Hudson's 1-2 Punch

[don]

Re: Hudson's 1-2 Punch

Yes, Dr. Hudson does have the problem that his encyclopedic knowledge is not generally available to everyone, thus key steps which are intuitively obvious to him are not to many who don't follow him closely.

The missing steps in this case are that Dr. Hudson is speaking of 2 different groups:

1) the rentiers
2) their lackeys

He actually refers to the lackeys in this particular case. The rentiers have a specific goal to loot as much as possible and then get out - using Fed provided cheap dollars to buy hard assets abroad. The lackeys on the other hand are continuing their rentier directed anti-labor program of squeezing as much as possible out of the working class in order to reduce expenses on the part of the rentiers, and in the process enrich themselves (the lackeys).

For the rentiers - the Depression isn't a good thing because that's how revolutions, guillotines, and confiscation happen. But this isn't a problem if said rentiers are elsewhere.

For the lackeys, however, the Depression is going to be a problem. But they won't notice that until it is too late - the short term reaping of massive bankster loot obscures reality.

Great point, c1ue! This is the weakest working and professional class, the historical brake on rape and pillage in America, in the last 100 years.

An overlooked factor in their over-the-top delirium.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Hudson's 1-2 Punch

The missing steps in this case are that Dr. Hudson is speaking of 2 different groups:

1) the rentiers
2) their lackeys

Ah - you mean like I described above, when I first instigated this subthread:

I think the resolution of this apparent conundrum depends on realizing that the financial interests come in (at least) two layers.

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: Hudson's 1-2 Punch

This is the weakest working and professional class, the historical brake on rape and pillage in America, in the last 100 years.

In my philosophy, ethics and morality are aspects of both individuals and communities. Those who would reduce all to individuals, acting in their own (perhaps woefully misrepresented) best interests are essentially incorrect in my view. Reductio ad personam is an incomplete understanding. Communities have their own dynamics as well, including their own ethics and moralities, often quite distinct from the ethics and moralities of any of their individual participants.

In times past, many of the working and professional class lived and worked in long standing communities with more deeply rooted ethics, or they worked in upstart communities such as a new booming city or frontier town. In the first alternative, the ethics and morality of the long standing community in which they worked (such as the rural farming community of my childhood) set the dominate tone for their behavior (such as the ethics and morality of the local doctor and lawyer of that community.) In the second alternative, the corruption of the newly forming community had only modest impact on the rest of the world, outside that boom town. Greed, crime, deceit and fraud in one young city or town did little damage to more stable communities elsewhere.

But with the explosive affects of the industrial, then the technological eras of the last 50 or 100 years, smaller towns and older cities have been hollowed out, losing their "soul." Their culture, their life blood, their entertainment, their news and daily points of interest, their economics, their food and materials sources, their markets, the raising and education of their youth, the socializing of their elders... have all become dominated by the metastasizing cancers of a few dominating and interlinked, yet young and thus usually spiritually hollow, "communities." What happens in New York, Washington, Silicon Valley, Bejing, Moscow, London, Paris, has in various ways immense impacts on the very fabric of the lives of people around the world.