WHAT ABOUT AVERAGING POLLS?

There is some merit in the idea that one should double check data for accuracy. This is generally done by those taking and recording serious data. Sometimes triple takes and more are conducted
to make sure we are not making a mistake.

It can be fun using vernier devices that allow for fantastic levels of apparent precision. Something so simple, yet so perceptually complex. Here is an interface between calculation and geometry. A genuine focus is necessary to learn these skills which like anything else can become easier and even automatic "skills" with practice.

Then we want more samples of data if we want to make a somewhat precise stab at characterizing a group along this or that parameter. So we have polling and maybe a thousand or two thousand people are questioned to come up with an effort to characterize the political views of some part of the population. In Presidential polls we are generally measuring the opinions of "likely voters" or some designated other group but "likely voters" is, the most likely! We see that such polls are said to have a margin of error of about two points for a population of over a hundred mllion people.

So that truly funny math, probability and statistics can presumably guide us as to whether we can somehow average the results of various polls.

Of course, polls are designed to find out similar things in these elections. We might say that they are instruments that ought to be highly positively correlated, but are they actually correlated p > .80 ? I don't think so my friends and this is probably way above any actual correlation. Doesn't this have profound implications for adding and subtracting means and other statistics computed from separate databases?

Of course if there is a legitimate way to compensate for these and other problems we can come up with odds for things that seem beyond our power to estimate odds at this time. I am assuming there is some sort of more or less statistically sane meta study analysis. I am assuming a lot of this data is already gathered with some statistical notions in mind, eg. the size of the same groups and polling questions that are useful to a political campaign, a news source or some other propaganda operation directed at slanting the polls a particular way.

Adding the means or other statistics from two different polls is somewhat like adding up the number of apples and potatoes in order to find out how many pieces of fruit there are. The potato may be the apple of the earth for the French but it is still a vegetable to me. Making the correct assumptions, seeing the actual fluctuation of data in a meaningful way is the crucial thing in these otherwise tiresome calculations. Of course once you realize that your calculations are a gift to treasure it is all worth it.

What to do about the devilish errors though and my complete bovine ignorance about so many things mathematical continue to challenge an often unenlightened curiosity? For this I have found it useful to contemplate my blessings, eg. that I was not born divine, yuck, yuck!

WE ARE BACK AND WE ARE NOT ROBOTS

For a while there this blog was down, why? I really don't know. I once heard a very egotistical Google dude talking about how to manipulate human behavior without being too obvious. So is that what we are dealing with here? Somehow some of the more controversial things I publish seem to get taken off the net for a while. They say they think I am a robot, a spam robot. This is generally original content friends and yes, I use the resources offered by the Google Account.

I am thankful to be back, even if I am suspicious of the less than transparent Google review.

A little human contact might go a long way to keep people using Google Accounts happy.

On the other hand the problem may be a little four letter word like c...
r....a....p? Or was it the word s-p-i- ...t?

I don't know why this blog was flagged or even if it was flagged by someone. Maybe they just thought it was a bot doing the writing. Yeah,
they use bots and I guess it may be a problem, but I have no reason to replace myself with a bot. I'm just a blogger with a wet brain, no computer chips here.

WERE CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS A FORM OF MATH ABUSE?

I was just reading another article about the financial crisis that has America, and perhaps the world in its grip. A really big number got my attention. The number, forty six trillion dollars! Yeah, that's $46,000,000,000,000!

It turns out that there is supposedly a market in a peculiar kind of insurance called credit default swaps . The market is supposedly forty six trillion dollars in size!

So how much is Manhattan Island worth? What about the United States? What is our GNP and GDP? Is it that big? Is it more or less than forty six trillion dollars? I don't know, but I'm skeptical that there were forty six trillion dollars in assets really represented by the credit default swap market.

I still don't know what a credit default swap is, especially since it is said to be a so-called "derivative". I keep on reading and hearing that no one knows what these derivatives really are so I suppose I have a lot of company but lets seek understanding, sister.

I just think the size of that market, forty-six trillion dollars, should have been a red flag to someone. It's similar to looking at the shacks that are valued at a hundred grand or more. It defies logic, rationality and common sense. Yet human greed and optimism seems to have fed what
one Federal Reserve taskmaster referred to as irrational exuberance. Like Marx, Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volker has a way with words.
"Irrational exuberance", indeed!

Curiously these psychological explanations, while being satisfying on, perhaps an emotional level, may be leaving something out, economics for example. Of course there is regulation and deregulation. Perhaps more regulation, less deregulation would have prevented this denouement.
But comrade workers and working class allies, we know it is something else. We know it is the capitalist system itself that was struggling to survive, forcing those running the system to play the fool and fraudster just to keep the huge contraption of profits going, and going and ooops!

WRONG CHANGE TO FINANCIAL FRAUD

As the glory of Western Civilization, "Free Enterprise" falls into crisis and those who own and operate it fight with one another about how to save their glorious contraption, it seems like a time to relax. After all, wondering about food shortages and a cold winter without utilities, is stressful. I hate homelessness! Yeah, it's time to relax.

Somehow I find it relaxing to think about some of the instruments of individual and mass deception. Specifically I am referring to mathematical concepts that are used to manipulate the public and politicians alike into doing irrational and destructive things.

I am going to use the term MATH ABUSE to refer to the misuse of math, and/or math concepts to deceive others. Such math abuse often results in poor decisions by those abused by the misinformation. Promises of an inexpensive war come to mind. Lying about one's age is another.

Incorrect change is one form of math abuse we have all encountered. Just the other day I had to point out to a sly cashier that I had given her twenty dollars, not ten.

Of course, the scam called "passing twenties" depicted in the movie Paper Moon is the same kind of math abuse but in reverse. This time the customer walks off with too much change.

Curiously, my own experience is that a conversation with a cashier is likely to lead to an unintentional error. If it is in the customer's favor the situation could become unethical. I don't see this as math abuse as such.

{This, perhaps ultimately, reflects the close relationship between gibberish and intelligent thought, perhaps a boundary where intelligence itself virtually exists? }