More of my philosophy about the financial market and about capitalism and about the markets and more..

13 views
Skip to first unread message

World-News2100

unread,
Oct 16, 2021, 3:43:41 PM10/16/21
to
Hello,



More of my philosophy about the financial market and about capitalism
and about the markets and more..

I am a white arab from Morocco, and i think i am smart since i have also
invented many scalable algorithms and algorithms..

As you have just noticed i have just spoken about the markets and about
globalization and about capitalism, read my thoughts below about it, and
now i will talk more about the financial market:

I think that the stock market crashes can be due to economic or natural
disasters, speculation, or investor panic, but i also think that
it is the "control" over the factors of speculation and investment panic
that is the most important that permits to prevent a stock market crash,
so first we have to know that an investor is concerned with the
fundamental value of his investment, whereas a speculator is only
concerned with market price movement, and here is my thoughts about how
to avoid stock market crash:

More philosophy about the future of financial stability and cyber risk..

I have just read rapidly the following very interesting article,
i invite you to read it carefully:

The future of financial stability and cyber risk

https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-future-of-financial-stability-and-cyber-risk/

I think that we have to be positive about the future of financial
stability and cyber risk, since notice that the financial stability
depends on three things:

1- Leverage
2- Maturity and Risk Transformation
3- Procyclicality of the price of risk

Read the above article to notice it, but i think that for the first two,
i mean Leverage and Maturity and Risk Transformation, the financial
institutions have not to put all the eggs in the same basket, so
they need to diversify the risk correctly by diversifying portfolios
etc., and for the third that is the Procyclicality of the price of risk,
i think that it is less risky since it depends on the "asset" prices
that are diversified to a certain level, and for the cyber risk i am
positive since i think we are getting much more sophisticated in cyber
security. So i remain positive.

And my above thoughts are related to how i will invest more for my
retirement etc. as follows, read my following thoughts so that to
understand my way of doing about it:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/h4FblBWnNHk

More of my philosophy about markets and about globalization and
about capitalism..

I invite you to read the following paper on Foreign Market Servicing
Strategies:

https://idjs.ca/images/rcsr/archives/V21N2-Buckley-et-al.pdf

And as you are noticing that the main important information
on the above paper is that the financial markets are substantially
integrated so that the world financial market can, for many purposes, be
regarded as a single market. And the market for goods and services is
differentiated on a regional basis with 'single markets' either existing
or emerging (especially in the cases of the EU and NAFTA). Such markets
are increasingly uniform in regulation, standards, codes of practice
(for example, anti-trust) and in business behaviour. They offer the
possibility of economies of scale across the market that also reduces
costs of products and services, but are substantially differentiated by
these aforementioned factors (and possibly by a common external tariff)
from other regional markets. Labour markets, however, remain primarily
national. Governments wish to regulate their own labour markets and to
differentiate them (to protect them) from neighbouring labour markets.
Many of the current difficulties in governmental regulatory policy arise
from the difficulty of attempting to pursue independent labour market
policies in the presence of regional goods and services markets and an
international market for capital.

Also like in the below article about Canada, agility and flexibility is
really important in organisations of multinational firms, and as
you notice it means that you have to be adaptable, progressive and
responsive, so this needs new talents and skills, and you can read
the following article about why Canada is the No. 1 Country in the
World, According to the 2021 Best Countries Report and you will notice
that Canada is also better at adaptablility than USA, read the following
article so that to understand:

https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/canada-is-the-no-1-country-in-the-world-according-to-the-2021-best-countries-report-867033906.html

So then i will also say that it is paramount that the Government
prioritises innovation. Since the competitive advantage depends on the
ability to develop and commercialise new ideas as well as the ability of
businesses to adopt technology and become more productive.

More and more about globalization..

1- Globalization has created new opportunities for firms to develop
business models and offerings that have a higher intensity of R&D,
innovation and capital. Many of the goods and services that have entered
the market over the past decades have exactly those features, and
without globalization, firms would have been forced to continue with
business models that work with a smaller volume of sales. Firms have
been able to specialize more than before and, as a consequence, human
capital and the share of skilled jobs in the economy have grown
remarkably. Today, advanced economies have a greater share of
better-paid and better-skilled jobs than ever before.


2- Globalization has increased real wages for people in Western
economies by making products cheaper or reducing the pace of price
increases. If the typical goods that every household purchases had
followed domestic rather than international price developments,
consumers would have been poorer and saddled with products of lower quality.


3- Globalization has made significant contributions to productivity
growth and, as a consequence, further raised living standards.
Globalization has been particularly important for enabling new
technology to spread fast across markets. In the long term, it is the
speed of technological improvement that sets the pace for how richer
societies get.

However, trade and investment are not growing fast anymore, and there is
much suggesting that the decline in trade and investment growth is one
explanation to the failing dynamism of Western economies. While some
appreciate the decline in the growth of globalization, those who care
about the prosperity of a society should deplore it and make efforts for
the world economy to return to high levels of trade growth.

Read the following study to know more about globalization:

The Economic Benefits of Globalization for Business and Consumers

http://ecipe.org/publications/the-economic-benefits-of-globalization-for-business-and-consumers/

And yet more philosophy about Globalization..

I think that globalization is a good thing, but you have to be smart
and know how to take advantage of it, so i invite you to read
the following about the positive effects of Globalization on developing
countries such as:

1- Globalization has permitted developed nations to invest in less
developed nations which has lead to creation of jobs for poor people.

2- The health and education system in developing countries has benefited
in a positive way due to the contribution of globalization.

So i invite you to read the following article to notice it:

The effects of Globalization on developing countries

Read more here:

https://medium.com/@BonillaXM/the-effects-of-globalization-on-developing-countries-1e465257c400

And how to manage efficiently complexity ?

As i said before, notice how i am talking about how we have not to have
a narrow view of what is smartness, and notice how i am talking about
the distributed smartness as rules etc. so i think i can logically infer
from my below thoughts the other way of solving the greatly complex
systems that is not by like "planning" the whole system from a
centralized government, but by emergence of a higher level intelligence
from distributing like the rules or.. into the small parts of the system
that will solve the greatly complex system, it looks like the
evolutionary design and planning, and it looks like the way of the
higher level smartness from an Ant colony, since in an Ant colony there
is no central government, but there is a distributed intelligence that
needs a kind of diversity of genetics of the members of the colony and
it needs like a distributed rules that the members have to follow that
will make emerge a higher level of intelligence. And of course it looks
like evolutionary algorithms in artificial intelligence, since the
advantage of evolutionary algorithms in artificial intelligence is that
they don't plan in advance but they search by like following some
distributed rules, and of course they need some "randomness" so that to
not get stuck in a local optimum, this is why i am talking below about
how to make our civilization that is a complex system much more
resilient by learning how to learn to humans with like a set
of rules like in an Ant colony by saying the following and notice
that the learning how to learn can be an efficient abstraction that
helps a lot:

More of my philosophy about how i am more happy and more..

I think that i am much more happy since i am understanding that being
happy is like a lifestyle that is based on some efficient rules that
permit the emergence of happiness, and i will talk about it more in my
new philosophy, so i think that we even need some important rules so
that to be a much more resilient civilization, since i think that there
is the way of learning people how to become an engineer, but this way of
doing is lacking very much, and there is also the way of learning people
how to learn that also permits to efficiently take advantage of this
sophisticated tool that we call internet, so i think that this way of
learning how to learn to people does make our civilization much more
resilient, since the way of "specialization" of our today civilization
is also a "weakness" that has to be solved much more efficiently by the
way of learning people how to learn on internet etc. and here is my
new proverb that talks about it:

"I think what is happening in the West and other parts of the world,
it is that individuals are becoming too stupid, since it is the way of
specialization that is required, since the individuals are specialized
in there jobs so that to enhance much more the efficiency and
productivity as a society or as group, but this specialization is a
weakness that is making individuals too stupid, but we can become smart
working as a group or as a society using the tools of internet etc."

