Dec

15

[Re the DailySpec Thanksgiving story.]

McDonald's Admits It's Too Expensive for Customers

In no way does this contradict the point of the story — customers looking for a low-price meal can (and have) go to other fast-food chains, such as Taco Bell. Free enterprise and competition are necessary for a happy society.

Dec

12

"Free trade" never loses an argument; it is like being in favor of virtue. Even the worst sinner knows that vice is not to be publicly defended. The difficult for those of us in the bleachers is that we have never been able to avoid asking the follow-on question: if you don't like tariffs as taxes, what do you want to have instead? Adam Smith's answers were (1) domestic excises - the sugar is allowed to arrive untaxed and then have a tax levied when it is sold and (2) occupancy taxes - to be measured by how many windows a building had. What is never mentioned, of course, is that Smith was completely in support of the navigation acts; Britain would have "free trade" but only on cargoes carried on British ships that traveled directly to British ports. His specific comment on that question was: “Defense is of much more importance than opulence.”

William Huggins writes:

i'm all ears to hear what national security threat the us is responding to with their 50% tariff on aluminum processed where there is an abundance of clean energy to do so and (until recently) all but perfectly aligned nat sec interests with the processor?

Stefan Jovanovich responds:

The answer offered by the authors and voters who made the Constitution the national law was "protection". I offer this only as an historical explanation, not advocacy, since those of us who live on popcorn and waiting from spring (what Rogers Hornsby said he did after the baseball season ended) have abandoned all attempts to understand what is called "policy", whether monetary or otherwise.

Art Cooper asks:

May I have your thoughts on Henry George's advocacy for the replacement of all other taxes by a land value tax?

Henry Gifford comments:

I think Henry George’s idea has a lot of merit, and not just because I heard that my father once taught at The Henry George School of Economics.

More than one calculation has shown that the cost of complying with tax laws in the US is about equal to the amount of taxes paid. If a land value tax eliminated all other taxes, almost all that cost would be saved. But, this would disadvantage the government because vague and complicated laws can be used by the strong against the weak, something not many in government want to see the end of.

Then there is the issue of jobs. The existing tax systems create a huge number of jobs, most of which would go away with a greatly simplified tax. Sure, those people could find more useful endeavors, increasing wealth for all, but if politicians started talking like that a lot of other things would be seen as folly.

Disagreements about the value of land could be handled like the ancient Greeks did – anyone claiming a lower value for their property can be challenged to sell it at that lower price.

A similar situation exists with the part of building design laws that regulate the energy efficiency of new buildings that get built. Now the laws run to hundreds of pages, which makes them very difficult to enforce. The vagueness gives the government people more power, as they interpret the laws as they see fit, or as they are paid under the table to do. For a time I was advocating a simple energy code: limit the size of the heating and cooling systems installed per the size of the building (you-tube: “The Perfect Energy Code”). Governments around the US were loathe to adopt a simplified energy code, because then jobs would be “lost” and the power to make arbitrary decisions would be reduced and the laws would actually be enforceable. A simplified tax collecting system will probably always be unpopular for similar reasons, despite what I think is a lot to recommend it.

Stefan Jovanovich responds:

Smith agreed with Henry George. He thought a land tax had all the attributes of a good tax, unlike income and employment taxes, which were the worst possible ones. Even tariffs had some virtues compared to those that required citizens to tell the state everything.

Nov

10

Tariffs

November 10, 2024 | 1 Comment

The Old Right Opposed Tariffs

The Old Right was a principled band of intellectuals and activists, many of them libertarians, who fought the “industrial regimentation” of the New Deal, and were the first to note that, in America, statism and corporatism are inseparable.

Despite some current claims, however, these writers ardently defended capitalism, including big business and corporations, celebrated the profit motive, and took a strict laissez-faire attitude towards international trade. They loathed tariffs, and saw protectionism as a species of socialist planning.

Humbert H. writes:

Current restrictionist trade theories in the conservative movement, therefore, are not those of the Old Right. Their intellectual legacy is more likely British mercantilism.

