Tab Content
No More Results
About asfbhero

Basic Information

About asfbhero
Biography:
I'm smart, easy-going, and a bit of a homebody (though don't get me wrong I like to party as much as the next guy). I tend to prefer a mellower environment along with some choice individuals most of the time. I like just hanging/going out with friends, watching movies, good music, playing video games, poker, chess, as well as a...bit eclectic...collection of other pursuits; that most people might find boring-- Economics, and trading, which pretty much all of my other academic sort of interests tie into; technology, sociology, psychology, politics, history, philosophy, and theoretical physics. By far I'm not an expert in any of these fields, besides economics and trading, but you have to know a lot of the other stuff. Plus it can be interesting. I'm totally down with the science channel. I like people who are smart, preferably smarter than me. I find most girls to be fairly superficial, and really only like uncommonly smart, pretty (I recognize that this, in itself is superficial... I'm a sucker for a pretty face, what can I say) and most importantly nice (as in good person; doing the wrong things for the right reasons is cool) girls. Very picky, I know.... I've been told. I'm very friendly though, and probably one of the most accepting people you'll ever meet. As long as you're not stealing, or hurting anyone, you're cool in my book.Right now I'm working on trading, my tech support business, and an economic theory outlined below that I'm sure no one will read. It's nowhere near done, not even a paper. Though I'd like for it to one day be a Treatise.<High School > When I was 15, my parents told me our house was worth a great deal more in 2004 than it was in 2003, along with the fact that this was expected to continue. First, I asked, "why not just buy houses on credit and sell them later for a profit?". I was told, and I'm paraphrasing here, "you could, but it's too risky, plus there is no way people can make a good living "flipping houses" (not sure if this was a real term back then). Enough with your something for nothing schemes". While my parents were way off about economics, finance, and business... the idea that "It's impossible to get something for nothing", truly shaped, much for the better my future economic/political theories.Soon, I became obsessed with the study of, and more importantly desire to understand what really moved markets, what was Economics really? What I was being taught didn't seem to fit with my observations. Did I just need to study more? Perhaps I couldn't understand, because the material being taught was flawed, or --most tantalizingly-- modern economic theory was incomplete, not fully understood yet...there was more to be discovered! Starting in 2005-2006 I'd had enough self study and economic observation, plus some AP ECON I could use as a lens to make some observations about the world's economic landscape. Soon after I had these tools I noticed the same think I'd been confused by at dinner, listening to my parents speak of the value of our home. Much more informed, and looking for personal gain more than anything else I looked deeply into the why's and how's of housing's seemingly unstoppable rise. Plain as day, right in the data, on the news, everything I was seeing in 2006 was telling me that a massive crash was coming. A large part of hypothesis came from how interconnected all the financial institutions, all the way down to individuals were. They were all connected by debt, everyone owed everyone money, and no-one could really pay it back, it was in my opinion completely unsustainable. I saw the coming crash as an inevitable fact instead of a theory. These ideas were all formed, from my personal theory on economics, that was, and still is forming, but whose basic tenants have always guided my analysis. <Early Undergrad> I was hooked on trading and investing for years already (what's better than playing a really fun game, and making money w, all while sitting on a laptop in class), but in 2008 I became hooked for good. Not just on trading, but on a serious professional development and refinement of my economic theories. The lead-up and crash of 2008, was a huge validation for my ideas. Before, everyone- family, friends (except a select few, you know who you are :-)), professors, the internet, text books... they all said my ideas, theories, and economic thesis were wrong for a myriad of reasons. I was so convinced that; in addition to placing my own trades, I launched a multi-month campaign that involved threatening to burn my parent's house down if they didn't protect their retirement money. Get it out of harm's way. I may have been going to state school, but my brother was looking Ivy League. In 2008 the crash finally came. I am still most proud of saving my parents from a life of working 'till death; paycheck to paycheck...instead they will live their lives comfortably off the money they worked their entire lives for. The experts, "Economists", with their "best" theories told ordinary people things were going to be alright, and they weren't. The current models had failed, and did so with the majority of the suffering, being laid upon those who had nothing to do with creating the plight they found themselves in. This level of exploitation, to me was unthinkable.<Middle Undergrad>The stark validation of my theories was great, but now the hard part began. I now had a basic working theory, but now I was obligated to pursue it. With the hubris of a man who believes he can fix a problem, especially the question of Economics... I set about my task. What choice did I have, other than to attempt and raise Economics back atop the lofty mantel, to which it aspires to reside. A theory of economic organization, that both in theory and in practice, benefits the whole world, promoting; Freedom, Economic Growth, Mass Prosperity, Innovation, and perhaps most importantly possesses a natural, and intrinsic fairness that I believe is an essential element to a better economic theory, one that is free and competitive, but understands that the purpose of an economy is the welfare of its people, as well as the raw pursuit of profit.<Later Undergrad & Early Grad> As I became more knowledgeable, through both, study, as well as trial-and error, I decided to try a technique that had proven successful in my design of Proprietary Trading Indicators and Algorithms. My approach was simple; make a flow chart describing what I needed to have the mathematics accomplish in order to generate earlier trading signals with less false/bad signals, find those equations, and simply put them together. It took me years to develop and tweak those series of algorithms, but the important part is that it worked (still does today, and no you can't look at the source code). The way I applied this concept to the development of a economic theory was essentially the same. I looked at theories, formulas, algorithms, etc. that weren't designed specifically for economics or finance, but each had a specific function I was looking for, so that when put together I would have a new theory and a way to test it. Continuing with the theme of interconnectedness, I took what I saw to be the "best", or "correct" parts of existing economic theories, and used them to help build a new, more complete, and what I believed to be a better whole. I already knew that the study of economics was fundamentally linked to, Finance, Business, Investing, Trade, Geopolitics, etc. But, I had read all of this from books and professors. <Independent Research & Selected Undergrad and Grad Classes>I had been having trouble using existing econometrics and theories. Trying to make the math work by itself, but making it work how I wanted at this level of math, without the formal training I needed I decided to take another tact while I educated myself on the necessary mathematics. I used a technique I've become quite fond of, that is where I build a flow chart, mapping out the theory. Using as much proven, existing theory, logic and math as possible, but leaving blank spots where I was either missing something, had to invent something, or was just plain wrong. This is bringing us closer to present day. In