 Author
|
Topic: Re-Examination of the Spreadsheet (Read 14274 times)
|
|
Justin
|
How do you recommend coming up with Best and Worst values, apart from using observed min and max? If there is a standard way of doing so, I'd be in favor of creating a new spreadsheet that allows you to do that.
Unfortunately, given its subjective nature, the method can be no more “standard†than the method that determined the 1.5M max population requirement. Yes, numerical analysis can help you make a decision, but it is still your decision to make. In simplified terms, the acceptability range just indicates how forgiving you are about a particular dimension. While one can attempt to use weights to accomplish this, they will also skew the dimension comparison, thus causing both to be erroneous. Currently you are pre-populating the weights. Weights inherently bring the state battle to the forefront. Perhaps we should pre-populate the acceptability ranges instead, this way we can put the blinders on and focus on one dimension at a time, allowing us to be more dispassionate. In effect we already do this with population, where Worst is 1.5M. A good question here would be, “What is the population Best?†It’s probably not zero. The problem I foresee is that ... disputes about "which state?" will hinge on both weightings and range parameters, making it nearly hopeless to achieve consensus.
I agree, but I wasn’t aware that we were trying to reach a consensus. I thought we were providing raw information, and a framework in which to apply one’s own value judgments. We should not expect to reach a consensus, but rather encourage individuals to play with the numbers, and make up their own minds. The state decision should be the product of a vote, not of our actuarial prowess. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. - Diderot
|
|
|
|
Justin
|
Welcome aboard, Justin!
Thanks Zxcv. It is a rare thing that will keep me up until 4am formulating a proposal. It feels good. On another note... I understand that many people may feel uncomfortable with an unwieldy spreadsheet. I can build a more user-friendly application that can guide them through the process, allowing them to input their priorities, without overwhelming them. I would just need as much raw data as possible. For example, breaking down Gun control issues, rather than stating some state has a Gun control value of 8.9, which doesn’t have much empirical value. If this is worthwhile, let me know and I can get started Monday. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. - Diderot
|
|
|
|
holy instant
|
As much as I love the concept of the FSP and the willingness of so many to participate, I would like to point out that we have a name for all this spreadsheet analysis: MENTAL MASTURBATION.
Mental masturbation happens when one doesn't have any idea what is really important but looks at surface appearances and then goes round and round intellectually trying to figure things out using a hopelessly limited viewpoint.
If the pioneers heading west in the 1830s and 1840s had considered things like jobs waiting for them and borders with countries and a few of these other spreadsheet items, there would have been no westward migration.
Incidently I talked to a leading architect the other day who happens to be a liberal environmentalist Ayn Rand hater. I told him about the FSP goals and he said, "If they are smart they will choose Wyoming!"
Sometimes your enemies can see more clearly than your friends, wouldn't you say?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TedApelt
|
True, most of my background is in astronomy, engineering, and physics.
Ted, if you are an astronomer, you should really like Wyoming. The state is half-way up through the pea soup, due to altitude, and there's not much light pollution either! Not much astronomy going on in Delaware, I bet.  True. One of the things I like best about the West is astronomy. However, in choosing a state, I am thinking of how easy or hard campaigning would be there, and dark skies don't help with that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How much political experience do you have? Probably not enough. Get some! DO THIS NOW!!!
|
|
|
|
TedApelt
|
the inclusion of federal land % as a good thing
WHAT???  How could federal land be anything but trouble for us? Maybe it won't be much of a problem, maybe the feds won't use it against us (I suspect they will!), but how could it possibly be good for us? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How much political experience do you have? Probably not enough. Get some! DO THIS NOW!!!
|
|
|
|
Zxcv
|
holy, the settlers for the Oregon Territory did use the best information they had available to them, to decide where to go. Unfortunately when they got there they found the information was extremely unreliable, and all the fertile land was already owned by earlier settlers. Many of them ended up with crap land up in the hills and could barely survive the first few winters. We can be sure if they had access to better information they would have used it. And spreadsheets are just a means of automating simple numerical computations; they probably played this stuff out in their heads when choosing where to go. Ted, go ahead and read this: http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2000/jul/04/510464612.htmlEasterners apparently have no idea how mad people out here get about these transgressions by the federal government. If we are ever going to try to push the feds back into some semblance of constitutional governance, for our state anyway, we will need people so motivated. Are there issues back east that provide the same sort of motivation? I heard about the Maine lobster fisheries, but that is pretty small stuff compared to what happens out here. I'm still not sure why you think campaigning will be difficult out here (outside statewide races, which I admit are difficult). How about an example? Look at Sweetwater County in Wyoming. A couple of big towns (Green River and Rock Springs) 20 miles apart, and a lot of empty land. The state reps are based in a county, so running for state rep in this county you'd hit these two towns and do mailings to the ranches and farms. Make one or two swings through the little towns. What's so tough? It's funny, with my expanded spreadsheet I've now tried several different weight vectors, both simple ones and others using almost every row, and I always end up with Wyoming on top! The other positions move around some. I'd actually like to see a vector that puts another state on top; I know it is possible but I bet it will be hard to justify. Any takers, guys? Justin, you might do what I did and modify (for your own use) Jason's sheet, in your case using different acceptability ranges, and seeing what you get. As to other applications, we need something for people who don't have spreadsheet applications like Excel or 1-2-3. I never could get the Java thing to work, although I didn't try hard. There is the Excel Viewer, free from Microsoft. Maybe we could have a collection of fixed spreadsheets with different weight vectors (simple ones), that people can go through, to find the one that comes closest to matching their preferences. Personally I don't think we need to break down the rows much more. Things like gun control we can fix once we get there. More than breaking down things like gun control, we need to look at our 5 or 6 major measures, and make sure the data is reliable. It sure wouldn't hurt to get corroboration from other sources. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 10, 2003, 09:45:58 pm by Zxcv »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Justin
|
I never could get the Java thing to work, although I didn't try hard.
