RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
fyi, Harry, just another example of social costs. Cruise Ship Engineers Indicted on Charges of Hiding DumpingThe Associated Press MIAMI (AP) - Three cruise ship engineers were indicted Thursday on charges of falsifying log books to conceal the dumping of waste oil at sea. Knut Sorboe, Peter Solemdal and Aage Lokkebraten, all of Norway, were employees of Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd. at the time of the alleged crimes, said Tom Sansonetti, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division. They no longer work for the cruise line, the company said. It could not immediately be determined if they had attorneys. Norwegian Cruise Line pleaded guilty in April 2000 to keeping a false log book and admitted the company lied to the Coast Guard for three years about unlawful discharges from the 2,030-passenger SS Norway during weekly Caribbean voyages. The company paid a $1.5 million fine. Norwegian admitted polluting the ocean in two ways: flushing an oil sensor with fresh water to make contaminated discharges look clean and dumping untreated wastewater overboard. It is unknown how much oil and contaminated water was dumped. The indictment alleges that the men used false log books to conceal the broken oil sensor. The log books are required as a pollution record, inspected by the Coast Guard, prosecutors said. The men each face up to 15 years in prison if convicted on the conspiracy and falsification charges. An employee fired from the Norway reported the matter to the Environmental Protection Agency in 1999. The whistle-blower has been awarded $250,000 for the tip, prosecutors said. AP-ES-12-18-03 2150EST This story can be found at: http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGASMTBNDOD.html -Original Message-From: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 10:26 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ As long as the price of the product includes the social costs (externalities) I think that consumers should consume until the "well runs dry" (of course if the product is properly priced, including the futurediscount rate of increasingly scarce resources, then prices will rise) arthur -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 5:39 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Arthur, As you might agree, one persons crap is another persons joy. I really dont like Eds implication that one person has the legal right to deny another person what he wants because it is thought to be crap. A Brave New World of force and coercion. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 5:39 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ We are awash in goods (or as you call it crap). Huge effort is spent on clearing the shelves of this crap and getting people to buy more so that more can be produced and sold. This is the way income is created and distributed. With so much effort by governments and advertising and marketing etc., to move products it seems that yes the production problem has been solved. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:41 AMTo: Harry Pollard; Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ I don't think we've solved the production problem. One reason for our inequitable distribution of income is that we use our scarce resources to produce a lot of crap. A lot of people make a lot of money producing crap. Others keep them rich and themselves poor by buying it. Ed - Original Message - From: "Harry Pollard" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:00 AM
RE: Find the cause (was RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites
You might add that the relentless advertising is tax deductible as an operating cost. So we are all helping to subsidize this propaganda. Both as a tax deduction and as a cost which appears in the prices of products. arthur -Original Message- From: Thomas Lunde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 3:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Find the cause (was RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Therefore, in any criticism of consumerism (and I agree that it's now a damaging symptom of modern society) unless you can find a universal cause then it is pointless to argue against it morally because it is unstoppable. If we find a cause, then we might be able to suggest alternatives. Keith Thomas: Could the cause be relentless advertising which is in effect a form of brainwashing. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Don't shoot me. (wasRe: Fw: [Futurework] FW Basic Income site s
I am in the same position as you Ed. I don't consider it a pity that OAS is "clawed back" I feel that it is going to someone who needs it more than I. That that person will receive some income, maintain their dignity and perhaps won't have to venture into a food bank. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 8:37 AMTo: Harry Pollard; 'Keith Hudson'Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Don't shoot me. (wasRe: Fw: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites It's being eligible for a government program payment, but getting less and less of it the higher you are on the income scale. For example, I'm eligible for Old Age Security, but don't get any because my income (combined with my wife's) is too high. Pity! Ed - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard To: 'Keith Hudson' ; 'Ed Weick' Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 7:31 PM Subject: RE: Don't shoot me. (wasRe: Fw: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Ed and Keith, What's a "clawback"? Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith HudsonSent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 11:58 AMTo: Ed WeickCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Don't shoot me. (wasRe: Fw: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Ed,Don't shoot me. I'm only the messenger.At 12:51 16/12/2003 -0500, you wrote: (KH)Your special problem in Canada is that your government(s) has already committed itself to future welfare payments of over 400% of your present GDP. How on earth you are ever going to afford those, goodness knows. You cannot possibly afford to consider any extra welfare payments. You will certainly need a voluntary sector (and a very large one, too, one imagines!).(EW)Keith, absolute nonsense! I have no idea of where you got your numbers, but no government, even ours, is that stupid. I'm afraid that the IMF thinks so. This from a report, "Who will Pay?" by Peter Heller, Deputy Director of Fiscal Affairs, IMF. Canada already has an explicit debt of something like 40-50% of GDP, but has committed itself already to future commitements of about 400% of GDP. See the Economist of 22 November 2003 for a summary of the report. In respect of future commitments, Canada is already twice as bad as France and Germany and they're already right up to the hilt in what they can squeeze from the taxpayer. But I do appreciate your sense of humour. I don't know if you saw my piece on how a BI might be cobbled together from existing programs. And this morning I posted a suggestion that you could have a universal BI program with clawback provisions. But, surely, clawbacks invalidate it as a BI. You might just as well suggest further sets of welfare provisions. But even a Labour government over here is talking about the need to reduce all sorts of pensions and benefits in the future, and we've much less current debt and far fewer future commitments than Canada. Keith Ed - Original Message - From: Keith Hudson To: Ed Weick Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 1:38 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Ed, At 19:18 15/12/2003 -0500, you wrote: A special problem we have in Canada, and I know we're not unique, is the division of responsibilities under our constitution. The federal government is responsible for some things, the provinces for others. Too many people at the table to get an easy agreement. Thank God we have a large voluntary sector that actually does things while our two levels of government wrangle themselves into stalemates! Your special problem in Canada is that your government(s) has already committed itself to future welfare payments of over 400% of your present GDP. How on earth you are ever going to afford those, goodness knows. You cannot possibly afford to consider any extra welfare payments. You will certainly need a voluntary sector (and a very large one, too, one imagines!). Keith Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:19 PM Subject: RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites I agree. I was too sharp in my response. I apologize. I
RE: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists
The fact is that it takes place, has taken place and will likely take place again. National and international legal systems are in place to try to ensure that it doesn't happen again. It is in this way that things are getting better in the world. At least we now know that humans have some sort of a murderous virus that erupts from time to time (especially when we know we can beat/subjugate/murder the other). Knowing the problem brings us a good part of the way to solving the problem. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 9:15 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists I've been halfway through Diamond for a little over a year now and must finish it someday, although I don't think I've ever finished a book in my life. In my view,one reason why hunting and gathering groups attack and destroy each other is that they are motivated by fear of something they cannotreally understand. Competition for resources may be another reason. There is something of a classic case in Arctic Canada, where the modern Inuit (the so called Thule Culture) replaced the Dorset Culture (Tunit) beginning about a thousand years ago. From what little I've read, the lifestyles of these two peoples were very different. The Inuit used dogs, moved about a lot, lived in tents in summer and snow houses in winter. The Tunit were sedentary, lived in stone houses (or really holes covered by stone roofs), and did not use dogs -they apparently used sleighs that they dragged about themselves. It would seem that the Inuit pictured the Tunit as some kind of strange and sinister population of giants that posed some form of shadowy, omnipresent threat, and it was therefore necessary to get rid of them, which is what seems to have happened. As they spread across the Arctic from west to east, the Inuit also needed access to Tunic hunting and sealing areas. As a distinct culture, the Tunit disappeared about 400 years ago, although a highly resepected anthropologist I once knew told me that the last Tunit he knew of, a woman, died on Southampton Island in the 1920s. I repeat a point I've made frequently on this list: inter-group or inter-ethnic strife is a very difficult thing to decompose into its elements. It is far more complex than an envious alpha-male jumping up and down because he wants to wear the same war-paint as the chief in the next valley over and is willing to part with his virgin daughter or kill people to get that paint. Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 8:54 PM Subject: RE: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists I am about one-quarter of the way through Guns, Germs and Steel (The Fate of Human Societies) by Jared Diamond. So far the picture that seems to emerge is that humans tend to band together and with a murderous rage will defeat the other band if they can. The stronger culture will defeat/murder/subjugate the weaker culture simply because it can. Its a sort of Darwinian survival of the strongest (measured in terms of resources, technology , social organization, tactics and strategy) I don't think its so much about status but about power and control and maybe its natural, the same way that animals in the wild will hunt down and kill sick and injured animals. I suppose the whole legal system is in place to offset this sort of acitivityand we are mostly successful in keeping the stronger from defeating/murdering/subjugating the weaker, although I am sure there are some on this list who would disagree. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:17 AMTo: Brad McCormickCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economistsBrad,At 07:50 18/12/2003 -0500, you wrote: Why doesn't all economics education and inquiry start with theprinciple: Friends hold all things in common. (--Desiderius Erasmus, and others)?Since we have markets and such, the firstlemma one seems forced to deduce from this principleis that "the economy" is a realm of socialrelations which are at best not friendly (andwhich in fact often are in varying degreespositively(sic) unfriendly).I am being entirely serious here.
RE: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists
Brad, I was thinking about the day to day actions of ordinary people living in a largely inhospitable and people unfriendly system. That pilots who are in bad marriages, in jobs with no future, maxed out credit cards, etc., are still able to get to the airport and do their jobs. That road rage usually remains just that and murder and mayhem rarely follow. That harassed and underpaid food servers and cooks in restaurants are not sprinkling poison in the food. And that computer programmers who dwell on life's inequities are still capable of turning out quality product. That sort of thing. arthur -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 10:06 PM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brad, I think that is a fair statement. The wonder is that the system works as well as it does, keeping in mind your observation that the economy is a realm of social relations which are at best not friendly (and which in fact often are in varying degrees positively(sic) unfriendly). I don't think there is any wonder to it. (Maybe I'm missing something?) Throw together any number of competing forces, and they will eventually reach some kind of equilibrium status (or at least the survivors will...). I see it as sort of like that no matter how improbable life is in the universe, and no matter how much more improbable intelligent life is, we wouldn't exist if we did not meet the criteria for existing, i.e., there is entirely no reason for being surprised that we exist, since an a priori condition for our being either surprised or n ot surprised or anything else is that we in fact exist. The thing that would be really surprising is if we didn't exist but knew it. Now *that* would be surprising indeed! Don't get am-Bush-ed! \brad mccormick arthur -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 7:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists Why doesn't all economics education and inquiry start with the principle: Friends hold all things in common. (--Desiderius Erasmus, and others) ? Since we have markets and such, the first lemma one seems forced to deduce from this principle is that the economy is a realm of social relations which are at best not friendly (and which in fact often are in varying degrees positively(sic) unfriendly). I am being entirely serious here. \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists
Editorial ReviewsAmazon.comDuring the three years (1993-1996) Samantha Power spent covering the grisly events in Bosnia and Srebrenica, she became increasingly frustrated with how little the United States was willing to do to counteract the genocide occurring there. After much research, she discovered a pattern: "The United States had never in its history intervened to stop genocide and had in fact rarely even made a point of condemning it as it occurred," she writes in this impressive book. Debunking the notion that U.S. leaders were unaware of the horrors as they were occurring against Armenians, Jews, Cambodians, Iraqi Kurds, Rwandan Tutsis, and Bosnians during the past century, Power discusses how much was known and when, and argues that much human suffering could have been alleviated through a greater effort by the U.S. She does not claim that the U.S. alone could have prevented such horrors, but does make a convincing case that even a modest effort would have had significant impact. Based on declassified information, private papers, and interviews with more than 300 American policymakers, Power makes it clear that a lack of political will was the most significant factor for this failure to intervene. Some courageous U.S. leaders did work to combat and call attention to ethnic cleansing as it occurred, but the vast majority of politicians and diplomats ignored the issue, as did the American public, leading Power to note that "no U.S. president has ever suffered politically for his indifference to its occurrence. It is thus no coincidence that genocide rages on." This powerful book is a call to make such indifference a thing of the past. -- Interesting. Most nation states tend to look the other way when genocide is underway, not just the US. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 10:13 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists A good read on the nature of the murderous virus is Samantha Power's "A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide", in which she reviews the causes and consequences of recent mass killings, and the ineffectiveness of national and international legal systems in preventing them. Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 9:40 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists The fact is that it takes place, has taken place and will likely take place again. National and international legal systems are in place to try to ensure that it doesn't happen again. It is in this way that things are getting better in the world. At least we now know that humans have some sort of a murderous virus that erupts from time to time (especially when we know we can beat/subjugate/murder the other). Knowing the problem brings us a good part of the way to solving the problem. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 19, 2003 9:15 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists I've been halfway through Diamond for a little over a year now and must finish it someday, although I don't think I've ever finished a book in my life. In my view,one reason why hunting and gathering groups attack and destroy each other is that they are motivated by fear of something they cannotreally understand. Competition for resources may be another reason. There is something of a classic case in Arctic Canada, where the modern Inuit (the so called Thule Culture) replaced the Dorset Culture (Tunit) beginning about a thousand years ago. From what little I've read, the lifestyles of these two peoples were very different. The Inuit used dogs, moved about a lot, lived in tents in summer and snow houses in winter. The Tunit were sedentary, lived in stone houses (or really holes covered by stone roofs), and did not use dogs -they apparently used sleighs that they dragged about themselves. It would seem that the Inuit pictured the Tunit as some kind of strange and sinister population of giants that posed some form of shadowy, omnipresent threat, and it was therefore necessary to get rid of them, which is what seems to have happened. As they spread acros
RE: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists
Brad, I think that is a fair statement. The wonder is that the system works as well as it does, keeping in mind your observation that the economy is a realm of social relations which are at best not friendly (and which in fact often are in varying degrees positively(sic) unfriendly). arthur -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 7:51 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists Why doesn't all economics education and inquiry start with the principle: Friends hold all things in common. (--Desiderius Erasmus, and others) ? Since we have markets and such, the first lemma one seems forced to deduce from this principle is that the economy is a realm of social relations which are at best not friendly (and which in fact often are in varying degrees positively(sic) unfriendly). I am being entirely serious here. \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economists
I am about one-quarter of the way through Guns, Germs and Steel (The Fate of Human Societies) by Jared Diamond. So far the picture that seems to emerge is that humans tend to band together and with a murderous rage will defeat the other band if they can. The stronger culture will defeat/murder/subjugate the weaker culture simply because it can. Its a sort of Darwinian survival of the strongest (measured in terms of resources, technology , social organization, tactics and strategy) I don't think its so much about status but about power and control and maybe its natural, the same way that animals in the wild will hunt down and kill sick and injured animals. I suppose the whole legal system is in place to offset this sort of acitivityand we are mostly successful in keeping the stronger from defeating/murdering/subjugating the weaker, although I am sure there are some on this list who would disagree. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:17 AMTo: Brad McCormickCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] My ongoing struggle to see the obvious :: Basic question for economistsBrad,At 07:50 18/12/2003 -0500, you wrote: Why doesn't all economics education and inquiry start with theprinciple: Friends hold all things in common. (--Desiderius Erasmus, and others)?Since we have markets and such, the firstlemma one seems forced to deduce from this principleis that "the economy" is a realm of socialrelations which are at best not friendly (andwhich in fact often are in varying degreespositively(sic) unfriendly).I am being entirely serious here.You've got the picture in one! Congratulations!When the leader of one group of early man saw the leader of the neighbouring group in war paint -- that is, with whom he was having a difference at the time -- of a particularly virulent shade of orange (iron ochre), he badly wanted some of the ochre for himself so that he, too, could look so splendid. But he couldn't lay his hands on any because there was none of this desirabvle rock in his own group's territory. So he had to he had to parlay with the neighbouring group's leader one fine sunny day when they were not at war (for, of course, warfare is only an occasional event) and decided to exchange one of his recently \post-puberty daughters whom he'd restrained (because she was about to leave anyway to find a partner elsewhere -- disposed to do so by what is called the 'patrilocal instinct' by the behavioural pscyhologists) for some "leadership paint". The deal was done and during the trading transaction the two leaders were pretty friendly. The next day, or perhaps a month or two later, the two groups were at war again -- perhaps one the group had invaded the other's territory and stolen a pig -- and this time both leaders were wearing war paint. They made sure that they didn;t kill each other -- leaders seldon do that. They make sure that the honour falls to an underling. And, while they were wearing their war paint -- or perhaps retained it for days or weeks after wards -- both leaders would have been very attractive indeed if any post-puberty girls from yet a distant third or fourth group had come wandering by looking for a mate.Keith Hudson \brad mccormick-- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21)![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED]- Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/___Futurework mailing list[EMAIL PROTECTED]http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futureworkKeith Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
Oh Harry you know the answer. The price of a product is the summation of all costs plus profits. Sometimes not all costs are included in price of the product. It is these costs that are not counted that keep goods so low in price and help to exacerbate the consumer society. Think car exhaust, smokestacks, diesel trucks, spilling mercury into rivers by pulp and paper manufacturers, etc. These externalities are social costs absorbed by the larger society. The costs get counted in a range of illnesses, tainted food, etc (and just possibly global warming.) arthur -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 7:31 PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Arthur, old lad, Would you mind listing these social costs if you can do it without hitting the books by candlelight, or something. Its holiday time. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] As long as the price of the product includes the social costs (externalities) I think that consumers should consume until the "well runs dry" (of course if the product is properly priced, including the futurediscount rate of increasingly scarce resources, then prices will rise) arthur -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Arthur, As you might agree, one persons crap is another persons joy. I really dont like Eds implication that one person has the legal right to deny another person what he wants because it is thought to be crap. A Brave New World of force and coercion. ---Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.552 / Virus Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003 ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.552 / Virus Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003
RE: [Futurework] Dissecting the voting machine madness
But
not doing so well with "competition" in electric power.
-Original Message-From: Harry Pollard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 18,
2003 7:31 PMTo: 'Ray Evans Harrell'; 'Karen Watters Cole';
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Dissecting
the voting machine madness
Ray,
In my
discussion of location monopolies, the local phone company looms large so
long as it tied to poles by the roadside. However, my cable company installed
a local service in direct competition with the local phone company.
They
supplied two lines with all the costly extras like caller ID thrown in along
with free toll calls for 60 miles in all directions. (It is free to China Lake where a Pollard family lives
about 200 miles north which I dont understand, but I dont
argue.)
The cost
was $39 a month. I now pay $2 a month for 9 cent a minute calls to the
UK and France. I have
abandoned MCI, Sprint, and ATT.
Your bills
seem extraordinarily high. Dont understand it. Must be an urban sinkhole
expense.
You could
get rid of the cell-phone.
Harry
Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655
Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818
352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ray Evans
HarrellSent: Tuesday,
December 16, 2003 12:21 PMTo: Karen Watters Cole;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] Dissecting the voting machine
madness
Sounds like my telephone bill since we got
deregulation and cell phones. Went from $36 a month to over one
hundred and sometimes as high as $300. Once MCI wanted it to be
$1,500 but that was a mistake. Anyway electricity is more
expensive than labor or should it be? What about "productivity" and
automation? It should have been less, but it isn't.
Must be privilege.
Logic
anyone?
---Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.552 / Virus
Database: 344 - Release Date: 12/15/2003
---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.552 / Virus
Database: 344 - Release Date:
12/15/2003
RE: [Futurework] A Basic Income as a form of Economic Governance
Doesn't the trade union movement off-set Ricardo's Iron Law? -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 4:22 PMTo: Harry Pollard; 'Ray Evans Harrell'; 'Thomas Lunde'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] A Basic Income as a form of Economic Governance Thanks, Harry. I'll make a few comments. Ed - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard To: 'Ed Weick' ; 'Ray Evans Harrell' ; 'Thomas Lunde' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 2:44 PM Subject: RE: [Futurework] A Basic Income as a form of Economic Governance Ed, Several remarks from the point of view of Classical Political Economy. You'll remember that. If Ricardo is correct, all that will happen over time is that wages will fall by about the amount of the BI. (The so-called "working poor" are an example of this.) I think that Ricardo's Iron Law of Wages is correct (that's the constant pressure downward on wages). However, I would add the element of land speculation to the equation - something he didn't do. I'm not arguing that the Iron Law of Wages is incorrect, but would point out that we live in a very different world than Ricardo's. His world was one of a huge number of poor, many having left or been kicked off the land, scrabbling for factory jobs in the emerging industrial cities. Ours is one of a much smaller proportion of poor and a huge middle class. Ours is also one of what I would call "income stratification". For example, you wouldn't expect an accountant or lawyer working for a corporation to be moiling about at the subsistence wage because a very long process of custom building, social stratification and unionization has led to an acceptance of what the recompense for an accountant and lawyer, or a middle or senior civil servant, should be. Even guys (men and women) who work on the shop floor of large factories can expect to be pretty decently paid. So, no, I don't see a BI leading toward a general downward spiral to a subsistence wage. What I see is bringing people who currently do not have a subsistence income moving up to that level. So, this year's great Basic Income addition to income would become not a useful extra - but would be linked to lower real wages as incomes become not much different from before BI. (Of course, the "dollars" would no doubt be greater.) Secondly, I would adopt a premise that Canadian land belongs to Canadians. Not some Canadians, but to all Canadians. People who want more valuable land than the margin should compensate the rest of the owners by paying Rent. In other words, though the houses and other structures built privately belong to those who built them - the land is held in trusteeship and requires a Rent payment to compensate the rest of the owners. This collected Rent belongs to all Canadians and could well be shared among them. However, unlike most suggestions for BI, which would be financed by the "rewards for screwing Canadians" (or as I would put it, Privilege income) - this distribution would merely be returning to Canadians what belongs to them. You have me here. All I can say is that our practice is to distinguish between privately held and publicly held lands. Productive privately held lands yield a return to their owners - i.e. income in the form of rent which can be taxed as income. Part of the rent is also taxed away as a property tax. For example, we pay property taxes which are related to the assessed value of our land. Public land put out to private uses (mining or oil and gas leases) yield returns such as licence fees until they begin to produce and resource royalties thereafter. There is always a lot of debate about whether the fees and royalties are set at a sufficiently high level. And no, the land is not seen as belonging to all Canadians. Most of the public lands in the provinces are provincially held and technically belong to the residents of those provinces. I believe the federal government is still the major landholder in the territories, but much is now also held by Aboriginal groups via land claims settlements. I have no idea what the land of Canada is worth, but an estimate of the value of American land is $30 trillion (that's trillion). Would you like to take 5% of that and divide it among 285 million Americans? I make it a bit more than $5,000 but don't trust my arithmetic. So, a family of 4 would get $20,000. (Ricardo's Iron Law would be squelched by collection of Rent.)
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
As
long as the price of the product includes the social costs (externalities) I
think that consumers should consume until the "well runs dry" (of course
if the product is properly priced, including the futurediscount rate of
increasingly scarce resources, then prices will rise)
arthur
-Original Message-From: Harry Pollard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 17,
2003 5:39 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework]
http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
Arthur,
As you
might agree, one persons crap is another persons
joy.
I really
dont like Eds implication that one person has the legal right to deny
another person what he wants because it is thought to be
crap.
A Brave New
World of force and coercion.
Harry
Henry
George School of Social Science of
Los Angeles
Box
655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel:
818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 5:39
PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework]
http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
We are awash in goods
(or as you call it crap). Huge effort is spent on clearing the shelves
of this crap and getting people to buy more so that more can be produced and
sold. This is the way income is created and distributed. With so
much effort by governments and advertising and marketing etc., to move
products it seems that yes the production problem has been
solved.
arthur
-Original
Message-From: Ed Weick
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:41
AMTo: Harry Pollard;
Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework]
http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
I don't think we've solved the
production problem. One reason for our inequitable distribution of
income is that we use our scarce resources to produce a lot of crap. A
lot of people make a lot of money producing crap. Others keep them
rich and themselves poor by buying it.
Ed
- Original Message -
From: "Harry Pollard"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:00
AM
Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
Arthur, Wouldn't you know it?
You almost repeated - word for word - what Henry George said
in 1878. Great minds think alike!
It's the reason why Classical Political Economy is described as "The
Science that deals with the Nature, the Production, and the
Distribution of Wealth. That "Distribution" bit is the
essence of Political Economy. Would that modern economists would
start thinking about why the distribution is so unfair, instead of
devising ways to patch the system by taking from the rich and giving
to the poor. Harry
---Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.548 / Virus
Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003
---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.552 / Virus
Database: 344 - Release Date:
12/15/2003
RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites
It really is all about dignity. arthur -Original Message- From: Thomas Lunde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 6:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Ed Weick wrote: If I read you right Ray, you are still associating BI with work, whether for profit or not for profit. I can't go there with you. It sounds a little too much like workfare, essentially grabbing people by the scruff of the neck and making them do the shit work nobody else wants to do Chris respnded: Who will do the shit work nobody else wants to do in a BI system ? Nobody, I guess. But it has to be done. (Not necessarily by workfare crews!) Worse, a lot of shit work has to be done that isn't profitable and thus is not done -- unless paid by the state, but the state can't afford that if it has to pay a BI to everyone. Thomas: I don't see a BI system as replacing the work for wages system. I see the BI system as a support system for a variety of ills. On a previous posting, I suggested $10,000 which is about what we Guarantee our Senior Citizens through government universality pensions At about $900 a month for Basic Income, there is a strong incentative to get a job. You're never going to buy a new house or car on $900 a month. But if you got a minimum wage job which brings you in about $1100 gross and maybe $800 net, all of sudden that shit work becomes worth doing with a BI supplement. Now the same thing could be accomplished by raising the minimum wage to a realistic $12 -14 an hour, but then the cost would fall totally on those businesses that use minimum wage employees and they would scream - unfair and I think rightly so. Plus, it would still leave those with no jobs dependent on Provincial Welfare which is less than $900 a month and creates tons of problems and expenses. But for those who can't find work or for some personal reason do not want to work at this point in their life, there is a support system that they can depend on to supply basic needs. That one would spend their whole life living on $900 a month is a ridicoulous assumption. As to the last sentence, I have mentioned in a previous posting that there is clawback when there is no need through the tax system. Respectfully, Thomas Lunde ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: I enjoyed Taming of the Shrew (was Re: [Futurework] RE: Survi vor
Or would translating into "modern language" remove much of the magic of Shakespeare, much like translating Catholic mass from latin to english or moving the Hebrew prayers into english. Seems to make it too accessible, too plain. Maybe too transparent. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:39 PMTo: Harry PollardCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: I enjoyed Taming of the Shrew (was Re: [Futurework] RE: SurvivorHarry,We had Shakespeare rammed down our throats so much at school I began to hate most of it -- except "Merchant of Venice" and "The Taming of the Shrew"*. It's only later in life that I appreciated just what a genius he was.It's scandalous to say this, but for the sake of thousands of schoolchildren I think someone should translate Shakespeare into modern language -- m'mmm that's probably impossible unless another genius could be found.*Is it politically correct these days to confess this?Keith At 10:55 15/12/2003 -0800, you wrote: Keith,I had the same problem with King Lear.When Kent preposterously says: I cannot conceive you.I knew I wouldnt like it and never read, or watched, or listened to, Lear again. Anyone who uses conceive like that is obviously illiterate or being clever. Perhaps hes indulging himself in a latest fad.It certainly filled me with the wish never to see it again.Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 11:32 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: SurvivorHarry,Keith,What is it you don't like about Survivor?For that matter, Ed, what is it you don't like?HarryI've little idea now what it is I don't like about Survivor because I can't remember it. All I can remember about it is that, during the few minutes I watched it, it filled me with the wish never to see it again.KeithKeith Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org ---Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003Keith Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org
RE: [Futurework] Political correctness is compaible with economic predation :: Microsoft and the demise of language
Brad, Thank God political correctness came to the rescue of American capitalism when corporations began their substantive race to the bottom for American workers! Wit political corerctness, corporations can both scr-w the workers and at the same time prove how much they respect their dignity, etc. arthur well said. -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 7:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] Political correctness is compaible with economic predation :: Microsoft and the demise of language Microsoft has released a press release apologizing for having included a font in their Office product that includes a swastika symbol. They said the font came from a Japanese source. They are providing a program to remove the offending symbol. So how are we to comunicate about evils without labels for them? Microsoft has never in my experience done *anything* as enthusiastically and expediently as removing this symbol. The multinational corporation doth cooperate too hastily? I have not been able to find the symbol. DSoes anyone have the Book Symbol 7 font in their MS Office? If yes I would appreciate a picture of the offending symbol (or the whole font. I would no teven be surprsied if the smybol was the Buddhist not the Nazi symbol (the two are reversed, I believe). Nothing woiuld please me more than for a buddhist to accuse Microsoft of anti-Buddhist discrimination if the symbol they removed was not the Nazi one. Computer programmers and managers and entrepreueurs have sufficiently little culture in genreal that it is entirely plausible they mistook one symbol for the other. Meanwhile,Edward Tufte has pulished a little pamphlet analyzing the negative effects of MS PowerPoint on persons' thinking. Thank God political correctness came to the rescue of American capitalism when corporations began their substantive race to the bottom for American workers! Wit political corerctness, corporations can both scr-w the workers and at the same time prove how much they respect their dignity, etc. \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano)
Yes, I have noticed that as well. Maybe we are going into some sort blurring of identities. We are all "guys." Quien sabe? arthur -Original Message-From: Lawrence DeBivort [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:28 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano) Very strange thing going on, at least in the media in the US: women are being referred to as 'guys.' Openly and ubiquitously, and with no resistance from women. I think it would be nice if women saved the world, though I haven't noticed any greater ability among women to do so than men. It would be very nice if anyone did, for that matter. Lawry -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Mon, December 15, 2003 8:32 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano) Has anybody else noticed that female gender persons from about age 8 to 100 are called women. And that male gender persons of whatever age are called "guys." Is this the new age way of demeaning males? Similar to what happened in the past when just about everyone called black males of whatever age "boy." Something is going on. Reframing for sure. arthur -Original Message-From: Karen Watters Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 6:07 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano) Here is another piece of Women On The Rise journalism, with an imposing date. Relax, just ovaries are mentioned this time. - KWC Women Will Have to Save the World Marlene Nadle, Pacific News Service, September 11, 2003 President Bush may not face much opposition in Congress to his plan for perpetual preemptive war, but he better watch out for the women. Angry over the swagger of violence coming out of the White House, disgusted by the bring-'em-on itch for a fight as the solution to political problems, women around the globe are organizing in new ways. These gender activists are on the Internet, in the streets, packed into rooms forming more groups and pushing resolutions through the United Nations. Some are setting up an Occupation Watch Center in Baghdad, and others are building a transnational movement. They even have their first martyr in Rachel Corrie, the young American who was killed trying to stop an Israeli bulldozer from destroying Palestinian homes. The surge of women's activism is happening now partly as a response to 9/11. That event accelerated the growth of new groups like England's Global Women's Strike and Central Asia's Worldwide Sisterhood Against Terrorism and War. Explaining her own reaction to that trauma and the macho strut of both bin Laden and Bush, Code Pink founder Medea Benjamin says, "I had feelings and fears I never had in all my years of organizing. The male aggressive voice was so very dominant. We needed to strengthen the voices opposed to that. Mobilizing women was one way to do it." Her reaction to violent solutions is shared by Indian writer Arundhati Roy who calls bin Laden Bush's "dark doppelganger." The new organizing is more than an attack on personalities. As Jasmina Tesanovic, a member of Women in Black in Serbia, says, "My enemy is no longer a bad hero, or a politician, or a person in power, but the culture that makes such primitive people possible and empowers them." The organizing is part of a culture war to end the love of military glory, power, dominance and hierarchy often taught as part of male traditions. New Profile, a women's group in Israel, demands a complete reevaluation of its country's "military consciousness." To counter a male habit of imposing power and dominance in postwar periods women diplomats and non-government organizations pressured the United Nations to pass Resolution 1325, calling for women's full participation in nation building. Now, Iraqi women are organizing to stop Bush from running their country as a Boy's Club. They are being supported and advised by the U.N. Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the Network of Kosovo Women, Women to Women International, PeaceWomen, and a deluge of visiting groups. This international alliance is aiding Iraqi women's own efforts to protest violent rapes, honor killings and the rise of fanatics. "We fear the threat
RE: [Futurework] A Basic Income as a for of Economic Governance
Well said. And I suggest that your Model Two, below, is more congruent with what we understand to be the future. A highly automated, technology intensive economy. arthur -Original Message- From: Thomas Lunde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 1:39 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] A Basic Income as a for of Economic Governance Hi Chris: Thank you for continuing this discussion with your usual intelligence and extensive background. As with many things you and I can spent time on defensive positions, attacks and riposte at another's gaffes or lack of knowledge. It's fun but pointless. It seems we have to ask some really basic questions in terms of outcomes so that the issue of a Basic Income has some context or as ol Marshal would say, some figure ground relationships. So, lets see if we can build some background on which we can place the Economic device called a Basic Income on. Taking the present, nation state, capitalistic economic system, globalization, robotation as ideas and forces that we live in and under, the question becomes What about human beings? Human beings, young, just born, adolescents, young parents, mature workers, senior citizens - that is what it is all about - what about them? What are they, families, individuals, citizens, consumers, workers, men and women - what are they? Well, there are many things aren't they, but what might be their commonalities no matter age, sex or state. 1.They all need to eat 3000 or some variant, calories a day. 2.They all need protection from the elements. 3.They all personal clothing And there we can stop - or we can go on: 4.They need governance. 5.They need a system of laws and rules to live under. 6.They need to feel physically secure 7.They need a reliable and consistent economic system And we can go on from their: 8.And they need a Constitution and Bill of Rights 9.And they need education. 10And they need meaningful work. 11 And they need a medical system for health. And as we go on defining the background finer and finer, we come to choices and it these choices in response to the above needs, and many more unnamed, that lead us to discussions of how to distribute goods and services. One model, that I might suggest you and Keith feel comfortable with is the basic existing model of capitalism as it is practiced in America and Europe. Basically, income is distributed through work and therefore we need more and more work for economies to grow - without any stated goal of when growth shall be achieved. And with this model, more and more people work harder and longer to satisfy the goal of growth. But this model has been coming up against the challenge that more and more work is being done by machines and less and less human work is needed. Of course they are many more challenges to this system but our area of focus is primarily the redistribution of income so that human needs can be fulfilled. Unfortunatly, within this system is a cruelty that states that if you can't make it, then die. The worker is valuable, the non-worker is not - he becomes an expense. Another Model is one in which the needs of humans is considered a right and that model suggests different ways of providing for all human beings needs. Of course this model will have different answers to the problem. If societies and the world, made it a priority that every human being should have their needs satisfied as a basic acknowledgement of their being, then means would be found to do this. It would demand different solutions to current mindset. Now, without writing a book and meaning this to only be an introduction to a way of productively looking at our differences - which are differences of perspective rather than truth. One solution for Model One is: I would do something else immediately on taking office. I would ask Congress for a Full Employment Act, guaranteeing jobs to anyone who is willing to work. We would give the private sector all the opportunity to provide work, but where it fails to do so, the government would become the employer of last resort. We would use as a model the great social programs of the New Deal, when millions of people were given jobs after the private sector had failed to do so. As quoted by Brian Adams in a recent E Mail In Model Two, the model I am defending would be a Basic Income. My argument for this is that there is no need for us, as human beings, to continue to live at the level of lack of needs that is currently present for three quarters of the world or more and that it is time for our Nation States to redefine the Rights of Man to include the right to a Basic Income. And it is up to countries with wealth to show the way. It is not really a question of money. It is a question of perspective. Once we can clarify a perspective, then we can find the means to implement that vision. If I have defined the problem correctly, I will
RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites
This must have an echo in many households. My mother-in-law has said much the same thing. arthur -Original Message- From: Thomas Lunde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 2:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites He bought a castle with 500 rooms and his wife was caught riding a Harley-Davidson through the extended corridors. Sally would give her a BI to pay the gasoline, I guess. Chris Thomas: Yep, I would advocate that she gets the Basic Income to do her thing. A story. My grandparents where Norwegian and the household was fairly European. Grampa handled the money. Grandma made the household work. When they got old, each of them got an Old Age Pension and grampa said to grandma, give me the money, I am the man of the family. Grandma said, All my life, I have never had any money of my own and now the cheque from the Government of Canada is addressed to me with the cheque made out in my name. This is my money. And she did things with that money that she had been denied from doing for 45 years of marriage. Maybe the billionare above bought the Harley but would not buy the gas. SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano)
Has anybody else noticed that female gender persons from about age 8 to 100 are called women. And that male gender persons of whatever age are called "guys." Is this the new age way of demeaning males? Similar to what happened in the past when just about everyone called black males of whatever age "boy." Something is going on. Reframing for sure. arthur -Original Message-From: Karen Watters Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 6:07 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano) Here is another piece of Women On The Rise journalism, with an imposing date. Relax, just ovaries are mentioned this time. - KWC Women Will Have to Save the World Marlene Nadle, Pacific News Service, September 11, 2003 President Bush may not face much opposition in Congress to his plan for perpetual preemptive war, but he better watch out for the women. Angry over the swagger of violence coming out of the White House, disgusted by the bring-'em-on itch for a fight as the solution to political problems, women around the globe are organizing in new ways. These gender activists are on the Internet, in the streets, packed into rooms forming more groups and pushing resolutions through the United Nations. Some are setting up an Occupation Watch Center in Baghdad, and others are building a transnational movement. They even have their first martyr in Rachel Corrie, the young American who was killed trying to stop an Israeli bulldozer from destroying Palestinian homes. The surge of women's activism is happening now partly as a response to 9/11. That event accelerated the growth of new groups like England's Global Women's Strike and Central Asia's Worldwide Sisterhood Against Terrorism and War. Explaining her own reaction to that trauma and the macho strut of both bin Laden and Bush, Code Pink founder Medea Benjamin says, "I had feelings and fears I never had in all my years of organizing. The male aggressive voice was so very dominant. We needed to strengthen the voices opposed to that. Mobilizing women was one way to do it." Her reaction to violent solutions is shared by Indian writer Arundhati Roy who calls bin Laden Bush's "dark doppelganger." The new organizing is more than an attack on personalities. As Jasmina Tesanovic, a member of Women in Black in Serbia, says, "My enemy is no longer a bad hero, or a politician, or a person in power, but the culture that makes such primitive people possible and empowers them." The organizing is part of a culture war to end the love of military glory, power, dominance and hierarchy often taught as part of male traditions. New Profile, a women's group in Israel, demands a complete reevaluation of its country's "military consciousness." To counter a male habit of imposing power and dominance in postwar periods women diplomats and non-government organizations pressured the United Nations to pass Resolution 1325, calling for women's full participation in nation building. Now, Iraqi women are organizing to stop Bush from running their country as a Boy's Club. They are being supported and advised by the U.N. Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the Network of Kosovo Women, Women to Women International, PeaceWomen, and a deluge of visiting groups. This international alliance is aiding Iraqi women's own efforts to protest violent rapes, honor killings and the rise of fanatics. "We fear the threat of fundamentalist religious movements which an occupying army inspires," the Iraqi Women's League said in a recent statement. The activists count on women in postwar and prewar situations to argue for political solutions to macho face-offs. They encourage them to use their social training in settling issues with words, cooperation, and even empathy for enemies. There are no illusions about ovaries making all women good and peaceful. Instead, Ann Snitow of the Network of East-West Women urges women to acknowledge their past complicity with men's wars. Few expect Bush National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice to give up her allegiance to traditional male stomp-and-rule values. But men who share their alternate vision are welcome in the movement. The women may be waging a culture war, but that doesn't mean they can't do down-and-dirty politics with Bush. In an incident that's an early warning about the 2004 elections, a group of women greeted a fundraising George W. Bush in Los Angeles recently with a 40-foot pink rejection slip that read: "You're Fired!" More significant is the change in young women who haven't been voting. In a recent article in a weekly magazine on youth voting, 23-year-old Chantel Azadeh said, "The last two years have done a number on
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
IBM east (believe and maybe think) vs. IBM west (think and we hope you believe). -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 6:49 PM To: Ed Weick Cc: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Ed Weick wrote: Most would say that the USSR was not Communist, aiming toward it perhaps but a brand of socialism. arthur My own take on it is that it was state capitalist. The state owned all of the capital, made all of the important decisions etc. It kept most people happy, up to a point, just like large corporations keep their employees happy. I think it would have continued in that direction had it survived. [snip] This doesn't sound like one of the worse alternatives to me. Happy paternalistic corporation employees in the Free World and happy state workers on the other side of the Iron Curtain. Too good to be true on *either* side \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites
Keith, I think similar criticisms were levelled against the minimum wage, child labour laws, old age security, medicare, etc. Same old, same old. Can't afford it today. Wait. Wait. Someday. Rubbish. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:58 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sitesChristoph,Well said!KeithAt 17:30 14/12/2003 +0100, you wrote: Thomas Lunde wrote: Well, Chris, you got me - sloppy analogy. Let me try a different one. We have a benefit for children called the Child Tax Benefit. Depending on the age of the child and the number of children in the family - every parent is eligible and I would say there is a 99% participation rate. Now note that their is no income eligibility. The millionaire's child is as eligible as the pauper's child. However, this has to be declared as income on the yearly income tax filing and for low income families they get to keep all the benefit of about $2000 per child while the affluent having to add this to their income find that the benefit is taxed back. The end result is the poor get the benefit and the rich - while they are rich and it is not always a permanent state, end up not getting the benefit.The BI Canada website (recommended by Sally) says: "Income tax would be paid from the first pound, dollar, franc or mark of extra income, but the basic income itself would not be taxable."This sounds like everyone, rich or poor, can fully keep the BI (untaxed). I see a way for a Basic Income to work in which everyone gets a monthly cheque or weekly and for the poor, they get to keep the Basic Income, while the more affluent find that it is revenue neutral in the sense they get the benefit on a monthly/weekly basis to use but at the end of the year, they would repay the benefit while paying there taxesBut even if you change the rules as described above, this system ends uppenalizing work (taxing work but not the BI). How can you solve theproduction problem --and keep it solved-- with a society of non-workers ?Worse: who, if not workers, is supposed to pay the taxes to fund the BI ? I think a Basic Income does represent going to the root of the problem which is an adequate redistribution of wealth so that all citizens benefit from the wealth of the country - not just the successful capitalists or overpaid ^ executives.Now I understand why you said it's a Canadian solution... "The wealth ofthe country" probably refers to timber, oilgas, and in the sell-out ofnatural resources, you want to distribute it to all Canadians instead ofjust a few managers of the sell-out.However, plundering forests and fossil fuels is not a sustainable solution,and it offers no model for countries who lack natural resources to plunder. Going back to school or building a house with a GBI ?? How many thousand dollars per month are you thinking of ? If you follow the Basic Income web addresses that Sally posted a few days ago and went to the United States web site, you will see them talking $25,000 a year. A few years ago, I worked out a Basic Income based on the governments budget with a figure of $10,000 per person per year.For Canada, that would be over $300 billion (about 5 Bill Gateses worth --how many Bill Gateses does Canada have, btw?), that is ~80 % of presenttax revenues. (So I guess the schools, hospitals, roads, sewage system,army etc. will have to be maintained by unpaid volunteers then.) Butsince the BI would be an incentive not to work, the tax revenues wouldfall significantly. Bye bye Canadian forests and gas reserves... I know the average knee jerk reaction to the family of eight in that many women would opt for 8 children and $80,000 a year. So what? It is damn hard work to raise eight children and I have read statistics that each child costs the parent $250,000 to raise a child in a middle class environment and through University.Including through University, i.e. you're talking about the first 25 yearsof life, times the BI of $10,000/year gives exactly $250,000 ! But who saidthat they'll send all children to University, especially if the kids canlive on the BI without working anyway ? So you'll end up with an incentiveto breed like rabbits and produce school drop-outs with no incentive ordesire to work or go to University. In a society of uneducated mostlynon-working people, plundering the country's natural resources is indeedthe only option that remains... Canada the Saudi-Arabia of the North
RE: [Futurework] How was Saddam captured alive?
Enter Jack Ruby. -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:11 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Futurework] How was Saddam captured alive?According to BBC Radio 4 this morning, some are wondering how it was that Saddam was captured alive. M'mm I've wondered about that, too. If the Americans allow him an even half-way fair trial (as, say, with Milosevich in The Hague War Crimes Tribunal) and Saddam decides to defend himself (he's articulate enough for that) it will cause some considerable embarrassment to America in view of former relationship. They would love to have killed him -- and were expecting to, I imagine. All I can think of is that the first soldiers who found him didn't realise he was Saddam and thought he was the house servant or similar.On reflection, just before I posted this, I think that Saddam will die before reaching trial.Keith HudsonKeith Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org
RE: [Futurework] Status and Honours
Keith, There is magic in secrecy but the drive to uncloak, to make transparent will bring great changes. Transparency will affect all institutions: business and government alike. A recent issue of The Economist asserted that the new book The Naked Corporation: How the Age of Transparency Will Revolutionize Business provides the first big idea since management books slumped a couple of years ago. Comparing Tapscott to management gurus Hamel, Peters and Christensen, the article notes that Tapscott argues that greater transparency is an unstoppable force: It is the product of growing demand from everybody with an interest in any corporation -- what he calls its 'stakeholder web' -- and of rapid technological change, above all the spread of the Internet, that makes it far easier for firms to supply information, and harder for them to keep secrets. (Economist 16 Oct 2003) http://www.economist.com/ arthur -Original Message- From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 3:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] Status and Honours 211. Status and Honours The importance of status can hardly be exaggerated. In hunter-gatherer times, the patrilocal instinct of girls leaving their group or tribe at puberty and seeking sexual partners in a neighbouring group would mean that they would preferentially select the alpha male, or at least as high-ranking a male as possible that she found there. An extremely good example of the modern survival of this practice is to be found in Michael Palin's book, Sahara (and the BBC TV documentary) where the young women from several different groups of the Wodaabe tribe select their lifetime partners from the young men who dress up, wear lashings of kohl and stibnite make-up on their eyes and lips, and prance about (in what, to us, is an amusing way). Here, the girls are making their selection not on the basis of status per se but on the looks, the imagination of the men's dressage and bearing -- to them, as highly correlated with status and likely future life-success of the males as modern girls are able to assess by going to a night club and dancing and talking with possible future boy friends. Every group, every institution, and every country develops clear visible signs for status -- statues, memorials, rankings (civil service, army, university), decorations, letters after their names, honorary prefixes, medals, ribbons, lapel badges, hats and uniforms and so on. In England, such rankings, formally initiated by William the Conqueror in 1066 after the invasion, when he chose those who should be his barons (in exchange for military services), have evolved ever since. Lloyd George, when prime minister early last century, used to (privately) sell peerages. Prime ministers ever since have sold peerages to those who contribute to party funds (and perhaps to pirvate pockets). People, and particularly the males (for instinctive reasons) are desperately eager for signs of status. For most people, status is indicated in the goods they buy and, of course, the notion of status goods is a central theme in my evolutionary economics hypothesis. But for a minority in England, we have the honours system -- whereby titles and decorations are given by the Queen on her official birthday and at the New Year. As with so many state functions, the business of choosing who should receive honours has been taken over by the civil service and, in particular, by a small group of very senior civil servants, usually the heads of departments, or Permanent Secretaries. The minutes of the meetings in which they discuss those who should receive honours on these occasion are normally considered state secrets. Even political leaders -- even the prime minister -- are not allowed to attend these deliberations or read these minutes, though the civil servants concerned will take notice if a prime minister has particular preferences. The records are normally kept secret well beyond the usual 30-years limits for state documents. However, someone has ratted on this secrecy a few days ago. A recent set of minutes has been leaked to the press. There we have read the reason why this person or that was chosen for this or that rank of decoration. Many of these reasons are revealed to be quite trivial -- indeed, insincere. This has caused a tremendous furore and will dynamite the secret procedures that have applied hitherto. There are those who affect to believe that status is not very important, particularly Americans who tried to overthrow all this royalty-derived business when they set up their republic. Even now, an American who receives an honorary knighthood from the British Queen is not allowed to put Sir in front of his name -- but this doesn't reduce his enthusiasm to go to Buckingham Palace and be tapped on the shoulder with the Queen's sword while he kneels before her (on a comfortable cushion it
RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano)
So its OK to refer to female gender persons as "gals." -Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:00 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano) I don't think so. I believe it is fashion and everyone wanting to be younger than they are. No one wants to be the baby boomer generation that breaks the bank. REH - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 8:31 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano) Has anybody else noticed that female gender persons from about age 8 to 100 are called women. And that male gender persons of whatever age are called "guys." Is this the new age way of demeaning males? Similar to what happened in the past when just about everyone called black males of whatever age "boy." Something is going on. Reframing for sure. arthur -Original Message-From: Karen Watters Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 6:07 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Reframing (was V is for Volcano) Here is another piece of Women On The Rise journalism, with an imposing date. Relax, just ovaries are mentioned this time. - KWC Women Will Have to Save the World Marlene Nadle, Pacific News Service, September 11, 2003 President Bush may not face much opposition in Congress to his plan for perpetual preemptive war, but he better watch out for the women. Angry over the swagger of violence coming out of the White House, disgusted by the bring-'em-on itch for a fight as the solution to political problems, women around the globe are organizing in new ways. These gender activists are on the Internet, in the streets, packed into rooms forming more groups and pushing resolutions through the United Nations. Some are setting up an Occupation Watch Center in Baghdad, and others are building a transnational movement. They even have their first martyr in Rachel Corrie, the young American who was killed trying to stop an Israeli bulldozer from destroying Palestinian homes. The surge of women's activism is happening now partly as a response to 9/11. That event accelerated the growth of new groups like England's Global Women's Strike and Central Asia's Worldwide Sisterhood Against Terrorism and War. Explaining her own reaction to that trauma and the macho strut of both bin Laden and Bush, Code Pink founder Medea Benjamin says, "I had feelings and fears I never had in all my years of organizing. The male aggressive voice was so very dominant. We needed to strengthen the voices opposed to that. Mobilizing women was one way to do it." Her reaction to violent solutions is shared by Indian writer Arundhati Roy who calls bin Laden Bush's "dark doppelganger." The new organizing is more than an attack on personalities. As Jasmina Tesanovic, a member of Women in Black in Serbia, says, "My enemy is no longer a bad hero, or a politician, or a person in power, but the culture that makes such primitive people possible and empowers them." The organizing is part of a culture war to end the love of military glory, power, dominance and hierarchy often taught as part of male traditions. New Profile, a women's group in Israel, demands a complete reevaluation of its country's "military consciousness." To counter a male habit of imposing power and dominance in postwar periods women diplomats and non-government organizations pressured the United Nations to pass Resolution 1325, calling for women's full participation in nation building. Now, Iraqi women are organizing to stop Bush from running their country as a Boy's Club. They are being supported and advised by the U.N. Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), the Network of Kosovo Women, Women to Women International, PeaceWomen, and a deluge of visiting groups. This international alliance is aiding Iraqi women's own efforts to protest violent rapes, honor killings and the rise of fanatics. "We fear the threat of fundamentalist religious movements which an occupying army inspires," the Iraqi Women's League said in a recent statement. The activists count o
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
I agree that credentials do cut through the HUGE NUMBERS. But, gosh, sometimes the credential acts to cloak the activities of the person and so the client is so mystified that he/she can't or won't ask questions---even when things go wrong. No easy solution to this issue. But making more open the workings of the medical, legal, chiropractic, architecural, etc. licensing and governance bodies is a good first step. arthur -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 8:44 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harry, Go back an re-read Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom. He makes a strong case for getting rid of a lot of the accreditation in society saying that it just builds enclaves of monopoly power. ie., privilege. [snip] It seems to me that the justification for accreditation lies in the HUGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE, which prevents persons from verifying the competencies of the persons they need services from by first-person experience of performative evidence. Our doctors, et al., apart from their cdredentials, are mostly pig in a pokes to us. I don't see how this can be changed in the anonymo-city. However, perhaps the credentialling process can be shifted from multiple choice tests to the making and predsentation of masterpieces. This happens to some extent (e.g., for watchmaker trainees). But I think the tendency is away from personal presentation of evidence of mastery toward enhancing Educational Testing Service's services. Anoher problem is that even where supposedly evidence of mastery is the criterion, as in the PhD dissertation process, much of the time the evidence prouced is something that means nothing to the learner but which is of some use as cheap labor to those who already have their credential. I think we need to acknowledge that many graduate students do not yet have any really meaningful interests in their young lives, and we need to find a way to let them do the jobs they are training for without jumping thru hoops. For the mindful god abhors untimely growth. (--Holderlin) Dissertations should be optional productions, which come when the spirit moves a person to have something to say in an honorific sense. Besides making the creenialling process more genuinely reasonable as part of meaningful personal and social life, I think we also ned to tr to minimize the situations which require credentialling. Automobile driving licenses are an obvious example here: The whole instituional establishment of driver licensing only exists because persons cannot walk to the places they need and want to go to in their daily lives. We need to design out of life such regimentation-creating social structures. -- unless, of course, we genuinely enjoy being tested and geting credentialled and failing to get credentialled Daddy, when can I take the SATs? I wanna! I really wanna! When, daddy, PLEASE! Sorry son, but you have to go to kindergarten first. You have to learn to be patient. You'll get your chance to do the fun things grownups do when you are old enough. You just have to have some patience \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] The inevitability of legalised euthanasia
Agree. I find it odd that our society seems OK with abortion, but will not allow a person at "death's door" to open it and walk through. I still feel that coming from the women's movement, the notion of choice will finally pervade the area of dying with dignity, dying with choice. People can depart more or less on their own terms and society will save mightily on those last expensive and painful months while dying is taking place. I have heard that we incur about 50 to 60 percent of our lifetime's medical expenses in the last 6 months of life. Nobody wins here exept the docs and some theologians. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 1:43 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Futurework] The inevitability of legalised euthanasia209. The inevitability of legalised euthanasiaThe certainty that our nursing homes are going to be chock-a-block with old and infirm people in the coming years, looked after by badly-paid, under-trained nursing assistants who will, in some instances, inflict even more cruelty than occurs now, means that euthanasia will come in with a swing before too long. Many religious people and some politicians, including my own MP, have been resisting it. But the problem is going to be so huge that when a minority of middle-class people who have signed living wills, as I have, say that they'd actually welcome dying in a dignified way before they inflict too much work on others or before they become too gaga will pass through the legislatures of developed countries with ease because it will at least relieve politicians of part of a serious and growing problem.Mary Warnock, who has been a brilliant observer of the human scene in this country for some decades and is highly respected on all sides, was once one of those who resisted the legalisation of euthanasia. I must confess that I was irritated that she, of all people, should have done so -- even more than I am presently irritated by my own MP who has just written me an extraordinarily long letter explaining why he is against it. However, Mary Warnock's resistance might have been for the best after all, because she has now changed her mind and the testimony of such a convert after her own real-life experience will be a powerful influence when legislation is next planned. And this, it is to be hoped, is not going to be too far ahead. I'd certainly like it to be in place before I become a burden.Her own article below is a well-argued piece of writing. I only disagree with her on the matter of mercy killing. I think this is desirable in principle -- as I carried out for my previous dog and will do so for my present one when in extremis (unless she survives me, which is quite possible). Mercy killing is also inevitable in my opinion.Keith Hudson I MADE A BAD LAW -- WE SHOULD HELP THE ILL TO DIELady Warnock, who once sat on a House of Lords committee that rejected legalising euthanasia, has since watched her husband die and now says the law should be changedMary WarnockHouse of Lords select committee is about to be set up to consider the issue of assisted suicide. Ten years ago I sat on a committee that was concerned with the more general concept of euthanasia. At that time we concluded that the law should not be changed and that assisted death should remain a criminal offence unless a decision should be made in court making it permissible for the patient to die in very particular circumstances, such as when someone is in a persistent vegetative state and needs a life-support machine to be turned off.A great deal was made at that time of the distinction between killing and allowing to die, neither doctors nor nurses being prepared to contemplate killing when the whole ethos of their professions demanded that they attempt to keep people alive.This seemed to me a wholly bogus distinction. The committee also considered the case of terminally ill patients. It was alleged that a doctor could never be sure that a patient was in fact terminally ill nor that an extra dose of morphine, for example, would hasten death. This seemed an odd argument for doctors to use.I was a member of that committee and I went along with its conclusions, conscious nevertheless that the arguments leading to the conclusions were suspect and therefore that the conclusions were not to be regarded as written in stone.I believed that at some time or other the medical and nursing professions would have to face the fact that being alive was, in certain circumstances, contrary both to a person's wishes and his interests, and that palliative care, even if available, would not render his suffering endurable.The establishment of the new euthanasia committee is the outcome of a private member's bill, introduced into the House of
RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites
Sorry I missed this one over the weekend. I think we are on the same page. The challenge is to redefine profitablity Who does it? How is it done? Where do the funds come from to pay for non-profitable social work? How are they distributed? arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 5:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Arthur Cordell wrote: Don't you think that at some point, at some time, there will be fewer workers needed in a highly productive economy? What then? How do we get income to those who are no longer employed? Shouldn't we begin to think about the transition to a new, new economy. One where the production problem is solved. It is here where basic income can play an important role. Even in a highly productive economy, there is no shortage of work. There's a shortage of profitable work and an abundancy of non-profitable (but societally/environmentally necessary/beneficial) work. What's necessary to get the latter kinds of work done, is to re-define profitability: From producing consumerist junk towards improving society and environment (such work includes both the blue-collar and white-collar level, e.g. environmental clean-up activities and RD for cleaner technologies -- note that both kinds of jobs can't be automated). With a BI, however, you won't get that work done. On the contrary, you're wasting funds (mostly for consumerism) that would be needed to pay for the necessary but non-profitable work. The BI prospect is pretty hopeless, both from an individual and societal perspective. An example: Say, we have $1.2 billion and a county of 1 million people, with a destitute public transportation system. (a) You give a general BI of $100/month to everyone. Most people will spend that on gasoline for unnecessary car travel, or on consumerism junk. After 1 year, all the money is gone. (b) I spend $1 billion to upgrade the public transportation system (new railway wagons, high frequencies, hiring good personnel) and the other $200 million for welfare for the few who really need it. After 1 year (and much longer!), all people have a good transportation service (possibly for free), there's less pollution from car traffic, and many people have a useful job in PT. I think solution (b) is much better. In solution (a), you can guess what's the probability that some people will take the initiative and build up a good public transportation system with the $100 BI they got. In the best case, some will write a poem for Thomas Lunde. Chris SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites
I agree. I was too sharp in my response. I apologize. I think Ed's posting covers why it is affordable. But we may not be socially ready for BI. We are used to taking from the pot but not giving back. My fear is that BI will only accentuate taking and not giving. It may not be a good idea, in my view, since we have yet to educate/socialize people understand that they are part of society and that while society is responsible to them with BI, they are also connected to and involved with society such that they are expected to give back to society. Blame on too many years of smash and grab consumerism/capitalism or bowling alone or what have you. arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 12:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Arthur Cordell wrote: I think similar criticisms were levelled against the minimum wage, child labour laws, old age security, medicare, etc. Same old, same old. Can't afford it today. Wait. Wait. Someday. Rubbish. Being in favor of the minimum wage(*), child labour laws, old age security, medicare, etc., but opposed to BI, I think there's a fundamental difference between the former and the latter: BI is of the perpetuum mobile kind. (not in the sense that BI works forever but that it won't work at all) It would be a pity if name-calling (rubbish) and misrepresentation of my arguments (can't afford it today -- no, can't afford it tomorrow either!) would be the only arguments of Arthur in reply to my posting and BI-example ($1.2 billion) of 13-Dec-03. Let's hear some good arguments (if possible with numbers) please... [if there are any] (*) Btw, I was informed that a Canadian province has reduced the minimum wage from $8 to $6 (Can.). For comparison, it's about $15 in Switzerland. I guess that's why a Swiss emigré mechanic recently had to return from Canada to work for 6 weeks here, and with the money he earned he can live for 5 months in Canada with his whole family. So Arthur, perhaps Industry Canada should introduce a _livable_ minimum wage for _workers_ first, before you fancy about an unaffordable BI for everyone being affordable. Chris SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Status and Honours
Let's call this the pornography of acquisition. arthur -Original Message-From: Karen Watters Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 11:52 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Status and Honours Here is the beginning of a weekend magazine article on consumerism though I wasn't sure if it was more appropriate for the Virginia Postrel post today. It's worth reading through this to get to the capuchin monkeys. Also note references to the cult of workaholism, competitive consumerism and perceptions of fairness. Lots of good sociological observation here, enough to make some of us very ill and hope not everyone in the Third World thinks we are all this way. Just this weekend I heard taped political commentary by Paul Krugman (here in Portland for a book tour) deploring that despite the wealth of America our poor are not better off than other [KWC] comparable nation's poor, if only because of the cost of and lack of health care - and housing. References to other writings included. Please go to the link and check out the photo of the first consumer profiled. At 14 pages and 77KB the word formatted document won't go through the FW filter. - KWC Quote: "Consumerism was the triumphant winner of the ideological wars of the 20th century, beating out both religion and politics as the path millions of Americans follow to find purpose, meaning, order and transcendent exaltation in their lives. Liberty in this market democracy has, for many, come to mean freedom to buy as much as you can of whatever you wish, endlessly reinventing and telegraphing your sense of self with each new purchase"This society of goods is not merely the inevitable consequence of mass production or the manipulation of merchandisers. It is a choice, never consciously made, to define self and community through the ownership of goods." Quote: "I have a very dark view of human nature," Small says. "I think the reason the monkey study has gotten so much publicity is that it touches something in all of us . . . There is a contingent that says the reason humans have such big brains is to keep track of social information, and we keep track of it all day long, including who got what." In recent years, who has gotten what in the United States might leave the capuchins screeching. In the decades following World War II, Americans in almost every income bracket saw their earnings increase at about the same rate. Since the early 1970s, however, the very wealthiest Americans have enjoyed virtually all the income growth, creating what Cornell economist Robert H. Frank calls a winner-take-all society. The lucky few have largely spent what they've earned, he says. In the process they've shaped everyone else's perceptions of what constitutes the good life." Acquiring Minds Inside America's All-Consuming Passion By April Witt, WP Staff Writer, Sunday, December 14, 2003; Page W14 @ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53732-2003Dec10.html A blonde with a perfect blow-dry flips through the pages of Us magazine on the morning shuttle to New York. She's not interested in reading about celebrities; she just wants to check out what they're wearing. "I have this dress," she says, pointing to a photograph of actress Jada Pinkett Smith wearing a $2,300 bronze-toned satin Gucci cocktail dress with a wide belt shaped like a corset. The fall shopping season is almost over, and Jamie Gavigan, a colorist at a Georgetown hair salon, is heading to New York City on one last fashion mission. She wants to find a killer cocktail dress and satisfy her special footwear urges at the Manolo Blahnik shoe salon. Jamie shops in Washington, too, at Neiman Marcus and Saks Fifth Avenue and some pricey boutiques. But two or three times a year, the 36-year-old single mother flies to New York to more fully indulge her fashion passions. It's her reward for standing on her feet nine hours a day, mixing chemicals and working straight through lunch to earn the six-figure income that makes these shopping expeditions possible. When the shuttle lands at La Guardia, Jamie hops into a cab and heads to her favorite department store, Barneys, at 61st and Madison, one of the culture's new cathedrals, where the affluent bring their soaring aspirations for better living through luxury shopping. "It's all good here," she says. "It's disturbing, isn't it? I like everything they have." On her feet, she's wearing $750 Manolo Blahnik black suede boots with four-inch-high stiletto heels. On her arm, she's carrying a blue Birkin tote bag by Hermes de Paris. If you could buy one, which now you can't, prices for the Birkin would start at $5,000 for plain leather and climb to more than $70,000
RE: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites
BI is a work in progress So it might follow one way or another. I think some variant, recognizable as BI will come to pass. What is interesting is the way it seems to affect FWers emotionally. The fact that it might be something for nothing might be the barrier to acceptance and implementation, not its cost. At a recent workshop on BI there was an interesting alliance between the far left wing and the right wingers, both of whom came out against a BI--for different reasons of course. arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 4:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW Basic Income sites Sally Lerner wrote: Bravo Ed and Thomas, for your explanations of how a Basic Income might function. ...which both deviated fundamentally from your website's version... While I support a version that would be universal and unconditional (get rid of stigma and address increasingly insecure nature of many jobs), it is just possible that we in Canada will move toward a BI in stages, group by group: relentless incrementalism as Ken Battle (Caledon Institute) calls it. And he is a Friend of Paul (Martin), our new Prime Minister. It rather seems to me that Paul Martin (and provincial counterparts like Gordon Campbell) is an adherent of relentless DEcrementalism, as far as social welfare is concerned... But then, if relentless INcrementalism refers to the number of foodbanks, Friend Paul can easily adopt it. At any rate, my point remains that tax money would be better spent on * minimizing (at the root causes, i.e. education etc.) instead of maximizing (as with BI) the number of people who depend on welfare money, and on * creating jobs that are not profitable by neoclassical economic criteria but are necessary/desirable for social and environmental improvements. You can't say do both this and BI, because the money spent on a general BI will lack for these things, no matter how you slice it, and you can't count on individual BI recipients to voluntarily do these jobs (see the railways example in my posting of 13-Dec). The result is that BI is detrimental to a sustainable (societal environmental) solution, and highly compatible to a sell-out of Canada. Might explain why Ken is a Friend of Paul. Chris SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
Most
would say that the USSR was not Communist, aiming toward it perhaps but a brand
of socialism.
-Original Message-From: Ed Weick
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 1:12
PMTo: Ray Evans Harrell; Harry Pollard; Cordell, Arthur: ECOM;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework]
http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
I don't know how best to characterize it.
Russia was a basket caseafter the revolution (even before). What
it tried to do under Stalin and even subsequently was to industrialize very
rapidly, which meant, via the state planning system,a very heavy
emphasis on producers goods, especiallythose needed for heavy
industry,and littleemphasis on consumers goods. Because of
both paranoia and legitimate fears, there were huge expenditures on the
military, meaning even less for the ordinary householder. By about the
1980s, the system was simply not able to meet all of the demands it had placed
on itself, and ordinary Russians had become tired of being asked to wait just
a little longer for the workers' paradise to arrive. It then began to
collapse of its own weight.
Via the planning system, the state decided both
production and distribution, and I find it very difficult to distinguish
between the two in the case of the USSR.
Ed
- Original Message -
From: "Ray Evans Harrell" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Harry Pollard" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 11:11
AM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
Yes but
wasn't it supposed to be distribution that did in the Communists? I'm
just a poor artist but I do remember that discussion from you
economists talking about our superior distribution. I'm
confused. Educate me please. REH
- Original Message - From: "Harry Pollard"
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:00 AM
Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/Arthur,
Wouldn't you know it? You almost repeated - word for
word - what Henry George said in 1878.
Great minds think alike! It's the reason why
Classical Political Economy is described as "The Science that
deals with the Nature, the Production, and the Distribution of
Wealth. That "Distribution" bit is the essence of
Political Economy. Would that modern economists would start
thinking about why the distribution is so unfair, instead of
devising ways to patch the system by taking from the rich and
giving to the poor. Harry
Henry George School
of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655
Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 --
Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net
-Original Message- From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10,
2003 5:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ We have "solved" the production problem
but can't seem to deal with the issue of distribution.
Arthur -Original
Message- From: Harry Pollard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December
10, 2003 5:15 PM To: 'Brad McCormick, Ed.D.'; 'Ed Weick'
Cc: 'futurework' Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/Brad,
We are discussing these problems in a society where the power to
produce has reached unbelievable proportions (After many have
been thrown out of work, the industries they left behind are
actually producing more. Productivity hasn't fallen even though
there are far fewer workers employed.) Why these
"problems"? Harry
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003
___ Futurework
mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
accreditation is a thorny issue. It is nice to see the diplomas on the wall (of doctor, lawyer, engineer, architect) but are we sure they know what they are doing? and what if they don't? what recourse? that is why I guess that people say, when moving to a new town ask around. find a doc in a teaching hospital (more accreditation and more supervision, helping to catch the oafs). Friedman would say that the market will work. As long as information is provided (which it currently isn't. the medical world, for example is shrouded in cya and mystery) When a patient dies, in Friedman's model the next prospective patient would move to a different doctor. Today with cover ups, when a patient dies there is no information on why this happened or indeed if it happened at all. Unless of course there is a law suit. arthur -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 8:44 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harry, Go back an re-read Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom. He makes a strong case for getting rid of a lot of the accreditation in society saying that it just builds enclaves of monopoly power. ie., privilege. [snip] It seems to me that the justification for accreditation lies in the HUGE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE, which prevents persons from verifying the competencies of the persons they need services from by first-person experience of performative evidence. Our doctors, et al., apart from their cdredentials, are mostly pig in a pokes to us. I don't see how this can be changed in the anonymo-city. However, perhaps the credentialling process can be shifted from multiple choice tests to the making and predsentation of masterpieces. This happens to some extent (e.g., for watchmaker trainees). But I think the tendency is away from personal presentation of evidence of mastery toward enhancing Educational Testing Service's services. Anoher problem is that even where supposedly evidence of mastery is the criterion, as in the PhD dissertation process, much of the time the evidence prouced is something that means nothing to the learner but which is of some use as cheap labor to those who already have their credential. I think we need to acknowledge that many graduate students do not yet have any really meaningful interests in their young lives, and we need to find a way to let them do the jobs they are training for without jumping thru hoops. For the mindful god abhors untimely growth. (--Holderlin) Dissertations should be optional productions, which come when the spirit moves a person to have something to say in an honorific sense. Besides making the creenialling process more genuinely reasonable as part of meaningful personal and social life, I think we also ned to tr to minimize the situations which require credentialling. Automobile driving licenses are an obvious example here: The whole instituional establishment of driver licensing only exists because persons cannot walk to the places they need and want to go to in their daily lives. We need to design out of life such regimentation-creating social structures. -- unless, of course, we genuinely enjoy being tested and geting credentialled and failing to get credentialled Daddy, when can I take the SATs? I wanna! I really wanna! When, daddy, PLEASE! Sorry son, but you have to go to kindergarten first. You have to learn to be patient. You'll get your chance to do the fun things grownups do when you are old enough. You just have to have some patience \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
I have often wondered the same thing and wondered too what would have been the history of the USSR if the western powers had been at least neutral toward the experiment. As with Cuba, if the west (read US) had gone along with this change then who knows.but then why would the US do such a thing and put market capitalism as risk. arthur -Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 3:50 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Cordell, Arthur: ECOMCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ I've often wondered what would have happened to the US in the first 80 years of its existance if it had the kind of cold war waged by the European powers against us at that time.America too had a genocide that effected more than Stalin's purge or Hitler's camps combined. The slaves were estimated at 60 million removed from Africa and the Native American population prior to contact was 33 million in North America. The US American Indian population in 1900 was under a million some say as low as 250,000 but that is not counting those of us who were in the "Hiding Bushes."We also had our own Apartheid until 1954. I can remember that. I can remember performing a Lakota song in Carnegie in 1978 when we were first given the right to practice our religion without going to jail. I did it after an evening of European and AmericanArt songs. The audience was frankly"stunned" as was noted by thenewpaper critic. I watched Jan Peerce today on PBS sang a yiddish spiritual for a Russian audience and their response was exactly the same. First stunned silence and then frenzied applause. I think history will eventually place both America and the Russian experiment in its proper context, whatever that is, but I believe the current descriptions are too close to us not to serve our individual interests in a very conflicted situation. I have met too many Russian immigres who were children of peasants and who were trained by the Soviet State in very technological jobs that would have been buried down on the farm in the Aristo-cratic system and seem to be on their way back to the farm in the current neo-Capitalist one. Their only chance was to escape to the US where they are not particularly happy. They don't like the jobs, the culture and certainly not the education system. They have started an excellent music school in Brooklyn for their own children and one of my daughter's playmates was performing the Mozart A major piano concerto in the third grade. She was not a strange or possessed child, just the daughter of musicians trained in the Soviet Union who were now struggling to get by here. Admittedly they were able to do so here better than in the chaos in the Ukraine and in Russia.One grandparent was a voice teacher in the Kiev Conservatory. To musicians, music isthe country and you go wherever you can to be home. But that doesn't mean that they enjoyed it here. They didn't. Truth is the substance of art and beauty is the ideal that it promises if we are but willing to have the discipline to learn. But it begins with telling the truth. Ray Evans Harrell - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 3:28 PM Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Most would say that the USSR was not Communist, aiming toward it perhaps but a brand of socialism. -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 1:12 PMTo: Ray Evans Harrell; Harry Pollard; Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ I don't know how best to characterize it. Russia was a basket caseafter the revolution (even before). What it tried to do under Stalin and even subsequently was to industrialize very rapidly, which meant, via the state planning system,a very heavy emphasis on producers goods, especiallythose needed for heavy industry,and littleemphasis on consumers goods. Because of both paranoia and legitimate fears, there were huge expenditures on the military, meaning even less for the ordinary householder. By about the 1980s, the system was simply not able to meet all of the demands it had placed on itself, and ordinary Russians had become tired of being asked to wait just a little longer for the workers' paradise to arrive. It then began to collapse of its own weight. Via
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Ca vem a n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Don't
even watch the super bowl.
-Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:10
PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was
Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Ca vema n Trade vs. Modern
Trade
What? You don't like the men's
channel?
REH
- Original Message -
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 10:06
PM
Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re:
[Futurework] David Ricardo, Ca vema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
It
seems to be the equivalent of mud wrestling.
arthur
-Original Message-From: Harry Pollard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December
12, 2003 8:39 PMTo: 'Keith Hudson'; 'Ed Weick'Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject:
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade
vs. Modern Trade
Keith,
What is it you don't like about
Survivor?
For that matter, Ed, what is it you don't
like?
Harry
Henry George School of Social
Science of Los
Angeles Box
655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818
352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242
http://haledward.home.comcast.net
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith
HudsonSent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 11:29 PMTo:
Ed WeickCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject:
Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade
vs. Modern Trade
At 23:11 10/12/2003 -0500, you wrote:
Harry, don't even mention the show 'Survivor' to me. I see
it as absolute American crap, like the "Stench of America".
There's nothing in it that even remotely bears any resemblance of the
reality of hunters and gatherers.EdMy God, yes! You really do
disappoint me sometimes, Harry. There are many things on TV that one looks
at for 5 minutes and then never ever want to see it again. Crap is hardly
the word. Many TV shows reflect a society that has become disembowelled
with consumerism. (Now there's a word I use a lot. But "consumerism"
doesn't have ad hominem overtones because we are all consumers and we are
all taken in to a greater or lesser extent. We need a society in which
consumer goods are on tap but not on top.)Keith
- Original Message -
From: Harry
Pollard
To: 'Ed Weick' ; 'Keith Hudson'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:15 PM
Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David
Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Ed,
Another good discussion.
I see little network television, but one I try to see
is Survivor. In it, people are voted out of the tribe. Those that
remain try to "survive" until the final episode when the winner gets
$1 million. (Remember the $64,000 question?)
One member was a good catcher of fish and they
enjoyed the food he supplied. Yet, he was also so good generally that
the others felt they would never win if he remained in the
tribe.
So he was voted off. Yet, the worries of the others
centered on the lack of fish that would follow his dismissal. The
crucial factor was that there was only a week or two
remaining.
If the tribe had looked to a longer life, I'm sure
they would never have let him go. His "hunter/gatherer" abilities were
too good.
Interesting.
Harry
---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked
by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.548 /
Virus Database: 341 - Release Date:
12/5/2003
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
Distribution is what politics is all about. And revolutions too. arthru -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:01 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Arthur, Wouldn't you know it? You almost repeated - word for word - what Henry George said in 1878. Great minds think alike! It's the reason why Classical Political Economy is described as The Science that deals with the Nature, the Production, and the Distribution of Wealth. That Distribution bit is the essence of Political Economy. Would that modern economists would start thinking about why the distribution is so unfair, instead of devising ways to patch the system by taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ We have solved the production problem but can't seem to deal with the issue of distribution. Arthur -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:15 PM To: 'Brad McCormick, Ed.D.'; 'Ed Weick' Cc: 'futurework' Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Brad, We are discussing these problems in a society where the power to produce has reached unbelievable proportions (After many have been thrown out of work, the industries they left behind are actually producing more. Productivity hasn't fallen even though there are far fewer workers employed.) Why these problems? Harry --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003 ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
I might accept it. But my view of my place in the social structure of this particular workplace would change. I would think less of things. Everybody is better off in absolute terms, most will be worse off in relative terms. Good or bad?? arthur -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:01 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Arthur, In all ways they are better off. If your boss offered to double your salary even as he increased the managers salary by four times, would you refuse it? I doubt it, for you would know you were better off with a double salary. Wouldnt you? Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 6:27 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade If group A is 2x better off than originally But group B is 4x better off than originally and group C is 10x better off than originally(well...you get the idea...) is the whole community better off?? In some ways yes and in other ways no. arthur -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 10:37 PMTo: 'Ray Evans Harrell'; 'Keith Hudson'; 'Ed Weick'Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Ray, Don't think George ever mentioned the invisible hand. Certainly not in his major books. I must say I can't understand the difficulty about the concept of the invisible hand. What it says is that if each individual member of the community is better off then it can be said that the whole community is better off. Is this something difficult to understand? Curious. A clear understanding of what is private property, and what is common property, is absolutely essential to a free and prosperous society. When you take time off from the chorale to make your own clothes, and build your own furniture, I will know that you don't believe in comparative advantage. Harry ---Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.541 / Virus Database: 335 - Release Date: 11/14/2003 ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Harry, Go back an re-read Milton Friedman's Capitalism and Freedom. He makes a strong case for getting rid of a lot of the accreditation in society saying that it just builds enclaves of monopoly power.ie., privilege. arthur -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 4:17 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Arthur, If you properly own something, you have the right to dispose of it as you wish. If you want to leave it to your daughter, privilege isnt involved. Nor is there privilege involved in the certificate of competency issued by an appropriate legal or medical Board. Privilege arises when the lawyer or doctor can prevent others from practicing law or medicine. When legislation prevents people from practicing and prevents citizens from going to anyone other than the one with a license we have privilege. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles +Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 12:14 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade What sort of privilege did you have in mind for elimination? Inheritance? License to practice law? License to practice medicine? -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 2:17 PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Arthur, Problem is that instead of looking for the cause of the rising inequalities, the left winger looks for ways to take from the rich and give to the poor. If the rich person deserves his higher income because he's earned it, the state has onlythe coercive right of robbery to take anything from him. If the rich person's income is the result of privilege, then it should be taken back completely - or the privilege that produces the inequality should be ended. But, that is radical thinking, not the wish-washy notions of the modern liberal mired in welfare payments, affordable housing, and food stamps, happy to give the poor anything but liberty and justice. The early Fabians must be spinning like tops in their graves. Harry ---Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.541 / Virus Database: 335 - Release Date: 11/14/2003 ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
We are awash in goods (or as you call it crap). Huge effort is spent on clearing the shelves of this crap and getting people to buy more so that more can be produced and sold. This is the way income is created and distributed. With so much effort by governments and advertising and marketing etc., to move products it seems that yes the production problem has been solved. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:41 AMTo: Harry Pollard; Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ I don't think we've solved the production problem. One reason for our inequitable distribution of income is that we use our scarce resources to produce a lot of crap. A lot of people make a lot of money producing crap. Others keep them rich and themselves poor by buying it. Ed - Original Message - From: "Harry Pollard" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:00 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Arthur, Wouldn't you know it? You almost repeated - word for word - what Henry George said in 1878. Great minds think alike! It's the reason why Classical Political Economy is described as "The Science that deals with the Nature, the Production, and the Distribution of Wealth. That "Distribution" bit is the essence of Political Economy. Would that modern economists would start thinking about why the distribution is so unfair, instead of devising ways to patch the system by taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ We have "solved" the production problem but can't seem to deal with the issue of distribution. Arthur -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:15 PM To: 'Brad McCormick, Ed.D.'; 'Ed Weick' Cc: 'futurework' Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Brad, We are discussing these problems in a society where the power to produce has reached unbelievable proportions (After many have been thrown out of work, the industries they left behind are actually producing more. Productivity hasn't fallen even though there are far fewer workers employed.) Why these "problems"? Harry --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
The capitalists have a theory for production and it has worked well. Markets and profits work. But there really is little that has to do with distribution (I know about marginal productivity of labour and all that--but it only takes you just so far) the communists had a theory for distribution but couldn't solve the productions problem so that they could ultimately go to free goods. Someday the 2 theoretical constructs will have to meet and marry and voilawho knows. arthur -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 11:12 AM To: Harry Pollard; Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Yes but wasn't it supposed to be distribution that did in the Communists? I'm just a poor artist but I do remember that discussion from you economists talking about our superior distribution. I'm confused. Educate me please. REH - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 2:00 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Arthur, Wouldn't you know it? You almost repeated - word for word - what Henry George said in 1878. Great minds think alike! It's the reason why Classical Political Economy is described as The Science that deals with the Nature, the Production, and the Distribution of Wealth. That Distribution bit is the essence of Political Economy. Would that modern economists would start thinking about why the distribution is so unfair, instead of devising ways to patch the system by taking from the rich and giving to the poor. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ We have solved the production problem but can't seem to deal with the issue of distribution. Arthur -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:15 PM To: 'Brad McCormick, Ed.D.'; 'Ed Weick' Cc: 'futurework' Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Brad, We are discussing these problems in a society where the power to produce has reached unbelievable proportions (After many have been thrown out of work, the industries they left behind are actually producing more. Productivity hasn't fallen even though there are far fewer workers employed.) Why these problems? Harry --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003 ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Title: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Ray, This is the question that haunts us all. If not now, when? arthur -Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 11:33 AMTo: Ed Weick; Harry Pollard; 'Robert E. Bowd'; 'Thomas Lunde'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade If the Elders won't do it, who will? REH - Original Message - From: Ed Weick To: Ray Evans Harrell ; Harry Pollard ; 'Robert E. Bowd' ; 'Thomas Lunde' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:33 AM Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade No Ed, it is just money, like economics and all of that stuff. The same choices as making symphony orchestras only play old stuff because no onewill make the effort tounderstand anything complex that hasn't been around for a hundred and fifty years. Shall I call it Beethoven as "mud wrestling?" Or are they just getting by with the most for the least effort? Least effort never got you anymore than banal entertainment. Now you complain? Fix the economic system! REH Next life, Ray. Ed - Original Message - From: Ray Evans Harrell To: Ed Weick ; Harry Pollard ; 'Robert E. Bowd' ; 'Thomas Lunde' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:13 PM Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade - Original Message - From: Ed Weick To: Harry Pollard ; 'Robert E. Bowd' ; 'Thomas Lunde' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 10:12 PM Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade I do think that it's a little more than money in most cases. It could be respect, including self-respect, stability - things like that. Ed - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard To: 'Ed Weick' ; 'Robert E. Bowd' ; 'Thomas Lunde' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 8:57 PM Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Ed, If you can't get a job as a programmer, you gat a job selling insurance, or laying bricks, or anything else that brings in money (if it's money you want). Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed WeickSent: Friday, December 12, 2003 11:45 AMTo: Robert E. Bowd; Thomas Lunde; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Good piece, Bob. What we seem to need is a widely accepted sense of "entitlement" of some kind that galvanizes people into political action. To get that, people would have to feel they have a common cause and a gut-level sense of betrayal by the system. I don't see that in wealthy democracies, where most people are concerned with maintaining their status or moving up the ladder. There are special interests and outlooksthat make people adhere to one political philosophy or another, but there is very little sense of injustice or outrage. A piece I posted earlier this morning dealt with how people in the now busthigh-techsector are coping with unemployment. In reading the article in the Ottawa Citizen, it seemed to me that there was very little anger among the unemployed techies. However,there was a lot of frustration, almost as though firing off job applications left, right and center, should somehow have fixed things up, but, dammit, it didn't,so what am I still doing wrong? Individualism, not common cause. Not what
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Title: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade that's the idea. although I think that many people running food banks (along with those who show up at shelters on X-mas day to dole out food) gain great comfort form these actions. arthur -Original Message-From: Thomas Lunde [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:53 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern TradeThomas:If I read you right Arthur, then shutting down the food banks by volunteer groups would increase the misery index and force government to address the problem in a different way? That's not a bad idea as I'm sure the ongoing drudgery of running a food bank must be a major pain in the ass.Respectfully,Thomas Lunde--From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern TradeDate: Mon, Dec 8, 2003, 12:02 PM I agree with your analysis, Ed. Social change is ongoing and new alliances will be formed---but out of necessity. The three groups you mention don't have to work together or even acknowledge each other as long as good hearted middle class folk are handing out free food. Turn off the tap and you will see cooperation and shared understanding aplenty.arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 11:17 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern TradeEd, when the poor kick back politicians will act.I agree, and in some cases they have on matters such as housing, for example. But they can't seem to present any kind of unified front. The people I described as using my food bank, older guys from the valley, embarrassed young mothers with kids, and the young who graced us with their presence really wanted to have very little to do with each other. What we need is a unification of the poor and politicians who pay attention to them, but we seem to have run out of people like Tommy Douglas, Stanley Knowles and David Lewis and we now seem to have a plethora of people like Peter MacKay, Stephen Harper and Paul Martin, people who pay far more attention to the rich than the poor. In the past few decades, the political drift has been rightward, and the drift of society as a whole has been toward the establishment of a middle class identity that sees poverty terms of personal flaw and the poor as undeserving. Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 10:37 AMSubject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern TradeEd, when the poor kick back politicians will act. -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 9:32 AMTo: Harry Pollard; 'Thomas Lunde'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern TradeI'm not laughing, Harry. I've just accessed a report by the Canadian Council on Social Development that shows that poverty in urban areas, including poverty among the working poor, increased in Canada between 1990 and 1995. It has probably continued to increase since then. I'm not sure of what can be done about it, but I would agree with Arthur that foodbanks are not the answer. Neither is kicking the poor harder, as politicians seem increasingly to want to do.Ed - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Ed Weick' mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; 'Thomas Lunde' mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 4:09 AMSubject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern TradeEd,Not only to liberty and justice not taste too well, when they aren't there to taste, you will be sure that ends will not meet.Two hundred years ago, Ricardo
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
iday, December 12, 2003 9:57 AM Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade And in the interim the misery index would increase - there might even be food riots, perhaps even home invasions for food, rather than status consumables, - while we waited for the government to take (re)action. Revolutionary conditions and the further deligitimation of the system. Food banks are a blight on civil society, almost unheard of before the neoconservative/neoliberal dismantling of the social contract in the past two decades. I do not doubt it's a thankless task begging for food donations from the greedy hegemons of our society. When I made my seasonal donation, this week, to a homeless shelter for youth, my donation was corporate-graded and I received an Enbridge Gas gift in return. Somehow I was not amused that my compassion was reconstructed as a market exchange. I reminded the volunteers there was a time when compassion for the poor was considered a communal responsibility - as it is in many other cultures, although even there it is under attack from the neo-cons - and not charitable volunteerism that looks good on a resume. Tithing has taken on a careerist overtone based upon the number of power-dressed corporate employees I am meeting in the malls. These are the same folks who bash the poor whenever liberalization of social policy [and increased taxes] are mentioned. I don't agree, necessarily, Arthur, that deprivation leads to co-operation (I wish!). History suggests otherwise. I recall reading Ted Robert Gurr's book, "Why Men Rebel?" and his book suggests that the answer is being deprived of a perceived entitlement.Hungry people just might perceive food as an entitlement, given its positioning on Maslow's hierarch ofhuman needs. Nowrebellion hasn't happened - but I believe that is only because the many people who are becoming increasingly marginalized in our society are existing within a misery index that is at a tolerable level, or directing their pain at themselves. (More the latter, I suspect.) That can change as conditions change. Coalition building is a great idea, but it is a middle class knowledge form, and that's about a third of the population of our classed society. And we ain't starving, in fact many of us are obese.Coalition buildingpresumes a level of political efficacy. Riots, on the other hand, are an ugly, ugly, thing to behold, as I have. Reconstructing a new vision of the social safety net is an absolute must, in my opinion, given the direction of our society. Clearly that is not happening in Dubya's America, and in Canada I am fearful of where Paul Martin will take us in his efforts to reduce the level of debt. If the precedent of Ontario politics is an example, he will be a fiscal conservative who will govern as a neoliberal, and keep the liberal rhetoric for managerial shuffling that is low cost. BB - Original Message - From: Thomas Lunde To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 12:52 AM Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Thomas:If I read you right Arthur, then shutting down the food banks by volunteer groups would increase the misery index and force government to address the problem in a different way? That's not a bad idea as I'm sure the ongoing drudgery of running a food bank must be a major pain in the ass.Respectfully,Thomas Lunde--From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern TradeDate: Mon, Dec 8, 2003, 12:02 PM I agree with your analysis, Ed. Social change is ongoing and new alliances will be formed---but out of necessity. The three groups you mention don't have to work together or even acknowledge each other as long as good hearted middle class folk are handing out free food. Turn off the tap and you will see cooperation and shared understanding aplenty.arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sen
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Ca vema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
It
seems to be the equivalent of mud wrestling.
arthur
-Original Message-From: Harry Pollard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 12,
2003 8:39 PMTo: 'Keith Hudson'; 'Ed Weick'Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was
Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern
Trade
Keith,
What is it you don't like about
Survivor?
For that matter, Ed, what is it you don't
like?
Harry
Henry George School of Social
Science of Los
Angeles Box 655
Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242
http://haledward.home.comcast.net
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Keith
HudsonSent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 11:29 PMTo: Ed
WeickCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re:
Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs.
Modern Trade
At 23:11 10/12/2003 -0500, you wrote:
Harry,
don't even mention the show 'Survivor' to me. I see it as absolute
American crap, like the "Stench of America". There's nothing in it
that even remotely bears any resemblance of the reality of hunters and
gatherers.EdMy God, yes! You really do disappoint
me sometimes, Harry. There are many things on TV that one looks at for 5
minutes and then never ever want to see it again. Crap is hardly the word.
Many TV shows reflect a society that has become disembowelled with
consumerism. (Now there's a word I use a lot. But "consumerism" doesn't have
ad hominem overtones because we are all consumers and we are all taken in to a
greater or lesser extent. We need a society in which consumer goods are on tap
but not on top.)Keith
- Original Message -
From: Harry
Pollard
To: 'Ed Weick' ; 'Keith Hudson'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:15 PM
Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David
Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Ed,
Another good discussion.
I see little network television, but one I try to see is
Survivor. In it, people are voted out of the tribe. Those that remain try
to "survive" until the final episode when the winner gets $1
million. (Remember the $64,000 question?)
One member was a good catcher of fish and they enjoyed
the food he supplied. Yet, he was also so good generally that the others
felt they would never win if he remained in the tribe.
So he was voted off. Yet, the worries of the others
centered on the lack of fish that would follow his dismissal. The crucial
factor was that there was only a week or two remaining.
If the tribe had looked to a longer life, I'm sure they
would never have let him go. His "hunter/gatherer" abilities were too
good.
Interesting.
Harry
---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.548 / Virus
Database: 341 - Release Date:
12/5/2003
RE: [Futurework] What happens when Asia has caught up?
Another factor is whether the carrying capacity of theglobe (energy, potable water, heat sink, pollution, resources, food) is sufficient to meet the development goals. -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 3:13 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Futurework] What happens when Asia has caught up?We have Karen to thank for bringing the following to our attention. In my view it is quite the most interesting and thoughtful economic discussion I have read in a long while -- a conversation ably transcribed into readable form by Erika Kinetz (a difficult job, as anybody who has done this will know!).The interlocutors had enough on their plates in talking about the jobs that are now leaving America and Europe for Asia to talk of other deeper factors. In a way, China, India and the other south east Asian countries have an easy job because they're playing catch-up. All they need to do essentially is to produce orthodox goods and services for the West more cheaply than we can make them and then supply their own consumer markets which, being much larger than ours, will produce a new super-large brand of multinational. Initially, as pointed out below, most of these will remain headquartered in American and European countries (hopefully swelling the funds of investors and pensions institutions over here) but increasingly they will become indigenous.Quite apart from the probability that all the developed and the neo-developed countries will be draining the existing energy resources of the world, there are two more big questions. The first is: Once the Asian countries have caught up, will they have the innovative ability to start supplying a new generation of consumer products? (We must remember that America's economic success in the last century -- to a very considerable extent -- has been due to being able to recruit the best brains of Europe and, in recent decades, Asia. The former brain drain will undoubtedly continue, but the latter will probably dry up in the coming years as their own countries supply sufficient opportunities for research and development.)The second question is: "Can we be sure that developed societies have the structural capacity to absorb further goods?" A corollary to this is: "Will the initiatory class (the middle-class consumer market with sufficient disposable incomes not in hock to the credit card companies) have the time, energy or inclination to absorb more consumer goods in their daily lives and thus set off another wave of consumption?Keith Hudson WHO WINS AND WHO LOSES AS JOBS MOVE OVERSEAS?Erika KinetzThe outsourcing of jobs to China and India is not new, but lately it has earned a chilling new adjective -- professional. Advances in communications technology have enabled white-collar jobs to be shipped from the United States and Europe as never before, and the outcry from workers who once considered themselves invulnerable is creating a potent political force. After falling by 2.8 million jobs since early 2001, employment has risen by 240,000 jobs since August. That gain, less than some expected, has not resolved whether the nation is suffering cyclical losses or permanent job destruction. Last month, The International Herald Tribune convened a roundtable at the Algonquin Hotel in Manhattan to discuss how job migration is changing the landscape. The participants were Josh Bivens, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, a nonprofit research group in Washington that receives a third of its financing from labor unions; Diana Farrell, the director of the McKinsey Global Institute, which is McKinsey Company's internal economics research group; Edmund Harriss, the portfolio manager of the Guinness Atkinson China and Hong Kong fund and the Guinness Atkinson Asia Focus fund; M. Eric Johnson, director of Tuck's Glassmeyer/McNamee Center for Digital Strategies at the Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College; and, via conference call from Singapore, Stephen S. Roach, managing director and chief economist of Morgan Stanley . Following are excerpts from their conversation. Q. How big an issue is job migration?MR. ROACH: Offshore outsourcing is a huge deal. We do not have a data series called jobs lost to offshore outsourcing, but 23 months into the recovery, private sector jobs are running nearly seven million workers below the norm of the typical hiring cycle. Something new is going on. America is short of jobs as never before, and the major candidates for our offshore outsourcing are ramping up employment as never before. So yes, I think two and two is four.MS. FARRELL: This is a big deal in the sense that we see something structural happening. But I would react to the notion that it is a big deal that we should try to stop
[Futurework] the web is amazing
HomeTownLocator Gazeteer: Census Info, Physical and Cultural Features, Aerial Photos, Maps... http://Gazetteer.HomeTownLocator.com/ This is nifty. Type in the name of a populated place and get links to aerial photos and regional, local and topographical maps. You can also get an aerial photo of your home, or find the distance in air miles between two places. from Neat New Stuff I Found This Week http://marylaine.com/neatnew.html Copyright, Marylaine Block, 1999-2003. [Publishers may license the content at reasonable rates.]
[Futurework] FW jobs and work
JobWatch http://www.jobwatch.org/ The Economic Policy Institute tracks current trends in the U.S. labor market and offers up-to-date readings on its status. Includes state-by-state job trends, updated monthly and a section on National Jobs and Wages. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Are they going mad?
I don't find the US action all that strange. In fact it seems quite logical. Why should those countries share in the contracts when they weren't willing to go along in the first place. There was an interview with Laura Bush (Larry King) and she in passing felt it a pity that the French were so intransigent. That a more united front might have forced Saddam's hand and lessened the need for armed intervention. So that is the view in the US and is worth considering. Not "mad." Just angry. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:35 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Keith HudsonSubject: Re: [Futurework] Are they going mad? Perhaps they always were a little mad and are now becoming more so. Naom Chomsky has a new book out,"Hegemonyor Survival". I saw ashort televisedinterview withhim last night in which he argued that the US Administration has become so obsessed with power that it has become a real danger to the world. George Soros says something similar in an article in the current Atlantic. Madness does seem to have descended upon us. Ed - Original Message - From: Keith Hudson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 3:21 AM Subject: [Futurework] Are they going mad? What irony! If there could have been any "justification" for America invading Iraq, it was because Saddam was excluding US and UK oil corporations from development contracts in the rich oilfields of northern Iraq.What's up with the Bush team? Are they going mad? Those whom the Gods wish to destroy .I think the Bush team is falling to pieces. Consider. Two days ago, Powell wanted NATO to help with the occupation of Iraq. Now the Pentagon comes out with this (below). Of course, this could seen as an immediate riposte to NATO turning him down (or, rather, expressing reservations).No, I think the members of the Bush team are now staggering about from one decision to another with little coordination of strategy. They're in a schizophrenic state. They really don't know what to do in Iraq. (Besides, why are they thinking about reconstruction contracts when they should be applying themselves to the prime objective of bringing about an Iraqi government by July?)I repeat my guess of a couple of days ago. I think Powell (and perhaps Condee) will resign soon. Then the team will really be seen to be falling apart.Now that Howard Dean is overwhelmingly the Democratic front-runner, it's possible that there'll now be a tidal wave of opinion against Bush. I'm amazed that America has been so supine over the invasion so far -- considering Vietnam (and soon, being kicked out of Afghanistan).Keith Hudson PENTAGON BARS THREE NATIONS FROM IRAQ BIDSDouglas JehlWASHINGTON, Dec. 9 The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, saying it was acting to protect "the essential security interests of the United States." The directive, issued Friday by Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, represents the most substantive retaliation to date by the Bush administration against American allies who opposed its decision to go to war in Iraq.from New York Times -- 10 December 2003 Keith Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org
RE: [Futurework] Are they going mad?
And Canadian troops never accidentally killed children during WW 2?? Never accidentally killed civilians?? What were Canadians doing in the Korean War vis a vis controlling the movements of refugees?? arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:54 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Keith HudsonSubject: Re: [Futurework] Are they going mad? Just a short addition to my previous post. The Americans have now become child killers. Nine a few days ago, six more recently. If this isn't madness, I don't know what is. The following from the CBC morning news: KABUL - Six children were crushed to death during a U.S. military operation in Afghanistan, a military spokesperson said Wednesday. The bodies of the children and two adults were discovered after a Friday night attack on a compound near Gardez, the capital of the eastern Paktia province. A wall had collapsed on the victims. American officials say the compound was used as a weapons storehouse by an Afghan rebel leader named Mullah Jalani. U.S. Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty said warplanes and soldiers attacked the site. "We try very hard not to kill anyone," said Hilferty, who said the U.S. regrets any civilian deaths. It's not known if any U.S. soldiers were injured or killed in the raid. FROM DEC. 6, 2003: U.S. attack kills 9 kids in Afghanistan It's the second time in a week children have died in an American raid. Nine children were killed Saturday in Ghazni province. They were discovered in a field after a U.S. air attack. American officials have apologized for the incident, which they say targeted a well-known Taliban official. The U.S. military launched on Dec. 2 what it calls the largest operation since the fall of the Taliban in late 2001. Operation Avalanche involves more than 2,000 troops. - Original Message - From: Ed Weick To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Keith Hudson Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] Are they going mad? Perhaps they always were a little mad and are now becoming more so. Naom Chomsky has a new book out,"Hegemonyor Survival". I saw ashort televisedinterview withhim last night in which he argued that the US Administration has become so obsessed with power that it has become a real danger to the world. George Soros says something similar in an article in the current Atlantic. Madness does seem to have descended upon us. Ed - Original Message - From: Keith Hudson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 3:21 AM Subject: [Futurework] Are they going mad? What irony! If there could have been any "justification" for America invading Iraq, it was because Saddam was excluding US and UK oil corporations from development contracts in the rich oilfields of northern Iraq.What's up with the Bush team? Are they going mad? Those whom the Gods wish to destroy .I think the Bush team is falling to pieces. Consider. Two days ago, Powell wanted NATO to help with the occupation of Iraq. Now the Pentagon comes out with this (below). Of course, this could seen as an immediate riposte to NATO turning him down (or, rather, expressing reservations).No, I think the members of the Bush team are now staggering about from one decision to another with little coordination of strategy. They're in a schizophrenic state. They really don't know what to do in Iraq. (Besides, why are they thinking about reconstruction contracts when they should be applying themselves to the prime objective of bringing about an Iraqi government by July?)I repeat my guess of a couple of days ago. I think Powell (and perhaps Condee) will resign soon. Then the team will really be seen to be falling apart.Now that Howard Dean is overwhelmingly the Democratic front-runner, it's possible that there'll now be a tidal wave of opinion against Bush. I'm amazed that America has been so supine over the invasion so far -- considering Vietnam (and soon, being kicked out of Afghanistan).Keith Hudson PENTAGON BARS THREE NATIONS FROM IRAQ BIDSDouglas JehlWASHINGTON, Dec. 9 The Pentagon has barred French, German and Russian companies from competing for $18.6 billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, saying it was acting to protect "the essential security interests of the United States." The directive, issued Friday by Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, represents the most substantive
[Futurework] informative web site
may be of interest, lots of computer tips and tips for every day living. http://www.irvings-info-page.cityslide.com ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] women in public office sometimes different
I agree. Women sometimes do govern differently. arthur When the mayor said 'cheese,' everyone in town had a feast 10 December 2003 The Globe and Mail Vancouver BC As the first female mayor of the northern B.C. town of Houston, Sharon Smith was proud of her accomplishments. So was her husband. So proud that he snapped photos of Her Worship wearing the chain of office - and nothing else. Everything was fine until photos of a smiling Ms. Smith were allegedly copied from her home computer during a house party her kids threw, then circulated around the mill town of 4,300. Now, the risqué shots of the toned and tan mayor are the talk of the town in coffee shops and on mill floors. In a town so small that gossip travels nearly as fast as the Internet, the mayor's photos have made quite a splash. Ms. Smith, 48, a former nurse, councillor and mother of three boys, is mortified - but unrepentant. In a letter to the local weekly paper, Ms. Smith said the photos were taken during a private moment with her husband. My privacy has been violated in every sense, Ms. Smith wrote in her letter earlier this month to Houston Today. These photos are private property belonging to my husband and me. I am very hurt and embarrassed. She said the photos are stolen property and warned that people who knowingly possess them are breaking the law. Ms. Smith did not return phone calls made to her Houston office yesterday. But in an interview with a Vancouver newspaper, Ms. Smith said her husband took the photos because he was proud of the fact that I was mayor. We made sure that we were not infringing on anyone else. It was a private moment and that's all it was. In one full-length photo (a portion of which appears at left) she is seated naked, with the mayor's medallion draped around her neck. Ms. Smith told the Vancouver Province she did not intend to disgrace the mayor's office, and has no plans to resign. She said most townspeople stand by her and have offered support. However, one former town councillor is aghast at Ms. Smith's behaviour, calling it a catastrophic error in judgment and demanding she resign. Nipper Kettle said that he recognized the location of the photos as the mayor's office and that many Houston residents are unimpressed with the mayor's defensive reaction. Mr. Kettle said Ms. Smith should have apologized to residents rather than play the role of crime victim. I pretty much condemn what she's done, said Mr. Kettle, who worked with Ms. Smith when both were councillors. To have pictures on your computer at home is not a big deal, I guess. That's within your rights. But when you go down to the municipal office that is paid for by the taxpayers and do those kinds of things and wearing the chain of office, that's where people see the wrongdoing here. People are feeling let down and very distraught. It's something that shouldn't have been done because that shows total disrespect for the office that you hold. RCMP Sergeant Dave Fenson confirmed that police are investigating a theft from the Smith home in early November. Sgt. Fenson said it's believed someone with access to the computer took the photos. But it's not a break-and-enter. Mr. Kettle said that according to town rumour, the photographs were stolen during a party thrown by Ms. Smith's sons when their parents were out. A young guest playing on the computer burned a disk of the photos and they began circulating around town. The RCMP would not confirm this version. Meanwhile, town administrator Jack Mussallem described Ms. Smith as a hardworking mayor. All I can tell you is that she works very hard on behalf of the community and is very diligent about her work. An avid outdoorswoman, Ms. Smith was featured in a recent B.C. magazine that showed pictures of her skiing with her family and posing with the carcass of a moose she had shot. In the article, Ms. Smith said she saw herself as a role model to kids and women in the community. If you set your goals, set your sights on something you want to do, you can achieve it. You don't have to come from a special family or special background; if you want to be there, just work hard and you can do it. --- ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
[Futurework] FW: women in public office sometimes different
sending again. trying for html. I agree. Women sometimes do govern differently. arthur When the mayor said 'cheese,' everyone in town had a feast 10 December 2003 The Globe and Mail Vancouver BC As the first female mayor of the northern B.C. town of Houston, Sharon Smith was proud of her accomplishments. So was her husband. So proud that he snapped photos of Her Worship wearing the chain of office - and nothing else. Everything was fine until photos of a smiling Ms. Smith were allegedly copied from her home computer during a house party her kids threw, then circulated around the mill town of 4,300. Now, the risqué shots of the toned and tan mayor are the talk of the town in coffee shops and on mill floors. In a town so small that gossip travels nearly as fast as the Internet, the mayor's photos have made quite a splash. Ms. Smith, 48, a former nurse, councillor and mother of three boys, is mortified - but unrepentant. In a letter to the local weekly paper, Ms. Smith said the photos were taken during a private moment with her husband. My privacy has been violated in every sense, Ms. Smith wrote in her letter earlier this month to Houston Today. These photos are private property belonging to my husband and me. I am very hurt and embarrassed. She said the photos are stolen property and warned that people who knowingly possess them are breaking the law. Ms. Smith did not return phone calls made to her Houston office yesterday. But in an interview with a Vancouver newspaper, Ms. Smith said her husband took the photos because he was proud of the fact that I was mayor. We made sure that we were not infringing on anyone else. It was a private moment and that's all it was. In one full-length photo (a portion of which appears at left) she is seated naked, with the mayor's medallion draped around her neck. Ms. Smith told the Vancouver Province she did not intend to disgrace the mayor's office, and has no plans to resign. She said most townspeople stand by her and have offered support. However, one former town councillor is aghast at Ms. Smith's behaviour, calling it a catastrophic error in judgment and demanding she resign. Nipper Kettle said that he recognized the location of the photos as the mayor's office and that many Houston residents are unimpressed with the mayor's defensive reaction. Mr. Kettle said Ms. Smith should have apologized to residents rather than play the role of crime victim. I pretty much condemn what she's done, said Mr. Kettle, who worked with Ms. Smith when both were councillors. To have pictures on your computer at home is not a big deal, I guess. That's within your rights. But when you go down to the municipal office that is paid for by the taxpayers and do those kinds of things and wearing the chain of office, that's where people see the wrongdoing here. People are feeling let down and very distraught. It's something that shouldn't have been done because that shows total disrespect for the office that you hold. RCMP Sergeant Dave Fenson confirmed that police are investigating a theft from the Smith home in early November. Sgt. Fenson said it's believed someone with access to the computer took the photos. But it's not a break-and-enter. Mr. Kettle said that according to town rumour, the photographs were stolen during a party thrown by Ms. Smith's sons when their parents were out. A young guest playing on the computer burned a disk of the photos and they began circulating around town. The RCMP would not confirm this version. Meanwhile, town administrator Jack Mussallem described Ms. Smith as a hardworking mayor. All I can tell you is that she works very hard on behalf of the community and is very diligent about her work. An avid outdoorswoman, Ms. Smith was featured in a recent B.C. magazine that showed pictures of her skiing with her family and posing with the carcass of a moose she had shot. In the article, Ms. Smith said she saw herself as a role model to kids and women in the community. If you set your goals, set your sights on something you want to do, you can achieve it. You don't have to come from a special family or special background; if you want to be there, just work hard and you can do it. --- ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Are they going mad?
War is terrible. Death is the outcome. Combatants and innocents alike. War is to be avoided. Sometimes it can't. -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 1:49 PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] Are they going mad? And Canadian troops never accidentally killed children during WW 2?? Never accidentally killed civilians?? What were Canadians doing in the Korean War vis a vis controlling the movements of refugees?? arthur So one killing justifies another? Thekids who were killed had absolutely nothing to do with the war. I still find it all rather horrible.The slaughter of the innocents! If there is such a thing as divine justice, this is where it fits. Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 9:59 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] Are they going mad? And Canadian troops never accidentally killed children during WW 2?? Never accidentally killed civilians?? What were Canadians doing in the Korean War vis a vis controlling the movements of refugees?? arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:54 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Keith HudsonSubject: Re: [Futurework] Are they going mad? Just a short addition to my previous post. The Americans have now become child killers. Nine a few days ago, six more recently. If this isn't madness, I don't know what is. The following from the CBC morning news: KABUL - Six children were crushed to death during a U.S. military operation in Afghanistan, a military spokesperson said Wednesday. The bodies of the children and two adults were discovered after a Friday night attack on a compound near Gardez, the capital of the eastern Paktia province. A wall had collapsed on the victims. American officials say the compound was used as a weapons storehouse by an Afghan rebel leader named Mullah Jalani. U.S. Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty said warplanes and soldiers attacked the site. "We try very hard not to kill anyone," said Hilferty, who said the U.S. regrets any civilian deaths. It's not known if any U.S. soldiers were injured or killed in the raid. FROM DEC. 6, 2003: U.S. attack kills 9 kids in Afghanistan It's the second time in a week children have died in an American raid. Nine children were killed Saturday in Ghazni province. They were discovered in a field after a U.S. air attack. American officials have apologized for the incident, which they say targeted a well-known Taliban official. The U.S. military launched on Dec. 2 what it calls the largest operation since the fall of the Taliban in late 2001. Operation Avalanche involves more than 2,000 troops. - Original Message - From: Ed Weick To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Keith Hudson Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [Futurework] Are they going mad? Perhaps they always were a little mad and are now becoming more so. Naom Chomsky has a new book out,"Hegemonyor Survival". I saw ashort televisedinterview withhim last night in which he argued that the US Administration has become so obsessed with power that it has become a real danger to the world. George Soros says something similar in an article in the current Atlantic. Madness does seem to have descended upon us. Ed - Original Message - From: Keith Hudson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 3:21 AM Subject: [Futurework] Are they going mad? What irony! If there could have been any "justification" for America invading Iraq, it was because Saddam was excluding US and UK oil corporations from development contracts in the rich oilfields of northern Iraq.What's up with the Bush team? Are they going mad? Those whom the Gods wish to destroy .I think the Bush team is falling to pieces. Consider. Two days ago, Powell wanted NATO to help with the occupation of Iraq. Now the Pentagon comes out with this
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
We have solved the production problem but can't seem to deal with the issue of distribution. arthur -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2003 5:15 PM To: 'Brad McCormick, Ed.D.'; 'Ed Weick' Cc: 'futurework' Subject: RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Brad, We are discussing these problems in a society where the power to produce has reached unbelievable proportions (After many have been thrown out of work, the industries they left behind are actually producing more. Productivity hasn't fallen even though there are far fewer workers employed.) Why these problems? Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brad McCormick, Ed.D. Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 9:06 AM To: Ed Weick Cc: futurework Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Ed Weick wrote: One question that this raises is whether what goes on in the decorated shed is going to become more banal or less. Linda Duxbury, who teaches business at Carleton University, argues that with the impending retirement of the baby boom population, employment will become a sellers market - people who are looking for jobs will be scarcer and will have the upper hand. But one wonders if they really will. Perhaps they will be paid a little more, but have to work longer hours and be run off their feet. Some of the work Duxbury is doing on work/life balance suggests that people in managerial positions are already working at the exhaustion level. Good questions and observations, but a bit diferent from some of the points I was trying to make (which is OK...) We're going to have a lot of aging persons, and relatively few young persons. There probably are different options. We could improve productivity and cut waste (like advertising and competitive duplication of production...) The young persons may be made to work longer hours for less pay to themselves (more of the product of their labor going to support the old people). The old can be made to work until they are physically or mentally unable to work any longer. I.e., retirement will for many persons not be an option. This is the future I think is going to become reality. Women can be coerced and/or cajoled to become more re-productive so that there will be more young persons to provide for the old persons and the earth will become even more conjested by hyper-population. Some persons like this option. It's also possible that life will be better in Europe than here in the U.S., which, as the Chaplin who the army is either prosecuting or persecuting said in the pepers yesterday, he loves America and wants to live here - just in better times. I think the idea of the transparent factory is worth thinking about, even if as something we won't be able to enjoy in our work life because we live in a neocon instead of a social welfare country. Cheers! \brad mccormick --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003 ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof)
Chris, When I wrote that the family or else the local community pays for the rentfood of the citizens who can't pay it on their own, I was referring to a legal requirement, not voluntary generosity. Arthur Legal requirement of the family or legal requirement of the community? If either, how is it enforced and by whom? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 3:52 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) Arthur Cordell asked: Taking the neutrality stance I think makes Switzerland a very special place and must cause the Swiss to think of themselves as somewhat special thereby giving them a degree of social cohesion. Or does the causation circle go the other way around, with social cohesion coming first and thus the degree of self to lead to the position of neutrality? Historically, for this country of four cultures situated between warring neighbors, neutrality was simply necessary to avoid falling apart as a country. Taking sides with one neighbor against the others would have turned off the other cultures in CH. (This in contrast to the cliché that neutrality was simply a means of war-profiteering -- probably true for mono-cultural countries like Sweden.) Being surrounded by kingdoms and regimes was an incentive for all Swiss to stick together against invaders/imperialists, in order to preserve freedom and democracy. (This still holds today as an incentive not to join the EU ;-} ) Anyway, I think you over-estimate the importance of social cohesion as a necessary precondition for a social security grid. When I wrote that the family or else the local community pays for the rentfood of the citizens who can't pay it on their own, I was referring to a legal requirement, not voluntary generosity. This could be introduced in countries with less social cohesion too. You suggest that the educational/poverty problems (which I agree are structual) of eg., Canada, do not exist in Switzerland. Is this so? I observed that the problem of foodbanks, as described on this list to exist in Canada, does not exist in Switzerland, because poverty is being addressed differently. Chris You suggest that the educational/poverty problems (which I agree are structual) of eg., Canada, do not exist in Switzerland. Is this so? arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 1:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) Harry Pollard wrote: When I read it, I agreed with Chris' remarks. Except of course his aside on protectionism. The problem is that the system I described wouldn't work under Free Market conditions. Our only hope in the US in many places is to make education voluntary. Teachers should teach only those who want to learn - or whose parents want them to learn. What about the others? This screw the rest attitude is so typical of the FT ideology. It only makes things worse. Btw, learning disabilities are increasing. I.e there are children who may want to learn (and whose parents want them to learn) but who are unable to learn (effectively). This is mainly due to effects of corporate policies (junk-food malnutrition, dental mercury, drugs, cell-phone radiation etc.), so blaming state schools in general and praising privatization/corporatization is really making the fox guard the henhouse. Chris ~~~ ~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Biography
OK if people want to do it, but not mandatory. Privacy, anonymity and all that. arthur -Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 11:45 AMTo: Keith Hudson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] Biography This is great. I think it would be wonderful if we finally arrived at an introduction type of post where we all do what Keith has done. These could then be put into an Introductions section at the web site and serve as a context file for each of us as we explore these things together. It also would be helpful if we posted the things that we are interested in, in relation to the Future of work and how we could help each other. Just a thought. What do you think Arthur, Sally? Ray Evans Harrell - Original Message - From: Keith Hudson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 9:57 AM Subject: [Futurework] Biography Hi Frank,Here's stuff for my biography page. I've probably left something out -- I always do -- then I've got to fiddle the dates again!- PHOTO (again!) with name underneathBorn 1935; Educated at Bablake School and Lanchester College of Technology;1957-1967: Experience in industrial chemistry, technical management, quality control management at Courtaulds and Massey-Ferguson;1968-69: Experience as first professional writer of learning programmes in England with Inadcon, and wrote material for Vickers, Sloan-Duployan and Unesco; 1970: Founder of Warwickshire branch of Conservation Society;1971:With Noël Newsome, joint-author of report on industrial toxic wates dumping into the countryside to Department of Environment (known in the press at the time as the Cyanide Dossier) which resulted in the passage of Deposit of Poisonous Waste Act 1972 as emergency legislation, the first environmental legislation in the last century apart from clean air legislation;1972: Founder and editor of Towards Survival, one of the first environmental journals in the English-speaking world;1974: Member of Midland Executive of Liberal Party, author of industrial policy proposals for the Midlands;1975: Member of National Executive of the Liberal Party;1979: Founder of Jobs for Coventry Foundation, the first privately-sponsored training organisation in England for young unemployed people under the Youth Opportunities Programme;1982: Founder of Interskills, training organisation in computer and allied skills;1982: Founder of Coventry Democratic Party, later subsumed into the national party (below)1982: Member of original Organization Committee of the Social Democratic Party and author of starter- pack material for local convenors; author of various background papers on future development of party politics generally and governance;1984: Author of Introduction to Computer-Assisted Learning ( Chapman and Hall Computing);1985: First retirement;1985: Was introduced to choral singing, one of the finest experiences of my life;1986: Joint-founder of Property Portraits Limited;1996: Corresponding member of Futurework List;1996: Second retirement;1997: Founder of Handlo Music Limited, publishers of early choral music, the first sheet music publisher on the Internet;2003: Third retirement;2003: Founder of Evolutionary Economics website.Deep and abiding interest in anthropology and neuroscience all through adult life and, more latterly, into evolutionary biology and its applications to economics and future political institutions and governance. Hoping to move soon from Bath to the village of Winsley for final retirement and the breeding of canaries (advice badly sought). then my signature and name again, pleaseBest wishes,KeithKeith Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org
[Futurework] Currency
this might be of interest. The Color of Money - How Currency Works http://money.howstuffworks.com/currency.htm When you hear the word currency, you probably think of the stuff in your wallet. But currency is really a very complex, fascinating aspect of human civilization. Especially these days, the value of money is utterly arbitrary -- did you know that there is no currency left that is actually backed by gold? ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Biography
yes http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ -Original Message-From: Lawrence DeBivort [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 2:21 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Biography Are our postings here being posted to a publicly accessible web site? -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tue, December 09, 2003 1:36 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Biography OK if people want to do it, but not mandatory. Privacy, anonymity and all that. arthur -Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 11:45 AMTo: Keith Hudson; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] Biography This is great. I think it would be wonderful if we finally arrived at an introduction type of post where we all do what Keith has done. These could then be put into an Introductions section at the web site and serve as a context file for each of us as we explore these things together. It also would be helpful if we posted the things that we are interested in, in relation to the Future of work and how we could help each other. Just a thought. What do you think Arthur, Sally? Ray Evans Harrell - Original Message - From: Keith Hudson To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 9:57 AM Subject: [Futurework] Biography Hi Frank,Here's stuff for my biography page. I've probably left something out -- I always do -- then I've got to fiddle the dates again!- PHOTO (again!) with name underneathBorn 1935; Educated at Bablake School and Lanchester College of Technology;1957-1967: Experience in industrial chemistry, technical management, quality control management at Courtaulds and Massey-Ferguson;1968-69: Experience as first professional writer of learning programmes in England with Inadcon, and wrote material for Vickers, Sloan-Duployan and Unesco; 1970: Founder of Warwickshire branch of Conservation Society;1971:With Noël Newsome, joint-author of report on industrial toxic wates dumping into the countryside to Department of Environment (known in the press at the time as the Cyanide Dossier) which resulted in the passage of Deposit of Poisonous Waste Act 1972 as emergency legislation, the first environmental legislation in the last century apart from clean air legislation;1972: Founder and editor of Towards Survival, one of the first environmental journals in the English-speaking world;1974: Member of Midland Executive of Liberal Party, author of industrial policy proposals for the Midlands;1975: Member of National Executive of the Liberal Party;1979: Founder of Jobs for Coventry Foundation, the first privately-sponsored training organisation in England for young unemployed people under the Youth Opportunities Programme;1982: Founder of Interskills, training organisation in computer and allied skills;1982: Founder of Coventry Democratic Party, later subsumed into the national party (below)1982: Member of original Organization Committee of the Social Democratic Party and author of starter- pack material for local convenors; author of various background papers on future development of party politics generally and governance;1984: Author of Introduction to Computer-Assisted Learning ( Chapman and Hall Computing);1985: First retirement;1985: Was introduced to choral singing, one of the finest experiences of my life;1986: Joint-founder of Property Portraits Limited;1996: Corresponding member of Futurework List;1996: Second retirement;1997: Founder of Handlo Music Limited, publishers of early choral music, the first sheet music publisher on the Internet;2003: Third retirement;2003: Founder of Evolutionary Economics website.Deep and abiding interest in anthropology and neuroscience all through adult life and, more latterly, into evolutionary biology and its applications to economics and future political institutions and governance. Hoping to move soon from Bath to the village of Winsley for final retirement and the breeding of canaries (advice badly sought). then my signature and name again, pleaseBest wishes,KeithKeith Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org
RE: [Futurework] Biography
amen. -Original Message- From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 3:52 PM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Biography If the idea of biographies on FW's site is taken further, then I suggest that they are restricted to, say, 40 words each, so there's a democratic element involved for any subscribers who are young and hitherto inexperienced or who do not want to parade too many personal details. What I think is tremendously important is to remember that innovative ideas nearly always occur to the young mind before it fills up with too much junk. So young minds are to be encouraged on FW. Keith Hudson s At 14:28 09/12/03 -0500, you wrote: yes http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/http://www.mai l-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ -Original Message- From: Lawrence DeBivort [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 2:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Biography Are our postings here being posted to a publicly accessible web site? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue, December 09, 2003 1:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Biography OK if people want to do it, but not mandatory. Privacy, anonymity and all that. arthur -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 11:45 AM To: Keith Hudson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Biography This is great. I think it would be wonderful if we finally arrived at an introduction type of post where we all do what Keith has done. These could then be put into an Introductions section at the web site and serve as a context file for each of us as we explore these things together. It also would be helpful if we posted the things that we are interested in, in relation to the Future of work and how we could help each other. Just a thought. What do you think Arthur, Sally? Ray Evans Harrell - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Keith Hudson To: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 9:57 AM Subject: [Futurework] Biography Hi Frank, Here's stuff for my biography page. I've probably left something out -- I always do -- then I've got to fiddle the dates again! - PHOTO (again!) with name underneath Born 1935; Educated at Bablake School and Lanchester College of Technology; 1957-1967: Experience in industrial chemistry, technical management, quality control management at Courtaulds and Massey-Ferguson; 1968-69: Experience as first professional writer of learning programmes in England with Inadcon, and wrote material for Vickers, Sloan-Duployan and Unesco; 1970: Founder of Warwickshire branch of Conservation Society; 1971:With Noël Newsome, joint-author of report on industrial toxic wates dumping into the countryside to Department of Environment (known in the press at the time as the Cyanide Dossier) which resulted in the passage of Deposit of Poisonous Waste Act 1972 as emergency legislation, the first environmental legislation in the last century apart from clean air legislation; 1972: Founder and editor of Towards Survival, one of the first environmental journals in the English-speaking world; 1974: Member of Midland Executive of Liberal Party, author of industrial policy proposals for the Midlands; 1975: Member of National Executive of the Liberal Party; 1979: Founder of Jobs for Coventry Foundation, the first privately-sponsored training organisation in England for young unemployed people under the Youth Opportunities Programme; 1982: Founder of Interskills, training organisation in computer and allied skills; 1982: Founder of Coventry Democratic Party, later subsumed into the national party (below) 1982: Member of original Organization Committee of the Social Democratic Party and author of starter- pack material for local convenors; author of various background papers on future development of party politics generally and governance; 1984: Author of Introduction to Computer-Assisted Learning ( Chapman and Hall Computing); 1985: First retirement; 1985: Was introduced to choral singing, one of the finest experiences of my life; 1986: Joint-founder of Property Portraits Limited; 1996: Corresponding member of Futurework List; 1996: Second retirement; 1997: Founder of Handlo Music Limited, publishers of early choral music, the first sheet music publisher on the Internet; 2003: Third retirement; 2003: Founder of Evolutionary Economics website. Deep and abiding interest in anthropology and neuroscience all through adult life and, more latterly, into evolutionary biology and its applications to economics and future political institutions and governance. Hoping to move soon from Bath
RE: Idiosyncracies (was RE: [Futurework] Biography ~ succinctness etc.
KH . I'm now allowing my beard to grow as long as Darwin's and maybe my success will follow AC What do you mean by "success." -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 4:54 PMTo: Brad McCormickCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Idiosyncracies (was RE: [Futurework] Biography ~ succinctness etc.At 16:06 09/12/2003 -0500, Brad McCormick wrote: Quoting Keith Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If the idea of biographies on FW's site is taken further, then I suggest that they are restricted to, say, 40 words each, so there's a democratic element involved for any subscribers who are young and hitherto inexperienced or who do not want to parade too many personal details. What I think is tremendously important is to remember that innovative ideas nearly always occur to the young mind before it fills up with too much junk. So young minds are to be encouraged on FW.How many could provide a 3 word biography, like Julius Caesar: Veni, vidi, vinci. (I came, I saw, I conquered.)Youth is not always correlated with innovative thinking.Immanuel Kant did not write anything of lasting valueuntil he was over 60 years old -- and then herevolutionized Western philosophy. I suppose that's so. Darwin was also quite ancient when he finally spewed out Origins. I'm now allowing my beard to grow as long as Darwin's and maybe my success will follow. Did Kant have any idiosynscracy that I can also adopt? -- so long as he wasn't a transvestite. Balzac could only write when wearing nightclothes but it's too cold in my office for that. Arnold Bennet and Georges Simenon both said independently that what's important is to write at least half-a-million words a year -- quality will inevitably follow quantity. At one posting a day on average I calculate that I'm falling lamentably short of that. On the other hand, Hardy used to do his writing before breakfast and before starting out on his horse establishing post offices. Well I do write my postings before breakfast and then take my dog for a walk before turning to the sordid business of making money, so that's a reasonable approximation.As for age being an advantage when writing in the humanities, then perhaps I can discover something new at my age. After all, I'm endeavouring to integrate the whole history (and pre-hisotry) of homo sapiens into my brilliantly innovative view of economics. Perhaps, at 68, I'm too young. Perhaps I ought to postpone the Great Book for another decade or so. Perhaps breeding canaries in my hoped-for olde worlde cottage for a few years will supply that serendipitous idea that will illuminate everything. I will tell the Nobel committee beforehand when the book is immient so they're prepared to move quickly while I'm still alive and before I die of some exotic canary-borne disease. Keith Hudson The real problemwith new ideas when you are old (or with getting a Nobelprize when you're 80...) is that you don't have thebody to go with it or the time to savor and build on it.In architecture, anybody under 40 is consideredtoo young to do really serious work. (I believe inmathematics it's the reverse, which may just say thatmathematics is not a humanistic discipline.)"Yours in time"\brad mccormick Keith Hudson s At 14:28 09/12/03 -0500, you wrote: yes http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ -Original Message- From: Lawrence DeBivort [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 2:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Biography Are our postings here being posted to a publicly accessible web site? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue, December 09, 2003 1:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Biography OK if people want to do it, but not mandatory. Privacy, anonymity and all that. arthur -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2003 11:45 AM To: Keith Hudson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Biography This is great. I think it would be wonderful if we finally arrived at an introduction type of post where we all do what Keith has done. These could then be put into an Introductions section at the web site and serve as a context file for each of us as we explore these things together. It also would be helpful if we posted the things that we are interested in, in relation to the Future of work and how we could help each other. Just a thought. What do you think Arthur, Sally?
RE: [Futurework] Biography ~ asides
Kurt Vonnegut wanted to have on his tombstone From somewhere to somewhere: He tried -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2003 9:57 PM To: Keith Hudson Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Biography ~ asides Every person has a biography (born - did - died). Although, to quote Michelet: the little people end up even more dead than the rest because their names are not preserved in history. But, among those who are higher than the low and lower than the high Some have resumes (e.g., computer programmers), while others have curriculum vitae (e.g., college teachers). All perish; few publish. (I once read/heard that 90% of people who get anything published never get a second publication.) Carpe diem (i.e., complain about how your time is stolen by your job or lack of same). I've been rereading a little essay by Hans Blumenberg: Shipwreck with spectator: Paradigm of a metaphor for existence (MIT, 1996) Perhaps the most lasting image from this essay is the idea that the sea effaces the wakes of all ships, big and small, afloat or sunk. Therefore, to speak of a path through life is at best questionable. \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Fw: Interesting
Thanx for this. Very interesting. arthur -Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, December 7, 2003 12:23 AMTo: futureworkSubject: [Futurework] Fw: Interesting Was wandering through the Washington Post on my birthday and came up with this article. I found it interesting. REH washingtonpost.com Polarization Myths . . . By Robert J. SamuelsonWednesday, December 3, 2003; Page A29 One of today's popular myths is that we've become a more "polarized" society. We're said to be divided increasingly by politics (liberals vs. conservatives), social values (traditionalists vs. modernists), religion (fundamentalists vs. everyone else), race and ethnicity. What's actually happened is that our political and media elites have become polarized, and they assume that this is true for everyone else. It isn't. Anyone who lived through the 1960s, when struggles over Vietnam and civil rights spilled into the streets and split families, must know that we're much less polarized today. It's not a close call. Unlike then, today's polarization exists mainly on the public stage among politicians, TV talking heads, columnists and intellectuals. Still, the polarization myth persists. Consider a new report from the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, which bulges with public opinion data that show (it says) "rising political polarization and anger." Actually, the data -- stretching from the late 1980s until now -- don't show that at all. It's true that over this period political allegiances have shifted slightly. Republicans gained, Democrats lost. As late as 1987, about 35 percent of adults considered themselves Democrats, 26 percent Republicans and 39 percent independents (including those who "don't know"). Now it's a dead heat: 31 percent Democrats, 30 percent Republicans and 39 percent independents. Gaps on some issues between political parties have predictably widened. If Democrats favoring a stronger military become Republican, party differences on that issue will rise. But polarization -- a visceral loathing of your opponent -- increases only if partisans feel more rabidly about their views. Here, little has changed. One standard survey question is whether Democrats and Republicans consider themselves "strong" party members. In the late 1980s slightly less than half of Republicans considered themselves "strong" Republicans; it's still slightly less than half. Among Democrats, about half are now "strong" and were then, too. Beyond partisan divisions, Americans share many basic beliefs. After Sept. 11, 2001, patriotism remains high. Most people (two-thirds or more) believe that hard work promotes success. Indeed, many opinions have hardly budged since the late 1980s. Surveys asked whether: * The United States should be "active in world affairs" -- 87 percent said yes in 1987, 90 percent now. * "Government should restrict and control people coming into our country" more than it does -- 76 percent agreed in 1992, 77 percent now. * "There is too much power concentrated in the hands of a few big companies" -- 77 percent said so in both 1987 and 2003. What's more important is that the changes that have occurred -- generally outside politics -- signal more, not less, tolerance, as the Pew data show. There seems to be a general shift in attitudes, led by changes among the young. Consider race. In 1987, 48 percent thought it "all right for blacks and whites to date"; now 77 percent do. Something similar has occurred on homosexuality. By a 51 percent to 42 percent margin, Americans believed in 1987 that "school boards ought to have the right to fire teachers who are known homosexuals''; now that's rejected, 62 percent to 33 percent. Sociologist Alan Wolfe of Boston College, after conducting extensive interviews with middle-class families, reached similar conclusions. "Reluctant to pass judgment, they are tolerant to a fault, not about everything -- they have not come to accept homosexuality as normal and they intensely dislike bilingualism -- but about a surprising number of things, including rapid transformation in the family, legal immigration, multicultural education and separation of church and state," he wrote in "One Nation, After All" (1999). This tolerance, Wolfe argued, springs partly from middle-class fears that "our society might become hopelessly divided." Cherishing "the belief in one nation," many ordinary Americans disdain fierce moral combat. Wolfe decided that the vaunted "culture war" is "being fought primarily by intellectuals." Just so. Today's polarization mainly divides the broad public from political, intellectual and media elites. Of course, sharp differences define democracy. We've always had them. From Iraq to
RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching
Just about everywhere. -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 4:09 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching Arthur, Perhaps we should check on what has already replaced human intelligence. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 6:11 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching Eventually machine intelligence will replace human intelligence throughout the economy. Wonder if the final outcome will be good or bad Productivity will have increased but human interaction (at least in these traditional areas such as education and probably health care) will have decreased. Arthur --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003 ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) (w as Re: Slightly extended)
I am tempted to agree. In a society that doesn't value learning why should we divert tax dollars into universities of learning so that accreditation can take place while learning does not. Seems a parody and a waste and a further example of dumbing down. arthur -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 4:28 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) (was Re: Slightly extended) Arthur, When I read it, I agreed with Chris' remarks. Except of course his aside on protectionism. There are probably areas almost the size of Switzerland in the US where there is little crime and living is good. There are other areas that aren't like that, However, unless thought is given to the basics such as education, we will get nowhere with our slapped on social poultices. Talking with a friend last night who teaches Junior College kids. When they find he wants written work, they flee to other classes. He's left with those who can't find another class. He says he should fail 75% of them but veteran teachers tell him to pass them through. Our only hope in the US in many places is to make education voluntary. Teachers should teach only those who want to learn - or whose parents want them to learn. Also, teachers should be allowed tax money to run their own schools. I suggested the economics of this a week or two ago. (The State could save money and the teachers would get a hefty raise. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) (was Re: Slightly extended) Chris, I think you and Harry might just have something in common with this idea. Your plan assumes some degree of social cohesion (that there are relatives that there is a local community.) Assumptions aside, I like the idea. So count me in with you and, perhaps, Harry. arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) (was Re: Slightly extended) Arthur Cordell wrote: We can end poverty. There can be a basic income. Who is supposed to pay a general BI ? It would be just fighting symptoms anyway, worsening the causes. There's a better system: Have an education system that minimizes the number of people who can't make ends meet. For the few remaining ones, help them to get as good a job as they can handle, and/or have their relatives pay for their basic needs. For the _very_ few remaining ones then, have their local community pay their basic needs (rentfood) until they are restored to earn money again. Result: No foodbanks, and no starvation either (and low crime rate too). Yet, low taxes. Guess which country this is? Harry may rant about protectionism as much as he wants, but there _are_ upsides to it! Chris ~ ~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003 ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Title: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
Ed,
when the poor kick back politicians will act.
-Original Message-From: Ed Weick
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 9:32
AMTo: Harry Pollard; 'Thomas Lunde';
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was
Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern
Trade
I'm not laughing, Harry. I've just accessed a
report by the Canadian Council on Social Development that shows that poverty
in urban areas, including poverty among the working poor, increased in
Canada between 1990 and 1995. It has probably continued to increase
since then. I'm not sure of what can be done about it, but I would agree
with Arthur that foodbanks are not the answer. Neither is kicking the
poor harder, as politicians seem increasingly to want to do.
Ed
- Original Message -
From:
Harry Pollard
To: 'Ed Weick' ; 'Thomas
Lunde' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 4:09
AM
Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re:
[Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
Ed,
Not only to liberty and justice not taste too well,
when they aren't there to taste, you will be sure that ends will not
meet.
Two hundred years ago, Ricardo postulated the "Iron
Law of Wages" and about 125 years ago George picked it up and ran with it.
Of course that's all Classical stuff - out-of-date for these complex
modern economies.
So, we have welfare for people with full-time jobs
who can't survive on what they get. We even have a name for them - the
working poor. We have a law to force employers to pay a minimum wage, when
in the England of half a millennium or so ago - there was a law to
keep wages down (the Statute of Laborers).
Why don't we laugh? Even though it might sound a
trifle hollow.
So, in ten years, or twenty, or a hundred, will we
still be trying but failing to provide something for an ever increasing
number of the poor?
On second thoughts, don't
laugh.
Harry
Henry George School of Social
Science of Los
Angeles Box
655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818
352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed
WeickSent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 6:08 AMTo:
Thomas Lunde; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly
extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern
Trade
Thomas, very good posting. Ontario has just
raised the minimum wage from peanuts to peanuts. Many of the poor are
working full time and even double time, but are still unable to meet the
rent or buy enough food, let alone get their kids the kinds of in toys
("status goods") that are going around. They can try eating freedom
and justice, but they don't taste very good when you can't make ends
meet.
Ed
- Original Message -
From:
Thomas Lunde
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003
3:36 AM
Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was
Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
They don't need money, Thomas. They need
justice and the freedom to enjoy it.HarryThomas:In a way,
you are right. Being poor and working with the poor as customers
and neighbours let's me see the many ways the poor are lacking justice.
A recent article in the paper made the outstanding statement that
37% of workers in Canada are not covered by the Labour Code and laws.
When wages for the poor are kept artificially low, then the only
way to compensate to maintain a survival standard is to work more.
Of course, there are about 4 to 5% who are mentally incapable, or
physically disabled or in the case of single mothers, family challenged.
However, the work more solution has only produced the working
poor, who still have to use food banks and subsidized housing, if thet
can get it. Not only that, as you suggest, they do not even have
the freedom to enjoy what little they have. I would agree, that
justice and freedom would go a long way to compensating for money - or
as you might suggest, make the earning and spending of money a by
product of an effective system of justice and the freedom and thereby
create a surplus to enjoy.Respectfully,Thomas Lunde
---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version:
RE: [Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: For Middle Class, Health In surance Becomes a Luxury
Compulsory cross licensing might be a good way to go. Patents good for 17 years, compulsory cross licensing after 5 years (or so). This allows generics to offer products, if they so choose. It's all about balance. arthur -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 10:02 AM To: Harry Pollard; Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: For Middle Class, Health Insurance Becomes a Luxury Once you get rid of the patent system which includes copyrights how would you pay people for their creativity? REH - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 3:01 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: For Middle Class, Health Insurance Becomes a Luxury Arthur, We could start by getting rid of the patent system that articially raises drug prices along with the bottom lines of the huge drug companies. This money helps them pay off Congress. If you saw the Bill Moyer show on Friday you would appreciate why Eisenhower originally intended to call it the military-industrial-congressional complex. Of course the other privileges should also go - primarily the one that gives some people the ability to collect Economic Rent - or rather an amount much higher than economic Rent, because the price mechanism doesn't control Rent. Thus it becomes something known throughout history - rack-rent - the path to poverty for generations of peasants. So, we are back to the problems in the article. If the basics are not dealt with, such problems will always be with us. But as Thoreau said: There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root . . . . So, I'll keep striking, perhaps to little avail, leaving the rest of you to get sweaty hacking away at those branches. Of course there is great benefit to doing that, That's the psychological uplift that reformers get even if nothing of consequence is accomplished. I know - I've been one. So, work on a dozen or a hundred programs designed to ameliorate rather than end misery. It passes the time. Harry PS It costs $266 a month for a 59 year old to join Kaiser. That $275 for Ms Pard's nine year old seem a bit stiff. Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 4:45 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: For Middle Class, Health Insurance Becomes a Luxury So, Harry P., how do you deal with this?? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 3:38 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: For Middle Class, Health Insurance Becomes a Luxury This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] For those who are not NYT subscribers. [EMAIL PROTECTED] / advertisement ---\ FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION: IN AMERICA - IN THEATRES NOVEMBER 26 Fox Searchlight Pictures proudly presents IN AMERICA directed by Academy Award(R) Nominee Jim Sheridan (My Left Foot and In The Name of the Father). IN AMERICA stars Samantha Morton, Paddy Considine and Djimon Hounsou. For more info: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/inamerica \--/ For Middle Class, Health Insurance Becomes a Luxury November 16, 2003 By STEPHANIE STROM DALLAS - The last time Kevin Thornton had health insurance was three years ago, which was not much of a problem until he began having trouble swallowing. I broke down earlier this year and went in and talked to a doctor about it, said Mr. Thornton, who lives in Sherman, about 60 miles north of Dallas. A barium X-ray cost him $130, and the radiologist another $70, expenses he charged to his credit cards. The doctor ordered other tests that Mr. Thornton simply could not afford. I was supposed to go back after the X-ray results came, but I decided just to live with it for a while, he said. I may just be a walking time bomb. Mr. Thornton, 41, left a stable job with good health coverage in 1998 for a higher salary at a dot-com company that went bust a few months later. Since then, he has worked on contract for various companies, including one that provided insurance until the project ended in 2000. I failed to keep up the payments that would have been required to maintain my coverage, he said. It was just too much money
RE: [Futurework] Re: Hobbes
Recognizing this, civil society developed and put in place a set of laws and other tools of governance and sanctions for those "who roll around in the sink" too much. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, December 5, 2003 11:47 AMTo: Stephen Straker; futurework; Selma SingerSubject: [Futurework] Re: Hobbes Thank you, Stephen. It makes one think about the darkness that Hobbes was trying to penetrate. I have a PBS video on the life of Napoleon that I watched the other night. What struck me was how quickly a people who, on the basis of the equality and rights of all men, beheaded a king, shifted to crowning an emperor because they again wanted to submerge their equality and rights into something they saw as greater than themselves. When I was a very young man, fresh out of university, I had a boss who became one of my mentors. He based his knowledge of human behaviour on cats. He had several cats, very large ones. When he had us out to his place, he would invariably set his cats on the kitchen counter and sprinkle catnip into the sink. The cats would jump into the sink and start roiling around. "See, see!" he would say in mock amazement, "Look at those cats!" And then he would always look us directly in the eye and add: "Never forget ... Never ever forget, people are just like pussy cats, ten percent conscious and ninety percent unconscious. And it's the ninety percent you have to worry about!" I don't know if he had his percentages right, but as I found in progressing through my career, he had a point. Ed - Original Message - From: "Stephen Straker" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Ed Weick" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "futurework" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Selma Singer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 3:15 AM Subject: Re: Hobbes Sorry to be so long replying on Hobbes. I have beenmeditating a decent response. Ed says: ... I must say I've never felt comfortable with Hobbes' articulation of man in the "state of nature". It depicts man as solitary, acting only to satisfy himself, being nothing more than an "organic automaton". Personally, I don't think it was ever like that. First, we have always lived not by ourselves, but in groups, and groups were always governed by codes of behaviour... As you note later, Hobbes does not understand himself to begiving a *historical* account. It may well be that it hasnever been "like that" for any historical society. But we can do the thought-experiment. What is it LIKE, whatis our condition *in the absence of civil authority*? Ans:It is like when there is civil war (as, very sadly, in someparts of the world right now). Speaking perhaps more directly to us, Hobbes says that thereis another way to see political actors living in "the stateof nature" -- take a look at international relations;consider the sovereign rulers of the sovereign states in theworld. Between them there is no law, no mine or thine, nocommon power to keep them all in awe thus to enforceobedience. There is only the practicalities and tenuousagreements, for the time being and every one of thembreakable. The invasion of Iraq shows this as clearly asanything could. [Thus there is ultimately a Hobbesian argument for worldgovernment (though he never argued for such a thing).] Thus a simple answer to Selma Singer, who asked: Something that has always puzzled me about Hobbes: In what way does the writing he does profit him? In what way does the fact of his being a writer, philosopher, generator of ideas, support and validate the philosophy he writes about? Hobbes wants us all to understand clearly: what a sovereign,what government, *is*, what a citizen is, what the nature oflegitimate political authority is, and, in short, why anyoneshould ever obey any law. He believes that almost everyone is grotesquely anddangerously confused about these things and thereforesubject themselves to the most slavish and absurdarrangements. He can make his argument from clear firstprinciples and he thinks it is persuasive. **It's all in your head**It has always seemed to me important to underline andemphasize one especially important feature of Hobbes'sargument: he is urging us to *revise* the way we look upon,and relate to, a landscape that remains largely familiar. Hewants us to look at it from another angle and see it as it*really* is for the first time. At one level nothing at allchanges. Daily life goes on and the things, people characters who populate our world remain intact - Dukesremain, princes remain, paupers and yoeman and farmers andsoldiers remain, just as before. But who they really are andwhat our relationship to them all is radically reconfigured.Give your head a shake and see it all for what it is. We are matter in motion,
RE: [Futurework] Soviet America?
You are right to be concerned. See below. --- What's in a name: Homeland security / Front Page -The Olympian ... Adolf Hitler exhorted German troops on the Eastern front with the words, With bated breath, the blessing of the entire German homeland accompanies you ... http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20020908/frontpage/46506.shtml -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, December 5, 2003 6:05 PM To: Ray Evans Harrell Cc: futurework Subject: Re: [Futurework] Soviet America? Ray Evans Harrell wrote: So, would America be doing such a thing if there was still a cold war and we had to put on a pretty face for the rest of the world compared to the terrible KGB and Soviet detention?We should have seen this coming when the Republicans began to write their House bills in Soviet Agit-prop language.Homeland Security Act no less. Next we will have the Patriotism for nice people only act.Democrats need not apply.I will not forget this and forgiveness will come very hard. I don't know if the word Homeland gives anyone else the creeps. REH December 5, 2003 Guantánamo Chaplain and His Wife Speak Out By SARAH KERSHAW [snip] Many American people came to me and said, `Do not be angry with us,' she said. I cannot blame all the American people. Praise God, I love America and I want to live here, but in better times. [snip] I thought this was eloquent and synoptic when I read it. The times do indeed seem to be a'changing. And I think the best is yet to come, during Dubya's second term \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Title: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade I agree with your analysis, Ed. Social change is ongoing and new alliances will be formed---but out of necessity. The three groups you mention don't have to work together or even acknowledge each other as long as good hearted middle class folk are handing out free food. Turn off the tap and you will see cooperation and shared understanding aplenty. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 11:17 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Ed, when the poor kick back politicians will act. I agree, and in some cases they have on matters such as housing, for example. But they can't seem to present any kind of unified front. The people I described as using my food bank, older guys from the valley, embarrassed young mothers with kids, and the young who graced us with their presence really wanted to have very little to do with each other. What we need is a unification of the poor and politicians who pay attention to them, but we seem to have run out ofpeople likeTommy Douglas, Stanley Knowles and David Lewis and we now seem to have a plethora of people like Peter MacKay, Stephen Harper and Paul Martin, people who pay far more attention to the rich than the poor. In the past few decades, the political drift has been rightward, and the drift of societyas a whole has been toward the establishment of a middle class identity that seespovertyterms of personal flaw and the poor as undeserving. Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 10:37 AM Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Ed, when the poor kick back politicians will act. -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 9:32 AMTo: Harry Pollard; 'Thomas Lunde'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade I'm not laughing, Harry. I've just accessed a report by the Canadian Council on Social Development that shows that poverty in urban areas, including poverty among the working poor, increased in Canada between 1990 and 1995. It has probably continued to increase since then. I'm not sure of what can be done about it, but I would agree with Arthur that foodbanks are not the answer. Neither is kicking the poor harder, as politicians seem increasingly to want to do. Ed - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard To: 'Ed Weick' ; 'Thomas Lunde' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 4:09 AM Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Ed, Not only to liberty and justice not taste too well, when they aren't there to taste, you will be sure that ends will not meet. Two hundred years ago, Ricardo postulated the "Iron Law of Wages" and about 125 years ago George picked it up and ran with it. Of course that's all Classical stuff - out-of-date for these complex modern economies. So, we have welfare for people with full-time jobs who can't survive on what they get. We even have a name for them - the working poor. We have a law to force employers to pay a minimum wage, when in the England of half a millennium or so ago - there was a law to keep wages down (the Statute of Laborers). Why don't we laugh? Even though it might sound a trifle hollow. So, in ten years, or twenty, or a hundred, will we still be trying but failing to provide something for an ever increasing number of the poor? On second thoughts, don't laugh. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed WeickSent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 6:08 AMTo: Thomas Lun
RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching
Agree. When we disconnect work from income, as you suggest, then how do people receive income? arthur -Original Message- From: Franklin Wayne Poley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 1:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching On Mon, 8 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There will always be a need for human intelligence. As human intelligence gets encoded into routine functions, productivity rises while fewer and fewer people are needed in the labour force. Good or bad? Depends on how we distribute the new wealth of nations The educational wealth of nations could be mass distributed NOW by teaching machines so that the poorest eligible student on the planet would receive quality higher education at little more than the cost of pc use. The question about MIT's $100,000,000 OCW venture is how much is boon and how much is doggle. That works out to $50,000/course. If they give me a budget like that I will ensure that not only are the course materials presented, but also the ENTIRE COURSE WILL BE TAUGHT. And it will be taught by teaching machine and the human professors will have to redefine their roles in society. The financial contributions of Microsoft to MIT for purportedly innovative education make me very suspicious. Microsoft's big programs like Windows and VS .NET are accompanied by such pathetic pedagogy in the books and manuals which purport to explain them that I have to think that the doggle part of this is deliberate. In other words they are protecting intellectual property by using deliberate methods of confusion so it is really counter-education disguised as education, misanthropy disguised as philanthropy. I guess some people learned their Cold War lessons well. Now there is a new kind of social class war: technolords against technopeasants. I would be happy to show Microsoft how to put out a first rate manual to accompany Windows or .NET but that does not appear to be what they want. So much for that quaint old slogan, The customer is always right. By keeping the technopeasant masses in the dark, the technolords have also raised up a new social class beholden to them, the technopriests. Technopriests disguised as technicians practice hermeneutics by teaching the ignorant peasants (alias customers) how to interpret the 'icons' (defined as religious symbols) for program use when any good manual would make this new priesthood unnecessary. That is what I would like to see Charlie Rose discuss the next time he has President Vest on as guest. FWP -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 4:09 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching Arthur, who establishes the codes? Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 1:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching As the saying goes, the smarter the machine the dumber need be the operator. With machine intelligence there will be little need for operators to know anything but punching in the codes--this goes for computerized machine tools or smart microwaves or smart cars. Arthur --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 12/5/2003 ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof)
Taking the neutrality stance I think makes Switzerland a very special place and must cause the Swiss to think of themselves as somewhat special thereby giving them a degree of social cohesion. Or does the causation circle go the other way around, with social cohesion coming first and thus the degree of self to lead to the position of neutrality? You suggest that the educational/poverty problems (which I agree are structual) of eg., Canada, do not exist in Switzerland. Is this so? arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 1:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) Harry Pollard wrote: When I read it, I agreed with Chris' remarks. Except of course his aside on protectionism. The problem is that the system I described wouldn't work under Free Market conditions. Our only hope in the US in many places is to make education voluntary. Teachers should teach only those who want to learn - or whose parents want them to learn. What about the others? This screw the rest attitude is so typical of the FT ideology. It only makes things worse. Btw, learning disabilities are increasing. I.e there are children who may want to learn (and whose parents want them to learn) but who are unable to learn (effectively). This is mainly due to effects of corporate policies (junk-food malnutrition, dental mercury, drugs, cell-phone radiation etc.), so blaming state schools in general and praising privatization/corporatization is really making the fox guard the henhouse. Chris SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching
THE NEW ECONOMY IS BACK -- BUT NOT THE JOBSThe latest economic indicators -- rising productivity, fewer jobs -- couldsignal a vindication for all those IT managers who spent big bucks ontechnology improvements in the last decade, says Fortune columnist DavidKirkpatrick: "We may be entering the second great technology boom. Thefirst one, of the late '90s, was a boom in expectations, which pushed upstock valuations and investor enthusiasm in the belief that the newtechnologies born of the Internet would fundamentally transform theeconomy. Contrary to what over-eager investors thought in the '90s, theusers of the technology, not the producers, will be the biggerbeneficiaries." Comparing today's corporate processes with those existingthe last time the U.S. emerged from a recession, there are strikingdifferences. Today, most large manufacturers have built a significant,sophisticated enterprise resource planning (ERP) infrastructure to automatethe supply chain and provide real-time data on inventory and profits.E-commerce is now routine -- both for manufacturing giants and forconsumers. Communication among workers both within corporations and betweencompanies is now automated via e-mail and Web portals, speeding theimplementation of corporate edicts and the fulfillment of business orders.Meanwhile the casualty of all this efficiency has been jobs -- about 2million eliminated in the last two years in the U.S. as companiesstreamline processes and outsource functions to overseas workers. Andthat's not likely to change, says Kirkpatrick, who warns, "To keep your jobin this new world, you'd better be doing something that benefits from adigitized economy." (Fortune.com 4 Dec 2003)http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/12/04/fortune.ff.real.boom/index.html-Original Message-From: Franklin Wayne Poley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 1:36 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future TeachingOn Mon, 8 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There will always be a need for human intelligence. As human intelligence gets encoded into routine functions, productivity rises while fewer and fewer people are needed in the labour force. Good or bad? Depends on how we distribute "the new wealth of nations"The educational wealth of nations could be mass distributed NOW byteaching machines so that the poorest eligible student on the planetwould receive quality higher education at little more than the cost of pcuse. The question about MIT's $100,000,000 OCW venture is how much is"boon" and how much is "doggle". That works out to $50,000/course. If theygive me a budget like that I will ensure that not only are the coursematerials presented, but also the ENTIRE COURSE WILL BE TAUGHT. And itwill be taught by teaching machine and the human professors will haveto redefine their roles in society.The financial contributions of Microsoft to MIT for purportedlyinnovative education make me very suspicious. Microsoft's big programslike Windows and VS .NET are accompanied by such pathetic pedagogy in thebooks and manuals which purport to explain them that I have to think thatthe "doggle" part of this is deliberate. In other words they areprotecting intellectual property by using deliberate methods of confusionso it is really counter-education disguised as education, misanthropydisguised as philanthropy. I guess some people learned their Cold Warlessons well. Now there is a new kind of social class war: technolordsagainst technopeasants. I would be happy to show Microsoft how to put outa first rate manual to accompany Windows or .NET but that does not appearto be what they want. So much for that quaint old slogan, "The customer isalways right".By keeping the technopeasant masses in the dark, the technolordshave also raised up a new social class beholden to them, thetechnopriests. Technopriests disguised as technicians practicehermeneutics by teaching the ignorant peasants (alias customers) how tointerpret the 'icons' (defined as religious symbols) for program use whenany good manual would make this new priesthood unnecessary.That is what I would like to see Charlie Rose discuss the next time he hasPresident Vest on as guest.FWP -Original Message- From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, December 8, 2003 4:09 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching Arthur, who establishes the codes? Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ma
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
e than a decade or so longer, anyway, before total collapse ensues (unless the most amazing reforms are made very soon). A BI sounds wonderful but it is a theoretical solution that runs absolutely counter to human nature. Human society is about relative status. Not only human society, but primate society. And not only primate society but any social mammalian society. We really need to understand this first before we can suggest quite new social structures that will satisfy our basic instincts -- and, if possible, basic incomes also. But not before then. Extending welfarism beyond what we have now in most developed countries, desirable though it might sound (and I don't object to it on moral grounds), is already running itself into the ground. Keith We live in a democracy. As Amartya Sen said, there is no history of starvation in democracies. As I said in my earlier posting, the current system may be remarkably stable. arthur -Original Message- From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 1:12 PM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade So what if all the righteous middle class people stopped sending their unused canned goods to the food banks? Well the hungry people might just vote in a government that promises radical change. Right now everyone wins: political parties promise change and don't; middle class feels good about sending food to the food bank; working poor can supplement their foodstock by heading to the food bank. The system may be quite stable. Maybe there really is no wish to change. arthur I'm on the Board of a downtown foodbank and have spent a little time there. The people who came to pick up food fell into several groups. There were older men, fifty plus, who had migrated to Ottawa because there was nothing for them in the valley communities. Their education and skills were limited, so there was nothing in Ottawa either. There were young mothers, some with children, who gave you every impression that they didn't want to be there; they hurried in and they hurried out. There were a number of cocky young people, some perhaps students, some living at the "Y", who acted as though they were indulging the foodbank with their presence. None of these people acted as though they wanted to change the system. All they wanted was the food - except for the older guys who also seemed to want to hang around and talk a little. There's an aura of powerlessness about it. The churches that operate the foodbank know that if they didn't do it, nobody would. So they keep doing it and their members keep bringing the cans of tuna and the packages of pasta. The churches might want to take an advocacy position, but that might infringe on their charitable status. The politicians get themselves elected and their promises become mere promises, not commitments. Most of the people who use the foodbank hate doing it, but they need to eat. Watching it without having to depend on it, I wish it would all go away. But it won't. It's what the world is like and how it will stay. Perhaps Canadians, as people who live in the developed world, should feel fortunate that they can afford foodbanks. Ever so many parts of the world can't, and people starve. Ed -Original Message- From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2003 9:08 AM To: Thomas Lunde; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Thomas, very good posting. Ontario has just raised the minimum wage from peanuts to peanuts. Many of the poor are working full time and even double time, but are still unable to meet the
RE: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/
I lived in NY Ray, and in many ways New Yorkers deny the rest of the country. For them it is often The City and the rest of the country, and perhaps The Coast. arthur -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 2:44 PM To: Brad McCormick, Ed.D.; Ed Weick Cc: futurework Subject: Re: [Futurework] http://www.glaesernemanufaktur.de/ Brad you said: I think the idea of the transparent factory is worth thinking about, even if as something we won't be able to enjoy in our work life because we live in a neocon instead of a social welfare country. Here is a thought from a neo-con columnist who thought he was being funny but came pretty close to telling the truth. New York (City anyway) is a different country. We do think about social welfare and a symmetrical synergy rather than this unbalanced fundamentalism that has to deny the world in order to exist. REH December 6, 2003 OP-ED COLUMNIST Going Native for 2004 By DAVID BROOKS o: Tom DeLay From: A Concerned Conservative Dear Tom, This week I read that you have abandoned plans to house Republicans safely on a cruise ship off the island of Manhattan during the G.O.P. convention in New York this summer. Have you paused to consider what this will mean? It will mean that instead of spending time in a secure environment offshore, kind, decent Republicans will be wandering innocently among packs of inflamed New York liberals. They'll be subjected to long harangues that rely heavily on the words multilateral, Kyoto and John Ashcroft. They'll get condescending looks when they go into a deli and order a strawberry and chocolate chip bagel with pineapple cream cheese - a perfectly acceptable bagel option in most suburbs. They will naïvely pick up The Village Voice, thinking it contains small-town news. When the Utah delegation pauses to say grace before dinner at Elaine's, the cultural dissonance will be so great it will be measurable on the Richter scale. Tom, New York is not a place where Republicans can feel at home. New York has Central Park, which is a large pastoral area without a single putting green. It is a city with nearly eight million people, none of whom own riding mowers. New Yorkers suffer from liberal anhedonia, which is the inability to derive pleasure from grossly oversized pieces of machinery. So when a Republican starts a perfectly normal conversation about the glories of his powerboat, snowmobile, combine or hemi, the liberal is likely to screech out something about the ozone layer. New York is a city of strange rituals. The people live in these vertical gated communities they call apartment buildings, but they don't seem to have normal family structures. If a Martian landed in a Manhattan playground, he would conclude that human beings start out small and white, and grow up to become middle-aged Jamaican women. In Manhattan, when an oldest child turns 12, entire families disappear overnight. If we are really going to abandon the idea of having a secure cruise ship offshore, we've got to reduce Republican delegates' vulnerability by giving them the information and tools they will need to camouflage themselves as New York liberals. I am willing to work up an instructional video - How to Be Ruth Messinger in 12 Easy Steps - but in the meantime we need to send out a fact sheet. We need to tell prospective G.O.P. delegates what sort of clothing they cannot wear in New York: pastels, pleated pants, khakis, Docksiders and tassels. If a Republican was seen walking down Riverside Drive wearing his normal outfit - tasseled loafers, no socks, green pants, a festive plaid sports jacket and a faded Hawaiian Tommy Bahama shirt - some New Yorker would come up and ask him if he could bring Paris Hilton out to his home for a reality series. We also need to tell them what they will need to blend in: dark, rumpled clothing, frayed shopping bags from the Strand, logo-less sweatshirts, Yasir Arafat-style facial hair and those black rectangular glasses that make everybody look like a Dutch architect. We're going to have to give them phrases they can use in case they are called upon to make elevator small talk. We have to give them examples of sentiments they should avoid (You're Jewish? Oh, I love your Ariel Sharon!), and examples of phrases they should use (Nice weather we're having. Too bad about the climate of McCarthyism settling over the land.) I don't like thinking about Orrin Hatch in a do-rag any more than you do, but this problem is going to require creative thinking. Liberalism doesn't just happen. It is a product of a certain environment. I'm afraid if our stouthearted Republicans find themselves in New York, with its insufficient closet space and inadequate kitchen counters, they may start turning liberal themselves. They may start caring about what happens inside Condé Nast, taking Quentin Tarantino seriously, practicing therapeutic yoga and fantasizing about
RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching
Eventually machine intelligence will replace human intelligence throughout the economy. Wonder if the final outcome will be good or bad Productivity will have increased but human interaction (at least in these traditional areas such as education and probably health care) will have decreased. arthur -Original Message- From: Franklin Wayne Poley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2003 8:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] Future Teaching Have a look at the robotic teacher I'd like to hire from King's College, London: http://www.geocities.com/machine_psychology/IMP_Cover_Page -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:35:46 -0800 (PST) From: Franklin Wayne Poley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IMP] Final Lesson 36 There are typically 36 hours of class time for a one semester, 3-credit course. Lessons 31-35 are more in the nature of an assignment: draft out a set of menus and prompts for the SEE-to-C program or even go further and turn that into C code if you are so inclined. How much of my notes on SEE-to-C I will post eventually on the expert system program for C code writing, I do not know. If I am correct about this (and you can find out by trying to write SEE-to-C for yourself) then future students can forget about texts like Aitken and Jones (Teach Yourself C in 21 Days) or a course like COMP 2425 at BCIT which takes about 144 hours. Gary Livick's C-programmed robot, Etcetera, will be able to teach C in one hour. Final lesson 36 is titled Godbot and it is designed to stimulate some creative and metaphysical thinking. If anyone has SPECIFIC criticisms I will welcome them. I certainly don't want to cap off a course which I have spent so much time developing, with any errors. http://www.geocities.com/machine_psychology/The_Ghost_In_The_Machine FWP Yahoo! Groups Sponsor -~-- Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511 http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/pU_rlB/TM -~- Machine Psychology has to do with machine substitution for the phenomena which are the traditional subject matter of psychology. IMP is being taught according to the slogan of automated teaching: THE STUDENT IS ALWAYS RIGHT! Courseware is being designed so that IMP will stand alone as a machine teacher without needing any further input from human teachers. http://www.geocities.com/machine_psychology/Table_of_Lessons Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Title: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
So
what if all the righteous middle class people stopped sending their unused
canned goods to the food banks? Well the hungry people might just vote in
a government that promises radical change.Right now everyone
wins: political parties promise change and don't; middle class feels good about
sending food to the food bank; working poor can supplement their foodstock by
heading to the food bank. The system may be quite stable. Maybe
there really is no wish to change.
arthur
-Original Message-From: Ed Weick
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2003 9:08
AMTo: Thomas Lunde;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was
Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern
Trade
Thomas, very good posting. Ontario has just
raised the minimum wage from peanuts to peanuts. Many of the poor are
working full time and even double time, but are still unable to meet the rent
or buy enough food, let alone get their kids the kinds of in toys ("status
goods") that are going around. They can try eating freedom and justice,
but they don't taste very good when you can't make ends meet.
Ed
- Original Message -
From:
Thomas
Lunde
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 3:36
AM
Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re:
[Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
They don't need money, Thomas. They
need justice and the freedom to enjoy it.HarryThomas:In a way, you
are right. Being poor and working with the poor as customers and
neighbours let's me see the many ways the poor are lacking justice.
A recent article in the paper made the outstanding statement that
37% of workers in Canada are not covered by the Labour Code and laws.
When wages for the poor are kept artificially low, then the only way
to compensate to maintain a survival standard is to work more. Of
course, there are about 4 to 5% who are mentally incapable, or physically
disabled or in the case of single mothers, family challenged.
However, the work more solution has only produced the working poor,
who still have to use food banks and subsidized housing, if thet can get
it. Not only that, as you suggest, they do not even have the freedom
to enjoy what little they have. I would agree, that justice and
freedom would go a long way to compensating for money - or as you might
suggest, make the earning and spending of money a by product of an
effective system of justice and the freedom and thereby create a surplus
to enjoy.Respectfully,Thomas
Lunde
RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching
As the saying goes, the smarter the machine the dumber need be the operator. With machine intelligence there will be little need for operators to know anything but punching in the codes--this goes for computerized machine tools or smart microwaves or smart cars. arthur -Original Message- From: pete [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 1:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eventually machine intelligence will replace human intelligence throughout the economy. Wonder if the final outcome will be good or bad Productivity will have increased but human interaction (at least in these traditional areas such as education and probably health care) will have decreased. arthur I guess this is a good place to relate an experience I had today. I'm currently at CERN, helping to install some pieces of hardware we've cobbled up into the next great accelerator - big science at its most impressive. Anyway, we had this huge piece of hardware held up on supports in the middle of a large workroom, when a couple of girls came in, one with a camera, and one with a laptop under her arm. I thought, perhaps the CERN Courier is going to do another little article on the progress of our project. But instead, these two take out a bunch of little black squares about the size of postit notes, and start climbing up and sticking them all over the construction. I'm not sure if they were adhesive, or like fridge magnets, or both. Each square has a one cm white spot in the centre, but each has a differently segmented white circle around the central dot, at about 3cm diameter. Then they take out a pair of telescoping rods and extend them to about a metre and a half, and clip them to our construction, one horizontally, the other vertically. Each rod also has one of the black patches with white coding, mounted at each end. Then one sets up the laptop, while the other starts taking pictures, walking around the device. While the picture taking is still proceeding, the one with the laptop says, Would you like to see? and shows a diagram already appearing on the laptop screen. You see, these girls are the survey team, and they are generating a full 3D map of the device. The camera has a wireless connection to the laptop and is uploading images. The laptop identifies the little targets in the photos and does a brutal quantity of computation in real time among the photographs to deduce the position of the targets based solely on the multiple images and the two reference rods. As the surveyor operating the laptop explained to me (she is now a CERN employee, but used to work with the company which developed the technology) by taking a sufficient number of photographs, with a sufficient number of targets (I'm guessing they used a binary multiple, 32 or 64) it is not even necessary to have a pre-calibrated distortion free lens on the camera. The software can deduce and correct for any aberration in the lens as part of the overall calculation. The accuracy of the process is somewhat limited by the image quality of the digital camera, though it does much better than simple resolution of the camera image - for our gadget, about 6x6x3 metres, they get down to about 1/2 mm. So much for theodolites, and a day's computations, to generate a survey. Well, that's my whizzbang techno story for today... -Pete -Original Message- From: Franklin Wayne Poley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2003 8:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] Future Teaching Have a look at the robotic teacher I'd like to hire from King's College, London: http://www.geocities.com/machine_psychology/IMP_Cover_Page -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:35:46 -0800 (PST) From: Franklin Wayne Poley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [IMP] Final Lesson 36 There are typically 36 hours of class time for a one semester, 3-credit course. Lessons 31-35 are more in the nature of an assignment: draft out a set of menus and prompts for the SEE-to-C program or even go further and turn that into C code if you are so inclined. How much of my notes on SEE-to-C I will post eventually on the expert system program for C code writing, I do not know. If I am correct about this (and you can find out by trying to write SEE-to-C for yourself) then future students can forget about texts like Aitken and Jones (Teach Yourself C in 21 Days) or a course like COMP 2425 at BCIT which takes about 144 hours. Gary Livick's C-programmed robot, Etcetera, will be able to teach C in one hour. Final lesson 36 is titled Godbot and it is designed to stimulate some creative and metaphysical thinking. If anyone has SPECIFIC criticisms I will welcome them. I certainly don't want to cap off a course which I
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Title: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
As my
colleague who was born in India says, the first picture of a Canadian child
dying with a distended belly will be the spark that ignites governments to end
this current (farcical) set of activities.
There
will be no starvation in Canada. There will be panhandlers on street
corners and panhandlers using the food banks. Dignity is lost all around:
Those who receive and those who give (although they feel mighty righteous at the
moment.)
We can
end poverty. There can be a basic income. Somehow there is little
incentive to change.
We
live in a democracy. As Amartya Sen said, there is no history of
starvation in democracies.
As I
said in my earlier posting, the current system may be remarkably
stable.
arthur
-Original Message-From: Ed Weick
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 1:12
PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was
Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern
Trade
So
what if all the righteous middle class people stopped sending their unused
canned goods to the food banks? Well the hungry people might just vote
in a government that promises radical change.Right now
everyone wins: political parties promise change and don't; middle class feels
good about sending food to the food bank; working poor can supplement their
foodstock by heading to the food bank. The system may be quite
stable. Maybe there really is no wish to change.
arthur
I'm on the Board of a
downtown foodbank and have spent a little time there. The people who
came to pick up food fell into several groups. There were older men,
fifty plus, who had migrated to Ottawa because there was nothing for them in
the valley communities. Their education and skills were limited, so
there was nothing in Ottawa either. There were young mothers, some with
children, who gave you every impression that they didn't want to be there;
they hurried in and they hurried out. There were a number of cocky young
people, some perhaps students, some living at the "Y", who acted as though
they were indulging the foodbank with their presence. None of these
people acted as though they wanted to change the system. All they wanted
was the food - except for the older guys who also seemed to want to hang
around and talk a little.
There's an aura of
powerlessness about it. The churches that operate the foodbank know that
if they didn't do it, nobody would. So they keep doing it and their
members keep bringing the cans of tuna and the packages of pasta. The
churches might want to take an advocacy position, but that might infringe on
their charitable status. The politicians get themselves elected and
their promises become mere promises, not commitments. Most of the people
who use the foodbank hate doing it, but they need to eat. Watching it
without having to depend on it, I wish it would all go away. But it
won't. It's what the world is like and how it will stay. Perhaps
Canadians, as people who live in the developed world, should feel fortunate
that they can afford foodbanks. Ever so many parts of the world can't,
and people starve.
Ed
-Original Message-From: Ed Weick
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2003 9:08
AMTo: Thomas Lunde;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended
(was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern
Trade
Thomas, very good posting. Ontario has just
raised the minimum wage from peanuts to peanuts. Many of the poor
are working full time and even double time, but are still unable to meet
the rent or buy enough food, let alone get their kids the kinds of in toys
("status goods") that are going around. They can try eating freedom
and justice, but they don't taste very good when you can't make ends
meet.
Ed
- Original Message -
From:
Thomas Lunde
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003
3:36 AM
Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was
Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
They don't need money, Thomas.
They need justice and the freedom to enjoy
it.HarryThomas:In a way, you are right. Being poor and
working with the poor as customers and neighbours let's me see the
many ways the poor are lacking justice. A recent article in the
paper made the outstanding statement that 37% of workers in Canada are
not covered by the Labour Code and laws. When wages for the poor
are kept artificially low, then the only way to co
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
Title: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade As I said. There is no incentive to change. I hate to say it but food banks are part of the problem. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:35 PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade I agree with the concept of a basic income or guaranteed annual income, but I don't think there's been much discussion of it in government since the early 1990s, and certainly nothing very recently. Ed - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:16 PM Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade As my colleague who was born in India says, the first picture of a Canadian child dying with a distended belly will be the spark that ignites governments to end this current (farcical) set of activities. There will be no starvation in Canada. There will be panhandlers on street corners and panhandlers using the food banks. Dignity is lost all around: Those who receive and those who give (although they feel mighty righteous at the moment.) We can end poverty. There can be a basic income. Somehow there is little incentive to change. We live in a democracy. As Amartya Sen said, there is no history of starvation in democracies. As I said in my earlier posting, the current system may be remarkably stable. arthur -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 1:12 PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade So what if all the righteous middle class people stopped sending their unused canned goods to the food banks? Well the hungry people might just vote in a government that promises radical change.Right now everyone wins: political parties promise change and don't; middle class feels good about sending food to the food bank; working poor can supplement their foodstock by heading to the food bank. The system may be quite stable. Maybe there really is no wish to change. arthur I'm on the Board of a downtown foodbank and have spent a little time there. The people who came to pick up food fell into several groups. There were older men, fifty plus, who had migrated to Ottawa because there was nothing for them in the valley communities. Their education and skills were limited, so there was nothing in Ottawa either. There were young mothers, some with children, who gave you every impression that they didn't want to be there; they hurried in and they hurried out. There were a number of cocky young people, some perhaps students, some living at the "Y", who acted as though they were indulging the foodbank with their presence. None of these people acted as though they wanted to change the system. All they wanted was the food - except for the older guys who also seemed to want to hang around and talk a little. There's an aura of powerlessness about it. The churches that operate the foodbank know that if they didn't do it, nobody would. So they keep doing it and their members keep bringing the cans of tuna and the packages of pasta. The churches might want to take an advocacy position, but that might infringe on their charitable status. The politicians get themselves elected and their promises become mere promises, not commitments. Most of the people who use the foodbank hate doing it, but they need to eat. Watching it without having to depend on it, I wish it would all go away. But it won't. It's what the world is like and how it will stay. Perhaps Canadians, as people who live in the developed world, should feel fortunate that they can afford foodbanks. Ever so many parts of the world can't, and people starve. Ed -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2003 9:08 AMTo: Thomas Lunde; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Thomas, very good posting. Ontario has
RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching
FWP But I am sure we can use the teaching machine optimally and still retain the option of calling in human teachers as we (the students) wish. arthur Who pays the teachers? The idea is to displace humans, especially the high paid ones. -Original Message- From: Franklin Wayne Poley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:53 PM To: pete Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, pete wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eventually machine intelligence will replace human intelligence throughout the economy. Wonder if the final outcome will be good or bad Productivity will have increased but human interaction (at least in these traditional areas such as education and probably health care) will have decreased. That is a good point. I recently posted a comment to the MIT- list on the ubiquitous nature of opposing forces like constructive-destructive, action-reaction, catabolic-anabolic and educational-countereducational. A variety of motives lie behind educationally progressive and educationally regressive outcomes. But I am sure we can use the teaching machine optimally and still retain the option of calling in human teachers as we (the students) wish. The question re MIT's $100,000,000 OCW is to what extent educational vs. countereducational forces are being applied. Facetiously we have to ask how much of OCW is boon and how much is doggle. Remember our old friend the Unabomber? He was a Phud mathematician. Yet he was targeting high tech leaders like Professor Gelernter (computing science) at Yale. Both progressive and regressive forces are in the midst of the intelligentsia. IMO, computing science is a particular target for the vultures. Was it Prometheus who was chained to a rock by the gods for giving knowledge to mortals, where he had his liver ripped out daily by vultures? Would a modern charicature of such a vulture look suspiciously like Bill Gates? After all, why would Bill Gates want to lead in AI advances? The status quo works very well for him ... and for many other neo-millionaires and billioanaires in high technology. What then is the Microsoft agenda in funding the reinventing of teaching and learning as Dean Magnanti at MIT puts it? Could it not be to enhance countereducation rather than education? The Microsoft Visual Stdio .NET manual which accompanied this software is an educational abomination. I have told them I can turn it into a model of educational clarity but they keep ignoring me. So what are they up to at MIT? arthur I guess this is a good place to relate an experience I had today. I'm currently at CERN, helping to install some pieces of hardware we've cobbled up into the next great accelerator - big science at its most impressive. Anyway, we had this huge piece of hardware held up on supports in the middle of a large workroom, when a couple of girls came in, one with a camera, and one with a laptop under her arm. I thought, perhaps the CERN Courier is going to do another little article on the progress of our project. But instead, these two take out a bunch of little black squares about the size of postit notes, and start climbing up and sticking them all over the construction. I'm not sure if they were adhesive, or like fridge magnets, or both. Each square has a one cm white spot in the centre, but each has a differently segmented white circle around the central dot, at about 3cm diameter. Then they take out a pair of telescoping rods and extend them to about a metre and a half, and clip them to our construction, one horizontally, the other vertically. Each rod also has one of the black patches with white coding, mounted at each end. Then one sets up the laptop, while the other starts taking pictures, walking around the device. While the picture taking is still proceeding, the one with the laptop says, Would you like to see? and shows a diagram already appearing on the laptop screen. You see, these girls are the survey team, and they are generating a full 3D map of the device. The camera has a wireless connection to the laptop and is uploading images. The laptop identifies the little targets in the photos and does a brutal quantity of computation in real time among the photographs to deduce the position of the targets based solely on the multiple images and the two reference rods. As the surveyor operating the laptop explained to me (she is now a CERN employee, but used to work with the company which developed the technology) by taking a sufficient number of photographs, with a sufficient number of targets (I'm guessing they used a binary multiple, 32 or 64) it is not even necessary to have a pre-calibrated distortion free lens on the camera. The software can deduce and correct for any aberration in the lens as part of the
RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching
And we end up with a computerized society. I think you are correctly pointing to the trends underway. And I wonder how things will sort out. Time to re-read Kurt Vonnegut's Player Piano. arthur -Original Message- From: Franklin Wayne Poley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:13 PM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching When computer scientists programmed the Skytrain which travels across the Vancouver megalopolis, the human train operators were rendered unnecessary. Who paid them? I just audited COMP 2425 at BCIT which is taught all over the world (intro C programming). Currently Dr. Mehta (who has the distinction of being Stephen Hawking's programmer) and I are putting it on teaching machine at [EMAIL PROTECTED]. When that is done, thousands of C profs will be rendered as obsolete as the train crews they replaced (BTW, the BCIT prof said Skytrain was originally programmed in C). FWP On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWP But I am sure we can use the teaching machine optimally and still retain the option of calling in human teachers as we (the students) wish. arthur Who pays the teachers? The idea is to displace humans, especially the high paid ones. -Original Message- From: Franklin Wayne Poley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 4:53 PM To: pete Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Futurework] Future Teaching On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, pete wrote: On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eventually machine intelligence will replace human intelligence throughout the economy. Wonder if the final outcome will be good or bad Productivity will have increased but human interaction (at least in these traditional areas such as education and probably health care) will have decreased. That is a good point. I recently posted a comment to the MIT- list on the ubiquitous nature of opposing forces like constructive-destructive, action-reaction, catabolic-anabolic and educational-countereducational. A variety of motives lie behind educationally progressive and educationally regressive outcomes. But I am sure we can use the teaching machine optimally and still retain the option of calling in human teachers as we (the students) wish. The question re MIT's $100,000,000 OCW is to what extent educational vs. countereducational forces are being applied. Facetiously we have to ask how much of OCW is boon and how much is doggle. Remember our old friend the Unabomber? He was a Phud mathematician. Yet he was targeting high tech leaders like Professor Gelernter (computing science) at Yale. Both progressive and regressive forces are in the midst of the intelligentsia. IMO, computing science is a particular target for the vultures. Was it Prometheus who was chained to a rock by the gods for giving knowledge to mortals, where he had his liver ripped out daily by vultures? Would a modern charicature of such a vulture look suspiciously like Bill Gates? After all, why would Bill Gates want to lead in AI advances? The status quo works very well for him ... and for many other neo-millionaires and billioanaires in high technology. What then is the Microsoft agenda in funding the reinventing of teaching and learning as Dean Magnanti at MIT puts it? Could it not be to enhance countereducation rather than education? The Microsoft Visual Stdio .NET manual which accompanied this software is an educational abomination. I have told them I can turn it into a model of educational clarity but they keep ignoring me. So what are they up to at MIT? arthur I guess this is a good place to relate an experience I had today. I'm currently at CERN, helping to install some pieces of hardware we've cobbled up into the next great accelerator - big science at its most impressive. Anyway, we had this huge piece of hardware held up on supports in the middle of a large workroom, when a couple of girls came in, one with a camera, and one with a laptop under her arm. I thought, perhaps the CERN Courier is going to do another little article on the progress of our project. But instead, these two take out a bunch of little black squares about the size of postit notes, and start climbing up and sticking them all over the construction. I'm not sure if they were adhesive, or like fridge magnets, or both. Each square has a one cm white spot in the centre, but each has a differently segmented white circle around the central dot, at about 3cm diameter. Then they take out a pair of telescoping rods and extend them to about a metre and a half, and clip them to our construction, one
RE: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) (w as Re: Slightly extended)
Chris, I think you and Harry might just have something in common with this idea. Your plan assumes some degree of social cohesion (that there are relatives that there is a local community.) Assumptions aside, I like the idea. So count me in with you and, perhaps, Harry. arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2003 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] The Politics of Foodbanks (or lack thereof) (was Re: Slightly extended) Arthur Cordell wrote: We can end poverty. There can be a basic income. Who is supposed to pay a general BI ? It would be just fighting symptoms anyway, worsening the causes. There's a better system: Have an education system that minimizes the number of people who can't make ends meet. For the few remaining ones, help them to get as good a job as they can handle, and/or have their relatives pay for their basic needs. For the _very_ few remaining ones then, have their local community pay their basic needs (rentfood) until they are restored to earn money again. Result: No foodbanks, and no starvation either (and low crime rate too). Yet, low taxes. Guess which country this is? Harry may rant about protectionism as much as he wants, but there _are_ upsides to it! Chris SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: Bush the confidence trickster (was RE: [Futurework] Blair's c urious illnesses
I think Bush (like Clinton) are a sort of Rohrshach test. There is an immediate response to the person, mannerisms, smile, manner of walking, etc. What all this means I will leave to the psychotherapists. For me I found Clinton to be a lying sleaze. Bush has a lack of guile that may be real or fake. Probably a liar as well. I don't know why but I like Bush better than Clinton, so far. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2003 9:26 AMTo: Harry PollardCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Bush the confidence trickster (was RE: [Futurework] Blair's curious illnessesHarry,At 12:33 02/12/2003 -0800, you wrote: Keith,The part that bothers me about your post is:"Yet I think Bush is intellectually stunted and is a confidence trickster through and through. And he's vengeful, so some of his former contacts say."What evidence to have that he is intellectually stunted?Harry, once again, I'm trusting the evidence of my own eyes and ears, having seen Bush on TV often enough and knowing the context from which he comes. I remember that when Bush came to office, he was unpracticed in the art of speaking. This evinced jeers and catcalls from the not so loyal opposition. He is a quick learner and he has adapted to his new position. His London speech was excellent, delivered without a slip from his notes rather than from reading a Teleprompter.Why do you say he is a confidence trickster?Because he's told lies. And we've found out about several of them. His track record is now such that you would have to be very naive to believe anything that Bush says without thinking carefully of why he might be saying them. We can certainly argue that the WMD didn't materialize. Yet, both Bush and Blair were more than confident they existed. Indeed, most of the people concerned with Iraq, including the inspectors, were sure they existed. If they were moved, where did they go? There were some early reports that they were buried in Syria.No! With the present sort of satellite photography (down to 6 inches visual resolution) and many years of satellites going overhead, the CIA would know the whereabouts of every single piece of fixed military or industrial technology in the whole country. Not only visual methods, but infra red, X-ray and so forth mean that any sort of significant underground installations would also be a doddle to discover. When the presence of 100,000 troops at his borders persuaded Saddam that he had better provide greater (if unenthusiastic) cooperation with the UN inspectors, it could well be that any remaining WMD would be better off elsewhere.What evidence shows that he is vengeful, other than the words of former contacts -- whatever that means? One of the problems of thinking about these matters is that every movement, every gesture, every decision, is analyzed and overanalyzed by people who do not really know. They are guessing. Authoritative guesswork is now well-paid, so there is no shortage of guessers and guesses.I think that Bush has accepted a Herculean task. He may not be up to it, but one must wonder who is? If the situation in Iraq comes off the boil, if Syria mends its ways, if Saudi Arabia takes the necessary antiterrorist action, if Iran continues the policy (that may have already started) of rapprochement with the US, Bush will become the president of the 21st-century.Lots of "ifs", but at least they are positive "ifs" -- a little different from the constant prognostications of doom and disaster.I really don't know how to express myself after reading the above paragraphs! So I won't.Keith Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 1:16 AMTo: Harry PollardSubject: RE: [Futurework] Blair's curious illnessesHarry,At 16:47 01/12/2003 -0800, you wrote: Keith,Long before Iraq, Gwen and I used to be amused by Presidentialhair color transitions. Hair that came in black, goes out gray.Gray heads become white. The job is not an easy one. I remember a science fiction yarn about the future Presidency.There were actually three Presidents - each with a specific areato cover - to handle the complexities.Maybe there should be several prime Ministers.That's precisely what I think is going to happen in the longer term future. We'll need (democratic) forums in each policy area. I only see Blair in action at Question Time and
RE: Bush the confidence trickster (was RE: [Futurework] Blair's c urious illnesses
On the other hand "One can know a man from his laugh, and if you like a man's laugh before you know anything of him, you may confidently say that he is a good man." (Fyodor Dostoevsky) Neither Bush nor Clinton pass the "laugh test". arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2003 9:26 AMTo: Harry PollardCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Bush the confidence trickster (was RE: [Futurework] Blair's curious illnessesHarry,At 12:33 02/12/2003 -0800, you wrote: Keith,The part that bothers me about your post is:"Yet I think Bush is intellectually stunted and is a confidence trickster through and through. And he's vengeful, so some of his former contacts say."What evidence to have that he is intellectually stunted?Harry, once again, I'm trusting the evidence of my own eyes and ears, having seen Bush on TV often enough and knowing the context from which he comes. I remember that when Bush came to office, he was unpracticed in the art of speaking. This evinced jeers and catcalls from the not so loyal opposition. He is a quick learner and he has adapted to his new position. His London speech was excellent, delivered without a slip from his notes rather than from reading a Teleprompter.Why do you say he is a confidence trickster?Because he's told lies. And we've found out about several of them. His track record is now such that you would have to be very naive to believe anything that Bush says without thinking carefully of why he might be saying them. We can certainly argue that the WMD didn't materialize. Yet, both Bush and Blair were more than confident they existed. Indeed, most of the people concerned with Iraq, including the inspectors, were sure they existed. If they were moved, where did they go? There were some early reports that they were buried in Syria.No! With the present sort of satellite photography (down to 6 inches visual resolution) and many years of satellites going overhead, the CIA would know the whereabouts of every single piece of fixed military or industrial technology in the whole country. Not only visual methods, but infra red, X-ray and so forth mean that any sort of significant underground installations would also be a doddle to discover. When the presence of 100,000 troops at his borders persuaded Saddam that he had better provide greater (if unenthusiastic) cooperation with the UN inspectors, it could well be that any remaining WMD would be better off elsewhere.What evidence shows that he is vengeful, other than the words of former contacts -- whatever that means? One of the problems of thinking about these matters is that every movement, every gesture, every decision, is analyzed and overanalyzed by people who do not really know. They are guessing. Authoritative guesswork is now well-paid, so there is no shortage of guessers and guesses.I think that Bush has accepted a Herculean task. He may not be up to it, but one must wonder who is? If the situation in Iraq comes off the boil, if Syria mends its ways, if Saudi Arabia takes the necessary antiterrorist action, if Iran continues the policy (that may have already started) of rapprochement with the US, Bush will become the president of the 21st-century.Lots of "ifs", but at least they are positive "ifs" -- a little different from the constant prognostications of doom and disaster.I really don't know how to express myself after reading the above paragraphs! So I won't.Keith Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141 -- Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 1:16 AMTo: Harry PollardSubject: RE: [Futurework] Blair's curious illnessesHarry,At 16:47 01/12/2003 -0800, you wrote: Keith,Long before Iraq, Gwen and I used to be amused by Presidentialhair color transitions. Hair that came in black, goes out gray.Gray heads become white. The job is not an easy one. I remember a science fiction yarn about the future Presidency.There were actually three Presidents - each with a specific areato cover - to handle the complexities.Maybe there should be several prime Ministers.That's precisely what I think is going to happen in the longer term future. We'll need (democratic) forums in each policy area. I only see Blair in action at Question Time and PressConferences. He seems to handle things well in those arenas.He's a very good perfomer. And that's all he is. He's intelligent but he has no intellectual
RE: [Futurework] Fwd: New Purported Bush Tape Raises Fear of New Attacks
Wonderful. Don't know whether to laugh or cry. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 7:14 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] Fwd: New Purported Bush Tape Raises Fear of New Attacks New Purported Bush Tape Raises Fear of New Attacks by Disassociated Press www.dissidentvoice.org November 28, 2003 A tape today surfaced in U.S. media outlets of someone purporting to be George W. Bush at a U.S. military base in Baghdad. Intelligence analysts around the world are studying the videotapes. It certainly looked and sounded like him, but we get so few glimpses at Bush in real-life situations that it is hard to tell, said one operative from a Western intelligence agency. People who know Bush said it appeared to him. That's him, all right, said one longtime associate. The tape shows the man claiming to be Bush praising U.S. attacks in Iraq. We will stay until the job is done, he threatened. The videotape was delivered to the Baghdad bureau of FOX News by an intermediary courier who has brought material before from the U.S. military, according to the U.S. network. There were calls for FOX to be banned from some Arabic countries for broadcasting American militaristic propaganda. While the quality of the tape was not poor, the alleged Bush did appear tired in portions of it, prompting speculation that he is on the run. The man claiming to be Bush said: We did not charge hundreds of miles into the heart of Iraq, pay a bitter cost in casualties, defeat a brutal dictator and liberate 25 million people only to retreat before a band of thugs and assassins. Analysts pointed out that given the ongoing nature of the Iraqi resistance since the end of major combat operations, that comment could have been recorded anytime in the past six months. When the man identified as Bush tells U.S. troops, 'You are defeating the terrorists here in Iraq so we don't have to face them in our own country,' well, it's a little hard to believe that even the Bush White House would try to spin that, said the operative from a Western intelligence agency. How could anyone believe, after all that has been disclosed about the lies and distortions used to manipulate the public into accepting this war, that U.S. troops are defending the American people in Iraq? No major world leader would be so obtuse or so low as to try to sell that to people at this stage. Members of the Iraqi Governing Council who met with the man identified as Bush said they had met with a man identified as Bush and were delaying comment until Paul Bremer was available to tell them what their comments would be. Omar Ali, an Iraqi in a poor area of Baghdad said: I don't understand why he didn't stay. Just because the U.S. nearly starved us with the sanctions for 12 years, killed my cousin during the invasion, busted down my door last week and is trying to find a way to steal our oil -- does he think that Iraqis would want to hurt him, our great liberator? Private Charles Sanders, who has been stationed in Iraq since the invasion said: I was supposed to be back home by now. It was really getting depressing, but this is great. Sure, I don't get to look into the eyes of my little girl, or hold my wife tenderly in my arms, but the president served me turkey! Susan Jones in Pittsburgh, who this morning was driven to tears while watching Dances with Wolves on cable TV, said: I was planning on talking over the Thanksgiving Day table with my family about how we slaughtered the Indians and enslaved the blacks, bullied Latin America and bombed Vietnam, and now were occupying Iraq. I don't know, is it just me, or do we just have this brutal aggressive side to us? But now I guess, we'll just talk about Bush's visit instead. When asked whether she was certain the president had gone to Iraq, Laura Bush said she hadn't noticed her husband had left the Crawford ranch. I assumed he was out clearing brush, the First Lady said. --- Correspondents Robert Jensen and Sam Husseini contributed to this report. Robert Jensen is a journalism professor at the University of Texas at Austin and a founding member of the Nowar Collective, www.nowarcollective.com. He is the author of the forthcoming Citizens of the Empire: The Struggle to Claim Our Humanity (City Lights Books). He can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sam Husseini is Communications Director for the Institute for Public Accuracy. He can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED] SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword igve. ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance~ the grim reaper enjoys his job
I understand that being in crowds, especially from an early age, helps to build immunity. arthur -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 7:30 PM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance~ the grim reaper enjoys his job [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All the more reason to invest in public health. (and this includes public transit) Do public health service officers and doctors at the CDC really think that crowd events improve the public health? I can well imagine, however, that they don't think too much about such things because subconsciously they know it would not be good for their personal wellbeing. Maybe we need a safe crowding campaign, like safe sex: When you go in a crowd, wear a full-body rubber suit and carry your own oxygen tanks to breathe. I myself would be far less queasy about being in a crowd if I was breathing air from my own oxygen tanks. Unspeakable topics. \brad mccormick -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 7:39 PM To: Ed Weick Cc: Harry Pollard; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Keith Hudson' Subject: Re: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance~ the grim reaper enjoys his job Ed Weick wrote: Public transit is the bus. It gets me downtown in ten minutes and I don't have to pay parking. [snip] Here's the other side: But I do get to breathe in lots of people's germs -- a consideration which may become more interesting to you when treatment-resistent tuberculosis AKA TB) from the breakdown products of the former Soviet Union come to the U.S. for a visit. (Did someone say S-A-R-S???) [snip] -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance
harrry,
What is public transit?
arthur
What you will be riding
from point A to point B when all costs are counted and internalized to the
transportation equation.
-Original Message-From: Harry Pollard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 01,
2003 8:28 PMTo: 'Ed Weick'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Keith
Hudson'Subject: RE: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life
balance
Ed,
I suppose everything I have is old - except the
computer and some of the peripherals.
My car is 8 years old. It's a station wagon which can
take an 8' x 4' sheet of plywood, or 7 passengers, as the need arises. My 60"
TV is now about 4 years old. I don't know how old my other two televisions
are. My 60" is used for films, news and discussion programs. The living
room TV mostly is used for peculiar international film noire byson Alan.
(He's just brought me in a DVD disk with an old British "Avengers"on it
(downloaded from the Internet) - restored in brilliant color and excellent
crispness. I hope he can get more episodes.
Don't feel 'holier'. Just continue to "do as you
wish, but harm no-one".
What is public transit?
Harry
Henry George School of Social
Science of Los
Angeles Box 655
Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242
http://haledward.home.comcast.net
From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 6:14 AMTo: Harry
Pollard; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Keith Hudson'Subject: Re:
[Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance
Harry, I drive the smallest car that fits my family
and regard it as nothing more than an appliance, like my refrigerator. I
have a bus pass and use public transit as much as possible. We have two
TVs, both well over ten years old. My wife and daughter get the big one
because they watch sitcoms; I use the small one and rarely watch anything but
the news and public affairs programs.Besides, I don't have
topound the small one to make the picture come full
size.
All of that, and other things, permits me to feel
that I am holier than other people. I enjoy my inverse
snobbishness. Excuse me, but I have to go polish my halo.
Ed
---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.541 / Virus
Database: 335 - Release Date:
11/14/2003
RE: [Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: Canada#146;s View on Socia l Issues Is Opening Rifts With the U.S.
thanx for this balanced assessment. arthur -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 8:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Futurework] NYTimes.com Article: Canada#146;s View on Social Issues Is Opening Rifts With the U.S. This article from NYTimes.com has been sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] IN view of some fairly recent discussions, I thought this would be of interest. Selma [EMAIL PROTECTED] / advertisement ---\ IN AMERICA - now playing in select cities IN AMERICA has audiences across the country moved by its emotional power. This Holiday season, share the experience of this extraordinary film with everyone you are thankful to have in your life. Ebert Roeper give IN AMERICA Two Thumbs Way Up! Watch the trailer at: http://www.foxsearchlight.com/inamerica \--/ Canada#146;s View on Social Issues Is Opening Rifts With the U.S. December 2, 2003 By CLIFFORD KRAUSS TORONTO, Dec. 1 - Canadians and Americans still dress alike, talk alike, like the same books, television shows and movies, and trade more goods and services than ever before. But from gay marriage to drug use to church attendance, a chasm has opened up on social issues that go to the heart of fundamental values. A more distinctive Canadian identity - one far more in line with European sensibilities - is emerging and generating new frictions with the United States. Being attached to America these days is like being in a pen with a wounded bull, Rick Mercer, Canada's leading political satirist, said at a recent show in Toronto. Between the pot smoking and the gay marriage, quite frankly it's a wonder there is not a giant deck of cards out there with all our faces on it. Mr. Mercer acknowledged in an interview that he was overstating the case for laughs - two Canadian provinces have legalized gay marriage, and Ottawa has moved to decriminalize use of small amounts of marijuana. But in the view of many experts the two countries are heading in different directions, at least for the time being. Recent disagreements over trade, drugs and the war in Iraq, where Canada has refused to send troops, has made the relationship more contentious and Canadians increasingly outspoken about the things that separate them from their American neighbors. The two countries are sounding more different - after 9/11, dramatically more different, noted Gil Troy, an American historian who teaches at McGill University in Montreal. You hear a lot more static and you see more brittleness. Of course there have been frictions before, for instance during the Vietnam War, when Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau welcomed American draft evaders, but the differences in those years were more political than social. Analysts say that Canada and the United States have always been similar yet different, and that the differences are often accentuated at the margins. But today, many analysts and ordinary Canadians said in interviews around the country, the differences appear to have moved center stage, particularly in social and cultural values. The nations remain like-minded in pockets, but the center of gravity in each has changed. French-speaking Quebec, with nearly a quarter of the population and its open social attitudes, pulls Canada to the left, just as the South and Bible Belt increasingly pull the United States in the opposite direction, particularly on issues like abortion, gay marriage and capital punishment. None of those have resonated much over the last decade in Canada, where the consensus on social policy seems more solidly formed, its fissures narrower and less exploitable. Chris Ragan, a McGill University economist, observed: You can be a social conservative in the U.S. without being a wacko. Not in Canada. Drugs are one point of departure. A bill to decriminalize small amounts of marijuana is working its way through the lower house of Parliament, bringing threats from the White House that such a law could slow trade at the border. Recently, while musing about his retirement plans, Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said he might just kick back and smoke some pot. I will have my money for my fine and a joint in the other hand, he said with a smile. The glibness of the remark made it nearly impossible to imagine an American president uttering it. But in a nation where the dominant west coast city, Vancouver, has come to be known as Vansterdam, few Canadians blinked. When Massachusetts's highest court ruled for gay marriage, the issue loomed over American politics. Conservatives vowed to change the Constitution. President Bush said he would defend marriage. Even the major Democratic presidential candidates backed away from supporting gay marriage outright. Contrast that with Canada, where two provincial courts issued similar rulings this year. With little anguish, Canada
RE: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance~ the grim reaper enjoys his job
All the more reason to invest in public health. (and this includes public transit) -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 7:39 PM To: Ed Weick Cc: Harry Pollard; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Keith Hudson' Subject: Re: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance~ the grim reaper enjoys his job Ed Weick wrote: Public transit is the bus. It gets me downtown in ten minutes and I don't have to pay parking. [snip] Here's the other side: But I do get to breathe in lots of people's germs -- a consideration which may become more interesting to you when treatment-resistent tuberculosis AKA TB) from the breakdown products of the former Soviet Union come to the U.S. for a visit. (Did someone say S-A-R-S???) If not me, who? If not now, when? (--not a quote from NIH, but it should be)( \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance
Brad, I remember the light rail system in Los Angeles (the red cars) and remember too when they were removed only to be replaced with GM buses. Coincidence? Probably. Now let me tell you why Oswald was the lone shooter... arthur -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 5:09 PM To: Harry Pollard Cc: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance Harry Pollard wrote: Arthur, I don't think we have a point A and point B in Los Angeles. I think I remember riding a bus once several decades ago, but I can't be sure. By the time I walked to the bus stop and waited for the next bus, I could drive into downtown LA. That is if I wanted to go there. By far, the best transportation system for LA is the automobile. Why this is so requires some thought, but thinking seems to be in short supply these days. [snip] I seem to recall having read somewhere that in the 1930s General Motors bought the LA public transit system for the sole purpose of destroying it so that the automobile would be the way to go. (I read that before I realized the importance of the audit trail, so I don't have the source.) Might I also ask whether the Moscow subway system was built under the saintly Czars or under The Evil Empire 1995 was already the period of free-fall capitalism in the breakdown-products of the former USSR, I believe. \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance
As my mother used to say "some people like vanilla, some people like chocolate" -Original Message-From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 1, 2003 9:14 AMTo: Harry Pollard; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Keith Hudson'Subject: Re: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance Harry, I drive the smallest car that fits my family and regard it as nothing more than an appliance, like my refrigerator. I have a bus pass and use public transit as much as possible. We have two TVs, both well over ten years old. My wife and daughter get the big one because they watch sitcoms; I use the small one and rarely watch anything but the news and public affairs programs.Besides, I don't have topound the small one to make the picture come full size. All of that, and other things, permits me to feel that I am holier than other people. I enjoy my inverse snobbishness. Excuse me, but I have to go polish my halo. Ed - Original Message - From: Harry Pollard To: 'Ed Weick' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; 'Keith Hudson' Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 3:46 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance Ed, I must say that I have always been a "status good" buyer. Back in England,around 1950when others were satisfied with a small 9" television screen, I had a 12"! Wow and double Wow! (Now you know why I have a 60" screen.) I would always have the latest hi-fidelity equipment. One mistake I made was to buy a top of the line Fisher in Canada for somewhere near $1,000. When I got to California a year later I foundI could get it for $500. It's called Canadian tariff protection. In Canada, I had a 27" Conrac television. They are the people who make most ofthe television monitors you see in the studios. Can't remember how I got it, but later I brought it to San Diego with me.By then it was aRube Ginsberg, or Heath Robinsonmachine. I had"repaired" it so often,whole sections had been shorted out and replaced with other bits. Yet, it still gave a first-class sharp 27" picture. (Remember this was over 40 years ago.) Was this a status buy? Or, a fun pursuit? How about my 12" television inEngland. Well, the 9" was far too small to watch comfortably. The 12" was a little better. Was it a status good? Few others had television back in the early 50's. Those that did looked at their 9" screen.Did I go around boasting I had a 12? Of course not. However, people like me are useful to the economy. We buy early at higher prices, making it possible for others later to buy cheaper. When I arrived in Southern California to do good, my income dropped severely. Did I bemoan the fact that I could no longer be in front of others in the pursuit of the latest toy? Again, of course not. We may be the only family in Southern California without a cell 'phone. One point I noticed in my Canadian subdivision. If one family got a new car, other new cars would pop up around the neighborhood. Status chasing? - Or simply copycatting? Actually, when one woman had a baby there seemed to be babies erupting around the subdivision. Maybe, that was copycatting. Or, perhaps it just became fashionable to have a car, or a baby. As for what we "need" -would friendship be a need? Is peace a need? Gets complicated. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed WeickSent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 1:55 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Keith HudsonSubject: Re: [Futurework] Downshifting to a better work-life balance Keith, I just want to make a brief comment on one of your points because it's always bother me a little. The point it: new consumer goods throughout the whole course of our economic history have been bought mainly for reasons of status, not need. However, as the repertoire of bought goods rises, we become entrapped in the way of life that they have moulded; I'm never quite sure of how to make the distinction between status and need. IMHO they overlap enormously. A decade ago, I had a job that took me across Canada and into the Yukon every couple of weeks or so. Across Canada, a four or five hour flight depending on direction, I travelled business class. I enjoyed the status, but, also, travelling that often and needing to feel rested, I felt there
RE: [Futurework] V is for Volcano
Let's hear it for a feminist paradigm. Golda Meir, Margaret Thatcher et. al. really will change things. Hmmm. I thought we were beyond the era of "male bashing." Perhaps Ms. Fonda's estrogen levels need a bit of a boost. "V" for Vagina, for vote, for victory. (or for vomit.) arthur -Original Message-From: Karen Watters Cole [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, December 1, 2003 2:04 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Futurework] V is for Volcano You gotta love this woman. I've not always agreed with her, but have always admired her fearless courage to lead with her heart and soul, even when defeated, detoured and deterred. Not a half-bad rousing speech. It's a shame our political candidates aren't using this voice and this tone. I'm sparing you my usual color highlights, because it would be covered with so many great quotable phrases. I hope all you wise, experienced, learned older statesmen will read this. - KWC Quote: "Maybe at some earlier stage in human evolution, Patriarchy was what was needed just for the species to survive. But today, there's nothing threatening the human species but humans. We've conquered our predators, we've subdued nature almost to extinction, and there are no more frontiers to conquer or to escape into so as to avoid having to deal with the mess we've left behind. Frontiers have always given capitalism, Patriarchy's economic face, a way to avoid dealing with its shortcomings. Well, we're having to face them now in this post-frontier era and inevitably -- especially when we have leaders who suffer from toxic masculinity -- that leads to war, the conquering of new markets, and the destruction of the earth. However, it is altogether possible, that we are on the verge of a tectonic shift in paradigms -- that what we are seeing happening today are the paroxysms, the final terrible death throes of the old, no longer workable, no longer justifiable system. Look at it this way: it's Patriarchy's third act and we have to make sure it's its last." V is for Volcano By Jane Fonda, AlterNet, 112403, Viewed on 120103 @ http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17248 Speaking at the National Women's Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C., Jane predicts the end of patriarchy. Before I turned sixty I thought I was a feminist. I was in a way -- I worked to register women to vote, I supported women getting elected. I brought gender issues into my movie roles, I encouraged women to get strong and healthy, I read the books we've all read. I had it in my head and partly in my heart, yet I didn't fully get it. See, although I've always been financially independent, and professionally and socially successful, behind the closed doors of my personal life I was still turning myself in a pretzel so I'd be loved by an alpha male. I thought if I didn't become whatever he wanted me to be, I'd be alone, and then, I wouldn't exist. There is not the time nor is this the place to explain why this was true, or why it is such a common theme for so many otherwise strong, independent women. Nor is it the time to tell you how I got over it (I'm writing my memoirs, and all will be revealed). What's important is that I did get over it. Early on in my third act I found my voice and, in the process, I have ended up alone...but not really. You see, I'm with myself and this has enabled me to see feminism more clearly. It's hard to see clearly when you're a pretzel. So I want to tell you briefly some of what I have learned in this first part of my third act and how it relates to what, I think, needs to happen in terms of a revolution. Because we can't just talk about women being at the table -- it's too late for that -- we have to think in terms of the shape of the table. Is it hierarchical or circular (metaphorically speaking)? We have to think about the quality of the men who are with us at the table, the culture that is hovering over the table that governs how things are decided and in whose interests. This is not just about glass ceilings or politics as usual. This is about revolution, and I have finally gotten to where I can say that word and know what I mean by it and feel good about it because I see, now, how the future of the earth and everything on it including men and boys depends on this happening. Let me say something about men: obviously, I've had to do a lot of thinking about men, especially the ones who've been important in my life, and what I've come to realize is how damaging patriarchy has been for them. And all them are smart, good men who want to be considered the "good guys." But the Male Belief System, that compartmentalized, hierarchical, ejaculatory, andocentric power structure that is Patriarchy, is fatal to the hearts of
RE: [Futurework] Death of a Consumer
It really is sad. The news casts are all about "will this be a successful shopping season" "Is it cold enough (too cold) for consumers to shop" Recently one upbeat bizz talk analyst was putting her money on "self gifting" ie., buying stuff for yourself. That this trend toward self indulgence should boost holiday sales. If I were a Christian I would be joiningthe "Put Christ back in Christmas movement" Re: X-mas, Keith. Be brave and take a stand. Give your grand-daughters a hug and a kiss and forget about buying into the declining and obscene consumer culture. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 4:11 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Futurework] Death of a ConsumerIn Arthur Miller's famous play, Death of a Salesman (1947) he described the end of the 'American Dream' -- that if any individual worked hard enough he could achieve success. In the tragedy that overcame his chief character, Willie Loman, Miller dramatised the demise of the old-fashioned virtues of hard work. On the other hand, millions of real-life equivalents of Willie Loman did, in fact, achieve all the trappings of success that Willie Loman believed in during the 1960s and 70s -- a house and car and all the rest of the usual consumer delights. This was achieved not so much by hard work by the ordinary worker but because they were fortunate enough to be employed in the growing number of large manufacturing and retailing industries that became more efficient from year to year and, very importantly, buoyed up by the increasing quantities of oil coming from abroad -- becoming cheaper from year to year.But now there are more than a few signs that the consumer revolution is coming to an end. There are, of course, millions of people in America and other developed countries who have not yet caught up with that broad segment of the better-off industrial workers and the middle class and they, paradoxically, are having to work quite as hard as the fictional Willie Loman ever did -- even more so, perhaps, and many millions have also given up in despair, destroying themselves with drugs rather than alcohol. But the steam seems to have gone out of the whole process that has been so powerful in the post-World War II years. Despite the apparent surge of growth in America in the last quarter, most thoughtful economists and journalists are very anxious. They fear that this might not continue, many of them noting that most consumers have huge credit card debts which will have to be paid off sometime before they will regain undisputed spending power -- real credit -- on which sustainable growth can depend.I really do not know what to buy my grand-daughters for their Xmas presents. Their parents are not rich, but their children already have everything that I could think of. I should only be buying items for them that they already receive week-to-week or month-to-month anyway. Then again, among the trend-setting middle class, where are the major consumer items (what I'm calling status goods) that drove the economic machine all through the last century? Once again, there is little else that they can buy that are the equivalents of the car, TV and so forth which, in the last century were major items of expenditure when they were new. Today, the same middle class don't have any more time for anything similar, even if such magical new goods existed. They can only re-establish their status in society by buying things which don't require more time -- re-modelling their bathrooms and kitchens according to the latest fashions, for example, even though they are already perfectly practical. Another current example is the buying of SUVs instead of the family car. When and if SUVs become too widespread there'll be another gimmick.It is no wonder, therefore, that the advertising and retail sector -- which accounts for about 70% of all expenditure in the modern economy -- is becoming increasingly desperate as to how to increase sales. One of the strategies now being tried is to bring the neurosciences to their aid, so that the retailer can more successfully penetrate the deeper needs of the indeed. So it is hoped. Many commentators are very worried by this, as though millions of people are going to be increasingly manipulated by new techniques. This is rather reminiscent of Galbraith's anxieties of 40 or 50 years ago -- that the right sort of advertising techniques can totally manipulate consumer taste. But, since that time, events haven't proceeded that way. There have been many examples of the most heavily advertised goods have failed completely. We have a new slogan now: "The customer is king". Instead quite new goods appeared on the scene which the retail sector had never anticipated, and had certainly never
RE: [Futurework] Death of a Consumer
Keith, It seems that the consumer society is alive (but slightly dazed) ---at least in Florida. Woman Knocked Unconscious By Wal-Mart Shoppers Witnesses: Shoppers Stepped Over Woman Having Seizure POSTED: 6:39 p.m. EST November 28, 2003 UPDATED: 12:29 p.m. EST November 29, 2003 ORANGE CITY, Fla. -- A 41-year-old woman was knocked unconscious and then trampled by a mob of shoppers who continued to step over her as she suffered a seizure during a Friday sale at Wal-Mart in Orange City, Fla., according to Local 6 News. Authorities said that Patricia Van Lester arrived at Wal-Mart at 3 a.m. for an early sale on a DVD player for her mother. When the store's doors opened at 6 a.m., Van Lester grabbed the DVD player but was quickly overcome by hundreds of shoppers rushing into the store. The woman was knocked to the ground, slammed her head on the ground and suffered at least one seizure, according to Local 6 News. Her sister watched the incident and tried to stop the crowd as they made their way to the merchandise. "I screamed, 'Stop, don't step on her, my sister is on the ground,' and nobody would listen," the woman's sister, Linda Ellzey said. "I've never seen so many people in a store at one time -- in one area. If there was a fire, nobody could've gotten out of there." When Orange City and EVAC paramedics got to the store they found Van Lester lying on her left side on top of the DVD player, surrounded by shoppers seemingly oblivious to the unconscious woman, said Mark O'Keefe, a spokesman for EVAC Ambulance. Van Lester was airlifted to Halifax Medical Center in Daytona Beach. Ellzey said her sister will likely remain hospitalized for days. -Original Message-From: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 2:21 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Death of a Consumer It really is sad. The news casts are all about "will this be a successful shopping season" "Is it cold enough (too cold) for consumers to shop" Recently one upbeat bizz talk analyst was putting her money on "self gifting" ie., buying stuff for yourself. That this trend toward self indulgence should boost holiday sales. If I were a Christian I would be joiningthe "Put Christ back in Christmas movement" Re: X-mas, Keith. Be brave and take a stand. Give your grand-daughters a hug and a kiss and forget about buying into the declining and obscene consumer culture. arthur -Original Message-From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2003 4:11 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Futurework] Death of a ConsumerIn Arthur Miller's famous play, Death of a Salesman (1947) he described the end of the 'American Dream' -- that if any individual worked hard enough he could achieve success. In the tragedy that overcame his chief character, Willie Loman, Miller dramatised the demise of the old-fashioned virtues of hard work. On the other hand, millions of real-life equivalents of Willie Loman did, in fact, achieve all the trappings of success that Willie Loman believed in during the 1960s and 70s -- a house and car and all the rest of the usual consumer delights. This was achieved not so much by hard work by the ordinary worker but because they were fortunate enough to be employed in the growing number of large manufacturing and retailing industries that became more efficient from year to year and, very importantly, buoyed up by the increasing quantities of oil coming from abroad -- becoming cheaper from year to year.But now there are more than a few signs that the consumer revolution is coming to an end. There are, of course, millions of people in America and other developed countries who have not yet caught up with that broad segment of the better-off industrial workers and the middle class and they, paradoxically, are having to work quite as hard as the fictional Willie Loman ever did -- even more so, perhaps, and many millions have also given up in despair, destroying themselves with drugs rather than alcohol. But the steam seems to have gone out of the whole process that has been so powerful in the post-World War II years. Despite the apparent surge of growth in America in the last quarter, most thoughtful economists and journalists are very anxious. They fear that this might not continue, many of them noting that most consumers have huge credit card debts which will have to be paid off sometime before they will regain undisputed spending power -- real credit -- on which sustainable growth can depend.I really do not know what to buy my grand-daughters for their Xmas presents. Their parents are not rich, but their children already have eve
RE: [Futurework] Bush's impossible problem of same-sex marriage
And I understand that breathing in and out seems to correllate very strongly with eventual death. It seems there is a perfect fit between breathing in and out and eventual death. We have the best minds working on this very interesting research problem. arthur -Original Message-From: Lawrence DeBivort [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 8:59 PMTo: Harry Pollard; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Bush's impossible problem of same-sex marriage I did some research -- the numbers are available if you are willing to really look for them -- and the news is really a lot worse. The simple truth is that most lives end in death, I calculate about 98%, plus or minus 4%. This is based on careful sampling, and, though it may seem counter-intuitive, seems to be true of all cultures. Also, I found out that Eskimos have many words for death, if you include euphemisms. There is also some research that suggests that if enough people die, then more will die -- a sort of 100th Monkey effect. Cheers, Lawry -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Harry PollardSent: Thu, November 27, 2003 3:14 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [Futurework] Bush's impossible problem of same-sex marriage Bill, Good! What I was reacting to - as you know - is the deliberate attack on marriage as a sometime thing. Marriages and divorces in a year are supposed to show that marriage is on the rocks. You seem to adopt my attitude. When in doubt, count. Since you came in to the discussion so well, I think I am going to broadcast the appalling statistic that half of all marriages end in death! That should stop people from getting married. Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 10:45 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [Futurework] Bush's impossible problem of same-sex marriage Harry, you are correct if you consider ever divorced, viz: Young Adults Were Postponing Marriage _ The proportion of divorced persons increased markedly at the national level in recent decades, but the increases were not the same for all areas of the country. In fact, by 1990, sharp regional and State differences were noted in the prevalence of divorce (see map). _ One measure often used to highlight the differences in the level of divorce is the divorce ratio, defined as the number of divorced persons per 1,000 married persons living with their spouse. _ The West had the highest divorce ratio of any region in 1990, with 182 divorced persons per 1,000 persons in intact marriages. In contrast, the Northeast had the lowest ratio (130 per 1,000). The ratios for the South and Midwest were 156 and 151, respectively. _ Not surprisingly, Nevada led the States in 1990 with the highest divorce ratio (268 per 1,000), more than double the ratio for North Dakota (101), with the lowest. If you divide all divorces by all marriages, you get a higher figure. I'm looking for that. Bill ---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.541 / Virus Database: 335 - Release Date: 11/14/2003
[Futurework] FW: Strategic Implications of the Unsaid
this may be of interest to some. -Original Message- From: Anthony Judge [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 12:31 PM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Subject: Strategic Implications of the Unsaid Global Strategic Implications of the Unsaid http://laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/unsaid.php The increasingly globalized communication society is paradoxically characterized by an increasing number of topics on which little or nothing may be publicly said. Whilst many of these zones of the unsaid have existed in the past, their existence becomes all the more felt in an information-rich environment. They might be compared with the astronomical black holes which populate the galaxies. The concern here is at what point an increase in the number of zones of the unsaid may completely undermine conventional hopes for global policy-making, world governance, and the implementation of strategic initiatives in response to global crises. The text comprises three sections. The first offers some examples of the unsaid. The second discusses possible opportunities for navigating a strategic-space with a relatively high density of the unsaid -- and the circumvention of its dysfunctional effects. The third provides clues to further reflection in the light of extensive web resources on the variety of forms of the unsaid. Enjoy Tony ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
Efficiency trumps just about everything in our economy. -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 9:02 AM To: Stephen Straker Cc: Cole, Karen Watters; Ed Weick; Keith Hudson; Lawrence DeBivort; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Thanks Stephen, Here is an article from the NYTimes today that makes the same point about corporate Productivity when it comes to things that make us healthy or wise. Note that the person writing the article is a Not-for-profit corporate executive since common sense is rarely productive or even profitable unless its buildings, widgits or furniture. All of the less important things in life. The things that disappear when you die and don't prepare you for anything but a senile comfort. This article shows why we have learned little from the Irish potato famine. Same mistake. REH November 24, 2003 OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR About a Turkey By PATRICK MARTINS When you sit down to your Thanksgiving meal on Thursday, waiting for the main attraction to be brought in on a platter, take a moment to think about where it came from and how it found its way to your table. After all, your turkey is not the same wily, energetic, tasty bird that struck our ancestors as the perfect centerpiece for an American holiday. Most Americans know that the turkey is a native game bird, and that Benjamin Franklin thought it would have been a better national symbol than the bald eagle. For good reason: in the wild, Meleagris gallopavo is a fast runner and a notoriously difficult prize for hunters. Even after they were domesticated, turkeys remained spirited, traditionally spending the bulk of their lives outdoors, exploring, climbing trees, socializing and, of course, breeding. Now consider the bird that will soon be on your plate. It probably hatched in an incubator on a huge farm, most likely in the Midwest or the South. Its life went downhill from there. A few days after hatching - in the first of many unnatural if not necessarily painful indignities - it had its upper beak and toenails snipped off. A turkey is normally a very discriminating eater (left to its own devices, it will search out the exact food it wants to eat). In order to fatten it up quickly, farmers clip the beak, transforming it into a kind of shovel. With its altered beak, it can no longer pick and choose what it will eat. Instead, it will do nothing but gorge on the highly fortified corn-based mash that it is offered, even though that is far removed from the varied diet of insects, grass and seeds turkeys prefer. And the toenails? They're removed so that they won't do harm later on: in the crowded conditions of industrial production, mature turkeys are prone to picking at the feathers of their neighbors - and even cannibalizing them. After their beaks are clipped, mass- produced turkeys spend the first three weeks of their lives confined with hundreds of other birds in what is known as a brooder, a heated room where they are kept warm, dry and safe from disease and predators. The next rite of passage comes in the fourth week, when turkeys reach puberty and grow feathers. For centuries, it was at this point that a domesticated turkey would move outdoors for the rest of its life. But with the arrival of factory turkey farming in the 1960's, all that changed. Factory-farm turkeys don't even see the outdoors. Instead, as many as 10,000 turkeys that hatched at the same time are herded from brooders into a giant barn. These barns generally are windowless, but are illuminated by bright lights 24 hours a day, keeping the turkeys awake and eating. These turkey are destined to spend their lives not on grass but on wood shavings, laid down to absorb the overwhelming amount of waste that the flock produces. Still, the ammonia fumes rising from the floor are enough to burn the eyes, even at those operations where the top level of the shavings is occasionally scraped away during the flock's time in the barn. Not only do these turkeys have no room to move around in the barn, they don't have any way to indulge their instinct to roost (clutching onto something with their claws when they sleep). Instead, the turkeys are forced to rest in an unnatural position - analogous to what sleeping sitting up is for humans. Not only are the turkeys in the barn all the same age, they - and the roughly 270 million turkeys raised on factory farms each year - are all the same variety, the appropriately named Broad Breasted White. Every bit of natural instinct and intelligence has been bred out of these turkeys, so much so that they are famously stupid (to the point where farmers joke they'll drown themselves by looking up at the rain). Broad Breasted Whites have been developed for a single trait at the expense of all others: producing disproportionately large amounts of white meat in as little time as possible. Industrial turkeys pay
RE: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
Brad However, generally lots of money is spent on sales costs, golden parachutes, etc. Arthur which is where a good deal of savings from efficiencies go. some, of course, goes to lowered prices. -Original Message- From: Brad McCormick, Ed.D. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 9:17 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Efficiency trumps just about everything in our economy. [snip] I think this hypothesis needs to be hedged in important ways. I would phrase it something like: eficiency in direct costs trump[l'oeil???]s just about everything else regarding the direct object of production. Example: make the car as cheaply as possible. However, generally lots of money is spent on sales costs, golden parachutes, etc. In my first programming job (1972), for an insurance company which has since been twice gobbled up, I formulated the hypothesis: The reason this company is not driven out of business by price competition is that all its competitors do the same stupid things, so they all are racing as hard as they can with similar handicaps. \brad mccormick -- Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works (Matt 5:16) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. (1 Thes 5:21) ![%THINK;[SGML+APL]] Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Visit my website == http://www.users.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ ___ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
RE: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade
It doesn't disappear. It re-invents itself in new ways with new product and process innovations. Let me be clear though, capitalism is only concerned with private efficiencies. What is going on out there is of little interest. As long as the power grids, computers, etc are running, the cost of efficiency to the public (social costs) are not factored in at all. In some ways private efficiencies are ONLY made possible by imposing costs externally., viz, pollution. arthur -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 9:32 AM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade If that were true capitalism would disappear. It is the most wasteful of all of the forms of governing with the least direction. At its purest it is kayaking to building dams. REH - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 8:47 AM Subject: RE: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Efficiency trumps just about everything in our economy. -Original Message- From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 9:02 AM To: Stephen Straker Cc: Cole, Karen Watters; Ed Weick; Keith Hudson; Lawrence DeBivort; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Caveman Trade vs. Modern Trade Thanks Stephen, Here is an article from the NYTimes today that makes the same point about corporate Productivity when it comes to things that make us healthy or wise. Note that the person writing the article is a Not-for-profit corporate executive since common sense is rarely productive or even profitable unless its buildings, widgits or furniture. All of the less important things in life. The things that disappear when you die and don't prepare you for anything but a senile comfort. This article shows why we have learned little from the Irish potato famine. Same mistake. REH November 24, 2003 OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR About a Turkey By PATRICK MARTINS When you sit down to your Thanksgiving meal on Thursday, waiting for the main attraction to be brought in on a platter, take a moment to think about where it came from and how it found its way to your table. After all, your turkey is not the same wily, energetic, tasty bird that struck our ancestors as the perfect centerpiece for an American holiday. Most Americans know that the turkey is a native game bird, and that Benjamin Franklin thought it would have been a better national symbol than the bald eagle. For good reason: in the wild, Meleagris gallopavo is a fast runner and a notoriously difficult prize for hunters. Even after they were domesticated, turkeys remained spirited, traditionally spending the bulk of their lives outdoors, exploring, climbing trees, socializing and, of course, breeding. Now consider the bird that will soon be on your plate. It probably hatched in an incubator on a huge farm, most likely in the Midwest or the South. Its life went downhill from there. A few days after hatching - in the first of many unnatural if not necessarily painful indignities - it had its upper beak and toenails snipped off. A turkey is normally a very discriminating eater (left to its own devices, it will search out the exact food it wants to eat). In order to fatten it up quickly, farmers clip the beak, transforming it into a kind of shovel. With its altered beak, it can no longer pick and choose what it will eat. Instead, it will do nothing but gorge on the highly fortified corn-based mash that it is offered, even though that is far removed from the varied diet of insects, grass and seeds turkeys prefer. And the toenails? They're removed so that they won't do harm later on: in the crowded conditions of industrial production, mature turkeys are prone to picking at the feathers of their neighbors - and even cannibalizing them. After their beaks are clipped, mass- produced turkeys spend the first three weeks of their lives confined with hundreds of other birds in what is known as a brooder, a heated room where they are kept warm, dry and safe from disease and predators. The next rite of passage comes in the fourth week, when turkeys reach puberty and grow feathers. For centuries, it was at this point that a domesticated turkey would move outdoors for the rest of its life. But with the arrival of factory turkey farming in the 1960's, all that changed. Factory-farm turkeys don't even see the outdoors. Instead, as many as 10,000 turkeys that hatched at the same time are herded from brooders into a giant barn. These barns generally are windowless
RE: [Futurework] RE: Miscellaneous
Probably some deep psychological reason behind this.
Wanting to fit in on the part of the young ones vs. a desire to be
distinctive on the part of others.
arthur
-Original Message-From: Harry Pollard
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, November 25,
2003 4:42 PMTo: 'Keith Hudson'Cc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [Futurework] RE:
Miscellaneous
Sorry Keith,
Didn't mean to give a wrong
impression.
I remember eons ago, a friend talking of his
elderly Scot's mother saying as she aged her Scottish speech became thicker
and thicker - almost beyond understanding.
That's probably happening to
me.
On radio, the accent was very useful as you might
imagine.
The kids lost their accents about 90 seconds after
arriving in Canada.
Harry
Henry George School of Social
Science of Los
Angeles Box 655
Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242
http://haledward.home.comcast.net
From: Keith Hudson
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003
10:21 PMTo: Harry PollardCc:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject:
Miscellaneous
First of all, apologies again that my last posting
"Status goods and positional goods" escaped my PC before it could be
corrected. Tidied up version on my website for anybody who might be
interested.Also, I must correct an impression that Harry is giving of
me to Ray:At 17:21 24/11/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Ray,cut
Keith's first comment when I spoke to him in England was about my
less than middle-class speech. But, then we weren't middle-class. I attended
the local elementary school and then with a couple of scholarships moved up
into secondary.cutWhen you rang me, I was
surprised that you'd kept your English accent after living so long in foreign
parts. I wasn't making a social-class remark. I was expecting some sort of
American-Canadian accent (I can't tell them apart). Yes, you still have a
working-class-type (almost Cockney) accent, Harry, but then, I have a working
class accent, too. Having lived in Coventry, so near to Birmingham, most of my
life I have a "Brummie" accent which people remark on -- probably one of the
least -- low me -- desirable accents to have in England's green and
egalitarian land. Though, blow me down, the chappie who's the link man in the
Working Lunch (business) programme on BBC has the thickest Brummie accent
imaginable (I suppose anybody who is not English can't imagine it. Even I
recoil sometimes. But Adrian Childes is smart. Oh he's smart. He sees right
through some of the financial "experts" that appear on his programme -- and
sometimes they're too dim to realise it!)KeithKeith
Hudson, Bath, England, www.evolutionary-economics.org
---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by
AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.541 / Virus
Database: 335 - Release Date:
11/14/2003
RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade
I don't think that left wing vs. right wing has much meaning any more. It is not about A or B. Rather it is about A and B. It is about workable governance models that have some degree of sustainability ( which means that there is requisite public acceptance.) arthur -Original Message-From: Harry Pollard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 4:42 PMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Arthur, I'm falling behind in replying to you, but I'll catch up. So many remarks about a simple and sensible statement. If each member of a community is better off, is it difficult toconcede that the community (of people) is better off? Ray didn't like "better off" (def: In a more fortunate or prosperous condition). I have no idea why. But, my humility is exceeded only by my infinite patience. For the umpteenth time,free trade and the free market do notestablish justice. Free trade enables us to make a bigger pie with the same exertion. Protective tariffs reduce the size of the pie and force usinto using more exertion for less return. This is why goods are so expensive in socialist systems - or modern capitalistic systems which in many ways are similar. The US has somewhere near 9,000 tariffs, a slew ofimport quotas and vicious anti-dumping legislation. (Chris thinks the US is a free trading country with an internal free market, but then he thinks some very peculiar things.) So, the free market will produce the biggest pie, but that doesn't mean the pie will be distributed fairly. The "unfairness" comes from somewhere else. The left has its attention firmly fixed on the big corporations. This prevents them from looking anywhere else, so they haven't a clue as to the reason for the unfairness. Corporate monopoly is not an effect of the free market. It's an effect of government irresponsibility in providing privileges in return for bribes (sorry, contributions). Although governments have a poor record, there is a naive belief among the left that though present government is inadequate, once a socialist government is in power, they will be wonderful. Hah! Once the honeymoon is over, they get down to the real issues - what pay and perks will they get. Because (with reason) I am critical of modern governments,you seem to thinkI am anti-government. That is nonsense. Government is part ofcommunity life, in the first place to deal with things the market cannot efficiently handle - then some other things that we might prefer the community to do rather than individuals. But, that's the rub. Those few other things burgeon, then erupt. So, we get the horrid situation (with which you apparently agree) where the record of all these regulations is compressed into the 75,000 page Federal register. With all due respect to you well-meaning left-wingers (I bet that term arouses argument)or for that matter you equally well-meaning right wingers,I want neither private injustice, nor public penury. George analyzed the rising inequality that accompanied the amazing increases in the power to produce back in 1878. You must have missed it - but then you were young. To summarize, free trade will produce a big pie, but that leaves justice to be attained. So, what is justice and how do we get it? Certainly not by making the pie smaller, Harry Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: 818 352-4141--Fax: 818 353-2242 http://haledward.home.comcast.net From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 7:10 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade Let's say better off equals more money, more income. If income is rising but at the same time inequalities are rising even faster. -Original Message-From: Ray Evans Harrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 10:09 AMTo: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo, Cavema n Trade vs. Modern Trade "Better off" is an interesting phrase. Sort of goes along with "lowered expectations." REH - Original Message - From:
