Game theory

15 comments on “Game theory ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Lanthanide 1

   16 July 2011 at 10:38 am

   If Labour loses this election, it will be seen by the “political class” that CGT was the blame and it’ll be out of consideration for another decade, further shafting us going into the future. Unless Labour stuck to their guns and argued it again in 2014, which I wouldn’t count on.

   Although, if they only just narrowly lose, after having looked like they had no chance until they unveiled the policy, the “political class” could take that into account and say “actually people wanted CGT”.
   • Afewknowthetruth 1.1

     16 July 2011 at 11:36 am

     2014? Do you REALLY think present economic arrangements will hold together for another three years?

     The Peak Oil crisis started in 2007, and four years of hiding ‘toxic sludge’ under the carpet and of governments printing money have resulted in a rapidly worsening situation worldwide.

     And environmental catastrophes have hit an all-time record over the past year.
     • Lanthanide 1.1.1

       16 July 2011 at 1:26 pm

       No, probably not. But I don’t yet know what the future is going to be like, so I am simply assuming a framework going forward as we have experienced in the last few years.

       If everything changes drastically, then everything I am saying, everything Labour is saying, everything National is saying, everything the mainstream media saying, will all have to change.

       In absence of knowledge for exactly how things are going to change (you don’t even know for sure yourself – we’re 5-6 years past peak and the world hasn’t come crashing down back to Olduvai as many peakists thought it would, myself included) I can only talk about a future that has some resemblance to what I’m used to. It’s like going up to an ordinary Russian citizen in 1989 and expecting them to make useful predictions about what life would be like in 1992, without them knowing that the USSR was going to fall in late 1991.
       • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1

         16 July 2011 at 7:57 pm

         But I don’t yet know what the future is going to be like

         No one knows for sure. But there are clues

         http://www.theoildrum.com/

         we’re 5-6 years past peak and the world hasn’t come crashing down back to Olduvai as many peakists thought it would, myself included)

         Hmmmmm yes thats the position of the doomers, a sudden one way crash back to the stone age. But when you look at the Hubbert curve you will see that for a period just past peak oil, actual oil production does not fall that much or that rapidly.

         http://www.energybulletin.net/primer.php

         In fact, by pushing both conventional and non conventional sources of oil even harder, a “flat top” to peak oil can be sustained for a relatively short period of time. This prevents the immediate collapse of industrial civilisation.

         But you can also note that with strictly constrained energy supplies the real/industrial economy cannot grow. It cannot grow even if you pour new money into the economy at a prodigious rate.

         IMO oil depletion will be very obvious an undeniable within 2 years.
         • Lanthanide 1.1.1.1.1

           16 July 2011 at 8:45 pm

           “In fact, by pushing both conventional and non conventional sources of oil even harder, a “flat top” to peak oil can be sustained for a relatively short period of time. ”

           But that’s the thing, no one really knows. We could stay on this plateau, or with only a very modest reduction in production, for 5-6 years yet. Or demand could drop off significantly (as happened in 2008-2009) to a point where it isn’t as pressing.
         • mik e 1.1.1.1.2

           18 July 2011 at 9:31 pm

           thats why the nats are building more motorways they always get infrastructure the wrong way round back to front, Muldoon think big . now we have Joyce building miles of motorways when just about every other developed economy has stopped because they are to expensive , that doesn, t worry Joyce he more interested just buying Auckland Votes.Just another Quick short term policy that will cost us more in the long run
2. Craig Glen Eden 2

   16 July 2011 at 1:44 pm

   While Labour has been bold with CGT its now the selling of it thats crucial. I watched Parker this morning being interviewed by Gaynor, shit oh dear. What are Labour strategists doing putting him up, it should be Cunliffe that sells this, Parker is out of his depth despite what some people like Mallard might think. Word of warning to Goff either you allow Cunliffe to present this to people of NZ or you will loose the next election, your choice Phil win or loose because if you piss about much more you will loose.
   • Draco T Bastard 2.1

     16 July 2011 at 3:17 pm

     Agreed that Cunliffe should be the main face for the tax policies. He’s the one people see when the go to Labour’s site and he’s their spokesman for finance.
     • Zetetic 2.1.1

       16 July 2011 at 4:29 pm

       Cunliffe’s on Q+A tomorrow.

