I guess after a re-read for interpretive value I can see that in your post. Now the greed ego, etc. is really the question; can they ever be rectified to the point where any system can function? The big IF?
On Jun 11, 6:14 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey, Slip. It's a melding of the two I'm talking about. There is no > valid reason a wealthy and robust economy can't take care of it's > members, even unto the least of them. However, there are number of > invalid reasons: greed, selfishness, ego, fear, etc. etc. etc. > > On Jun 11, 2:56 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Double posting Gruff? Good to see you emerging from a long hiatus, > > leave it to capitalistic dialogue to lure you in. Either that or the > > desert heat is pointing to a better indoor environment and more time > > on the computer. > > > As usual I wish I could wholeheartedly agree with you but regardless > > of how much better poverty seems in the current light it doesn't > > change the fact that much of capitalism is causal to poverty. I could > > agree with the behavioral aspect to which you point to as being a huge > > flaw but not as it being the only one. There is much to be done to > > improve the system but then again we could also tweak socialism to be > > a better system and perhaps a melding of the two might bring about a > > whole new perspective on social governance.
