Economic Policy: Birds are starving feed horses more oats

Economics is one of several domains of knowledge for which I have an aversion. I did take a course in economics in college many years ago and it dealt a heavy blow to my grade-point average.

This fact may be evident by my question; isn’t there a better economic policy than feeding the birds by giving the horses more oats?

I assume you are criticizing the corporatist trickle-down policies of the neo-conservative, and you are right. Use the oats to build infrastructure (education, water projects, highways, bridges, environmental controls) and the economy will prosper.

I have little knowledge in economics and have no specific proposal to make things better. However, like all ideologies capitalism has deluged us with a constant refrain that for the good of society we must have very rich people so that they can create jobs for the rest of us. I think that it is important for the rest of us to occasionally peek behind the curtain and then critically examine the policies that sometimes serve a good purpose but in other times the purpose served is more that of self-interest for those making the policy.

For a good analysis and critique of left-wing capitalism google on the book : The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, by Naomi Klein.

For a good analysis and critique of capitalism, from a left-wing point of view, google on the book : The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, by Naomi Klein.

About the hidden secret of the "free" market. Check out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kieyjfZDUIc
Here, I found quite a numbers of audio and visual quotes on economics. For example, Milton Friedman presents his case for what he calls the "free" market. He also uses the term, "competitive capitalism".

BTW, in his comments he admitted that capitalism is not a "sufficient" cause of democracy. He also admitted that both communism and national socialism used a form of capitalism.

"But" he says, "capitalism is a necessary part of any democracy."

Yes I saw her on C-Span interview and bought the book. It is certainly an eye opener. She does not pull her punches. A very bright young woman indeed.

Lindsay

If I were not completely turned off when trying to study economics I would like to really examine the assumptions and I suspect distortions in the science so that I could rebut all of the ideologues who preach capitalism's praises.

Coberst, how do you feel about my "tail-feathers" metaphor?

BTW, we must not let the chart-drawing so-called "experts" intimidate us. Much of what they write about is academic bunk. This is why I call myself an intuitive economist. I have as much right to be wrong as are the experts.

Interestingly, Paul Samuelson, in his tome, ECONOMICS--I have the Canadian edition, for which he won the first Nobel Prize in economics, in 1969--does state that fractional-reserve banking (Chapter 16) began under fraudulent kind of circumstances. Later, bankers and political leaders made the fraud legal. They argued that what they did served the public good. Tell that to the victims of the sub-prime "scam".

BANKS, USING PAPER AND INK, DO CREATE FIAT MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR
=================================================================
He also points out that bankers are "quite wrong" when they argue that banks do nothing more than put the community's currency to work. "The banking system and the public do, between them, create...bank deposits...for each new dollar on reserve. In other words, banks are in the money creating business. He then goes on to describe how this is done.

I must apologize because I overlooked that remark and after going back I still cannot find it.

Coberst, to what "remark" are you referring?

You asked me this question and I cannot comprehend it.

"Coberst, how do you feel about my "tail-feathers" metaphor?"

IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS:
=======================
Usually, economists write from one of two positions: left wing, or right wing.

"MONETARISM--A definition
========================
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&client...nition&ct=title
Monetarism, a right wing approach, tends to say: Leave the economy to the market place and things will right themselves.

"KEYNESIANISM--offers a left wing approach.
============
http://www.history-ontheweb.co.uk/concepts...nesianism51.htm
The key propositions of Keynesianism?--named after John Maynard Keynes: Here is an example:

1 of 6: There is no natural tendency for capitalist market economies, which now dominate world economies, to correct economic shocks and maintain an equilibrium at full employment. Before Keynes it was well known that there was a regular pattern of boom and slump but it was assumed that economies quickly righted themselves without government intervention. Keynes denied this.

MY PERSONAL APPROACH?: BIRDS HAVE FEATHER ALL OVER, NOT JUST ON THE WINGS.

As I have indicated elsewhere, as an intuitive economist, I take what I call "a feathers approach" to the political economy, not just a left wing or right wing one. After all, feathers are essential to the welfare of the whole bird.

And don't forget the essential tail feathers. Without them, the wings--indeed the whole bird--could not function. Without tail feathers flight is impossible no matter how strong the wings happen to be. They balance the wings and enable birds keep on course in those long migratory flight in search of food.

Politicians, take note that tail feathers are, humbly, located right over the anus--another essential part of the bird.

COOPERATIVE AND COMMUNITY CAPITALISM (CCC)
========================================
Perhaps this is the essential function of democratic forms of government: Be humble tail feathers and promote a democratic form of capitalism, what I call cooperative and community capitalism (CCC).

