US Dollar & Commodity Price

The line chart below shows the relationship between US Dollar Index and Commodity Price Index.

The dynamic macroeconomic condition of the world drives me to find the correlations among some macroeconomic indices.

Rising Energy Price and Commodity Price

The tight relationship between Russia and Ukraine (and NATO) and the pandemic drive energy price such as crude oil and gas keep increasing. On one hand, I may consider the rising energy price as mainly a supply-side problem. Although European countries conduct sanctions on Russia, they still have relative rigid demand for gas and crude oil from Russia. The lack of energy from the EU pushes the oil price to rise as the Green Line shows in the Figure below. On the other hand, the tight Global relationships between huge parties such as Russia, US, the EU, and China enhance the needs of necessities. Therefore, the prices of commodities and oil, which are necessities not only for the downstream consumers but also for industries, increase as expected.

Those facts that positive correlation of commodity price, energy price, and crude oil price can be found in the Figure below.

US Dollar Index and Commodity Price

Intuitively,

As the US dollar is internationally admitted and exchanged currency, commodities and crude oils are priced by it (the US Dollar).

As shown in the Figure below, there seems a negative correlation between the US dollar index and the Commodity index.

One explanation of that negative relationship is that the value or the intrinsic value of a commodity is the same either priced by the US dollar or price by the British pound. Therefore, if the US dollar depreciates, then people should spend more US dollars to buy the same certain quantity of commodities. Similar logic could be found in crude oil prices.

There could be other explanations or other factors that could be taken into consideration. Under the current world condition that de-globalisation and uncertainty emerge, people would hold more safe assets. Thus, commodities and old, which are necessities, and gold, which is a generally accepted symbol of value, become the top safety consideration for people (investors and firms may have greater demand for commodities and energy, and normal people may get access to gold and have more demand for gold). Finally, the price of them increases.

However, there raises a question I haven’t yet spent time on studying it.

If the US dollar appreciates, then the price of commodity should decrease as I just introduced. Then, there might be more demand for commodities and oil as the price is getting low (you may say the low price is due to the appreciation of the US dollar. you are right maybe, but that cannot convince me), at least in the U.S. market. As the transaction is made with the US dollar, the more demand for commodities and oils means more demand for the US dollar, therefore US dollar should keep appreicating. Is that right? If it is, then there won’t be a convergence and won’t have an equilibrium, instead, the appreciation of the US dollar would be magnified. The reverse situation would happen if the US dollar depreciates.

Emerpically,

The Fred commission announced to increase the interest rate, in order to face the hyper-inflation resulting from its previous quantitative easing. Increasing interest rate means the US market would be more attractive to Global investors, so an increase in demand for the US dollar drives the US dollar to appreciate. The commodity price logically should go down. However, that divergence does not come out as we can find in the figure since the tight relationship between Russia and Ukraine happened.

Why the empirical finding contradicts with our logical indication?

Is that a result of the safety consideration (that people worry about the war and start to hold necessities) we just mentioned? If it is, then how can we split that part of the effect and show the negative correlation between the US dollar and commodity price. If not, then what factors contribute to the conflict? Is that due to the reason I discussed above? or there are any other factors (of course there are, but I neglect them because they have relatively small effects) cause that phenomenon?

Crisis

In the second figure, the crisis happened in 2008 and 2019-now, as shown in the shaded period. In the crisis, the commodity price seems a leading index of the US dollar. The commodity reflects prior to the other economic factors, as demanders of the commodity, production firms, need to avoid fluctuations of prices. So they make hedging transactions earlier and predict the commodity price so that they can apply to their production process smoothly.

US Dollar and Inflation

Why monetary policy does not result in inflation in the U.S. market?

Or we may say the impact on inflation is not as theory tells.

The reason is easy, considering the supply and demand of USD. As USD are internationally accepted and even treated as the credit currency and security, the demand for USD is unexpectedly large, especially in a crisis. Therefore, the extra supply of USD by FRED is absorbed by other countries’ demand. Without too much supply of money, the price level would not increase and inflation does not exist.

Things become different while including other factors in the model such as the commodity.

