Sebrof

Can you explain how you are calculating the wages paid out to workers? In words you state:

c. It is assumed that consumers are not going into debt, which means the total money they spend on net consumption comes from the wages (or dividends) paid by industry. Wages are paid by each industry proportionally to their gross labor usage

And in the code you have:

` %Industry to consumer sales (assuming consumers save/lose nothing)

S = o.*P; %Sales to consumers

Y = sum(S); %Total consumer spending = wages paid out

W = L.*Y; %Wages paid out vector by industry

I have a couple of questions about this, but I still start with the calculation of Y (the answer may clarify my remaining questions).

You start with S = o.*P; %Sales to consumers where you are performing an element-wise multiplication of a n x 1 vector of net-products by a n x mag array of prices.

Working under the assumption that the net product is the net consumption of workers, i.e. n = c (also, don’t worry about using a standard notation - there isn’t really much of one. I am using a mix of Ian Wright’s, Pasinetti’s and my own ) the line S = o.*P; is calculating the below, correct?

Each of these elements, s~i~ = p~i~ c~i~ is the part of sector i’s revenue which it receives from its sales to consumers. (It isn’t the total revenue of the sector, though. That is given earlier by R~i~ = p~i~ q~i~).

Then you are summing along each column (you mentioned that MatLab’s sum function sum’s matrices down the column). For a single instantiation of a price vector, this is results in

Y = p~1~c~1~ + p~2~c~2~ + … = p c

which gives us a global wage bill, i.e. the total expenditure of the working class for the economy. This is an aggregated quantity over the entire economy.

Y is a row-vector, though, in your code since you are testing multiple prices - mag of them in fact. if I have the correct understanding, your Y vector is

Y = [Y^(1)^ Y^(2)^ … Y^(mag)^ ]

where I am using superscripts to designate distinct price instantiations.

But I think I must be misunderstanding something, because if the above is true, then I am not certain how the line

W = L.*Y; %Wages paid out vector by industry

Works out because you couldn’t element-wise multiply a n x 1 array L with a 1 x mag array Y.

My understanding is that your L vector is a n x 1 array of normalized labor-times for each sector.

L = O.*l;

L = L/sum(L); %Normalising gross labor use

So I need your help in understanding the calculation here.

---

I have more questions, but I will save them for later. Thanks for taking the time to discuss this!

Hello again, I'm going through your code and taking some notes so I am getting back to you in sections. I plan on putting everything in one post, but I thought I could comment on this particular point separately in the meantime. Also, apologies if I come across as if I am speaking down you. I recognize you are acquainted with these ideas and I'm trying to be clear to avoid any confusion for both of us and anyone else reading these comments!

---

The way that you calculated labor values here can work, as long as you are multiplying the labor coefficients across columns in a row when doing the element-wise multiplication. If done correctly, you are correct in that you are essentially calculating

v = v A + l = l (I - A)^-1^

which is the total labor required to produce a unit net product.

I have an example here to make my point:

1. Here is my labor coefficient vector, l

2. Define Leon as the Leontief inverse matrix (I-A)^-1^

MatLab trips me up with the \ operator, so I just take the inverse explicitly and define it as Leon to avoid any confusion.

This will be a little different form your approach where you are taking Leon and then matrix-multiplying by unit vectors (a matrix of unit vectors i.e. I) to perform the sum. Here, I make the sum more explicit to step through the calculation.

3. Calculate the total labor it takes to produce a unit of net output, i.e. a (standard) labor-value.

Since I am not familiar with MatLab I am not claiming you are doing this the correct or incorrect way - you can determine this since you know MatLab better than I do - but I wanted to show you a possible wrong way to calculate v depending on how you do the element-wise multiplication.

Incorrect Way If the labor coefficient value l~i~ is multiplied to the values in the i-th column of the Leon matrix and you sum the values of each column (sum across rows for column i) as shown below:

Then you will be getting a vector that doesn't correctly trace the labor inputs of each sector.

You would be accidentally calculating

(I - A)^-1^ l

i.e. you would be defining v~i~ as Leon~i,1~ l~1~ + Leon~i,2~ l~2~ + ...

instead of correctly calculating it as

Correct Way

l (I - A)^-1^

i.e. v~i~ = l~1~Leon~1,i~ + l~2~ Leon~2,i~+ ...

The order of the subscripts helps keep this straight, since the embodied labor in net product i is the sum of labor going from sector 1 to sector i plus labor going from sector 2 to sector i plus ..., etc.

As long as your method is doing the element-wise multiplication correctly then it will work. Here are the examples I have continued:

Here, as long as the first element of l is being multiplied to the first row of Leon, and the second element of l by the second row of Leon and etc. then when you sum the columns

you get the correct calculation of the labor value, which the above shows.

