I suspect free markets are as rare as Flying Harrington's - and I much prefer the latter. Key issues in financial services and other white collar bastions such as the one Craig hopes to join are similar to those manufacturing and agriculture have faced for centuries. These are essentially about productivity based on ruthless process analysis and the collapse of myth. A truly free market would not allow lawyers (and plenty of other professions) to kill low wages and competition through their professional guilds. Bwanking in particular is low-skill-high-bull and should have been subject to technical routinisation long ago. Much the same is true across the white-collar board and the sports and celebrity market.
Much has actually been written about the 'self-made man' and there is no doubt this is a myth. So-called professional integrity is indeed so-called. My guess about the way all this is perpetuated is that easy forms of leadership-followership are deep set genetically and that we need markets free of this guff. People are not generally good at rationality and so cheat. They can cheat as easily in an alleged democracy as they can in a soviet once what can be done under the rules in practice is understood. Soviet and free-world nomenclature- parasite groups were around the same size. What we need is a move from the iron-cage of bureaucracy and to recognise just what bureaucratic parasitism is. On 6 Mar, 16:38, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > Very good point. Reminds me of the old "what's good for GM is good > for America" line some ancient CEO of that venerable(currently > vulnerable) company once said. Our world economy can be quite > simbiotic if things go well. As we are seeing, however, when America > coughs the world catches a cold and we are currently wheezing and > rattling our way into oxygen tent pnumonia. While greed is a great > motivator it unfortunatly blinds the greedy to the great risks they > are taking. > > dj > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 3:06 PM, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > There's a slight difference between people acting in behalf of their > > own interests and acting in behalf of their own best interest, but > > that slight difference resulted in the current crash. A person acting > > in their own interest would not be bound by any principle such as win- > > win. A person acting in their own best interest would consider the > > party or parties on the other side of the equation and would behave as > > though their best interests coincided with the other parties best > > interests. > > > On Mar 3, 12:59 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yes, capitalism assumes people will act in their best interest. It's > >> what makes the market work. The socialist concept of busting your ass > >> for the 'public good' isn't going to work. Obama and co. are going to > >> have a rude awakening when they finally figure this out. It's going > >> to be a rough 4 years. Probably 8. > > >> dj > > >> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > >> > Don, > >> > Yes, I too hold the individuals responsible. But isn't that a given? > >> > Isn't the expectation that individuals will be greedy and self > >> > interested? I guess its no surprise then that the institutions set up > >> > by those individuals mirror their qualities. > > >> > On Mar 3, 11:24 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> As usual, I see your side and agree Craig. However, I don't discount > >> >> the responsibility of the individuals that signed the papers knowing > >> >> they couldn't afford what they were getting. If they didn't know, > >> >> they should have. I have made mistakes in the past and have paid for > >> >> them dearly in some cases. It frustrates me that I'm expected to pay > >> >> for others as well. > > >> >> The banks and financial institutions are also at fault for creative > >> >> schemes gone wrong. I'm talking about Credit Default Swaps and > >> >> convoluted derivatives in general. Bundling mortgages and passing > >> >> them off to unsuspecting investors, while apparently legal, is > >> >> certainly unethical and our SEC should have taken better care of the > >> >> publics interest. It's supposed to be why they exist. But, surprise, > >> >> surprise! The government is incompetent. I'm shocked. And appalled. > > >> >> Someone made the point that we are government. There is some merit to > >> >> this which is why I support less government. Less to go wrong. > > >> >> dj > > >> >> On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Kierkecraig <[email protected]> > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> > Same thing I said to Slip, I say to you gruff. This isn't the banks > >> >> > fault. They would never have done that. It doesn't make financial > >> >> > sense to do that. The