On 2 Jun 2009 at 10:10, John Carl wrote: > > Platt calmly responds: > > > > I read the article about voluntary collaboration at your suggestion and > > kept looking for something about the quality, merit or value of the end > > result. Nada. Just a lot of huggies about how marvelous it is that, with > > little at stake we can all get along. I learned that playing sandlot > > baseball > > at age 11. > > > > Platt I would say "getting along" is of much higher quality than lobbing > nukes at each other.
Depends on who threatens to start the killing doesn't it? I pray Israel takes out the atomic facility in Iran before it gets a nuke. > If you have a bunch of very high quality individuals, all isolated from one > another and trapped in their own existence, then it doesn't matter how high > the quality they possess. You have to have social interaction for > intellectual excellence to take hold. Social static latching is necessary > for any positive change. I don't see how organizing individuals responding > to DQ undermines any individualism. So long as the activity is voluntary no problem. The question I raised was about the quality of the end result. > Nor do I see how industrial corporate control of the masses leads to more DQ > in society. Big Corporations aren't interested in Quality - they are > interested in profit and if keeping people stupid leads to higher profit... > well you can look around and see the results for yourself. Keeping people stupid is the goal of government education as the results plainly show. In a free market, profit assures quality because customers know the difference between what is quality and what isn't. The proof is in the standard of living and vitality of those who have benefited from capitalism vs. socialism. > > Have you been to North Korea lately? How about Cuba, Venezuela, > > or China? The way things are going, Communist China may well fulfill > > Kruchev's promise to the West, "We will bury you." You've heard about > > the ballooning U.S. debt the Chinese hold? The battles are far from > > over. > Standing on the sidelines it looks to me like those Chi-Coms are bigger fans > of capitalism than you. It also looks like they got seriously screwed by a > buncha sharp yankee traders. What's gonna happen to all that debt when the > dollar becomes worthless? ChiComs bigger fans of capitalism than me? You got to be kidding. As for the debt, you just asked the $6 trillion question. More important, what's going to happen to you and me when Obozo's big deficit spending makes the dollar worthless? > A crisis overblown to provide an excuse for the growth of big > > government with resultant loss of individual liberty. > What loss? Can you show me one example of a Govt bailout program depriving > me of any liberty? I don't see how it makes much difference one way or > another what unka sam does for GM. Every new government regulation represents a loss of individual liberty. It may not affect you directly, but ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee. > > "It's about time to return to the rebuilding of this American resource -- > > individual worth." (ZMM) > > > > Agree; time for one step further: It's time to start harnessing this > American Resource of individual worth through the creation of a total > networking infrastructure and deregulation committed to this task. We got the networking infrastructure, created as a result of the absence of regulation. Also, note how Horse, the moderator of this site, encourages individual liberty by not interfering except in rare instances. He doesn't even impose a tax although he would be justified to do so for his time and trouble. So John, in the end we seem to agree. Keep the bloody do-gooders in government off our backs. Let freedom ring. Platt Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
