Let's go on now to the Division of Labor in Social Order. I'd like to start with this quote from Mises, one of the great statements that he makes in Human Action, where he says, human society is an intellectual and spiritual phenomenon. It is the outcome of a purposeful utilization of a universal law determining cosmic becoming, namely the higher productivity of the Division of Labor. As with every instance of action, the recognition of the laws of nature is put into the service of man's effort to improve his conditions. When I first read through Human Action, these sorts of passages really strike you. They grab your attention, and they're inspiring, and so on. I've come to the conclusion that it's for this reason that sometimes neoclassical economists will denounce Mises and the book Human Action as a polemic. I think it's just jealousy. They can't express themselves on these important points in such a magnificent way. But as Tom Woods mentioned last night, this is just a fact. Mises is simply stating a fact here. Imagine what life would be like without the Division of Labor, where we're all just self-sufficient farmers or shepherds or no trade, no greater productivity, no social interaction in the economic sense. Of course, for us to live out our lives as fully human beings to have human life and flourishing, we need the Division of Labor. Tom Woods again pointed out, what sort of life would Mozart have had if he would have lived in self-sufficiency? Einstein, what would he have done had he been just a shepherd and had to live on his own production? Now, in order for us to live our lives as the persons that we are, we need a Division of Labor so that we can concentrate on the things that make us a person and other people can concentrate on the things that we then need to support us in our own endeavors as we become the human person that we have the potential to become. So this is, as Tom Woods pointed out, this is a wonderful thing. It's a marvelous thing. Who could be against the Division of Labor? Well, there are some. And we'll talk about that later in the week. Now, it's also the case I want to point out that economics as an academic discipline arose in the 14th century from the Scholastic movement in recognition of this fact, recognition of the fact that society is a natural order. Society doesn't need to be planned from the top, but that we can all organize into a Division of Labor without central direction, that this is an order. It's not chaotic, or it doesn't fall apart at the least provocation or trouble and so on. In fact, it works better than the collectivized planning system. And you've probably heard already this week, and you'll hear more about this later. When economists talk about the central principle that provides this order, we speak about economizing. So human action is always economizing. That is, we try with our action to attain higher valued ends with the means that we have available to us. And we try to attain each of our ends using a means, the combination of which has lower value in alternative uses to us. Once we recognize that that's a principle of human action, then certain logical implications follow from this. I might point out that this is a different approach. It seems somewhat similar, but you'll see during the week it's a different approach from the neoclassical approach, which makes an assumption of maximization. So they make an assumption of profit maximization for entrepreneurs and utility maximization for the consumers so that they can generate mathematically tractable models to try to explain empirical regularities in the world. Whereas, obviously, Mises has something else in mind here, right? He's not trying to protect empirical regularities here. He's trying to explain what human life is all about, how we live as human beings, and why there are certain differences that we see in the world as the division of labor extends or atrophies. Now, the second step in this discussion about the fundamental of the order of society, I've only said up to this point that there's a certain order for each person's action. It's economizing. And what makes it possible for different persons to come with their different actions in concert with one another is the principle of economic calculation. And this is something, again, you'll have many lectures about that use this idea and explain this idea later in the week. But fundamentally, this is just the, as Tom Woods pointed out last night, the array of prices that are generated through our voluntary exchanges that we use for decision making so that we can effectively buy things. We can know what the opportunity cost is of our purchases. We can make production decisions. We can self-select into different lines of production because we know the wages that are paid in the different lines. And the entrepreneurs can arrange the production for different goods that we would demand as consumers and for the different combinations of the factors of production. And so this is what provides social order, right? Mises writes in an unpublished manuscript that's in the Mises archive at Grove City College. He writes that this relationship of the economic calculation provides a human or humane social system. It's really the only social system that mimics human action itself, right? It's economizing in the same sense that each person's action is economizing, a rather, again, remarkable thing. Now let me just mention something about the division of labor, and then we'll go into some additional logistics of this. We define the division of labor in economics in the following way. It's specialization in production according to efficiency. So there are two aspects to it, right? First, we're not self-sufficient, we're specialized in production, each one of us is producing for the consumptive ends of other people, and then some of our consumptive ends are being met by the production of other people. That's one aspect of the division of labor. And the other aspect is that when we decide who is going to produce what, how each of us will be arranged in the different lines of production, we do this according to efficiency. So the allocation of the different factors of production into the different lines of production is not willy-nilly. It's not specialization for specialization's sake, but it's done with a recognition of replacing inefficient producers with efficient ones. And this is where the gain then comes from the division of labor. Now our friends on the left and the right tend not to see things this way. They tend to ignore or dismiss this principle. Instead, they think of society as the army. And the army is just controlled from the top. And if you need somebody to peel potatoes, you just, the sergeant just says, go Joe, go peel the potatoes. They don't worry whether Joe's a great accountant or would be a good basketball player or an entrepreneur or whatever. And so they have all these different tasks and they're just assigned arbitrarily, we would say, from the perspective of economizing. So the division of labor is more than teamwork. It's more than just getting a bunch of people together to do the tasks together. Again, the division of labor is the assignment of the particular task to the efficient producers. And so it raises the question of how do we ascertain this? How do we discover who is efficient at what? I should also lastly point out in the opening remarks here that we call this the division of labor, but of course it applies to all factors of production. There's a specialization according to efficiency of land sites. There's a specialization according to efficiency of capital goods in the structure of production as well as labor. And the same underlying principles then of discovering efficiency apply in all cases, whether it's a land site or a human labor skill or a capital good. Okay, so let's go on to some of the details here. And if we wanna get at the fundamental principles, it's always best to have an imaginary construct, as we say in economics, a thought experiment if you will, where we simplify a situation of acting to expose the basic principle. And so we don't get distracted by ancillary features of the circumstances that are more complex. And this of course is our famous example of Caruso. So Caruso, a person stranded on the desert island who would have to be self-sufficient of course before he comes in contact with Friday, but once he comes in contact with Friday, it's possible that they can engage in cooperative production. They can engage in a division of labor. They can specialize according to efficiency so that each of them produces for the consumptive ends of the other person, at least partially, and this specialization is to their advantage. It gives them a greater satisfaction of their ends. So I've constructed a simple chart that illustrates the basic principles of production. So we've got Caruso on the left. This is his marginal physical product of labor. And he has two production processes, coconuts in the first column and berries in the second column. And you'll notice as you go down the columns, Caruso would be applying an additional unit of labor in each entry. So if he picks coconuts with the first unit of labor, he would get six coconuts. But then if he applies a second unit of labor to the production of coconuts, he would only get five and then four for the third unit of labor and similarly for berries. Most of you recognize this as the law of returns. Why is there a law of returns? Well, because the natural world is diverse in its productive capability and is economizing actors. Human beings then exploit the most productive production process first. Once they've fully exploited that, if they want even more of that good, they have to go on to less productive possibilities and so on. So Caruso has a coconut grove and on the coconut grove, they're coconuts laying on the ground that he can pick up easily. So he can, it's a lot of production there. And then they're coconuts up in the trees. Well, once he picks the coconuts up off the ground, then he has to climb the trees and he isn't as productive with a given unit of labor, let's