late 2011, early 2012, I was inspired by the founding fathers distrust of a two party system. This sparked a though, what if I'm looking for a capitalist solution, or a socialist, or a communist, when none of those contain the answer. It's like a gridlocked congress; nothing can work properly because everyone wants to go in the opposite direction. The most cogent example of this I saw in modern economic discourse, was until very recently (even now it's a rarity), is the lack of discussion of Corporatism. Corporatism is the economic evil that we should be fighting. In the coming decades, along with a mix of potent stagflation, corporatism will become the new enemy that needs to be busted. If the secret gets out that is.Free Market Capitalism is the most powerful driving force in human history. It creates innovation, industry, new opportunities, etc. It is fast, powerful, and ruthless. There are laws to protect against property rights, and to ensure that there is a minimum of fraud, so as to make sure the markets stay trusted. While free market capitalism, even in the ideal situation of 0 corruption of fraud, is without a doubt the best driver of economic growth and development. However there is a very high, and difficult to quantify negative externality. That is human suffering, and poverty created because, while capital can traverse the world in seconds, people cannot. If industry doesn't move, but changes, some will be unable to adapt on their own to the rapid re-training required, etc. Even the most ruthless capitalist can see the flaw here, eventually after too much suffering; there will be dissidence, insurgency, rebellion... All of which, are highly negative to economic growth, and profits.Communism simply doesn't work, because no government can accurately predict the needs of its people, and if it can, it will only ensure survival. There will be no innovation, progress, or growth. Communism will go the same way as our ruthless capitalist, eventually after too much suffering; there will be dissidence, insurgency, rebellion...Socialism seems to be the true happy medium, and in principal, I believe that it is. However that which we now call socialism is more akin to communism. What political pundits in the US describe as Socialism is even worse. They say socialism, but the economic system we are really using is Corporatist. Instead of distributing wealth from the upper echelons of society, to those who are struggling (what classic socialism is), wealth is distributed from the middle to lower echelons of society to the Ultra-Wealthy corporations, who run the country as de facto Monarchal Oligarchs. This is the system we live in now, and things are only going to get worse.<Independent Research>Using my theme of interconnectedness, and taking the "good" parts of other theories, and creating one Uber theory is the strategy I used, once again here. A strong, powerful, lasting economy must be built on one core concept; that the purpose of economics isn't to create the best economy, it's to create the best system of economic organization, that will result in the greatest possible prosperity, growth, innovation, learning, and of course profits, for a SOCIETY. This means that people HAVE to come first, they are human beings, not simply units of capital to be exploited. It is true that the best way to allocate labor is by treating workers as units of capital. There is nothing wrong with this. It is the most productive, and efficient way. However, there is one caveat, since the Economy is for the betterment of the people, and not the other way around, workers have a fundamental right to humane working conditions. The question then becomes who decides on what a humane working condition is; a fair wage, etc. Most of these problems have been solved for us already. Unions. Unions are analogous to corporations, but for labor (special kind of capital, because they're people), not regular capital, as with corporations. Unions are the natural response of labor in a free market. Higher living wages will put an additional strain on corporations, but with a proper progressive tax code (more in depth later) this burden will be lessened. In addition, workers earning higher wages will then be able to back and actually purchase the products they helped produce. Whatever; if any additional strains placed on businesses, won't even be a bad thing. There will be few regulations on businesses, save for safety, and quality control s. Workers will be encouraged to form unions, but the government, will largely not be involved. The exception being; to ensure neither businesses, nor unions engage in any kind of violence or intimidation. Businesses will always have an advantage over workers, because businesses can move. Capital is mobile, labor capital is now. Well it is far more mobile that it was, and becoming more and more mobile every day. People will inevitably want to live in one place for extended periods of time, to raise families, go to school, etc. The solution to this would be to create, not only local unions, but national, and really in our current and rapidly expanding global economy, international unions. If all auto workers across the planet agree on a acceptable wage (over time global wages, and living conditions would even out, but at first workers who earn less now will earn comparatively less then) and working conditions, then all auto manufactures would have to work on building better cheaper, safer cars, better service...innovate. The wages would never be too high, because the auto company would never agree to it, and without an auto company everyone is out of luck. It's a negotiation. If the auto companies on the unions want to play hardball and decide to just go out of business, in addition to being stupid, it would be useless. This is a free market economy, with very few regulations, if the auto industry went bankrupt overnight because their workers went against almost every known instance of collective bargaining. The mass unemployment created would be severe, but relatively painless. As a consequence of having such a raw and powerful capitalist free market system there has to be a tax to pay for basic living, and/or retraining for workers. The tax, like any other puts a drag on the economy, but it allows for you to boost the economy, in a highly productive, innovative way, much harder. A small tax is a small price to pay, to keep people happy when they are out of work as economies adapt to changing conditions. These periods of unemployment will be briefer than those we see now, because of the nature of a more deregulated free market system. Industry will be able to recover much more quickly. The basic idea is to run a powerful capitalist free market economy, but cushion labor capital from the violence of the system. Creative destruction is a fascinating and powerful force, but people, must be considered. It would also cost much less money to help displaced workers than it does to bail out banks, or run up public debt, that will be paid by the lower and middle classes through inflation.All public goods (those that cannot be efficiently allocated by the free market), will in most cases be controlled by the states, but in some cases, healthcare seeming to be one of them, the federal government can do a better and cheaper job than the states individually. Other public goods are emergency services; fire department, police, ambulance, national guard, military, etc.As for government investment in research and technology, I think that should be voted on by the congress. My personal opinion is that programs like NASA have proven throughout history to have HUGE monetary and technological payoffs. Maybe not every quarter, but fund NASA for a few decades and we are going to see some cool stuff. Stuff that will benefit us economically, health-wise, weapons, everything. That, alongside government funding for universities, and infrastructure, all wrapped up in the economic powerhouse created by as close as you can get to
Location:
A, A
Interests:
Day trading, The Young Turks, Current Events, Economics, Hanging Out, Trading American Football, You
Occupation:
Paralegal, Data entry, organization, accuracy checking, make notations when necessary, etc. Utilize