       The channels don’t like to have the same person interviewed on their head to head shows. Makes sense to give Parker the smaller show.
   • Reality Bytes 2.2

     16 July 2011 at 6:57 pm

     Agreed about Cunliffe, his video lecture on Labour’s tax policy was very well done. I didn’t see the Parker interview so can’t comment on that, but Cunliffe absolutely nailed it imo. I forwarded that video to some of my (usually) Nact supporting mates/family who admitted they were impressed, and acknowledged they were concerned and disappointed with Nationals answer to our problems being a one-off asset sale.

     Although it doesn’t affect my opinion (I prefer substance over charm) I do appreciate Key has charisma and appeal, hence his popularity, but in my opinion Cunliffe did a hell of a lot better than Key in that video. Cunliffe emanates good solid practical analysis coupled with trustworthy charisma, and sound logic to give it all some real substance.

     As long as they can keep the momentum up, some of these Nact supporting guys and gals I know may give Labour the tick this year, they have given Labour the vote once or twice before (inspite of usually being Nact supporters).

     Winning over traditional Nact supporters is what it’s about if Labour wants a shot at being our next government. Reshuffling votes between Labour/Greens won’t achieve it.
     • Draco T Bastard 2.2.1

       16 July 2011 at 7:47 pm

       Winning over traditional Nact supporters is what it’s about if Labour wants a shot at being our next government.

       There’s 20% of voters that didn’t vote last time. Getting them out to vote would be good to.
       • Reality Bytes 2.2.1.1

         17 July 2011 at 7:35 pm

         Yup indeed, and the new first time voters. Gotta remember there is 3 years worth of them.
3. Afewknowthetruth 3

   16 July 2011 at 10:07 pm

   Lan, CV.

   Yes, geological factors indicate a fairly gentle descent down the oil depltion curve. But the export-land model indicates a rapid fall-off in internationally traded oil from around 2011 on.

   The real unknown is how quickly the international financial system will collapse. That gold has nearly reached $1600 (under $1200 a year ago) suggests things are moving faster than many people realise.

   Most states in the US are technically bankrupt. And the US is rapidly reaching the point of not being able to borrow. Tornadoes, drought and flooding are taking their toll. Much depends on the coming hurricane season. Continued drought or a major hurricane could deliver the knock out blow for the US.

   Another important factor is unemployment. Real unemployment rates are around double the official rates in many countries, i.e. the US reports 9% unemployment which translates to around 20% as the real rate. And real jobs are being replaced with low-paid service sector jobs. Spain’s unemployment figure may be reasonably accurate, since Spain admits to 20% unemployment (I don’t think it has reached 40% yet.).

   All I know for certain is that NZ politicians continue to ignore all the factors that will determine the future. And local couincils continue to ratify ten-year plans that haven’t got one mention of any of the factors that WILL determine the future. It’s all utterly bizarre.

   Draco. If voting made any difference the powers that be would make voting illegal.
   • Colonial Viper 3.1

     16 July 2011 at 10:16 pm

     Yes, geological factors indicate a fairly gentle descent down the oil depltion curve. But the export-landf model indicates a rapid fall-off in internationally traded oil from around 2011 on.

     I can agree that geologically assessed available oil is likely to overestimate reserves. And that the descent down the oil depletion curve will be relatively gentle. For a little while longer.

     It’s all utterly bizarre.

     Yeah there are a few things going on like that at the moment.
   • Bored 3.2

     17 July 2011 at 7:51 pm

     AFKTT, you are right on the money, all hell is breaking loose, but here in Sleepy Hollow at the end of the world we are cushioned from seeing the blow coming…it will have knocked ten bells out of NZ before anybody who watches the MSM realise something is askew. Did anybody perchance see anything on tonights news about the PIGS crisis, or the government liquidity crisis in the USA? Thought not.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS