From: Case (Case@iSpots.com)
Date: Wed Sep 21 2005 - 15:50:55 BST
>> [Platt]
> Most liberals I know favor socialism, ceilings on and redistribution of
> profits, internationalism, and a U.N. military peace force..
[Case]
From your descriptions below it is hard to tell whether I favor socialism or
not.
I do favor a progressive tax code. I don't believe there should be an income
tax at all frankly. The only explaination I can find for why we have one is
that someone convinced the voters that it would only be a tax on the rich
and so they voted in a constitutional ammendment. I would personally favor a
tax code that only hit businesses and not individuals at all sort of like a
sales tax but that ain't gonna happen.
If by internationalism you mean that our country should be a good neighbor,
that we should lead by our example and work with our friends to make more
friends and when necessary to act together in the use of force, I am for
that too.
>> [Platt]
>> > How could the early followers of Jesus be communists since communism
>> > didn't exist until the 1800's?
>> [Case]
>> I guess that is kinda of true in the sense that gravity didn't exist
>> before
>> Newton, whatever that means. But if you read how it is described in Acts,
>> it sure sounds like what they were doing is pretty pink. Also for the
>> over
>> whelming majority of the time people like us have lived on this planet
>> they
>> lived in tribes which function more or less along communist lines.
[Platt}
> I for one am glad I don't live in a commune or a tribe. As for what the
> religious right thinks about it, I wouldn't know.
[Case]
So you see the connection between the early Christian church and communism
then?
Our species was "designed" to live in groups of less than 100 people who
relied on each other to survive. The social patterns of modern life mimic
the patterns of tribal life in many ways with varying degrees of success. I
would say that many of the woes of life in modern societies result from
modern society's inadequacy in meeting spiritual needs that are satisfied in
tribal societies. I am not especially eager to return to tribal life either
because many of the physical needs left wanting in tribal societies are met
in ours. But I do acknowledge the trade offs. As you point out there are no
collectives that aren't composed of individuals. But the reverse is also
true there are no individuals without collectives to support them.
[Platt]
> Except for restrictions on abortion which is murder, marriage which
> assures a viable society and the Patriot Act which defends against
> terrorists I believe you should be free to fry your mind with drugs and
> engage in whatever sex turns you on with whatever consequent diseases you
> may acquire. Just don't ask me to pay for your doctor's bills.
[Case]
Too many worms in too many cans to even mess with any of that.
[Case]
>> This a simplistic view of the situation. McVey was not connected to the
>> middle east nor was the crew that gassed the Japanese subway. Terrorism
>> is
>> not restricted to the Middle East nor to any particular country in the
>> Middle East. Chomsky would hold that the US is greatest purveyor of
>> terrorism in the world, we just name it something else. Ever wonder why
>> we
>> don't count Iraqi bodies?
[Platt]
> Who doesn't count Iraq bodies? Chomsky hates America. If you research
> terrorist acts in the past 10 years, you'll find the majority have their
> origins in the Middle East.
[Case]
Except to note which car bomber blew up how many I see little concern over
the any causality but our own.
Chomsky like many patriots loves his country but hates what it does.
I think if you look again you will see that the vast majority of terrorism
originating in the Middle East stays in the Middle East. When you get
outside of the Middle East, terrorists are a much more eclectic bunch.
[Platt]
>> > Capitalism creates wealth, socialism redistributes it.
>> Capitalism creates nothing. Individuals create wealth within whatever
>> system they operate. The "ism" merely describes how the wealth is
>> redistributed.
> Capitalism consists of entrepreneurs who who organize, manage and assume
> the risks of producing goods and services, thus creating wealth. Socialism
> consists of bureaucrats who redistribute the wealth created by others.
[Case]
So Capitalism is a system that creates wealth but does not distribute it and
Socialism is a system that distributes wealth that is not created? What good
is wealth that is not distributed? How do socialists distribute wealth if
none is created?
>> [Case]
>> >> Economics is all about money. Money is what psychologists call a
>> >> conditioned reinforcer. A conditioned reinforcer is one that derives
>> >> its
>> >> power to effect behavioral change by being paired with primary
>> >> reinforcers. Primary reinforcers are typical things that satisfy
>> >> biological needs: air, food, water, shelter, sex, drugs... Money is an
>> >> especially powerful conditioned reinforcer because it can be used to
>> >> get
>> >> almost anything in the way of primary reinforcement. As such it works
>> >> very well to establish the relative "value" of things. A problem
>> >> occurs
>> >> because money is such a powerful conditioned reinforcer that it
>> >> becomes
>> >> an end in itself. In the United States this has de-evolved to the
>> >> point
>> >> where money overshadows nearly every other value.
>> [Platt]
>> > Money is the medium of exchange between free traders. As the measure of
>> > the value of goods and services in a free society, it is indispensable.
>> [Case]
>> Are you saying that money is not as I have described it? I am saying that
>> by understanding it better we can use it more wisely, both as individuals
>> and as a matter of public policy.
