• Markets
• Economy
• Federal Reserve
• Housing
• Energy
• Digital Media

Thinking the unthinkable, predicting the unpredictable

The spin these days is that all of these disasters -- 9/11, Iraq Insurgency, New Orleans flood -- were both unthinkable and unpredictable.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

These were all thought of and predicted -- way in advance. I can name at least a dozen private (and public) sector firms that spend all of their waking hours dreaming up stuff like this. Not only was all this foreseeable, but its the subject of deep and regular analyses by some very, very bright people.

Indeed, from the office of strategic planning in the Pentagon, to risk management officers in Re-insurance companies to capital preservation specialists at Futures trading firms to doctors who specialize in pandemics at the NIH, all sorts of these "what-could-go-wrong" analyses occurs everyday. Even Wal-Mart plans distribution and routing strategies around all kinds of planned and sudden unplanned weather interruptions (see our earlier discussion). 

On Wall Street, bigger funds consider the "What-if" scenarios all the time.  I have participated in stress-testing asset pools with funds running 100s of billions of dollars:  What happens if a Nuke goes off in DC, if China invades Taiwan, if various heads of different States are assassinated (including the US President and/or VP), if the Royal House of Saud falls. Nukes are fun, cause there are so many scenarios -- in addition to the dirty bomb problems, there's what if N. Korea accidentally blows up a weapon, if Israel nukes Iran, if Russia admits 5 bombs are unaccounted for. Then there's the accidental US silo disaster, including various alternative misinterpretations (i.e., accident, terrorist, Russian or Chinese espionage, etc.)

All of this is called strategic planning. Up until recently, it was something that was not only carried out by the private sector and the military, but also at he highest levels of US government. Lately, it seems to have become a lost art.

My personal theory for a lot of what has gone wrong over the past few years is that ideology (i.e., Neo-Con) and faith-based belief systems (insert your choice here) have replaced elbow grease, deep thought, and long term strategizing as the methodology of implementing policy.

Its apparent in the anti-intellectual bend of much of the White House. Is it a surprise that pseudo-science is challenging Science? Not if you have been paying any attention.

The bottom line is that this distasteful, difficult stuff -- planning, strategizing, executing --  matters. It matters to the nation, its population and ultimately, to their safety from all manners of ordinary, natural and extra-ordinary man-made disasters.

This is one of the few times I get to admonish the public and exhort members of both political parties with words such as these:   

Figure it out -- or die.

Thursday, September 22, 2005 | 08:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (42) | TrackBack (2)
add to de.li.cious | digg this! | add to technorati | email this post

Comments

and yet all asset classes -- stocks, bonds, real estate, commodities, gold -- extended. is it the complacency u note in your piece or 3 years of accomodation by Greenspan. a little of both, i guess. Pax Americana -- if there ever was such a thing -- coming undone

Posted by: scorpio | Sep 22, 2005 10:01:07 AM

I think that, once again, you've hit the nail on the head. This is precisely the fruit of ideology and non-Science. Excellent post. This continues to be one of the best sites on the web. Not just one of the best blogs, but one of the best sites, period.

Posted by: john m | Sep 22, 2005 10:23:32 AM

Yeah, these faith-based fools will be the death of us all. Any hope for empiricism making a comeback?

Posted by: Brian | Sep 22, 2005 10:25:56 AM

It baffles me -- why couldn't the majority of Americans see the detrimental effects of the Bush Administration coming?

As a corp executive, I've hired many, many people over the years. Bush came across as an intellectual light-weight right from the beginning.

What large Corporation could you see Bush running? GE/MSFT/XOM/WMT? Faith is insufficient when you must review hundreds of reports, deal with thousands of outcomes, manage finances, people, inventory, production, marketing, etc.

Somewhere along the way, I think the Bush Administration forgot that in their perpetual campaign, where every speech, every policy directive, every change is politically driven, that they have to find time to actually get down to the nuts-and-bolts of managing the Federal Government. What a disaster.

As a case in point Barry: John Snow at Treasury. In the event of a banking meltdown or a dollar crisis, Snow will make Mike Brown of FEMA look like a genius. Read around the web Why doesn't Wall Street demand competence from this Administration?

