Sanctions vs. war [vs. trade]
Tue, 21 Jan 2003 11:23:34 -0800
> I'm beginning to think trading with an enemy, particularly a totalitarian
> one, is the easiest way to kick his ass.
That is what worries me the most about
the current situation. If two players
play an even game, the greater bankroll
has a much stronger position, and the
larger the bankroll difference relative
to the variance of the game, the better
So, if one "carries a big stick" (acts
from a position of strength), it is
much better to "speak softly"  (act
to reduce variances).
Conversely, if one starts in the weaker
position, then it is better to act to
increase variances. 
Now, I'd thought we were supposed to be
a superpower, and that war is a higher
variance activity than commerce -- but
when we rattle sabers, it makes me think
the administration believes at least one
of those two to be false.
:: :: ::
 TR learned to drive a team to impress
a certain young lady, so he certainly had
first-hand experience with his metaphors.
 which explains why it is a foul to bump
in an America's Cup race: the presumption is
that the bumper is trying to make up for a
weakness relative to the bumpee by shaking
things up a bit.
> ... mergers and acquisitions are God's way of
> telling you your stock price is too high...
Does hybris invite Nemesis, or do 1D random
walks return to zero with probability one?