Sociology and game theory.

The use of game theory is expanding from nuclear strategies to the social sciences. And one of the users of this interesting theory is are companies. The company owners want to know. What is the point when personal benefit overruns the collective benefit? There is the possibility that some person gets a job from another company. But that thing causes the fall of the present workplace. 

The collective benefit must go ahead. The benefit of the company is the benefit of its workers. Or that is the normal way to think. But the company owners are people whose benefit is that the workgroup is optimal. When we think. About the number of workers. There are always people who are not "doing anything". The reason for that is that if the worker will not make things right. That person can kick off the company. If the workforce is minimal. There is no way to divorce workers. But if there is some kind reserve of workers. That means the divorcing worker is easier. 

But then we must realize that the worker would not have the same benefit as the company owner. The owner might want to make money. And the only reason why the employee is at the company is the product. The production requires workers. And that is the reason, why the workers are only the loss of money in the company. 

So why do we have unemployment? The companies benefit is always that there are lots of unemployed workers. That makes their ability to select workers from a large number of applicants. That large number of unemployed people makes it possible to put salaries down and the companies can say that there are thousands of applicants. 

A large number of unemployed people are not the benefit of society or the state. The state must pay the minimum payment for unemployed people that they can pay for their food and clothes. If that payment is too low. That causes increasing criminal behavior. 

The prisoner would cause other kinds of costs to society. That person requires surveillance officials. And prison guards. Those people require their payments. And that thing costs money. When we are saving money from someplace. That raises the costs of some other place. Nothing is free. 

All people want money. And there are multiple points for the money of the state. And even the largest and richest countries have limited resources. The resources that are given to someplace are away from some other place. The problem with modern politics is that people who are operating in the political field are members of some party. 

That means they are listening first to their people. And after that, they listen to others. The fact is that the benefit of the person and that person's support group can sometimes be different. This is one thing that we must realize. When we are thinking about illegal refugees from Mexico. 

Those people come to the USA swimming over the Rio Grande. We know how poor those people are. We might ask why some people want to kick them off. If we are looking at the maps where is shown the people who are against those refugees we can notice that those people are living near the border. When people who live near borders say. They are afraid, because of those refugees. 

They have the right to do that. There are always some people who are carrying drugs. And some of those people are dangerous. We are not living at the border of Mexico. And for us, that might seem ridiculous. But for people who are facing those cases that is not the same. The thing is that people who are living thousands of kilometers away from some area might have a different way to see things. 

People are reading news differently. The people who are close to the cases are seeing only negative things. The risk and the fear are the dominating effects in the news that they read. And of course, there are always people who forget to ask. "Why does somebody want to swim across the Rio Grande"? 

Why didn't those people use legal ways to cross the border? The name of the game is that every people have a different way to highlight the parts of those stories. The people who resist firearms might say. That there is only a couple of people who are carrying drugs. But the free firearms supporter might say that "those couple of guys might come to visit you". 

So who is right. Which of those people has better arguments? The answer that we will give might depend on things like do we own guns? That thing is quite expensive. And of course, we must remember that we must justify that thing to ourselves. 

When the audience is asked for callup surveys. There is always some category of how those people are selected. The game theory is the thing that determines the people who are giving answers that benefit the maker of the survey. 

If the maker of the research is the NRA (National Rifle Association) the reason for selecting people for the survey might be people who just bought firearms. Those people might want to justify buying for themselves and their friends. So those people would probably answer that they are made the right choice. The argument for buying a handgun is the will to look for protection from firearms. 

https://gamesandtehories.blogspot.com/

What kind of person is the populist?

