Where is the US economy headed?

Do you "understand the nature of reality"?

I think, George, that the strict scientist would say that there are no questions and issues outside the domain of science and that it is only a matter of time, provided sufficient government funds are allocated, before they are all answered. He would therefore claim that your position is tautological depending as it does on their being domains outside of science which are, obviously, unknowable.

When the period of time has elapsed to achieve the desired objective, assuming the taxpayer has not gone broke, the scientist will know what is correct in every circumstance he can imagine. His position is also tautological because it depends on there being no domains he cannot imagine.

Absolute truth is not always knowable.

science has already amply demonstrated that the future state of even well-understood dynamic systems, for which the forces acting and laws of motion are clearly determined, remains unknowable in many conditions - a phemonenon known as chaos, resulting from non-linearity and sensitive dependencs on initial conditions. The surprising trajectory of the recent hurricane that struck the Gulf Coast is a good example. Applied to neural network,s this principle opens new insights to the indeterminisn of even human volition.

Many of the references to faith that you may have heard, for example at the recent Republican convention, had to do with the motivation of human behaivor and achievment in the face of the unknowns and uncertainties we all face in this world. I think that is a concept every athletic coach understands very well, as do many of the leaders of successful organizations.

How can your "working models" replace that?

How do you determnine what in the realm of human affairs is "more correct" ?

Quote:

Absolute truth is not always knowable.

Absolute truth is not always knowable.
Are you suggesting that it is sometimes knowable? If so then I agree with you but that does not mean that we are both correct because I have seen others that can make a good case that shows absolute certainty iunattainable.

Quote:

science has already amply demonstrated that the future state of even well-understood dynamic systems, for which the forces acting and laws of motion are clearly determined, remains unknowable in many conditions ...

.]
Does this give you reason to abandon science and hold tighter to faith and belief?

Quote:

Many of the references to faith that you may have heard, for example at the recent Republican convention, had to do with the motivation of human behavior and achievment in the face of the unknowns and uncertainties we all face in this world. I think that is a concept every athletic coach understands very well, as do many of the leaders of successful organizations.

How do you know that it is truly the face of the unknowns and uncertainties we all face in this world. Have you been studying the social sciences that speak about these issues?

Quote:

How do you determnine what in the realm of human affairs is "more correct" ?

I would think that it would be through experimentation rather than my beliefs.
You never did answer the last question that I asked which was " What is the methodology that you use to come close to truth?

In fact I am a practicing scientist with a Ph.D. degree in fluid mechanics.

If then you do believe that "absolute certainty is unattainable" , what then is the basis for your preference for science?

Moreover these social sciences are nothing more than empirical statistical associations.

A common enough conceit, but one which is easily debunked, merely by noting ther existence of meaningful questions that science cannot ever answer.

The fact is there are things that are perfectly explainable by science in retrospect, but also perfectly unpreductable by that same science in prospect.

There is no generally accepted and complete theoretical scientific model for human behavior

Reasoning is simply a smart person with a good understanding of the world

but I would think that where ever our passions are, "it may be possible that our understandings are close.

The anti-Christians for example ignore the damage to the culture of such things as promiscuity, divorce and abortion presumably in their own interests and yet it is inconceivable that the Church would condemn such things for any other reason.

Specie backed money is money distributed, normally as paper money, that is assigned value based on valuable minerals tied to the paper money. The idea is that with specie backed money, though the paper itself holds no true value, it represents whatever mineral is held in reserve, historically gold and silver. Holders of the paper money could theoretically exchange their bills for the gold or silver that it represented. This way, the money held a true value, while not being as bulky or tough to carry around as say gold, silver, or cows. Specie backed money has generally given way to fiat money, money that is not backed by any valuable resources. Today most currencies are fiat currencies, with values assigned by the governments issuing the bills, and holding no true values.

Harbingers of Harder Times


Published: March 12, 2005

At $58.3 billion, the United States' trade deficit for January exceeded everyone's worst expectations. The huge mismatch reported yesterday between imports and exports just missed breaking the monthly record, set last November, and is all the more remarkable for occurring in a month when the price of oil actually declined.

The trade deficit is the single most important factor in measuring the extent to which the nation lives beyond its means. As such, it should force us to own up to the dangers of rampant deficit spending. But the White House is showing no sign of action, as if doing nothing might make the problem smaller.

In response to yesterday's trade deficit figure, the dollar weakened against the euro and the yen, and traders predicted further declines in the weeks and months ahead. That, in turn, contributed to a drop in stock and bond prices. Such gyrations are certainly not unprecedented. The dollar has been on a downward trajectory for three straight years and was going into a fresh skid even before the latest trade deficit figure was released.

That slump was largely in response to recent reports, some later denied, that Asian central bankers may begin moving their huge dollar holdings into other currencies. That would mean higher interest rates in the United States because the government would need to sweeten Treasury yields, and higher interest rates imply further declines in stock and bond prices. A declining dollar also risks higher inflation; more expensive imports give domestic producers an excuse to raise prices.

There may be more trouble to come. Next week, the government will release figures showing how much capital flowed into the United States from abroad in January. Those numbers were down by nearly one-third in December. If next week's report is disappointing, the logical response from the currency markets would be to sell dollars - again raising the threat of all the possible side effects.

Since the trade deficit is intimately connected to the federal budget deficit, the best way to reduce the trade imbalance is to reduce the budget gap. But President Bush is calling for more tax cuts, politically implausible spending cuts and costly Social Security privatization. Both parties in Congress must address the twin trade and budget deficits - or risk being forced to do so by events beyond their control.

Do you believe that the US may be approaching economic disaster? If so what can or should the administration and congress do to avert it?