The British did pretty well under mercantilism. I have always supported free (meaning from both sides) trade with equally situated countries, like US and Canada, but I love restrictionism and tariffs imposed on countries like China. It's crazy, in my opinion, to have "free trade" with a country that can and routinely does restrict imports, has slave labor, no "social safety net", steals intellectual property in a variety of ways, and can chose to focus on any trade area to bankrupt it's counterparts in a "free" country. The ability to produce a variety of goods is fundamental to the strength of the country. In wars, pandemics, and trade wars the other country starts having domestic capabilities is crucial. When this debate was first discussed in France, restricting the imports of oranges from Spain and Portugal into France was used as an example of what not to do, and that's a poor example compared to importing steel and semiconductors.

Larry Williams comments:

Hamilton's use of tariffs made America great.

Stefan Jovanovich writes:

Hamilton made his living as a private attorney in New York representing the marine insurance companies whose policies required shippers to be "woke" - i.e. perfect observers of their policies' neutrality warranties.

Pamela Van Giessen adds:

Silent Cal Coolidge the Vermonter was also good with tariffs and preferred them to income taxes.

Along with Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon, Coolidge won the passage of three major tax cuts. Using powers delegated to him by the 1922 Fordney–McCumber Tariff, Coolidge kept tariff rates high in order to protect American manufacturing profits and high wages. He blocked passage of the McNary–Haugen Farm Relief Bill, which would have involved the federal government in the persistent farm crisis by raising prices paid to farmers for five crops. The strong economy combined with restrained government spending produced consistent government surpluses, and total federal debt shrank by one quarter during Coolidge's presidency.

Michael Brush responds:

Smoot-Hawley worsened the Great Depression.

Humbert H. cautions:

That's not really a fact, it's a debatable point. There's a range of opinions there from "it caused it" to "it did nothing to worsen it". It's one of those things like "what caused the fall of Rome" that can't be decisively proven.

Stefan Jovanovich offers:

Effective date of Smoot-Hawley Tariff: June 17, 1930
Tariff collections:
Fiscal Year 1931: $378,354,005.05
Fiscal Year 1932: $327,754,969.45
Fiscal Year 1933: $250,750,251.27
Total tax collections by Treasury:
Fiscal Year 1931: $2,118,092,899.01
Fiscal Year 1932: $2,118,092,899.01
Fiscal Year 1933: $2,576,530,202.00

Pamela Van Giessen writes:

Amity Shlaes goes into detail about how the depression was extended (or recovery didn’t come) in The Forgotten Man. She attributes the worsening of the depression, especially in the late ‘30s, to a combination of government interventions that included the Smoot-Hawley tariff, government (and union) demands to keep wages high, banking regulation, over-regulation, and FDR’s new deal, among other government interventions. In short, there doesn’t seem to be just one cause though it seems reasonable to blame each of the interventions.

Art Cooper adds:

I also found Murray Rothbard's America's Great Depression to have worthwhile insights.

Oct

13

Milton's travel through Florida had the eye wall intact straight through until it got to the Atlantic. Strong storm. Among the 4 strongest in the history of the Atlantic. One thing is clear though: There's a lot of destruction from this storm.

Hence, I have to wonder if there are going to be any insurers left in the Florida market, and if there are any left, which ones? I'm not sure that those insurers still there will make for good investment, but maybe they'll be able to survive in that market. It just seems unlikely.

Art Cooper responds:

There will certainly be private P&C insurers (in addition to state-created Citizens Property Insurance Company) continuing to do business in FL after Milton, but I strongly suspect they will continue to increase their restrictions on coverage. I understand that many victims of Hurricane Helene who thought they had coverage for its damage are being shocked to find out they either didn't, or did not to the extent to which they'd believed.

Historically, the aftermath of an event causing massive insurance claims is an opportune time to invest in carriers doing a lot of business in the affected area, because marginal carriers cease writing policies, thereby minimizing competition, and the event provides cover for dramatic rate increases. (Buy when there's "blood in the streets".) If you're bullish on the P&C sector, wait till after billions of dollars of claims are made, then try to buy at support levels.

