On 01/09/2014 01:45 PM, Marcus G. Daniels wrote: > [...] -- a safety net. That means > taking at scale (i.e. taxing) and filling in the gaps around those that > don't fit immediately within the economy & society where they find > themselves. If one buy that there is anything of value to subjective > life integrated over the population (other than sanctity), then it is > crucial to the social & economic organism to give each instance a rich, > unstructured, environment to grow. There are assumptions and > preferences in this world view.
I actually agree with you. But I wouldn't call it a "safety net" so much as an "exploitative heat" or somesuch. The idea isn't to prevent those with unrealized potential from dying, getting sick, or whatnot. The idea is to input energy into the unrealized potential so that it becomes realized. As such, I'm completely for giving money, food, shelter to everyone. But that's not much good unless we _also_ give them/us band saws, hammers, computers, soldering irons, 3D printers, composters, lego sets, etc. In other words, a safety net doesn't go far enough. If all we're going to do is provide a safety net, then we may as well do nothing at all. I suppose it's why I donate to the local communitarian efforts like the food coops, community garden, tool library, etc. But perhaps I'm not actually a libertarian because I think the government should be funding these things with my tax money. [sigh] That would be way more efficient than relying on getting the attention of individual donors. -- ⇒⇐ glen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
