 |
| Nate Silver (Photo credit: jdlasica) |
When an analyst, Nate Silver, predicted 80-90% chance of Obama reelection, one national talk show host said that any one who don't think it's a tossup (i.e. a tie) should be kept away from the public (so they can't "rig" the election for one side, so he claimed).
Well, Nate Silver was right all along. So who's "eating crow" now? It never was "close".
Some people are just too engaged in wishful thinking. A person engaged in wishful thinking can no longer distinguish what they wish to be true, versus what is true. They simply ignore and insult any information that does not fit their "world view", or "narrative".
In this case, Republicans are just too sure of themselves, and sees any results or analysis contrary to they wish to be true, as "the enemy" and needs to be silenced. In fact, Karl Rove is known to have expressed incredulity at the results when they came in. He can't BELIEVE his strategy did not work.
You know where else does this happen? In MLM and "income opportunities". Far more often, in fact. After all, new MLMs seem to start every day, while you only get a presidential election every four years.
However, presidential race only affects you indirectly, while what MLM you join will affect you directly. So which is more important to YOUR future?
MLMers are constantly bombarded by wishful thinking, and is in fact, encouraged to partake in a lot of wishful thinking, and encouraged to pass on that wishful thinking to others.
Think about it. How many MLMers sound so positive and cheerful that they will make tons of money on MLM? That this is the opportunity of a lifetime, blah blah blah? Do they ask you to think positive thoughts, imagine a life without worry for money, etc.? That they are successful, and you can be just like them?
Wishful thinking.
How do they react to criticism, such as Nate Silver's analysis? They would react just like the Republicans:
- you have no idea what you're talking about,
- you're just out to make a name for yourself
- you are biased with your data (and I'm not)
- and more
Exactly the same.
Which is why this blog was created... to document all the bad arguments MLMers used.
Analysts are right because they are basing their evidence on real evidence, proper analysis, and sound logic. If they are not, then feel free to criticize them. But there are a LOT of parallels between Nate Silver, and the Crtiics.
Nate Silver was right about the 2012 election, months before the election actually took place.
Critics of ZeekRewards was right about it being a Ponzi scheme, when SEC closed down Zeek on August 16, 2012. Critics have been discussing how Zeek's model makes no sense back in 2011.
If you dismiss analyst's opinions because it doesn't fit your wishful thinking, you will be hurt.
That is why you should listen to the analysts, instead of dismissing them.
Bonus: See someone trying to "defend" a particular scheme against a critic? If their argument looks like it was generated from this template, stay away from the scheme.
Why are companies like Amway still around? Is the FTC really that powerless or just uninformed? I hope it's the former because it doesn't take a genius to realize MLMs are scams.
ReplyDeleteFTC was argued by Amway to a standstill back in the 1970's.
DeleteI wouldn't say the entire MLM genre are scams, but they are always teetering on the edge of backsliding toward "pyramid scheme", and it takes a lot of vigilance to stay on the legal side, and it doesn't always attract the brightest and the most ethical people.
I discussed that here:
http://kschang.hubpages.com/hub/Networking-Marketing-is-doomed-to-failure-its-all-about-the-dream-not-reality