$640.00 to fill the tanks...

Anno v. Heimburg wrote:
Isn't part of the point of a government to do social engineering?

For the governments of countries lacking a large degree of
personal freedoms, yes.

For governments such as exists (or should I say 'used to exist')
in the United States, absolutley not. It has been this lack of
social engineering by government policy that has made the US
an economic superpower in the span of 100 years. The Soviet
Union was an example of the failure of a government dedicated
to the concept of social engineering in as many years.

None the less, it seems we are running headlong toward the same
end.

None the less, it seems we are running headlong toward the same
end.

The lure -- and illusory rewards -- of bribing us with our own money
are far too great for any country to long resist.

If you want to see America's future, all you need to do is visit any
inner city convenience store that sells lottery tickets, right after
the first of the month. It's really quiet pathetic...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:

None the less, it seems we are running headlong toward the same
end.


The lure -- and illusory rewards -- of bribing us with our own money
are far too great for any country to long resist.

If you want to see America's future, all you need to do is visit any
inner city convenience store that sells lottery tickets, right after
the first of the month. It's really quiet pathetic...

Exactly. And it is sad to say, but public (government) schools are
doing a fine job of insuring new generations will go forth with
limited understanding of the real power of economic freedom and
just how precious it is to maintain.

Exactly. And it is sad to say, but public (government) schools are
doing a fine job of insuring new generations will go forth with
limited understanding of the real power of economic freedom and
just how precious it is to maintain.

Actually -- so far -- the schools in Iowa City have done a pretty good
job of teaching the free-market system to my kids. Of course, this is
done with an undertone of self-consciousness -- as if they are somehow
ashamed to live in a capitalist system -- and there is always the
message that capitalism needs to be reigned in lest it go crazy and
crush the weak and weary.

Luckily, the kids spend many hours each week in the "real world",
working at the hotel. There, they can see life as it really is, in bold
relief -- sometimes in ways that their school teachers could never
dream of...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

and there is always the
message that capitalism needs to be reigned in lest it go crazy and
crush the weak and weary.

And that is a valid and important message, as Microsoft, Exxon, and Sony
have demonstrated.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 17:00:19 GMT, Jose
wrote:

and there is always the
message that capitalism needs to be reigned in lest it go crazy and
crush the weak and weary.

And that is a valid and important message, as Microsoft, Exxon, and Sony
have demonstrated.

Not at all. This sounds like the Elephant and the blind man.
Any system has flaws and be it capitalism or socialism some one or
group will exploit that advantage.

Each of the above has been found guilty of abusing the system in one
way or another and one location or another. In the end, I think
Capitalism will reign in the abusers if enough people speak up.

Be it government, industry, or individual the larger and/or more
powerful the more temptation for abuse of the system.

Currently we are seeing those abuses in both industry and government.



Jose
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Any system has flaws and be it capitalism or socialism some one or
group will exploit that advantage.

Yes. This is why we have three branches in government designed to act
as checks and balances. Captialism needs also to be balanced.
Unrestrained capitalism is bad, as is unrestrained government. But the
two together provide a better system.

The OP was praising "unrestrained capitalism".

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jay Honeck wrote:
Exactly. And it is sad to say, but public (government) schools are
doing a fine job of insuring new generations will go forth with
limited understanding of the real power of economic freedom and
just how precious it is to maintain.


Actually -- so far -- the schools in Iowa City have done a pretty good
job of teaching the free-market system to my kids. Of course, this is
done with an undertone of self-consciousness -- as if they are somehow
ashamed to live in a capitalist system -- and there is always the
message that capitalism needs to be reigned in lest it go crazy and
crush the weak and weary.

Luckily, the kids spend many hours each week in the "real world",
working at the hotel. There, they can see life as it really is, in bold
relief -- sometimes in ways that their school teachers could never
dream of...

True. It is unfortunate, but unionized teachers are about as insulated
from the real world as it gets. Only politicians are more insulated.

Matt

Jay Honeck wrote:

Actually -- so far -- the schools in Iowa City have done a pretty good
job of teaching the free-market system to my kids. Of course . . .
. . . . there is always the
message that capitalism needs to be reigned in lest it go crazy and
crush the weak and weary.

Well, I should think you'd want them taught "the facts of life". The
final sentence above is pretty much an emperically proven fact, is it
not?

I'm not putting down the free market system or capitalism in saying
this; not at all. I believe the underlying laws of free market
economics are demonstrated economic (and/or psychological) principles,
more or less as valid, universal, reliable, and inescapable as the laws
of physics that I know a fair amount about.

And I'm also in full agreement with, was it Churchill?, who supposedly
once said something like: "Democratic capitalism is not a particularly
good social or economic system. It's just substantially better than any
other social system that mankind has come up with." True enough, then
and now.

But when Free Market Economics turns into, not a set of economic laws to
help shape our broader policy making, but into an ideology, a economic
theology, before which we're all supposed to bow down -- that's bad news.

When FME becomes an economic religion which, as interpreted by its
acolytes and ayatollahs is supposed to reign dominant over every other
consideration in our lives, then indeed a lot of crushing of the weak,
the weary, the unfortunate, the innocent -- not to mention a lot of
exploitation of them and others -- is certain to result.

AES wrote:
Jay Honeck wrote:


Actually -- so far -- the schools in Iowa City have done a pretty good
job of teaching the free-market system to my kids. Of course . . .
. . . . there is always the
message that capitalism needs to be reigned in lest it go crazy and
crush the weak and weary.


Well, I should think you'd want them taught "the facts of life". The
final sentence above is pretty much an emperically proven fact, is it
not?

I'm not putting down the free market system or capitalism in saying
this; not at all. I believe the underlying laws of free market
economics are demonstrated economic (and/or psychological) principles,
more or less as valid, universal, reliable, and inescapable as the laws
of physics that I know a fair amount about.

I think part of the problem is that no economy is ever completely
capitalistic. For one thing, many "costs" aren't easily quantifiable or
assigned to the entity that created those costs. That is one reason
that "pure" capitalism tends to not be very nice to the environment.
The costs of pollution historically haven't been borne by the polluters.
I realize that Germany, as one example, is trying to change this with
their "cradle to grave" responsibility that a company bears for its
products. I suspect that this will have a profound effect over time.
If the makers of things that pollute have to bear all of those costs,
then capitalism is still very effective, even at preventing pollution.

So, I still think capitalism is a pretty good system, the problem is
that we seldom truly practice capitalism, and I don't think it is even
possible to do so.


Matt