[Platt]
> Yes. Money is not as you have described it. What you describe is
> psychological mumbo jumbo..
[Case]
I can't resist saying how funny it is to hear a behavioral description
described as "psychological mumbo jumbo". That is a term usually reserved
for psychological babble about artificial mental constructs like the id, the
ego, consciousness, feelings or wanting to marry your mother. The closest
things we have in these discussions to this are Ham's bizarre attempts to
analyze and find purpose his own thought processes.
How do you explain our willingness to exchange about one third of our
allotted time on earth in the pursuit of rectangular pieces of paper and
small disks of metal?
>> [Case]
>> I think letting power run amuck is a prescription for disaster and so did
>> the founding fathers. Why would you place more trust in private companies
>> that are not answerable to the public interest at all?
[Platt]
> Companies must answer to the public interest or they couldn't survive.
[Case]
Sadly, too often this is either not true or by the time the company gets
caught the damage is done.
[Platt]
> Likewise, if you don't like what a company does, don't partake of its
> goods or services.
[Case]
So you are living in a small town and Wal-Mart builds a Super Center. This
puts the local merchants out of business. You don't like it but what are you
to do? Where are you to shop?
[Case]
>> Consider if you will all of the individual rights you
>> have already surrendered to private interests. We are now under almost
>> constant surveillance wherever we shop.
[Platt]
> You mean by cameras designed to foil criminals?
[Case]
Perhaps they do that, perhaps not, but they also watch every other thing you
do. They watch you and who you are with, what you look at, who you talk to
and which car you get in to leave. In short they provide all of the tools a
totalitarian government would need to keep you in line.
[Case]
>> If it was government cameras spying
>> on us we would be horrified.
[Platt]
> Are you not aware of police cameras viewing public streets?
[Case]
We don't have them except at some traffic lights where I live but I suspect
the practice is far more widely used by business everywhere. It has reached
the point were government doesn't even need to bother.
[Case]
>> We surrender many of our constitutional rights
>> to companies every day. The fact that we do it voluntarily does not make
>> it
>> any less a surrender.
[Platt]
> What constitutional rights are you talking about?
[Case]
I suppose you would have to grant, as the courts have done, that privacy is
a right. Then there is piss testing which seems to me to be an unlawful
search and seizure but the courts have upheld that. Also read any End User
Licensing Agreement and see what rights you surrender.
>> [Case]
>> Government does indeed need watching. But I find it curious that
>> conservatives see it as the root of all evil. The Giant is us. Remember
>> "We
>> the people of the United States in order to form a more perfect union..."
>> '...government of the people, by the people and for the people..." I am
>> truly mystified by this self loathing.
[Platt]
> If government would mind its own business as outlined in the Constitution,
> we conservatives would have no problem with it. But today it's hand is in
> everything and everybody's pockets.
[Case]
As outlined in the Constitution the government's business in Our business.
Remember the "We the People..." thing? You seem reluctant to acknowledge
this. Why? I think we would be better off if more of us minded the
government's business.
It sounds as though what you really oppose is taxation of any kind. I
apologize if I am misrepresenting you here but taxation has been with us for
thousands of years. I am hard put to think of any civilization that has not
had taxes in one form or another. In fact some ancient civilizations are
known to us only through their public works. Even the ancient Hebrews
insisted on tithes as offerings to God to support the work of the Levites.
On the other hand I don't think tribal societies have taxes you might want
to check into that.
[Case]
>>Take this soccer mom bumper stick example: "Wouldn't it be a
>> great day if the schools had all the money they needed and the Pentagon
>> had
>> to hold a bake sale to build a bomber?"
[Platt]
> You seem to suggest schools don't have enough money. I think they have
> more than enough. As for the Pentagon, if you don't want to defend this
> country against its enemies, just say so. Not that there isn't a lot of
> waste in the Pentagon, just as in public schools and all monopoly sectors
> of government.
[Case]
I don't just suggest it, I insist on it. In my state for example the
citizens were outraged by the number of children being put into classes. We
passed an amendment to the state constitution to limit class size but our
legislature has yet to enact the taxes needed to fund the amendment. I don't
think our situation is unique.
As for the Pentagon stuff, I would say the best defense against our enemies
is more friends.
You touch on the subject of waste. What is waste? Is business immune from
it? Is there any form of human activity that does not involve waste?
[Platt]
> France is a mess economically, and who wants to wait weeks to get needed
> hospital care or even see a doctor?
[Case]
If you think a 35 hour work week with 11 holidays and 5 weeks of paid
vacation is an economic "mess" then I would have to say things are entirely
too tidy here.
I have talked to many Canadian who are very happy with their health care and
can't understand what our problem is. I also notice that if I just want to
call in for an appointment with a doctor I have to schedule the appointment
in some instances for three months from now. This depends of course on what
doctor for what kind of appointment but I suspect it is not terriblly
different from how things are in Canada.
Case
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 21 2005 - 16:45:42 BST