I was thinking today that all classes speculate- from horse traders- bingo-lottery-casino- really, an endless list. Wall Street is just another version of speculation. It's really a shame that Obama has derided success/wealth- I find him to be a very divisive type and an unfortunate leader then remind myself of humanity riding out cruel or weak emperors, tyrants and kings. Then I "whistle a happy tune"! :-)
On Nov 14, 9:54 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > It would be interesting to know who the rich are. Orwell said > somewhere that propaganda reduced a word to one meaning. We tend to > stereotype. I think this would be about what they do and don't do > rather than naming names. I'd take the following guesses: > > 1. They mostly don't fight in wars. > 2. They get a lot of education in networks not generally available - > both in private schools and elite management of better state > provision. This tend to make education a means to foster lack of > social mobility and part of the continuation of privilege. > 3. A lot of them are to be found in finance and professions that are > the most heavily "unionised" places of restrictive practice. > 4. You won't find them doing hard work (only for fools and horses). > 5. They are the politburo controlling what we call politics. > 6. Criminal money and tax dodging play a big role. > 7. They are linked to ancient landlord rents in modern form. > 8. They don't take risks, but leave the rest of us holding the baby. > > On 14 Nov, 13:25, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Funny. The modern concious self has gotten very talented at avoiding a > > conscience let alone going through a thorough examination, Roman > > Catholic style, but it's been a bonanza for shrinks and do-it-yourself > > writers and advisors to fill the vacuum. And the super rich, as Gabby > > points out, generally try to crack the upper crust- as a source of > > future monetary opportunities, as a justification, as a display, as a > > safety factor. Few realize money has become a product in and of > > itself- like a bonanza crop for a farmer and even fewer complain when > > then are making money (Madoff''s "investors", etc.) > > > On Nov 14, 2:28 am, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > That is true,, I think i misspelled as usual conscious,, you know the > > > thing that nags you when you are doing something wrong.. > > > Allan > > > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 9:11 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It depends on what you understand by 'social conscious'. The super > > > > rich by necessity have to be 'social conscious' in order to be able to > > > > develop further. You don't need to have 'social conscious' if there is > > > > nothing that you can do to participate in the given richness. > > > > > 2012/11/14 Allan H <[email protected]>: > > > >> It is the super rich that filled their pockets from the world's debt. > > > >> From > > > >> the looks of things there is a form or lack of social conscious > > > >> that is lacking. > > > > >> Allan > > > >> Matrix ** th3 beginning light > > > > >> On Nov 13, 2012 8:50 PM, "archytas" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >>> There is hardly anything more important to thriving functioning > > > >>> capitalism than productivity, and sharing the fruits of productivity. > > > >>> It is notable that productivity among U.S. workers actually > > > >>> skyrocketed over the last decade and a half, but real wages have > > > >>> flattened or declined. > > > >>> Where did the surpluses go? To parasitic financializers who have seen > > > >>> their share over all corporate profits grow from 10% to over 45% in > > > >>> recent decades. > > > >>> After costing trillions and wiping out the world economy, what asset, > > > >>> good, or service do big banks produce that has genuine public worth? > > > > >>> • “Expert advice”, in which brokers intentionally sell junk to > > > >>> consumers, as shown in investment bank emails? > > > >>> • “Financial services”, which turn out to be so laden with hidden fees > > > >>> and loosened/fabricated credit qualifications that the lendee is worse > > > >>> off? > > > >>> • Allegiances that concentrate financial wealth the top 0.1% of the > > > >>> population, causing the vast majority of the world to get poorer? > > > > >>> If anything, citizens would stand to gain more by paying big banks to > > > >>> close their doors. > > > > >>> Big banks have largely stopped lending to businesses or individuals > > > >>> because that’s not profitable enough and because they need to retain > > > >>> capital to reduce their exposure due to their own foolish > > > >>> overleveraging. This depresses community and small business > > > >>> entrepreneurship and productivity. > > > > >>> Bottom line: Big banks’ “services” take far more in costs than they > > > >>> provide in benefits. Much would be gained, and little lost, if they > > > >>> were allowed to fail or were decommissioned outright for their > > > >>> criminal behavior. > > > > >>> The bail outs could have been given to individuals and families > > > >>> instead of the banks - we would probably have been looking at $120,000 > > > >>> a family. > > > > >>> It's not the roar of the crowd rigsy - we might call that socially > > > >>> approved epistemic authority. It's about forming decent culture and > > > >>> that we are less individual than we are made to think. Ask people if > > > >>> they have a figure on what the TARP and the rest have cost each one of > > > >>> us - you'll generally come up dry. If people struggle even with > > > >>> basics like this what chance complex schemes of internal training? > > > > >>> On 13 Nov, 19:28, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > The US has lots of problems it does not want to admit to.. There is > > > >>> > one > > > >>> > extremely dangerous quake off the northwest coast .. that will > > > >>> > happen > > > >>> > more sooner than later. > > > >>> > Allan > > > > >>> > Matrix ** th3 beginning light > > > >>> > On Nov 13, 2012 1:59 PM, "rigsy03" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >>> > > You seem to see morality as a group thing rather than an > > > >>> > > individual > > > >>> > > struggle between good and evil- which is a religious/spiritual > > > >>> > > matter. > > > >>> > > As for individualism, it is a necessary tension against "the roar > > > >>> > > of > > > >>> > > the crowd". There are too many examples to list. > > > > >>> > > On Nov 12, 9:49 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > > > Even one person one vote isn't it on its own. Majorities are > > > >>> > > > manipulable and often wrong. If you look at an issue like > > > >>> > > > abortion > > > >>> > > > - > > > >>> > > > which I think should be available and also avoided by better > > > >>> > > > sexual > > > >>> > > > practice - there might be a majority against for all sorts of > > > >>> > > > superstitious reasons. The US relies on Roe v Wade rather than > > > >>> > > > statute. For all the romanticism of Irish republicanism, they > > > >>> > > > leave > > > >>> > > > a > > > >>> > > > young, raped girl to 'her fate'. I believe there comes a time > > > >>> > > > when > > > >>> > > > we > > > >>> > > > should have help to slip from the mortal coil but one can > > > >>> > > > immediately > > > >>> > > > see problems. Molly talks of embracing pardoxes - but much of > > > >>> > > > the > > > >>> > > > difficulty concerns cultural ideologies based in the > > > >>> > > > manipulation of > > > >>> > > > ignorance. Any half-wit should be able to grasp that the > > > >>> > > > treatment > > > >>> > > > of > > > >>> > > > wages as a cost to be hammered down is inconsistent with a > > > >>> > > > developed > > > >>> > > > economy and genuinely available opportunity for most. Yet our > > > >>> > > > politics treats the dominant ideology of a race to the bottom on > > > >>> > > > wages > > > >>> > > > as as taken as read as any Soviet claptrap. Worker unions are > > > >>> > > > to be > > > >>> > > > detested, yet managers, owners and professionals are more > > > >>> > > > unionised > > > >>> > > > than any set of mine workers in history. > > > > >>> > > > Science more or less accepts we are good and evil and that the > > > >>> > > > unit > > > >>> > > > that promotes good behaviour is the social. Virtue ethics > > > >>> > > > arise in > > > >>> > > > writing within an unchallenged slave economy - I don't want to > > > >>> > > > be > > > >>> > > > 'pure' and live off the backs of others (though inevitably as I > > > >>> > > > grow > > > >>> > > > creaky I do). I'm sick of phrases like 'flexible employment' > > > >>> > > > that > > > >>> > > > mean a return of 'you, you and not you' casual labour and > > > >>> > > > managerial > > > >>> > > > abuse in a unitary framework of the employment relationship. > > > >>> > > > Disgusted would be a more accurate term - much morality comes > > > >>> > > > with > > > >>> > > > that feeling (scientifically). > > > > >>> > > > The story of what is happening in America and the imposition of > > > >>> > > > 'individualist' ideology (a bad joke when one looks at the lack > > > >>> > > > of > > > >>> > > > it > > > >>> > > > in American Football) has been long told. When are we > > > >>> > > > individual > > > >>> > > > and > > > >>> > > > when are we selfish prats? You look very individual when you > > > >>> > > > step > > > >>> > > > the > > > >>> > > > big forward, stiff the sweeper, dummy the fullback and dive > > > >>> > > > over the > > > >>> > > > line. Try doing that without the guy who gave the precision > > > >>> > > > pass, > > > >>> > > > the > > > >>> > > > guys running interference and all the attrition that knackered > > > >>> > > > the > > > >>> > > > big > > > >>> > > > forward giving you the edge. > > > > >>> > > > My grandson has just had a small knee operation free at point of > > > >>> > > > delivery. The hospital had a room with Xbox (all donated). We > > > >>> > > > get > > > >>> > > > some stuff right. Must go to collect him. > > > > >>> > > > On 12 Nov, 09:20, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > I think it is it should be one person one vote,, and the > > > >>> > > > > corporate > > > >>> > > > > wallet closed completely and with a maximum amount that can > > > >>> > > > > be > > > >>> > > > > donated (nation wide ) with no exception,, > > > > >>> > > > > effectively the excessively rich and companies and the > > > >>> > > > > companies.. > > > >>> > > > > The super pacs need to be forced to revel all donors and the > > > >>> > > > > amount > > > >>> > > > > they donated.. and that is a minimum these organizations > > > >>> > > > > should > > > >>> > > > > be > > > >>> > > > > totally removed. the Pacs as a republican invention and they > > > >>> > > > > need > > > >>> > > > > to > > > >>> > > > > be brought into control. > > > > >>> > > > > the US has created a political money quagmire.. > > > >>> > > > > Allan > > > > >>> > > > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 4:48 > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --
