Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Yay!

Expand Messages
  • Niko
    You got me Dan. So just replace poor with producing class - or a term I d like to key on from SEK3, the entrepreneuriat. That also reminds me of a class I had,
    Message 1 of 19 , Sep 30, 2008
      You got me Dan.


      So just replace poor with producing class - or a term I'd like to key
      on from SEK3, the entrepreneuriat.


      That also reminds me of a class I had, just now actually, where the
      teacher is obviously a Bolshevik and pretended to be Karl Marx for 30
      minutes.

      I wanted to ask him why he screwed over the Anarchists and then follow
      it up with a request to calculate prices, but unfortunately Karl
      doesn't take questions, he only writes poorly and grows a slightly
      pubic looking beard.

      "Markets can't solve these things," my arse.

      --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Dan Ust <dan_ust@...> wrote:
      >
      > --- On Tue, 9/30/08, Niko <niccolo_adami@...> wrote:
      >
      > > Quasi,
      > >
      > >
      > > I suppose I'm looking at it from a strategic level only
      > > then.
      > >
      > >
      > > Like you, I am aiming to both convince people further of
      > > the
      > > de-legitimacy of the state, but I am also looking to keep
      > > the collapse
      > > going as long as possible to redistribute some income back
      > > to the poor
      > > from those that have taken it from them before we see the
      > > coming
      > > stagnation.
      >
      > First, it's not only the poor who had income taken from them.
      Second, any correction will likely not return the stolen wealth --
      even though it will likely make things better. The inflation and
      other distortions had real effects and some of those will not be
      undone in any correction. Some of these represent a deadweight loss
      -- as when someone made a fantastic amount of money due to the
      inflation and other intervention, blew it all on partying, and is now
      broke. Wealth was actually destroyed by things like that -- not to
      mention just forcing investments along the wrong lines.
      >
      > > Personally, I have no problem with hard times. I realize
      > > that it will
      > > mean I too shall struggle for bread, but a little struggle
      > > here, I
      > > feel, is worth a larger victory tomorrow.
      >
      > I agree about little pain now for a better tomorrow. The problem
      is, though, many people see only the pain now and don't see the long
      term prospects. Also, many are buying into the view that if the
      federal government doesn't do something, things will get much worse.
      In fact, I heard one radio commentator telling her audience that the
      problem with the Great Depression was that the US federal government
      took too long to respond, letting too many banks go under before doing
      something. I don't know her audience size, but I'm guessing many of
      them agreed with this capsule history and, naturally, with its policy
      implications.
      >
      > Regards,
      >
      > Dan
      >
    • Dan Ust
      ... Well, I wasn t out to get you. :) ... I m not sure I like that term. The people who will be robbed are not necessarily entrepreneurs. In fact, some of
      Message 2 of 19 , Oct 1, 2008
        --- On Tue, 9/30/08, Niko <niccolo_adami@...> wrote:

        > You got me Dan.

        Well, I wasn't out to get you. :)

        > So just replace poor with producing class - or a term
        > I'd like to key
        > on from SEK3, the entrepreneuriat.

        I'm not sure I like that term. The people who will be robbed are not necessarily entrepreneurs. In fact, some of the beneficiaries of any bailout will be entrepreneurs -- and not just political entrepreneurs.

        They're also not necessarily productive. The problem is more that they are being robbed at all -- provided their wealth is legitimately theirs in the first place.

        It's funny because, on another list, someone is actually proposing that the bailout should go through, but it should only go to buying good debt. The person offering this up is either supposed to be a libertarian or generally sympathetic to libertarianism. Yet what he's suggesting is wealth transfer (via inflation) to good debtors. Leaving aside why good debt would need to be bought up in the first place, there's no reason that the government should reward good debtors (or good creditors) with a bailout.

        > That also reminds me of a class I had, just now actually,
        > where the
        > teacher is obviously a Bolshevik and pretended to be Karl
        > Marx for 30
        > minutes.

        That's funny. I saw the Howard Zinn documentary recently. Zinn wrote a play on Karl Marx and they showed a clip from it -- with the Marx character talking about how bank mergers meant his ideas were still relevant. This reminded me of how economically uninformed Zinn is.

        > I wanted to ask him why he screwed over the Anarchists and
        > then follow
        > it up with a request to calculate prices, but unfortunately
        > Karl
        > doesn't take questions, he only writes poorly and grows
        > a slightly
        > pubic looking beard.

        Well, the beard was the style back then -- and not just among Marx and his sympathizers.

        > "Markets can't solve these things," my arse.

        Regards,

        Dan
      • Dan Ust
        ... The other list is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Rand-Discussion/ For anyone who s interested. Regards, Dan
        Message 3 of 19 , Oct 1, 2008
          --- On Wed, 10/1/08, Dan Ust <dan_ust@...> wrote:

          > It's funny because, on another list, someone is
          > actually proposing that the bailout should go through, but
          > it should only go to buying good debt. The person offering
          > this up is either supposed to be a libertarian or generally
          > sympathetic to libertarianism. Yet what he's suggesting
          > is wealth transfer (via inflation) to good debtors. Leaving
          > aside why good debt would need to be bought up in the first
          > place, there's no reason that the government should
          > reward good debtors (or good creditors) with a bailout.

          The other list is:

          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Rand-Discussion/

          For anyone who's interested.

          Regards,

          Dan
        • Niko
          Well, I don t know. Are those that received subsidies from the state really entrepreneurs? When SEK3 used the term, I think he was just attempting to create a
          Message 4 of 19 , Oct 1, 2008
            Well, I don't know.

            Are those that received subsidies from the state really entrepreneurs?
            When SEK3 used the term, I think he was just attempting to create a
            new class that consisted of both pro-active, market producers and the
            innocent victims of the state.


            I always liked to say the state-socialists want to make everyone a
            proletariat; the Anarchists want everyone to be an entrepreneur.

            I would also consider labourers to be entrepreneurs.
            --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Dan Ust <dan_ust@...> wrote:
            >
            > --- On Tue, 9/30/08, Niko <niccolo_adami@...> wrote:
            >
            > > You got me Dan.
            >
            > Well, I wasn't out to get you. :)
            >
            > > So just replace poor with producing class - or a term
            > > I'd like to key
            > > on from SEK3, the entrepreneuriat.
            >
            > I'm not sure I like that term. The people who will be robbed are
            not necessarily entrepreneurs. In fact, some of the beneficiaries of
            any bailout will be entrepreneurs -- and not just political entrepreneurs.
            >
            > They're also not necessarily productive. The problem is more that
            they are being robbed at all -- provided their wealth is legitimately
            theirs in the first place.
            >
            > It's funny because, on another list, someone is actually proposing
            that the bailout should go through, but it should only go to buying
            good debt. The person offering this up is either supposed to be a
            libertarian or generally sympathetic to libertarianism. Yet what he's
            suggesting is wealth transfer (via inflation) to good debtors.
            Leaving aside why good debt would need to be bought up in the first
            place, there's no reason that the government should reward good
            debtors (or good creditors) with a bailout.
            >
            > > That also reminds me of a class I had, just now actually,
            > > where the
            > > teacher is obviously a Bolshevik and pretended to be Karl
            > > Marx for 30
            > > minutes.
            >
            > That's funny. I saw the Howard Zinn documentary recently. Zinn
            wrote a play on Karl Marx and they showed a clip from it -- with the
            Marx character talking about how bank mergers meant his ideas were
            still relevant. This reminded me of how economically uninformed Zinn is.
            >
            > > I wanted to ask him why he screwed over the Anarchists and
            > > then follow
            > > it up with a request to calculate prices, but unfortunately
            > > Karl
            > > doesn't take questions, he only writes poorly and grows
            > > a slightly
            > > pubic looking beard.
            >
            > Well, the beard was the style back then -- and not just among Marx
            and his sympathizers.
            >
            > > "Markets can't solve these things," my arse.
            >
            > Regards,
            >
            > Dan
            >
          • Harry Pollard
            I left a family of 5 back in England when I made my assault on North America in 1954. I arrived in Toronto with $84 clasped in one hot little hand. I had no
            Message 5 of 19 , Oct 1, 2008

              I left a family of 5 back in England when I made my assault on North America in 1954.

               

              I arrived in Toronto with $84 clasped in one hot little hand. I had no job, no contacts, I was on my own. I left a very good job, a fun political career (I chaired London's Young Liberals), even membership in a prestigious Men's Club a stones throw from Trafalgar Square. (Women only allowed in the dining room and for tea on the Terrace overlooking the Thames.)

               

              In Toronto some $7 went to the YMCA for a week's lodging, for 89 cents I could get a meal (from soup to dessert) in a local Chinese restaurant.

               

              I had my family over in a year, and moved into our newly built house in 18 months. Unimportant things like a refrigerator and decent beds (not metal bunkbeds) came a little later.

               

              It wasn't easy, but I wonder if an equivalent situation is anywhere near possible today?

               

              I can understand why one would perhaps look back nostalgically to the 50's - particularly if one has children.

               

              Harry

               

              *******************************

              Harry Pollard

              Henry George School of Los Angeles

              Box 655  

              Tujunga  CA 91042

              (818) 352-4141

              *******************************

               

               

              From: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of quasibill
              Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 5:31 PM
              To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: On 50s nostalgia (Re: [LeftLibertarian2] Re: Yay!)

               

              --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Rad Geek <feedback@...> wrote:

              >
              > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
              > Hash: SHA1
              >
              > quasibill wrote:
              >
              > > On the other hand, the next few years are
              > > going to be difficult in a whole slew of ways, and as a parent of two
              > > young children, I am very worried. A part of me wishes we were back
              > > in the 50s, for my childrens' sake.
              >
              > Well, how much safer the 1950s felt than today probably depends in part
              > on how far you lived from the nearest primary target.
              >
              > There's plenty hitting the fan today, and perhaps a lot more to come,
              > but we do have more options than just stocking the backyard fallout
              > shelter and praying that two imperial governments that are each
              > ideologically committed to the other's annihilation didn't go ahead and
              > make use of their capacity to wipe out life on earth several times over.

              No doubt. The point being that as a relatively comfortable middle
              class white family, the 50s would have, in hindsight, been a "safer"
              time for my family. Especially since I've been reading about how
              children can be turned against their parents under totalitarian
              regimes. It's possibly the one thing that could cause me to sell out.
              It's an entirely selfish, self-centered just above subconscious
              thought. But I'd be lying if I said it didn't pop up now and then.

              I am certainly not engaging in fantastic nostalgia about the 50s.

              No virus found in this incoming message.
              Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
              Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1702 - Release Date: 10/1/2008 9:05 AM

            • Dan Ust
              I imagine most will view their formative years with nostalgia.   Later!   Dan ... I left a family of 5 back in England when I made my assault on North
              Message 6 of 19 , Oct 1, 2008
                I imagine most will view their formative years with nostalgia.
                 
                Later!
                 
                Dan

                --- On Wed, 10/1/08, Harry Pollard <henrygeorgeschool@...> wrote:

                I left a family of 5 back in England when I made my assault on North America in 1954.

                 

                I arrived in Toronto with $84 clasped in one hot little hand. I had no job, no contacts, I was on my own. I left a very good job, a fun political career (I chaired London's Young Liberals), even membership in a prestigious Men's Club a stones throw from Trafalgar Square. (Women only allowed in the dining room and for tea on the Terrace overlooking the Thames.)

                 

                In Toronto some $7 went to the YMCA for a week's lodging, for 89 cents I could get a meal (from soup to dessert) in a local Chinese restaurant.

                 

                I had my family over in a year, and moved into our newly built house in 18 months. Unimportant things like a refrigerator and decent beds (not metal bunkbeds) came a little later.

                 

                It wasn't easy, but I wonder if an equivalent situation is anywhere near possible today?

                 

                I can understand why one would perhaps look back nostalgically to the 50's - particularly if one has children.

                 

                Harry

                 

                *******************************

                Harry Pollard

                Henry George School of Los Angeles

                Box 655  

                Tujunga  CA 91042

                (818) 352-4141

                *******************************

                 

                 

                From: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of quasibill
                Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 5:31 PM
                To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: On 50s nostalgia (Re: [LeftLibertarian2] Re: Yay!)

                 

                --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Rad Geek <feedback@...> wrote:
                >
                > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
                > Hash: SHA1
                >
                > quasibill wrote:
                >
                > > On the other hand, the next few years are
                > > going to be difficult in a whole slew of ways, and as a parent of two
                > > young children, I am very worried. A part of me wishes we were back
                > > in the 50s, for my childrens' sake.
                >
                > Well, how much safer the 1950s felt than today probably depends in part
                > on how far you lived from the nearest primary target.
                >
                > There's plenty hitting the fan today, and perhaps a lot more to come,
                > but we do have more options than just stocking the backyard fallout
                > shelter and praying that two imperial governments that are each
                > ideologically committed to the other's annihilation didn't go ahead and
                > make use of their capacity to wipe out life on earth several times over.

                No doubt. The point being that as a relatively comfortable middle
                class white family, the 50s would have, in hindsight, been a "safer"
                time for my family. Especially since I've been reading about how
                children can be turned against their parents under totalitarian
                regimes. It's possibly the one thing that could cause me to sell out.
                It's an entirely selfish, self-centered just above subconscious
                thought. But I'd be lying if I said it didn't pop up now and then.

                I am certainly not engaging in fantastic nostalgia about the 50s.


              • Harry Pollard
                Too true! ******************************* Harry Pollard Henry George School of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 (818) 352-4141
                Message 7 of 19 , Oct 1, 2008

                  Too true!

                   

                  *******************************

                  Harry Pollard

                  Henry George School of Los Angeles

                  Box 655  

                  Tujunga  CA 91042

                  (818) 352-4141

                  *******************************

                   

                   

                  From: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dan Ust
                  Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2008 11:24 AM
                  To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [LeftLibertarian2] RE: On 50s nostalgia

                   

                  I imagine most will view their formative years with nostalgia.

                   

                  Later!

                   

                  Dan

                  --- On Wed, 10/1/08, Harry Pollard <henrygeorgeschool@...> wrote:

                  I left a family of 5 back in England when I made my assault on North America in 1954.

                   

                  I arrived in Toronto with $84 clasped in one hot little hand. I had no job, no contacts, I was on my own. I left a very good job, a fun political career (I chaired London's Young Liberals), even membership in a prestigious Men's Club a stones throw from Trafalgar Square. (Women only allowed in the dining room and for tea on the Terrace overlooking the Thames.)

                   

                  In Toronto some $7 went to the YMCA for a week's lodging, for 89 cents I could get a meal (from soup to dessert) in a local Chinese restaurant.

                   

                  I had my family over in a year, and moved into our newly built house in 18 months. Unimportant things like a refrigerator and decent beds (not metal bunkbeds) came a little later.

                   

                  It wasn't easy, but I wonder if an equivalent situation is anywhere near possible today?

                   

                  I can understand why one would perhaps look back nostalgically to the 50's - particularly if one has children.

                   

                  Harry

                   

                  *******************************

                  Harry Pollard

                  Henry George School of Los Angeles

                  Box 655  

                  Tujunga  CA 91042

                  (818) 352-4141

                  *******************************

                   

                   

                  From: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of quasibill
                  Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 5:31 PM
                  To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: On 50s nostalgia (Re: [LeftLibertarian2] Re: Yay!)

                   

                  --- In LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com, Rad Geek <feedback@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
                  > Hash: SHA1
                  >
                  > quasibill wrote:
                  >
                  > > On the other hand, the next few years are
                  > > going to be difficult in a whole slew of ways, and as a parent of two
                  > > young children, I am very worried. A part of me wishes we were back
                  > > in the 50s, for my childrens' sake.
                  >
                  > Well, how much safer the 1950s felt than today probably depends in part
                  > on how far you lived from the nearest primary target.
                  >
                  > There's plenty hitting the fan today, and perhaps a lot more to come,
                  > but we do have more options than just stocking the backyard fallout
                  > shelter and praying that two imperial governments that are each
                  > ideologically committed to the other's annihilation didn't go ahead and
                  > make use of their capacity to wipe out life on earth several times over.

                  No doubt. The point being that as a relatively comfortable middle
                  class white family, the 50s would have, in hindsight, been a "safer"
                  time for my family. Especially since I've been reading about how
                  children can be turned against their parents under totalitarian
                  regimes. It's possibly the one thing that could cause me to sell out.
                  It's an entirely selfish, self-centered just above subconscious
                  thought. But I'd be lying if I said it didn't pop up now and then.

                  I am certainly not engaging in fantastic nostalgia about the 50s.

                   

                  No virus found in this incoming message.
                  Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                  Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1702 - Release Date: 10/1/2008 9:05 AM

                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.