AFAIK: The world economics is a complex system dynamics (interactive, nonlinear, and counterintuitive), as linear modelling thinking should be insufficient for analysis and planning. Perhaps, establishing updated system dynamics model(s) for simulation and analysis would be probably a much better approach. A bit like weather forecasting. http://donellameadows.org/archives/a-synopsis-limits-to-growth-the-30-year-update/ World Model Standard Run as shown in The Limits to Growth
A similar scenario assumes that ... In a final scenario, ...
AFAIK: The world economics is a complex system dynamics (interactive, nonlinear, and counterintuitive), as linear modelling thinking should be insufficient for analysis and planning. Perhaps, establishing updated system dynamics model(s) for simulation and analysis would be probably a much better approach. A bit like weather forecasting. http://donellameadows.org/archives/a-synopsis-limits-to-growth-the-30-year-update/ World Model Standard Run as shown in The Limits to Growth
A similar scenario assumes that ... In a final scenario, ... EvenOdd 发表于 2021-03-19 10:03
Jay Forrester with the breakthrough help of computer at MIT developed System Dynamics for simulation modelling around 1958. Basically, all conventional economists, with their mathematics and computing capability, couldn"t be able to do that. Q https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Wright_Forrester Forrester characterizes normal debate and discussion as being dominated by inexact mental models: The mental model is fuzzy. It is incomplete. It is imprecisely stated. Furthermore, within one individual, a mental model changes with time and even during the flow of a single conversation.The human mind assembles a few relationships to fit the context of a discussion. As the subject shifts so does the model. When only a single topic is being discussed, each participant in a conversation employs a different mental model to interpret the subject. Fundamental assumptions differ but are never brought into the open. Goals are different and are left unstated. It is little wonder that compromise takes so long. And it is not surprising that consensus leads to laws and programs that fail in their objectives or produce new difficulties greater than those that have been relieved. UQ
Jay Forrester with the breakthrough help of computer at MIT developed System Dynamics for simulation modelling around 1958. Basically, all conventional economists, with their mathematics and computing capability, couldn"t be able to do that. Q https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Wright_Forrester Forrester characterizes normal debate and discussion as being dominated by inexact mental models: The mental model is fuzzy. It is incomplete. It is imprecisely stated. Furthermore, within one individual, a mental model changes with time and even during the flow of a single conversation. The human mind assembles a few relationships to fit the context of a discussion. As the subject shifts so does the model. When only a single topic is being discussed, each participant in a conversation employs a different mental model to interpret the subject. Fundamental assumptions differ but are never brought into the open. Goals are different and are left unstated. It is little wonder that compromise takes so long. And it is not surprising that consensus leads to laws and programs that fail in their objectives or produce new difficulties greater than those that have been relieved. UQ EvenOdd 发表于 2021-03-19 10:25
<Forrester characterizes normal debate and discussion as being dominated by inexact mental models: The mental model is fuzzy. It is incomplete. It is imprecisely stated. Furthermore, within one individual, a mental model changes with time and even during the flow of a single conversation.The human mind assembles a few relationships to fit the context of a discussion.> This statement further clarifies, why a conventional 2-party demoncracy administration based on politicains selected purely by majority voters, is not necessarily better than a 1-party elitism/meritocracy admiistration. One way to improve the 2-party demoncracy would be to provide special training of system dynamics thinking and analysis to individual politicians and their staffers. However, the reality is some or many people, including some politicians, do not really like the kind of complexity and dynamics of systems thinking, by nature or by capability. But sometimes these politicians, when without systems thinking, could be the ones who decide the long lasting policies/fate impacting their beloved nation for long long long time, possibly. Constructive? Healthy? Mindful? Fire prevention, or Fire fighting? Only God knows!
<Forrester characterizes normal debate and discussion as being dominated by inexact mental models: The mental model is fuzzy. It is incomplete. It is imprecisely stated. Furthermore, within one individual, a mental model changes with time and even during the flow of a single conversation.The human mind assembles a few relationships to fit the context of a discussion.> This statement further clarifies, why a conventional 2-party demoncracy administration based on politicains selected purely by majority voters, is not necessarily better than a 1-party elitism admiistration. One way to improve the 2-party demoncracy would be to provide special training of system dynamics thinking and analysis to individual politicians and their staffers. However, the reality is some or many people, including some politicians, do not really like the kind of complexity and dynamics of systems thinking by nature or by capability. But sometimes these politicians could be the ones who decide the long lasting fate impacting their nation for long long time, possibly. Constructive? Healthy? Mindful? Fire prevention, or Fire fighting? Only God knows!
<This statement further clarifies, why a conventional 2-party demoncracy administration based on politicains selected purely by majority voters, is not necessarily better than a 1-party elitism/meritocracy admiistration.> Q https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy The Meritocracy Party wants to achieve the following: A world in which every child gets an equal chance to succeed in life. The abolishment of party politics. Only those with a relevant education and work experience should be allowed to vote, rather than just anyone who has reached the age of 18 or 21. The introduction of 100% inheritance tax, so that the super-rich can no longer pass on their wealth to a select few (their privileged children). This would mean the end of the elite dynasties and hereditary monarchy. A radically reformed educational system, based on the MBTI personality types, and insights from radical innovators such as Rudolf Steiner and Maria Montessori. To replace free market capitalism with social capitalism and to replace democracy with a fully transparent meritocratic republic, under a meritocratic constitution. The end of nepotism, cronyism, discrimination, privilege and unequal chances.
To build a country with a 1Country4Systems structure should be worth to try! Rationalisation, instead of maximisation or optimisation! EvenOdd 发表于 2021-03-19 11:43
<全民菁英世代>, just a political term with clearly self-conflicting meaning. Obviously, majority of voters would love this saying! <Elitists believe only a few "movers and shakers" truly change society >, that should be much more realistic, imo. <The Meritocracy Party wants to achieve the following>, perhaps the UN does have a position or comments about this approach, and recomond it to all countries, for either the 3rd, 2nd or 1st world! 「實踐是檢驗真理的唯一標準」- 鄧小平
<全民菁英世代>, just a political term with clearly self-conflicting meaning. Obviously, majority of voters would love this saying! <Elitists believe only a few "movers and shakers" truly change society >, that should be much more realistic, imo. <The Meritocracy Party wants to achieve the following>, perhaps the UN does have a position or comments about this approach, and recomond it to all countries, for either the 3rd, 2nd or 1st world! 「實踐是檢驗真理的唯一標準」- 鄧小平
I think the Mainland is definately a progressive country. There are so many measures to be improved further and further for an emerging country like China!
I think the Mainland is definately a progressive country. There are so many measures to be improved further and further for an emerging country like China! EvenOdd 发表于 2021-03-20 01:46
I think the current healthy competition for driving the economic growth of both the US and Chinas hould be constructive and positive. They should have realised that internally for long time.
I think the current healthy competition for driving the economic growth of both the US and Chinas hould be constructive and positive. They should have realised that internally for long time.
共產主義人民民主專政 跟 西方民主 都是 貴族菁英政治 但現在世界走向 全民菁英 也就是 匹式民主
那麼所有貴族菁英政治的修正與藉口 都成了 偽先知
減法經濟學
全世界需的 資源 由三個項相乘
人口 乘以 每個人的 需求慾望 乘以 每個需求所需要的 資源
population desire resource PDS
馬克思跟凱恩斯都認為 人口會增加 每個人的需求慾望會增加 每個需求所需要的資源不變
也就是 P D 上升 S 不變
但現實又如何呢? 連最 共產主義的 最 馬爾薩斯主義的且 人民已經生活在 有中國特色的社會主義天堂的
刁 區
人口出生率也直線下落 沒人要生 兩胎三胎全開放都沒用 不給國家添人口 不給組織添麻煩
也就是 P 下降
而 科技的發達 使得 滿足每一個慾望所需要的資源逐漸降低 因為大家都透過科技拚壓低成本 所有的創新 不是在增加新的慾望 而是在降低每個慾望所需要的成本
也就是
S 下降
至於每個人的 需求慾望 已經在資本主義改革的刺激之下 放大到了最大值
可以在沒風險可以重生的薩爾達世界 放著公主不救 四處亂混 又何必去跟著 臉胖眼斜的 刁皇帝 說著言不由衷的話 賺著不知何時會被跳樓的風險錢
D 不但沒法上升 甚至還下降了
一台蘋果 早期還得賣腎 現在賣勞力就夠了
三和大神 社會的最底層 打一天工可以玩三天的電動 試問 你的工作 行嗎? (謎之聲音 你從 WFH 之後就沒認真工作過吧...)
也就是說 馬爾薩斯的理論 人口需要的資源 是兩個上升 一個持平 但 匹式減法經濟學的理論 竟是兩個下降一個升不了了
房地產的炒作 是假設人民都有買房子的需求 然後透過稀有性把這個需求 所需付出的錢給增加
這個錢的增加 卻是假性的增加 慾望跟慾望所需的資源沒有增加 增加的只是 貴族官僚割下來的人民的韭菜的份量
那既然 人口數降低 們也就只住得起那些房子 在不考慮印鈔票通貨膨脹的效應之下 隨著科技的進步 蓋房子的成本甚至年年降低
房地產 也就注定了崩盤
刁 區現在的問題 在於
其信奉了 偽先知的 馬克思主義 去批判凱恩斯主義 卻沒發覺 馬克思 凱恩斯都是 偽先知
當然 四匹也不是先知 以上 匹式減法經濟學 乃是經過幾十年的研究與討論 獲得的結果 感謝
數十萬名各種顏色或變過顏色的靈魂 協助我成就了 魔王級的 經濟學進化
The world economics is a complex system dynamics (interactive, nonlinear, and counterintuitive), as linear modelling thinking should be insufficient for analysis and planning.
