Side Paths, Complications and Short-Term Memory

        Each side-path you take from your main path, results in adding complication; but only when you intent to later come back to your main path and for that need to set aside precious little short-term memory in your brain for the necessary shift back.


There are ofcourse 2 ways to prevent this addition of complication (as should be deducted from the last line above):
    First is to not come back to the main path once the side-path is ran its course. The so-called side-path become the main path as soon as you enter it, and if you later move to another path that path become your main path. Since you never intent to move back you do not set-aside short-term memory to remember where to move back to, therefore no complication is added.
    Second way is when you do intent to move back but not have to set aside short-term memory, instead its long-term memory where information is stored. This switch from short-term memory to long-term memory dont come instantly, it needs repeatition - if you do a thing for a while your long-term memory take over and your short-term memory is left spare, thus complication is reduced.

       Note that complication increase only when you use more short-term memory, and reduce only when you use less short-term memory.

Short-Term Memory
    Short-Term Memory is very fast, almost instanteneous; its like when it looks like you already know the answer, the answer is at your "finger-tips" and requires no conscious thinking at your part.
    Short-Term Memory is fast because its very little - not a lot can be saved in it. Since its very little no conscious linking is required to recall it and therefore you appear not thinking when recalling it.

Long-Term Memory
    Long-Term Memory is opposite of Short-Term Memory. Its slow but vast. Since its vast it requires linking and thus thinking. Since it requires linking it requires repeatition of information to be saved in it.    

What Goes In Short-Term Memory
    Its not just information about previous-path-to-move-back-to that goes in Short-Term Memory. The other thing that is stored in it is values. These 2 are the only types of things that goes in Short-Term Memory: address of values, values.
      
        Remember that wherever there is a division, at top-most level there is always division in 2 parts. In data its values and addresses-of-values.

How To Reduce Complication       
    [Consider this as your take-home lesson from this article]

    Since complication increase only when usage of short-term memory increase and reduce only when usage of short-term memory reduce, the only way to reduce complication is to reduce usage of short-term memory.

    Since both values and address-of-values goes in short-term memory reducing either reduce  complication. Following are some tricks:

• Dont try to remember too many things at a time (reduce number of values in short-term memory). Make each process you use require as little values as can be managed, or make groups of values so at top level you not have to remember too many things at once but dont make more than 1 level of groups. Note that remembering 3 things at once when there is no grouping is already hitting limits of human brain, and with grouping you can increase that to 6 values at most.

•  Dont go into another side-path (another level of indirection) when you are already inside a side-path. Once you are done processing the side-path you are already in, go back to main path and from there move to the next side-path. Make your processing structure accordingly. This is to follow only when you are not already doing compound side-pathing for a while, because if you are used to this i.e. have practise then its your long-term memory that is storing values - not short-term memory so number of address-of-values is not a concern.

• Use external memory if you must absolutely have to go inside deeper and deeper levels of side-paths and/or absolutely must have to remember more than 6 data-values at once in short-term memory. Use pen-and-paper or use software, but using pen-and-paper is usually much less complicated because most of the people are used to it much more than they are used to saving short-term stuff in software notes.

• Utilize another person. If work is really too much complicated then utilize services of another human being. Delegate tasks.

Change Has To End

[Following applies to all systems, and also to all phases of a system (be it design-phase or operational-phase), and even to all sub-phases of a system (be it discovery and laboratory-experimental sub-phases within design phase or young or matured sub-phases of operational-phase etc)]

A change in a system is needed only in either its Functionality (what a system do) or in its Mechanism (how a system works).

If its functionality that has to be changed then its either to expand the system (by adding more features to cover more environmental or input conditions) or to contract the system (by reducing number of features to optimize for a cost or output variable) (cost variable may be time or money or human effort or material etc, output variable may be effectiveness or availability etc of the system).

If its mechanism that has to be changed then its either a change in level of technology (upgradation or downgradation) or a change to a parallel level of technology (side-stepping instead of moving up or down, to better match resources available) (sometimes you do have to downgrade technology level because newer technology is too complex and thus have too many requirements).

A change is a process i.e. it has steps. The steps, by definition, have to occur in sequence (not in parallel).

(Multiple things may and should happen at parallel, but its still just one step).

First step in the process is a plan. Its a meta-step because in this you decide what to do in remaining steps. You also decide when to do those whats.

