On Wednesday, September 5, 2012 8:18:44 AM UTC-4, rclough wrote: > > Hi Craig Weinberg > > Lord of the Flies is basically the conservative view put forth by Hobbes > (and Paul). > At root we are criminals. > > Welfare is essentially the leftist view put forth by Rousseau. > At root we are saints. > >
I think that most people are neither criminals nor saints. This quote I think sums up my view of economics: "Money is like manure. If you spread it around it does a lot of good. But if you pile it up in one place it stinks like hell." Craig > > Roger Clough, [email protected] <javascript:> > 9/5/2012 > Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him > so that everything could function." > > ----- Receiving the following content ----- > *From:* Craig Weinberg <javascript:> > *Receiver:* everything-list <javascript:> > *Time:* 2012-09-05, 00:40:00 > *Subject:* Re: There is no such thing as cause and effect > > > > On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 11:14:17 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: >> >> On 9/4/2012 9:07 PM, Craig Weinberg wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, September 4, 2012 8:49:45 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote: >>> >>> On 9/4/2012 4:23 PM, Richard Ruquist wrote: >>> > What struck me is that the "the USERS of wealth in directing the life >>> > of the country." >>> > seem to be exporting jobs overseas and hiding their money there as >>> well. >>> > Richard >>> >>> OK, let us confiscate all capital and distribute it evenly to every >>> one. Then what? >>> >> >> then we have democracy? >> >> >> No, because people always congregate into groups, it is their nature. >> And from there it is "Lord of the Flies" all over. It has happened many >> times before. Why do we never learn? >> > > I think that's why Jefferson was keen on periodic revolutions. If > inequality is inevitable though, it makes sense to mediate that tendency to > some extent if we can, rather than giving carte blanche to the winning > savages. It's like saying we should learn that there is always crime so why > bother with police. Isn't civilization based upon the effort to tame our > innate tendencies toward self interest? Or at least to agree to conspire > against the barbarians outside of the walls. > > >> >> wouldn't even need to confiscate all capital, and I don't think that >> anyone is suggesting that. Just make hoarding wealth more expensive. >> >> >> Sure! A tax credit for investing. Oh way, that already exists! It is >> why the investment tax is so low as it is! >> > > Investing in guaranteed payouts is what makes hoarding of wealth possible. > Why would we want to give tax breaks for the wealthy to find ways of taking > more money out of the economy faster? At the plutocrat level, you should be > rewarded only for investing in non-profit enterprises that lose money. > Being able to invest huge amounts of money, especially unearned money from > a dynastic fortune, is a privilege that should be taxed, not rewarded. > > >> >> Maybe follow the Scandinavian model on a trial basis for 20 years in a >> handful of cities. >> >> >> Scandinavia is a bad place to build a model because it has a >> homogeneous population. Such populations behave, on average, very different >> from highly diverse populations. Segregation into polarized groups happens >> much slower in homogenous populations. You might check out the meme flow in >> such conditions, its amazing. >> > > If by homogeneous you mean financially homogeneous, then a plan which > tilts the economy in favor of the middle class should by definition make > any place into a more homogeneous society - in which case the Scandinavian > model would be expected to perform as it does for them now. If you are > talking about anything else, then I suspect it's just a coded racism. This > country was built in large part by slaves. We exploit poor migrant workers. > There may not be a choice ultimately for us but to choose whether to become > slaves and disposable workers ourselves (assuming we are not already) in a > feudal plantation-prison society or to settle the score and go after those > who continue to benefit the most from the system as it is. > > In any case, there is no reason to think that experimenting with a > Scandinavian type system, or even Canadian, British, etc, when it comes to > health care would not be better than what we have now. The biggest problem > is that our political assumptions are unfalsifiable. No matter how far our > standard of living plummets and how the far-too-rich get richer at everyone > else's expense, it can always be suggested that it could be worse had we > not done what we did. Only through experimentation in a scientific way will > we ever learn anything. > > > Craig > > >> >> Craig >> -- >> >> >> >> -- >> Onward! >> >> Stephen >> http://webpages.charter.net/stephenk1/Outlaw/Outlaw.html >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/TCkITfdw-KcJ. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> > . > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] <javascript:>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/4g1ydbeIV0MJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