I don't have any numbers on net migration out of FL, but I can attest anecdotally that the pandemic-induced flood into the state has ended. Bear in mind, however, that migration to FL has been characterized by wild swings for the past 100 years, and I'm confident it will continue to be volatile. Weather events such as Helene and Milton, and more importantly the greatly increased cost of homeowner's insurance, will of course be inhibiting factors going forward.

Carder Dimitroff writes:

I understand why some would consider NEE for short positions. I can see why the market might ping them. If the price sinks and the value is right for you, consider buying NEE as others sell.

Why? NEE Florida's assets are regulated. Within the state, they operate on a cost-plus-a-margin basis. They have a good relationship with the state's regulators (the state needs them). Their power plants and wires may be damaged, but the state's ratepayers will likely cover all their losses. There may be a temporary cash flow issue, but even those costs will be covered. For traders, it might take a year for NEE to recover financially.

Apr

16

Investors wrongfooted as ‘higher for longer’ rates return to haunt markets

Zubin Al Genubi asks:

Interest alone on US debt is 1 trillion dollars a year! Anyone concerned?

Larry Williams is definite:

NOPE. NOT AT ALL.

Art Cooper, however:

*I* am certainly concerned, in the long term. When the coverage ratio on gov't debt auctions drops close to 1.0, it will be time to take meaningful action, with a major re-allocation of investment portfolios.

Larry Williams responds:

Not to worry…says MMT guys…as long as we are not gold-backed $, it's all just accounting numbers.

Kim Zussman wonders:

Reallocate to what? (he says looking around twice with stocks near ATHs)

Art Cooper suggests:

There are a universe of hard assets out there, including gold (though GLD could easily go far higher). Because I like to emulate the Sage and shop in the bargain basement, I personally find extremely distressed income-producing real estate of interest. Babies are being thrown out with the bath water.

Larry Williams writes:

The public debt is just $ in savings accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank. When it matures the Fed transfers those dollars to checking accounts (aka reserves) at the same Fed. It's just a debit of securities accounts and a credit of reserve accounts. All internal at the Fed. When gov sells new Tsy secs, the Fed debits the reserve accounts and credits securities accounts. Those $ only exist as balances in one account or the other.

Asindu Drileba adds:

David Graeber once mentioned that the US can never default on its debts since the Fed is the largest holder of Treasuries.

William Huggins comments:

its not that the US -can't- default on its debts, its that 70% of those debts are to americans. so what is the probability of americans voting to default on themselves when they have the ready alternative of printing money? more important might be whether or not the 30% foreign holders will keep playing along but that analysis is an exercise in ranking "next best alternative" for them. when one starts looking under the hood at the alternatives, its boils out like china's bank regulator said in early 2009, "except for treasuries, what can you hold? gold? you don't hold japanese government bonds or uk bonds. us treasuries are the safe-haven. for everyone, including china, it is the only option: "we hate you guys but there is nothing much we can do."

H. Humbert replies:

The Americans would be about equally unlikely to default if most of the debt was held by foreigners. If you can print money there is no need to piss off any of your "customers". It's not like things worked out super well for Argentina, at least until they hit bottom.

Mar

24

An alternate understanding of a market being at all time high (market reaching new prices it has never encountered) is this: "Everyone that has ever bought that stock or instrument is now in profit". What might be the psychological implications of this?

Kim Zussman comments:

It is possible (and probable) to buy, then sell after a decline and stay out only to see it reverse and go up further. This (timing) is one reason it is so much easier to do better with B/H than trading.

Big Al adds:

The other advantage to B&H is that the opportunity cost viz time/attention required is basically zero. I have looked at various index timing approaches and have not found anything that beats B&H, especially when considering the vig and opportunity cost. However, should one need to scratch the itch, timing strategies may work better with individual stocks. But again, opportunity cost.

Humbert H. writes:

I've always been believer in B&H vs. trading. But even in B&H the debate between indexing and individual stock selection never dies. I don't like indexing, but I don't have a mathematical basis for that. It's a fundamental belief that buying things without any regard to their economic value has to fail in time, at least relative to paying some attention to it.

Zubin Al Genubi adds more:

Another aspect of buy and hold that Rocky pointed out is the capital gain tax severely eats into returns. The richest guys hold for years and have only unrealized untaxable gains.

Art Cooper agrees:

There was an excellent article in the Jan 7, 2017 issue of Barron's by Leslie P. Norton on VERY long-lived closed end mutual funds which have surpassed the S&P's performance. They have all followed buy and hold strategies.

Michael Brush offers:

Far more money has been lost by investors in preparing for corrections, or anticipating corrections, than has been lost in the corrections themselves.
- Peter Lynch

Steve Ellison brings up an important point:

And yet trading is one of the focal points of this list. The way I square this circle is to keep most of my trading account in an equity index fund at all times. When I think I have an edge, I make trades using margin.

Larry Williams writes:

B&H is the keys to the kingdom, but…the massive fortunes of Livermore were short term trades despite his comment about sitting on your hands. Even the current high performers, Cohen, Dalio, Tudor etc use market timing. When I won world cup trading $10,000 to $1,100,000, it was all about timing and wild crazy money management. One approach wins big the other wins fast. A point to ponder.

Bill Rafter writes:

What we found in studying only the SPX/SPY is that in the long run a buy-and-hold yielded 9.5 percent compounded annually. That was from 1972 to recent. Our argument is that studies before 1972 are flawed. That 9.5 was great considering there were several collapses of ~50 percent. However if you could just eliminate the collapses you could raise the return to 13.5 percent compounded annually.

Eliminating the down moves did not involve prescience. You did not need to forecast recessions, only identify them when you were in one. That was not difficult, and timing was not a critical as one might think. We identified several algos that worked well.

When you were out of equities, you could either simply hold cash, or go long the 10-year ETF. The bonds were better, but not by much. Interestingly, long term holding of bond ETFs yielded low single-digit returns. Best avoided. Which also means that the Markowitz 60/40 strategy was a sub-performer.

Taxes are investor/vehicle specific. For example, if you use a no-tax vehicle, there are no taxes. Regarding turnover, there are very few transactions, as there are very few recessions. The strategy is basically B&H, but with holidays.

Asindu Drileba has concerns:

My problem with buy & hold Is that it has no risk management strategy. If you bought the S&P 500 in 1929 for example during the wrong month. It took you 25 years i.e until 1954 not even to make profit, but just to break even. The real question is, how do you know your not investing in a market path that will take 25 years just to break even?

Humbert H. responds:

That’s why, dollar cost averaging. I don’t think anyone thinks buy once in your lifetime and never interact with the stock market ever again. I think if you had averaged in monthly or quarterly from the summer 1929 through summer 1959 and then held and lived off dividends or cashed out/interest in retirement, you did well.

Art Cooper adds:

The year 1954 is almost universally given as the "break-even" year to recoup losses for buy & hold investors who bought at the 1929 peak. It's wrong to do so. First, it ignores dividends. Had dividends been re-invested the recovery year would have been much earlier. Second, it ignores the deflation which occurred during the Great Depression. In this column Mark Hulbert argues that someone who invested a lump sum at the 1929 peak would have recovered in real economic terms by late 1936.

I'm not arguing against dollar-cost averaging, merely pointing out a historical falsehood.

Hernan Avella writes:

What people should do while they are young and have human capital left is to leverage!

Life-Cycle Investing and Leverage: Buying Stock on Margin Can Reduce Retirement Risk

The most robust research, incorporating lifecycle patterns and relevant time horizons for long term investors tells us that the optimal allocation is 50/50 all equities, domestic and international. But most ppl don’t have the gumption to be 100% on equities.

Jan

26

Daily sd's 1 (1,1,1,1,1,0,0) mean variation .71 PL 2
Daily sd's 2 (0,0,0,0,0,0,5) mean variation .71 PL -18
Correct forecast, but went bust anyway, due to lumping of volatility.

Asindu Drileba asks:

What would be the best strategy to capture the return of this distribution? How would the position size be computed? Say you have $10.

Zubin Al Genubi replies:

OTM option? Don't know which direction so maybe a strangle? Its an example of a fat tail event surprising someone expecting a certain variance. Like the LTCM guys. $.20? 2%? As a hedge. Depends if its hedge or a trade.

William Huggins comments:

what you're picking up on is that variance alone doesn't describe non-normal distributions very well - you need additional tools like skewness (possibly kurtosis) to pick up on those differences. despite having a better description though, there is the presumption that the data generating process is stable across the sample period, and going forward. I've generally found (despite my poor timing record) that money is to be made when the distribution is changing, not stable (the computers rule those waves imo) so detecting breaks may be more valuable than fixed descriptions.

Peter Ringel writes:

I can confirm this from the math-undereducated trading side. Stability is boring, and boredom can lead to undisciplined trades. Shocks and short-term exaggerations are great.

Art Cooper points out:

Stability is boring, and boredom can lead to undisciplined trades. It's Minsky's Theory when this becomes widespread.

Zubin Al Genubi responds:

Thank you Dr Huggins. That is indeed the point that variance, regression, sd, means, should be used with power law distributions with extreme caution or not at all.

Hernan Avella questions:

Why is all that mumbo necessary when all you need is good entries and good stops? The house never closes and there are so many opportunities ahead. f you need that big of a stop, or it gets triggered so frequent that ruins the profits, your system sucks! It’s not a stop-loss problem.

H. Humbert comments:

I think he is saying the system did suck because it relied on improper statistical analysis, using gaussian distributions for prediction when it should have used a more sophisticated statistical analysis that doesn't make such assumption. If you know of good entries reliably without using statistics, more power to you! And maybe he needs volatility swaps in addition to variance swaps and then his system will be A-OK because that could be a simple way to hedge the fat tails. Since I don't trade, I'm just trying to interpret what's flying by.

Humbert H. writes:

Var swap vs. vol swap would be the purest expression. You could also buy a call on realized variance, by buying an uncapped variance swap and selling a capped variance swap (for historical reasons, the cap is struck at 2.5x the variance swap strike, the cap level acting as your effective call strike).

For 100k vega notional and uncapped strike at 22, and capped strike at 20, and realized vol over the period of 80:

100,000/(2*strike) = var notional = 2,272.72 var units uncapped, 2500 var units capped
Pnl uncapped 13.4mm
Pnl capped -4.1mm
Net 9.3mm for ~0.2m cost, not bad (approx (22-20) * vega not).

Some payouts were on the order of 2000:1 during March 2020. Pre 2020 you had some active sellers:

‘Amateurish’ Trades Blew Up AIMCo’s Volatility Program, Experts Say

H. Humbert responds:

Interesting. And an interesting article. You'd think that after LTCM people would realize that 100 year floods are just named that for convenience. That's why I never buy stocks in insurance companies. He whose name shouldn't be mentioned (not the fractalist but the Middle Eastern guy) always advocated buying black swan options, but I think the Chair didn't think he made money on this.

Kim Zussman links:

The hedge fund titan who’s been watching for ‘black swans’ for decades says the ‘greatest credit bubble in human history’ is set to pop—but he’s not worried

Nov

16

Everyone went to Hawaii last year. They all went to Europe this year. Everyone drives the same vehicle. People love to follow the herd. Hedgies, quants, teckies all looking at the same data, same correlations, all doing the same trade.

Nils Poertner writes:

being in a herd somewhat offers protection and one can save energy - as our brains like to save energy (constant decision making and testing stuff costs energy and our brains are already weakened via e-smog etc etc).

as a trader though - one cannot make any money long term if one is constantly part of the group - one is more like that rabbit that is hypnotized with the headlight of the oncoming vehicle. so one has to find a niche. energy is key in my view- to keep the energy up - as traders often lose it as time goes by (maybe a talent to not give a f*** about anything, too).

William Huggins comments:

i would argue that running with the herd minimizes the energy lost scrambling in all directions looking for an edge. unless someone has a refined technique for discovering edges and implementing them, its hard to conceive that active selection would overcome the "drift of industrialization". numerous studies (most famously jack bogle's) have shown that buying and holding the index is just fine and does in fact make decent money over the long term. when you factor in the costs of active trading, you really need an edge to overcome the friction imposed.

clearly, both strategies can be successful but one requires much more skill (and earns commensurate rewards) so i think its misguided to suggest that "one cannot make any money long term" by following the herd. you just won't earn exceptional returns.

Nils Poertner adds:

I think it is time to sharpen up in coming yrs- the reality is that most folks in finance (in particular at large firms) really don't have special skills compared to other professions in non-finance (yet they get paid so much more). The whole financial system has just gotten a bit too big - and time will be for those who go the extra mile - and not sit comfortably and hope mediocracy will be work out. many things will change anyway…many….medicine got to change - see how unfit and mentally challenged most citizens are by now.

Humbert H. asks:

You think if they don't know how to sharpen up just getting that advice will somehow help them find the way? What exactly do they need to do?

Nils Poertner replies:

1980 - til 2021 - bond bull mkts and good for lev assets (private equity, real estate), neg real rates. easy money - favouring a few more than others. with rising nominal rates, that is going to change. (had a lot more in mind - people are somewhat depressed, highly suggestible, joy missing, too)

William Huggins expands:

predicting regime shifts (and their direction) has proven to be quite challenging so i would start by ensuring that one doesn't get knocked out of the game when they come (position limits with exit numbers away from rounds, etc). that way, you might at least survive the turn. resilience seems essential but people who only know one-directional markets don't put enough stock in it.

something related i'm teaching tonight is that people's beliefs always trump the facts. i don't mean pie in the sky fantasies, i mean what people think the facts are, and what the implications of those things should be. but when the herd's thinking changes, their volume moves markets. perhaps the key is to identify the early rumbling (or other signs) that precedes a stampede? i'm inclined to expect a high risk of false positives though as it is a well-worn strategy to spook the herd from time to time.

Henry Gifford writes:

I used to wonder how running with the herd helped animals in the wild. Sure, some will likely survive, but what is the incentive for an individual to be part of that large target?

Then I found out about one technique deer and many deer-like animals use. Someone, maybe a human who can outrun a deer on a hot day (furry animals generally can't sweat, people can, thus people can cool themselves very effectively). chases after a herd. After a brief sprint one member of the pack takes off in a direction away from the pack. The human or other hunter might choose to go after the individual animal, thinking it is easier prey than the pack, and safer because there are only four hooves to avoid, not dozens. But the deer aren't stupid - one of the fastest and fittest is running alone. After a while the individual circles back into the pack. Now the pack, which wasn't running fast, or maybe not at all, is more rested than the hunter, who ran a longer distance chasing the individual deer. Now the pack takes off again, with the hunter after them, then another fit and rested individual animal takes off away from the pack, again and again. I assume they have other strategies.

Art Cooper adds:

This is the mirror image of how wolves hunt their prey.

Humbert H. responds:

Being in a herd offers lots of benefits. Clearly there are lots of pairs of eyes facing in multiple directions to alert others about approaching predators and emit warning sounds. Also, many predators tend to surround a isolated victim for a few reasons, one of them being that it's much harder for an individual animal to fight back when attacked from all sides. Obviously it's almost impossible to use this method with a herd. It's also more distracting for a predator to have to focus on multiple targets. Large herd animals find it a lot easier to fight a predator while facing them and a herd can protect the backs of all of it's members.

Now being a part of a "herd" or market participants is quite different. Market participants have no incentives and, typically, means to protect each other, and metaphorical market predators, whatever they are, don't really behave like a pack of wolves or a pride of lions. It's much harder to jump on an isolated market participant, unless it's some "whale" known to be in distress, and distressed "whales" don't run in herds anyway. You often have no idea why a market stampede has started, so imitation is more dangerous than for a herd animal. All the physicality of being a grazing herd animal goes out the window and this analogy seems of dubious value.

Henry Gifford continues:

The discussion was about pack animal behavior. The description from the deer expert sounds like he was adventurous and curious and brave enough to chase a solitary deer. I don't think North American deer exhibit pack animal behavior - I've never seen them in packs, only family groups, maybe they don't form packs at all - I don't know. I wish I knew why some fish swim in a group ("school"), but I don't.

I think I can judge the budget of a zoo by seeing how many deer-like animals they have. Such animals look much like deer, thus my description, and presumably have evolved to survive much like deer: eating leaves and running away. Zoos that I think have low budgets don't have the interesting predator animals kids see in books, but instead have many deer-like animals with only minor variations from one species to another, from one animal enclosure to another. Suffice to say there are many animals in the world similar to deer, but which are not North American deer, especially in Africa, where many or all those species found in low-budget zoos come from. Presumably some run in packs, even if North American deer don't.

The story that humans ate by outrunning deer-like animals has been around a while, but was finally documented by anthropologist Louis Liebenberg, who reportedly, in 1990, witnessed human hunters !Nam!kabe, !Nate, Kayate, and Boro//xao run down antelope in the heat of the day in the Kalahari desert in Botswana. Please don't ask me how to pronounce those guys' names. One time when I was googling around on the topic I saw maps created with the aid of electronic tracking devices that showed one or more of the parties to such chasing running fairly straight for a while, then circling around, then straight, etc. I don't remember if the tracking device was on a human or animal or both.

Another method has multiple humans chasing a pack of animals. One human gets tired chasing the animal that left the pack, chasing it on a zigzag or circular path, while the other humans jog slowly, on a shorter route, following footprints left by the pack, and soon the animal that left the pack rejoins the pack while the pack of humans is very close to the pack, with only one tired human in the pack of humans. If Randy has tried that method it would be nice to hear how he and his friends made out.

I suspect all the above has implications for trading in the same sense others have posted about pack behavior and trading.

Those guys in Botswana have at least one of the three factors some say are the reasons why marathon runners tend to come from Kenya and that area (the Rift Valley). One is that their ancestors lived in a hot climate (Africa) for tens of thousands of years, thus they developed limbs that have a relatively high surface/area ratio: long and skinny, optimal for cooling, and also optimal for moving back and forth (running) with minimal energy (low WRsquared) compared to short, stubby limbs (similar to the physics of pendulums). The second factor is that their ancestors lived at sea level for thousands of years, thus they have the ability to produce more hemoglobin (moves Oxygen to muscles) readily when they are at altitude. The third factor is that they grew up at a mountain altitude, thus they developed large lungs. I don't know if the hunters in Botswana had any of the other two. A mass migration from sea level to high altitude is I think not so common (or people from other areas would also be winning marathons), but reportedly many humans ate via chasing down animals for many years, presumably many who didn't have all three of these factors in their favor.

Then there was the argument in a Welsh pub that led to the annual 22 mile Man vs. Horse race, run since 1990. I suspect, but cannot confirm, that alcohol was involved. Some years the humans win. The human ability to sweat, and therefore cool the body, keeping it in a temperature range necessary for metabolic processes to function (running, breathing, not dying, etc.), is key - presumably the humans would do better in a warmer climate or in a longer race. I think it would be interesting to track the temperature and relative humidity of different race years vs. who won, but I don't have the data handy, and don't know if it is available on a Bloomberg terminal.

Larry Williams writes:

Correct on deer. Antelope and buffalo go in herds-packs, if you will. so do elk - a beautiful sight to see as the bugle sounds.

Zubin Al Genubi adds:

The Gwich'in natives in the Arctic run down the caribou on snowshoes. Caribou bolt, rest, bolt. Man runs runs runs without rest up to 60-100 miles.

The caribou vadzaih is the cultural symbol and a keystone subsistence species of the Gwich'in, just as the buffalo is to the Plains Indians.[4] In his book entitled Caribou Rising: Defending the Porcupine Herd, Gwich-'in Culture, and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Sarah James is cited as saying, "We are the caribou people. Caribou are not just what we eat; they are who we are. They are in our stories and songs and the whole way we see the world. Caribou are our life. Without caribou we wouldn't exist."

I met Sarah James and spent a week with her in Arctic Village and up at hunting camp. She is an amazing person. The villagers and tribe have a beautiful philosophy of life and respect for nature.

Rich Bubb comments:

the herding/grouping re/actions is/are common in so many species' game plans & their instincts, then there's their need to hunt, defend, fight-flight, etc en-masse because of their evolutionary status vs predecessors. Humans same; hopefully.

Pamela Van Giessen writes:

Bison herds are led by a cow. And when she decides to move, they all move. Quickly. You definitely don’t want to be in the path of a bison herd on the move. Elk herds will go around you or they will make you wait for them to pass. Antelope herds will outrun everything. More deer get hit by cars than any other creature (except maybe raccoons). Perhaps they are at higher risk because they do not travel in large herds. The type of herd matters. One imagines there must be similar parallels in the markets.

Rich Bubb recounts:

about those cute furry deer etc… having a mini-herd slam into vehicle on a highway is rarely something I can evade. Got Deer'd 4 times in NE Indiana, only?. I think 1 of the mini-herds died, the rest either bounced off or got bumped out of the way, which also? causes very extensive collision expenses! When a shifty insurance office-drone tried to blame me once that I as to blame for the deer-car (b/c I was driving the car, not the deer). After the ofc-drone ranted at me for while, I said, "Here's how much time I had react (GOING 55MPH), then slam the phone's receiver down on my desk, hard. The drone lost that one.

Steve Ellison understands:

I never hit an animal while driving, but once I was on a state highway in Idaho headed to Hells Canyon through a forest. A deer shot out from the trees on a dead run and crossed the highway some distance ahead of me. I only saw it for a second or two, and it was gone. I was lucky to see it from a distance, because it would not have been possible to stop a car traveling 55 miles per hour in one second.

Richard Barsom offers:

Turkeys, they are super smart. I mean despite their rather undeserved reps of being "Turkeys" . They travel in large groups but send scouts out in various directions. The scouts are usually so fast that they send hunters on a wild goose chase so to speak. This is done on purpose to alert the group and frustrate the we be hunters. You could learn a lot from a turkey.

Jul

23

You have to admire a state that distinguishes is BBQ intrastate between eastern and western styles. Ole Time BBQ on Hillsborough in Raleigh serves an excellent example of the former for those in NC. (ie Stefan)

Reading The Boys in the Boat about the 1936 U Washington crew team and their journey to compete in the Berlin Olympics. Some great coaching and lessons from Ulbrickson the Washington coach. The downplaying of expectations before big races, "My boys are not ready for the race but they're the best we got", the quiet in the boatyard before the competitions, the practices at night in brutally cold conditions to avoid observation from competitors. The Stoicism in the face of victory and defeat.

Art Cooper responds:

I enjoyed The Boys of '36 by PBS on their American Experience series very much.

Jeff Watson adds:

I’ve been rereading Finnegan’s Pulitzer-Prize-winning Barbarian Days, arguably one of the best autobiographies I have ever read. The best surfing literature.

Nils Poertner writes:

good to read a book at all. most adults I know, in particular - males, and from a certain age onwards, say 40 - often give up on reading long text. why? hm, I guess visual stress during the day from excessive near vision these days so overwhelming (screen time), and made worse by poor visual habits etc (ppl don't blink enough when they read text etc) maybe other reasons, too. lack of curiosity etc.

Oct

14

Heard a great quote today while driving and listening to SiriusXM. No clue who said it but enjoying this nugget of deliciousness from the meal for a lifetime:

Music is mathematics for the ears.

[Ed. note: attributed to Stockhausen]

Art Cooper writes:

Here's another, in a similar vein:

Geometry is frozen music.

Peter Saint-Andre chimes in:

Music is the hidden arithmetical exercise of a mind unconscious that it
is calculating. - Leibniz

Music is mathematics - and architecture is music in stone. - Ayn Rand

Andy Aiken builds on the theme:

Goethe said, "Architecture is frozen music".

There aren’t physical geometric forms, but many physical representations of geometry, such as in architecture.

Nils Poertner suggests:

Christopher Wolfgang Alexander

(born 4 October 1936 in Vienna, Austria)is a widely influential British-American architect and design theorist, and currently emeritus professor at the University of California, Berkeley. His theories about the nature of human-centered design have affected fields beyond architecture, including urban design, software, sociology and others.

Archives

Resources & Links

Search