On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote: > Gene Coyle wrote: >> (Unfortunately most people, including many on this list, see that as an >> unquestioned good thing.) > > Have you done a poll to see if this is agreed to by "most"? > > My position, in case anyone asks, is that capitalism is set up so that > almost everyone is highly dependent on their money incomes for > survival or getting beyond that. We're hanging on to the tail of a > tiger. > > Because of this dependence, cutting incomes or even keeping them > constant without instituting massive methods of non-market > distribution -- i.e., something like a revolution -- would be a > disaster for almost everyone. It would be like a repeat of the Great > Depression.
In other words, until the Revolution comes, we must have (GDP) growth! I am afraid this argument (apology?) is completely bogus. You are not explicitly admitting it, but in reality you are prioritizing some issues over others. Things like, for instance universal health care must happen at once. But ecological issues like unsustainable growth - well that can wait for the Revolution. I disagree. I think we should be talking as loudly about the growth disease as about other things like health care. -raghu. -- "My fallacies are more logical than your fallacies." _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
