----------
>From: "Durant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> So, the answer is yes, and the explanation for the failure of
> the welfare-state was far from adequate...
> We might as well go for something new if we have to
> go against the tide... We are running out of time, we
> cannot repeat past mistakes.
>
> Eva
Dear Eva:
I have been wrestling with the problem of jobs and poverty for several
years. Up until JG's book, the best answer I could find was the Basic
Income as a means of redistributing income and banishing poverty and all
it's associate ills. There have been other answers I have found attractive
suchs Georges rent ideas rather than private property. What I have come to
accept - reluctantly, is that the world or an individual country is probably
not going to jump off the cliff towards a Basic Income or other creative
idea. It will have to be incremental - unless chaos introduces a new
variable like a plague that wipes out 50% of the population or some other
unforeseen event.
Therefore, I was impressed with JG's analysis as the beginning of a long
dialog that must occur among the academics and government bureacrats and
could possibly lead to changes that create more jobs and less poverty. Not
my ideal solution, but perhaps a possible one and as it addresses my goals,
one that I can support.
I agree we are running out of time but the lemmings in control will keep
going until they fall off the cliff and even then, they will argue for the
status quo all the way to the bottom and final impact. It is only if some
of lemmings change direction slightly and a percentage follow them that we
may see change - a pretty cynical viewpoint isn't it.
Respectfully,
Thomas Lunde
