Payscales and Pitchforks

Shocked, disappointed, disgusted. See e.g., Claire McCaskill and President Obama. Those are the responses to news of exhorbitant bonuses and astronomical compensation packages, for CEO’s, executives, and others in anti-government, anti-tax, anti-regulation corporations that are gorging mind-numbing amounts of taxpayer funds from the bailout trough. Wronged, self-exculpatory, defensive. See e.g., John Thain and Rudy Giuliani. Those are the responses to the criticisms of the McCaskills and Obamas.

And yet, in retrospect, none of this is surprising. The principal fiction underlying the obscene compensation of those “masters of the universe” is that the market determines their compensation based purely and irreducibly on their value. This fiction becomes, has become, deeply rooted and self-fulfilling (for a time). In their minds, the cause-effect relationship between value and compensation has been conveniently stripped of every other factor: externalities, structural effects, market inefficiencies, morality, finite resources, personal biases, etc., etc. Stripped of these considerations the compensation logic is unassailable, albeit circular.

Why is their compensation so high? Because of their value! How do we know they are so valuable? Because they require such high compensation! Such simple positive feedback systems eventually consume all available resources destroying themselves in the process. But from their vantage, and applying this impeccable logic, it appears to the masters, for the time being, that the excesses are those of the mere rabble. How dare they question the value of their economic aristocracy?! The unfortunate history of the world has repeatedly demonstrated that when aristrocracy becomes insensitive to the rabble in this way, their breakthrough understanding is delivered through pitchforks, either real or metaphorical. My advice? Invest in pitchforks.

The "Obama Effect"

The study has not yet completed peer review, BUT...

Take a look at the plot that is shown as evidence here. (Vanderbilt University press release on Ray Friedman research.)

Then review the critique of graphical analysis here. (Taibbi critique of Thomas Friedman.)

Finally consider the rich irony that both plotters are Friedmans.

I propose a new phenomenon: "Friedman napkin" - a plot of arbitrarily selected parameters with either real or imaginary data used to reach a wildly inappropriate conclusion.

(Note: Both "Friedman plot" and "Friedman graph" already have specific meanings in math and science, hence the slightly more pejorative term "Friedman napkin." On the other hand, the number of syllables is nicely consistent with "Friedman unit."

You heard it here first.

The trouble with global warming skeptics

In a NOVA piece on global climate change, “What’s up with the weather?”, James Trefil observed:

If you sat down and said, "I'm going to design a public issue that is the absolute worst nightmare of every scientist, of every communicator in the world," you couldn't do better than the greenhouse effect. You're dealing with something that's very complicated. You're dealing with something where there's legitimate uncertainty in the science. It's not that people are trying to pull the wool over anybody's eyes. There's legitimate uncertainty. You're dealingwith something that has enormous consequences for people. And you're dealing with something whose effects will happen 30 years down the road, you know, when they happen. And then you say- you give people this and say, "Okay, do something about it."

For context.

The Crystal Vase: A one act play in three scenes.

Cast, in order of appearance:
Futzinfarb
Futzinfarb’s spouse
Millie, an orbital forcing cat
Trouble, an AGW monkey
Antimarx, a pet store clerk


Scene 1: A cozy living room, two chairs arranged around a fireplace

Futzinfarb: I sure do like that expensive crystal vase you gave me.
Fuzinfarb’s spouse: You’re welcome dear.
Futzinfarb: And it looks so nice on the mantelpiece.
Futzinfarb’s spouse: Indeed.
Millie: Meow!
Futzinfarb: Oh look, isn’t that cute? Millie likes the vase also. She’s rubbing against it….. Oh, oh no, it’s starting to tip! Millie! Stop! No! Bad cat!
Futzinfarb’s spouse: Oops, there it goes!
(Sound of vase smashing to bits.)
Futzinfarb: Fudge.
Futzinfarb’s spouse: Double fudge.
Millie: Meow!

Scene 2: The same living room, the next morning.

Futzinfarb: Oh look, honey – we won the ebay auction for the vase! It will be a perfect replacement for the one that Millie tipped off the mantel last night.
Futzinfarb’s spouse: I’ll go get my credit card. You’d better figure out what to do about Millie before the replacement vase gets here.
Millie: Meow!

Scene 3: A pet store, later that afternoon.

Futzinfarb: I want to complain about Millie, this cat that you sold me last week.
Millie: Meow!
Trouble: Ee, ee, ee. Ooh, ooh!
Futzinfarb: She rubbed up against an expensive crystal vase that we had on our mantel last night. It rocked and then tipped off the mantel and smashed to bits.
Futzinfarb’s spouse (wandering away, distracted): Cool! A tarantula!
Millie: Meow!
Trouble: Ee, ee, ee. Ooh, ooh!
Futzinfarb (ignoring Futzinfarb’s spouse, who is sticking one hand into a tarantula cage): We bought a replacement vase, but what do you suggest we should we do about Millie’s bad behavior?
Antimarx: No problem! We’ll happily trade in your cat Millie for this monkey, Trouble. Since Millie is the one that tipped your vase off the mantel last night, you’ll have nothing to worry about with Trouble.
Millie: Meow!
Futzinfarb’s spouse: Ouch!
Trouble: Ee, ee, ee. Ooh, ooh!

Curtain falls.

Update: It has a name.