say a half hour of his labor effort. And similarly for picking berries, right? So that's a law of the finitude of material life that we see. And we have the same for Friday. We're making an assumption here, this is a thought experiment, so we can make conditions. And the assumption is that the complementary factors of production, the coconut groves and the berry bushes are the same for Caruso and Friday. Caruso's on the west side of the island, Friday's on the east side, but the coconut groves and berry bushes are configured the same way. So the differences in productivity here just due to their labor, that's what we're trying to isolate, right? Now you notice in this chart, we've done the hard case. We've done a case where Caruso is more proficient or has absolute productivity advantage over Friday in both production processes. So that's the hard case. It's easy to see how they would specialize for a productivity gain if Caruso was better at coconut gathering and Friday better in an absolute sense at berry picking. So we've taken the hard case, the difficult case. And this is what we mean by proficiency. So proficiency is just how good are they at producing? How much output can they produce with the application of their labor? Efficiency, of course, refers to cost. What does it cost them to produce? And their costs are also different. So for example, with the first unit of labor, Caruso could either apply it to get six coconuts or two quarts of berries. So if he applies the first unit of labor to get the two quarts of berries, his cost would be six coconuts. That's his opportunity cost. And in a similar fashion for Friday, we could do the calculation for Friday, right? Okay, so that's our setup. Now one last thing, one last assumption, if you will, of this thought experiment. We'll assume, and we do this again for the sake of isolating this particular feature of their differences in productivity. We're gonna make the assumption that their consumptive demands are the same. Because hopefully it's just commonsensical to you that if their consumption demands were radically different, if Caruso really liked coconuts and Friday really liked berries, that they would devote their self-sufficient production to the exploitation of inefficient areas of production there relative to the other person. Who wasn't exploiting the more productive areas that they're not consuming, right? And so there we could also get cooperation and harmonious social order if we just had differences in preferences to begin with. But we're setting that aside as well to see again this more fundamental point. So let's do a calculation. Let's say that Caruso applies three units of his labor, one to coconut gathering, two to berry picking. So in self-sufficiency he gets six coconuts and three and a half quarts of berries. And let's say Friday does the same thing. He applies one unit of his labor to coconut gathering, two to berry picking. He gets five coconuts and one quart of berries. This summarizes their production in self-sufficiency. So their total production if we added it up would be 11 coconuts between the two of them. They get 11 coconuts, six from Caruso, five from Friday and four and a half quarts of berries. However, what we notice is at this point their opportunity cost of production of the berries is radically different. Caruso is in fact much more efficient at berry picking than Friday. Let's go back to the slide and see. So Caruso again is right here and right here. So if he wants to give up that unit of labor and coconut gathering and extend berry picking, he could get one more quart of berries. He'd give up six coconuts. So his cost for the quart of berries is six coconuts. Friday is here and here. So if he gives up the five coconuts he can only get a quarter of a quart of berries. And so his cost is 20 coconuts per quart of berries. Much higher cost. So as we said before, as long as differences like this exist, if we displace the inefficient producer with an efficient producer, we're going to get more output, right? Because we've calculated efficiency here in terms of the physical output of other production processes. We've calculated it as opportunity cost. Okay, so let's do that. Let's move Caruso into the production of berries where he's more efficient. He'll specialize now. And when he does this he gets two for his first unit of labor, one and a half for the second, one for the third, so he gets four and a half quarts of berries. And Friday switches now to coconuts. He gives up berry production because he's less efficient there. And he gets five, four and three, right? If he devotes all three of his units of labor to coconut gathering he gets 12. So now physical output has gone up. With the same inputs we get more physical output. That's the effect of the division of labor. That's what Mises was talking about. Human beings can recognize that with these differences of efficiencies exist they can be exploited in such a way that it's mutually advantageous, that is it's advantageous to all persons who participate in this division of labor. Now this greater specialization than according to efficiency, the greater productivity of this specialization for people to willingly enter into it must generate a production benefit to each person. So how does that happen? Well that happens then through trade, right? And this would be one example of an exchange ratio at which both parties would benefit from, engage physically, they'd have more output by engaging in the division of labor. Caruso could trade one quart of berries to Friday for six coconuts. And if they mutually accept this exchange ratio then Caruso would end up with six and a half coconuts and three and a half quarts of berries, an additional half coconut. And Friday would end up with five and a half coconuts and one quart of berries. That's half a coconut better than he was in self-sufficiency. Now again this is just a stylistic illustration of the principle, right? So obviously in the real world the question is how do we ascertain where these efficiencies lie and how do we then organize the social apparatus to take advantage of these latent differences in efficiency. Now before we go on to that next idea let me make one last point about specialization here at the bottom of the slide. Specialization per se does not raise productivity. In fact you can do the numbers as a homework problem. If in my example if you reverse the specialization pattern so that a Friday moves to berries and a Caruso moves to coconuts you'll see that their output production would go down. So there's nothing inherently great about specialization. Again, this is the mistake the collectivists make about running the army. It doesn't increase productivity to just sort of willy-nilly assign people to different tasks. You have to be able to calculate their efficiency and then assign them accordingly or have a system by which they can self-select which is what the market does, right? They can self-select into their areas of efficiency. So it could be the case that when people specialize that by doing things over and over again they get better at it and they become more efficient. It could be that when they do things over and over again they get bored with the task and their productivity goes down. That's just an empirical question, right? That is not a law of economics. It's not a universal truth. It's just maybe it does maybe it doesn't. Okay. Then the next principle where we get this transition to the question of how we assess these things is the law of association. And the law of association says that each factor of production is efficient in some line of production. Each person is the efficient producer of something. Each land site is the efficient site for the production of something. And the reason why this is so, again we can see in our thought experiment since we strip out all the complexities of social life is that the opportunity cost of producing one of the goods is always in terms of the foregone production of the other good. And so as we did before, if we calculate the opportunity cost of producing more berries, we saw that Caruso's trade-off was six coconuts for one quart of berries and Friday 20 coconuts for one quart of berries. But if we want then to calculate the opportunity cost of producing more coconuts, if we just reverse the calculation, then we see that the ratios are simply reciprocals. So Caruso gives up one quart of berries to produce six coconuts. Friday gives up one quart of berries to produce 20 coconuts. And so obviously if Caruso's more efficient at berry production, Friday's more efficient at coconut production. This must be the case, right? This is a mathematical principle that if we have ratios that are unequal and we invert them, then the inequality sign reverses. This is always the case, no exceptions. So Friday, even though he's less productive in an absolute sense compared to Caruso, can still find a place in the division of labor. He can still find employment in the division of labor. Still to his advantage and to Caruso's if they divide their labor. That's the principle. Now, one last point about this last point on the slide about the law, this law of association. What this means is the implication of this is that employment, as long as we have a social system by which we can discover efficiency and people can enter into their efficient areas, then employment can be indefinitely expanded. The only strict technical limitation to this would be if the human population got so big that given our technology at that time, every square inch of habitable surface area of the earth was taken up in production. And yet we had even more people. If that were the case, then to employ those people, we'd have to displace other people and some people would then be permanently unemployed, right? Again, our lefty friends tend to think of the world this way. They tend to think of the world in terms of fixed production systems that if you have too many people, you can't fit them all into the fixed boxes of where they're going to go. Now, that made some sense. That particular view of the world made some sense, of course, before the Industrial Revolution. It was true, right? It was, you know, you had subsistence farming and herding and so on and very little development of the division of labor. Then if human population would grow, it would lead to excessive people who couldn't be usefully employed given the stagnant system of production. But as we've seen since the Industrial Revolution, we can transcend that limitation, right? That's not a fixed technical limitation. That just depends upon our development of technological improvement and our building of a capital structure that permits greater productivity along with greater employment. Again, we'll get to that basic principle. It will expose the logistics of that basic principle in a minute. But first, let's just run through the categories of the limits that economists have mentioned in the literature on the division of labor then. Now, Adam Smith in his book The Wealth of Nations pointed out that the division of labor is limited by the extent of the market. And by the way, if any Trump minions happen to be watching this, okay, pay very close attention to this.  So anyway, in order to have the division of labor develop to extend, we just need to bring these other people who aren't in the division of labor into the trading relationships. And as soon as they come into trading relationships, then it's possible to discover where their areas of efficiency are and then we can employ these people into areas where their efficient production lies. So the market actually integrates, a little left to its own devices, would integrate the entire world into a single order of production, a single division of labor. Yeah, I know it's a big surprise. We don't need, as Tom Woods pointed out last night, we don't need politics to have globalization, right? To have a global economy, big surprise. We can have an international economy, a worldwide economy, just as a natural result of this process of human action. So government intervention in trade retards the division of labor. And if it retards the division of labor, it means that it makes us less physically productive. So that is the actual implication of trade barriers that some people are suggesting we engage in to make America great again. Now the second limitation, though, of the division of labor is the extent of saving and investing, the extent of capital accumulation, which again was a theme of Adam Smith's wealth of nations. So if we don't have a process of ongoing capital accumulation without saving and investing, that's my SNI, without saving and investing in capital accumulation, then the division of labor would not develop extensively enough to employ seven billion people. It would stagnate, right? And we'd have superfluous people, and then we wouldn't have enough production to feed them, and then the human population would sink back again. This again is, as I suggested, how lefties sometimes think about the world. But instead, what happens in the actual world, even though it's limited to some degree by the state, we have had tremendous capital accumulation. And with this, we can extend the division of labor then much further, supporting a much larger human population and even at higher standards of living. So how do we overcome these limits? Well, it's again as fairly obvious and more will be said about this in detail in lectures later in the week. So I'm just providing with sort of categories to think about. We have to eliminate state intervention in trade. We have to have free trade. And here, there are two possibilities, right? The state might prevent some people from engaging in trade. So this is what Trump has been talking quite a bit about. Not to put a barrier so that Americans can't trade with people in China. But it's also the case that the state could forcibly, they could use force to impose trade. So here, it would be done by subsidies or attack structure and so on. So the government here too is moving resources in society when they do this to less efficient areas. So the poster child for this right now, of course, is Tesla. Heavily subsidized electric cars. No, this is just wasting resources. It may be technologically interesting or it may happen in 50 years or something naturally in the market. But right now, by subsidizing this, we're shifting employment away from efficient areas in the US to inefficient. And we're making ourselves worse off than we would have been otherwise. So we need to get rid of these impositions. And then, of course, to eliminate state officials that make decisions over production. We know that this, and again, you'll have lots of opportunities to think about this with lectures later in the week about how entrepreneurs engage in this process of economizing. But suffice it to say at this point, entrepreneurs, unlike government officials, can appeal to profit and loss for making production decisions. They earn the profit from anticipating what consumers will demand and then arranging factors of production, bearing the cost, paying for these inputs and then selling the output at revenue generating levels that are greater than their costs. And then they, of course, avoid loss producing lines of, or at least they attempt, as best they can to avoid loss producing lines. And the same thing with investment. So entrepreneurs know what to invest in because they can test their investment decisions by looking at the market and making appraisements of the market value of their capital. Whether the Tesla giga battery factory is really worth it or not. The answer is no. Again, maybe someday, but not now. How do we know this? Because it's heavily subsidized in order to make it viable. Okay, so we need to get the government officials out of making decisions like this, capital investment decisions, leave these again to the entrepreneurs and then have the open process of self-selection of people into the different lines of production. So we all, that, as Tom Woods pointed out last night, this is one of the beauties of the market, one of the true aesthetic benefits of the market, right? That we can all live with freedom, self-selecting into this division of labor and yet cooperate with one another. Okay, now the last thing that I have on that, sorry if you can't see the bottom of this, but that last line says that people themselves, in society, can choose whether or not to overcome what I've called here for the, just for the pedagogical purposes, natural barriers. There might be natural barriers as opposed to the artificial barriers of the state to that can be overcome or not overcome according to people's choice. So this is things like culture. So it might be the two different people and two different areas of the world just culturally don't want to interact with each other, even though there would be material benefit from their interaction, but they just choose not to. They just don't want to come into society with these other people. That's of course their business, right? That's just a matter of their own choice to do or not to do. But if these barriers can be eliminated, then bringing more people into the common division of labor would raise productivity. This is the material cost of their choice not to integrate. And then there could also be just physical objective features of the world that would limit, by choice, people would limit the degree to which they engage in a division of labor. These are things like transportation costs of goods. They could be just too high for certain people in certain parts of the world to integrate fully in their production with other people in other parts of the world. And then maybe in the future, again, technology would improve and transportation costs could be reduced and this integration could occur. This is a nice chart of, well, as it says, the world economy. It's GDP per capita in Western Europe and China. This is from a book called the World Economy and Millennial Perspective by Angus Madison, that was published in 2001. And you can see two interesting things that we'll just dwell on briefly. So the red line is Western Europe, the estimate of Western Europe standard of living, as you would say. And the blue line is China. And you'll notice that for the first millennium of after Christ, the Chinese standards of living were marginally higher than standards of living in Western Europe. And then about 1000 AD, or maybe a little late, a couple of centuries later, the high middle ages, 1200 AD or so, we start to see this steady upward progress. And standards of living are much higher by the Industrial Revolution. And then with the Industrial Revolution, they spike up in Western Europe. By the way, it's pretty easy to see what this is. This is a correction of the official statistics after the opening up of China to the West. So actually, their official statistic, their standards of living were actually down here. The same thing happened in Russia, right, after the collapse of the Soviet Union. We found out then in the West that their standards of living were actually much lower than they'd been saying all these years. So that's that little downward blip. And then the upward blip, of course, is market reform, right? The period, the last 30 years or so, market reform. We've seen the same kind of process of overcoming these limits to the division of labor in China that we saw happen more than a century earlier in the Western world. Madison estimates that since 1000 AD, population in the world has increased 22-fold. GDP, however, has increased 300-fold. And so GDP per person has increased 13-fold since 1000 AD. And you can see a large portion of that is post 1800, just in the last couple hundred years. Okay, so how does the economist account for this? Well, through the process I've alluded to of capital accumulation. And capital accumulation occurs in the following logical sequence. And again, there are many lectures later in the week that flesh this out. So if this just seems like an outline, yes it is, to provide you with a framework for thinking about this later. So people have lower time preferences, which means they're less eager to have present gratification. They're more willing to delay their present gratification into the future, so they save and invest more. When they save and invest more, they can build up a capital structure. And this is the other thing that we wanna mention logistically about the basic principles. We'll get to that in just a minute. So they build up a capital structure production. They mine ores out of the ground. They have mining operations and then this gets shipped to factories and things are fabricated and made and so on, right? We have this capital structure. Improving technology gets integrated into the capital goods over time and greater productivity as a result. And so standards of living rise. So these rising standards of living are due to the unleashing of this process. And again, the unleashing of this process has been the overcoming of these limits that we mentioned already. Now, what's the employment effect of all this? Well, I culled out some interesting statistics from a paper called The Occupational Changes during the 20th Century. This was written by Ian Wyatt and Daniel Hecker. And as I point out in the parenthesis, it's published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.  This is well-accepted in the mainstream. This paper was published in March of 2006 and it documents, as the title indicates, occupational changes in the U.S. economy. And here in the first block, I've got farming employment, 1910, this is in the U.S. in 2000, so there were almost 13 million people employed in farming in the U.S. in 1910. And in 2001.6 million, shock and horror, right? We're being displaced, where are jobs going? Isn't this horrible? How are we, where are these people going? Isn't this just create 10 million unemployed? And not only did this happen, but productivity, this, by the way, is the percent of total employment in farming, 33, and now it's 1.2. Farming production has increased roughly three-fold in this time. So the first column is wheat production in bushels and the second column is corn production. So we have a fraction of the people working in farming that we had in 1910. And we have three and a half times the output. That's what capital accumulation does, right? That's the natural process of the market. That's what's being reflected in Angus Madison's chart. Now, what about manufacturing? What Trump is worried about? All those great manufacturing jobs going overseas, yeah, terrible, right? Well, here are the statistics. This is employment in production and operatives. So this is the closest category of manufacturing employment in this paper. 1910, 4.3 million people is 11% of the workforce. It peaked in 1950, 8.8 million at 15, and now it's again at 11, but you'll notice the total employment's larger. Total employment's still going up. In fact, total employment peaked in 1980 at about 11 million. And since then it's fallen to 9.4. Should we be worried about this? Should people in the 20th century have been worried about this? Did this create Armageddon? Did it create mass unemployment? No. No, this is just the natural progress of the market economy. Engineers is even better, right? They're also tend to be in manufacturing endeavors. 0.2% in 1910, 1% in 1950, now it's doubled as a percent. So there's no crisis here, right? There's nothing in particular to worry about. Okay, so now let's talk about this fundamental principle that we want to expose again for your own, just to get you introduced to it so you can learn about it more fully in other lectures. And this is to go back to Caruso and capital accumulation just to see the basic principles involved. So let's say Caruso finds that they're fishing a stream on his island, but he can't catch them without the aid of capital. So he thinks of a technological innovation. He thinks of making a net. He could do something more primitive, like just making a spear on the end of a stick or something. But he thinks, oh, I can make a net with the materials that exist on the island. And so he starts to go through stages of production. First he extracts the raw materials out of nature, vine and twines. And then he takes them back to his hut and he wheezes together the net. And then he takes the net and he fishes with it. And his fishing with the net then would generate marginal physical product. He'd be able to catch some fish. He'd apply a half hour of his labor to fishing with the net. He'd get five fish with the first unit of labor and then four and three, right? The diminishing returns would set in, the law of returns. So you see that Caruso will, even outside of society, Caruso will begin to extend the capital structure and more of his employment will go to the higher stages. It'll simply be shifted from the lower to the higher stages. Always finding employment wherever he sees the greatest value, right? He doesn't have any unemployed labor. And neither do we in society. We're just moving it around according to its efficiency as we develop new production processes and so on. At least as long as we have a market economy. Now, what about the decision to produce the net? What would this depend upon? And again, later in the week, you'll, we'll elaborate quite a bit on this. But it's a matter of the capital value, as we say of the net, the present value of the future fish that will be caught by the net. Or as we say technically the sum of the discounted marginal value products. The sum of the value today to Caruso of the future fish that he thinks he can catch with the net. And then he'll compare that to the cost of the factors he uses to produce the net in other goods that he has to forego. Just as we did our discussion before about coconuts and berries. So it's on that basis that all investment, saving and investment decisions are made, even again in the market, except in the market there are prices and appraisement. But fundamentally it's the same process as going on. Now, let me emphasize one point and then we'll go to the conclusion. Caruso, when Caruso improves his productivity by using the net in production, he's gone through these logical steps of first gaining knowledge about production that might be possible to him. He's developed technology. And then he's embodied this technology through production into a capital good. He thinks I can make a net. From the materials on the island and then I can use the net to catch fish and boy, that would be great. That'd be very valuable, much better than eating berries. So there's a certain logical structure here. Caruso invests in the technology itself, right? He would spend time exploring the island, finding out what the production possibilities are. And the same with us in our world too. We need a market where technology is open to the application of resources that the entrepreneurs would devote to technological improvement, to research and development. That's how we can economize then resources in the development of technology itself. But the technology, the ideas themselves don't raise our productivity in and of themselves. They have to be embodied in capital goods. Okay, so now let's go to the end because I wanna integrate one last principle. In society, we can do what Caruso cannot do. We can specialize, as we pointed out before in production. We have Caruso on Friday. But in our world, we can even specialize further, right? We can specialize the activities of saving and investing. Because not everybody with low time preference who's good at saving has the good foresight of knowing what the best investment lines are. It might be that those skills are disparate across different people. But if they can get together in the market, if we can have a division of labor, well, we can improve this process. And some people think that the big spike that we looked at in the Madison graph after 1800 was due in large part to the democratization of financial markets. So that becomes a big issue, right? That's a very important issue for us to talk about during the week. What's the role of financial markets in fostering real production processes and greater productivity? So I offer that for your consideration. Then the other point, the middle point here, economic calculation then would continuously reveal changing patterns of preferences the consumer has and integrating new ideas in production and so on. The world is constantly changing with respect to the economizing allocation of things. And entrepreneurs in the market can adapt to this in the efficient way. And so with this, as we suggested before, we get this indefinite expansion of the division of labor so that human population can rise in an unprecedented way as it has in the past couple hundred years. And yet our standards of living are almost imaginably higher as well. All right, at this point I'll stop. Thank you.


Hello and welcome to the session, I am Deepika here. Let's discuss the question which says choose the correct answer integral from 0 to 2 by 3 dx upon 4 plus 9 x square equals a pi by 6, b pi by 12, c pi by 24 and d pi by 4. Now in this question we will use the second fundamental theorem of integral calculus. So, let's start the solution. Let i is equal to integral from 0 to 2 by 3 dx upon 4 plus 9 x square dx and we can rewrite this as integral from 0 to 2 by 3 dx upon 9 into x square plus 4 over 9. Again this integral can be written as this is equal to 1 over 9 integral from 0 to 2 by 3 dx upon x square plus 2 by 3 and definite integral 1 over 9 integral of upon x square plus 2 by 3 square. Now we know that integral of 1 over x square plus a square dx is equal to 1 over a by a plus c. So therefore, 1 by 9 integral of dx upon x square plus 2 by 3 square is equal to 1 over 9 1 over a. Now h 2 by 3 so this is 1 over 2 by 3 tan inverse because 1 over x square plus a square dx is equal to 1 by 8 tan inverse x by 8 and this is again equal to 1 by 9 into this is equal to 1 over 6 tan x upon 2. Now this is our effects by second fundamental theorem is equal to 2 by 3 this is equal to 1 by 6 over 3 that is tan and this is again equal to 1 by 6 1 by 6 and inverse 1 inverse 1 is pi 2 is equal to pi over 24. So the answer for the above question is c. I hope the solution is clear to you. Bye and take care.