This helps keep the wings in a state of balance and thus help the head (made up of all social leaders, including educators, spiritual leaders, business leaders, whoever) do that which is needed by the body of the whole bird, including the smallest feathers (our precious youth)."
For details check out link below.
===========================================================
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthrea...25169#Post25169

I always suspected that economists and accountants were anal.

Do you mean full of you-know-what? Now, do you understand my "feathers" metaphor? If so, what do you think of it?

Lindsay

I can agree on the location and that the tail must be there to guide the creature but beyond that I guess I miss the point.

Ah! The art of communication. It is not an easy one. Agreed?

Let me try the following: Left-wing economists argue that the whole of society benefits when the three levels of government--municipal, provincial and federal--play the major role in the distribution of wealth. If you agree with this, you could be--depending how radical or moderate your views--a communist, or a at least a democratic socialist.

Which are you? Neither of the above?

Perhaps you are a right-wing capitalist. Then you believe in the trickle-down theory. Right-wing capitalists argue that the whole of society benefits when we allow strong, intelligent and imaginative people to create all the wealth possible, without the constraints of governments. Rich and powerful capitalists will automatically employ those who are willing to work for them, and all will be happy.

But what does society do with people who are totally incapable of looking after themselves, and have no economic value?

Coberst, re you left-wing socialist? That is, a Keynesian?
Or a right-wing capitalist? That is, a monetarist?

If neither, what are you?

When I get your answer, I will take it from there.

Lindsay


I won’t try to use labels because they are not very meaningful for me. I shall just try to point out my convictions as to the errors in the American culture.

The US is a very powerful nation; a very large percentage of that power rests in the hands of very few individuals. I will call these individuals, men, and I mean white men, because almost all of the 10K (ten thousand) are white men.

In my opinion almost all of the power of this nation rests in the hands of 10K. Almost all of the 10K has very similar and very narrow world views. The 10K has this power because they not only control directly a great deal of wealth and organizational power in the nation but they also control public opinion via Madison Avenue techniques, because the population in general lacks sufficient intellectual sophistication to be independent critical thinking citizens.

Because of this power concentration it is not possible to correct errors, which are fundamentally the result of this concentration of power.

OK, I will label you "NO NAME". But I would like to know if you are full of beans; or full of whatever.

But seriously, I have no objection to you giving me a label as long as you will agree not to impose it on me and will give me the opportunity to dialogue about it.

BTW, isn't "American culture" a label?

You say that the USA is owned and operated--you mean it is like a corporation?--by ten thousand white men.

What happened to the spirit of 1776 ?(a label?)

You say it is, "because the population in general lacks sufficient intellectual sophistication to be independent critical thinking citizens."

OK, I assume you are a critical thinker. Now apply it to some of the economic solutions offered by the Family Life Foundation.


You say, "Because of this power concentration it is not possible to correct errors, which are fundamentally the result of this concentration of power." Really? Accepting the possibility that some of the rich and powerful are not mean-spirited and greedy, do you really mean that you believe nothing can be done to challenge the power and greed of the mean-spirited ones?

If you really believe this, what is your response if I label you as having what I feel is a "victim mentality"?

Lindsay

The only way that I can see to challenge this situation is for a significant number of individuals to become self-actualizing self-learners.

And, with the help of the personal computer (PC), this is is precisely what the Family Life Foundation (FLF) is up to doing. http://www.flfcanada.com
Since the 1970's the FLF has been a strong advocate of the barter system which the PC now makes possible on a large scale.

Over the past few months, with the help of Canadian-owned www.barterWorld.com we have spearheaded a barter system for charities, including spiritual fellowships using the url http://www.universalbartergroup.com

THERE ARE LOVING-SPIRITED PEOPLE OF WEALTH
The developer of this program is a loving-spirited and generous person of great wealth. I have met him and have a signed copy of his latest book.
It looks as if this system can work anywhere there is a supply and demand situation. For example: I once exchanged my house and car, in Toronto, with a family with a house and car in England, for several weeks. Five of us got to see, not only England and Scotland, but France, Switzerland and Italy. It was wonderful education for teenage children. We even took their grandmother with us. This can happen all over the world.

BTW, Coberst, where are you located? Anyone: have you ever bartered anything with anyone?

Coberst, you opened this thread with the comment: "Economics is one of several domains of knowledge for which I have an aversion."

As I have said, more than once: Properly understood, economics (managing household things)--about managing things wisely and well, about stewardship (keeping the animal stys productive with milk, cream and cheese products, and clean), about the ecology of nature--is about the very stuff of life: land, water, air and life-giving products.

