[Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 22:44 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Musings on crossing a hundred > For his September 9, 2005 birthday, he had the company >of his children and grandchildren from Geneva, >Switzerland, Perth and Montreal and Toronto. Now, >doesn't that say something about Goan migration? ...and doesn't it make all the talk one hears from 'true Goans' about 'outsiders' sound completely hilarious? -- Question everything - Karl Marx
[Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Mario, Thank you for your response. While I can find hundreds of references which basically debate with the ghost of Marx as a great thinker, I wonder if you can provide some references which see him utterly negatively in the specific way you have described? I would welcome such info. Cornel - Original Message - From: "Mario Goveia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 8:22 PM > Cornel, > In my opinion, the reason that scholars, thinkers and > politicians the world over are still talking about > Karl Marx is the monumental harm that he wrought on > millions of people around the whole world, especially > creating mind-numbing dependencies on government among > the poor, and the immense misallocation of natural and > other resources that resulted from his simple-sounding > siren song.
[Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Cornel, I will see what I can find. However, the ruins and misery from Karl Marx's ideology are strewn around the world, from the old Soviet Union to China, India and much of Africa and South America. Some, like India, which had a committment to democratic principles learned from the Brits, did not go to the extremes of communism, but all of the victimized countries, with the possible exception of Myanmar, N. Korea and Cuba, have thrown Marxism into the dustbin of history, where it belongs. The defect in Marxism lies in the contempt and lack of respect for the average citizen. A small cabal of elites sought to tell everyone else what was good and bad for them. Since being controlled by someone else is not the normal human condition, this led inevitably to totalitarianism, since that was the only way to keep the proletariat under the control of the ideas of the elites. The bureaucrats that ran the day to day affairs had no incentive to solve any problem, as this would make them obsolete. Results always trend down to the least common denominator. The simple beauty of the free-enterprise system is that the decisions are made by millions of individual buyers and sellers, each looking out for their own long-term interests, which includes the self-serving need to be good stewards of their assets and resources and the environment around them. Incompetence, inefficiency and inconveniences are never tolerated for very long, because it is in someone's economic interest to fix it. Competition forces efficiency, and obsolescence leads to renewal retraining and re-directed effort, keeping the pot boiling as it were. The result is the rising tide that lifts all boat. In the US, the closest system to a pure free-enterprise system in a country of any size, the one thing everyone can count on is that competition will ensure that things will change, almost always for the better over the long run. --- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Mario, > > Thank you for your response. While I can find hundreds of references which > basically debate with the ghost of Marx as a great thinker, I wonder if you > can provide some references which see him utterly negatively in the > specific way you have described? I would welcome such info.
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Hi Vidyadhar, I studied Marx and his writings hell of a lot in student and post-student days. Ok, this was many moons ago. However, I never came across the view that Marx said "question everything." I am just curious about its source. Is this attribution to Marx genuine in this case? Cornel - Original Message - From: "Vidyadhar Gadgil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Goanet mails" Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2005 3:30 PM Subject: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred On Sat, 2005-10-01 at 22:44 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Musings on crossing a hundred For his September 9, 2005 birthday, he had the company of his children and grandchildren from Geneva, Switzerland, Perth and Montreal and Toronto. Now, doesn't that say something about Goan migration? ...and doesn't it make all the talk one hears from 'true Goans' about 'outsiders' sound completely hilarious? -- Question everything - Karl Marx
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
--- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Vidyadhar, > I studied Marx and his writings hell of a lot in > student and post-student > days. Ok, this was many moons ago. However, I never > came across the view > that Marx said "question everything." I am just > curious about its source. Is > this attribution to Marx genuine in this case? > Mario muses: > If Karl Marx really suggested we question everything, which is quite a common sense suggestion, one wonders why he did not question his own basic assumption, that a small cabal of elites could make better decisions for entire economies than the weighted average decisions of entire populations, and caused untold economic misery and misallocation of resources until abandoned recently.
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Curiously, when Marx was supposedly asked, just before his death, what he would like to be remembered for, he apparently said that he doubted he would be remembered for long and that if he had the time, he would probably re-write much of his work. I cannot vouch for the story above, but clearly, he would never have guessed that scholars, thinkers and politicians the world over, would debate with the ghost of Marx for more than a century after his death. Cornel - Original Message - From: "Mario Goveia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 5:25 PM Subject: Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred --- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Vidyadhar, I studied Marx and his writings hell of a lot in student and post-student days. Ok, this was many moons ago. However, I never came across the view that Marx said "question everything." I am just curious about its source. Is this attribution to Marx genuine in this case? Mario muses: If Karl Marx really suggested we question everything, which is quite a common sense suggestion, one wonders why he did not question his own basic assumption, that a small cabal of elites could make better decisions for entire economies than the weighted average decisions of entire populations, and caused untold economic misery and misallocation of resources until abandoned recently.
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Cornel, In my opinion, the reason that scholars, thinkers and politicians the world over are still talking about Karl Marx is the monumental harm that he wrought on millions of people around the whole world, especially creating mind-numbing dependencies on government among the poor, and the immense misallocation of natural and other resources that resulted from his simple-sounding siren song. --- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Curiously, when Marx was supposedly asked, just > before his death, what he > would like to be remembered for, he apparently said > that he doubted he would > be remembered for long and that if he had the time, > he would probably > re-write much of his work. I cannot vouch for the > story above, but clearly, > he would never have guessed that scholars, thinkers > and politicians the > world over, would debate with the ghost of Marx for > more than a century > after his death. > Cornel > - Original Message - > From: "Mario Goveia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994!" > > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 5:25 PM > Subject: Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a > hundred > > > > --- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Hi Vidyadhar, > >> I studied Marx and his writings hell of a lot in > >> student and post-student > >> days. Ok, this was many moons ago. However, I > never > >> came across the view > >> that Marx said "question everything." I am just > >> curious about its source. Is > >> this attribution to Marx genuine in this case? > >> > > Mario muses: > >> > > If Karl Marx really suggested we question > everything, > > which is quite a common sense suggestion, one > wonders > > why he did not question his own basic assumption, > that > > a small cabal of elites could make better > decisions > > for entire economies than the weighted average > > decisions of entire populations, and caused untold > > economic misery and misallocation of resources > until > > abandoned recently. > > > > > > > >
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Mario, Again, thanks for your response. I well know the case for being against the tried out communist systems e.g in the former Soviet Union. I spent three weeks there in 1967, and although warmly welcomed as an Indian wherever I travelled, by car, I saw at first hand, how bureaucracy and authoritarianism actually worked in a police state. I also spent, at other times, periods in the other Eastern bloc countries where Soviet hegemony prevailed and know for certain that, I could not live in those conditions. However, I am not entirely persuaded by your claim of how successful free enterprise within capitalism is and as also discussed briefly by Fred Noronha. I have serious doubts about the trickle-down theory. Indeed, there is much in the serious literature to indicate that the gap between the well to do and the poor in the USA has widened ever so detrimentally in recent years. The measure of this kind of gap is also deemed to be a good yardstick internationally, to ascertain how well or how badly citizens are doing in a given country. Unfortunately, at present, my sources from the USA itself, and elsewhere, are not terribly positive about progress on this count in your country. In short, it could do a lot lot better. I think capitalism is wonderful for the winners, (I admit to being one), but relatively painful for those who fall by the wayside in such a system through no fault of their own. I also see it as ruthlessly exploitative of man and the environment and am not enamoured by its inherent orientation to satisfy human desire/greed rather than human need. I regret I do not have much time currently, to press on with this debate between us, much as I relish it, on the merits, or not, of the economic system in the USA but would like to indicate that I have a preference for a system which mitigates against the harsher realities of capitalism. In this sense I am much happier within an European model which is capitalistic, no doubt, but values human beings in theory and practice rather more than profit predominantly. OK, there are many ups and downs in terms of economic performance eg. France and Germany at present, but then, Norway and Sweden seem to be outstanding examples of high taxation, excellent welfare