To: Citizen's Income Online at URL http://citiinco01.uuhost.uk.uu.net/discussion/index.shtml and friends on several mail lists Good day folks, We can partially answer the subject question by noticing who are the most vociferous objectors to any serious proposal to improve the general welfare of society. Every day these vociferous objectors promulgate new technically incomplete proposals, which are by definition "red herrings" and are not expected to win public acceptance. These incomplete proposals then become the centerpieces of generously funded NGOs and attract the best minds in related fields of expertise to their service. The resulting drum-roll of acrimonious debate among the best minds of diverse disciplines addles the public mind and keeps the public from giving serious attention to any particular proposal. We can obtain another partial answer to the subject question by defining more completely the financial structure of the status quo, so we can see where our money goes and how much of it goes there. But before I attempt again to disclose the secret of the temple that has been taboo for 2500 years in our Judeo/Christian culture, let me explore the difference, if any, between the thinking of Progressive proponents of a Citizen's income and the thinking of Conservative opponents of a Citizen's Income, as posted on the Citizen's Income discussion page at URL http://citiinco01.uuhost.uk.uu.net/discussion/index.shtml It seemed to me that Progressive proponents of a Citizen's income were the only folks contributing to the CI discussion so I was delighted to receive Mr. Douglas P. Wilson's conservative comments on my post "From Red Herrings to a general solution" and his conservative comments on the social-credit party's contribution to British Columbia's political history. I thought a concise statement of the conservative position might stir the CI discussion pot and get the progressive folk's blood circulating again, so I wrote to Mr. Wilson, with copy to list [EMAIL PROTECTED], as follows: >>>>>>>>>>> Begin letter to Mr. Wilson <<<<<<<<<<<<< Subj: Your responses (both) to "From Red Herrings To A General Solution" Date: 03/20/2000 11:17:15 AM Eastern Standard Time From: Wesburt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/20/2000 11:18:32 AM E CC: Wesburt Douglas, I am beginning to understand why Aaron Agassi called you Saint Douglas. Your kind comments and suggested ways to improve my presentation of the Teflon Topic have helped me more than you will ever know, although you did notice my improvement over recent months. I am writing to ask you, if you can take the time away from work on your project, Computer Aided Social Activities (CASA), to post your two e-mail responses to me under the appropriate titles on the Citizen's Income discussion web site at URL http://citiinco01.uuhost.uk.uu.net/discussion/index.shtml. Being much younger than I, you will have no trouble finding the correct black titles on the dark blue background of the index listing. Your review of political experimentation among the Commonwealth provinces in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand nicely summed up the numerous red herrings that have been preached to the English speaking people over the last century. Bringing the cure for the English Disease into public view is no easy task, and I may fail also, as did Thomas Paine, Frederic Bastiat, Henry Carter Adams, C. H. Douglas, Louis Even, and Bertrand Russell before me. But I think the world is ready for a cure of the English Disease. If you think such a cure would diminish the market for CASA, you will not, of course, post your comments on the CI web site. To the contrary, I believe CASA will find more applications in a stable and prosperous society, free of the ED, than it will under our present condition. I hope you decide to post your responses. Sincerely yours, Wesley S. Burt PS Be sure to use the (CONTROL + V) keys, instead of the mouse, to post text to the CI web page. >>>>>>>>>>> End letter to Mr. Wilson <<<<<<<<<<<<< I looked forward to some heated discussion on the CI page when Douglas P. Wilson replied to my letter as follows: >>>>>>>>>> Begin Douglas P. Wilson's reply <<<<<<<<<<<<< Subj: Re: Your responses (both) to "From Red Herrings To A General Solution" Date: 03/21/2000 8:11:50 AM Eastern Standard Time From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Douglas P. Wilson) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have done as you requested, though I disagree with your views. I will probably address your comment abut CASA in another message, later today or tomorrow, but briefly, if what you propose was implemented and worked as you imagine it would, CASA would be more effective, since economic barriers would no longer hinder social relationships and the pool of match-candidates world be larger. If I thought your ideas could have the benefits you seem to be describing, I would therefore argue in favour of them. But I don't. I suspect you suffer from the standard malady of utopia-designers everywhere -- you have come up with a system under which people like you would flourish, forgetting about the vast number of people who are not like you at all. You might make good use of a citizen's income, but there is a lot of people who would use it to support a life of idleness and public nuisance. dpw Douglas P. Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.island.net/~dpwilson/index.html http://www.SocialTechnology.org/index.html >>>>>>>>>> End Douglas P. Wilson's reply <<<<<<<<<<<<< The heated discussion I anticipated is still in the future. Mr. Wilson's classic statement of the conservative position has been on the CI discussion web page for ten days now, and the only response was Gavin Putland's three delicate questions concerning the conservative position, as follows: GIVING UNEARNED MONEY IS HARMFUL? CI RESULTS IN PAYMENTS TO THE RICH? TAXATION IS HARMFUL TO ECONOMIC ACTIVITY? What can an unbiased observer conclude from this fifteen year old CI, BI, UBI debate as summarized by BIEN News Flash n°2 (March 2000)? Surely he would conclude that the common cause of both progressives and conservatives alike, of every nationality, is to keep the American public locked into its century old public policy consisting of only public education plus means tested public welfare for parenting families that fall below the poverty level. Meanwhile, the Commonwealth nations, Europe, and Japan have enjoyed a half century of social comfort and progress based on children's allowances which stabilize the labor market for their parenting families while still in the workforce, which allowances were established after World War II at the rate of 1/5 average wage per under aged dependent. The status of children's allowances around the world, which conservatives everywhere paint with the dirty brush of socialism, is the best kept secret of the last five decades. Speaking as that unbiased observer, the best I can do is to repeat what I wrote last August in "Ideas Have Consequences, after they converge to a general theory"; >> The process of globalization carried out by Great Britain in the 19th century continues through the 20th century by force of US industrial and military power, and will continue for several decades into the 21st century. If the world does not like the results it sees all around, the world should make the internal operations and social policies of US society its primary field of study. It is not enough to demonize the economics profession, to hate capitalism, to hate markets, to hate international corporations, or to resent Americans. We need more than one slowwitted, inarticulate, old mechanical engineer to put our largest industrial society in a proper conceptual framework so that each of us can see it whole and know why it operates with 4-10% unemployment, 2-3%/year inflation, and a 5% of GNP deficiency of purchasing power in the lower half of the workforce. Remember, by your silence on this issue, you encourage folks to believe that you are a Determined Defender of the Status Quo. Looking forward to more traffic at those three web sites, Wesburt <<<<<<<< End excerpt from last August post >>>>>>>>>> Those three web sites which were hosting parts, or the whole, of 'the only technically valid global model on the Internet" were reduced to two this month, when Paul Dumais' FAQ Economics website vanished at URL: http://plaza.powersurfr.com/Usalama/economics.html But this loss was compensated by my discovery of the full text of the last August post at URL: http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/european-social-policy/1999-08/0006.html The web page included links to both of the remaining global model sites above and links to eight other sites mentioned in the text. They say that someone looks after fools, drunks, and Americans. I sincerely appreciate all the help I get. Kind regards Wesburt