Perhaps, establishing updated system dynamics model(s) for simulation and analysis would be probably a much better approach. A bit like weather forecasting.
http://donellameadows.org/archives/a-synopsis-limits-to-growth-the-30-year-update/
非線性代數 馬克思跟凱恩斯的問題是 都只用到一次微分
沒用到二次負微分
更慘的是
一堆後面的 學者
沒人敢否定 前面的人寫的東東
最多是用高次元 一次微分 矩陣疊代
直接用 二次負微分 才能看出真正的內涵啊
Basically, all conventional economists, with their mathematics and computing capability, couldn"t be able to do that.
Q
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Wright_Forrester
Forrester characterizes normal debate and discussion as being dominated by inexact mental models: The mental model is fuzzy. It is incomplete. It is imprecisely stated. Furthermore, within one individual, a mental model changes with time and even during the flow of a single conversation. The human mind assembles a few relationships to fit the context of a discussion. As the subject shifts so does the model. When only a single topic is being discussed, each participant in a conversation employs a different mental model to interpret the subject. Fundamental assumptions differ but are never brought into the open. Goals are different and are left unstated. It is little wonder that compromise takes so long. And it is not surprising that consensus leads to laws and programs that fail in their objectives or produce new difficulties greater than those that have been relieved. UQ
活到 98歲啊
不簡單
刁 只承認不能用 GDP
卻沒法見到
減法經濟學
This statement further clarifies, why a conventional 2-party demoncracy administration based on politicains selected purely by majority voters, is not necessarily better than a 1-party elitism/meritocracy admiistration.
One way to improve the 2-party demoncracy would be to provide special training of system dynamics thinking and analysis to individual politicians and their staffers.
However, the reality is some or many people, including some politicians, do not really like the kind of complexity and dynamics of systems thinking, by nature or by capability.
But sometimes these politicians, when without systems thinking, could be the ones who decide the long lasting policies/fate impacting their beloved nation for long long long time, possibly.
Constructive? Healthy? Mindful? Fire prevention, or Fire fighting? Only God knows!
fuzzy 系統
還是可以被
大樹法則 給蓋過去的
Rationalisation, instead of maximisation or optimisation!
Q https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meritocracy
The Meritocracy Party wants to achieve the following:
A world in which every child gets an equal chance to succeed in life.
The abolishment of party politics.
Only those with a relevant education and work experience should be allowed to vote, rather than just anyone who has reached the age of 18 or 21.
The introduction of 100% inheritance tax, so that the super-rich can no longer pass on their wealth to a select few (their privileged children). This would mean the end of the elite dynasties and hereditary monarchy.
A radically reformed educational system, based on the MBTI personality types, and insights from radical innovators such as Rudolf Steiner and Maria Montessori.
To replace free market capitalism with social capitalism and to replace democracy with a fully transparent meritocratic republic, under a meritocratic constitution.
The end of nepotism, cronyism, discrimination, privilege and unequal chances.
Elitists tend to favor social systems such as meritocracy, technocracy and plutocracy as opposed to political egalitarianism and populism. Elitists believe only a few "movers and shakers" truly change society, rather than the majority of people who only vote and elect the elites into power.[5] UQ
全民菁英世代 沒有人喜歡在另一個制度
<全民菁英世代>, just a political term with clearly self-conflicting meaning. Obviously, majority of voters would love this saying!
<Elitists believe only a few "movers and shakers" truly change society >, that should be much more realistic, imo.
<The Meritocracy Party wants to achieve the following>, perhaps the UN does have a position or comments about this approach, and recomond it to all countries, for either the 3rd, 2nd or 1st world!
「實踐是檢驗真理的唯一標準」- 鄧小平
全民菁英世代
的台灣
才能防得了
摳逼病毒啊.....
<全民菁英世代
的台灣>
What % of population are degree holders in TW? Maybe around 20% (=5M/23M).
US 46.36% UK 45.74% Australia 45.36% https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/most-educated-countries
I myself wouldn't call Australia being "全民菁英".
Q Undergraduate degree holders in Taiwan exceed 5 million 03/12/2016 UQ
你確定你有用對
分母?
該列表基於接受高等教育（兩年製或四年制學位）或通過職業課程接受過教育的25至64歲成人居民的數量。
0:00 / 0:00 台灣25至34歲逾7成受高等教育 高於日韓英美 2020-08-10 12:18 中央社 / 台北10日電 高教
【專題】 ▪110學測成績公布！不想考指考 必看選填志願、申請入學詳細教學
近日公布教育統計指標的國際比較，2017年台灣「25-34歲」年輕族群的人口比率逾7成，高於、和美國、英國等歐美國家。 教育部統計資料顯示，全球高教趨向普及化，高教人口比率也增長，以「25-34歲」的年輕族群來看，2017年台灣及南韓年輕族群接受高教的人口比率分別為71%、70%，其次為加拿大62%、日本61%，英國51%，美國、法國、德國和OECD（經濟合作暨發展組織）國家平均都不到50%。 教育部表示，觀察2017年主要國家高等教育學生占總人口的比率，以澳大利亞7.3%較高，南韓、美國及紐西蘭各為6.1%、5.8%及5.7%，台灣5.4%居中，高於馬來西亞、德國、法國、英國、新加坡、中國大陸和日本。 以2017年各國高教國際學生數占高教學生總數的比率來看，教育部統計指出，主要國家中以澳大利亞21.5%較高，其次是紐西蘭19.6%、英國17.9%、香港11.4%、法國10.2%、德國8.4%、馬來西亞8.1%、美國5.2%，台灣4.4%，高於日本4.3%、南韓2.3%。 教育部統計也發現，台灣碩、博士女性畢業生比重分別為44.4%及31.5%，比南韓（51.4%、37.6%）略低，但高於日本（33.9%、30.5%）；2017年高教階段女性教師所占比率，台灣36%高於南韓35.1%及日本28.4%，但都不及OECD國家平均的43.8%。
Q Undergraduate degree holders in Taiwan exceed 5 million ... focustaiwan.tw › Society
12 Mar 2016 — Taipei, March 12 (CNA) The number of people with undergraduate degrees in Taiwan topped 5 million for the first time at the end of 2015, ... UQ
Q Taiwan - Population 2014 | countryeconomy.com countryeconomy.com › demography › taiwan › year=2...
Increases in Taiwanese population. Taiwan ended 2014 with a population of 23,434,000 people, which represents an increasea of 60,000 people compared to ... UQ
台灣可以說服人民戴口罩
刁 只能透過 禁閉人民 用大水淹一個省
來避免病毒的蔓延
菁英民主專政 與全民民主專政
畢竟對人民的教育的投資
還是有很大的落差的
刚才无意中做了一下全国21岁同龄人受教育程度的统计，原始数据来源于统计局第六次普查。 也许从各种新闻报道中，你会发现，我国大学生比例低于10%，严格的说是9.5%（不含大专的话是4%）。 可是别忽略了某些客观因素，历史原因，没读书的大部分都是40岁以上的大爷大妈。所以，想要看真实的比例，还得看某个年龄层的，于是，我做了全国21岁同龄人的统计，统计结果显示：约28.2%的人接受大学教育（不含大专的话是13%），那么大部队去哪了？ 全国21岁同龄人中，71.8%的人没考上大学，50.8%的人没考上高中，6.7%的人没考上初中。 显然，大部分人都死在中考上了，淘汰率很高。 发布于 2017-12-10
作者：知乎用户 链接：https://www.zhihu.com/question/53053402/answer/273793509 来源：知乎 著作权归作者所有。商业转载请联系作者获得授权，非商业转载请注明出处。
毛主席說過的
過早曝露實力
年輕人啊 就是忍不住
但中國能不能超越美國？謝金河認為，未來仍有待考驗，例如，鄧小平生前留下的兩個政治遺產，一是韜光養晦，絕不強出頭，二是領導人體制，一個人兩任，第二任選出隔代接班人。如果這兩個機制今天都在，相信中國會超越美國。但中國太早秀肌肉，前工信部副部長苗圩說：中國大而不強，很多科技技術一旦被砸脖子，就立刻現形。
刁 講清楚了 中國內部要講 鬥爭哲學
鬥爭 就不是正面與建設性的
美國這邊本來也以為是 正面的 建設性的 結果姑息出了
摳逼病毒 基改人
无法理解啊!
要從 泡麵 vs 帝王蟹 的角度去理解
如果外派我去阿拉斯加 或北海道
然後
沒有鮭魚 帝王蟹 龍蝦 海膽
只有
泡麵
那是得大發脾氣了
真是
以後泡泡麵就會想起
王毅那張 麻將臉
阿拉斯加漁夫捕撈的阿拉斯加帝王蟹與龍蝦才特別[珍貴，海產的肉質極地細緻美味。