From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Nov 15 2002 - 09:28:31 MST
Lee Corbin wrote:
> ...
>
>How can the present situation in the developed countries,
>holding many millions of persons each, be altered so that
>no one has to work except as it interests them?
>
>Do you believe that a sufficiently strong government could
>make an announcement of some kind? Or do you believe that
>good will on the part of a lot of corporations or rich
>people could pull it off?...
>Thanks,
>Lee
>
I doubt that more centralized control is a feasible answer. If it is,
then China should soon demonstrate this to us. But I also doubt than an
anarchy would work. Still, most wealth in the world today is due to the
collected knowledge and work of past generations. Relatively little is
due to the efforts of the current generation. Certainly, I don't
consider people like the fast food chain builders to be any decent
model. They decreased the overall wealth, though they were, indeed,
marvelouslly efficient in concentrating what they left into their own
hands. Still, when the workers at a company qualify for public
assistance, that company must be considered a net detractor from the
economy, so unless it's tangible products are sufficiently valuable to
justify this, then we'd be better off without them.
This is largely due to current laws and customs. Corporations have a
totally unwarranted immunity from prosecution. One of the prime
culprits here is a court decision that granted them the status of
"person". But corporations are without ethics or morals. The only
legal restriction that they can usually be held to is to act in such a
way that their shareholders can be expected to receive maximum benefit.
It thousands of people get permanently mutilated in the process,
neither the corporation nor the officials who actually performed the
acts can usually be held accountable. That's one factor.
Another factor is the inefficiency of decisions about local actions
being made at a distance. The government is the primary culprit here,
though large chains and franchises also do this. When someone in
Wahsington tells a school district in Idaho how they must spend the
money of their school several things happen:
1) Inefficiency: Between the time that the funds are collected as
taxes, and the time that they are returned to the local school district,
perhaps half of the funds are spend in ways that benefit the local
school hardly at all. (I really don't know the factor, but more money
is extracted from the poor school districts than is returned to them,
even though the ostensible purpose of this centralized collection is to
normallize the funding.)
2) Inefficiency: Regulations in how the money can be spent, and how it
must be accounted for increase the cost of operations. Perhaps two
additional administrators per school (average) and a lot of extra work
on the part of each teacher.
3) Inefficiency: The money can only be spent on certain projects, which
may well not be the most urgent needs of the particular school.
4) Favoritism: Sometimes certain vendors are given preference. E.g.,
certain textbook publishers. This choice cannot be made on the basis of
which book is most needed at the local school, and usually seems to be
made on the basis of who has the most effective lobbyest. Academic
quality is usually, or at least frequently, ignored.
Etc.
I mentioned schools, but this same effect happens in every branch. It
happens on streets and roads funding, e.g.
Unfortunately, this doesn't say how to do things better. It just points
to places where things need to be changed, and where the change is
exactly in the direction of LESS central control, not more.
So... I don't have a design for a better system, but merely a knowledge
of a few of the features that it will need to have. And I SURE don't
have a plan for how to get from here to there. But...
Since I currently spend probably half of my work life as a slave to the
government (not counting tribute to the lords of the land), I'm fairly
sure that it would be possible to design a system that would work
better. What I'm not certain of is that there's any way to get from
here to there at an acceptable price.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:08 MST