provision and excellent prosperity. Nowhere there, is there comparable povery and acute residential segregation as in the USA. OK, I accept that, residential segregation in the USA, previously institutionalised by law as in former South Africa, and also 'enforced' by the Klan, in the South, is now changing, albeit slowly. Yet, I'd rather live, apart from the UK, in a highly taxed Scandinavian country but which manifestly values human beings highly too. No doubt there are weaknesses and problems but a visit there by our American friends on Goanet and on the other network would be illuminating. A final thought...if indeed the economic system is so good in the USA, why is this 'fact' not so persuasive that there would be many more takers for the system, especially from Western Europe and other relatively prosperous countries? You might say that, aka Marx, that it is a case of false consciousness on my part, but the evidence of poverty in the USA, crime/imprisonment and other pathologies etc does undermine the suggestion that unadulterated capitalism there works so well, as to be a model for the rest of the world. You have often asked about India and China now taking the capitalist route but I have to say that the levels of poverty in both these countries are likely to get even worse than they are, and sadly, human life cheapened for the many cogs in the capitalist machine, even more, in the interests of those who succeed materially. Yet, I am willing to be persuaded by you that I could be entirely wrong in everything I have said above! Please ignore any typos etc as I have done this post at speed. Cornel - Original Message - From: "Mario Goveia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 5:15 AM Subject: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred Cornel, I will see what I can find. However, the ruins and misery from Karl Marx's ideology are strewn around the world, from the old Soviet Union to China, India and much of Africa and South America. Some, like India, which had a committment to democratic principles learned from the Brits, did not go to the extremes of communism, but all of the victimized countries, with the possible exception of Myanmar, N. Korea and Cuba, have thrown Marxism into the dustbin of history, where it belongs. The defect in Marxism lies in the contempt and lack of respect for the average citizen. A small cabal of elites sought to tell everyone else what was good and bad for them. Since being controlled by someone else is not the normal human condition, this led inevitably to totalitarianism, since that was the only way to keep the
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Cornel - Your post is very interesting and informative, but I have to disagree on the subject of "no segregation" in Scandinavian countries. What about Malmo??? Do you see a difference between "forced" segregation, as in The South (USA) during the last century, and the natural desire of people to "live among their own"? Did the congregation of Muslim immigrants in Malmo occur on purpose, either because the non-Muslim Swedes desired it or because the new Muslim immigrants desired it, or by accident, according to you? Viviana cornel wrote: ...but then, Norway and Sweden seem to be outstanding examples of high taxation, excellent welfare provision and excellent prosperity. Nowhere there, is there comparable povery and acute residential segregation as in the USA.
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
In my opinion, Cornel has no idea what he is talking about when it comes to poverty and segregation in the US, where I have lived for 35 years and am a volunteer in a social service agency that helps people considered poor in this country. Many poor Americans have a better standard of living than many middle-income Europeans, and the acute and widespread ghettoization throughout Britain and Europe seems to have escaped Cornel's attention, as Viviana's example showed. The following compilation is only offered in the hope that Cornel is interested in the general facts on poverty in America: Source: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports: 1. Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes 2. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio. 3. Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning. 4. Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. 5. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person. 6. The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.) 7. Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars. 8. Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions. 9. Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception. 10. Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher. 11. As a group, America's poor are far from being chronically undernourished. The average consumption of protein, vitamins, and minerals is virtually the same for poor and middle-class children and, in most cases, is well above recommended norms 12. Poor children actually consume more meat than do higher-income children and have average protein intakes 100 percent above recommended levels. 13. Most poor children today are, in fact, supernourished and grow up to be, on average, one inch taller and 10 pounds heavier that the GIs who stormed the beaches of Normandy in World War II. > --- Viviana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cornel - > Did the congregation of Muslim immigrants in Malmo > occur on purpose, either because the non-Muslim > Swedes desired it or because the new Muslim > immigrants desired it, or by accident, according to > you? >
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
--- cornel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have serious doubts about the trickle-down > theory. Indeed, there is much in the serious > literature to indicate that the gap between the well > to do and the poor in the USA has widened ever so > detrimentally in recent years. The measure of > this kind of gap is also deemed to be a good > yardstick internationally, to ascertain how well or > how badly citizens are doing in a given country. > Mario replies: > Cornel, I accept you as a serious observer, albeit one with an unbelievable misunderstanding of what free-enterprise means. For example, I don't know what there is to doubt about the trickle-down theory, or what you even think it means. Trickle-down happens automatically and constantly over here. How do you think so many meaningful jobs are created in a free enterprise society? Do you have any idea how many jobs are created in the US on a net basis each and every quarter to achieve an unemployment rate of less than 5% for a country with a total population of 300 million, inspite of the shocks of 9/11, Cat 4 hurricanes, wars of liberation, etc.? The growing gap you speak of is a socialist statistic that means nothing here, even if it were true. It suggests an envy for the success of others. Those who do slip further behind. Here many people who start off poor end up rich. The enterprising poor do not resent the rich, because they, too, want to be rich some day, and often succeed. Free enterprise provides equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes. > Cornel writes: > > Unfortunately, at present, my sources from the USA > itself, and elsewhere, are not terribly positive > about progress on this count in your country. In > short, it could do a lot lot better. > Mario replies: > I, and most Americans, literally shun such negative people as your "sources", because we don't ever want to be like them. We're too busy, and cannot afford the psychological drag. Besides, their socialist criteria are not our criteria. If there is a place they think is doing better, this place is not for them. We have millions of immigrants each and every year who risk their lives to validate our system, and it is they who have what we call the "American Spirit". Without this "Can Do. Never Quit" spirit it is best to stay away from the US. > Cornel writes: > > I think capitalism is wonderful for the winners, (I > admit to being one), but relatively painful for > those who fall by the wayside in such a system > through no fault of their own. > Mario replies: > More people are winners under capitalism than any other system, the others are working at it. I'm not sure what your definition is of "falling by the wayside". Maybe you mean those who are too lazy or don't want to compete. We don't have a solution for them. This place is not for them. Those who have a physical or mental disability are well taken care of here, either by the state or privately. > Cornel writes: > > I also see it as ruthlessly exploitative of man and > the environment and am not enamoured by its > inherent orientation to satisfy human desire/greed > rather than human need. > Mario writes: > You seem to be either intuitively a Marxist with no understanding of basic human nature, or are severely brain washed with misleading socialist dogma. For example, no one who is ruthlessly exploitative would last long here. The kind of "greed" you speak of with so much contempt would lead to certain failure here, if not incarceration. Every successful enterpreneur with half a brain avoids exploitation and greed for their own long term interest. > Cornel writes: > > I have a preference for a system which mitigates > against the harsher realities of capitalism. In > this sense I am much happier within an European > model which is capitalistic, no doubt, but values > human beings in theory and practice rather more > than profit predominantly. > Mario replies: > You are describing a system that most of us don't even recognize over here. No entrepreneur who does not value human beings can succeed here. This is not theory, but a brutal reality that an enterpreneur must always keep in mind, day in and day out, or he or she will surely fail. > Cornel writes: > > Nowhere there, is there comparable povery and acute > residential segregation as in the USA. OK, I accept > that, residential segregation in the USA, > previously institutionalised by law as in former > South Africa, and also 'enforced' by the > Klan, in the South, is now changing, albeit slowly. > Mario replies: > Your view is a) so obsolete as to be unrecognizable. South Africa? The Klan? Changing slowly? Where are you getting such false propaganda?, b) so false as to be delusional. Viviana and I have pointed out elsewhere, that you arrive at such misleading views by totally ignoring the numerous immigrant ghettoes spread all across Europe. > Cornel writes: > > Yet, I'd rather live, apart from the UK, in a > h
Re: [Goanet] Re: Musings on crossing a hundred....
Viviana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Cornel - Your post is very interesting and > informative, but I have to disagree on the subject > of "no segregation" in Scandinavian countries. > What about Malmo??? Do you see a difference between > "forced" segregation, as in The South (USA) during > the last century, and the natural desire of people > to "live among their own"? Viviana, "Forced segregation" did not take place in The South only during the last century. It is still taking place today. I have lived in a black "ghetto" in Alabama and I have lived in a Jewish "enclave" here in Toronto. The difference between the two is that one can move out on an "enclave" whenever you want. The fact that 40 years after de-segregation, people still cannot move out of "ghettos" in the south, ought to speak volumes on the situation in your country. Mervyn3.0 __ Find your next car at http://autos.yahoo.ca
