Actually there are some who just want to work. That aside, the issue then seems to be where one draws the line when it comes to "within reason". This to me appears to be a very difficult thing to come to agreement upon.
On Jun 8, 10:00 pm, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > I didn't mean that, o'mind; apologies if i gave the impression. > > You have to agree though, that one of the joys of making money is > deciding how to spend it; within reason, of course. > > On Jun 9, 1:31 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I see. Thanks paradox. > > > It just sounded like you were attributing the right to use money for > > any end one wishes to no matter how it affects others. Perhaps you > > didn't mean to say that. > > > On Jun 8, 1:26 pm, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Oh goodness no, o'mind. Even if we could figure out what was "might" > > > and what was "right", we'd still have to figure out which was right > > > and which was might. In this context, money changes lives and ideas > > > move mountains. Which is right, and which is might? In any event, we'd > > > be measuring apples and pears. > > > > On Jun 8, 6:30 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > So paradox, you embrace the idea that might makes right, yes? > > > > > On Jun 8, 9:56 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hey, lets not knock the personal choices of the wealthy; they have as > > > > > much right to splash their dollars around as we have to splash our > > > > > ideas around :) > > > > > > Or maybe we're living the trance right now :) > > > > > > On Jun 8, 12:45 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > As to education and parasites archytas, here in the colonies the art > > > > > > of plutocracy remains firmly in place. > > > > > > > Countless excellent examples are noted as side comments in the main > > > > > > stream media today. > > > > > > > I’ve mentioned the Koch Brothers > > > > > > before.http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer > > > > > > > Newer info on them for the 'right' can be found > > > > > > here:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/apr/08/koch-b... > > > > > > > Their purchasing of Florida State’s department of economy along with > > > > > > who will be hired to teach is but one example and is well known. > > > > > > > Overall, few if any of the reasons for said trance are accidental. I > > > > > > say this fully agreeing with archytas’ analysis… merely expanding on > > > > > > the ‘reasons’ involved. > > > > > > > On Jun 7, 3:50 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > To change, we probably have to break a trance. I don't think > > > > > > > humans > > > > > > > are competent to bring the change through planning. Stuff is > > > > > > > happening - our abilities to talk and access history are improving > > > > > > > through the Internet. But they may be about to bring ands end to > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > this. We need to know how little effort is needed to provide > > > > > > > basics > > > > > > > and prevent banditry and a lot about the current role of parasitic > > > > > > > money and be able to get people up to speed on this. I believe > > > > > > > very > > > > > > > little 'work' really needs to be done and parasitic money could be > > > > > > > replaced. I'd have this dialogue first, but one has to wonder > > > > > > > why we > > > > > > > haven't had it up to now. Instead, we have work ethic ideologies > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > ejukation that avoids important questions altogether. I believe > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > exploit a well known human frailty in preventing all this, one it > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > dangerous to bring into the open. > > > > > > > > On Jun 7, 8:25 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Because of debt, obviously, but also because of the false role > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > financial instiutions/markets play with our economy. I can't > > > > > > > > think of > > > > > > > > a nation or empire that lasted very long with an empty treasury. > > > > > > > > Perhaps we are another example of Marx- alienation and > > > > > > > > fetishism. Lady > > > > > > > > Gaga, anyone? She's enormously popular but to me she looks like > > > > > > > > she > > > > > > > > belongs in a Diane Arbus photo exhibit. Anyway, that would be a > > > > > > > > discussion of worth and value and America has been sort of a > > > > > > > > dreamscape for the opportunistic- good or bad. I'm not sure I > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > expectations about politics anymore. > > > > > > > > > On Jun 6, 10:53 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I think political philosophy (philosophy in general, > > > > > > > > > actually) is good > > > > > > > > > food for the mind; enjoy... > > > > > > > > > > Why do governments and budgets/business seem bankrupt to you? > > > > > > > > > Are you > > > > > > > > > benchmarking them against some expectation set you might hold? > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 6, 12:21 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I am just starting a section on political philosophy in my > > > > > > > > > > reading so > > > > > > > > > > I am not up to it...yet! I did learn I am not a Hedonist, a > > > > > > > > > > Cynic, or > > > > > > > > > > Stoic and my Christian background is tattered or a lovely > > > > > > > > > > quilt > > > > > > > > > > depending on one's point of view. > > > > > > > > > > > The remark is cleverly put since government and > > > > > > > > > > budgets/business seem > > > > > > > > > > bankrupt to me. But what do I know? > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 6, 6:09 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > A friend said to me the other day "The sole difference > > > > > > > > > > > between > > > > > > > > > > > Politics and Business is one of Currency"; initially, i > > > > > > > > > > > thought that > > > > > > > > > > > this might be a simplification too far, and unduly > > > > > > > > > > > cynical perhaps > > > > > > > > > > > (though i dont believe he meant it in a perjorative > > > > > > > > > > > sense); yet, the > > > > > > > > > > > more i think about it, the more difficult it is for me to > > > > > > > > > > > refute. > > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -
