book...Morally and philosophically I find myself in agreement with
virtually the whole of it: and not only in agreement with it, but in
deeply moved agreement." Having said that, Keynes did not think
Hayek's philosophy was of practical use; this was explained later in
the same letter, through the following comment: "What we need
therefore, in my opinion, is not a change in our economic programmes,
which would only lead in practice to disillusion with the results of
your philosophy; but perhaps even the contrary, namely, an enlargement
of them. Your greatest danger is the probable practical failure of the
application of your philosophy in the United States." George Orwell
responded with both praise and criticism, stating, "in the negative
part of Professor Hayek's thesis there is a great deal of truth. It
cannot be said too often — at any rate, it is not being said nearly
often enough — that collectivism is not inherently democratic, but, on
the contrary, gives to a tyrannical minority such powers as the
Spanish Inquisitors never dreamt of." Yet he also warned, "[A] return
to 'free' competition means for the great mass of people a tyranny
probably worse, because more irresponsible, than that of the state."
…" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom#Contemporary_commentary
"…In his review (collected in The Present as History, 1953) Marxist
economist Paul Sweezy joked that Hayek would have you believe that if
there was an over-production of baby carriages, the central planners
would then order the population to have more babies instead of simply
warehousing the temporary excess of carriages and decreasing
production for next year. The cybernetic arguments of Stafford Beer in
his 1974 CBC Massey Lectures, Designing Freedom—that intelligent
adaptive planning can increase freedom—are of interest in this regard,
as is the technical work of Herbert Simon and Albert Ando on the
dynamics of hierarchical nearly decomposable systems in economics—
namely, that everything in such a system is not tightly coupled to
everything else.…"
"…More recently, Hayek's support of free market institutions has been
challenged on a new front: the free market economy that he advocated
is designed for an infinite planet, says Eric Zencey in "The Other
Road to Serfdom," and when it runs into physical limits (as any
growing system must), the result is a need for centralized planning to
mediate the problematic interface of economy and nature. "Planning is
planning, whether it's done to minimize poverty and injustice, as
socialists were advocating then, or to preserve the minimum flow of
ecosystem services that civilization requires, as we are finding
increasingly necessary today."..." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom#Criticism
More. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom#Libertarian.2FConservative_critics
It is refreshing to see propaganda in such a nice and assimilatable
package! Cartoons can give us a world which appears to be reality
without any of the restraints thereof.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nEgjwfX6s8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXOCHn7Vfec
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3ezma9cLEs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDozr1KPUyY&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0ubj8piAjE
Yes, any particular ideology one wishes to espouse can be put to film
and promulgated. And this is a serious topic. In any analysis some set
of assumptions are made. Here, one might make human life a need and
place it high on the list of that which must remain. In fact, most do…
since the analysis is being done by a human being and thus one who is
alive. Even though Lee may disagree, yes, most place life as being
sacrosanct. Beyond that, how to retain life is based upon personal
experiences and passions. So, any such ideology will be founded upon
such subjectivity. How else could it be? The obverse would be a sort
of cult of death with the goal of eradicating all life.
So, what we are left with is a dialectic. And, as much as I too tend
to lean towards one side or the other, such ideologies don't seem to
be the 'answer' do they?
On Sep 5, 4:46 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkz9AQhQFNY
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 4:27 AM, ornamentalmind
> <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Neil mentioned insurance... something that is as close to the
> > protection racket as possible.
>
> > Here in the States, we have many examples but one who stands out is
> > William McGuire. His stock option of over a billion dollars (yes,
> > billion with a 'b'), shows what happens when people who purchase
> > insurance end up not getting anything for their money. That and the
> > over 30% stock profits show what a sham the private sector is when it
> > comes to the health racket. Many countries have laws denying any
> > profit for such situations. Here, such crimes are seen as 'good'...a
> > shining example of capitalism. Talk about serfdom!
>
> >http://www.startribune.com/business/11093081.html
> >http://www.forbes.com/static/pvp2005/LIRRI3M.html
>
> >http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1848501_18...
>
> > On Sep 4, 2:11 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I'm fairy convinced on a politburo of the rich -a kind of shadow big
> > > government. I like it no more than any other big government. I don't
> > > think the threat is 'socialism' but rather serfdom. I regard anything
> > > I have to pay to retailing or excess profit as tax and anything I have
> > > to pay to capital based on accumulated wealth as a toll. I'm not
> > > concerned whether the government or private sector taxes me, but my
> > > control over it. For instance, I regard anything beyond a basic
> > > haircut as a tax, but can easily avoid anything other than a short
> > > back and sides.
