The higher the lower, the more the less. Inverse correlations get complicated when used to form logical arguments about objective reality. It gets even more complicated when combined with negative correlations.
Negative and inverse correlative values make political-economy ambiguous. The ambiguity is so available that the ambivalence (the valence of the values) is often the object of extreme action and reaction. To form a predictive understanding, it is necessary to identify motives, which is hard to do because it derives from inferring the cause from the observable effect.
Intelligence analysts, for example, use models for predictive utility. If the data detects certain patterns of existence that fit the model X, “X” is probably objective reality, which is exactly what physicists do to derive a practical effect from nature “using” what are believed to be natural laws because there is a positive correlation.
If every time you do X, Y is the expected effect, and confirms most of the time, you believe X causes Y to happen; not because it really does, however, but because it correlates, positively. When it goes negative there is reason to believe X does not actually cause Y–and this available ambiguity happens a lot when doing political-economic analysis, used to form arguments that resolve the ambivalence on demand, or as needed (which is then to define what objective reality–the imperative–actually is).
The levels of ambivalence have measurable levels of diplomacy–politics with economic dimensions. This forms “the risk” that concerns all the parties; and it is a quantifiable thing, logically conditioned but, like when doing physics, the risk is that reality may not “actually” square with the perception of it.
Since people do not share the same values (the same utility in the pursuit of happiness), the difference in priorities forms the probable risk and occupies the analytical space. Over time, patterns emerge that fit the probable motive, inferred from the evidence, which then gives it a causal, or objective, identity.
For example, if we want to infer the probability of what actually happens if there is a Republican congress and executive administration–what is the model?
Republicans argue that conservative values and principles are the ultimate model of efficiency. Their policy program has been in place for more than 15 years and we have the greatest, measurable amount of income inequality ever. For 1% it’s a positive correlation. For everybody else it’s negative.
So, then, to gain the natural utility in the pursuit of happiness, what is the imperative value?