From: InterSnap(Server) (intersnap@intersnap.hu.se)
Date: Wed Sep 10 1997 - 22:01:58 MDT
Your message was originally sent on: Thu, Sep 11, 1997 6:10 AM
----- Unsent message follows -----
Subject: Re: Free Markets: Extro-Nazi's or Extro-Saints
Ahhhhhh. Sigh. Alas, to my disappointment, I see that none of you have been able to see past your own success. It is obvious from your posts that most of you live in the valley where success grows on trees. Take a trip to the Midwest and tell me what you see. Most of you remind me of Marie Antoinette when she said "let them eat cake!". I will try to address everyone's arguments in this post.
Eric Watt Forste said: High taxes, perhaps? Heavy regulation and mandates?
Me: I don't know - you tell me. And then prove it.
Eric: Yes. And for much of those 25 years, the public sector's share of the economy has been increasing. Could there be a connection?
Me: Yes, that public share you speak of is that small minority who has in one way or another scored it big over the last 10 years. The remaining vast majority have no share in it. Please, lets get back to the ~80% I'm speaking of.
Eric: Okay, but when they leave benefited jobs to go to temp work, are they getting enough of a pay increase to more than compensate for the loss of benefits and "job security"?
Me: Absolutely not. That's why most families need 2 breadwinners now..
Eric: Who conducted the poll? What was the methodology of the poll?
Certainly I have less job security than ever before... I planned it that way. Job security isn't something I find
desirable.
Me: USA Today. Job insecurity might be okay for you when you have an IQ over 140 and computer skills to equip an army. But what about the rest of the country who have kids to raise, let alone having even touched a computer?
Eric: Um, what is wrong with working 50 and 60 hour workweeks if that is what you want to do? My own work pattern has been lately developing into working for several months, and then not working at all for
six weeks or so. Ideally I'd like to have a pattern of six months on, six months off. None of the figures you present indicate that this couldn't be happening with most of the people you are worrying about.
Me: Nothing is wrong with working 60 hours/wk if thats what *you want to do*. Most people hate their jobs - they do it because they have to survive. Again, I'm glad you have the luxury, high IQ and skills to design your own flex-schedule - most do not have that option. Where have you been? Obviously you've spent way to long in your cybernetic ivory tower to notice (I hear Marie Antoinette again).
Eric: Job security is not an objectively good thing.
Me: Don't tell that to the average working family or they'll likely draw and quarter you.
Eric: Also, your "increasingly unnecessary" claim is totally unsubstantiated.
Me: Tell that to the people who have been automated out of a job. All I'm asking is for you to tell me what people of average IQ, little money and little skill are going to do when the majority of the economy has been automated? Most of these people are not collected money from mutual funds even if they knew how. Are you saying invest money or die?
Eric: I have zero interest in watching the rest of humanity languish to death, and I doubt many other list members do, and it's pretty offensive of you to imply that this is something we want to do.
Me: I'm glad to hear it and I apologize to you if I implied you were lacking in conscience. That's why I'm asking the question: Extro-Nazi's or Extro-Saint?
Eric: Criticism without offering suggested alternatives is sterile.
Me: Probably true, but that's why I'm posted this stuff - I want to hear your alternatives as I have found none myself. A long time ago, RAW's RICH economy seemed the ideal solution - unfortunately I have not figured out a way to implement it as the free-market seems to prevent it from occurring. After all, we can't have 80%+ of the population lying around watching TV, having sex and smoking pot, can we? They must all work, work, work! 'Get to work wage slaves!' - is all I have been hearing these days.
To summarize Damien R. Sullivan:
So he says, as he types away on his computer. Farmers used to be far more than 80% of humanity. Mostly obsolete now. No human need be unnecessary in the absence of orders of magnitude
superior AI. Admittedly being an educated human helps. I can't feel guilty for knowing more. Besides, I'd be happy to share...
Me: I'm a she by the way. I agree with most of your post. Please explain to me how people will survive over the coming years when most of the economy has been automated.
Hagbard Wrote:
People are stockholders in corporations. As corporations do well, so do their stockholders. You're funny. You care about the people you are obsoleting? Stake your claim now, the moral high ground is disappearing fast! But you don't care that much, right? Or else, you wouldn't be doing it, would you? I think a social conscience is just that, a social conscience. It has zero praxis. Its easy to feel bad about "plights." What is your guilt accomplishing?
Me: Its accomplishing quite a bit! I think my guilt, to what degree I have any, is having the encourage to see these problems which many on this list are too afraid to acknowledge even exists (I hear Marie Antoinette again). Hagbard: Again, the fact that you *DO* care about the majority of humanity is useless.
Me: You should be ashamed to call yourself Hagbard (after the Illuminatus! Character I presume). The real Hagbard cared very deeply about the state of humanity. Tell me, how is caring about ones fellow human beings useless? My compassion has led me to several projects that have directly benefited people - including my stint with Habitat for Humanity and the Peace Corps.
Hagbard: Free-market not needed by the people? What is your alternative? I mean there's pure communalism, pure capitalism and all the fuzzy gradations in between. Take your pick.
Me: If there is no third alternative then we are in big trouble!
Hagbard: Holly, you must have missed my earlier post (actually, this morning), on Godwin's Law of Nazi Apologies. What little credibility you might've had just went out the window in my eyes.
Me: I just signed up on this list today, so I missed your post. If you base a persons credibility on one post then you are very shallow person indeed.
Lee Daniel Crocker wrote: The easiest way to "explain" that is to point out that it's bullshit.
Life has never been better. Health has never been better. The poor have never been as rich as they are today.
Me: See what you did, Marie Antoinette is going to be echoing in my head for days now! Speak for yourself - life has never ben better for *you*. I'd guess you live in the valley too! The poor have never been as rich as they are today? I refer you to QueenMuse:
QueenMuse said:
> The easiest way to "explain" that is to point out that it's bullshit.
> Life has never been better. Health has never been better. The poor
> have never been as rich as...
Please, I hate to enter into it with you, because I know who i am arguing with, but how can someone be poor AND rich at the same time?
Me: And on that note I bid you all goodnight. I will login tomorrow if time allows.
Holly Pearson
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:52 MST