Define scope and stick to it or make only minor changes. In scope decide what (parts of system) to change.

(During implementation of plan, minor changes in scope is ok, may even be necessary because ofcourse you cannot plan for everything, but if you find yourself touching entire classes of areas you never thought of making changes into then you need a new plan and new implementation, judiciously undo some or all of the changes made so far and repeat the entire exercise).

Second and last part of planning is to make a sequence. Having already decided what to change in first part now is time to decide when to make those changes. Its here where you look at dependencies and layers in system. 

Your plan has to be in written form, for it to be a plan.

Dont be afraid to make changes in majority of parts in a system (be it functionality or mechanisms). Different sequences of changes in a system should be very away from each other in time. Nobody like frequent and seemingly never-ending series of changes. At end of each sequence of change a system should be well-suited to situation at hand as well as to foreseeable situations in future.

(A situation is a set of all environmental and input conditions at a time).  

A system is a set of interacting parts. If parts dont interact then its not a system. By definition, all functionalities as well as mechanisms of a system interact with each other. Therefore, when you decide change in some parts of system do take into account intended and not-intended effects on other parts of system, do consider your scope very carefully.

[If you can remember only one thing from this post, be it neither that parts of a system must be interacting nor that change in a system is only in functionality and mechanism, make it that all necessary changes in a system must happen in one sequence. Let all sequences of changes stand on their own, i.e. after each sequence system work exactly as it should be and not depend on further changes to handle current or foreseeable situations. In other words, each change must have an end]

Groups, Teams & Tactics

For my purpose I define _group_ of people as collection of similar people i.e. people doing same kind of task. For example: a group of salesmen, a group of tax-accountants, a group of grain-farmers, a group of coat-tailors etc.

I also define the term _team_. I define it as a collection of dissimilar groups .

I dont have to define the term _tactic_. Its current meaning, suffice for my purpose, is technique used to accomplish a task. I do have to define the term _task_ though.

Simply put, a task is smallest, usually repeatable and thus reassign-able goal. Examples are: produce 100 tons of wheat, sew (or make thread for) 100 shirts, run a bakery for a day, defend this square mile for a day, capture that enemy trench and so on.

In this article I will try to figure out where we need groups and where we need teams.

Note that using a team, instead of a group, is same as using Combined Arms Tactics (its a military term).

Combined Arms Tactics has huge benefit of solving most, if not all, of logistics problems (logistics is one of the biggest problems in all tasks).
 
For example, you cannot securely guard a system of trenches or area around a bunker, or make an  offensive by just having a group of shooters, you also need medical staff and supply people. You can choose to have separate units of shooters, medical staff and supply people but this will result in huge nightmare of logistics problem (because of communication gaps and delays).

Note that _unit_ here obviously dont mean a single soldier - but a platoon, company or battalion, depending on type and task. 

Also note that by a medical unit I mean a group of those people that are present when shooting happen, who physically carry wounded (and dead) soldiers on stretches to field hospitals, and provide first aids. I dont mean field hospital people who are behind at (relatively) safe place and dont see shooting when the task was done.

Similarly, by supply unit I mean the group of people that personally, that is, by hand, take supplies to the front where shooting is happening. It not include the truckers etc working behind the fields.   

In order to complete a task where different types of units need to work in close co-ordination, putting them in separate commands make the co-ordination unnecessarily lengthy and complicated, and thus error-prone.

The units that need close co-ordination to work together, must be combined in a single unit.

Note that this merging may result in too large a unit and thus may need to be divided into smaller units, while maintaining the heterogeneity.

If the units dont need close co-ordination, that is, the units can work asynchronously, that is some kind of buffer/storage is present, then Combined Arms Tactics is not needed, because the loss in efficiency cannot be justified by immediate need.


A bakery need not have its own kitchen. The biscuits and cakes etc of the bakery and all other bakeries of the locality should be made in a separate cooking facility. This is both more efficient and manageable. The bakeries can each provide something unique to its customers (that other bakeries dont) by dividing items made in the cooking facility among them, and can also dedicate 1 cook each to themselves, thus providing uniqueness in taste too.

Combined Arms Tactics, that is, giving each bakery a kitchen and a cook that work inside the bakery, is not needed because items cooked can be stored. This is different than the military task discussed above because a wounded soldier cannot really wait for a medic to come all the way from the field hospital, the medic needs to be already nearby. Ofcourse this availability of medics is inefficient because although at some fronts few soldiers will be wounded and at others many we need to provide as much medics at each front as if there are many wounded at all fronts.


In the bakery example I will call collection of salesmen a group, collection of cooks a different type of group, and collection of helpers a yet another type of group. To accomplish the task of running the bakery for a day you will need multiple groups, of all 3 types, in different quantities.

You will need as many groups of salesmen as number of bakeries you are running. Note that its not efficient to run only 1 bakery, your business must run multiple bakeries.

Each group of salesmen will have as many people in it as number of salesmen needed in that bakery. I recommend a number between 4 and 6 for normal scenarios and 3 and 7 including edge cases with 2 and 8 being so out of line numbers that something needs to be done immediately.

Only 1 group of cooks is needed for the entire business (multiple bakeries). Number of cooks in the group need to be as many as number of bakeries.

Likewise, only 1 group of helpers is needed for the entire business, having same number of helpers as number of cooks.

By having a group of cooks you have certain advantages, including:
    _ If a particular cook is absent on a day or resign from job altogether your business dont come to a halt.

    _ You can use a cook to keep an eye on other cooks. Its very probable that you - the business owner - yourself is not an expert in cooking.

    _ A senior cook can boost moral of other worker cooks, and can also train trainee cooks

    _ The senior cook can also resolve minor issues between other cooks.

To effectively run the scheme you need absolute minimum of 3 tactical sub-units, which in case of bakery business means 3 bakeries. Comfortable numbers for this is 4, 5 and 6. 7 is at edge of what is manageable. 

In order to properly utilize a group-leader (your senior cook is a group-leader), since he is working himself too, not just leading, give him between 2 and 4 other worker cooks, and 1 to 2 trainees if trainees are at all present, to lead. If you have more than 5 cooks you have to have more than 1 senior cook.

Note that the senior cook will have other cooks in his command, but not any helper, although the cooks will be working in close co-ordination with them (helpers will wash pots, pans etc and do loading and stirring etc work).

Each salesman will be in command of the supervisor of his bakery, means the supervisor of a bakery will be group-leader of the salesmen of the bakery. Since salesmen will be the only workers working in a bakery (they will do sweeping, cleaning, loading etc themselves) the supervisor of a bakery will command all the staff of a bakery.

All of the supervisors will be under command of the business man who invest in and run the group-of-bakeries. The businessman will also directly command the senior cook and the senior helper.  

Techniques and Situations

One size never fit all, one technique dont work in all situations.

At the other extreme - its highly inefficient to have a different size for each, different technique for each situation. Dangerously, mission-losely too in-efficient. 

You can learn only a few techniques that you can effectively use. You cannot learn many,  because you cannot manage that large a set, nobody can.

You have to generalize situations - group situations having same properties in classes.

Match one technique with one class of situations, another with another class and so on. Which technique you match with which class, is your policy.

Make a policy and stick to it. Use broad strokes so you can adjust & learn without changing the core.

You will be trust-worthy.

Tax The Rents

Production requires Land (natural resources) and Labour (human effort). It do not require Capital (tools/machines, buildings, inventory). After all, the first of the Capital was built by direct application of labour on natural resources (by necessity).

Wild fruits can be collected without using any equipment (capital).

If the wild fruits thus collected are not immediately consumed, and are stored for later usage, then we have inventory. This is frozen labour. This is also capital because it can be used to attract animals and birds who can be caught and consumed as food. Thus, its proved that atleast one type of frozen labour - inventory - is capital.

Simplest of the tools - such as round stones or sharp branches of trees - are frozen labours because it took human effort to collect or round/sharp them. They are also capital because they can be used to grind grains to make them edible when they were not edible in their raw/natural form, or to hunt bigger animals that could not be hunted without them.

Complex tools and machines are made by using other tools and machines which may themselves were made by using yet other tools and machines, but, by necessity, they are at the end made by simple tools which are made by applying human labour directly to natural resources. Thus, all tools and machines, simple or complex, are frozen labours and capital.

Last of the types of capital left to discuss is buildings. Buildings are made by applying human effort either directly on natural resources - such as make a mud wall or stone wall - or by applying human effort on natural resources through tools and machines. Since, as shown above, tools and machines are just frozen labour, all buildings are not just capital but also frozen labour.

Since everything that is capital is also frozen labour, it can be safely deduced that capital is nothing but frozen labour itself.

Hence, as shown above, to produce something, only Land (natural resources) and Labour (human effort)  is needed, Capital is not a separate thing because its already included in definition of Labour.

Once a production is made, profit must be divided among the two factors of production. The share of land is rent, that of capital is called ROI, that of labour is called wages.

A shopkeeper who is a tenant of the shop literally do divide the proceeds of production in the 3 factors. A shopkeeper who owns his shop implicitly keeps the rent. If he rents out the shop to somebody else he can still gather the rent. One important thing to note here is that the shopkeeper is also getting ROI for capital in both cases. The capital here is the building, the machinery, the furniture etc of the shop. The most important part of land (i.e. the natural resources) here is none of the area of the surface of planet he is occupying, sunlight or wind etc but the physical location of the shop. The same area (measured in square yards) of the surface of planet at a lesser part of the city would not generate the same income.

Two identical buildings, lets say of barbers, which are identical down to the same surface area of the planet, same number of floors, same quality of building materials used, same skilled labour used in construction, same furniture, same lightning etc, which are also providing the exact same quality of service, but are in 2 different parts of city, the first in a posh area, the other in a slum, would generate drastically different incomes in both rents and total sales. Why? We already established that the two have the exact same capital and labour, the only difference therefore is in land but in what part of land? Clearly in location only.

Now the question is, what gives a location its value. Is it something natural, outside of human activities so that locations have implicit values and we humans can neither increase nor decrease such values, or is it something depending on human activities.

Do a 2500 sq kilometers area of land which is a potential sea port but is at present just an empty plot worths the same as a developed city of same area housing 25 million people? How many such empty plots can be purchased by selling the developed city?

Is a house in a village worths same as an identical house in a city?

Obviously human activities do give locations their values. When my neighbour renovates his house, my house also increase in value. When a new butcher shop opens in the neighbourhood, values of all the houses and shops increase. When people move away from a town, value of all shops and houses of the town decrease. Its the people that gives a location its value.

The first ones to buy a piece of land in a new part of city enjoys tens of times increase in value in a matter of a few decades. Such a huge profit is coming to them by no effort of them but by efforts of society. Its the society that populate the land, build the infra structure etc. Therefore, the landowners owe the increase in the value of land to the society. The society through its agent i.e. government should tax the increase in the value of land which comes through activities of society.

Another way of looking at this is, just because a person was borned at an earlier date dont give him any more right to any natural resource than a person borned today.

If a person buy a piece of land 3 decades ago and not build anything on it and is selling it now, he should get exact same value as was the original price of land, and all the remaining amount must go to the government in tax. The person did nothing to develop the land, holding a piece of land is not equal to developing it. Infact the person prevented the land from being developed, therefore must be taxed for all the years equal to the rent of the land minus the rent of the land at the cheapest place in the country.

Every citizen of a country do have right to occupy some land. Since every citizen do have such right we will amount that to the cheapest land to rent in the country because otherwise we would be favouring some citizens over others. Therefore cost of occupying a land, taken by govt in form of rent tax, would be market rent of the said land minus the lowest rent of the same surface area of any land available in the country.

The rent tax should be given for all land occupied by all citizens in the country regardless of the land being developed or not. The difference is, if the land is developed, for example a house or a shop is built on the land, only half of the market rent must be considered and from this half rent the rent of the cheapest rent must be deducted and whatever amount is left must be taken in the form of rent tax from the citizens. This is because, a developed land employ all the 3 factors of production in the development and although a citizen dont have any right on natural resources of the country more than any other citizen, he do have 100% right to enjoy the proceeds of his capital and labour and govt have no right to tax such proceeds. Govt can only tax the natural resources of the country.

Simply put, out of the 3 proceeds of production: rent, ROI and wages, govt can only tax the rent and all of it except the rent of the cheapest land in the country. Govt has no business taxing ROI or wages.

Rent Tax alone will suffice all expenses of govt plus leave a substantial amount which govt should give back equally to all citizens.

Rent Tax will prevent people from hoarding natural resources and therefore economic progress will happen without hurdles.