I was going to wait for the new list; but got a thought in my head that
wants to get out:
>>The village had supported itself for centuries by fishing and trading.
>
>Sounds sort of like capitalism (or was it true laissez-faire?).
I don't think much capital is involved in such economies: it's more labor
intensive. It could have been closer to the latter; but see below
>>Here, fellow Americans, is your tax dollar at work...and the dark side of
>>altruism.
>
>Hmmm... which side are you on?
I try to see the +s and -s in both; but underlying everything else I would
say human beings predate (and created) concepts of wealth & capitalism and
thus individuals and societies should not be subservient to wealth &
capitalism.
Back to our happy campers on Guam (or wherever):
Suppose that instead of government aid our villagers were receiving monthly
royalty checks from Exxon for offshore drilling rights.
Would it make a difference that the $ came from capitalism instead of
socialism?
If the villagers were laissez-faire capitalists they would have invested
their $ in a new enterprise. Since they didn't, I suspect (a) their
culture did not stress economic goals or the role of capital in an economy,
or (b) a TV set, refrigerator, and monthly check (whether provided by
capitalism or socialism) are all some people need to be happy.
Rob Cozens, CCW
http://www.serendipitysoftware.com/who.html
"And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three;
Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee."
from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)