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
0
Posts Per Day
0
General Information
Last Activity
02-27-2014 10:21 PM
Join Date
01-27-2014
Referrals
0
Activity Information
  • Total Points:
  • 404.2
  • Activity Level:
  • 7
  • To Next Level:
  • 88.8
  • Percent Into Level:
  • 29.52% Achieved
  • Daily Activity:
  • 0.1 / 2.55 (3.92%)
  • Weekly Activity:
  • 0.4 / 17.84 (2.24%)
  • Monthly Activity:
  • 2.6 / 71.36 (3.64%)
Points
  • Points for Posts:
  • 0
  • Points for Threads:
  • 0
  • Points for Thread Ratings Given:
  • 0
  • Points for Thread Ratings Received:
  • 0
  • Points for Visitor Messages (Given):
  • 0
  • Points for Visitor Messages (Received):
  • 0
  • Points for Polls Posted:
  • 0
  • Points for Poll Votes:
  • 0
  • Points for Confirmed Friends:
  • 0
  • Points for Reputation (Given):
  • 0
  • Points for Reputation (Received):
  • 0
  • Points for Infraction Points (Given):
  • 0
  • Points for Infraction Points (Received):
  • 0
  • Points for Referrals:
  • 0
  • Points for Social Group Messages:
  • 0
  • Points for Social Group Discussions:
  • 0
  • Points for Calendar Events:
  • 0
  • Points for Days Registered:
  • 404.50000000002
  • Points for Blogs:
  • 0
  • Points for Blog Comments:
  • 0
  • Points for Shouts:
  • 0
  • Points for Mentions Given:
  • 0
  • Points for Mentions Received:
  • 0
  • Points for Tags Given:
  • 0
  • Points for Tags Received:
  • 0
  • Points for Triple Triad Battle (Draw):
  • 0
  • Points for Triple Triad Battle (Won):
  • 0
  • Points for Triple Triad Battle (Lost):
  • 0
  • Points for Triple Triad Tournament Won:
  • 0
  • Points for Triple Triad Trade:
  • 0
  • Points for Profile Completed:
  • 0
  • Points for Contests Won:
  • 0

0 Achievements

0 Awards

0 Currently Held Trophies

0 Previously Held Trophies