And here is my thoughts about artificial intelligence and evolutionary
algorithms in artificial intelligence:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.culture.morocco/c/P9OTDTiCZ44

Also I think you can manage complexity by the “divide and rule” approach
to management, which also leads to hierarchical division of large
organisations, or wich also leads to the Division of "labour", you can
read more about the Division of labour here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_labour

Also you can manage complexity by using constraints, such as laws, road
rules and commercial standards, all of which limit the potential for
harmful interactions to occur, also you can manage complexity by using
higher layers of abstraction such as in computer programming, and we can
also follow the efficient rule of: "Do less and do it better" that can
also use higher level layers of abstraction to enhance productivity and
quality, this rule is good for productivity and quality, and about
productivity: I have also just posted about the following thoughts from
the following PhD computer scientist:

https://lemire.me/blog/about-me/


Read more here his thoughts about productivity:


https://lemire.me/blog/2012/10/15/you-cannot-scale-creativity/


And i think he is making a mistake:


Since we have that Productivity = Output/Input


But better human training and/or better tools and/or better human
smartness and/or better human capacity can make the Parallel
productivity part much bigger that the Serial productivity part, so it
can scale much more (it is like Gustafson's Law).


And it looks like the following:


About parallelism and about Gustafson’s Law..


Gustafson’s Law:


• If you increase the amount of work done by each parallel
task then the serial component will not dominate
• Increase the problem size to maintain scaling
• Can do this by adding extra complexity or increasing the overall
problem size


Scaling is important, as the more a code scales the larger a machine it
can take advantage of:


• can consider weak and strong scaling
• in practice, overheads limit the scalability of real parallel programs
• Amdahl’s law models these in terms of serial and parallel fractions
• larger problems generally scale better: Gustafson’s law


Load balance is also a crucial factor.


So read my following thoughts about the Threadpool to notice that my
Threadpool that scales very well does Load balance well:


---


About the Threadpool..


I have just read the following:


Concurrency - Throttling Concurrency in the CLR 4.0 ThreadPool


https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/msdn-magazine/2010/september/concurrency-throttling-concurrency-in-the-clr-4-0-threadpool


But i think that both the methodologies from Microsoft of the Hill
Climbing and of the Control Theory using band pass filter or match
filter and discrete Fourier transform have a weakness, there weakness is
that they are "localized" optimization that maximize the throughput ,
so they are not fair, so i don't think i will implement them, so then
you can use my following invention of an efficient Threadpool engine
with priorities that scales very well (and you can use a second
Threadpool for IO etc.):


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well


And here is my other Threadpool engine with priorities:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/threadpool-engine-with-priorities


And read my following previous thoughts to understand more:


About the strategy of "work depth-first; steal breadth-first"..


I have just read the following webpage:


Why Too Many Threads Hurts Performance, and What to do About It


https://www.codeguru.com/cpp/sample_chapter/article.php/c13533/Why-Too-Many-Threads-Hurts-Performance-and-What-to-do-About-It.htm


Also I have just looked at the following interesting video about Go
scheduler and Go concurrency:


Dmitry Vyukov — Go scheduler: Implementing language with lightweight
concurrency


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K11rY57K7k


And i have just read the following webpage about the Threadpool of
microsoft .NET 4.0:


https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/jennifer/2009/06/26/work-stealing-in-net-4-0/


And as you are noticing the first web link above is speaking about the
strategy of "work depth-first; steal breadth-first" , but we have to be
more smart because i think that this strategy, that is advantageous for
cache locality, works best for recursive algorithms, because a thread is
taking the first task and after that the algorithm is recursive, so it
will put the childs tasks inside the local work-stealing queue, and
the other threads will start to take from the work-stealing queue, so
the work will be distributed correctly, but as you will notice that
this strategy works best for recursive algorithms, but when you you
iteratively start many tasks, i think we will have much more contention
on the work-stealing queue and this is a weakness of this strategy,
other than that when it is not a recursive algorithm and the threads are
receiving from the global queue so there will be high contention on
the global queue and this is not good. MIT's Cilk and Go scheduler and
the Threadpool of Microsoft and Intel® C++ TBB are using this strategy
of "work depth-first; steal breadth-first". And as you are noticing
that they are giving more preference to cache locality than scalability.


But in my following invention of a Threadpool that scales very well i am
giving more preference to scalability than to cache locality:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/an-efficient-threadpool-engine-with-priorities-that-scales-very-well


Other than that when you are doing IO with my Threadpool, you can use
asychronous IO by starting a dedicated thread to IO to be more
efficient, or you can start another of my Threadpool and use it for
tasks that uses IO, you can use the same method when threads of the my
Threadpool are waiting or sleeping..


Other than that for recursion and the stack overflow problem you can
convert your function from a recursive to iterative to solve the problem
of stack overflow.


Other than that to be able to serve a great number of internet
connections or TCP/IP socket connections you can use my Threadpool with
my powerful Object oriented Stackful coroutines library for Delphi and
FreePascal here:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/object-oriented-stackful-coroutines-library-for-delphi-and-freepascal


---


And enhancing productivity is also related to my following powerful
product that i have designed and implemented(that can also be applied to
organizations):


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/universal-scalability-law-for-delphi-and-freepascal


Please read the following about Applying the Universal Scalability Law
to organisations:


https://blog.acolyer.org/2015/04/29/applying-the-universal-scalability-law-to-organisations/


Yet more of my philosophy about quality control and quality..


So first you have to define quality(read below about it) and second you
have to construct quality and third you have to control quality.


So, I have just read the following about the Central Limit Theorem (I
understood it), i invite you to read it carefully:


https://www.probabilitycourse.com/chapter7/7_1_2_central_limit_theorem.php


So as you are noticing this Central Limit Theorem is so important for
quality control, read the following to notice it(I also understood
Statistical Process Control (SPC)):


An Introduction to Statistical Process Control (SPC)


https://www.engineering.com/AdvancedManufacturing/ArticleID/19494/An-Introduction-to-Statistical-Process-Control-SPC.aspx


Also PERT networks are referred to by some researchers as "probabilistic
activity networks" (PAN) because the duration of some or all of the
arcs are independent random variables with known probability
distribution functions, and have finite ranges. So PERT uses the
central limit theorem (CLT) to find the expected project duration.


So, i have designed and implemented my PERT++ that that is important for
quality, please read about it and download it from my website here:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/pert-an-enhanced-edition-of-the-program-or-project-evaluation-and-review-technique-that-includes-statistical-pert-in-delphi-and-freepascal


---


So I have provided you in my PERT++ with the following functions:


function NormalDistA (const Mean, StdDev, AVal, BVal: Extended): Single;


function NormalDistP (const Mean, StdDev, AVal: Extended): Single;


function InvNormalDist(const Mean, StdDev, PVal: Extended; const Less:
Boolean): Extended;


For NormalDistA() or NormalDistP(), you pass the best estimate of
completion time to Mean, and you pass the critical path standard
deviation to StdDev, and you will get the probability of the value Aval
or the probability between the values of Aval and Bval.


For InvNormalDist(), you pass the best estimate of completion time to
Mean, and you pass the critical path standard deviation to StdDev, and
you will get the length of the critical path of the probability PVal,
and when Less is TRUE, you will obtain a cumulative distribution.


So as you are noticing from my above thoughts that since PERT networks
are referred to by some researchers as "probabilistic activity networks"
(PAN) because the duration of some or all of the arcs are independent
random variables with known probability distribution functions, and have
finite ranges. So PERT uses the central limit theorem (CLT) to find
the expected project duration. So then you have to use my above functions
that are Normal distribution and inverse normal distribution functions,
please look at my demo inside my zip file to understand better how i am
doing it:


You can download and read about my PERT++ from my website here:


https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/pert-an-enhanced-edition-of-the-program-or-project-evaluation-and-review-technique-that-includes-statistical-pert-in-delphi-and-freepascal


America's Not-So-Broken Education System

Read more here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/06/everything-in-american-education-is-broken/488189/

I have just talked about the way to success, and read the following
about the best big brains from around the world in USA so that to
understand more about the way of success:

Let's look for example at USA, so read the following from Jonathan Wai
that is a Ph.D., it says:

"Heiner Rindermann and James Thompson uncovered that the “smart
fraction” of a country is quite influential in impacting the performance
of that country, for example, its GDP."

And it also says the following:

"“According to recent population estimates, there are about eight
Chinese and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains.”
But consider that the U.S. benefits from the smart fractions of every
other country in the world because it continues to serve as a magnet for
brainpower, something that is not even factored into these rankings.

What these rankings clearly show is America is likely still in the lead
in terms of brainpower. And this is despite the fact federal funding for
educating our smart fraction is currently zero. Everyone seems worried
Americans are falling behind, but this is because everyone is focusing
on average and below average people. Maybe it’s time we started taking a
closer look at the smartest people of our own country."

Read more here:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/finding-the-next-einstein/201312/whats-the-smartest-country-in-the-world

So as you are noticing it's immigrants(and there are about eight Chinese
and Indians for every American in the top 1 percent in brains) that are
making USA a rich country.

And read also the following to understand more:

Why Silicon Valley Wouldn’t Work Without Immigrants

There are many theories for why immigrants find so much success in tech.
Many American-born tech workers point out that there is no shortage of
American-born employees to fill the roles at many tech companies.
Researchers have found that more than enough students graduate from
American colleges to fill available tech jobs. Critics of the industry’s
friendliness toward immigrants say it comes down to money — that
technology companies take advantage of visa programs, like the H-1B
system, to get foreign workers at lower prices than they would pay
American-born ones.

But if that criticism rings true in some parts of the tech industry, it
misses the picture among Silicon Valley’s top companies. One common
misperception of Silicon Valley is that it operates like a factory; in
that view, tech companies can hire just about anyone from anywhere in
the world to fill a particular role.

But today’s most ambitious tech companies are not like factories.
They’re more like athletic teams. They’re looking for the LeBrons and
Bradys — the best people in the world to come up with some brand-new,
never-before-seen widget, to completely reimagine what widgets should do
in the first place.

“It’s not about adding tens or hundreds of thousands of people into
manufacturing plants,” said Aaron Levie, the co-founder and chief
executive of the cloud-storage company Box. “It’s about the couple ideas
that are going to be invented that are going to change everything.”

Why do tech honchos believe that immigrants are better at coming up with
those inventions? It’s partly a numbers thing. As the tech venture
capitalist Paul Graham has pointed out, the United States has only 5
percent of the world’s population; it stands to reason that most of the
world’s best new ideas will be thought up by people who weren’t born here.

If you look at some of the most consequential ideas in tech, you find an
unusual number that were developed by immigrants. For instance, Google’s
entire advertising business — that is, the basis for the vast majority
of its revenues and profits, the engine that allows it to hire thousands
of people in the United States — was created by three immigrants: Salar
Kamangar and Omid Kordestani, who came to the United States from Iran,
and Eric Veach, from Canada.

But it’s not just a numbers thing. Another reason immigrants do so well
in tech is that people from outside bring new perspectives that lead to
new ideas.

Read more here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/technology/personaltech/why-silicon-valley-wouldnt-work-without-immigrants.html

More of my philosophy about capitalism and innovation..

Read my following interesting writing:


The Limits of the Earth, Part 1: Problems

"In my own new book, The Infinite Resource: The Power of Ideas on a
Finite Planet, I challenge this view. The problem isn’t economic growth,
per se. Nor is the problem that our natural resources are too small.
While finite, the natural resources the planet supplies are vast and far
larger than humanity needs in order to continue to thrive and grow
prosperity for centuries to come. The problem, rather, is the types of
resources we access, and the manner and efficiency with which we use them.

And the ultimate solution to those problems is innovation – innovation
in the science and technology that we use to tap into physical
resources, and innovation in the economic system that steers our
consumption.

The situation we’re in isn’t a looming wall that we’re doomed to crash
into. It’s a race – a race between depletion and pollution of natural
resources on one side, and our pace of innovation on the other."

Read more here:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-limits-of-the-earth-part-1-problems/

More philosophy about why raising taxes destroys the economy and more..

I invite you to look at the following interesting video:

Why raising taxes destroys the economy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GChpnX44_Ns

So i think you are understanding more that raising taxes destroys
economy, so there remains an important thing and it is that we have to
fix capitalism in a smart way by more-effective regulation and not by
raising taxes, since there remain the following problem, read about it here:

One last chance to fix capitalism

https://hbr.org/2020/03/one-last-chance-to-fix-capitalism

So i invite you to look at the following video about capitalism:

How to Improve Capitalism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOaJe68C-bU

So as you notice in the above video that you can also fix capitalism by
giving voting rights and tax advantages to long-term shareholders and
not by raising taxes, and you need to have sovereign wealth funds and
national pension funds representative of the long term collective
interests etc, so i invite you to look the above video of "How to
improve capitalism" so that to understand more.

And read my following interesting writing about Income Inequality in
capitalism:

Capitalism is the Solution to Income Inequality, Says Gannon Lecturer

“Free enterprise can work. The profit motive is very effective. But the
profits have to be channeled the right way. You have to share the pie.
Let free enterprise create a bigger and bigger pie, but then make sure
you share the bounty. … It has worked before and it can work again.”

Read more here:

https://news.fordham.edu/business-and-economics/capitalism-is-the-solution-to-income-inequality-says-gannon-lecturer/

More philosophy about does capitalism really drive innovation..

I invite you to look at the following video:

Does Capitalism Really Drive Innovation?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNhdKpTGfAU

But i am not in accordance with the above video, here is why,
read the following:

"In today’s advanced economies, private firms undertake the bulk of
research and development. The business sector’s share of total R&D
spending ranges from 60% in Singapore to 78% in South Korea, with the
United States closer to the higher end, at 72%. But it is the public
sector that provides the essential social, legal, and educational
infrastructure that sustains private R&D."

Read more here:

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/08/democratizing-innovation

"Which is more innovative, public or private sector?

While the public sector has been known to innovate… to a degree, I think
the grand prize for innovation goes to the private sector.

The public sector is handicapped by heavy bureaucracy that tends to
maintain the status quo, that discourages innovation. Secondly it is
comfortable to the type of people who are attracted to it. Some of them
are, or would like to be, innovative but their enthusiasm for new ideas
tends to be smothered in most public organizations.

Innovation is often the child of discomfort. The private sector has more
incentive to make something better and because it has less bureaucracy,
especially smaller organizations, there are fewer restrictions on
exploration of new ideas.

The “profit motive” in the private sector is also a sizable factor in
developing innovation."

And more philosophy about Globalization..

I think that globalization is a good thing, but you have to be smart
and know how to take advantage of it, so i invite you to read
the following about the positive effects of Globalization on developing
countries such as:

1- Globalization has permitted developed nations to invest in less
developed nations which has lead to creation of jobs for poor people.

2- The health and education system in developing countries has benefited
in a positive way due to the contribution of globalization.

So i invite you to read the following article to notice it:

The effects of Globalization on developing countries

Read more here:

https://medium.com/@BonillaXM/the-effects-of-globalization-on-developing-countries-1e465257c400


Thank you,
Amine Moulay Ramdane.

World-News2100

unread,
Oct 16, 2021, 3:45:39 PM10/16/21
to
Hello....
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages