Thank you for your reply (Mr. ) Lonnie Clay...... I am not trying to "bait" you....I suggest to you that some of your "concepts" or proposed ways of reasoning may themselves be of a "totalitarian" bent or direction or leaning (all metaphors) to say that, in their abstract sense or definition, maybe you do not see that they are Preferential to one or some and Restrictive against the others or many....
(under the fixed term electoral system) the representatives are elected by those motivated to steal the fruits of other's work / LC See?.... now "factually" in any close-to-democratic system.... the representatives are elected by the "majority" of the popular votes of the citizen voters....By your claim, LC, the majority of "individual voters" here in the U.S. are motivated by "greed" and bent on "stealing" ... If that were actually so.... then the majority of voters would be in prison.... but prisoners don't get to vote... I know, that's a statistically "minor" effect argument... but the true factual contrary to your point is that .... for all this supposed "thievery".... the majority of voters do not seem to be getting very rich off it....To the contrary, it is the actual "rich" that seem to benefit the most from the way the politically disbursed money pie is cut up....Cases in point.... Wall Street bailouts... too big to fail....Military Industrial Complex...Oil and Energy subsidies..... Agriculture subsidies.... Business Tax subsidies and Deregulation... and on and on.... In another sense.... it would seem to me that you want to somehow further negate or nullify the "majority vote" of the "little guy" voters even more.....as degraded and economically ineffective as it actually is. Entitlements blossom into a burden on society that gobbles up all excess capital through sales of government debt with deficit budgets. / LC Well, again, factually the governmental "burden on society" economically stems a lot more from the "woes" that the Wall Street-Banking, Military-Industrial Complex, Business-Industrial-Energy-Agricultural subsidies an deregulation, etc. that the so-called "private entrprise" corporate sector have imposed and caused.... not on what the actual "worker" little folks get and pay for (income tax, FICA, etc.).... Business investments and research decline leading to stagnation of the economy. /LC Business investments are "hoarded".... they say that money is fungible.... it can be kept in the "pocket" just as easily as spent or invested.... the rich just stow it away or let it stagnate, as gold or durable commodities and such.... that's the stagnation.... and that's the actual "trigger" for what the Federal Reserve(s) and the Treasury (s) world wide have been forced to do.... "create" new money to replace that"pocketed" moneythe rich took out of circulation (Wall Street / Banks didn't Crash.... they stole the money that was there to begin with.... and they get first dibs on the "new" money coming in).... As for the research.....most of that is "public sector"....what little of it there is left, in actual "research"......the "private sector" doesn't "do" research... at least not here in the U.S. http://www.locomotive-project.org/cms/Content/download/The_Global_View_on_Outsourcing_of_RandD.pdf Anyway... Lonnie.... it's obvious that you and I are miles apart....on the facts.... I think you are mistaken (I can go that far, for sure.....) On Saturday, March 23, 2013 11:13:39 AM UTC-4, Lonnie Clay wrote: > > I never encountered the term "Communal Modesty" before and there are only > 189 google hits on it, so it is probably NOT something of which I am > guilty. I am quite familiar with personal greed both as work and steal. The > problem assaulting governments worldwide is that (under the fixed term > electoral system) the representatives are elected by those motivated to > steal the fruits of other's work. Entitlements blossom into a burden on > society that gobbles up all excess capital through sales of government debt > with deficit budgets. Business investments and research decline leading to > stagnation of the economy. > http://www.economist.com/content/global_debt_clock > > With government debt growing faster than economic expansion there is a > ticking bomb which will go off within the next decade or two. At what point > will government debt be downgraded to junk status, wiping out the > accumulated wealth of debt holders? What is a way to fix the system so that > there is no debt, and entitlements are under control? That is the question > which I was trying to answer in 1997... > > You can assign your proxy to yourself and spend all your time reading > proposed legislation, but unless you are a billionaire it probably would be > better to find a compatible professional representative to whom you assign > a proxy voting right. > > Business stockholders meetings operate on one voting share one vote which > is not strictly one dollar one vote because some types of stock are not > allowed to vote, receiving a dividend instead. > > I loathe all forms of totalitarianism, but since you seem to be fond of > jumping to conclusions on little evidence, I'll keep in mind that you are > probably trying to bait me rather than meaning your accusation seriously. > > Lonnie Courtney Clay > > > On Friday, March 22, 2013 8:20:31 AM UTC-7, nominal9 wrote: >> >> Believe me, (Mr. ) Lonnie Clay.... I read your whole linked article (or >> blog).... considering how far it goes back (1990s) you were very >> intelligent then and probably still are.... but I'm not here to stroke >> egos, yours or my own.....My point is that when anyone chooses one >> "approach" (in all walks -fields-or senses) they deny others.....The >> options to your own approach to the "politcal-economic" questions you raise >> embodies certain "ways and mans" that automatically negate others.... Let's >> assume that for purposes of argument each "variation" is doable (which may >> well NOT be the case, depending on the math or base assumptions >> involved..... but let's assume that they are... doable). The next question >> is... which is "ethically better"?.....let me propose the same overall >> social-economic quandary in another way to you >> >> Personal Greed / Steal....... Communal Modesty / Work >> >> Personal Greed / Work........Communal Modesty / Steal >> >> This is a bit lower down the "taxonomic " scale...... So... (Mr.) Lonnie >> Clay.... can I assume that you opt for the Communal Modesty / Steal pole of >> the opposition? >> >> BY the way, from your article.... Why "proxy".... and not direct personal >> vote... in politics?..... you do know that "stockholders" operate on the >> principle... One dollar One vote.... not One stockholder One Vote (proxy >> has nothing to do with the "power" relationship)......Capitalism is not a >> "shared" authority environment.... Frankly, I believe that your "tendency" >> is toward a totalitarian politics..... by your suggestion.....not a >> democratic politics.... >> >> On Friday, March 22, 2013 10:31:25 AM UTC-4, Lonnie Clay wrote: >>> >>> That's a very simple minded two dimensional view of reality. You know >>> that the real world is much more complex. I'm not going to get into an >>> argument except on the contents of my posting. Debate my propositions and >>> facts, not some academic mumbo-jumbo catch phrases. To answer, I prefer >>> capitalism democracy but not in its purest form. >>> >>> Lonnie Courtney Clay >>> >>> On Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:38:03 AM UTC-7, nominal9 wrote: >>>> >>>> Democracy = One Person, One Vote. >>>> Totalitarianism = One Person, All the Votes. >>>> >>>> Socialism = One Person, One Dollar. >>>> Capitalism = One Person, All the Dollars. >>>> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_of_opposition >>>> >>>> >>>> Democratic / Socialism...........Totalitarian / Capitalism >>>> >>>> Democratic / Capitalism..........Totalitarian / Socialism >>>> >>>> Where do you stand, Lonnie... "governmentally' and "economically".... >>>> combined? >>>> >>>> Choose one and you oppose the others... either in part or in the >>>> whole.... >>>> >>>> Totalitarian / Capitalism is usually referred to as "Fascism".... >>>> Totalitarian / Socialism.......Communism.... >>>> >>>> On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:24:56 PM UTC-4, Lonnie Clay wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://lonniecourtneyclay.blogspot.com/2011/07/blast-from-halloween-1997.html >>>>> >>>>> Lonnie Courtney Clay >>>>> >>>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