everyone has a lot of familiar faces around here so I'm just gonna start off with looking for this so I basically got introduced to the power story when I was six years old and so I lived in a normal house with my parents we had a garage and in this garage we had a huge gaping hole in the ceiling no one really knows how it got there we're pretty sure no we're pretty sure the guy before us put it there by accident but anyway it was it was always a source of like interest for all my friends so all my friends were what I come over and be like oh what's in this hole the only way to kind of persuade them that this hole wasn't something that they should be looking in was to convince them or tell a story that there were scorpions in the hole I'm not sure if it was because I was such a good storyteller or kids are idiots but it stopped people going a hole the problem though then was that the kids would tell their friends and then our friends would tell their friends and then sooner soon enough everyone in the school wanted to see your scorpions so yeah be careful with stories because if they go wrong you've really got a big deal that you can't stop so just to introduce what kind of we do or what kind of I do is copywriting so for copywriting to work you have to engage people and the only way you're engaging people is with your writing so it's kind of a science because you have to look at how your words are going to affect people and how how they react and test things so if if something works sometimes you don't really know why but things do work and things don't work and you just have to kind of go with what you're doing and test and test until you've got something perfect so we have a lot of persuasive techniques to do this to engage people and to kind of persuade them to like you it's the thing that we do you can't see it here but there's lots of other writing on it the main point is the best way we can do this is with stories everything else is a persuasive technique is kind of a posh tactic so you're trying to influence them by saying oh we're the best and you need to buy this but if you pull a user pool tactic basically you're you can imagine it as you're a magnet and you're trying to draw people towards you with your stories so when they start coming towards you on their own being because they've heard about the things themselves it's much more powerful because people are then kind of persuading themselves they've already made their idea up about you and you just have to kind of finish it off then so what are stories stories are basically descriptions of events so stories consist of a character a conflict and then a resolution this is a basic story so you can make a story about anything it kind of the power of the story is that you can kind of simulate an experience for someone so someone who's never done that thing before you can put it into context for them and so they can understand why someone did something that way and the emotions that kind of ran through them to make them think how they think so what's upon the time 400,000 years ago was about the time when people were starting to gather around campfires to cook their food and with this a culture emerged where people would explain their experiences of the day the saber-toothed tiger that they fought off the mammoth that they didn't quite catch because they're huge and who wants to eat a mammoth so these kind of stories then ingrained in us because it's been such a long time that people were doing this for it it came a part of the culture and people realize this like people who wrote the religions they made sure that every single every single religion that you'll see they have a big story book with it they don't have a book just telling you don't kill people they have a book telling a story of what are the consequences of this person killing this person and how will that react how will that come on to you what's interesting though is because of stories stories were basically the greatest part greatest thing for getting your information out because people would understand it and then they'd keep it going they'd tell their next generation they tell their friends and this was the power of the stories again so because of this we have a big science called geomythology so geomythology is basically the study of old stories that relate to earthly events so a tidal wave an island got sunk by a tidal wave or volcanoes you know where fire filled the air because of this there's a Aboriginal tribe in Australia and they reviewed interviewed sorry one of these elders and they interviewed him about some of his old stories in the area so he told of this smoke cloud coming in one day and people from the from the village would go into this smoke cloud and get burned alive people whoa that's a it's a crazy story why is this it turns out that in this exact area about 7,000 years ago there was a volcano which spewed out a hot ash cloud and this would have killed people on site as soon as they touched it they would have burned and because of stories this eyewitness account was then able to be retained for people to remember for 7,000 years which is incredible so what stories are and what they are not this is what's happened now so we kind of are in a state of information overload so people have too much to think about and so all the information is just getting thrown on to the fire people don't really know what to do with it so if a decent story you can put those facts and that information into a context which people would then be able to react with and understand and then use themselves so they can you can put your information in a form that actually people understand and you can fight your arguments from both sides you're not looking like you're trying to say it from one side and influence someone you're kind of just saying how it is and people then infer their own meaning from it and convince themselves so stories to make them good or make them interesting for people to then share you need to have unexpectedness so you have to get their attention in first place what copyrighting does a lot of the time and what people are kind of using too much is this process called interrupt so people are just interrupting someone one time with say you can do it really well if you just use someone's name if you've ever heard your name being called out you'll stop immediately look it's not for me carry on with your day but this kind of interrupt advertising agencies and everyone they're using it so much now that you kind of becoming more and more numb to this so it's okay to use unexpectedness we have to follow it up then concreteness so you need to make the story tangible so this to do this you kind of need people to really be able to feel it to taste and smell to understand what this information is so a good example is to give something that people understand in their context so for instance this bag of popcorn contains the same fat content as a Big Mac meal an English breakfast and a steak dinner all together now you can understand how much fat is in that popcorn you probably won't have popcorn next time you go to the cinema right credibility so you can do this with people that are already authority figures so you could do this with a doctor or with someone who's already proven themselves this is kind of why books like Tim Ferriss is on the shoulders of Titans works because people want to know about the people who have done it before because it's already credible because you already seen that they've done it this way so then their story is more relevant to you because you like well this is a good story but the thing with credibility is it needs details so to have details you need people to be able to compare the information for themselves and the only way to do this is to give them a way that they can understand so if you said three billion people suffer from poverty in the world most people can't put this in context they don't understand three billion people so you can't test that yourself you can't say whether that's a credible fact or not you just kind of let it go it's not really interesting for you if you said one in three people suffer from poverty in the world then you can start summing that up you can test this yourself and if it comes out one in three people oh yeah she is poor then you can start thinking okay the rest of the story has got credibility and it'll take off more so emotional is getting people yeah actually passion isn't something that's emotional passion you can have as much passion as you want but if someone doesn't actually feel the emotion for your topic then they're probably gonna lose that topic if you can engage them with some sort of well this is from the New York Times of things that got shared so the most the ones that got shared the most with anxiety anger and awe and practical value so people would share this stuff but people don't share sadness people don't want to share the emotion of things that make them sad so if you're writing something make sure you're not making it too sad because people don't want to share that people don't even want to hear about it usually and simplicity so if you're gonna write a story or a parable make it about one clear thing with one clear point people will then be able to latch on to that when they want to make their point so yeah this is an example of the WWF campaign with a story emotional unexpected it's it's got everything here then from this because of how humans can comprehend and make inference seven words let you know that story don't let this be my last selfie that's a story because you've got even in seven words you understand what that's saying you're saying okay I'm a lion my conflict is that I'm endangered I'm probably gonna die my resolution would be help us with sending your tweets to this so I'm not talking about huge epic stories to write a huge epic story you have to kind of think about Joseph Campbell's The Hero's Journey this works because you're always keeping people in suspense you're always giving them like an emotional roller coaster which they'll follow through so this is a good formula if you want to write a huge epic novel but really an epic novel is never gonna have as much impact as say just a small story so how would you do it you choose what your story is gonna be about so say you are a CEO and everyone's saying okay we need to move first we need to move first we need to get our technology at the forefront of this but you as a CEO you don't want to you you want to stay back a little bit you want to see what other people are doing so everyone's telling you come on the early birds catching the worm they're all doing it you'd have to think okay what can I come up against that so you choose what your story was going to be about and that was not being the first mover then you choose some interesting components for it so you'd have maybe a character in there you'd have a conflict and then you try and pick the resolution that you want and then you put it all together so to do this you could do the second mouse gets the cheese so from just that you can make a story so you can say okay the fat mouse was the second in to get the cheese and you'd like what's this mean well it means the first mouse got the mouse trap and died so you want to be the second mouse and from that people understand the context of it all okay so stories you should have would be you're going to tell them again and again is a story of who you are so you want to tell people in your own terms who you are and the best way to do this is with a story so this is why kind of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates and Walt Disney they're probably not that nice in real life but because of the stories you've heard you kind of build rapport with them before you've even met them because of who they are and they've made their story fictional because if you realize what they've actually done to some of the work then you want to say why you're here so what do you bring to this meeting you'll have this over and over like you'll have to meet new people all the time and so if you haven't had a chance to say who you are then you have to say why you are and then you can have another story which are your values in action so this kind of explains why you are why you are so if you have these three stories and you've made them yourself you can literally be prepared for any kind of situations so I want to leave you with one last point which is a story I'd like you to imagine the truth is a girl so truth is a girl and she's on in the winter of St. Petersburg and it's cold and she's naked you know she's got nothing to hide she's not shamed she's just naked but cold and alone no one in the village will let her into their houses because she's naked people don't like to see this people it makes people uncomfortable so a parable this guy parable he picks her up he takes her back to his house and he puts a cloth of story around her he says now try again go out into the world so she goes out but this time everyone in the houses lets her in invites her to eat with them around her to around their tables and this is why stories are so powerful thank you questions answered the truth is you will always kind of exaggerate the details to get the point across and that's the joy of the story because you're not really lying to someone you're just telling it in a way that makes it better for you but yeah it's it's a tricky one you can't really tell a story that is a lie because you need certain elements of truth for people to pick off on because if you don't have any kind of truth and I say it's raining upwards or you I know you miss you meet Mr. Tom this and he invites you to this snowy area you need something that kind of puts them into that area first so CS Lewis did it with like the wardrobe so if you can get them out of reality then actually there's no boundaries to your stories you can literally lie your way for it but you do have to have some truth in that otherwise people just won't give it any credibility and they won't share it yeah so you really have to distill it with kind of make it as simple as possible it is difficult but there's only three points that you really need for a story which is the character and a conflict and then a resolution so if you just have a character in a conflict which would be yourself and this is the point and then you just you can basically make people not make but let people simulate their own experience from what you're saying so if you've if you've ever been in a situation and you think oh if someone else was in this exact situation and I could convince them this way then the best way to do it is just to tell them a story of your situation and how it made you feel and how you came about and solved it yeah right yeah so just yeah because yeah this is the joy of the story like you can really let people simulate their own experience so they can be there and they're not there but they'll have the same kind of feeling that you had and same thoughts that you had so yeah and then there was actually scorpions there no it was just what I wanted to say is once it had started and once it had already like taken off and people grabbed onto this story you can't stop it like you can say oh it's a lie but people still they believe these stories and they'll keep going with them as long as they can and this is the problem if they hear a lie so because they'll grab onto this lie and they'll keep every single fact that you're throwing at them they'll use that fact in their own story they're not gonna it's it's really hard to stop them believing what they think they know right thank you I think probably in the Middle Ages they were more practical stories so they weren't so well they still exaggerated so they still had dragons and they still had things that didn't exist as a way to kind of explain away these phenomena that they didn't really understand and that's why kind of these geomorphology things worked and they got stored because people would explain things so the sky was on fire what does this mean like people could never really understand that but then it's the story not the story but as our science progressed and we understood what happened back then then we can realize oh it was on fire because it was a huge volcano spewing ash everywhere so yeah it was always just back in the Middle Ages I guess they just used stories the same as we kind of do today although not for the purpose of influencing or selling they kind of used it just to teach and survive around here thank you


Follow me, if you're this generation, go vote, free our nation from modern day. Look at your paycheck, see what's taken out of it. Taxes to the IRS and then the U.S. Congress votes to give great big subsidies to corporations who sell products internationally and keep all the profits for themselves even though for their billion dollar subsidies. I call that modern day slavery to put an end to this scheme. The rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, U.S. Congress votes to give dollars away for free to the corporations as subsidies of this generation. Nation from modern for Chris Erickson, send her down to Washington D.C. I'm Chris and I approve of you voting for me.


Hi, welcome to CCTV channel 17 live at 525 the preservation Burlington show Preservation Burlington is a non-profit 501 c3 organization Our mission is to preserve and protect the historic architecture and livability of Burlington through education and advocacy I think I need to raise the cue card. So I'm looking at the screen when I'm talking Thanks again for tuning in I know it's been quite a hiatus, but we've had a couple of good shows in a row now and Yep, and Preservation Burlington has been staying busy with webinars. We've been doing virtual walking tours All through the past couple of years Of course, we've done some live stuff and we have a full schedule set up for this summer of neighborhood walking tours and in an effort to Compensate for the last couple of years and not doing the the homes tour. So all of that's going to be pretty Fun and exciting stuff. I'm really pleased to say that past president Preservation Burlington Karen Norwood is here who's been spearheading a lot of our our virtual offerings with I think Not surprising in the content, but surprising in that we don't do that normally how popular they've been Yeah, it's really really exciting to see a lot of people just excited to learn about We've been focusing on the last couple webinars We've done on architectural styles and Burlington and that's something that people have been really excited about because one of the great things about Burlington is it's such an awesome place to go for walks and To go out and to be able to identify architecture and learn a little bit about what you're seeing around you is just really fun And it's been something that I think a lot of people are really interested in so it's great to see turns out they are So a little bit about you because you're obviously really good at this You teach right? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I graduated from the UBM historic preservation program in 2013, but I also am a teacher as well. So I really really love to educate people about the past and really fortunate to be able to still be with Preservation Burlington and be able to Help and participate with our educational activities like webinars and I just think there's nothing more exciting than teaching people about What we have all around you us our historical surroundings Education committee member of course, and yeah, it's great. Obviously having you still be a part of the group How about the Ramble? The Ramble. Yes, the Ramble was so much fun. We did it was so exciting to be able to it must have been like a hundred people I don't know right two megaphones I think people so we did a In-person walking tour at the Ramble this past summer and we had a huge turnout through the Old North End learning a little bit about The past we had an amazing intern with us Nick Agresta who did a lot of great research with us to put together that tour and a lot of people showed up I think everyone was just really excited to be able to get out to Be with other people to walk around a community and learn so I'm hoping we'll be able to this summer We're hoping to have a bunch of walking tours available for the public to get people back out because Because they want us the best way to do it the best way to do it the virtual stuff is Interesting can be I've been doing all kinds of like webinars and different things But you know, there's definitely like a zoom burnout Where it's like the nice thing is you miss it like I missed our webinar because I had a conflict and I was so upset hence, thank you for coming in and doing it over again for me personally right here, but um Yeah, but a lot of times, you know, they're available later so you can rewatch them or watch Definitely and we don't have a whole lot of time for the program today, so I definitely can't go into every single The full length of the webinar that I did a few weeks ago on Burlington's Architecture by neighborhood, but we will have that posted on our website So if you do want to watch the whole thing and go through all of those Slides and learn about the different neighborhoods that's definitely gonna be available for you. It's great. Yeah, there's a lot of slides I know we won't get through all of it today But so you you said earlier and it is true walking around Burlington is a lot of fun But the thing I like about the way you've put the slides together and of course broke this down by neighborhood So it's architectural style, but it's also pretty easily Broken down by neighborhoods, right? Yeah Yes, and I didn't get to every single neighborhood that would have been like a 200 slide presentation But we can certainly I can give you a little sneak preview of of what we we started to talk with so The first neighborhood we really were focusing on was in the downtown area and so what you're gonna see in a moment is First of all that burnt buildings and their styles provide clues to our neighborhoods are developed So when you look around in Burlington, you're going to see a Whole bunch of different styles and neighborhoods and they're often times grouped together because that's when that neighborhood was developed So I kind of went through oldest up to modern so the The webinar went through downtown looking at Pearl to King, which is kind of the earliest area settled by Europeans And then I went into the Hill section the Old North End the five sisters Prospect Park that area and then the New North End So looking through the 1800s all the way up to the mid 20th century or later And you know now the mid 20th century that's considered historic architecture right 60 years or older Yeah, and if Washington slept there Two strikes for making it historic. I know so for all of you who? 40 what was it now? 1950 years 60 60 years ago right is it 50 years? It's 50. It's 50 so 1970 1972 anyone around that age you're historic so those split levels from my childhood are all historic They're getting up there. Yes, they are and they tell a really interesting story about the United States at that time So right now on this you can see There is an image from 1830 this is the plan of Burlington Village by Amy B. Young all these images are available And I really recommend going to UVM Center for Digital Initiatives. It's an online incredible collection of maps photographs of Burlington, so if you Really want to do some more research about your community your neighborhood in Burlington check those maps out It's a fabulous resource you can zoom in and out and there's just so much to see about how Burlington's changed over time It's so cool to see those big blank areas where now there's all streets and houses You know you compare that map to the bird's-eye map of 77 1877 yeah, yeah, yeah, and even then the development was really taken off Crazy, and I mean that really we see so much growth in Burlington with like the historic architecture from the mid 1800s up until the early 1900s because this was a period where Burlington had its biggest boom in population With the lumber industry really thriving and Burlington was just really growing at this time So a lot of the architecture we see mirrors that time period Yep, you live in a gorgeous old house I do. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, and I think you know, it's funny So it's not federal style the massing is federal style, but it's an Italian ate it lost its cupola But it's funny. It was built on the redstone quarry land that Daniel Dyer Howard Purchased the land from the quarry and he had so there's an attachment to my deed that I'm not allowed to Quarry the land so nobody since has been allowed to quarry the land Non-competition clause. It's fascinating So let's start talking a little bit about the downtown area So that's the earliest area where Europeans were settling and that's where we see one of our earliest styles So the federal style of architecture All of these earliest styles are really borrowed from Europe So what was trendy over there was brought over here? federal's considered the national the first national style of our new country and It was really modeled off of Roman architecture Wasn't it before we hated the king wasn't it called Georgian? Yeah, you could even Georgian was before federal So Georgian was this time. Yeah, we're like, haha George. He's great But yeah, federal came in and that was like this is our new colony. This is our new nation and We had a new style. We left King George behind with a Georgian architecture. That's right. Yeah, so you'll see federal's all along Pearl Street, so there's a great example up there with our wonderful 1860 Federal-style church right along Pearl Street at the top of church. You can always tell federal by the Fan shape so there's a fan light. So when you look for the round arches above windows or doors That's a dead giveaway of the federal style of architecture. I think a couple more examples. Yeah, so this is right on pearl Covered in ivy, but you can see that fan light above the door and it's such a distinct giveaway of that style Yeah, so when you see the fan light usually and you're in an area that was developed in you know the early 1800s It's probably a federal and that massing is very symmetrical. Yeah There's two windows on each side of a door two windows above that very order Yeah, and there's another style we see often that goes right along with that and that's the Greek revival style So you'll see this all throughout the the downtown as well And we have high-style examples of it and we have more vernacular Less ornate examples of this style. So Greek revival style happened in the 1830s up until the 1850s or so This was a