Using resolution in Menzies state indicators.

Pick an N and a resolution.  Does Menzie believe that the economy hgas eight bit accuracy? OK, then take your N, likely 300 million, and Huffamn encode it to a rank eight encode and Menzie lowers the resolution to match his view of economic accuracy.

Now, encode the state populations individually and discover that Montana barely can see (count N). The half million people inside the state will be unable to discern any market except national tourism. They cannot sample fast enough to keep up with the economies of scale in California.

Then take California, it has much greater resolution, more value chains can be supported. In this case California sees more opportunities than can be had and they go flat earth inviting people from around the world to come live and take advantage. Soon the big states are heavily skewed as wealth concentrates into the illusion of  increasing N. Newsom can get a small clue here, but try to explain this to our failed Hispanic legislature.

In both cases they are out of focus.  The House and Senate leaders are supposed to have a clue. How many think Pelosi and McConnell have a clue? They have no clue, there are few economists who understand this who will make the effort to inform them.  I mean, they have slight clues, but try to get that clue into the head of some bonehead Senator at random.

Soon we end up with an unresolvable tax battle between the large states and the central government.  We are at that point, there is no fair tax solution available, it becomes meeting of the elders. And this is what a well matched state coincident indicator will show, the system does not close, it does not meet Lucas criteria. Solution? Live within the means of the underlying Markov net.

Vermont News:

U.S. House passes latest stimulus bill; includes more than $2 billion for Vermont

OK, Vermont is one person out of 300 in all the states.  The house bill is 3 trillion. That comes to 10 billion per state. Vermont was short changed by eight billion if we are proportional by person. Anyone see the problem? Is it becoming obvious?

We cannot sneak around this problem like this bonehead politician:

“There’s differences and we don’t have the luxury of time for the full debate all of us would prefer,” Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt., who voted for the bill, said Friday morning on the House floor.

Peter Welch is an ignorant flat earther and just follows party line.  He clearly short changed the stats. Vermont is better off with no stimulus, and now the Senators of Vermont, both flat earthers, will have to decide. The decision is, go with the flat earth crowd and get some ear marks later, or just chuck the whole thing.

There are about 15 states small enough to get ripped off by the House bill, that is 30 senators. The Senate will barely pass the bill, and if they do they trigger an avalanche of ear markets for eight years trying to catch up. The Senate is likely to vote no and resolving the balance is next to impossible given the complete mis-education of these politicians by our economists.

The solution is adaption.  The Senate needs to get their payment upfront, based on their perfomance on the last budget.  That keeps everyone's resolution in balance.  But the flat earthers , like Krugman, will have Wile E Coyote moment.

How long before California climbs out of the mess:

If this recession is like the last, California will need four or five years.  That is going to be lifetime for the Swamp.  Do not listen to Krugman on this, we will have a long, if not impossible, recovery in California.  California is likely to push us to a meeting of the elders.  Who attends the meeting? Likely Trump and the kleptomaniacs.  Flat earth economists got us into a whole bag of doo doo and they are helpless on getting us out.