Posted by: CorpExec | Sep 22, 2005 12:20:17 PM

CorpExec: they havent demanded it because up to now it hasnt been required. Bush the "useful fool" who somehow managed to connect w the middle while robbing them and the poor blind and delivering Corporate America -- most particularly the CEO class -- everything they ever wished for. there is no longer much of a future in this country for anyone except the top 1% and the next 9% who cater to them. even as this folly has been exposed in Iraq and New Orleans, there is no alternative construct to interpret events as Dems are prostrate, supine as wealth concentrates ever more. only question is whether there will be a Keynes to clean up Greenspan et al's mess.

Posted by: scorpio | Sep 22, 2005 12:52:31 PM

What a bunch of liberal biased trash!!! Your stress testing example shows little thought. Just because things are stress tested and fat tails determined doesn’t lead to a prediction of a fat tail event. How many times have you stressed tested and then invested for the fat tail? I assume your comment “at least a dozen private (and public) sector firms that spend all of their waking hours dreaming up stuff like this” implies that as they dreamed they also predicted. A dozen people dreaming is hardly a strong statistical indicator. One would have to know the dreamers track record of dreams leading to prediction that end up being correct.

Faith has nothing to do with the prediction of the events you discussed nor does it have anything to do with your buzz “strategic planning. The secretary at the White House knows more of that than you could ever remember. But by your tone you certainly, along with other post, sound biased and bigoted. From someone who sounds like he so much want to be consider an enlightened one, you actually come across as unintelligent, which may or may not be the case but your post certainly shows lack of clear thinking, analysis but is full of bias and bigotry.

Posted by: Hondo | Sep 22, 2005 1:18:34 PM

I think you guys are wrong to place this all at the feet of the White House. I think in today's world individuals have to step up themselves and strategize for themselves and their own families, whether in how they allocate their 401(k) plans (I allocate only 25% of mine to US equities and bonds, my personal prediliction), look for work, manage their careers or prepare for disasters. There is a decent college-textbook type publication available free as pdf on the FEMA website ("Are You Ready, A Citizen's Guide to Disaster Preparedness" - it's 220+ pages/20MB pdf). They say in the introduction that bureaucracies can set up a framework but that ideally citizens can do much more (the whole bottom of the triangle in their diagram) to ready themselves, with some preparations being fairly simple.

I am not looking forward to a genius at the top of a bureaucracy to micromanage down how to deal with all of these things. That's the route to having us all have bar codes slapped on our heads.

As for Bush being a lightweight, just keep repeating that mantra to yourselves. "Evil" Rumsfeld & Cheney are not lightweights, and I don't see that in Bush (I look beyond the West Texas twang); the unchanging nature of your perspectives will not enable you to forsee history passing you by.

Posted by: ReveBM | Sep 22, 2005 1:19:33 PM

these quotes are great why to go on all of your work.

Posted by: takarra | Sep 22, 2005 1:23:41 PM

I could not agree with you more. Some combination of religious and secular ideology has become quite prevalent in some parts of society where they did not previously seem to be so widespread.

However, I wonder about three other possible trends that might be contributing to the decline in serious strategic planning.

One is that society (on regional, national, and global levels) has become sufficiently complex sufficiently rapidly that it has outstripped the existing regulatory mechanisms. If real, such a trend would complement the problems caused by a secular ideology that dismisses any need for regulation.

A second is that many people may feel that the trend toward increasing complexity will inevitably lead to disaster, so there is no point in trying to avoid it. If real, that feeling would complement the views of religious fundamentalists who forsee doom as a consequence of the decline of religion or the overweaning pride of Man or the frankinsteinian ambitions of evil scientists or whatever other myth they subscribe to.

A third possible trend is some kind of generalized decline in public ethics, which certaintly seems to have taken hold in the political and corporate worlds. It does seem that many erstwhile conservatives on K Street, Wall Street, and Main Street have come to believe that the main benefit of government and business is the maximum extraction of private rents from a public concern. It's hard to disentangle that trend from the others, but it's also hard to ignore the remarkable level of personal irresponsibility that one sees not just in the President but in so many other functionaries who claim to adhere to traditional conservative values. It contrasts quite strongly with the irritatingly do-gooder personalities of many of my friends on the left and even with the attitudes of the kind of moderate conservatives who invariably used to fill the important staff-level jobs in government.

Posted by: dcbob | Sep 22, 2005 1:53:13 PM

To ReveBM:

> Not looking forward to a aenius at top of bureaucracy.

Why not? That shocks me. The Feds provide incredibly necessary services: national defense, long-term infrastructure investments, and referee of last resort in many cases. Not only is it vital, but is absolutely essential that very smart people be in critical management positions. Bush's management failure has been a near religious inability to learn from facts on the ground. And a near pathological inability to stand up to his party by A) Firing incompetents B) Taking policy turns C) Vetoing spending from the Republican led Congress. These actions suggest to me that Bush is leading on faith and not on logic.

There is no question that Rumsfeld & Cheney and many others within the Bush Admin meet many peoples criteria (including mine) of being very smart. As for Bush himself, you must be confused. It isn't just "twang". Some of the smartest folks I've met have twangs/tics/moles/you name it. Superficial observations are obviously foolish as measurements of intelligence.

Arms-length observations that are relevant include: clear examples of rigorous, structured logical thought leading to reasoned conclusions. Rumsfeld demonstrates these traits in nearly every public outing. Cheney demonstrates these traits. Bush, on the other hand, rarely demonstrates critical thinking abilities in his public speeches. You may think this is a matter of perception -- where a listener's prejudices apply -- fair enough. But I will tell you flat out -- that many of my acquaintances (both left and right alike) would easily consider hiring Rumsfeld&Cheney as CEOs -- but would laugh at Bush in the role.

A team made of brilliant players led by a bush-league coach isn't going to win the superbowl.

Posted by: CorpExec | Sep 22, 2005 2:01:16 PM

CorpExec

I will admit that Snow has not seemed impressive, particularly with comparison to Rubin. Why hasn't the Transportation Secretary ever been fired? Some good people such as Wolflowitz have left...

Republican spending has been out of control...I don't like that either.

I guess I don't directly perceive your own disdain of Bush's lingo, but I think it drives many others in the media.

Two other things. I assume you may admire the Sr. Bush for his thinking/strategic abilities, but as I recall Late in the Reagan/Sr. Bush period a lot of talented people left Washington and that the remaining staff in Bush's term and that someone commented that the White House had the atmosphere of one of the "dumbest country clubs" in America.

Also, assuming you might have considered Clinton to be a brilliant strategist/policymaker, which if any of his policies have stood the test of time? I'll give you Rubin, I loved Rubin.

One policy which "W" Bush has been pushing which I like, is - It looks like we may be building domestic nuke plants again soon.

Posted by: ReveBM | Sep 22, 2005 2:30:43 PM

There is a genius at the top of the bureacracy - Rove. It's just that he's a totally Machiavellian genius. Not that I would expect Hondo or ReveBM to have any idea who Machiavelli was, or to have actually read "The Prince". it's a short book, guys - give it a try.. Then you might understand the Bush administration and stop praising them. Or, prehaps, try picking up a newspaper and actually look at the state of the world today.

Anyway, yes, I agree. Lack of a proper education in this country is absolutely killing us today. It astonishes me how many people think ideology and faith can solve all our problems. A little reading of history would quickly disuade them of that notion. But we don't teach history anymore, not in the cause and effect way. We teach "social studies". My own kids say they've learned more watching the History Channel than in most of their "history" classes. We teach kids to memorize dates instead of knowing what really happened.

Hondo and ReveBM, your attacks are just silly. Bring some facts next time, k? The people who are being most hurt by this adminstration have no Internet access and wouldn't know how to download a PDF if they tried. They don't HAVE 401Ks. Not everyone is as privileged as your are, and to not understand that is moronic.

Posted by: donna | Sep 22, 2005 3:00:19 PM

Great observation. I wish everyone could recognize the mental laziness and fuzzy thinking that pass for planning in the Shrub administration. Love your site.

Posted by: Joel Files | Sep 22, 2005 3:44:06 PM

Barry I love your site too. Thanks for the reality-based commentary.

I think the country started to go seriously off the rails during the spurious impeachment proceedings against Clinton, and the wasted millions spent investigating his affair with Monica. There the Republicans showed themselves to be committed to spin and moralistic posturing with no concern for the *ethics* inherent in solid governance.