(Picture I)

https://avoimenkoodinmaailma.blogspot.com/p/what-kind-of-person-is-populist.html

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Why populists get people to the streets, is the question, what is always interested about sociologists and political investigators? Those persons, who are mentioned as "populists" are normally some kind of different than so-called "regular politician". Those people have strong opinions on any problem in the state. They use language, what makes them seem like "real working-class people", who would be met in some bars. They always find something to say about every situation, and of course, the reason, why people would have no job or they have bad salary is coming from outside of the borders. They protect the regular people and they have strong values of the things, what is dear for this person and the followers. Of course, real populists are always people's choice, as you can see from the poster of the presidential campaign of the USA from the year 1904, what is above the text.

Of course, the new political movement would always be mentioned as the "populists" or aggressive right-wing nationalists. The populists have the great eye for talking everything, what people want to hear, and pleasing the biggest group of people is the most important thing, in the life of populist. This person separates from the mass, and they have the simple solution for every problem. That is foreigns out from the country, that every person in the nation, would get jobs. Of course, universities must be made paid, because that would guarantee the studying places for the people of that nation. In this case, there we can find some things, what are forgotten. First, what kind of jobs is that populist promising to the people?


Are they some cleaners or hotel piccolos jobs, and what kind of salary is paid for those works? And the second one is, where normal person, whose parents are not wealthy persons would get money for studies? Of course, the children of bosses are always people, who would have money for paying the studies, but that will isolate those persons from regular people. The populists have always answers to those questions. They would say, that if somebody doesn't have parents in the top place of business life, they would not have the chance to get any position in the business life, and that means that they would not be needed in those universities. And why regular people need to pay those studies? Populists have always the ability to make feel like in rock concert.


Their followers would sway the flags, and burn the torches like in some football match, and those people keep others away from the sight of their idol. And this is the worst weakness, what populists have. They would see only persons, who really like their speeches, and sometimes they would get many votes, but when they would get the seat of the prime minister or president, would the cold realities show their faces.


Many populists promise new jobs in the police or military forces, what are of course the important part of the state and public safety. In the real life, the police- and military forces are very expensive part of the state. Those persons, who work in those organizations must get their payments, and if the line with speeding tickets and another kind of things is very tight, would the state give very large part of the incoming money to those organizations.


Because if the speeding ticket is very expensive,  people would start to avoid driving, and other things, where the punishment will be the ticket. This is the very sad thing because police and army are the very important thing in the independent state identity and protection of its own territory. Any nation would not have money for everything, what they would need, and same money would be needed for defense, police work, rescue service and education system.


This makes the economy of the state so complicated thing. And nobody wants speeding ticket. This is also the truth and the persons, who make decisions, how to deliver money must know that. But also traffic police makes very important work, by hunting the persons, who drive after drinking too much. That is another way to see the work of the police. But the police can also be used to hunt the political enemies. And here I must say that violence is the bad way to handle populists. They want that somebody would use the weapon against them because those actions would make them seem more patriotic. And if their followers would die, they will turn as martyrs.


If somebody treats them, they would publish that, and after that, this kind of actions would give them more followers than ever before. The best way to act against them is, to let them go in the power of the nation. There they must make their decisions about freedoms and another kind of things. And then people would see, can they really solve the problems of that nation. if they can they have earned the trust from people, but if they fail, would there be next election abut the ruler of the nation.

Sources:



Picture I


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1f/Populist_Party_campaign_poster_1904.jpg

To be or not to be that is the question of the importance of mankind

travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/
travellingintimeandspace.wordpress.com/2018/04/15/to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question-of-the-importance-of-mankind/

Gift of the luck is not always same for the group

Barge Haulers on the Volga
Ilya Repin
(1870-1873)

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Barge Haulers on the Volga is a portrait, where great Russian artist thinks about work. This portrait raises the question in the people head: who actually does the job? There are many aspects in this portrait, and one of them is, who actually does everything in the state? Who goes to war in if the ruler of the state would want to go to the war?


In the real life is always people, who get more about their jobs than others in that group.  The role of the suffering is always reserved to workers, who don’t, of course, have any education. This portrait might inspire Karl Marx or Friedrich Engels in the Surplus Value Theory, what has transformed in the hands of sociologists to the theory, what has the same name, but different content and message to the people.


