Research Publication: Raw Notes

 

Hello readers of this blog, I have decided to publish my raw notes on "supply side economics."  My big ideas, which I think are some of my best ever, about demand and priorities lists and replacement coupons, were ones that I went into a lot of detail on.

I decided to try my hand at doing a supply-side version of that innovation.  I had one false start.  I decided to write up some notes about my idea, and I was thinking that I would develop my notes into something more coherent and complete.  I re-read my notes today--I saw someone outside expressing enthusiasm, apparently, for my notes ("r lock," yes, I thought in terms of a lockbox and a key, and in terms of shareware and an "upgrade") on economics, and that triggered a feeling of being cheered up and interested in my economics ideas.  It's funny how certain gestures trigger positive feelings in me almost automatically, although I'm not sure if it happens consistently.

Anyway, I decided to go easy on myself, and just make a few "update notes" in my notes file.  I am just going to paste my raw notes with those updates.  If you're really interested in this, please feel free to read it in depth (of course).  At the same time, I feel that continuing to develop on these ideas would be repetitive and kind of unnecessary...the notes kind of explain the whole idea as much as it needs to be explained, there's no more "crucial innovation" that needs to be done to make the ideas ready for presentation.  It's just written a bit sloppily and not like a usual finished product at this point.

Here are my notes!:

03-20-2026

PASTED from JOURNAL file:

Regarding economics:

I think the thing is, there is no "deterministic theory" of supply side interactions.  Instead, there is a notion of "nondeterministic theory."  The question is, what is that theory?  What are the free choices that suppliers have in the economy?

I think one comment we're going to make is, both market clearing and profit maximization are going to go out the door.  In particular, consumers have *finite* priorities lists.  That would tend to imply that after a certain amount of wealth expenditure, there is no desire for anything more.  So profit maximization is not needed.  What is needed is, a *target level of wealth* that the owners of the businesses want to be able to secure for themselves.  That is more realistic than the Walrasian approach.

Also, market clearing cannot be determined.  Before the "whole setup" is arranged, we can't know what will happen regarding market clearing.

I think the comment is, each supplier tries to find a way to reach their target amount of wealth.  The problem is, other actors might act in a way that might foil their plans.  So is there some sort of game theoretic idea that suggests that the player's strategy *guarantees* a certain amount of wealth?

We don't know how other actors will act.  But can we characterize it?  Can we identify it in terms of some finite number of dimensions?  What sorts of quantifiable, increasable and decreasable things can we talk about here?  What are the "buttons"?

Recall the "pizza parlor" game from Mataloni's class.  The game is anti-coordination.  But who goes first?  Also, what if sometimes, violating the anti-coordination rule will yield enough to meet one's wealth goals?

/* 03-21-2026:  Update, for notes publication:  The "pizza parlor" idea was, if you have a geographic area, and someone has put a pizza parlor at Address X, you do NOT want to place *your* pizza parlor right near it; instead, it's a game of chicken, where you want to maximize your profits by locating your "pizza parlor" business at an address where the other pizza parlors are a rather long distance away, so that local consumers will choose your pizza parlor over others that are further away. */

I think the comment is, the secret to supply-side economics is, build a big, k-dimensional /* 03-21-2025:  Cartesian space */  *map* of the opportunities.  Demand comes first; consumers can have their priorities bundles even without any wealth or income or companies in existence.

Recall my idea about "the physics of economics" that I came up with in jail.  The "mass" of profitability is decreased by proximity to another large mass of the same "type" or dimension or whatever.

I think the idea is, yes, you want a big, k-dimensional map.  You might have J products, and K=J+1 dimensions!  The key is to determine the distance between any two products in a carefully done way.  I might want to prove that any distance matrix for J products can be expressed in J+1 dimensions.  That's a good theorem to prove later.

So first, we have the distances between the products.  Then, we have the distances between the *businesses*.  We'll have some law that relates the distances between the products and the distances between the businesses to "total time step profit mass."  That will probably be a function of the net demand and essentialness for the products.

So!:  We need to identify the function for "total profit mass at this time step" in terms of all of the input variables to it, i.e., something like f(x1, x2, x3, ..., x26) or something like that.

/* 03-21-2026:  Update, consider using polynomial regression and empirical data to find the data for each function. */

Paste this into another file and work on it later!  I'm going to go for a nice walk now, it's 4:21 p.m.

4:30 p.m.

 - The business units *also* develop "priorities lists," for their supply-chain needs.  They work just like the ones (priorities lists) for regular consumers.

/* 03-21-2026:  The difference is, there are no replacement coupons here; businesses only produce straight down the list.  If the business runs out of money for production, it stops producing.  Also, if continuing down the list would decrease profit, the company will stop producing...the company can "simulate" going down the list all the way, and then "pull back" and stop at a place that maximizes profit. */

 - The business units can output "laborer labor units," e.g., one person could set up a company that supplies 16 half-hour Type Z labor units to another company.

 - The "business placement" game is a strictly sequential move game.  /* 03-21-2026:  Maybe we could select whose turn it is at random, and players could "pass for now" if they want to wait to decide. */  During one time step, let's say one month, *all* of the consumers who have not yet started a business may "place" their business down somewhere in the Cartesian space, and set up their priorities list and things that they will produce.  Note, in general, all "recipes" for a product are exactly the same; the key is, there might be a *particular type of laborer labor unit* that *only some laborers* can produce.  I.e., a sole proprietor business might be run by Laborer X, and she might be able to produce Labor Unit Q_30, but maybe no one else can produce that type of Labor Unit, at any rate of production.  Maybe someone could produce a substitute labor unit good, Unit Q_65, and that might be used in different, less efficient recipes for a similar product that is lower in quality and less demanded by the other consumers.