Don't confuse me with the facts. And
certainly statistics lie and liars use statistics. The
use of facts and statistics are always subjective.
There is no "true" fact and statistic. These two
things are merely snapshots of a thing from a
different perspective at a different time by different
people.
Two people, three people, or more, might all be
able to come up with facts and statistics about a
thing. And all will be valid. Because the facts and
statistics are not something floating around in the
air. They are mere complilations of what a person
things he needs to know to make a decision.
The further back in history one goes the murkier
the facts get. The further back in history the less
statistics there are. No one bothered to count
things like the way we do today. They couldn't keep
track of it if they did because they didn't have the
computer data bases we have today.
No matter which fact you come up with there is
always someoen with a different, often contradictory
fact.
No matter which statistic you use there is always
another set of data, counted slightly differently, that
results in a different set of facts.
The clearest example of this is the argument over
which is the tallest building in the world? First, that
depends on your definition of "building." Is a
television tower a buidling? Or merely a structure?
Is the television tower on top of a buiding part of the
building or something else? Do you count to the
roof line? And what is the roof line? On a flat
topped building it is easy to tell, but when you
consider the Chrysler Building in New York, it is
murkier.
I have seen people come almost to blows about
some facts and statistics that use the same words
and only when the things are defined do they find
out that they are talking about two wholly different
things. The largest company? By what measure?
Income? Revenue? Sales? Profits? Employees?
Square footage? There are too many ways to
count the "largest" to come to one conclusion. The
fact is therefore ephemeral and not real.
Facts are not real, they are constructs of the
definition on uses.
certainly statistics lie and liars use statistics. The
use of facts and statistics are always subjective.
There is no "true" fact and statistic. These two
things are merely snapshots of a thing from a
different perspective at a different time by different
people.
Two people, three people, or more, might all be
able to come up with facts and statistics about a
thing. And all will be valid. Because the facts and
statistics are not something floating around in the
air. They are mere complilations of what a person
things he needs to know to make a decision.
The further back in history one goes the murkier
the facts get. The further back in history the less
statistics there are. No one bothered to count
things like the way we do today. They couldn't keep
track of it if they did because they didn't have the
computer data bases we have today.
No matter which fact you come up with there is
always someoen with a different, often contradictory
fact.
No matter which statistic you use there is always
another set of data, counted slightly differently, that
results in a different set of facts.
The clearest example of this is the argument over
which is the tallest building in the world? First, that
depends on your definition of "building." Is a
television tower a buidling? Or merely a structure?
Is the television tower on top of a buiding part of the
building or something else? Do you count to the
roof line? And what is the roof line? On a flat
topped building it is easy to tell, but when you
consider the Chrysler Building in New York, it is
murkier.
I have seen people come almost to blows about
some facts and statistics that use the same words
and only when the things are defined do they find
out that they are talking about two wholly different
things. The largest company? By what measure?
Income? Revenue? Sales? Profits? Employees?
Square footage? There are too many ways to
count the "largest" to come to one conclusion. The
fact is therefore ephemeral and not real.
Facts are not real, they are constructs of the
definition on uses.
| The dismal science it is not called for nothing. Why dismal? Because it has math involved. You can not understand economics if you don't understand math. And you can not understand economics if you don't have a rudimentary understanding of time, money, goods, sales and a slew of other things. The words we use to describe economy today were, believe it or not, mostly invented by Karl Marx. Before him there was really too much written about economics. Adam Smith described economics in a fundamental math sense, and oddly, even Socialists have to follow his precepts. They deny this of course. Indeed, you couldn't find barely a person who would believe that the explanation of producing a widget was applicable to Socialism as it is to Capitalism. The reality though is that there is only one underlying mathematics for all the people on the globe when it comes to economics. What everyone is really arguing about is who gets to Control the economics everyone must deal with. The idea that there are different economic systems is false. There is only one economic system. What there are is different systems of controlling the economics. |
| Practicalist |
Jim Hlavac |
| Someone had to make a simplified explanation of the way the world works. |