In sociology, The Surplus Value Theory means that some workers don’t do anything in their workplace, and the leaders of the state would see different things in the same thing than other people. When high-class aristocrat told other people about the barge-haulers, they meant the people, who owned those vessels. When the owners of those vessels told about those barge haulers, they meant the captains of those vessels.


They didn’t mean the men who pulled the vessels. And this is the very good thing to think even in the modern working life. If we were captains of that vessel, we would do that job even 12 hours per day, but those men who pull this thing would not stand that long. In this picture is a message that even if the persons have the same salary for this work, then another person would get more than others. The superiority official makes light and easy days, but the people who pull this thing has very hard work to do.


In this picture is the good message about the work of the boss. This person might put all work to his henchmen, and then he must not do anything. If the person doesn’t do single work during his workday, this might make those days boring. And that kind of place is actually very light for those persons, who could do even 16 hours working day in their offices. So this is the message of this famous portrait, what is a very good example of the Russian realism from 19th. century.

Sources:

Picture 1:

http://artpaintingartist.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Barge-Haulers-on-the-Volga-by-Ilya-Repin.jpg

https://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/gift-of-luck-is-not-always-same-for.html

Bubble effect and what does it mean in sociology?

Japanese gang members,
who is the leader of the gang
(Picture 1)

Kimmo Huosionmaa


“Bubble effect” is the sociological theorem, where the person is only with the people like this person is. In this homogeneous group of people is only persons who act and behaves like others. And that would make illusion, that everybody on Earth has the same kind of thoughts and values. This is very often seen in the speaking of the members of some street gangs, what uses “uniforms”. “Bubble effect” is the sociological theorem, where the person is only with the people like this person is. In this homogeneous group of people is only persons who act and behaves like others.


And that would make illusion, that everybody on Earth has the same kind of thoughts and values. This is very often seen in the speaking of the members of some street gangs, what uses “uniforms”. Those groups may also have own tattoo code or some other codes, what would show the rank and position in those gangs and Japanese gang in the picture on the top of the text doesn't make exceptions Guess, who is the leader of the gang? (Picture 1).


Those uniforms are actually similar clothes, and in some cases west. Those west are the mark that the person is the member of some gang, and that might seem the little bit silly in the eyes of outsiders. This means that those gang members don’t seem anything abnormal in their west or personal outfit. There is the very good reason for that clothing. Members of those gangs might not see anyone else, except other gang members.


And this makes the same kind of effect, what you might see in some rock music happenings. There might feel that everybody in the world is some kind of rocker. And then the festival ends, the real world might seem different, then before the concert. This situation would be like the people would close in the bubble. There are only the persons who act and think about the same way, And if you are in some festival like Woodstock, there would seem only the people, who wear Rock clothes.


So when some group of people is in this kind of closed room, they don’t understand how prominent they actually are. In the isolated societies is always seems the same effect as in military groups, what uses uniforms. Military uniforms are clothes, what are in same time the thing, what hires a man in the group, but it makes the single military man in the middle of civilians very easy to track.


That is the similar thing, what happens in every society, what have coherent clothes or dress code. Members of that team don’t see anything special in their clothes. And when there are similar opinions in all members head, there would happen that the all group would do something stupid. And if nobody says anything against the bad ideas, the force of the group would cause that somebody would think that, the robberies or violence are the good way to earn money.


And in those groups, everybody must be tougher than the guy before that member. This would sometimes drive all group of the persons to make very bad crimes. This is because the group force would make the decision to begin violent actions easier than lonely person’s case. When there are many men, they are always more frightened than lonely man. That’s why the alienation is worse if there is the group of people, who would start to live outside the society. That will make gangs the problem for public security.

Picture 1

http://static.messynessychic.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/rocka-930x578.jpg

https://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/

http://crisisofdemocracticstates.blogspot.fi/p/bubble-effect-and-what-does-it-mean-in.html