Surely, if you have an aversion to the important and practical things of life--like the air you breath and water you drink--on planet earth, you must come from a different planet than I do.

Economists' charts are not about the important and practical things of economics.

Lindsay

I often take an interest in a domain of knowledge and spend months trying to understand the fundamentals. I have tried that with classical economics but find that I cannot maintain my interest.

I am not talking about "classical economics". In my opinion the classical economists, on the left and the right, have it wrong. They create more problems than solutions.

Check out the work of Hazel Henderson
http://www.hazelhenderson.com/editorials/p...s_of_money.html
Also, professor Bernard Lietaer
http://www.transaction.net

This statement is very easy to prove: observe that they re-elected Bush-Cheney.

Amen!

say Rick.
Coberst responds Careful Coberst, Rick will not approve of you using a common Bible word. The Great Amen is another name for the deity.

If it is, it is absolute, within all, the alpha and the omega and it is equivalent to the AUM.

Origin, name and written symbols of AUM
================================
The Sanskrit name for the syllable is praṇava, from a root nu "to shout, sound, praise", verbal pra-nu- being attested as "to make a humming or droning sound" in the Brahmanas, and taking the specific meaning of "to utter the syllable om" in the Chandogya Upanishad and the Shrauta Sutras.

In Hinduism
==========
The syllable Aum is first described as all-encompassing mystical entity in the Upanishads. Aum is also Om--from which we get Aum-men, or Omen, or Amen.

FOR DETAILS
===========
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Om#Origin.2C_...written_symbols
=================
The most sacred symbol in Hindu dharma. Aum (OM) is the sound of the infinite.
[Sounds like what I have in mind when when I think of the Divine Being to which I refer in my signature.]

Aum is said to be the essence of all mantras, the highest of all matras or divine word (shabda), brahman (ultimate reality) itself. Aum is said to be the essence of the Vedas.

By sound and form, AUM symbolizes the infinite Brahman (ultimate reality) and the entire universe.

A stands for Creation

U stands for Preservation

M stands for Destruction or dissolution
=============================
http://www.hindunet.org/aum/

A stands for Creation representative of "Sattva" Guna, and the God Visnu

U stands for Preservation representative of "Rajas" Guna, and the God Brahma

M stands for Destruction or dissolution representative of "Tamas " Guna, and the God Siva

In Eastern teachings God represents the movement of the absolute which is forever still. When the absolute is stirred by consciousness it draws forth the Aum (the word of God) which is then solidified (so to speak) into the active manifest. Consciousness itself resides in both the absolute and in activity forever creating and observant of itself as both uncreated and created.

Conscious awareness of the absolute and the absolute in activity is the foundation of enlightenment.

Any thoughts on how to test those ideas so that a reproducible science of mind/existence can be constructed?

Personal experience is inevitably the strongest link in any chain of human events.

I presume that one can think of mind and spirit as one and the same, okay?
The challenge, IMO, is: How is the spirit related to the brain and the rest of the body?

You can presume, however it does not always inspire someone who bases all beliefs and knowledge on the prevailing facts created by the works of others who are approaching a subject from a relative and material point of reference.

The Science of Yoga is a bit more abstract in that it does not apply to relative beliefs that do not accept anything other than what one can see and experience from what is called a normal state of consciousness.
From my own experience of having a neurologist measure my brain waves while meditating, the responses were different when approached by two distinct levels of thinking.
The neurologist who made time to study the affects of consciousness or the brain wave patterns while I was in different stages of thought, waking, meditating with eyes open and then with eyes closed was very optimistic and interested. His colleague however in passing, wasn't interested and when approached with the information immediately recommended I have a series of brain scans done to pinpoint the brain injury that would be responsible for the abnormal brain wave patterns that were the result of the scans.

What has become more evident with those who have established a level of practice in meditation is that when stress is removed from the body through Yoga or meditation, the body becomes more supple, energetic and healthy in all areas. The mind that is not weighed down with repetitive thoughts that have no direction other than being the result of stress is clear and objective rather than subjective and narrow.

When love and joy is increased in ones life everything is enhanced and expanded. Intuition and subtle sensitivity is increased and one automatically works to increase this in themselves and others working toward the good of all rather than to limit ones self to selfishness out of fear of lack and low self esteem.

Spirit is the underlying nature of all of reality, but it is often ignored for the material facts of belief relative to scientific protocols.
To me it is clear that when protocols are useful it is in guiding one toward the infinite rather than the finite. To automatically restrict thought to ideas based on limits rather than possibilities is to stifle creative thinking and the spirit within, by denying what is possible for what is democratically determined to be real.