Further Steve, I'm curious where you see that I "think governments ( read politicians and bureaucrats) are well intentioned and among the most competent of the populace". I think they are as good or as bad as anyone else and should be subject to the normal checks and balances of daily (and political) life--which of course, should but have in recent times ceased to apply to elements of the financial and other corporate sectors as well..
My overall point is that if we are going to find a way out of the various messes that uncontrolled corporate (and personal) greed have gotten us into then the instrumentalities of the State are about the only ones that could work and mindless suborning and critiquing (and where allowed as in Canada at the moment--dismantling) of those instrumentalities is to my mind suicidal. Do you really want to put your faith in BP and XE and Burson Marsteller to make it all right? For those of us content to pass on a Mad Max dystopia to their grandchildren along with the keys to their gun racks and their secret back yard bunkers it may not matter, to the rest of us who prefer some sort of civilized life in a peaceable dominion it does matter very much and the life-eating virus that is currently vectored among the most irresponsible elements in US society and media are currently infecting and destablizing the world. And I'm deeply and almost despairingly pessimistic of their being a way out in time... M -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Christoph Reuss Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2010 11:55 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Krugman's Insanity, And The Hard Mathematical Truth Steve wrote: > Mike called my one prior Denninger post a "right wing rant." It is quite usual from that side to dismiss as "right wing" anything that doesn't fit into their simple scheme. This saves them from having to deal with their own contradictions. > And human nature (like the rest of > nature) will not voluntarily share equally; > it's not in our genes. ===^^^^^^ Who is "us"? Are altruists from a different species or planet? Btw, there is a big difference between sharing _equally_ and "sharing" à la Soros (which only exists in this one species -- which already indicates that it is NOT "in our genes"). > Apart from a few exceptions like Keith and maybe Ed Weick, this list > is populated with positive future type activists who deem overshoot > non-existent. They also think governments ( read politicians and > bureaucrats) are well intentioned and among the most competent of the > populace. I disagree. They also seem suspect of any who excell at ( > and are rewarded for) private endeavors. This doesn't describe me. While I'm not a cave-man, I don't deem overshoot non-existent -- in fact, I deem overshoot a highly probable outcome unless Predator rule can be overcome in time. The difference is that the cavemen deem Predator rule and insatiable greed a hard-wired determinism, whereas I see a chance of overcoming it by modern technological means. But I concede that this chance is small indeed, given that the Predators also know how to instrumentalize modern technology for their goals. Also, I do NOT "think governments ( read politicians and bureaucrats) are well intentioned and among the most competent of the populace." On the contrary, I have pointed out earlier that the current politicians and bureaucrats are Predators (i.e. badly intentioned and technically incompetent) and should be replaced by Producers. Finally, I am NOT generally "suspect of any who excell at (and are rewarded for) private endeavors", but I distinguish between Predator and Producer endeavors, with only the latter being worth of getting rewarded, while so far it usually goes the other way around (Predators get rewarded a lot, Producers do the actual work but get little reward). > But I will teach locally, in person, beginning next winter. It is a > better use of my time than to try to convert religious people into > evidence based thinkers or utopians into realists over the internet. Do you think your outreach and selection possibilities will be greater off-line?? > As long as > 'someone else' pays, people will vote for it and politicians will > spend it. Lazy is not just correct about the US, it is the species. Don't your off-line pupils belong to this species? > Cultures > modify behavior, but they do not change the boundary behaviors of > animal homo superstitious. Will your teaching change that, or will it replace one superstition by another? > I'm aghast at the rationale anyone has for admiring > Krugman. He wants to grow our way out of overshoot!! :-) Krugman is just another bandit err pundit confusing people with smoke&mirrors about the real issues, in order to let the deep pockets get away with theft. He got the fake Economics "Nobel" (Alfred Nobel must be spinning in his grave that the banksters fabricated this contradiction in terms*) for a reason... > Here's a final teaser for the smart folks on this list: > > http://www.world-science.net/othernews/100701_freewill As Predators have figured out long ago, the "unconscious" can be steered to a great extent. If they can steer it for bad purposes, why shouldn't it be possible to steer it for good purposes? Cheers, Chris __________________________________________________________________ * "They are bloodsuckers who thrive on money for making a few short-sighted statements about short-lived rules which are so obscure that darkness is rendered even darker by them." -- Alfred Nobel on Lawyers and Economists ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