really popular style that you guessed it. That looks like after Greek temples So you can see this one is the Timfold house and this is a really great high-style example That's the fallot, right? You see that from the waterfront Yep, you had big parties there in the 1840s and Then he lost all his money and died. I think in an insane asylum. I think so. Yeah It's interesting story, but not a happy story. Not a happy story beautiful house though. Yeah, absolutely So this is an example of a more simple Greek revival and I like to use this one as an example of a building that's changed over time There's an addition to the front of it a one-story edition that kind of wraps around and Coins on the corner. So is that Italian eight technically or I mean it has yeah The coins are definitely an indication of Italian a however. I think this is probably you know 1980s and I wouldn't say Ron Would you say this is a good addition to this Greek revival or not? I I would say it's less than sympathetic Yes, the original design you do you can still make out the pedimented gable bow. Yeah so in the 1850s we have a Boom in Burlington you can see it's a lot more developed as you think about that 1830s map We're looking in the 1850s Burlington starting to build up lumber industry starting to get going and you can see more people are settling There's more buildings And more more houses. So these two You see the JW Hickok building this I think is owned by UBM and I think it's a sorority. Okay, Delta Delta Delta and Yes, the other building is owned by Champlain College now And again, so there's a lot of these wealthy people who have really great high-style examples of styles The JW Hickok is actually one of the earliest Italianates in Burlington that we have I think it's like 1852 or so Yeah, and speaking of Italianates, I think we have an image up here. So there it is today Yep, and then I think I have another yep. Perfect. So the Italianate style Super super popular in the United States. You see this throughout And you'll see a lot of examples again in Burlington's downtown area Really distinct with the overhanging eaves and the bracketed cornice Yep, usually like a flat or low-lying hip to roof tall windows And then they often have crowns on top of them, which that's such a such a beautiful version Yeah, that's a really great. That's on Union Street. Yeah. Yep. I think do we have them on the homeless tour a few years ago? We or maybe it's the Queen Anne next door. Yeah, I think it's the Queen Anne next door I think this one is condominium eyes So there's like a couple units in the front and then they built off of the back You know and they built well because everything off the back is sort of hidden so the house still stands alone as an example of its its architecture Love it. It's a great example. There's another example of an Italianate and it has the The Coupel on the top or the Belvedere. So that's another kind of distinct giveaway of that style You can stay at that one. Yeah, I know right so gorgeous Second Empire this was on the Holmes tour one year. Oh, yeah, I just remembered that Yeah, and another style you're gonna see is the second Empire style super distinct and fun it comes out of France actually and The the roof is a man's hard roof and so that's dead giveaway It's like a double-hipped roof and it has that really distinct shape and whenever you see one of those buildings You can almost guess it's from the 1870s. Yeah, because that was like the heyday of it You know, I it's don't tell my house, but it's one of my favorites The second Empire style too, it's so wonderful the Adams family Every it's anonymous now with like spooky houses Yep, I do too. It's like it's definitely my favorite Italianate being my second favorite Queen Anne's are fun. Yeah, they are. All right 1890 Burlington. Let's get into Queen Anne's getting so developed Yes, you know by that time period is the Queen Anne style. This one's super fun. It's really eclectic And we have a lot of really great examples of Queen Anne's builders and architects went wild They went wild you can see them throughout Burlington. There's the pattern shingle work, and there's different colors They have usually a tower on them They're usually pretty asymmetrical in shape And you know, you'll see many streets of Burlington like this where you have just kind of rows of Queen Anne's that are now Kind of all chopped up into apartment buildings. Yeah, because they were so big. Yeah Time little doors everywhere. I know it's so fun I think a friend of mine has a Queen Anne up on off of Mansfield and I think they've got Seven doors on the first floor heading out It's crazy.  There's a couple of side doors There's door off of them off of the bay window. They're definitely fun fun house yeah, so um, I'm gonna go through the hill section and then I Love to I don't know much how much more time we have. Oh, we've got plenty of time plenty of time awesome All right, so I'm gonna touch upon the hill section and then it's really cool We'll see a lot of More folk examples or more vernacular examples of these same styles in the the old north end So the hill section this is generally a more well-to-do neighborhood area And it's still more of a well-to-do area in Burlington and there's generally because that's where my house Yeah, exactly This is a great high-style example of a tutor revival right by Champlain College and tutor revivals you guessed it It's like thinking medieval turn of like renaissance period where you have like the really steep shaped Roof pitches the front-facing gable and you have usually sometimes a stucco sidings kind of mimicking like if you think of like Old English streets with like the tall skinny gable roofs and sometimes timber Yeah, the Waddle and Dove and stucco in between. Yeah, and they do that with tutor revivals, too They'll have like the the fake wooden timbers on there to kind of mimic that that time period, right, right Here's another really awesome high-style example of a Queen Anne One of the very best at UBM. You really can't beat that building. That's the alumni house, right? 61 Summit Street everybody can go take a look at it. We've had events there. Yeah, and this one has really incredible Woodworking, too, which I think you were involved Albert Whitikin with restoring.  They don't build them like they used to. No, sir. That's why we got to save them That's right each and every one. That's right Colonial revivals. So this is a really broad Style it's so diverse and the examples that you'll see you'll see Dutch Colonials with like the gambrel roof. You'll see Georgian revivals. They're all over And it spans from the late 19th century up to the mid 20th so long so popular so long so popular Yeah, in the hill section, you'll see a lot of really great examples of the style Gorgeous one there. There's another one. This one is a little bit later, and you can tell it was really done I almost feel like sometimes the later that you get in like the 40s 50s I feel like the house has almost become even more accurate to their colonial They were trying harder to be really trying harder. It was less eclectic. Yep. Yep No, they're this one's actually a neoclassical Building so it has that tall two-story Entry and then the one-story porch that wraps around it and that's pretty much a hallmark of the neoclassical Again neoclassical me what era would that be so that's pretty much kind of the same spectrum as colonial revival Yep, but the distinguishing feature is the full height entry porch And that kind of makes a difference with with capitals and everything Yeah, that's a way to distinguish it from the colonial revival. Okay. Yeah. Now. This is an interesting house, right? Shingle style runs a gamut, but I know this is in the neighborhood I mean and there's I think four at least four of them that are identical to and then the other street to back-to-back sort of You know and then actually this one I think is right on Willard. So yeah Yeah, shingle styles really fun again, and this was considered one of our early first American like true architectural styles and Really the way to identify this one is it usually will have like a gambrel roof line. It's sometimes a regular, but then it also has Clotting that really just wraps around it like a second a second skin. That's a distinctive way about it There's an amazing high-style example. I think there's one right on the next. Yeah, this one's a great example of a shingle style I think they won a preservation award from us a few years ago this Squinting I want to see where it's hanging up. I think you're right though. They did. Yeah, it's gorgeous Nice shingle style. This one's fun. I haven't seen any other examples of this, but this is also in the hill section French eclectic again, this is part of that whole period of revival architecture and Yeah, see the little diamond pane windows. Yeah, the diamond pane windows absolutely Yeah, the roof line is outrageous But yeah, that's an only example of a French eclectic style Inset dormer So fun pretty pretty neat stuff. Absolutely. How long do you have to walk around town to find that one? I've taken so many photos of so many houses Ron It's really crazy. So we're gonna get to my neighborhood, which is awesome. I'm glad we get to talk about it It's the Old North End and the Old North End this area was Really settled by a lot of immigrants today. It is still a very diverse place, which is amazing I love the Old North End for its diversity and culture and Old North End really was an area that had a lot more vernacular Or simple houses just because it was more of an area that was more for like the working class Versus the Hill section. So you'll see a lot of houses like this one, which are really don't have a style In that case, they're just kind of called a folk house. My own house is a folk house. It's simple gable gable front You'll see them all through It's actually very common profile if you walk down a street in the Old North End You'll just see kind of rows of gable front Yeah, with like a yep. Yeah, it's super common. There's another example of one the vernacular the vernacular I Love them. Yeah, this is a vernacular Greek revival. You can just tell it is it's from that time period instead of having that elaborate Temple front like we saw on Tim Follett's house full at its house. We have just like a little cornice Yeah, that indicate that it's Greek revival So it has a little bit of the style but obviously the people that owned that house couldn't afford all of it Little more humble a little more humble. Yep. No, I mean the colors obviously I'm You know because the colors, you know, you think Queen Anne because of the way they painted the Queen Anne's in San Francisco Which isn't necessarily accurate, but what's this? This is an Italian eight. Yeah, so heavy bracketed flat roof line You can see the brackets on it and this one is an Old North End and unlike, you know That big fancy one we saw was kind of standalone all in brick. This one was a duplex So it was made for people multiple families to live there and indicative of the socioeconomic level in this community and then you know with these with these simpler Examples of styles it shows like everyone wanted to have the fashion of the time period You could do it with just a little bit of embellishment And it's really cool to see that in the Old North End just compared to the hill section Sometimes you can see that's a fun thing about working on older houses, too Like you'll see You know a pretty a vernacular house, but I'll have all these like added on Embellishments from a different period so if it was built in the early 1800s or something then all of a sudden it's got a talent Yeah, you can see those changes. It's so fun because yeah, they're like I want to update and modernize it And so you added in like the next thing This is a Queen Anne duplex you can see it's asymmetrical. There's like a tower on one side Just a really nice example of this style For the Old North End. Yeah, and pretty big in France. Here's some more examples of the Queen Anne You'll see in the neighborhood in the Old North End Again very diverse architectural style. Ah These ones are so great. You're gonna tell a story. Do you want to tell the story? Yeah, because you know it better than I do but John Roberts, right? We see them all over town You see them all over town John Roberts So John Roberts was a builder in the area and like around the 1890s or so and he built these houses these simple Gable front houses with a bay window With the Queen Anne embellishment in the the Gable As a way for people to have the style of the time the Queen Anne style of the time But also at a very affordable price and they're so fun. You'll see them.  You're like, there's a John Roberts house There's a John Roberts house and they're so distinctive because see they were built really like the plan of the houses is very much the same Yeah, yeah, once you see one you see them everywhere, right?  I have. Is it amazing? They are pretty neat Yeah, we'll stairwells and a nice trim work inside and you know, and then he just disappeared, right? Yeah Yeah, I kind of like fades away.  I you'll also see a lot of Dutch Well, you'll see a lot of colonial revivals especially the further up in the old north end You get kind of going towards when you ski you'll see more colonial revivals And so this is an example of a Dutch colonial revival With the flared ease and it's really it's actually I think it's on a street called like colonial lane or something like that Yeah, and there's a ton of really great examples of the style there You'll also see in the old north end. I love these two. Yeah American four squares So this is a shape not a style. So it might have had styles applied to it. This one has some craftsmen embellishments to it But it's kind of how it sounds. It's a square shape two story It has a front dormer almost always it has a full-width one story front porch hip to roof very distinctive Early 20th century. We'll see those Mm-hmm, and then you'll see also craftsmen right which kind of borrow that same, you know Like those four squares can lean craftsmity because the difference the change of siding and So passion was a response to industrialization and it really is focusing actually was borrowed from like arts and crafts movement in England then it was brought over starting in California with the green and green Brothers and then it kind of became super widespread and prevalent in the United States You'll see many many examples of a craftsman something that knows it industrialization. Yes. Yes Yes, we don't have a whole lot of time left, but the five sisters neighborhood is a really fascinating part of Burlington. So the streets are named after five sisters and these were sisters of Maria Buell Hungerford, so they were her children and they were named the streets were named after them So she's just like a wealthy family from the Buell estate They kind of chopped up several big estates to form the five sisters neighborhoods in the 1920s. Yeah, and this is one of the Estates that was broken up. This is the Hick Hock estate And so in the 1920s all this land was sold up to developers and they created the five sisters And the five sisters is just an amazing distinct neighborhood in Burlington It gets like in magazines all the time best place to live and it's amazing. It's a fabulous neighborhood. I walk through the five Walkable Houses are cute Yeah, this whole neighborhood was developed for for working-class families and made in the latest styles of the day So you'll see lots of really great examples of colonial revivals Tudor revivals craftsmen Throughout the neighborhood Walk there today don't drive because the rotary is being done over. Yes. It's a hot mess there So you'll see Tudor revivals in that neighborhood. It's again the steep pitch. You'll see craftsmen As you walk through You'll also see kid houses Yeah, we did a home store on kid houses that one year. So And got a lot of them in that neighborhood. Yeah, kid houses are the best They're so fun and then you'll see colonial revivals as well So kid houses is really cool and might be not a bad way to end. So kid houses were developed. Oh, perfect Yeah, kid houses was in the early 20th century and basically there are tons of big companies like sears and roebuck laden And basically they created Catalogs and families could like look through these catalogs and pick out a house that they wanted Pieces would all be shipped to them by the train Builder would pick those parts up and build the house just like in the picture Yeah, it's also a fun scavenger hunt. So there's tons of people who are like kid house enthusiasts And they'll go through neighborhoods and they're like, uh, like I think that could be sears like the lucerne And so it's just a really awesome Cool development in american architecture. Just so you know, um, even so if we go over The picture goes away, but we could talk the rest of the night if you want because we could just say You know on and on and on because it's such a fun topic hours I think that um, I think we've given everybody a good they can go deeper on our website, but they you know Very obviously there's amazing places to um walk all over town and and just once you start, you know Field guide to american houses Great book if you get a used copy of it and just walk around look for them. It's so much fun You know so much fun and and the maps so thanks. Thanks for sharing that Yeah, absolutely. I hope you guys people can join us this summer for some walking tours I hope you check out. We will be posting the webinar So you want to hear about the other more modern neighborhoods? You can find it on our website Yep, and we'll be and the schedule will be posted up there too. So Yeah, because I know we planned a lot of stuff so I can't remember it off my head when things are hitting but Um, I do want to thank everybody for tuning in to cctv live at 5 25 in preservation burlington For more interest for more information on burlington history Or our tours and events like we just said to where to get a marker for your house go to preservation burlington dot org And we'll see you next month. Thanks for tuning in. Thanks. Karen. Hey, it's fun


Take a 440 Hz tone and a 441 Hz tone and add them together. What happens? They interfere with each other. Sometimes the interference is constructive, producing a louder signal and sometimes the interference is destructive, cancelling the signal out altogether. This getting louder and softer again is called a beat frequency and is equal to the difference between the frequencies of the two tones. Add more tones at adjacent frequencies with carefully controlled amplitudes and we can make the tone shorter. However, the beat frequency remains at 1 Hz. To silence the 440 Hz tone for longer, we have to reduce the difference between adjacent frequencies. Looking at what we just did in the frequency domain, we can see all the frequencies present in our time domain signal. We are building our signal out of discrete frequencies. This is why signals that are discrete in the frequency domain produce periodic signals in the time domain.