What to do about the rich?
33 views
Skip to first unread message
archytas
Mar 8, 2013, 1:44:10 AM3/8/13
to "Minds Eye"
We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth
concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. (Justice
Louis Brandeis)
The rich are independent of the rest of us. Obviously they are
materially independent so long as their property rights remain
recognized. They can achieve what they want by themselves, that is by
buying it from others or paying someone else to do it for them. But
this power of command also generates a social distance from society
that allows them to become 'ethically independent'. Since they don't
depend on the goodwill of others to succeed - for example, few of them
have recognisable jobs - they may become less concerned in general
about whether they deserve goodwill.
That means that the rich don't have the same political interests as
the rest of us. They aren't worried about crime (their gated
communities come with private security) or the quality of public
education (their kids go to the fanciest schools money can buy) or
affordable accessible health care, job security, public parks, gas
prices, environmental quality, or most of the other issues that the
rest of us have no choice but to care about, and to care about
politically since they are outside of our individual powers to fix.
The political concerns of the rich do not lie in the provision of
public goods, but in furthering their private interests, whether their
personal wealth and power or their political whimsies. This is why
Adam Smith warned us so vehemently to be suspicious of their self-
serving rhetoric (e.g. WN I.11.264).
It is sometimes thought that the rich are necessary to the flourishing
of a free market economy, that because they have more wealth than they
need for their own consumption it is their investment of capital that
makes the economy spin around and create jobs. Thus the claim that
there is a trade-off between democracy and material prosperity. But
that ‘job creator’ thesis is out of date and back to front.
First, while in Adam Smith's time it might have been true that
economic development required capitalists to reinvest their profits
this was because everyone else was too poor. But these days the
economies of democratic societies are characterized by a broad middle-
class whose savings are quite sufficient for funding business
development and expansion (such as through the share-ownership of our
pension funds or the bank loans backed by our deposits).
Second, the greater the wealth inequality, the worse we may expect the
economy to perform. A flourishing economy requires customers as well
as investors. If the gains of economic productivity are overwhelmingly
transferred to some small group (as profits) that means that they
don't go to ordinary people (as wages). (For example, since 1979 all
the productivity gains of America's economy have gone to the richest
1%.) The implications are, first, that economic growth does not
increase national prosperity because it does not increase the economic
command of ordinary people to satisfy our wants (which is how Smith
defined the wealth of nations). And, second, economic growth itself
will eventually suffer since high inequality limits the extent of the
market (fewer customers) and thus the scope for innovation.
Hence my modest proposal. We should first identify with some precision
the category of what it seems reasonable to call the rich i.e. those
people whose capabilities for independence from and command over the
rest of us crosses the threshold between enviable affluence and
aristocratic privilege. Then, when anyone in our society lands in the
category of the problematic rich we should say, as at the end of a
cheesy TV game show, "Congratulations, you won the economy game! Well
done." And then we should offer them a choice: give it away (hold a
potlatch, give it to Oxfam, their favourite art museum foundation, or
whatever) or cash out their winnings and depart our society forever,
leaving their citizenship at the door on their way out. Since the rich
are, um, rich, they have all the means they need to make a new life
for themselves elsewhere, and perhaps even inveigle their way into
citizenship in a country that is less picky than we are. So I'm sure
they'll do just fine. Still, we can let them back in to visit family
and friends a few days a year - there's no need to be vindictive.
concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. (Justice
Louis Brandeis)
The rich are independent of the rest of us. Obviously they are
materially independent so long as their property rights remain
recognized. They can achieve what they want by themselves, that is by
buying it from others or paying someone else to do it for them. But
this power of command also generates a social distance from society
that allows them to become 'ethically independent'. Since they don't
depend on the goodwill of others to succeed - for example, few of them
have recognisable jobs - they may become less concerned in general
about whether they deserve goodwill.
That means that the rich don't have the same political interests as
the rest of us. They aren't worried about crime (their gated
communities come with private security) or the quality of public
education (their kids go to the fanciest schools money can buy) or
affordable accessible health care, job security, public parks, gas
prices, environmental quality, or most of the other issues that the
rest of us have no choice but to care about, and to care about
politically since they are outside of our individual powers to fix.
The political concerns of the rich do not lie in the provision of
public goods, but in furthering their private interests, whether their
personal wealth and power or their political whimsies. This is why
Adam Smith warned us so vehemently to be suspicious of their self-
serving rhetoric (e.g. WN I.11.264).
It is sometimes thought that the rich are necessary to the flourishing
of a free market economy, that because they have more wealth than they
need for their own consumption it is their investment of capital that
makes the economy spin around and create jobs. Thus the claim that
there is a trade-off between democracy and material prosperity. But
that ‘job creator’ thesis is out of date and back to front.
First, while in Adam Smith's time it might have been true that
economic development required capitalists to reinvest their profits
this was because everyone else was too poor. But these days the
economies of democratic societies are characterized by a broad middle-
class whose savings are quite sufficient for funding business
development and expansion (such as through the share-ownership of our
pension funds or the bank loans backed by our deposits).
Second, the greater the wealth inequality, the worse we may expect the
economy to perform. A flourishing economy requires customers as well
as investors. If the gains of economic productivity are overwhelmingly
transferred to some small group (as profits) that means that they
don't go to ordinary people (as wages). (For example, since 1979 all
the productivity gains of America's economy have gone to the richest
1%.) The implications are, first, that economic growth does not
increase national prosperity because it does not increase the economic
command of ordinary people to satisfy our wants (which is how Smith
defined the wealth of nations). And, second, economic growth itself
will eventually suffer since high inequality limits the extent of the
market (fewer customers) and thus the scope for innovation.
Hence my modest proposal. We should first identify with some precision
the category of what it seems reasonable to call the rich i.e. those
people whose capabilities for independence from and command over the
rest of us crosses the threshold between enviable affluence and
aristocratic privilege. Then, when anyone in our society lands in the
category of the problematic rich we should say, as at the end of a
cheesy TV game show, "Congratulations, you won the economy game! Well
done." And then we should offer them a choice: give it away (hold a
potlatch, give it to Oxfam, their favourite art museum foundation, or
whatever) or cash out their winnings and depart our society forever,
leaving their citizenship at the door on their way out. Since the rich
are, um, rich, they have all the means they need to make a new life
for themselves elsewhere, and perhaps even inveigle their way into
citizenship in a country that is less picky than we are. So I'm sure
they'll do just fine. Still, we can let them back in to visit family
and friends a few days a year - there's no need to be vindictive.
gabbydott
Mar 8, 2013, 6:50:07 AM3/8/13
to minds-eye
There have been many good points made in what has been said here. Yet I do believe that at this stage of our evolution we must know our past by heart and keep on acting with/on a common forward orientation. What I see being described as a phenomenon at the top, I see happening at the grassroots level also. Heaven and Hell meet where the airspace allows for dust particles to form clouds and where the earth evaporates conceivable amounts of sulfuric gasses. After all that has been freed from a Pawlowian drooling reflex and is being seen as potentially deconstructable, Connectivism is the new tribalism operating at both ends. Goethe's "Wahlverwandschaften" being read through the chemist's glasses. There is no back to family visits when you are busy building your tribe. The foam carpet is not being exposed by highlighting its most spectacular and fluorescent bubbles.
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Allan H
Mar 8, 2013, 9:16:40 AM3/8/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
You would think that over the centuries man would learn.. actually I
think it is starting to happen with the new banking laws coming into
play. hand shake deals will becoming to an end and taxes where the
rich like it or not will have to be paid.. off shore banks will be
finding it much more difficult to transfer money..
Oddly before long there will be more careful examination ass to where
wealth came from and how it was created.. there appear to be grass
root changes taking place.. Neil that is where sound direction is
needed .. a place for these roots to grow and better society.
--
(
)
|_D Allan
Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
Of course I talk to myself,
Sometimes I need expert advice..
think it is starting to happen with the new banking laws coming into
play. hand shake deals will becoming to an end and taxes where the
rich like it or not will have to be paid.. off shore banks will be
finding it much more difficult to transfer money..
Oddly before long there will be more careful examination ass to where
wealth came from and how it was created.. there appear to be grass
root changes taking place.. Neil that is where sound direction is
needed .. a place for these roots to grow and better society.
(
)
|_D Allan
Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living.
Of course I talk to myself,
Sometimes I need expert advice..
archytas
Mar 11, 2013, 9:45:17 AM3/11/13
to "Minds Eye"
The madness of it is they got us thinking their interests were our
interests. Adam Smith warned against that at some length.
On Mar 8, 2:16 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You would think that over the centuries man would learn.. actually I
> think it is starting to happen with the new banking laws coming into
> play. hand shake deals will becoming to an end and taxes where the
> rich like it or not will have to be paid.. off shore banks will be
> finding it much more difficult to transfer money..
>
> Oddly before long there will be more careful examination ass to where
> wealth came from and how it was created.. there appear to be grass
> root changes taking place.. Neil that is where sound direction is
> needed .. a place for these roots to grow and better society.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 12:50 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There have been many good points made in what has been said here. Yet I do
> > believe that at this stage of our evolution we must know our past by heart
> > and keep on acting with/on a common forward orientation. What I see being
> > described as a phenomenon at the top, I see happening at the grassroots
> > level also. Heaven and Hell meet where the airspace allows for dust
> > particles to form clouds and where the earth evaporates conceivable amounts
> > of sulfuric gasses. After all that has been freed from a Pawlowian drooling
> > reflex and is being seen as potentially deconstructable, Connectivism is the
> > new tribalism operating at both ends. Goethe's "Wahlverwandschaften" being
> > read through the chemist's glasses. There is no back to family visits when
> > you are busy building your tribe. The foam carpet is not being exposed by
> > highlighting its most spectacular and fluorescent bubbles.
>
> > 2013/3/8 archytas <nwte...@gmail.com>
> >> For more options, visithttps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
interests. Adam Smith warned against that at some length.
On Mar 8, 2:16 pm, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You would think that over the centuries man would learn.. actually I
> think it is starting to happen with the new banking laws coming into
> play. hand shake deals will becoming to an end and taxes where the
> rich like it or not will have to be paid.. off shore banks will be
> finding it much more difficult to transfer money..
>
> Oddly before long there will be more careful examination ass to where
> wealth came from and how it was created.. there appear to be grass
> root changes taking place.. Neil that is where sound direction is
> needed .. a place for these roots to grow and better society.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 12:50 PM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > There have been many good points made in what has been said here. Yet I do
> > believe that at this stage of our evolution we must know our past by heart
> > and keep on acting with/on a common forward orientation. What I see being
> > described as a phenomenon at the top, I see happening at the grassroots
> > level also. Heaven and Hell meet where the airspace allows for dust
> > particles to form clouds and where the earth evaporates conceivable amounts
> > of sulfuric gasses. After all that has been freed from a Pawlowian drooling
> > reflex and is being seen as potentially deconstructable, Connectivism is the
> > new tribalism operating at both ends. Goethe's "Wahlverwandschaften" being
> > read through the chemist's glasses. There is no back to family visits when
> > you are busy building your tribe. The foam carpet is not being exposed by
> > highlighting its most spectacular and fluorescent bubbles.
>
>
> > --
>
> > ---
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > ""Minds Eye"" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visithttps://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
> > --
>
> > ---
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > ""Minds Eye"" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
Allan H
Mar 11, 2013, 4:35:33 PM3/11/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
I know what you mean Neil,, Seems that change is starting.. the
Doctors over here started a web page against tobacco.. and they are
revealing those legislator that are being influenced by the tobacco
lobby.. it seems like light is beginning shine in the darkness..
I support the Light.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Doctors over here started a web page against tobacco.. and they are
revealing those legislator that are being influenced by the tobacco
lobby.. it seems like light is beginning shine in the darkness..
I support the Light.
archytas
Mar 12, 2013, 9:42:27 AM3/12/13
to "Minds Eye"
The big myth is that rich people have worked hard for their wealth and
deserve it (pace rigs). Even the slavers were paid off in huge
amounts and one can trace such money to the present day - much the
same true of Nazi businesses. We are hooked into a control fraud.
deserve it (pace rigs). Even the slavers were paid off in huge
amounts and one can trace such money to the present day - much the
same true of Nazi businesses. We are hooked into a control fraud.
gabbydott
Mar 12, 2013, 10:29:40 AM3/12/13
to minds-eye
I am trying to get used to music from the cloud. It's a bit too easy to say I support the Light. The homeopathic effect of synaesthetic perception needs time and space to disappear. How mistaken I was about linguistic shortcuts. Here is a song/album from my recent heavy rotation list for/against Neil's frustration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbGJgrBsgng (hope it works over at your place, I can't see it here in Germany).
Allan H
Mar 12, 2013, 2:29:25 PM3/12/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
I know for a fact my great grandfather was the one that originally
found the copper mine in Butte Mt.. only to have it stolen by extreme
dishonest means,, the rich it seems can not tolerate someone else
that is not in there circle becoming wealthy.. Controlled fraud is
a good way to put it..
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
found the copper mine in Butte Mt.. only to have it stolen by extreme
dishonest means,, the rich it seems can not tolerate someone else
that is not in there circle becoming wealthy.. Controlled fraud is
a good way to put it..
Allan H
Mar 12, 2013, 2:37:43 PM3/12/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Sorry Gabby I both listened to and read (several times) and the truth
is I see nothing .. I reads like a very shallow person just putting
words together to make a so called song...
is I see nothing .. I reads like a very shallow person just putting
words together to make a so called song...
James
Mar 12, 2013, 6:30:45 PM3/12/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
As the dust settles here and there I hope that more many people become
more aware together, from that I guess we will see if more intentional
existence arises. So much is uncertain, except that divided we are
pecked at and invisible, almost proverbial and perennial at the same time.
Partially inspiring song gabby, I have to cut it short to write quickly
here. The song made me reflect on predators in the jungle..
>>>>>>> that �job creator� thesis is out of date and back to front.
more aware together, from that I guess we will see if more intentional
existence arises. So much is uncertain, except that divided we are
pecked at and invisible, almost proverbial and perennial at the same time.
Partially inspiring song gabby, I have to cut it short to write quickly
here. The song made me reflect on predators in the jungle..
andrew vecsey
Mar 13, 2013, 6:06:03 AM3/13/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
On Friday, March 8, 2013 7:44:10 AM UTC+1, archytas wrote:
........The rich are independent of the rest of us. ........
No. They depend on customers to make them rich.
...... A flourishing economy requires customers as well as investors. .......
Exactly
......since 1979 all
the productivity gains of America's economy have gone to the richest
1%.) ............when anyone in our society lands in the
category of the problematic rich we should say, as at the end of a
cheesy TV game show, "Congratulations, you won the economy game! Well
done." ...........
Yes, exchange part of their wealth for merit points and redistribute their wealth to the poorest who need it most.
The problem is not people getting rich, but rather people becoming too rich. When there are no limits to wealth, we do not have a sustainable system where the poor have a chance to become rich. One thing we can all do to limit the "too weathy" is not to support them by buying their products and services. This is very easy to do as usually we do not need their products and services which are actually harmful to us. Vote them out with your wallets.
The problem is not people getting rich, but rather people becoming too rich. When there are no limits to wealth, we do not have a sustainable system where the poor have a chance to become rich. One thing we can all do to limit the "too weathy" is not to support them by buying their products and services. This is very easy to do as usually we do not need their products and services which are actually harmful to us. Vote them out with your wallets.
archytas
Mar 14, 2013, 7:55:06 AM3/14/13
to "Minds Eye"
If we were all millionaires who would do the work we love so much?
Gabby's dirge reminded me I ain't been to the pub for a couple of
weeks. The folk singers do lunchtime today, so I'm off for a few
choruses of John Barleycorn.
Given I have no interest in clothes and can't take the weather naked,
Andrew, I buy shirts, socks and trousers direct from a Portuguese
factory in boxes of a dozen at twice the factory gate price. I am not
otherwise sure how to subvert the rich and their retailing. As far as
I can I've gone no logo except for our German (also made in Portugal)
car, which despite all its vorsprung durch tecknologie does not
achieve the claimed mpg figures. I suppose, in buying the car, I have
contributed to the Volkswagen senior managements use of Angolan
prostitutes flown first class to the Paris Hilton - and had I gone BMW
would have been rewarding the Nazi-Daimler fortunes invested in them.
British rewards to slavers were in billions. I like the idea of
consumers not rewarding such filthy rich and don't drink Starbucks on
grounds of tax fiddling - overall the strategy doesn't work.
Gabby's dirge reminded me I ain't been to the pub for a couple of
weeks. The folk singers do lunchtime today, so I'm off for a few
choruses of John Barleycorn.
Given I have no interest in clothes and can't take the weather naked,
Andrew, I buy shirts, socks and trousers direct from a Portuguese
factory in boxes of a dozen at twice the factory gate price. I am not
otherwise sure how to subvert the rich and their retailing. As far as
I can I've gone no logo except for our German (also made in Portugal)
car, which despite all its vorsprung durch tecknologie does not
achieve the claimed mpg figures. I suppose, in buying the car, I have
contributed to the Volkswagen senior managements use of Angolan
prostitutes flown first class to the Paris Hilton - and had I gone BMW
would have been rewarding the Nazi-Daimler fortunes invested in them.
British rewards to slavers were in billions. I like the idea of
consumers not rewarding such filthy rich and don't drink Starbucks on
grounds of tax fiddling - overall the strategy doesn't work.
rigs
Mar 28, 2013, 9:04:37 PM3/28/13
to "Minds Eye"
It's not a myth- it's a fact. One you don't like along with zillions
of others. And the rich do create opportunities for others. There are
misers, of course, but the poor can also be miserly. Let's get our
moral judgements on a realistic plane as human nature has its good and
bad points in all economic spheres. The main slavers were Arabs,
Africans and nations with a robust shipping trade plus colonizing
nations needing human labor prior to machines- though wages may be
argued as another form of enslavement. We are hooked into a perpetual
game of economic musical chairs; a class is ousted and the ousters
take on the same qualities of the ousteed. Some do not define
themselves by money or stuff- even if they have them.//The Cypus event
of the week is deja vu a la GM,etc. Lagarde reminds me of a former
Sacred Heart nun- but no matter. Don't underestimate the lure of greed
fueled by envy- again, back to the Garden of Eden.// I have been
watching the sun melt the ice- it's going well on the north side but
had the roofer out today and he will install a heat wire this summer
so I don't have to worry each spring. Also cooking a lot. Company for
Easter.//How do you think Henry VIII got his navy???By robbing the
Papacy!!! :-)
> > Sometimes I need expert advice..- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
of others. And the rich do create opportunities for others. There are
misers, of course, but the poor can also be miserly. Let's get our
moral judgements on a realistic plane as human nature has its good and
bad points in all economic spheres. The main slavers were Arabs,
Africans and nations with a robust shipping trade plus colonizing
nations needing human labor prior to machines- though wages may be
argued as another form of enslavement. We are hooked into a perpetual
game of economic musical chairs; a class is ousted and the ousters
take on the same qualities of the ousteed. Some do not define
themselves by money or stuff- even if they have them.//The Cypus event
of the week is deja vu a la GM,etc. Lagarde reminds me of a former
Sacred Heart nun- but no matter. Don't underestimate the lure of greed
fueled by envy- again, back to the Garden of Eden.// I have been
watching the sun melt the ice- it's going well on the north side but
had the roofer out today and he will install a heat wire this summer
so I don't have to worry each spring. Also cooking a lot. Company for
Easter.//How do you think Henry VIII got his navy???By robbing the
Papacy!!! :-)
>
> - Show quoted text -
rigs
Mar 28, 2013, 9:07:06 PM3/28/13
to "Minds Eye"
Or thieves cannot tolerate someone else's good luck or fortune- so
they steal it.
> Sometimes I ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
they steal it.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Allan H
Mar 29, 2013, 4:30:12 AM3/29/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Rigsy Henry the 8th got his navy on the backs of the poor.. not the
Papacy .. all he did was destroy a bunch of monasteries.. but there
was never enough money there to fiance his navy.. get real.. stole
from church because they would not let him have his way with
divorces.. how many did he go through either by divorce or killing
them.. one thing for sure he is no hero.. more of a cowering thief.
the greedy created their own environmental and fears and then created
and taught people to fulfill their fears so they can scream they are
right and point fingers.. all signs of the cult of the golden calf.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Papacy .. all he did was destroy a bunch of monasteries.. but there
was never enough money there to fiance his navy.. get real.. stole
from church because they would not let him have his way with
divorces.. how many did he go through either by divorce or killing
them.. one thing for sure he is no hero.. more of a cowering thief.
the greedy created their own environmental and fears and then created
and taught people to fulfill their fears so they can scream they are
right and point fingers.. all signs of the cult of the golden calf.
Allan H
Mar 29, 2013, 4:53:47 AM3/29/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
nothing but propaganda of the golden calf.. yes tier can not tolerate
another persons good luck and fortune, .. Now tell the thieven hearst
family fortune the fortune that they stole from my great great
grandfather and that includes the money it made.. actually the rich
are often the worst thieves of them all.. lawyers rate very high in
that scale..
What was stolen doesn't matter,, the point is it was stolen,, whether
by paying minimum wage , denying benefits, bad working the list goes
on and on,, don't cry and point fingers. Rigsy lawyers the protect
the wealthy and greedy when they commit crimes are as guilty of the
crime as if they committed the crime themselves. charging excessive
rates. for lawyer games like phone tag a great money maker.. cost the
poor hundreds of dollars.. an easy hidden thief.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
another persons good luck and fortune, .. Now tell the thieven hearst
family fortune the fortune that they stole from my great great
grandfather and that includes the money it made.. actually the rich
are often the worst thieves of them all.. lawyers rate very high in
that scale..
What was stolen doesn't matter,, the point is it was stolen,, whether
by paying minimum wage , denying benefits, bad working the list goes
on and on,, don't cry and point fingers. Rigsy lawyers the protect
the wealthy and greedy when they commit crimes are as guilty of the
crime as if they committed the crime themselves. charging excessive
rates. for lawyer games like phone tag a great money maker.. cost the
poor hundreds of dollars.. an easy hidden thief.
rigs
Mar 29, 2013, 8:04:54 AM3/29/13
to "Minds Eye"
The wealth and lands of the Church were part of papal wealth. The
royal treasury was empty. Yes- the British navy took off under the
Tudors. The divorces came later along with his "solutions". (I did
take a 2 quarter course in Tudor history but request some slack for
facts.) One could also point to the later Enclosure act that ended the
common lands and set up the British aristocracy leading to slum-cities
and the ills of the Industrial Revolution. It's musical chairs. The
greedy still create their own enviornment but change the nouns and
verbs - they still need power to attain their ends: politics or wars.
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
royal treasury was empty. Yes- the British navy took off under the
Tudors. The divorces came later along with his "solutions". (I did
take a 2 quarter course in Tudor history but request some slack for
facts.) One could also point to the later Enclosure act that ended the
common lands and set up the British aristocracy leading to slum-cities
and the ills of the Industrial Revolution. It's musical chairs. The
greedy still create their own enviornment but change the nouns and
verbs - they still need power to attain their ends: politics or wars.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
rigs
Mar 29, 2013, 8:11:03 AM3/29/13
to "Minds Eye"
Lawyers run most governments and make the laws. Like any other group
there are the good, bad and the ugly.
there are the good, bad and the ugly.
Allan H
Mar 29, 2013, 10:39:58 AM3/29/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
henry the 8th was all about divorce.. So it is okay to steal what is freely given to the church and use it to line you pockets or royal treasury.. what you are saying is it is okay to steal as long as you can blame others for your wrong doing.. there is a great litany of excuses the rich use for stealing ... wonder if these excuses work with God as you understand him..
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
archytas
Mar 29, 2013, 11:54:02 AM3/29/13
to "Minds Eye"
Spot on on Lagarde rigs. Her flat was raided in a criminal enquiry.
She may have had a role in a dodgy French arms' deal with Pakistan
where bribes were kicked back to fund the Franco-GOP candidate in a
presidential election. I can remember playing musical chairs as a kid
- I liked the running about and bumping into girls (this was the other
way round) but had no clue the idea was not to be left standing,
wondering why deviant adults kept stealing the chairs. I submit the
long adult version with child replaced by gawping scientist.
It is impossible to apply hard science to these issues. I do sometimes
try to think as a scientist without knowledge of economics – difficult
as I teach the subject in business context. I always find, in this
thought experiment, that I just would not start with concepts from
economics. A key finding in ‘anthropological archaeology’ is that the
lives of a certain class of people got worse with our turn to
agriculture – something we might call ‘broken back syndrome amongst
the sod turners’. A book of examples later, I conclude the problem
with real-world economics – the theories-in-action as opposed to
espoused – is that it has no way of fairly organising work and reward
against such ideals we might cherish like real democracy and proper
guardianship of the planet. This no doubt looks like naive thinking. I
then find myself thinking about how we organise such matters as ‘a
trip to Mars’ (Newton, Einstein, the 3-body problem, moving space and
down to stuff like the crew having to line (with proper hygiene) the
craft with their excrement to protect against ‘space weather’. Lots of
other complex systems flow – the arms’ race of co-evolution, combating
Lyme’s disease, parasitism as the most common lifestyle – and I find
myself questioning why I an feel some much more competent as a
scientist than economist or increasingly disaffected cog in the
political machine.
Popper once pointed out that Freud and Marx could not be scientific
because if you went against the theories you were immediately in
denial or false-consciousness. As we repeatedly see “economics”
destroy the potential of most ordinary lives (and those of the few
through hedonism in a libidinal economy) we are told it is because we
just won’t engage in real free markets – the neoclassic form of the
denial-false-consciousness routine.
I’m less inclined to worry who is next to go under as a country in the
great depression (I guess Luxembourg, Switzerland, UK – though all
bets are off if the USD goes down) – but on how and why we are in
thrall to a mad control fraud that keeps on failing. Invited on a
space ship to Mars built by economists I would simply wish the crew
godspeed and utter a silent atheist prayer, noting that oars are an
unlikely propulsion system. If the crew were Critical Theorists I’d
want to save, I’d be happy in the thought none of them could row.
Deep down we seem scared of the idea of a world of people with enough
“money and security” to be able to tell power they will only work for
“things and a quality of life” they want. I have instant reservations
about this state myself as a manager and through experience of free-
loading and the dire trivia most people “want” – from plastic crap,
neat mobile phones to Saudi princes raiding Syrian refugee camps for
wives. Nonetheless, with much of ‘Robot Heaven’ with us in principle
and some practice, the lack of modern thought experiments (such as
what place Calvinist work ethic would have in 100% Robot Heaven – how
could we morally keep people poor when machines do all the work etc?)
and repeated fetish concerns with homilies from the 18th century
leaves me cold.
The current model seems no better than handing over bags of electronic
cash to people who trouser it and at most engage in acts of charity
similar to pouring slops over a medieval monastery wall. In the UK we
have a Chancellor so smart he has just created a British Fanny Mae/
Freddy Mac! As one country after another faces becoming Cyprus (by the
end of next week we will be discovering we don’t know the half of that
– note three old-fogey judges are already rostered for the cover-up)
we have no politics of lancing the banking boil generally and
production-based (responsible type) schemes for people to work their
way out of the mess without seeing the toil go to paying off bank
debts.
I agree with Allan that all this is really about the rich stealing.
What we lack is a conception of a fairer society that makes sense of
what people would be in it. I share rigs' concerns with the 'ash-grey
uniform of equality' and big government, but we can at least dream up
something in which this would not come about. "They" certainly seem
to be putting the wind up us - making us feel money in the bank may as
well be hidden about the house - yet somewhere we seem to have
forgotten how quickly economies can recover as Germany and Japan did
after WW2.
> ...
>
> read more »
She may have had a role in a dodgy French arms' deal with Pakistan
where bribes were kicked back to fund the Franco-GOP candidate in a
presidential election. I can remember playing musical chairs as a kid
- I liked the running about and bumping into girls (this was the other
way round) but had no clue the idea was not to be left standing,
wondering why deviant adults kept stealing the chairs. I submit the
long adult version with child replaced by gawping scientist.
It is impossible to apply hard science to these issues. I do sometimes
try to think as a scientist without knowledge of economics – difficult
as I teach the subject in business context. I always find, in this
thought experiment, that I just would not start with concepts from
economics. A key finding in ‘anthropological archaeology’ is that the
lives of a certain class of people got worse with our turn to
agriculture – something we might call ‘broken back syndrome amongst
the sod turners’. A book of examples later, I conclude the problem
with real-world economics – the theories-in-action as opposed to
espoused – is that it has no way of fairly organising work and reward
against such ideals we might cherish like real democracy and proper
guardianship of the planet. This no doubt looks like naive thinking. I
then find myself thinking about how we organise such matters as ‘a
trip to Mars’ (Newton, Einstein, the 3-body problem, moving space and
down to stuff like the crew having to line (with proper hygiene) the
craft with their excrement to protect against ‘space weather’. Lots of
other complex systems flow – the arms’ race of co-evolution, combating
Lyme’s disease, parasitism as the most common lifestyle – and I find
myself questioning why I an feel some much more competent as a
scientist than economist or increasingly disaffected cog in the
political machine.
Popper once pointed out that Freud and Marx could not be scientific
because if you went against the theories you were immediately in
denial or false-consciousness. As we repeatedly see “economics”
destroy the potential of most ordinary lives (and those of the few
through hedonism in a libidinal economy) we are told it is because we
just won’t engage in real free markets – the neoclassic form of the
denial-false-consciousness routine.
I’m less inclined to worry who is next to go under as a country in the
great depression (I guess Luxembourg, Switzerland, UK – though all
bets are off if the USD goes down) – but on how and why we are in
thrall to a mad control fraud that keeps on failing. Invited on a
space ship to Mars built by economists I would simply wish the crew
godspeed and utter a silent atheist prayer, noting that oars are an
unlikely propulsion system. If the crew were Critical Theorists I’d
want to save, I’d be happy in the thought none of them could row.
Deep down we seem scared of the idea of a world of people with enough
“money and security” to be able to tell power they will only work for
“things and a quality of life” they want. I have instant reservations
about this state myself as a manager and through experience of free-
loading and the dire trivia most people “want” – from plastic crap,
neat mobile phones to Saudi princes raiding Syrian refugee camps for
wives. Nonetheless, with much of ‘Robot Heaven’ with us in principle
and some practice, the lack of modern thought experiments (such as
what place Calvinist work ethic would have in 100% Robot Heaven – how
could we morally keep people poor when machines do all the work etc?)
and repeated fetish concerns with homilies from the 18th century
leaves me cold.
The current model seems no better than handing over bags of electronic
cash to people who trouser it and at most engage in acts of charity
similar to pouring slops over a medieval monastery wall. In the UK we
have a Chancellor so smart he has just created a British Fanny Mae/
Freddy Mac! As one country after another faces becoming Cyprus (by the
end of next week we will be discovering we don’t know the half of that
– note three old-fogey judges are already rostered for the cover-up)
we have no politics of lancing the banking boil generally and
production-based (responsible type) schemes for people to work their
way out of the mess without seeing the toil go to paying off bank
debts.
I agree with Allan that all this is really about the rich stealing.
What we lack is a conception of a fairer society that makes sense of
what people would be in it. I share rigs' concerns with the 'ash-grey
uniform of equality' and big government, but we can at least dream up
something in which this would not come about. "They" certainly seem
to be putting the wind up us - making us feel money in the bank may as
well be hidden about the house - yet somewhere we seem to have
forgotten how quickly economies can recover as Germany and Japan did
after WW2.
>
> read more »
Allan H
Mar 29, 2013, 5:23:24 PM3/29/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
I also remember how the german currency went to worthless also.. I am thinking about what the man said abou the fiction of currency
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
archytas
Mar 30, 2013, 2:28:01 AM3/30/13
to "Minds Eye"
I'm not sure the Papacy ever owned the dissolved monasteries rigs,
though the process did fund about 30 ships. A hundred years later we
were floating joint stock companies to attack Spain - a failed Drake-
Norris expedition being the first (£80K only returning £30K in
plunder). The Royal Navy comes much later with the Act of Union
(1707) and it's around then money was raised by the Bank of England.
