|
|
Musings Report 2018-25 6-23-18 How Do We Change Our Lives in a System That's Broken?
You are receiving this email because you are one of the 500+ subscribers/major contributors to www.oftwominds.com.
For those who are new to the Musings reports: they are basically a glimpse into my notebook, the unfiltered swamp where I organize future themes, sort through the dozens of stories and links submitted by readers, refine my own research and start connecting dots which appear later in the blog or in my books. As always, I hope the Musings spark new appraisals and insights. Thank you for supporting the site and for inviting me into your circle of correspondents.
Clarification:
When I wrote last week that "My work tends to enter a relative vacuum..." I meant "in the mainstream." Musings readers understand, of course; otherwise you wouldn't be supporting my work.
How Do We Change Our Lives in a System That's Broken?
Everyone wants to change their lives for the better (or preserve what's positive), and this is relatively straightforward in a healthy system with positive incentives and a transparent, high-functioning set of rules and feedbacks.
But what if the system is broken? How do we change our lives for the better in a dysfunctional system of opaque privilege and perverse incentives? Needless to say, it's difficult, and this is why we see a rise in inward-directed solutions.
If we can't change the external world we inhabit, then the "solution" is to nurture an inner tranquility. It's no wonder that Taoism--perhaps the ultimate inner-directed philosophy--arose during the Warring States era in China, when social unrest and conflict were endemic.
But what about real-world changes such as improving our health, fitness, resilience, work/career satisfaction, income security and psychological well-being? When it comes to affecting real-world changes in a broken system, it often feels like we're swimming against the tide: the system doesn't make positive improvements easy, despite an abundance of lip service to goals such as losing weight, improving our career options, etc.
There are number of reasons for this; here are a few:
1. The economy, society and systems of governance are all changing in fundamental ways. I've written a lot about these forces: AI, robotics, globalization, financialization, the concentration of wealth and power at the top, and so on.
The point here is that even if our system was fair and functional, the structural dynamics are generating uncertainty, instability and winners and losers.
2. Ours is not a fair and functional system; the status quo is dysfunctional, dominated by self-serving insiders, the Protected Class and various elites. Actual inflation (loss of purchasing power) is under-reported, and other metrics are gamed or distorted to improve the optics--that is, the perception.
Markets have been grossly distorted to reward the already-wealthy; stocks and housing have been transformed into signals of economic strength when in reality they are asset bubbles that increase wealth and income inequality.
3. Maximizing profit and convenience via marketing is the core of our economy now. Unfortunately, what's highly profitable and heavily marketed is often unhealthy or deleterious to our physical, mental and financial health: fast food, packaged food, social media, high-cost, low-utility higher education, medications with serious side-effects, and so on.
Accomplishing changes often requires declaring war on convenience, as convenience is the enemy of everything required to swim against the tide: discipline, sustained effort, sacrifice, etc.
So how can individuals and households manage positive changes in a destructive, perverse and broken system?
One place to start is to eliminate as much marketing as possible, and as many negative, deranging distractions as possible. This means limiting media and social media exposure to a bare minimum.
Another is to focus on value rather than convenience. This goes against the tide not just of marketing but of "progress," which is implicitly defined as an increase in convenience and a decline in drudgery, effort and discipline.
Ironically, most of life's good things are not convenient at all: fitness, real food prepared at home, learning skills with steep learning curves, etc. are all terribly, horribly, irrevocably inconvenient.
Third, look outside the mainstream and status quo "solutions." Solutions outside the mainstream status quo tend to be inconvenient, wrenching and difficult, and there is very little institutional support for anything outside the mainstream. Rather, the entire weight and force of the status quo is put to bear in support of passive compliance with the approved "solutions."
For example, the approved "solution" to ill health is surgery or costly medications that haven't even been tested for interactions with other powerful medications.
The "solution" to the high cost of housing in desirable cities is to surrender the household income for the next 30 years and buy a decaying bungalow for $800,000 or more (or $1.8 million in bubble-mania neighborhoods).
These are simulacrum solutions; they only make the initial problem worse, not better.
As Bucky Fuller noted in his famous dictum, “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."
This is as true of our individual lives as it is of systems. Rather than fight a system designed to thwart us, we need a model for our own lives that bypasses the perverse tides and obsoletes the impediments in our current path.
Highlights of the Blog This Past Week
Are You Prepared to Invest in Troubled Times? 6/22/18
Gresham's Law and Bitcoin 6/20/18
Onward to Stock Market Nirvana... Or Not 6/18/18
Best Thing That Happened To Me This Week
At the risk of sounding gratuitously grateful (i.e. every victorious sports player has been coached to first express gratitude when handed the microphone), my dental exam went well--I still have all my teeth and am not in pain. That's truly something to be grateful for.
Market Musings: Three Little-Noticed Indicators
That there are hundreds of market indicators is unsurprising, given the tens of thousands of smart people trying to discover an "edge" in trading/investing.
The real trick in trading is not so much discovering a new indicator--it's using the old standards in a disciplined fashion.
Here are three standard indicators that reveal the narrowing of volatility and the rise of complacency--sentiments that often set up significant downturns.
NYMO (McClellan Oscillator) is a measure of volatility and market sentiment. Note the wide swings of early 2018 have given way to a range-bound complacency and low volatility.
BPSPX is the bullish percentage of stocks in the S&P500 (SPX). Note the sharp declines in February and April, and the recovery since then that's formed a bearish rising wedge.
CPCE is the put-call equity (stocks) ratio, a measure of how many participants are buying puts as a hedge against a decline. In complacent times, fewer punters see the need for puts. In times of panic, everyone rushes to protect their portfolios with puts.
Note the decline of extremes, which suggest complacency rules the roost.
Add these up and you get a snapshot of a complacent, overly confident market that's poised to rediscover risk and uncertainty.
From Left Field
People kicking these food delivery robots is an early insight into how cruel humans could be to robots -- I would say the temptation is just too great...
Affordability Crisis: Low-Income Workers Can't Afford A 2-Bedroom Rental Anywhere In America
As Labor Shortage Worsens, Small Businesses Are "Recruiting In The County Jail"
Is Inflation Understated? -- Let us count the ways...
The Chapwood Index -- one real-world measure of inflation...
The Billion Prices Project
Mammals Go Nocturnal in Bid to Avoid Humans
Beyond the Image: Hidden inscriptions on Athenian vases -- instructions from the potter...
Rule of law 'virtually absent' in Venezuela, UN report says
More tigers live in US back yards than in the wild. Is this a catastrophe?
"Men are so made that they can resist sound argument, and yet yield to a glance." Honore de Balzac (via LaserLefty)
Thanks for reading--
charles |
|
|
|
|
|