---

My apologies for the earlier misunderstanding. I see that you are not aggregating

The spotify DJ just April fooled me

I actually didn't know that. I know he had some cools videos about the General Crisis and quoted Marxist historians. I was pleasantly surprised, but the later videos turned me off. It's a shame because I'm a sucker for maps lol

The mirror of our collective linguistic hallucination came in clutch

Here is a DeepSeek translation of the 10 tweets. Anyone who speaks Farsi can feel free to provide a better translation and I can delete this if better translation emerges. The AI overlords have spoken thus:

Here are the English translations of all 10 tweets by Reza_Mad (@maysam21901), numbered and translated individually while preserving their original structure and split threads:

---

Tweet 1

Mar 30, 2025 · 8:17 PM UTC
If war breaks out and we face a conventional attack, aircraft carriers will position themselves at a safe distance. Fighters will launch cruise missiles and standoff bombs from outside our air defense perimeter. B-52s will fire 1,000 km-range cruise missiles. Carriers will deploy Tomahawks. Growlers and F-35s will suppress air defenses. Primary targets: #Rasht

---

Tweet 2

Mar 30
Primary targets include Chabahar, Bandar Abbas, and Bushehr airbases; naval bases; shipyards; fixed HAWK and S-200 air defense systems; and early-warning radars. They will also attempt to suppress mobile air defenses activated to counter missiles. Attacks will continue for several days.

---

Tweet 3

Mar 30
In response, we will first minimize the impact of enemy missile strikes using our air defenses. Then, we will mine the Strait of Hormuz extensively, causing merchant ships to hit mines and creating major disruptions. We will also use existing submarines, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles...

---

Tweet 4

Mar 30
...and long-range anti-ship ballistic missiles like the Abu Mahdi and Qadr-380 to attack the enemy’s naval fleet. Simultaneously, we will strike their bases in Bahrain, Qatar, and Iraq. If we are conventionally attacked, the enemy will gradually move their fleet closer to our borders to extend air defense suppression around nuclear facilities and create a corridor for B-2 bombers. We will try to prevent aircraft carriers from entering the Persian Gulf.

---

Tweet 5

Mar 30
To prevent war, we must activate diplomacy: engage in direct negotiations with the U.S. on peaceful nuclear energy while threatening that if America attacks us, we will first strike Israeli cities and facilities, then seriously pursue nuclear warhead development.

---

Tweet 6

Mar 30
In my opinion, a Trump-like figure is both a threat and an opportunity. If we negotiate directly and rationally, perhaps this 50-year hostility could end—provided both sides genuinely want peace. Israel and Iranian hardliners will sabotage efforts to ensure no agreement is reached. This is a major problem.

---

Tweet 7

Mar 30
After resolving this crisis (whether through war or diplomacy), our defense doctrine must change. Prioritize air, naval, and land forces over missiles and drones. Our navy needs real destroyers and submarines to project defense beyond coasts and into the ocean.

---

Tweet 8

Mar 30
Our air force needs long-range interceptors like the Su-35 in large numbers to defend beyond borders, fifth-gen fighters to counter neighbors’ future stealth jets, multirole fighters for offensive ops, AWACS, and transport aircraft.

---

Tweet 9

Mar 30
Our army needs tanks with active protection systems, mobile artillery, and truck-mounted towed guns. Artillery requires computerized targeting and fire control. If our defense doctrine doesn’t change, we will face heavy casualties in war.

---

Tweet 10

Mar 30
[Continuation of Tweet 9]
If our defense doctrine doesn’t change, we will face heavy casualties in war.

---

Notes:

• The original Persian tweets include engagement metrics (e.g., "22 replies · 5 retweets · 1 like · 177 views"), but these are not translated as they are numerical data.
• Threaded tweets (e.g., Tweets 3–4 and 9–10) are preserved as separate entries to reflect the user’s request for 10 distinct translations.
• Military terminology (e.g., "HAWK," "Tomahawk," "Su-35") is kept in its original form for clarity.

Let me know if you need further adjustments!

Richard Dufus

I remember I had a phase where I'd watch Kings & Generals, but then I saw they had videos about the eViL sOvIeTs iNvAdInG Afghanistan and pro Ukrain shit and I haven't gone back. What else should I expect from a channel called Kings & Generals lol.

I wasn't aware of the video you mentioned above. Gross

I was in that same boat with my micro models. It got to where I felt like I had to add X, but to add X properly it felt like I also needed to handle Y, and so on and so on. So I get the struggle! I can have a problem of not knowing when and how to set the level of abstraction and not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I have so many scrap projects that stall out because of this. And proletariat science unfortunately has to deal with the fact that we have other jobs that take away our time.

I will give it another look now that I understand what you were doing with the 1000 prices and that you did disaggregate. It isn't bad code, it just isn't my first language!

Don't know when I will get back, but I hope do it soon as I genuinely love this sort of stuff!

Thanks for your comments and clarifications! I'll read them and get back to you. The use of the 1000 price vectors within each iteration, and the explanation of some MatLab code helps

When he says it he gets to be president, but when I say it I get a knock from the FBI

The smashing of the USSR and the era of the blackest reaction