I would have fancied a maritime Robin Hood raid on the Vatican myself.
I don't see this rich thing as about class - it's more to do with
social structuring through 'money as power' - as a famous poem stated,
there's no point in changing the rulers.
THE GREAT DAY (W.B. Yeats in Montague 1974:239)
Hurrah for revolution and more cannon-shot!
A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot.
Hurrah for revolution and cannon come again!
The beggars have changed places, but the lash goes on.
Not only do we have to get rid of the rich, we need to ensure no new
group forms - this was the idea of classical economics - to remove the
drain of economic rents on production. All the current fuss is
because we failed to do this - nearly all the complaints about welfare
drains to the poor and so on are irrelevant. The welfare queens are
the banks.
The obvious thing is that we are being told, after massive increases
in technology and productivity, we are worse off. On preference I'd
want no part in the idiot system but it's hard to keep wolves from the
door without taking the establishment mark - unless you luck in to
something. Tudor history help much when you worked at the S & L rigs?
(in the same way my quantum chemistry didn't when teaching bankers) -
I have a feeling we may discover how useless the banksters have really
been this year.
> ...
>
> read more »
though the process did fund about 30 ships. A hundred years later we
were floating joint stock companies to attack Spain - a failed Drake-
Norris expedition being the first (£80K only returning £30K in
plunder). The Royal Navy comes much later with the Act of Union
(1707) and it's around then money was raised by the Bank of England.
I would have fancied a maritime Robin Hood raid on the Vatican myself.
I don't see this rich thing as about class - it's more to do with
social structuring through 'money as power' - as a famous poem stated,
there's no point in changing the rulers.
THE GREAT DAY (W.B. Yeats in Montague 1974:239)
Hurrah for revolution and more cannon-shot!
A beggar on horseback lashes a beggar on foot.
Hurrah for revolution and cannon come again!
The beggars have changed places, but the lash goes on.
Not only do we have to get rid of the rich, we need to ensure no new
group forms - this was the idea of classical economics - to remove the
drain of economic rents on production. All the current fuss is
because we failed to do this - nearly all the complaints about welfare
drains to the poor and so on are irrelevant. The welfare queens are
the banks.
The obvious thing is that we are being told, after massive increases
in technology and productivity, we are worse off. On preference I'd
want no part in the idiot system but it's hard to keep wolves from the
door without taking the establishment mark - unless you luck in to
something. Tudor history help much when you worked at the S & L rigs?
(in the same way my quantum chemistry didn't when teaching bankers) -
I have a feeling we may discover how useless the banksters have really
been this year.
>
> read more »
Allan H
Mar 30, 2013, 4:18:20 AM3/30/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
liked the poem,, with have to copy it on my phone..
interesting way of putting if,,, when you think about it the banksters are the true welfare queens of society, only they do excessive harm. there is a lot to say only it would be finger pointing,, and finger pointing tells me I am at fault, probably in what I have failed to do...
> ...
>
> read more »
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
rigs
Mar 30, 2013, 8:45:14 AM3/30/13
to "Minds Eye"
I would have to say that all RC property and wealth "belonged" to
Rome, in a sense.//What about the Armada victory? A navy has to start
somewhere, afterall. :-)//Yes- I took away some thoughts to savor and
save after the Tudor classes. The prof had attended Oxford and had
delightful asides. I called him about a paper and lo and behold he
lived in one of my childhood homes! He invited me to go through but I
declined- it would have disturbed my memories, perhaps. He retired a
few years ago.// Money just replaced lineage and land...more portable.
But it cannot replace education and other qualities.//I read you last
night and felt blue afterwards- reminded me of Anthony Burgess-
"Nothing Like the Sun"- in its energy. I often pray for you and
others. But I loved Chaucer (read in Middle English) and Milton and
only audited Shakespeare as a course or picked up works in other
courses. I have some favorites of Yeats and read up on Maud Gonne who
intrigued me.//
Rome, in a sense.//What about the Armada victory? A navy has to start
somewhere, afterall. :-)//Yes- I took away some thoughts to savor and
save after the Tudor classes. The prof had attended Oxford and had
delightful asides. I called him about a paper and lo and behold he
lived in one of my childhood homes! He invited me to go through but I
declined- it would have disturbed my memories, perhaps. He retired a
few years ago.// Money just replaced lineage and land...more portable.
But it cannot replace education and other qualities.//I read you last
night and felt blue afterwards- reminded me of Anthony Burgess-
"Nothing Like the Sun"- in its energy. I often pray for you and
others. But I loved Chaucer (read in Middle English) and Milton and
only audited Shakespeare as a course or picked up works in other
courses. I have some favorites of Yeats and read up on Maud Gonne who
intrigued me.//
Allan H
Mar 30, 2013, 11:02:41 AM3/30/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
no rigsy not all RC Property and wealth belongs to rome,,, all of the european wealth (old money) either came off the backs of the poor or was stolen else where.. with rare exception..
--
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
archytas
Mar 30, 2013, 2:39:22 PM3/30/13
to "Minds Eye"
Our great victory over the Armada is over-written rugs and had a lot
to do with the weather and Dutch. One has to agree wealth is usually
amassed on the broken backs of others, I don't think we need to be so
libidinal or mean given new technology. I would have liked to spend
more time with literature - I did music for a long time - enough to
know I was no good. I'm not much affected by the arts and certainly
have no talent or even representational ability in such. It's not
that I don't appreciate such - I get wowed but it's never enough in-
itself for me - I suspect too many people have lost out in modern
culture - I can barely remember a rugby coach without a guitar and
choruses of American Pie and Classical Gas to prove I had a sensitive
side to doubting ladies. I can appreciate local talent nights - just
hate to see them on television. I spent 4 hours in the Vatican just
to see a Raphael and a Holbeck. Of course, I spent weeks with the Ma
and Wang paper on the dark-adjusted field equations I'm sure I posted
here as a tease.. There's a beauty in such that never materialises
from economic regressions. You are in what passes for my prayer too.
> ...
>
> read more »
to do with the weather and Dutch. One has to agree wealth is usually
amassed on the broken backs of others, I don't think we need to be so
libidinal or mean given new technology. I would have liked to spend
more time with literature - I did music for a long time - enough to
know I was no good. I'm not much affected by the arts and certainly
have no talent or even representational ability in such. It's not
that I don't appreciate such - I get wowed but it's never enough in-
itself for me - I suspect too many people have lost out in modern
culture - I can barely remember a rugby coach without a guitar and
choruses of American Pie and Classical Gas to prove I had a sensitive
side to doubting ladies. I can appreciate local talent nights - just
hate to see them on television. I spent 4 hours in the Vatican just
to see a Raphael and a Holbeck. Of course, I spent weeks with the Ma
and Wang paper on the dark-adjusted field equations I'm sure I posted
here as a tease.. There's a beauty in such that never materialises
from economic regressions. You are in what passes for my prayer too.
>
> read more »
richard blay
Sep 25, 2013, 7:39:44 AM9/25/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
interesting ideas expressed here about the 'rich'. The rich need us as
we much need them. Suppose we balance the equation, that's, equal
wealth, I tell you without doubt that in about days there'll be again
the matter of poor and rich. It's not what we should do about the
rich, it's about what the poor should do about themselves; their
unrealistic desires and how to move from that class. Is not bad to get
rich in good ways.. I'm not rich nor poor though
we much need them. Suppose we balance the equation, that's, equal
wealth, I tell you without doubt that in about days there'll be again
the matter of poor and rich. It's not what we should do about the
rich, it's about what the poor should do about themselves; their
unrealistic desires and how to move from that class. Is not bad to get
rich in good ways.. I'm not rich nor poor though
andrew vecsey
Sep 26, 2013, 4:28:24 AM9/26/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
IMO the problem is not that there are rich and there are poor. The problem is that the rich are too rich and the poor are too poor. When you are playing monopoly and one person takes over the entire game, then it is no longer fun to play. Then you clear the board and start a new game. It is time to clean the board and start a new game. Bitcoin offers a possibility to do just that.
Allan H
Sep 26, 2013, 6:41:44 AM9/26/13
to mind...@googlegroups.com
It is not the rich or the poor that are the real problem. It needs to be a.balance and be out of balance favoring extreme wealth. Wealth that has no purpose..
Wealth with out purpose leads to two things. Fear & War
(
)
[_D Do No Harm
Allan via mobile
Zenom
Feb 27, 2019, 1:30:25 PM2/27/19
to "Minds Eye"
being rich itself is NOT wrong (it's the 10% of 1% are convicts of the forbidden sin = {money power lust CONTROL network} aka {the WALL}
...
finally: the money EON empire
...is the biggest WALL of all works-in-progress...
hints: em-ARSE-gods may learn from the Mongolian & ??: it’s the *people-be* the best “wallaw”:
“build the wall” to “destroy the people”
(hints: public education, healthcare…)
that’s the ONLY way to “protect the empireS” = “national security” of Trump, China CP, Vietnam CP & other C?P’s
that’s WHY it’s a “do or die” 4 em-ARSE-gods, the wall must be built at any cost (not the PUNY 5.6 B Trump requested)
...
On Friday, March 8, 2013 at 1:44:10 AM UTC-5, archytas wrote:
We must make our choice. We may have democracy, or we may have wealth
concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. (Justice
Louis Brandeis)
The rich are independent of the rest of us. Obviously they are
materially independent so long as their property rights remain
recognized. They can achieve what they want by themselves, that is by
buying it from others or paying someone else to do it for them. But
this power of command also generates a social distance from society
that allows them to become 'ethically independent'. Since they don't
Zenom
Feb 27, 2019, 1:31:11 PM2/27/19
to "Minds Eye"
ref. 4 next statements:
> Trump is mostly “being read as a liar” <but at the same time> there’s “brutal honesty” in him
> “ANGER” is the key word: by Trump’s quote (NOT his exact words, but it shall be SAME)
> i can’t remember b/f or after he was-elected as president - imho, Trump himself was NOT so ANGRY at that time
“a lot of ANGER from people i met”
===================================================================================================
<initially, it’s only the “control objective” - eventually, destruction of others by any ways & means is the “final solution”>
(seek-read below notes & REread Reagan’s evangelical speech further down this page)
Zenom
Feb 27, 2019, 1:31:45 PM2/27/19
to "Minds Eye"
NOTES on the last statements: (just REread 4 “other way to be”)
> tie silly thy into nail “control objective?”
> by any destruction of others & way sly same sin the eventual“final solution!”
4 ?qi! people, only the ONE word BALANCE needed to explain the whole thing, but…
===================================================================================================
hard<?q>easy<i!>answer:
survival of the fittest??
hints: the ONE command, tic-tac-toe, game theory of LIFEReply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages