What Would We Do Without Experts?

| 26 Comments

Their greatest asset is our short memories: In forecasting the future, experts are generally no better than everybody else. They might be worse.


26 Comments

I work in the insurance industry.

Shakespeare's Dick the butcher said "... Kill all the lawyers".

He was wrong. We should kill all the actuaries.

look back through the last century and actuaries stand alone in the level of damage they have wrought compared to the other white collars.

Based on their 'wisdom', multi-trillion dollar entitlement debt have been created around the globe:

1. They fixed social security retirement age at 65 back in the 1930s hen it should have been adjusted for life expectancy - it would be closer to eighty today.

2. Their cost estimates for Medicare in 1965 for 2005 missed by 10,000 percent.

And on and on.

They base their predictions for the future based on past experience. That's like driving a car looking out the back window.

You may be right. Your commentary and analysis have often been very good in the past.
I do not know if you are giving good info this time. More information, please.

Monday; I am drinking 1.4 cups of coffee, because I read a study promising it would help my liver.
Tuesday; I will NOT drink any coffee, because I read it causes pancreatic cancer
Wednesday; I will resume drinking 10 cups of coffee per day, because it was found to protect against heart disease.
Thursday; I will throw-out all my coffee, because I saw a program linking coffee to kidney stones
Friday; I will buy a Venti-sized coffee at Starbucks (I threw all of mine out yesterday), because I read that coffee helps flush "toxins" out of the human body,

Saturday; I have scheduled my first ever coffee enema ... symbolic of all the coffee studies that have been shoved into my various orafices

Do the private insurance companies actuaries actually change their tables? ... or use the 1930's data?

Just who do you think pointed out the retirement age should be changed to Harper? What happened when Harper changed it?

Don't you see in difference in the motivations of the management of private companies and politicians?

They update their tables periodically. But IMO they are just window dressing. The companies set their prices where they think the market will buy.

For example: in the mid eighties a life annuity on a 55 year old paid well over 15% annually. Today you would get barely your deposit back if you lived to a normal expectancy. The rate is not based on what is reasonable to expect for the next thirty or so years rather it is based on current interest rates and what a lay person is prepared to pay at the time of sale.

The social security age was pegged at 65 when fdr signed it into law. That only changed recently up to age 67. In the thirties the average life expectancy was lower than 65. Today it is over 80. (I read somewhere that 65 was the age used by the first employee pension ever - set up by the Krupp family in the late 1800s and that the us ss creators adopted it directly)

The Medicare underestimate is pretty well documented: the house ways and means committee cost estimates are discussed here:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703746604574461610985243066

A key snip: "The rate of increase in Medicare spending has outpaced overall inflation in nearly every year (up 9.8% in 2009), so a program that began at $4 billion now costs $428 billion."

"The companies set their prices where they think the market will buy."

Of course. The one thing that they will not do is sell at a loss (this is were the actuaries come in) . The government has no such concerns.

My prediction is an easy one. The trumpster cultists will all be embarrassed, and none of them will admit it. No way to tell who would have been the best pick, but it was easy to tell who was most feared; Walker, Perry, Cruz, Carson all drew serious flak. Drawing flak means you are over the target.

As for how Trump would actually perform as a president, only 2 things you can say at this point. He is no Reagan, and too soon to tell on anything else. Trump was around during both Carter and Reagan, so safe to say he has seen the effects of policy. Also safe to say, he sat on the sidelines till very late in the game. Apart from political donations to the Clintons.

If Trump is no Reagan, that's good enough in my expert opinion. Harper was no Reagan; he was much better in a number of ways. Already Trump has made a better VP pick.
https://mises.org/library/sad-legacy-ronald-reagan-0

Enoch Powell was correct.

Computer models are the crystal balls of the 21st century.

Just like a crystal ball, the information provided is based on the agenda of the charlatan controlling it.

the insurance industry is like going to the slots, 'cept slots are honest

Anyone who does not contemplate outcomes of societies and what direction that takes are fools. As a business owner I always did this through necessity not idle curiosity. The various 'influencers' change but that simply reinforces the need for regular review. It is an inexact exercise but that does not discount the need.

Most people want predictable outcomes but the essence of life is dealing with the variables. Human progress has now evolved to a high tech innovative state where disruption is fast and can be devastating. No one knows where it will all end.

as I'v said for years, get religion out of politics. Cuz, Carson, Bachman, Huckabee, Bush2 and Jeb, all perfect examples as to why. You want religion, go to church, not government. Why the fact that many of us are turned off by religious bull$hit is so hard for the bible bangers to grasp is to their own detriment. I know a few who will not vote for bible bangers, and John Tory was a prime example of that.

Yep, the word expert is meaningless when it comes to speculative science. It is not even close to the precision and accuracy of real experts in science, trades and technology. The speculative science experts, usually humanities and social science areas but not exclusively, are professional guessers. Their work is based on WAGs and SWAGs : wild ass guesses and scientific wild ass guesses. In a rational world they'd be as harmless as astrologers and tarot card readers but they've convinced the political class that their WAGs and SWAGs are essential. For some reason (professional courtesy?) real experts don't challenge them.

Personally, I think that despite education and secularism people still default to a pre-Renaissance mindset. Superstition, religious behaviour, belief in the power of clerics, the need to be ruled, guilt and redemption, etc. You can physically take humans out of the dark ages but you cannot take ancient evolutionary instincts out of the human mind.

"Drawing flak means you are over the target."

OK. So who, from both inside the party and the media, drew the most flak?

Interesting concept - you try to prove a point by disproving your it.

But they sold lots of product that lost money in the high interest rate era 25 years ago. And the actuaries signed off on it.

Oh Dear NME 666 is off his meds again. On a more serious note, because really who cares what NME 666 ingests or spews, the fact is that the "experts" are like the false prophets written about in the Old Testament. The king would call for his experts (he called them prophets) and the prophets would feed the king the information he wanted to hear, whether it was long life or success in war or whatever. We have the same today when our 'prophets' (we call them experts) tell the king and the masses what the king wants them to hear. The world is burning up (AGW) the nation will go bankrupt (Brexit) Everything will shut down (Y2K) etc etc etc. As has been pointed out innumerable times: Those who don't learn from history - repeat it.

That brings to mind a saying about computing that was old by the time I wrote my first FORTRAN programs over 40 years ago: garbage in, garbage out.

That truism, however, appears to have been forgotten over the years. How else can one explain social media?

"That truism, however, appears to have been forgotten over the years."

The MSM is about to learn that lesson..They think they KNOW what people "should" think...When they don't understand the crap they are pushing is crap...Happy trails

great babble Josey, but do you have a point, or more specifically, will address my point. And don't forget to use the toilet paper and wipe clean.

Selling predictions of the future is the oldest, best selling scam ever. Appreciating that there even is a future sets us apart from the animals. Abusing the desire of people to have somebody, ANYBODY, confidently tell them the future is a disgusting, exploitative part of human nature

Astrologers read historical patterns, correlate star and planet alignments to earthbound events. Astrologers then take these historical patterns and extrapolate future events from past correlations.

Replace astrologers with climatologists/Karl Marx/shaman
Replace "star and planet alignments" with tree and ice rings/available information from the library of London/vein patterns on a correctly slaughtered lambs' liver.

Oracles, Prophets, John Edward...wrap your predictions in enough mumbojumbo, some (sometimes enough) people will believe anything

Absolutely correct. However, the innate human being is much older than the dark ages.

People like Pol Pot, Stalin, Marx, Hitler, Mao Tse-tung, etc. wanted to change human nature ... and killed hundreds of million people attempting to do that.

“The Met Office, badly burned by the failure of its long-range forecasts a few years ago……….
………..Half way through May it said this about the coming summer: “the outlook suggests the chances of above – or below – average rainfall are approximately similar.”…………
……….Even then, it added a disclaimer: “this is not a normal weather forecast. It’s an experimental and complex outlook based on probabilities”.


If that’s not a sophisticated “expert” bullshit?..........What is?

The problem was created by LBJ (The real reason may not be obvious) by passing a law that prevented preaching politics from the Pulpit. (The loss of IRS Tax free Status). The religious right could only get a voice in the Republican Party & has become a cumbersome millstone

Donald Trump promised to wipe out that law and put religion back into the Pulpit..The religious Right welcomed that decision... He then embraced Gay's & issues important to the Republican women... No religious test in Trumps Republican Tent...

Leave a comment

Archives

November 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      

Recent Comments

  • Phillip G Shaw: The problem was created by LBJ (The real reason may read more
  • Lev: “The Met Office, badly burned by the failure of its read more
  • ural: Absolutely correct. However, the innate human being is much older read more
  • johnmac: Selling predictions of the future is the oldest, best selling read more
  • NME666: great babble Josey, but do you have a point, or read more
  • Phillip G Shaw: "That truism, however, appears to have been forgotten over the read more
  • B Deplorable: That brings to mind a saying about computing that was read more
  • Joe: Oh Dear NME 666 is off his meds again. On read more
  • Gord Tulk: But they sold lots of product that lost money in read more
  • ural: "Drawing flak means you are over the target." OK. So read more