government did what you are complaining of. > >> >> > Such an atrocity would never have happened in a truly free market. > > >> >> > On Mar 3, 8:28 am, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> We could always start with the real estate agents who, once the dogs > >> >> >> of finance were unleashed, told any lie they could get away with to > >> >> >> entice undeserving and under-earning people who couldn't afford a pot > >> >> >> to piss in to buy a six figure home on the promise of a quick buck in > >> >> >> a year or two when the 10% return on investment provided them with a > >> >> >> five figure profit. > > >> >> >> I just wonder when (and if) the powers that be are going to go after > >> >> >> those who reaped these unwarranted profits and got out before the > >> >> >> crash. > > >> >> >> On Mar 2, 9:27 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > I apologize for the belated welcome but nevertheless, Welcome! > >> >> >> > What you have to understand, wood, is that many people have not the > >> >> >> > slightest idea of financial calculation and are "told" by financial > >> >> >> > experts that they "can" afford the house, the car, the credit card. > >> >> >> > We cannot blame the people alone but more so the financial > >> >> >> > institutions that have taken advantage of those who cannot perceive > >> >> >> > their own financial worth and capability of repayment. The US > >> >> >> > unfortunately is full of sharks that have taken control of > >> >> >> > government, > >> >> >> > taken control of the poor situations in which people live. > >> >> >> > Who of you out there would not want to have a better home, car, and > >> >> >> > other amenities in life? > >> >> >> > What is happening now is an "Atrocity" perpetrated by the wealthy > >> >> >> > in > >> >> >> > control of the government. > > >> >> >> > On Mar 2, 8:02 pm, wood <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > As much as I would love to blame, the government for this mess, > >> >> >> > > but > >> >> >> > > the government is not entirely to blame—The problem is closer to > >> >> >> > > home. > >> >> >> > > People only have themselves to blame for putting themselves into > >> >> >> > > situation they could have avoid only if they were mentally > >> >> >> > > stronger, > >> >> >> > > and not be blinded by false dreams and value. In trying to live > >> >> >> > > the > >> >> >> > > “American dreams” people makes premature decision; buying house > >> >> >> > > they > >> >> >> > > know they cannot afford, cars they can’t maintain… All for what? > >> >> >> > > People need to change their outlook on life and stop falling > >> >> >> > > victim to > >> >> >> > > mind imprisonment. In the drive to establish independency and > >> >> >> > > individuality, everyone has become the same. > > >> >> >> > > On Feb 26, 4:17 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > >> >> >> > > wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > "... Now our government is trying to keep deadbeats in houses > >> >> >> > > > they > >> >> >> > > > can't afford and shouldn't have gotten loans for in the first > >> >> >> > > > place. > >> >> >> > > > It's asinine." - DJ > > >> >> >> > > > What is even more 'asinine' and is not being talked about at > >> >> >> > > > ALL in > >> >> >> > > > any media is that those of us who don't even own a house, > >> >> >> > > > whether we > >> >> >> > > > could afford one or not ...and rent or...whatever, live on the > >> >> >> > > > street, > >> >> >> > > > at parent's home etc. are among those who are PAYING the banks > >> >> >> > > > to help > >> >> >> > > > keep people in homes! It's not even asinine, it is criminal! > > >> >> >> > > > On Feb 26, 2:42 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > > Government is the problem because they manage the tax code. > >> >> >> > > > > It's so > >> >> >> > > > > confusing the guy hired to be in charge of it can't figure > >> >> >> > > > > out how to > >> >> >> > > > > pay his taxes. Let's make it easy. How about a flat tax on > >> >> >> > > > > all > >> >> >> > > > > income and consumption? Without the loopholes that are so > >> >> >> > > > > abundant > >> >> >> > > > > for the extremely wealthy to avoid taxes. I love the idea. > >> >> >> > > > > Of > >> >> >> > > > > course, this would eliminate Congress's major power of > >> >> >> > > > > reward/punishment ability so it will never happen. The > >> >> >> > > > > bribes...oops, > >> >> >> > > > > I mean campaign donations... would dry up. > > >> >> >> > > > > dj > > >> >> >> > > > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:45 PM, ornamentalmind > > >> >> >> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > > > Yes, it is fran. Today many who pay a lot in taxes, not > >> >> >> > > > > > percentage > >> >> >> > > > > > wise, but in amount based on a large income don't mind at > >> >> >> > > > > > all. Only a > >> >> >> > > > > > select vocal few are heard in the media to the point that > >> >> >> > > > > > such > >> >> >> > > > > > propaganda about the government being the problem > >> >> >> > > > > > (Ronnie)....has > >> >> >> > > > > > become a common myth. I've said it many times...when I was > >> >> >> > > > > > a kid, my > >> >> >> > > > > > father paid 91% of his income in taxes...and, we did VERY > >> >> >> > > > > > well....no > >> >> >> > > > > > complaints. Today, in most cases, the poor pay a higher > >> >> >> > > > > > percentage of > >> >> >> > > > > > their income in taxes than the rich. Robin Hood aside, > >> >> >> > > > > > this is absurd > >> >> >> > > > > > no matter the argument. > > >> >> >> > > > > > On Feb 25, 9:28 am, frantheman > >> >> >> > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> > > > > >> Don's - of course - purely rhetorical suggestion about > >> >> >> > > > > >> the non-payment > >> >> >> > > > > >> of taxes seems to echo a certain US American mythology > >> >> >> > > > > >> that there's > >> >> >> > > > > >> something un-american about paying taxes, as well as > >> >> >> > > > > >> there being > >> >> >> > > > > >> something inherently suspect about (central) government. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Nobody likes paying taxes and very few would even > >> >> >> > > > > >> consider paying more > >> >> >> > > > > >> than they absolutely have to - including me. But I must > >> >> >> > > > > >> also > >> >> >> > > > > >> acknowledge that taxation is the basic method for paying > >> >> >> > > > > >> for things > >> >> >> > > > > >> which a country/community/society feels need to be > >> >> >> > > > > >> organised > >> >> >> > > > > >> collectively. It belongs to the basic ideas of > >> >> >> > > > > >> self-definition of a > >> >> >> > > > > >> country/community/society to decide what these collective > >> >> >> > > > > >> tasks are > >> >> >> > > > > >> and how far they should be funded by the common purse. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Even as a non-US American, I seem to remember that the > >> >> >> > > > > >> rallying cry > >> >> >> > > > > >> for the American Revolution was not, "No taxation," but > >> >> >> > > > > >> rather "No > >> >> >> > > > > >> taxation without representation." The USA established > >> >> >> > > > > >> itself on this > >> >> >> > > > > >> basis as a representative democracy. Everything else > >> >> >> > > > > >> flows from that. > >> >> >> > > > > >> To use the language of 18th Century political thinkers, > >> >> >> > > > > >> that's the > >> >> >> > > > > >> basic social contract and there's no way to opt out of it > >> >> >> > > > > >> and back to > >> >> >> > > > > >> the "state of nature." As far as I recall, the US fought > >> >> >> > > > > >> a rather > >> >> >> > > > > >> spectacular civil war about that very issue. Those who > >> >> >> > > > > >> wanted the > >> >> >> > > > > >> right to opt out lost. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> None of this, of course, addresses problems of injustice > >> >> >> > > > > >> within > >> >> >> > > > > >> particular taxation systems. But, strictly seen, that's > >> >> >> > > > > >> what has to be > >> >> >> > > > > >> sorted out within the representative democracy framework. > >> >> >> > > > > >> Or, if your > >> >> >> > > > > >> conscientious objections lead you to refuse, then you > >> >> >> > > > > >> must accept the > >> >> >> > > > > >> consequences. In my opinion, that's the kind of bravery > >> >> >> > > > > >> Orn is talking > >> >> >> > > > > >> about. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> Francis > > >> >> >> > > > > >> On 25 Feb., 16:50, ornamentalmind > >> >> >> > > > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > First, since the US stopped being serious about > >> >> >> > > > > >> > tariffs, taxes are > >> >> >> > > > > >> > needed for the common good. The IRS has been > >> >> >> > > > > >> > under-funded for years > >> >> >> > > > > >> > and the result(s) is they only go after those accounts > >> >> >> > > > > >> > that will be > >> >> >> > > > > >> > easy to collect. read: the accounts of the > >> >> >> > > > > >> > non-powerful/non-rich. > >> >> >> > > > > >> > Our founding fathers not only decided not to continue > >> >> >> > > > > >> > to pay their > >> >> >> > > > > >> > taxes, but they took action that would have resulted in > >> >> >> > > > > >> > their death if > >> >> >> > > > > >> > caught. Almost to a man, they died in poverty. Few > >> >> >> > > > > >> > today are as brave. > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > On Feb 24, 6:41 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > Sure, the Duty of Civil Disobedience, good ole > >> >> >> > > > > >> > > Thoreau. > > >> ... > > >> read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
