Hi Harry
I'm not sure how to answer you. I tried, but found I was just
repeating myself. I think your "QEDs" aren't, I see quite a few
non-sequiturs instead. As below, just a couple of instances. Further
to that, re population growth, you misunderstand the dynamics of
poverty and population growth. It is well established, easy to find
good information. The best way to decrease population growth is to
improve the economic situation of the poor, especially of poor women.
Helping poor women to get an education is highly effective. Again,
"help" is a dangerous idea - in the vast majority of cases, these
people do not need charity, it can do (and often does) more harm than
good. What they usually need is the constraints removed so they can
help themselves. These are usually external constraints, not
home-grown barriers to progress arising from their being primitive or
incompetent or unmodernised illiterates who don't know any better.
>Now you have made me think!!
>Naturally I don't mean to support the global free trade push, rather I
>support regulation at the national level, but it is the mechanism of that
>regulation I am struggling to identify.
As below ("This is improving my expression but I am still waiting for
mechanism"), you're looking for a fix-all, there isn't one, any more
than there's a "best technology" for energy in all circumstances
whatever the context. It's always different in the next valley.
Trying to fit the context to the technology tends to have unfortunate
side-effects. If you haven't already, try reading Schumacher's "Small
is Beautiful - Economics as if people mattered", and ask yourself why
it might be that Appropriate Technology, developed in support of
small-scale eeconomics, is almost invariably seen as something for
the Third World, not for developed countries, though many say that's
where it's really needed. Answers to the questions "Who benefits? -
and at whose expense?" have to be rigorously pursued. The true
answers are very often just the opposite of those initially offered.
>I like your point about real capitalism as opposed to the corporate way.
>Unfortunately the pooling of resources may be a characteristic of modern man
>in that it gave a selective advantage to the tribes that employed it best.
What has the corporate way got to do with the pooling of resources?
What you're referring to is the normal cooperation that permeates all
societies and always has done - some say it's what societies were
formed to facilitate. Against this background, the corporate way is a
newcomer, and a gross usurper.
>I
>am not convinced that this is intrinsically evil. Even at a village level
>those who benefit from working together need a way to demonstrate a social
>conscience, in the absence of a spiritual incentive, taxation seems
>appropriate.
No, it's top-down, no spiritual incentive is required, at local level
it has traditionally worked well more often than not. And the "not"
has usually arisen from external influences - such as the tax you
propose. You're reinventing the wheel.
"All that needs to happen is for the common man to be left alone." -
Skip Goebel (www.sensiblesteam.com)
Do you know these good people? The Institute for Local Self-Reliance
(ILSR) is a 23-year old organization that works with both the public
and private sectors in the US on economic development through the
efficient use of local resources.
http://www.ilsr.org/
Please see:
http://journeytoforever.org/community.html
http://journeytoforever.org/community2.html
I'll withdraw now, Harry. There are a lot of leads for you to follow
up if you want to, should be ample.
Best
Keith Addison
Journey to Forever
Handmade Projects
Tokyo
http://journeytoforever.org/
><---profits are privatized, but costs are socialized. The attendant repair
>and maintenance are left to succeeding generations if possible, if not,
>to present low and middle income taxpayers.">
<snip>
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Please do NOT send "unsubscribe" messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
