See interspersed comments - Barry
On Aug 7, 2011, at 1:06 PM, Ray Harrell wrote:
Questions?
1. Do the list members believe that the problem of the U.S.
government is debt or stimulus?
Neither - the fundamental problem is politicians wholly-owned by
corporations & big business interests. Even if the politicians are
initially concerned about the nation and/or the population, they are
quickly bought off by monied interests.
2. Is the lists’s assumptions about the basic systems of
economics more like fractals, fluids or organic systems?
The system is organic. It can't be any other way.
Would not the math for fractals and fluids be different in context?
Probably.
Would not the problem of math with Allopathic Medicine and the
system of science in relation to pharmaceuticals make an “Organic
system analogy”, for the marketplace, problematic with things like
credit ratings for large systems, if you believe in the
“psychological” model for the marketplace?
Yes, this is problematic. But it seems to me to be a more appropriate
way of looking at things. The 'psychological model' is the only
appropriate model I know of for dealing with human-based systems.
(Is there an inherent conflict of interest in a set of referee
organizations, S & P, whose sympathies lie with the private and not
the public sector and whose politics continually create a situation
that is not scientific but political as in their current comments
that go nowhere in today’s NYTimes? http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/business/a-rush-to-assess-standard-and-poors-downgrade-of-united-states-credit-rating.html?_r=1&ref=global
In other words, can we call it law if the Judge is psychologically
conflicted?
Yes, there is conflict of interest. I don't know of a way to avoid the
conflicts of interest completely. Perhaps your Native systems were
better at this, or at least at compensating for it, in that multiple
speakers represented different perspectives before decisions were
reached. (At least, that's an incomplete representation of my
incomplete understanding...)
3. Again: is the underlying assumptions of the list that the
marketplace is an example of the laws of Design, the laws of
thermodynamics, or the organic laws of human psychology (or maybe
agri-culture)?
I have to go with the psychological perspective. Most economics, I've
been taught, prefer a Design approach, I think. Clearly, this is not
entirely appropriate for real-world situations involving people.
I’m asking about the assumptions behind what you post, the context
from which you choose to build not only your intellectual arguments
but from which you choose to perceive what you believe to be the
“stuff” of “the” world. I’m asking if it might possibly be the
“stuff” of “your” world instead,(of “the” world) and that an
examination of the place where each of us sits is a part of the
examination of the problem itself?
Interesting approach to understanding. I hope it is useful to the list.
Just some thoughts as I read the posts this morning.
REH
Barry
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
