Barry,
When you look at the whole paragraph where the "invisible hand" is mentioned
by Smith, it says exactly the opposite of what's being taught and propagandized.
It is the REAL meaning of the invisible hand that's causing the dieoff.
As for being goosed by it, reminds me of the time 20 years ago, when I had a
shop in Richmond, a suburb of Vancouver, on an island of the Fraser delta.
I was working late one night and when I closed up the whole area was
blanketed with thick fog. There was nobody around, it was a truly eerie
sensation. I went to my truck and as I was unlocking the door, I was goosed.
It gave me the creeps, but as I turned around it was only the neighbour's
hunting dog pointing at the wrong duck in the wrong place.
When we look at the real meaning of the invisible hand, it means the
recognition of responsibilities, or else.......... as it works both ways.
The way it is being conceptualized, the invisible hand becomes the mighty
phallos of the Money God, divinely empowered to screw anything and anybody
in it's way. Yet, but when we turn around and look, it is nothing but a
dog's black nose brownnosing in the fog. The fog of chickeshit brains
superficially programmed like word processors that can not comprehend the
real meaning of words or ideas and come up with an interpretation dictated
by the convenience of shallow waters.
All the very best, Ed (Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC, Canada)
At 09:55 AM 09/12/97 -0800, you wrote:
>> Jay wrote:
>> >#1. That the approaching dieoff is the WORST possible outcome, and
>> >that the primary goal of governments MUST be to avoid that dieoff.
>> >
>> >#2. That participants are willing to put everything on the table -- are
>> >willing to abandon any "belief" in the face of contrary scientific evidence.
>> >This would include the "belief" that the right economic theories can save
>> >us.
>
>Yes, everything should be on the table, but the table is finite. Success
>requires all the items on the list of necessary items. That includes
>right theories in various fields. (impling demise of false theories)
>Then, we must IMPLEMENT those ideas, as Doug Hinrichs says. So on the
>table are also methods of implementation.
>
>We can not expect to come up with a compete and accurate list of
>necessary items. In fact, subjective value differences will make
>agreement about the list impossible.
>
>To avoid dieoff we must make some interim list of necessary items. It
>would be best to make the list inclusive where there is doubt. By
>definition, any subset of the complete list of necessary items would be
>insufficient.
>
>
>Alan McGowen wrote:
>> It seems unlikely that academic economics will cease operations in the
>> near future. Bringing the Darwinian revolution to economic theory may
>> not save us, but at least it would route creationist and religious
>> fundamentalist impulses that run rampant in the field today.
>>
>our theories are under computational resource constraints (including
>time pressure)
>
>To avoid DIEOFF (what a great goal) would seem to require academics to
>use the old "computational resource" we used to call a brain, and
>get-over the PC, blind, market-biased, anti-commie, pro-growth,
>pro-venal, navel-worshiping, STUF that too often passes for academic.
>Yes, Garbage takes forever to process!
>
>These academic guys are really very smart, but they are held back by the
>invisible venal-ideology. They may wake-up soon. Maybe we should scare
>them. We are all being goosed by the invisible hand?
>
>Barry Brooks
>
>