>
> > > If we lived in a commune, those of us getting home with sore backs
> > > after a day of toil might well object to other members who claimed
> > > their job was to sit around all day playing Monopoly. This is much
> > > how I regard the banksters - beyond the primitive stuff we need. The
> > > trillions swilling about that Orn raises represent a form of Monopoly
> > > played with our currency.
>
> > > Around the West you can see that wages have ceased to rise and debt
> > > increasing since around 1965 - the previous examples are in gold
> > > rushes and the Depression. China is no different in the last 20
> > > years. The figures expressed in GDP terms are clear and also show a
> > > massive adjustment of wealth to the rich. The essence of it all is a
> > > move from building lives and capital that is investment in such, to
> > > accumulation through speculation for a few. Our politics is 60 years
> > > behind what is going on. The figures don't show the money going on
> > > public services but into the Monopoly game we don't get to play in.
>
> > > If you look at what the bottom 50% in our economies own of what we can
> > > put a money value on it's very small in comparison with the top 20%.
> > > Our governments are both corrupt (most MPs or representatives are
> > > economically useless) and scared - they are ploughing money to the
> > > banks and changing requirements for them to hold more Teir 1 capital
> > > and the rest - but must know the banks simply change their false-
> > > accounting schemes in order to play their old games. The new QE is
> > > privatised and what's going on is asset sweating - they are still
> > > borrowing our savings and pensions in repo deals that mean our low
> > > risk investments are still going into junk and gambles. The question
> > > is where the losses are and how they have been dumped. In the old
> > > Barings case, the losses were dumped into an 888 account - but in this
> > > wider crisis the losses are so massive that governments have decided
> > > to inflate their way out. This is an old trick, practised by the
> > > Germans to evade reparations.
>
> > > The alternative is to go for job growth and wage inflation - the other
> > > being war. The situation is clouded by soaked up ideologies about
> > > meritocracy, hard work and despising poor people as wasters. In
> > > reality we have no idea of how little work we need to do, or how bent
> > > the banksters are. The banksters have created their own free table
> > > (Plato's communism), but socialism isn't needed to end this -
> > > transparency is.
>
> > > The USD is probably finished as a reserve currency - this should scare
> > > all Americans and Europeans who have lived under the US military
> > > umbrella - much as many of us resent what this has done. I
> > > investigated a few 'insurance rings' as a cop - discovering many
> > > dodges happening through players in different organisations that
> > > allowed cuts to be taken from insurance payouts - the banksters do
> > > something similar. At root it's about taking money to 'insure'
> > > investments knowing there is no insurance because any insurer would go
> > > bust if required to pay up. In the processes they get to buy real
> > > assets with dud 'secuitised' money. They have been betting with our
> > > futures.
>
> > > We need rid of them without ending up with big government.
>
> > > On Sep 4, 8:17 pm, Don Johnson <daj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Timmy "Turbo Tax" Geithner has much to answer for. Ruining this
> > country's
> > > > economy seems to be at the top of his list. I wonder if the msm will
> > pick up
> > > > on any of this and stick with it until incompetent and/or conniving
> > > > opportunists can be removed from their appointed positions of great
> > power.
> > > > How long will it take?
>
> > > >http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405311190346110457646007.
> > ..
>
> > > > dj
>
> > > > PS: Interesting in that your link fails to mention the man(Bernie
> > Sanders)
> > > > with the provocative quote about socialism for the rich is actually a
> > card
> > > > carrying socialist himself. One of the few actually willing to admit
> > it.
> > > > Also, strangely, no mention of the architect behind the 'secret'
> > bailouts.
> > > > Mr. Timmy 'Turbo Tax' Geithner. A mystery wrapped in an enigma and
> > slathered
> > > > with stinky Maroilles.
>
> > > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 1:00 AM, ornamentalmind
> > > > <ornsmindseyes...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
> > > > > For those who know the private corporate status of the Fed., the
> > > > > following won't be much of a shock. For the rest, it may be.
>
> > > > > First Federal Reserve Audit Reveals Trillions in Secret Bailouts
>
> > > > > The first-ever audit of the U.S. Federal Reserve has revealed 16
> > > > > trillion dollars in secret bank bailouts and has raised more
> > questions
> > > > > about the quasi-private agency's opaque operations.
>
> > > > > "This is a clear case of socialism for the rich and rugged,
> > you're-on-
> > > > > your-own individualism for everyone else," …read the rest at:
> > > > >http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/08/28-3
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário