net in the form
> of direct handouts of cash for anyone who was needy but couldn't
> work and slavery for anyone who was able to do useful work.
How much of Marx's work have you read? ISTM that you are describing
Stalin, adnot Marx.
My
> sustem would offer handouts of jobs for anyone who wants them,
Who will pay for the make-work?
but
> pay only if they complete the work, everyone working at the same
> minimum wage (except where labor is scarce compared to jobs, where
> bidding more than the actual needed time would still get contracts,
> such as the example in the previous paragraph).
> > The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are
> > always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of
> > doubts. -- Bertrand Russell
> I take it he wasn't aware of Albert Einstein and his photo-electric
> theory and his special relativity and his general relativity, where
> AE was quite sure of himself and he was also correct? Or did BR
> intend that remark to refer only to *most* people, not to those
> rare exceptions such as AE?
I think it would be fair to insert "generally" at the appropriate place.
> On the one hand, over recent months I've become more and more
> confident that my proposed new economic system will be really good
> for the world, and my only major doubt is whether others will like
> the idea enough to join my system to make it actually work, but
> still I am not certain that it's a good idea in the first place,
I don't understand how it is any different from our present system.
--
Beam Me Up Scotty
I think it'll still hit 5000 before Obama is run out of Office.
Robert Maas, http://tinyurl.com/uh3t
> > > > where the global currency will be labor-time rather than some
> > > > national currency such as US$.
> > > What will you do with the guys who stand around with their thumbs
> > > up their asses?
> > They won't be able to complete a contract
> What contract?
See: <http://www.rawbw.com/~rem/Pub/EcoWeb/newEco-FAQ.html#contracts>
> How does this "bid" and "contract" system work?
ibid
> > > Or have no skills, and can only work as a weak little "laborer"?
> > Everyone has *some* skills. Somebody as you describe would get (and
> > complete) a contract only on rare occasion, so my system would give
> > them a chance to work on improving their skills,
> Who pays for free schools?
Who said anything about free schools (except the ones we already
have)? Somebody with only very weak skills would get a job only
when the job is super easy and nobody else bids for the job because
they're all busy with other jobs (contracts) at the moment. But
even that super easy job would stretch their skills a teensy bit,
and over many such easy jobs they'd start to pick up enough skills
to perform slightly more difficult tasks, allowing them to get
contracts more often than before.
> > If they're currently unemployed, my system will give them practice
> > working for other people, plus some small amount of income, and
> > give them something to put on their resumes, so that when the
> > recession is over they can show recent work and get a job. If they
> > already have a good job, they won't join my system.
> So your system is totally voluntary?
Yes.
> How does it differ from what is already in p[l]ace?
At present there's no way somebody can see a bunch of contracts
available and bid on some of them and land one of them and do some
little bit of work and get paid shortly after completion of the
work. And there's no system where *anybody* can do some work to
earn work-credits and then immediately use those to post Request
For Bids to shortly hire others to work for him. If you know of any
such system in existance, tell me, because I'd like to bid on some
work. Otherwise, my <tinyurl.com/NewEco> will be the first such
system.
> > Also, any time there is a shortage of labor in their speciality,
> > they can bid more hours than they would really require for the job,
> > and nobody will under-bid them, so they can get paid more than they
> > actually require to do the job, and because of the slack time in
> > their contracts they don't have to worry about contingencies
> > causing them to fail to complete the contract.
> So the higher skilled folks get paid more for same time expenditure?
Only if there's no competition. In this economy, even people with
20+ years experience are willing to work at minimum legal wage
($8/hr), or even for *free* to impress a potential employer, so the
competition for any but the very most skill-requiring tasks would
bid the price down to the bare minimum of how long it'd take for
the *most* productive worker to finish the job.
> How is that different from what we do today?
There's no work at all available for unemployed people, even people
with 20+ years experience writing computer software.
> How does that differ from the way some independent contractors do
> things today?
There's no InterNet site where people wishing to work for a few
minutes at a new task can find listings of such tasks and apply for
them and get the tasks assigned to them and then perform the tasks
and get paid. It's really really difficult to find customers
without any job-board to show you who wants work done and allow you
to apply for such work. For example, I've been trying to do
independent contract work for the past 16 years without any luck
whatsoever.
> ... I thought the unit of currency was "hours worked".
It's hours worked per contract. If you complete the contract early,
you still get paid the full amount, no penalty for finishing early.
The only penalty for bidding more than it'll actually take you is
if somebody else of equal skills bids more honestly and gets the
contract instead of you.
> What you just said seems to be the same as what we do now.
Not at all. There's no system today to match workers with
contracts. Like I said, if you know of any, show it to me, because
I'd love to have some paying work for the first time in 16 years.
> > But there
> > are very few jobs where nobody else can also do the work and is
> > willing to arrange inflated hours less than factor of 10 i.e.
> > $80/hr, so most people who have been expecting such high wages
> > under the old economic system will quickly discover there *are*
> > others who can do the same work and are willing to do it for less
> > pay, so with competition for lowest bid, inflated wages under the
> > current system will drop to a fair price for that skilled labor.
> Why doesn't that happen now?
Because employers have a stupid mind-set that the only people worth
hiring are people who already have jobs, that anyone unemployed
must be worthless. Under my system, anyone can bid on a contract,
even unemployed people, and get paid, if they can do the work,
which brings highly-skilled but currently unemployed people back
into paid-productivity.
> Why would any employer pay $80/hour when they can get skilled
> help for less?
Moot question, because in fact they would *not*. You seem to have
missed the point above, that only when there's no competition for a
job because it's ultra-specialized would the one bidder be able to
inflate hours needed in the contract to in effect get ten times
minimum wage. Under the current system, that employee who can do
the very rare task nobody else can do would be able to get $200 per
hour, because the employer is afraid to lose him, and then because
of the full-time work situation the employer would pay $200/hr
*all* the time instead of only when the employee is doing the task
only he can do. Under my system, for any task somebody else can do,
another bidder would jump in and take the job at a much lower
price. And usually in fact there are at least two people in the
world who can do the job, only one of which the employer knows
about or has access to under the current system, but under my
system *both* people would be bidding on the same tasks, which
would bid down the price.
> > My sustem would offer handouts of jobs for anyone who wants them,
> Who will pay for the make-work?
You're knocking a straw man again. I said nothing about make-work
in the sense of making up bogus tasks just to have something for
somebody to do. Every job under my system would be something
somebody really wants done and is willing to pay for.
> > On the one hand, over recent months I've become more and more
> > confident that my proposed new economic system will be really good
> > for the world, and my only major doubt is whether others will like
> > the idea enough to join my system to make it actually work, but
> > still I am not certain that it's a good idea in the first place,
> I don't understand how it is any different from our present system.
Please read the FAQ item and my answers above and see if you still
feel there's no difference.
> The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are
> always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of
> doubts.
Note that I'm not certain, just getting more and more confident
that my idea is good and hence we really should try it to see if it
really is good. By the way, Tuesday I met with a couple guys who
are business experts, meeting arranged by the local Chamber of
Commerce, and after the meeting one of them explicitly said he
thought I had a good idea. The main quibble one of them had during
the meeting was that he thought my self-organizing truth-futures,
part of the NewEco system, would result in chaos, but he
interrupted me before I could explain how a "reverse tree" combined
with the truth-futures market would (I expect) work to avoid chaos.
EskW...@spamblock.panix.com
> > How does it differ from what is already in p[l]ace?
> At present there's no way somebody can see a bunch of contracts
> available and bid on some of them and land one of them and do some
> little bit of work and get paid shortly after completion of the
> work. And there's no system where *anybody* can do some work to
> earn work-credits and then immediately use those to post Request
> For Bids to shortly hire others to work for him. If you know of any
> such system in existance, tell me, because I'd like to bid on some
> work. Otherwise, my <tinyurl.com/NewEco> will be the first such
> system.
ISTM that you want to automate the day laborer market.
--
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
-- Bertrand Russell