I have become more of a leftie in the years since, but at that time I was a loyal employee of >10 years at one of the leading technology corporations. Our CEO was brilliant. I remember looking at our CEO and wondering who in their right mind would trash a brilliant executive for a private affair. People's Lives and Livelihoods Depend on Good Governance. What was the matter with people? Well now we see that there is a price to be paid.

I think the Dems need to sieze on this as an issue of basic ethics. It's not only greed, cronyism, outrageous over the top pork barrel spending, an addiction to deficit spending & war fantasies (Iraq) etc ad nauseum that distinguishes the Republicans. It's that they've used their anti-government ideology to justify horrible management in every respect *other* than political spin. This has had tragic, indeed unforgiveable consequences.

I think all Republicans owe their country an apology and need to work off their debt to society by
1. reforming their actions *and* their values.
2. learning to tell and live with truth rather than spin.

Posted by: camille roy | Sep 22, 2005 4:01:35 PM

donna

Have read Machiavelli, but alas in your worldview must have learned nothing from it...

Read the WSJ every day, gag when I even scan Times headlines.

Cheap shots are the stuff of life, are they not?

Posted by: ReveBM | Sep 22, 2005 4:50:05 PM

The idea that people on the left are "reality-based" in any way, shape or form is side-splittingly funny. Ever try to have a reality based discussion with someone on the left about race and crime? How about genetics and IQ? How about gender differences? Or illegitmacy rates? Or teachers unions and school spending? Or Titile IX? Racial Quotas? Immigration?

The secular crowd has its own gospels called feminism, multiculturalism and big government. Deviation from these fundamentalisms is punished severely.

Posted by: jon smith | Sep 22, 2005 5:01:12 PM

Camille Roy

Which "Republican values" specifically would you reform or change, and

Isn't deficit spending a problem for both parties in the last 30 years?

Posted by: ReveBM | Sep 22, 2005 5:26:46 PM

What I find to be more telling, in a way, than the response fiasco, are the reports that federal funding for levee maintenance and improvement programs had been drastically reduced already during the current administration and that they had even been seeking further cuts; despite the fact it has been well known that New Orleans was a disaster waiting to happen someday. Certain right-wing economists seem to take great pleasure in Euro-bashing but I don't think even they could honestly ever envision a scenario wherein the Dutch government short-changes dike maintenance in order to fund tax cuts for the rich.

Posted by: rram | Sep 22, 2005 5:43:35 PM

"Which "Republican values" specifically would you reform or change?"

For a start,
- Dump ideologies
- Embrace empiricism.
E.g dump neo-con wars and war plans.
E.g. dump supply side economics.
E.g. dump tax cuts as a bandaid for all economic and social problems.

This would be an excellent start, but it is minimal. Of course more moves are necessary.
- Base policy on research not the wishes of the (rich) donor base.
- Base communication with the public on a committment to honesty rather than spin.
- Bring good faith (not 'Christian' spin!) back into politics.

For example, research indicates that the intensity of hurricanes has soared in the last 30 years, and that fact is directly related to rising ocean temperatures. Would you trust this administration to investigate this, and if the most established and reputable scientists for the most part agree that this is global warming related, develop policies to mitigate global warming?

Not in your life would this admin do this! They would pay off some industry researchers to give a show that would allow them to ignore any role global warming played. This type of ideology based mismanagement is nothing other than criminal. It is immoral. It is deadly.

It must stop.

Those of you who support this administration are guilty as well. Your political choices have moral consequences.

Posted by: camille roy | Sep 22, 2005 5:57:39 PM

meteor -> wasn't this on SNL a while ago?

Posted by: nate | Sep 22, 2005 6:21:20 PM

jon-
Most of us that are upset at Dubya's administration in the way the Barry is are not "left." We're pragamatic, libertarian people who understand that you have to get your hands dirty if you want to get "stuff" done. And you have to get that "stuff" done without going over budget.

Rev-
Thanks for your comments. At least you're willing to listen, give points where they're due. Your point about a "genius" micromanager slapping bar codes on our heads is sophistic. Good executives don't micro-manage, and it's this administration who's been fighting for the computerized Big Brother you're afraid of. Rumsfeld didn't get his Carnivore, and-- why don't you say it with me: thank goodness!

As far as my contribution to the debate, I'd just like to put out something I've been told when "stuff" is overwhelming:

"Faith can move mountains, but you might want to bring a shovel."

-jaz

Posted by: jaz | Sep 22, 2005 6:22:22 PM

i have been coming in and out of this. someone may have written this already.

it may pay to keep the gas tank in you car full of gasoline at the end of each day.

Posted by: nate | Sep 22, 2005 6:46:33 PM

Camille and Reve--did you guys take a wrong turn at DailyKos and end up here by mistake? Be honest now, you guys aren't real, you are actually DNC dummybots who roam the Net polluting comment boards with boilerplate talkingpoints, right?

Camille--if you really exist--thanks for demonstrating my point about the phoniness and hypocrisy of the "reality based" Left. Everyone else deals in bad faith and cynicism EXCEPT YOU!! You brave noble soul that speaks truth to power!!! You are just too good for this country and if everyone could just embrace your vision of peace and justice it would be UTOPIA! Priceless.

Was it the bear hug embrace of empiricism by people like you the reason it took a conservative congress to reform welfare after 30 years of dependency and failure? How about longer jail sentences for criminals and more prisons cutting the crime rate? Care to consult the empirical record on that one? How about the other issues I mentioned above? You mentioned tax cuts and supply side econ, though I doubt you could define it. Guess what? The unemployment rate is at 4.9%. Revenues are surging. Global warming as the cause for hurricanes? Sorry sweetie, not even the Lefties at Slate were buying that one last week.

Trust me when I tell you that you have your own ideological demons to slay and the empircal record is most definitely not an arrow in your quiver.

Reveb--You talked about how superior Euro-values would never, ever, not in a million years allow a catastrophy like Katrina to take place. Huh. I guess you missed the heat wave that swept France in 2003-4 and killed about 10,000 people (most of them elderly and infirm) for lack of air conditioning. How's that for compassion, preparedeness and humanitarianism?

The sad thing about people like you two is that you really don't see the resemblence between you and religious fundamentalists you despise. You are their mirror images. You preech (or in your case "Camille" screech) the virtues of tolerance over and over and over again and the first time someone disagrees with you, you label them a fascist. Some tolerance.

Posted by: jon smith | Sep 22, 2005 6:56:47 PM

Excellent post Barry (again) - even though a predicted major catastrophe may have a "statistically insignificant" probablility of occurring, it is the planning and practice for those "what if's" that unfortunately has become a "lost art" due to budget constraints at federal, state and local levels IMHO.

Posted by: Aaron | Sep 22, 2005 8:51:29 PM

I am not sure that the religious as a group are responsible fr mantaining this system, though of course some are religious.

It dates back many years, but I think it syrged with Rush and talk radio. It is faith based reality.

It employs a slime machine that demonizes any opponent. Thus John McCain was a North Vietnamese agent. While not all patyicipated, one can see how it just flummoxed a guy to be accused of working for those who tortured him for years.

The original source was a guy who conned the families of MIAs. He took money from them and their supporters promising their loved ones were alive. When McCain threw him out, he struck back and because it was convenient to believe it Rove released the Limbaighian hordes.

These are not neo conservatives.

They are individuals seeking deeper and deeper into madness. We start to see the demand for "faith based reality" in Iraq. It is the press who causes all problems, if they didn't report bad news, then there wouldn't be bad news. I don't make this up. Read their blogs. Pointing ut that the south is dominated by Iranian connected militias or that corruption is killing the country is "treason."

There must be some psychological or philosophical term for this, external reality doesn't exist, it's all partisan game and if you can destroy the other side and all that's left is you and your friends saying the same things you control reality.

A more potent drg than LSD.

With Katrina we see the pushing to the limit, this madness is coming to an end.

I pray that the president can separate himself from those he used and who have usd him, leave this delusion and face things. I think that he is fundamentally better than they are, but they have played to his weakness.

I hope to see him define them as "evil."

Posted by: rebecca | Sep 22, 2005 9:53:33 PM

December 2008

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31