"come the double dip..." But Keith, come the double dip and the ensuing bank bailout...
Government interventions have been narrowed to the objective of "preventing system collapse" -- which translates into reinforcing the neoliberal immiseration regime. On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Keith Hudson <[email protected]>wrote: > Ed, > > But the relative gap between the rich and the poor (in the advanced > countries) is nowhere near the relative gap between the rich and the poor a > century ago. J.P. Morgan was as rich as Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and > several more combined. So was Carnegie, so was Rockefeller. In modern day > terms each of them was probably a trillionaire. Going back further, Morgan > and Co were not as rich in relative terms to the poor as the great > landowners of the Middle Ages. Henry VIII (with 49 palaces) and about a > dozen more owned half of England. > > It's true that there has been a recent surge in the gap, but come the > double dip the rich are more than likely going to take a relatively larger > bashing, too. The gap has only become really outrageous since the credit > surge of the last 30 years. It's more than likely that the present gap will > be greatly reduced to the long-term historical trend once the present > currency catastrophe finally sorts itself out. All in all, the main > difference today is a perceptual one. We know a great deal more about the > rich than ever before, nor do we have scruples about being envious these > days. Previously it was considered a sin to be envious in order to keep us > in our place. Today, probably proportionately more money is being left by > the rich to foundations and charities -- hundreds of them in recent decades > -- than to families. Most of the medical innovations of the last 50 years > have been due to research paid for by private foundations, not > government-backed science. Just the Rockefeller Foundation and the Howard > Hughes Medical Institute alone have probably produced as many new therapies > than all US government research spending. Think of the Gate's and Buffet's > present and future contributions to medical research and future eradication > of some diseases such as malaria all round the world. > > Meanwhile we in the advanced countries devote less than 1% of our GDPs to > the Third World. > > Keith > > > > > > At 14:11 21/09/2011, you wrote: > > Economics could still be considered a "moral science", given the prominance > of concepts like "growth" in economic analysis. Where it fails as a moral > science is in not having much to say on the morality of things like the rich > getting richer and the poor getting poorer, leaving that to politicians and > other social sciences. > > Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Sandwichman <[email protected]> To: > RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME > DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION<[email protected]> Sent: > Tuesday, September 20, 2011 10:05 PM Subject: Re: [Futurework] > Professional Ethics (of economists) > Either that or you're both obsessed with bedbugs... But, hey, to bring this > discussion back to where it started, I just want to mention that "economics" > sprung from "moral sciences": "The emergence of economics as a separate > subject (or Tripos, in Cambridge terminology) created intense debate over > its relationship with the existing organization of teaching through the > 'Moral Sciences' Tripos. John Neville Keynes, the father of John Maynard > Keynes, faced considerable mental and emotional anxiety in his attempt to > reconcile economic science with ethics and religion." (Martin Daunton, > "Welfare, Taxation and Social Justice") > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Ray Harrell <[email protected]> wrote: > > I should start reading from the top. I come in after teaching a class > until nine and find that Ed commented on bedbugs first. Either he’s an > artist or I’m an economist. > > > REH > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]<[email protected]>] > On Behalf Of Ed Weick Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 3:18 PM > To: [email protected]; RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, > EDUCATION Subject: Re: [Futurework] Professional Ethics (of economists) > > Rat farming? How about bedbugs? They're making a comeback. > > Ed > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Spencer" <[email protected] > > To: < [email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 2:30 PM > Subject: [Futurework] Re: Professional Ethics (of economists) > > > > Last night, I commented on Tom's reference: > >>> > http://ecologicalheadstand.blogspot.com/2011/09/professional-ethics.html >> > >> Over the past 30 years, the economics discipline has been >> > systematically subverted....Many of the most prominent economists >> in > America are now paid to testify in Congress, to serve on boards >> of > directors, testify in antitrust cases and regulatory >> proceedings, and > to give speeches to the companies and industries >> they study and write > about with supposed objectivity. This is not >> a marginal activity; it > is now an industry, run by a half dozen >> large companies. >> >> I > didn't know that. Why does that remind me somehow of the privatized >> > prison industry? > > Saw this on Slash/dot: > > How Bug Bounties Are > Like Rat Farming 104 > > Posted by timothy on Tuesday September 20, > @11:00AM > from the first-we-hypothesize-a-problem dept. > > > Gunkerty Jeb writes "In a keynote speech at the United Security > > Summit, Stephen Dubner, co-author of Freakonomics, drew parallels > > between the increasingly popular (and successful) practice of > > software vendors offering bug bounties and a new industry > springing > up in Johannesburg, South Africa, where the population > has recently > found itself beset with a growing rat problem. In > order to help > mitigate their rodent problem, officials in > Johannesburg began > offering a small monetary rewards for each dead > rat turned in. It was > wildly successful, and it didn't take long > for fresh batch of > entrepreneurs to pop up and exploit the > situation. Of course, I'm > talking about rat farming. Evidently, > business minded individuals > have taken to breeding rats, only to > kill them and turn them in for > rewards. Obviously, rat farming is > somewhat unscrupulous, but > security researchers are doing the same > thing: breeding bugs in the > lab, then leading them to the > slaughter for a nice payday. And it's > a good thing." > > Which probably isn't a totally new thing [1] but a > reminder about how > that works with prisons, weapon systems and > (allegedly) economists. > > The way it works out for (software-) bug > hunting -- the relevance for > Slash-dotters -- seems to be free of the > malignancy/fraudulence of rat > farming: > > > http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/how-bug-bounties-are-rat-farming-092011 > > > as one commenter there (somewhat intemperately) observes. > > So the > question is: how do you structure privatization of prisons, > corporatized > for-fee economics consulting or any such activity so that > it works like > bug-hunting and not like rat-farming? Do we need to > somehow extract or > sequester such activities completely from > capitalist incentives? > > > - > Mike > > > [1] The Paris rat-catcher of circa 1689 in Stephenson's > _Quicksilver_ > was already (and quite entertainingly) into rat > farming. > > -- > Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, > Canada .~. > > /V\ > [email protected] /( )\ > > http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/ > > <http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0%A0>^^-^^ > > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing > list > [email protected] > > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > > > > -- Sandwichman > > ------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > ** > > ** Keith Hudson, Saltford, England > http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2012/08/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > -- Sandwichman
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