荷兰农业 v.s. 中国农业

1. 背景

荷兰农业出口额仅次于美国，位列世界第二。但荷兰国土面积仅占美国1/270。

2. 基本条件

  • 天然气 荷兰纬度与我国黑龙江接近，地理环境导致荷兰气温低，对于农业为劣势。
  • 育种业 保障全年生产新品种
  • 机器自动化 通过计算机自动控制温度 湿度等，研究 不同光线对作物生产的影响等 以提高单产。

  • 农业人口少 1% 与美国农业人口类似。
  • 荷兰出口额ranking：1. 花卉 2. 肉 3. 蛋、奶 4. 蔬菜 5. 水果 6. 酒 7. 谷物等副产品 etc
  • 蔬菜仅占rank3

3. Finding

研究 – 提高产值的方法

规模效应 – 人少 -人均高

4. 中国农业 v.s. 荷兰农业

观点来自参考资源，未研究数据严谨性，仅作为思考inspiration

荷兰农业为赚钱 v.s. 中国农业为了维持社会稳定

我国农业为了维护公平 保证employment。于是限制资本进入农村，以保护农民利益。

即使科技技术引进可以提高产能，但是为了避免利润被大农业公司榨干，因而给予限制。

商业机构在整条产业链上寻求利润，因为最上游生产端被限制进入，于是从下游终端介入，通过互联网平台与菜贩子竞争利润空间。

公平 – 保证employment <- 我国为保 就业+稳定 而限制商业进驻农业生产上游

效率 – 科技 + 管理带来规模效应 <- 被选择性舍弃

5. Inspiration

在 公平 和 效率 之间取舍。 放弃了效率，放弃了市场的选择，为了保证贫富差距，为了保证就业公平

本源 1. 人口： 人口多 人均少。2. 教育：部分群体受教育程度不足以在城镇化转型中获得工作机会（prob农业） <-> 教育同时意味着 人才相对缺失。 3. 市场：由于上游限制，人才不愿意进入农业生产，因为没有profitable opportunities。人才并非为regulation的原因而缺少。4. 城镇 制造业+服务业 无法吸收农业人口的转移

基于 1. 人口。 城镇的制造业+服务业 无法吸纳农业人口转移，也因此 为保证 公平 农业人口数量不能减少 以将土地租给高效的生产管理人员。

6. Reference

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Fr4y1a7ua?share_source=copy_web

近期经济观察

中国央行降息 松货币 宽信用 为刺激国内经济，增加信贷，盘活经济，实现年增长目标。

美联储升息 为应对 通胀风险。

双方的双向操作使得中美利差缩小。

US interest rate is relatively more attractive to global investors than CNY. However, in the exchange market, CNY appreciates and the USD depreciates. How does that happen? Why investments do not flow to the U.S. market?

In the following, we consider why money does not escape from the Chinese market. –

1. Regulation

CNY has continued appreciating since 2018, while the spread between CNY and USD converging. That is largely because of the regulation. – 资本管制、外汇市场干预、风险因素

In this case, the real demand and supply of China in the EX market does not flow with the change of interest rate spread.

2. Risks

Investors consider not only profits but also risks. For the profit part, which is about the spread convergence, it does make sense that the US dollar should appreciate. However, for the risk part, we normally under-evaluate the risk of the U.S. market.

Although FRED increases the interest rate, that policy aims to battle hyperinflation ( face crisis) instead of actively controlling unexpected growth (contractionary policy). Therefore, the policy of increase in interest rate would more likely to end up with higher risks, which are investors does not want to face.

The Chinese policy of decreasing interest rates might also aim to face the crisis. That is hard to evaluate which part risks dominate.

Other Facts

U.S. aims to 1. battle with inflation 2. attract money to flow from EU and Emerging market back into U.S. market.

China is facing severe international conditions as well. See news and reports e.g. economists 6th March.

常识的力量 书评

因此，从文字的演进再结合中国人的思维和行为实例，大致可以看出，东方传统思维的特征大体是归纳能力强，逻辑演绎推理弱，辩证逻辑能力强于形式逻辑；注重局部与个案经验，忽视整体思维，缺少理论框架。从表意文字到写意绘画，再到如今给予新股、科创板或新兴产业较高的估值，这之间是否有一定的内在联系呢？

摘自李迅雷 书评

参考李迅雷的书评和结合我自己的一些想法，我发现国人教育培养出来的适合社会的人往往是：归纳能力强，逻辑演绎推理弱，创新想法弱或被限制。

价值投资的常识

  • 1. 重视行业竞争格局

在股票投资中，我们要高度重视行业竞争格局的分析，因为良好的竞争格局可以帮助企业将竞争对手阻挡在外，获取持续的超额利润。不同竞争类型的市场结构决定了企业所获得超额利润的持续性。越是接近完全竞争的市场结构，行业内企业数量越多，竞争越激烈，企业没有定价权，最终只能获得市场的平均利润率。反之，越是接近垄断类型的市场结构，龙头企业在行业内的垄断优势明显，拥有产品的定价权，更容易在竞争中获取超额利润。

( 国企牌照经营带来垄断 )

但我们会发现，很多人在做投资的时候，经常会优先选择成长性高、想象空间大的行业。在这里，我想告诉大家的是，行业是否高增长可能没想象中那么重要。行业高增长固然是好事情，但高成长性势必会吸引大量竞争者进入这个行业，行业内竞争激烈，竞争格局不够清晰和稳定，这对投资者来说需要承担更高的投资风险。此外，高成长性行业往往具有高估值的特点，投资者对未来盈利增速预期较高，这会导致其盈利增速低于预期的概率大大提升。而在竞争格局稳定的行业，即使行业增速趋缓，但龙头公司依然能凭借其核心竞争力持续稳定地获得超额利润，拥有更高的投资确定性。

( 行业是否高增长 v.s. 行业的行业内竞争情况 竞争即考虑 entry difficulty and substitution)

在A股有很多典型的案例，比如贵州茅台、海螺水泥、格力电器等，这些公司所处的行业虽然成长性不是很突出，但他们都拥有良好的行业竞争格局，充分享受行业集中度提升所带来的红利。反过来，我们也看到很多成长性似乎很高、想象空间很大的行业，如光伏、通信设备、人工智能等，行业竞争格局高度不确定，里边的公司不断被超越、被颠覆，投资难度极大。

因此，和成长性相比，行业竞争格局可能更为重要。如果一个行业同时拥有这两个特点，即竞争格局稳定且成长性高，自然是投资的最优选择，但这样的投资机会非常少见。当两者相互矛盾的时候，我们会优先选择竞争格局稳定的行业。

  • 选择最具竞争力的优秀公司

最具竞争力的优秀公司同时拥有良好的行业竞争格局和宽阔的护城河这两个特点，投资者选择这样的公司能够充分享受公司内在价值增长所带来的长期回报。

在日常生活中，很多人非常喜欢后来者居上的故事，因为一旦成功，往往能够给投资者带来丰厚的回报。就像一场比赛进行到一半的时候，原本劣势的一方如果开始出现反转，最后实现反超，往往是最激动人心的时刻。但事实上，真的有这么多后来者居上的故事吗？历史经验告诉我们，后来居上是一个小概率事件，而强者恒强才是大概率事件。所以，我们在投资中要选择最具竞争力的优秀公司，而不赌差公司会变好，因为好公司不容易变坏，坏公司更难变好。很多陷入困境的企业，需要面临许多亟待解决的问题，一个问题尚未解决，另一个问题已经接踵而来。而优秀企业的护城河要经历很长时间才能形成，一旦形成，竞争者将会很难撼动优秀企业在行业内的地位。就像贵州茅台，已经成为中国白酒的代名词，占据消费者心智，它在消费者心中的品牌优势是很多白酒企业难以撼动的，所以即使面临白酒行业增速放缓，茅台还能通过行业集中度的提高实现公司内在价值的快速增长。

2017年以来，A股市场发生了变化，市场开始愿意给具有竞争力的龙头企业一定的确定性溢价，这和2017年以前，市场喜欢炒小市值股、垃圾股公司是截然相反的。这是市场的巨大进步。

  • 3. 做优秀公司的长期朋友

巴菲特曾说过：“时间是优秀企业的朋友，却是平庸企业的敌人。”从长期来看，优秀的公司往往能够经受住时间的洗礼，历经宏观周期的更迭变换依然能保持稳定的业绩增长，穿越牛熊。随着时间的流逝，他们的护城河将会不断加深，内在价值不断提高，长期持有他们将会获得可观的超额回报。我们要高度注重公司的核心竞争力，而公司短期的业绩波动实则没有那么重要，更无需为公司的短期股价波动而过分操心。作为价值投资者，我们应该做优秀公司的长期朋友，充分享受时间所创造的复利价值。

做优秀公司的长期朋友，这就意味着我们不以短期价差为买入目的，不依赖频繁交易创造回报。频繁交易意味着投资者要做大量关于短期股价走势的准确判断，但其实是非常困难的。上海证券交易所曾经统计过2016年至2019年期间各类投资者的收益率情况，从中我们可以得出一个结论，无论是机构投资者还是散户投资者，均很难依靠择时获取收益，择时只是一种神话。用仓位的大幅波动做时机选择和波段交易，寻找短期价差所带来的收益，很难给组合带来正贡献，同时还会消耗你大量的时间和精力，并且你可能还要支付高昂的交易成本。

（ 长期投资 ）

  • 4. 留足安全边际，相信均值回归的力量

价格回归价值

不要过分相信相对估值，因为相对估值往往基于假设市场有效 价格已经反应价值 某公司 或者 某些公司价值正确且 无 anomaly无behaviours 或其deducted，再用ratio估target firm。

明显假设难以holds, especially in Chinese market that illusion largely exist.

  • 5. 追求正确的非共识，从定价错误中寻找超额收益

Clear, and similar as above

  • 6. 选择优秀公司构建组合，并注重组合均衡

allocate risks and eliminate unsystematic risks.

  • 7. 区分“重要的事”和“能力圈内的事”

价值投资者的常识清单中，有一件非常重要的事情，那就是区分“重要的事”和“能力圈内的事”。

在股票投资中，有很多东西，尽管非常重要，但这些东西不是你能力范围内能预测、能把控的事情，你就不应该把你的时间精力放在研究和预测这些东西上。对绝大多数投资者来说，甚至对绝大多数机构投资者来说，宏观经济就是“重要但是能力圈外”的事情。

这是因为：其一，宏观经济本身很难预测，大部分经济学家的预测类似于“算命”，其命中率其实乏善可陈。有人曾经这样开玩笑：“经济学家预测出了过去5次衰退中的9次”。其二，宏观经济走势和股票市场走势之间，也未必是强相关性，股票市场提前、同步、滞后反映宏观经济，都有可能，所以根据宏观经济判断来预测股票市场走势，理论上很正确，实践中非常困难、非常不靠谱。反过来，如果你真有能力预测宏观经济，而且能从宏观经济推导出股票市场走势，那么大家买股指期货就可以了，根本就不需要研究和投资个股了，因为股指期货带杠杆、收益更高。

正因为这样，投资大师巴菲特就指出“做宏观预测，或者听别人的宏观或市场预测，纯属浪费时间。事实上，它还是很危险的，可能让你的视野变得模糊，看不清真正重要的东西。”另一位投资大师彼得.林奇也说过：“根本没有任何人能够提前预测出未来利率变化、宏观经济趋势以及股票市场走势。不要理会任何对未来利率、宏观经济和股市的预测，集中精力关注你投资公司正在发生什么变化。”

( Macroeconomy in China does not largely depend on the market, but policy. Therefore, marecoeconomy is about the collusion control, health of firms, support from gov – policy, and another key fact international finance or international relationship )

不光是这些投资大师认为宏观经济、股票市场不可预测，我观察我身边的专业投资者，越是成功的投资者，越少关心宏观经济走势和股票市场走势。那么这些成功投资者，他们关心什么问题呢？答案是“能力圈内的事”。

第一，行业竞争格局好不好？ industry orgnisation

第二，公司壁垒深不深？ entry barrier

第三，公司抗风险能力强不强？ risk control or inner control

第四，公司是不是为股东赚钱？ Profitability

第五，公司业务会否被替代颠覆？ substitutivness

这些事情，既是重要的，又是能力圈内的。股票投资，要聚焦在这些“重要且能力圈内的”事情。

  • 8. 了解并避免决策盲区

我们在做股票投资时，也经常会遇到自己的决策盲区，也很容易受到诸多非理性因素的影响，从而做出非理性决策。

丹尼尔·卡尼曼在《思考，快与慢》一书中指出，人类的大脑分为两个系统，即系统1和系统2。其中，系统1的运行是无意识且快速的，它经常依赖情感、记忆和经验迅速做出判断，系统2则需要耗费更多的注意力来分析和解决问题。通常情况下，系统1会优先于系统2做出决策，但系统1也很容易上当，更容易受到非理性因素的影响，从而引导我们做出错误的决策。系统2则相对缓慢，比较不容易出错，可以帮助抑制住系统1的冲动，表现为更为理性的分析和有逻辑的判断，但它经常走捷径，倾向于跟从系统1的决策。正因为如此，我们需要学会多调动大脑的系统2进行思考，避免跟随系统1随意决策、快速决策。

对于价值投资者来说，要清醒认识到自己的决策可能会因为认知误区而变得不那么理性，要时刻提醒自己陷入这些认知误区。所以说，价值投资不仅仅需要知识，需要技能，更需要和各种人性弱点作斗争，这也是价值投资知易行难的根本原因。

最后总结一下，常识在投资中至关重要，建立正确的认知，将有助于提升我们决策的胜率。

在《常识的力量》一书中，我总结了价值投资者所需要遵循的常识。这些均是我自己对价值投资的思考和理解，但未必是所有人的认知。比如对于行业竞争格局和行业成长空间哪个更重要这个话题，大家由于投资哲学和投资方法论的差异，结论是完全不一样的。但不管如何，我希望这些“常识”，能帮助大家提供一个深度思考的视角，帮助大家避免思维上的盲区。

Reference

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/pZ8NpgmzzOb6JaEsP6AGmw

中国金融发展促进共同富裕

中国金融发展促进共同富裕需要着力于以下五点：

1. 金融回归服务实体经济

  • 减少金融抑制，推动金融市场化发展：1. 减少政府干预、推进资本要素市场化配置、完善股票市场基础制度、加快发展债券市场。2. 加快金融领域市场化改革，推进存贷款基准利率与市场利率并轨，提高债券市场定价效率。
  • 增强人民币汇率弹性，保持人民币汇率在合理均衡水平上的基本稳定。
  • 避免经济脱实向虚

2. 促进房地产业健康发展，努力实现住有所居

  • 房地产为金融与实体经济的枢纽，房地产业对于政府是经济发展的重要抓手，对于银行是信贷的抵押物，对于消费者是重要财产与住处。
  • 坚持房住不炒，房地产供应保障需求，稳地价房价。
  • 政府介入，保障房政策。

3. 落实农民土地财产权利，缩小城乡收入差距

  • 参考“荷兰农业”
  • 土地市场化资本化 与 农民利益的博弈 – 效率 与 公平的博弈

4. 发展普惠金融，使低收入群体也能分享增长红利

  • 提升小微企业和低收入群体获得信贷的可能。 普-普遍+惠-低价
  • 降低准入门槛，使低收入群体能分享收益 – 居民利息、股息、红利、租金、保险等 金融基建

5. 重视金融科技的双刃剑效应，推进金融科技向善

  • 数字金融 对于农村 西部等地区欠完善，不够人性，难以深入消费者中
  • 规范金融科技。 保证金融科技在私人收益率与社会收益率保持一致。
  • 数据整治，隐私权 安全管理

Reference

学习参考 金融发展与共同富裕的“中国故事” 张晓晶

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/dcH19UuBstFTEeJ7-g84MQ

货币+信用 分析

一般来讲（参考“宽信用阶段哪些行业会有超额收益？”）宽货币+宽信用 or 紧货币+紧信用为目标状态。即 货币为政策的工具（为实现货币政策目标），信用为市场方向。当政策与市场同向，可以理解为政策工具即货币的调整使得市场达到想要的效果。

那么 宽货币+紧信用 and 紧货币+宽信用 即为达成货币政策目标的中间态。

我国经济情况总体为控制风险，宽货币大多仅在为刺激经济发展时出现。当前国内经济不景气，中央政策刺激经济发展而采取增加专项债、针对小微企业贷款释放等政策。但是银行为了限定违约率往往难以执行这些政策。

但是具体行业对宽货币宽信用的反应难以一概而论。

宽货币：降准 降息 etc

近期经济观察

  • 第十三届全国人大常委会将于2022年3月5日召开。
  • 全国政协十三届五次会议将于2022年3月4日召开。

人大会议《政府工作报告》包括主要四个部分。

  • 1. 2021回顾
  • 2. 社会经济发展总需求

Estimate: 稳中求进+高质量发展

  • 3. 今年经济社会发展总目标：
  1. 5.5%经济增长。按域不同
  2. 增加城镇就业，减少失业率
  3. 通胀目标3%
  4. 进出口平稳，国际收支平稳
  5. 居民收入增长 与 经济增长基本同步
  6. 粮食产量1.3万亿斤
  • 4. 今年工作重点:
  1. 加大宏观政策力度： 财政政策货币政策协调乏力。减税，扩大支出，基建投资，遏制隐形债务，防范金融风险，引导金融机构对小微企业、科技创新、绿色发展的支持。
  2. 深化改革：要素市场化、全面股票注册制、国企改革、电网铁路等自然垄断行业改革，强化反垄断。（牌照行业反垄断）
  3. 创新驱动：支持创新，为此增加基础研究投入、加大税收优惠政策、扩大设备投资、发展数字经济。
  4. 扩大内需和区域协调与新型城镇化：扩大家电汽车等大宗消费，扩大有效投资。新能源+大宗商品。住房改革etc
  5. 乡村振兴：粮食生产+粮食供给+高标准农田建设
  6. 扩大开放：对出口企业政策支持，减税降费。扩大开放，有效利用外资，共建一带一路。
  7. 绿色低碳：发展新能源环保产业。
  8. 防范化解金融风险
  9. 改善民生：医疗、教育、养老、就业。

财政

21年财政收入同比增加，财政支出同比保持相对稳定。

专项债投入稳步增长。应对农林、生态、社会事业、交通基建、城镇冷链等。

土地出让金下行风险 – 房地产市场不景气

货币

面临问题：需求收缩、供给冲击、预期转弱。1. 疫情冲击、需求减弱；2. 房地产投资负增及相关产业链不景气；3. 出口压力 国际压力。

宽信用：资金刺激小微企业、个体商户、农业经营主体

避免陷入流动性陷阱。避免陷入负利率时代，利率调整将失去刺激经济的作用。增加金融风险。不可盲目对标国外负利率政策，要有长远考虑。

关注海外加息压力及汇率压力。目前Fed紧缩，us利率提升，目前国际收支健康。但fed政策继续加大可能会吸引国际资本回流美国，同时影响中国市场。

全国商品涨价、能源装甲、劳动力短缺、供应链问题、通胀压力持续。

我国双循环仍大量依赖出口，若出口增速回落会对国内经济复苏产生巨大压力。

Isoquant

An isoquant map where production output Q3 > Q2 > Q1. Typically inputs X and Y would refer to labour and capital respectively. More of input X, input Y, or both are required to move from isoquant Q1 to Q2, or from Q2 to Q3.

MRTS equals the slope of the Isoquant.

Difference with the Indifference Curve

Isoquant and indifference curves behave similarly, as they are all kinds of contour curves. The difference is that the Isoquant maps the output, but the indifference curve maps the utility.

In addition, the indifference curve describes only the preference of individuals but does not capture the exact value of utility. The preference is the relative desire for certain goods or services to others. However, the Isoquant can capture the exact number of production.

Shape of the Isoquant

The shape of the Isoquant depends on whether inputs are substitutions or complements.

Example of an isoquant map with two inputs that are perfect substitutes.
Example of an isoquant map with two inputs that are perfect complements.

Convexity

As we always assume diminishing returns, so MRTS normally is declining. Thus, the Isoquant is convex to the origin.

However, if there is an increasing return of scale, or there is a negative elasticity of substitution ( as the ratio of input A to input B increases, the marginal product of A relative to B increases rather than decreases), then the Isoquant could be non-convex.

A nonconvex isoquant is prone to produce large and discontinuous changes in the price minimizing input mix in response to price changes. Consider for example the case where the isoquant is globally nonconvex, and the isocost curve is linear. In this case the minimum cost mix of inputs will be a corner solution, and include only one input (for example either input A or input B). The choice of which input to use will depend on the relative prices. At some critical price ratio, the optimum input mix will shift from all input A to all input B and vice versa in response to a small change in relative prices.

Reference

Learned from Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoquant

Thinking, Fast and Slow

A book was written by Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Prize of Economics winner in 2002.

  • This book introduces a fact that our brain is running with system 1 and system 2.

System 1 is also called the “automatic system”, which is controlled by our innate and automatic consciousness. System 2 is also called “effortful system”, which could be understood as the ability to actively control our common-sense – system 1. However, system 2 takes more working memory that is limited in our brain, so doing anything using system 2 would reduce your ability to think.

System 2 also monitor the suggestion of System 1, modifying and adjusting the direct conscious idea of System 1.

System 2 has limited capacity. Two aspects of effortful tasks are (1) difficulty of the question, and (2) thinking fast the get the results.

  • Pupils are sensitive indicators of mental efforts.

Pupils dilate substantially when people make two digits multiplication, and they dilate more this problem is harder. People, when engaged in a mental sprint, may become effectively blind.

  • Ego depletion refers to the idea that self-control or willpower draws upon a limited pool of mental resources that can be used up

System 2 has limits.

  • Self-control requires efforts and attentions. Or says, controlling thoughts and behaviours is one of the tasks that system 2 performs.

Remember system 2 has limits.

Activities that impose high demands on system 2 require self-control, and the exertion of self-control is depleting and unpleasant. After exerting self-control in one task, you do not feel like making an effort in another, although you could do it if you really had to.

Maintenance of a coherent train of thought and the occasional engagement in effortful thinking also requires self-control.

  • The nervous system consumes more glucose than most other parts of the body, and effortful mental activity appears to be especially expensive in the currency of glucose.