Keith,
On the radio this morning an astrophysicist was saying that we are now discovering so many planetary systems elsewhere in our galaxy that the number of planets with lifeforms must be at least a billion. If this is so, then I can only deduce that at least one of them has been observing us for a long time! But, so far, they have been kind enough not to interfere. cordell, Are you sure??? -----Original Message----- From: Keith Hudson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 4:01 AM To: Ed Weick Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Economics *is* simple (was Re: Privatizing the Public: Whose agenda?: At What Hi Ed, Before our mutual admiration society becomes too intense, let me comment on what your Dene elder considered to be the reason for the dysfunctional ways of some modern Denes. (EW) <<<< I was recently privileged to hear a Dene elder from the Mackenzie Delta tell a story about why he felt his community had fallen into evil and socially dysfunctional ways. He said that about a hundred years ago his people were given little pieces of paper because they gave some animal skins to some white guys who happened to be travelling in their lands. They had given the skins away, not expecting any recompense, and were puzzled by the little pieces of paper until one of the whites suggested that they take them to a trading post some distance away. They did that and discovered that the little pieces of paper were money, and its been downhill ever since. >>>> Surely you and the Dene elder are not saying that the Denes were unacquainted with money! It would seem to me from the account above that the Denes were using skins as money (just as Mongolians had used sheepskins for centuries until relatively recently). (In fact, I understand that now Mongolians are allowed to own their own flocks of sheep again since the overthrow of communism, then sheepskins are now used again as currency for much of their internal trading.) Also, I imagine the Denes would have had some experience of wampum, wouldn't they? (Incidentally, I'd welcome specific information about wampum if there are knowledgeable FWers. As I understand it, denominations of wampum currency consisted of shells of specific sizes and colours. In other words, it was not to be found lying around, as some detractors would have it. As with gold, much time and effort had to be expended in "mining" it and therefore it had scarcity value.) However, paper money would certainly have been a culture shock to the Denes! Even the Chinese, who invented it in the early Middle Ages failed to make it stick -- even on pain of death. In the west, paper money grew "naturally" from merchants' promissory notes but only over a long period. The impact of western civilisation on prior cultures is surely a poignant one. But I can't see how it can be avoided, even though a great deal that is splendid is lost. On the radio this morning an astrophysicist was saying that we are now discovering so many planetary systems elsewhere in our galaxy that the number of planets with lifeforms must be at least a billion. If this is so, then I can only deduce that at least one of them has been observing us for a long time! But, so far, they have been kind enough not to interfere. Keith At 11:15 10/04/02 -0400, you wrote: (EW) <<<< Thank you very much for butting in. For some reason, my comments on Harry's posting did not seem to make the list or perhaps it just hasn't shown up yet. I haven't been able to follow the list very closely recently because I've been travelling, so I'm sorry to say that I missed a lot of the "three basic assumptions" material. And yes, I recognize that economics, at the theoretical level, must be kept simple, and that the simpler the situation, the more likely people are to behave as theory expects them to. If the price of gas (petrol) goes up and stays up for a year or more, people start buying smaller cars, etc. My point, however, is that simple economics has little practical value because it doesn't really explain very much. Human nature is indeed complex, and socio-cultural differences among interacting groups create enormous uncertainties about outcomes. In commenting on the Indian wars of the American west, a writer I'm reading put it in terms of Indians and whites having tried to understand each other but, in reality, having spent the past four hundred years looking past each other. I must admit that I can't do it all of the time, but whenever I enter into a new situation in the work I do, I try to be very, very dumb and avoid any pre-conceived notions about human behaviour. My main objective is to find out what is going on in the situation and not apply anything I know about how people should behave until I have at least a glimmer of understanding of why they are behaving as they are. I've done a lot of work with Aboriginal people over the years and have found that you can dress them in coveralls, put hard hats on them, and put them on mining exploration crews, but you cannot take cultural differences that have built up over at least twenty thousand years away from them. And it is those cultural differences that often count in the end. I was recently privileged to hear a Dene elder from the Mackenzie Delta tell a story about why he felt his community had fallen into evil and socially dysfunctional ways. He said that about a hundred years ago his people were given little pieces of paper because they gave some animal skins to some white guys who happened to be travelling in their lands. They had given the skins away, not expecting any recompense, and were puzzled by the little pieces of paper until one of the whites suggested that they take them to a trading post some distance away. They did that and discovered that the little pieces of paper were money, and its been downhill ever since. I don't know how accurate the story is as a piece of history, but it does illustrate my point. To us, money is a very natural and integral part of our lives. To the Dene elder, it was the unnatural corrupting influence that led to the downfall of his people. Keith, your contributions to this list are also superb. So are Harry's. We may disagree, but in the process we learn. >>>> __________________________________________________________ "Writers used to write because they had something to say; now they write in order to discover if they have something to say." John D. Barrow _________________________________________________ Keith Hudson, Bath, England; e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________________
