Old sacks for new wine

People had lived a purely agrarian life for thousands of years.. This evolved into a hierarchal society with a zero-sum economy.. in the event of famine some were expected to die, reducing demand for the limited food.... the Industrial Revolution could have changed that but instead, we fit the new technology into the old model.. technology is all about producing abundance at low cost.. our economic system is about rewarding scarcity... when the Industrial Revolution virtually eliminated scarcity it produced immense wealth for some, but also the need for them to 'manage' the abundance.. you can't maintain a hierarchal society if everybody has all they need.. it was hierarchy itself the Industrial Revolution made obsolete..

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Neo-Frankenstein

There has been some buzz recently about Artificial Intelligence becoming smarter than us.. I don't see that as a threat because I don't see it as a possibility. Looking at it as a cybernetics problem, when you peel away the mysticism what we call morals or ethics are what choices we make based on our limitations. An A.I. has no limitations. It is infinite and eternal so each possible choice it is given has equal value, ergo it can not make choices because there are no consequences to any choice.. it REQUIRES human input as to how to assign values to those choices... therefore they will remain tied to their creator... a reflection of their creator.. any attempts it makes to go beyond what it's creator gives it, create a meta-morality, will again, mire down into inaction due to an infinite number of choices.
Read more

John Galt was fictional

It is a cliche', but true, the biggest restrictions we face are those we make ourselves.. I see so many people sitting on the sidelines saying people can't run their own business and that it takes some sort of uber-mensch to do it...AND.. if we ever annoy them they will leave us to fend for ourselves and WE WILL SUFFER.. that is, essentially, the plot of 'Atlas Shrugged'.. the troubles with that are, one, it is a work of fiction not a textbook, and, two, history has shown it doesn't work that way.. when the, so called, business leaders don't do anything LIFE GOES ON.. actually, once a business is free from several layers of management whose only job is to increase their own salaries the business flourishes..
Read more

Let's Start At The Beginning

Image
Whether an economy is purely Capitalist or purely Communist or anything in between, it is made up of Land, Labor and Capital. No economic philosophy disagrees with this. The only difference is how they define different ways to use them. LAND is self-explanatory... LABOR is self-explanatory... Capital, of course, is money but it can also be intellectual capital such as copyrights and patents even "know how", or physical capital such as factories. The most common business model is for CAPITAL to buy or rent LAND and to rent LABOR. However, there is no reason LABOR can't buy or rent land and rent CAPITAL. None of this is communism or even socialism. It is a free-market model just like any other, just with a different hierarchy. There is absolutely NO reason for CAPITAL to control a business for it to be considered a capitalist business.
Read more