Tim Groves says:
I for one think novelty is overrated and variations on a theme—if done well and with a worthwhile theme—can be more useful as well as more entertaining. Even great artists and thinkers end up mining and recycling their own ideas or covering the same old ground in the course of their careers.
Gail’s work covers a well-defined and limited field and tends to be descriptive rather than prescriptive. She explores what’s happening in the macro-economy and tries to make sense of it by fathoming how the different phenomena connect with and influence each other, joining dots, extrapolating trends, and pointing out commonly-held misconceptions.
She’s been laboring on this work for a decade or more and so brand new insights are likely to be few and far between. Also, this sort of work is bound to involve revisiting the same topics and points over and over, coming at them from different directions and looking at them from different angles, and this is not by any means a fault.
For readers of her posts, repetition of many of the the same points helps greatly in helping us to become familiar with them is an aid to memory. We are more likely to retain a grasp of ideas we encounter several times than ideas we encounter only once.
Trevor says:Great points. I’ve been on the same themes for 50 years, so I relate well to what you say. McPherson bumped my game up a notch or two, then fizzled out. Gail has helped me even more, and shows signs of being on a much steadier course. In fact, Gail’s and this site’s combined insights on energy make me now believe that steadiness is a now required way to avoid panic and energy drag. When we determine that there is a similar energy dynamic to the technological and the psychological, steady behavior in both areas seem to make sense.
Posts
