----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Arnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 12:51 PM
Subject: RE: Loneliness in America
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > Behalf Of Dan Minette
>
> [snip]
>
> > Well, we are a lot less capitalistic than we were 75 years ago. So, its
> > hard to argue that capitalism is at the root of loneliness.
>
> That wouldn't have been my first guess, but it makes me curious. However,
> I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that less of the U.S. economy
> operates as a free market, or that the markets are less free?
The government is much more involved in the economy than in the 20s. We
have many more restraints on the market than we did in the Roaring 20s. We
have many more rules that protect workers than we did then.
> > I can look at
> > other social changes and see much more obvious causes:
> >
> > 1) Divorce
> > 2) People moving away from families
> > 3) The decrease of religion as a force in the US
> > 4) The acceptance of a wider range of freedom; fewer social norm
> > restraints
> > 5) The acceptance of sex outside of a committed relationship
> > 6) Job hopping
>
> You're looking for causes and effects, which I think leads to circles.
> These things are certainly both causes and effects of one another, and
tied
> into many others things. I'm arguing for a root cause that I would expect
> you will appreciate, even if you don't agree -- too much faith in the
human
> inventions of capitalism and democracy. Do you imagine that God is a
> capitalist and a democrat (note the little 'd' there, please!
>
No. They are not perfection. The advantage of markets, I think, is that
they can be manipulated fairly straightforwardly. JDGs suggestion of a gas
tax to encourage conservation vs. rationing or depending on a spiritual
renewal is an example of this. We do live in a society that deliberately
puts restraints on the will of the people to do things through the use of a
constitution, so democracy does have restraints.
I see us trying for a better dynamic balance between social control and
allowing the markets to do what they want. There are clear examples of the
failure of an unblended system of either type. So, I favor a mixed system.
But, I will agree with other posters on one point: we really need a real
alternative to discuss. Of course something might be better, but its hard
to implement a vague something.
Dan M.
