Over A Million Families Destroyed!

[flintlock]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

2010 - 50 yrs = 1960. Many would hold 1960 to be the (economically) golden age of post-war America. Your point works against your argument; those things are demonstrated to have helped quite a bit.

Ha, I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps he meant 80 years ago?

[Sharky]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

2010 - 50 yrs = 1960. Many would hold 1960 to be the (economically) golden age of post-war America. Your point works against your argument; those things are demonstrated to have helped quite a bit.

My point was that having those things didn't prevent us from progressing from that state to where we are now. Why should we expect it to be any different the next time around?

The fact that bad government exists and does harm is not an argument against working towards a good government or having one.

Does your argument extend all the way, having less and less government until we get to lawless anarchy?

I'm not against all government; I'm against an immoral and unprincipled government. I think there is an important role for a proper government. That is, one that protects individual rights, rather than violates them. Limited power is also important.

One point I'm trying to make here is that passing more and more laws (or regulations) or creating more and more taxes isn't the answer: it's been tried, and it simply hasn't worked. One place to start might be enforcing the good laws we already have. For example, fraud is illegal, right?

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

My point was that having those things didn't prevent us from progressing from that state to where we are now.

Yup. The laws and regulations have become part of the problem. They have been corrupted beyond likely recall, as have some of the courts (such as in New York, according to Martin Armstrong), and many of the state and federal politicians.

[flintlock]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

I'm in general agreement that less government the better. I think we could use a little more emphasis on going after fraud though. Fraud is becoming so commonplace that we as a society have come to accept it without question. "Free enterprise" cannot successfully coexist in this environment of fraud, lies, and deceit.

[Rajiv]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

this environment of fraud, lies, and deceit.

When have fraud, lies, and deceit have been absent in any period of human history?

[vinoveri]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

When have fraud, lies, and deceit have been absent in any period of human history?

exactly...and envy, greed, power lust, etc. been absent? And this Rajiv is precisely the reason why socialism and big government cannot work; both systems rely on a relatively small group of bureaucrats to administer and maintain the "social welfare". No one can be trusted to not act in their own selfish interest, i.e, no one can be trusted to be objective and fair.

What did Lord Acton say about power and corruption? This is the main argument, for me anyway, for very strict limits on the power of any government.

Subsidiarity is a common sense view
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity

http://www.acton.org/publications/ra...rticle_200.php

Also, GK Chesteron was opposed to both big government and big business, as he saw them both as conspiring against the common man's freedom. He favored an economic approach known as distributism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism

[Rajiv]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

exactly...and envy, greed, power lust, etc. been absent? And this Rajiv is precisely the reason why socialism and big government cannot work; both systems rely on a relatively small group of bureaucrats to administer and maintain the "social welfare". No one can be trusted to not act in their own selfish interest, i.e, no one can be trusted to be objective and fair.

And "Capitalism" doesn't? A system that relies upon wealth becoming concentrated in the hands of a few, and no way to level the playing field (no possible redistribution) again?

See "Why it is hard to share the wealth "

The rich are getting richer while the poor remain poor. If you doubt it, ponder these numbers from the US, a country widely considered meritocratic, where talent and hard work are thought to be enough to propel anyone through the ranks of the rich. In 1979, the top 1% of the US population earned, on average, 33.1 times as much as the lowest 20%. In 2000, this multiplier had grown to 88.5. If inequality is growing in the US, what does this mean for other countries?

Almost certainly more of the same, if you believe physicists who are using new models based on simple physical laws to understand the distribution of wealth. Their studies indicate that inequality in market economies may be very hard to get rid of.

Economists will join physicists to discuss these issues next week in Kolkata, India, at the first ever conference on the "econophysics" of wealth distribution. "We are interested in understanding whether there is some kind of social injustice behind this skewed distribution," says Sudhakar Yarlagadda of the Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics (SINP) in Kolkata.

