A resonance frequency approach to stopping the motor of the world
In a prior thread, we considered the possibility of committing sabotage to stop the motor of the world. To stimulate the discussion, I took the role of "devil's advocate" and suggested that Galt might have engaged in sabotage. There was almost universal agreement that Galt would have lost his moral authority to lead the Gulch if he had committed sabotage, rather than only convincing titans to go Galt.
A recent thread entitled "Obama is John Galt" started by jimjamesjames was largely shot down as well, and for good reason.
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/30...
However, that thread made me reconsider strategy for stopping the motor of the world.
The looters and moochers in real life have taken Cloward and Piven's strategy of overwhelming "the system" with more and more moochers. This is an act of sabotage. This is a moral line that we have decided not to cross. This puts us at a strategic disadvantage.
Add to that disadvantage the fact that Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are convincing others (like Larry Ellison of Cisco Systems) to give to charity. I urge you to look at how many billionaires have taken The Giving Pledge:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giving_...
Someone here in the Gulch recently suggested that this giving pledge might actually be their way of going Galt. I forget which Gulcher suggested this (Zenphamy? sjatkins?) and apologize to that person.
We all know what Ayn Rand thinks about altruism. I have said previously that the charitable contributions of these billionaires may lengthen the time for the collapse of the looter/moocher era sufficiently that there may not be a time when producers like us would be able to go back into the world. Their charitable contributions delay the inevitable pain for the moochers.
Now switch gears and start thinking about physics and differential equations.
Think back to when you took physics and learned about constructive and destructive interference. If there is a disturbance that causes an object to oscillate at its resonance frequency (or an integer multiplier of it), then the object will break MUCH faster.
For an introductory treatment of resonance frequencies, go to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance
For an example, see the Tacoma Narrows Bridge Collapse videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-zczJXS...
If we are to stop the motor of the world, an alternate solution would be to do something that reinforces the interference that the looters or those encouraging people to take the Giving Pledge are applying.
Does it make sense to convince MANY producers to go Galt, or will we be more effective by harnessing the momentum of The Giving Pledge to accomplish the goal of depriving the looter/moocher world of producers?
If one takes producers out of the system, how does this change the 2nd order differential equation(s) that would describe the producer-looter-moocher problem?
Please comment on
a) how one would implement such a strategy; and b) whether this would count as sabotage.
A recent thread entitled "Obama is John Galt" started by jimjamesjames was largely shot down as well, and for good reason.
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/30...
However, that thread made me reconsider strategy for stopping the motor of the world.
The looters and moochers in real life have taken Cloward and Piven's strategy of overwhelming "the system" with more and more moochers. This is an act of sabotage. This is a moral line that we have decided not to cross. This puts us at a strategic disadvantage.
Add to that disadvantage the fact that Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are convincing others (like Larry Ellison of Cisco Systems) to give to charity. I urge you to look at how many billionaires have taken The Giving Pledge:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giving_...
Someone here in the Gulch recently suggested that this giving pledge might actually be their way of going Galt. I forget which Gulcher suggested this (Zenphamy? sjatkins?) and apologize to that person.
We all know what Ayn Rand thinks about altruism. I have said previously that the charitable contributions of these billionaires may lengthen the time for the collapse of the looter/moocher era sufficiently that there may not be a time when producers like us would be able to go back into the world. Their charitable contributions delay the inevitable pain for the moochers.
Now switch gears and start thinking about physics and differential equations.
Think back to when you took physics and learned about constructive and destructive interference. If there is a disturbance that causes an object to oscillate at its resonance frequency (or an integer multiplier of it), then the object will break MUCH faster.
For an introductory treatment of resonance frequencies, go to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resonance
For an example, see the Tacoma Narrows Bridge Collapse videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-zczJXS...
If we are to stop the motor of the world, an alternate solution would be to do something that reinforces the interference that the looters or those encouraging people to take the Giving Pledge are applying.
Does it make sense to convince MANY producers to go Galt, or will we be more effective by harnessing the momentum of The Giving Pledge to accomplish the goal of depriving the looter/moocher world of producers?
If one takes producers out of the system, how does this change the 2nd order differential equation(s) that would describe the producer-looter-moocher problem?
Please comment on
a) how one would implement such a strategy; and b) whether this would count as sabotage.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 6.
The "housing bubble" nearly took down our economy. Since we have world markets and other countries invest in our markets, it did worldwide damage. And it can easily happen again.
The three angles that can cause an even bigger oscillarion are: energy, currency, and war. A sharp enough blow from any of the three could cause fatal resonance.
A while back Straightlinelogic posted his own article http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/1e... about bankrupting the system/causing economic collapse that would seem to fit in very well with your resonance frequency approach. I never took physics so you have exceeded my ability to link them together any better than that.
I missed the suggestion you referred to about the giving pledge being someone's way of going galt. If you or someone else could post a link to that I would be grateful. I have often thought that, myself. Bill Gates and Microsoft had no presence in Washington prior to being dragged into court for anti-trust "violations" and began lobbying after that for their own protection. But in the midst of the bogus lawsuits, who was at their side? Nobody. Where were the people standing up for the company that put a computer on Everybodies desk? When the prevailing attitude was that computers were basically for the higher educated, and/or the wealthy. I think Gates shrugged, not from the government, but from the people who benefitted the most from his efforts but allowed that to happen to him and his company. Consider, also, that he is welathier now, after the "giving pledge" than before he took it.
On your post about Galt committing sabotage, while I did not agree with your suggestion that he did, I based my disagreement on my view that he did not need to. I would question his loss of the moral high ground by raising this question, which I have asked before; At what point does the governments (and the people who they represent) initiation of the use of force require the retailiatory use of force? The answer to that would answer your final question. (b)
To your question (a); my impression is that you are looking for ways to speed up the process of collapse. In the book, I was under the impression that the number of producers that disappeared was, maybe, a couple hundred. I would suspect that in todays world it would take thousands, possibly many thousands to speed up the process significantly. As has been stated around here before, there is enough wealth currently to drag out the collapse for generations. The problem with the Giving Pledge idea is that these people have already produced so much that the effect of their removal is negligible.
Maybe I just can't see it because I'm not sure I'm ready to speed up the process to bring on the collapse. I still think that education can turn this thing around. HOWEVER,... the thought hit me the other day, "if Jeb Bush is the republican nominee, I just might have to vote for Hillary." If Jeb Bush is the best option the republicans can offer, it's time to put this dog down.
My opinion, now, is that the crew were correct. The explanation may have right but the system could have been approaching the peak resonance frequency and the water sloshing could have got worse and drenched and damaged other areas (then stopped when the pool had emptied itself).
So, jbrenner may be correct, a little touch may be enough to set the economy into swinging into disaster. In that case whoever provides such assistance will be blamed. Or, the little touch may move the economy towards more stability. Even if that is good, the wrong people will get the credit. In general, systems with the potential to oscillate are very sensitive to provocation near the resonance frequency.
Summary- if you do not know the effects of what you are going to do, best keep your hands off. Good intentions are no substitute for knowledge.