Skip to main content
Skip to content

Duplicate Document

This document appears to be a copy. The original version is:

Abstract discussion of 'next generation theory' and economic return without concrete leads
Case File
kaggle-ho-010969House Oversight

Abstract discussion of 'next generation theory' and economic return without concrete leads

Abstract discussion of 'next generation theory' and economic return without concrete leads The passage is a theoretical, philosophical exposition on economics and evolutionary biology. It contains no specific names, transactions, dates, or actionable allegations linking powerful actors to misconduct. Therefore it offers no investigative value. Key insights: Mentions concepts of cash flow, collective return, and time preference.; References historical economists (Boehm-Bawerk, Irving Fisher, Karl Marx) but only in academic context.; Cites a friend Alan Rogers, a population geneticist, without any relevance to wrongdoing.

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
kaggle-ho-010969
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Abstract discussion of 'next generation theory' and economic return without concrete leads The passage is a theoretical, philosophical exposition on economics and evolutionary biology. It contains no specific names, transactions, dates, or actionable allegations linking powerful actors to misconduct. Therefore it offers no investigative value. Key insights: Mentions concepts of cash flow, collective return, and time preference.; References historical economists (Boehm-Bawerk, Irving Fisher, Karl Marx) but only in academic context.; Cites a friend Alan Rogers, a population geneticist, without any relevance to wrongdoing.

Persons Referenced (1)

Tags

kagglehouse-oversighteconomicstheoryevolutionary-biologyacademic-discussion

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Free growth then arrives at its whim, like a deus ex machina, without calling for more than this steady effort of replication. I find myself focusing more and more on that cash flow component of rate of return, or pure consumption rate at the collective scale, as the part we can predict and model. The generation length is a biological norm which probably has not varied by more than a factor of two since Ancestral Eve some 200,000 year ago. This suggests that next generation theory can be tested against data from any period. Meanwhile it predicts only at the collective scale. Collective return is average risk return. Subtract collective growth rate to leave cash flow rate. Return and growth are two of the most closely measured rates in economics. That says that tests of next generation theory should be practical. I will show tables broadly in support. Next generation theory is a blockbuster. An explanation of interest and return has been the Holy Grail of capital theory. Boehm Bawerk contributed a big advance by revealing return as an artifact of time preference rather than the other way around. Some including Irving Fisher have seen that beautiful insight as enough. Not me. What explains and quantifies time preference? What turned out to be Petty’s idea occurred to me about 40 years ago, when I first took an interest in evolutionary biology. My friend Alan Rogers, a population geneticist | didn’t know all the time, was thinking in the same direction. His two published papers on this are in my appendix. Neither of us knew about Petty’s priority. The idea would have been a still bigger blockbuster before the wall came down. Wars were being fought about whether return has any legitimacy at all. Karl Marx, ironically a champion of Petty, may have missed his argument on that. Petty’s idea is really the biological imperative I discussed in Chapter 1. The first priority is survival and reproduction. I will argue that this was implicitly accepted Chapter 2: Fast Forward 1/06/16 29

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 10OtherUnknown

EFTA01804309

3p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02358088

11p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02420041

58p
House OversightUnknown

Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank, DMI Trust, Saleh Kamel, and Dallah al‑Baraka alleged to have knowingly funded al‑Qaeda before 9/11

Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank, DMI Trust, Saleh Kamel, and Dallah al‑Baraka alleged to have knowingly funded al‑Qaeda before 9/11 The brief details extensive allegations that specific Saudi financial institutions and individuals (including members of the Al Rajhi family and Saleh Kamel) provided material support to al‑Qaeda through charities, front companies, and direct banking services. It cites government warnings, the "Golden Chain" donor list, and multiple intelligence reports, offering concrete leads—names, entities, and alleged transactions—that could be pursued for further investigation or civil litigation. While many of these claims have been previously reported, the compilation of detailed pleading excerpts, corporate structures, and references to newly cited evidence (e.g., Treasury designations, UN resolutions) provides actionable investigative angles. Key insights: Al Rajhi Bank allegedly maintained accounts for known al‑Qaeda front charities and was warned by U.S. officials in 1999 about terrorist financing.; Saudi American Bank is accused of financing al‑Qaeda projects in Sudan and facilitating donations to extremist charities.; DMI Trust and its subsidiaries are described as central financial conduits for al‑Qaeda, with ties to Saudi and Sudanese banks.

1p
DOJ Data Set 11OtherUnknown

EFTA02718157

3p
Dept. of JusticeAug 22, 2017

15 July 7 2016 - July 17 2016 working progress_Redacted.pdf

Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Irons, Janet < Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:47 AM Richard C. Smith     Hello Warden Smith,     mother is anxious to hear the results of your inquiry into her daughter's health.   I'd be grateful if you could  email or call me at your earliest convenience.  I'm free today after 2 p.m.  Alternatively, we could meet after the Prison  Board of Inspectors Meeting this coming Thursday.    Best wishes,    Janet Irons    1 Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent:

1196p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.