Well, good thing I'm a Java software engineer.  I'll work on the design on Monday (have to work on a project this weekend). I'll set it up so that we can readily change the sets of data, but the basic formulae will be consistent. One question, what format whould be preferable, applet or web-based (like JSP/ASP/PHP stuff)? Applets can get a bit fancier with the UI, but web-based doesn't require the user to have the Java plug-in on their machine. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest. - Diderot
|
|
|
|
stpeter
|
Incidently I talked to a leading architect the other day who happens to be a liberal environmentalist Ayn Rand hater. I told him about the FSP goals and he said, "If they are smart they will choose Wyoming!"
A classic quote from someone who sounds like the anti-Roark.  I agree that Wyoming is the best choice and I'm not sure what all the arguing is about at this point, but I'm trying to stay patient... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TedApelt
|
Ted asked: How could federal land be anything but trouble for us? Maybe it won't be much of a problem, maybe the feds won't use it against us (I suspect they will!), but how could it possibly be good for us? Ted, I live in a county and state (Lake County, Colorado) with a very large percentage of federal land and lakes. I answered the above question in the following discussion thread. http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=686In that thread, you said that it was not a problem. You did not say that it was somehow good for us. You might be right that it is harmless, but I still have my suspicions that for environmental or other reasons restrictions will be placed on industrial, agricultural, or other uses of private land that is near the federal land. This is already happening in Florida with the Everglades. These restrictions could be quite reasonable, and might be the same as if a large company owned the land, but they could also be an excuse for the feds to handicap our efforts. I am not sure, but I do have a very uneasy feeling about it. There is also a lot of talk about using the threat of succession as some kind of bargaining chip. If a lot of federal land was involved when we tried to do that, it would seriously weaken that option. And, even if we decided to never use that option, we could still be painted as extremists that are plotting to seize and sell off national parks or something like that, even if it was absolute nonsense. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
How much political experience do you have? Probably not enough. Get some! DO THIS NOW!!!
|
|
|
|
JasonPSorens
|
Justin - Web-based is definitely better than applet, if you can do it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Audio signature (MP3) "Experience has shown that it is difficult, if not impossible, for a populous state to be run by good laws." --Aristotle, The Politics
|
|
|
|
Zxcv
|
Jason, here's a document that explains the distinctions about taxes and other forms of revenue. http://www.oregontaxes.org/yt11-01.pdfBesides that explanation, it also has several tables that illustrates what is going on; these tables have all the states so our candidates are in there. I don't know if you have taken this into consideration already - if so, then there's nothing to worry about. The Alaska spending is astounding. Wyoming doesn't look so hot either. I know Alaska is spending oil money; is Wyoming spending money from minerals? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JasonPSorens
|
Wyoming does get a lot of revenue from natural resources - not as much as Alaska, but it is a major issue in the state. Another thing to remember about western states is that their state governments spend a lot of money on highways because of their large land areas. So large spending totals don't necessarily indicate a statist political culture there; that's 1 reason I favor including all kinds of different variables for getting at political culture. Spending is probably a better measure for size of government than taxation, though, since it includes what the government spends from borrowing & non-tax revenue, both of which are also (in general) Bad Things from a libertarian perspective.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Audio signature (MP3) "Experience has shown that it is difficult, if not impossible, for a populous state to be run by good laws." --Aristotle, The Politics
|
|
|
|
1DayAtATime
|
Spending is probably a better measure for size of government than taxation, though... I am not sure what size of government in this respect matters. What matters is how free the people are. What matters is what tax rates are. Also, in AKs defense, everything is a lot more expensive in AK |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JasonPSorens
|
Spending is probably a better measure for size of government than taxation, though... I am not sure what size of government in this respect matters. What matters is how free the people are. What matters is what tax rates are. Are you any freer if government charges you "fees" instead of "taxes," or backloads taxes onto future generations through borrowing? Size of government, measured by spending, directly correlates with individual freedom. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Audio signature (MP3) "Experience has shown that it is difficult, if not impossible, for a populous state to be run by good laws." --Aristotle, The Politics
|
|
|
|
1DayAtATime
|
I am not sure what size of government in this respect matters. What matters is how free the people are. What matters is what tax rates are.
from Keith (FreedomRoad)
Are you any freer if government charges you "fees" instead of "taxes," or backloads taxes onto future generations through borrowing? Size of government, measured by spending, directly correlates with individual freedom.
from JasonPSorens
I think user fees are much better. Also, you have to remember federal government dependence. The Western states, overall, get much more help from the federal gov. than the Eastern states. However, states like ND and SD get a lot more help than WY does. I am in favor of the government replacing many of its taxes with user fees in the short term. This is a libertarian method. I am not the first libertarian to speak of this. This is basic libertarian step-by-step freedom. Also, look at the federal gov. The fed. gov. will spend all of the money it gets and then some. This happens if a R or D is in power. The debt will keep going up like it did the entire time Clinton was prez. If the gov. will spend the money and just make the gov. bigger and more expensive.... Taxes have to be cut. Continue to cut taxes. People need their money. People know how to spend money much more practial than the gov. The gov. will continue to grow. We might be able to change this. However, this is the way things work as we know them. Lots of us used this arguement in TN when the R and D combined together and tried to give us an income tax on wages. We fought them for years. The managed to give TN the largest tax increase in its history but we still do NOT TAX wages in TN. Thank you, God. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
