Hadn't thought about that, but there's that too, gabbydot :) I guess we'll all decide where our "reason" driven limits might lie; and the law (religious or secular) will hold us accountable; this ought to work, as long as we have a resonable "voice" in lawmaking.
On Jun 9, 11:48 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > Ah, Orn, a slight misunderstanding maybe, the joy that paradox speaks of > might simply be the reasonable result of not having to agree with anyone but > yourself. > > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:21 AM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > 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 -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