It is well known that wealth is shared out unfairly. "People on the whole have normally distributed attributes, talents and motivations, yet we finish up with wealth distributions that are much more unequal than that," says Robin Marris, emeritus professor of economics at Birkbeck, University of London.


.
.
.
.
.
.

Also U.S. wealth distribution:

[vinoveri]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

of course capitalism does, especially when it becomes crony corporatism and in bed with the government.

did you review the link I sent on Distributism as a 3rd alternative?

private property, subsidiarity, enforcement of contract law. Capitalism should mean the wide distribution and access to capital ... with which to build, create, and invest, ... to the extent capitalism results in a few people holding all the capital, there's the problem ...

[Rajiv]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

Yes I saw that -- however, to many here, that would be considered an extreme form of socialism. However, my comment was more on the fact that you had not included "capitalism" in your list.

Native American "Potlatches" are a form of distributism.

A potlatch[1][2][3] is a festival ceremony practiced by indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast. This includes Haida, Nuxalk, Tlingit, Tsimshian,[4] Nuu-chah-nulth,[5] Kwakwaka'wakw,[3] and Coast Salish[6] cultures. The word comes from the Chinook Jargon, meaning "to give away" or "a gift". It is a vital part of indigenous cultures of the Pacific Northwest. It went through a history of rigorous ban by both the Canadian and United States' federal governments, and has been the study of many anthropologists.
.
.
.
.
The main purpose of the potlatch is the re-distribution and reciprocity of wealth.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

And "Capitalism" doesn't? A system that relies upon wealth becoming concentrated in the hands of a few, and no way to level the playing field (no possible redistribution) again?

See "Why it is hard to share the wealth "



Also U.S. wealth distribution:

Your distribution data are from 2001; things have changed.
Here's from 2007. (source: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html)

[ViC78]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

Your distribution data are from 2001; things have changed.
Here's from 2007. (source: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html)

From your link, I think this image says it all.



CEO's salaries have comfortably outpaced corporate profits and the gains have not been shared with labor at all. Henry Ford recognized a long time ago that it is important to share the profits more equitably with labor so that they can afford the products that his company built. The debt binge covered this fact until recently. It may be time to re-learn this lesson again.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

This begs several questions, 1) where does it say in the Constitution or anywhere else that you are entitled to a job and unemployment benefits

26 U.S.C. ch.23

[flintlock]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

When have fraud, lies, and deceit have been absent in any period of human history?

Did I say they ever were?:confused::eek: We both know I'm talking about the prevailing level being unacceptably high. You can't turn on the TV without watching some hokey crap being pitched. "Reality" shows that are totally faked and everyone knows it. Yet all pretend they are "real". Business used to be run on a handshake. Now it reminds me more of two guys tied at the wrist having a knife fight. Neither trusting the other. Bullshit has crept into the American consciousness to such a level that we don't even call it out for what it is anymore. Instead they've turned it into an art. Where as long as you lay it on the right way, there is no such thing as a lie anymore. Only the uneducated, the powerless, the unsophisticated can lie. The rest are just caught in "misunderstandings". :rolleyes:

Maybe you don't remember a time or place where such a level of BS was not tolerated, but I sure do.;) At least in the past people pretended that integrity mattered. Now its merely scoffed at as old fashioned. Or only paraded out at election time for the hypocrites to claim as something the other lacks.

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

Henry Ford recognized a long time ago that it is important to share the profits more equitably with labor so that they can afford the products that his company built.

Bingo. As a business man, I harvest peoples wages. If nobody has wages, I have nothing to harvest. When the wealth and income gets too highly concentrated at the top, there are only a few really rich people to sell to, and the line at their door gets too long.....:rolleyes:

[Rajiv]

Re: Over A Million Families Destroyed!

My point was more that as a society, corruption is percieved as being low, when there are adequate safeguards in the system, and the costs to the individual are very high when they succumb to the temptation of veering from the straight and narrow!

Also it is important that there be a limit to wealth disparity -- times of extreme income/wealth disparity lead to the ills you mention, because in those/these times, it is perceived by the many that greed pays!