All Life Is Problem Solving

By Warren Mosler With permission of the author The G20 has dropped its support for fiscal expansion. The deficit hawks are prevailing. But why is that? We all either know or should know that operationally Federal spending is not constrained by revenues, as Chairman Bernanke stated last year, when asked on ’60 Minutes’ by Scott [...]

[Read more →]

Almost 9 months ago I wrote my first post calling for an end to the filibuster. Since then I’ve written many that have advocated ending it, all linked from this page. As the months have gone by, and apparently due to the obvious damage the institution of the filibuster has done to pending health care [...]

[Read more →]

Many progressives, even though they’ve been working for a PO-based health care reform bill, have 1) never given up Medicare for All as the goal of their activity, and 2) decided, in the first quarter of 2009, that Medicare for All could not pass the new Congress. They then reacted to their realization by concluding [...]

[Read more →]

The strategy I outlined in my last post may not work out. There may be no HCR bill resulting from it. In that case, progressives ought to introduce a back-up plan offered just yesterday by Scarecrow at Firedog Lake, based in part on an analysis of Dean Baker’s. Scarecrow’s proposal has the following steps. First, [...]

[Read more →]

It’s not easy for people to accept that continuous critical evaluation of our ideas is a good thing. During the discussion in the actkm listserv Neil Olonoff responded very strongly to my view that continuous critical evaluation on a level playing field is a good thing. He pointed out that: “Many well-known products and services [...]

[Read more →]

The issues of whether we should allow all ideas, both good and bad to flower, and whether bad ideas or fads don’t need to be experienced to be learned, have arisen in the actkm listserv discussion group in the context of my advocacy of critical evaluation of new ideas. This reminds me of the more [...]

[Read more →]

Occasionally, someone in KM brings up the question of whether the discipline is a science. And then the arguments start. Some dislike the idea of science and deny that KM has anything to do science. Others identify science with knowledge that successfully describes, predicts and explains; and they conclude that the discipline of KM with [...]

[Read more →]

During a discussion in the act-km group, Neil Olonoff expressed his distaste for the phrase “knowledge processing,” which I use frequently as a summary term for the activities in the second tier of the three-tier model of KM. In reply, I said that I’m not constitutionally wedded to the phrase “knowledge processing,” that the phrase [...]

[Read more →]

In a recent exchange in the Fed KM Google group, one of my correspondents thought that it would be very helpful to a National KM Center to have access to benchmarking-derived “lessons learned,” “best practices,” and “knowledge architecture” from APQC. In reply, I indicated my agreement provided that these ideas were construed appropriately, but then [...]

[Read more →]

Yesterday, I offered a high-level case for Federal Knowledge Management. But I did oversimplify things a bit, to keep my post short. The complication I didn’t want to introduce earlier is the idea that Knowledge Management already exists in every locale within the Federal Government, whether we think it does or not, and whether we [...]

[Read more →]