Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NOW who wrote (12561)	4/24/2004 5:08:22 PM
From: orkrious	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

puplava interviews doug noland this weekend netcastdaily.com

To: NOW who wrote (12561)	4/24/2004 5:34:00 PM
From: glenn_a	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

O/T - Hi tooearly. Yes, of course greed accompanies the quest for power. Wouldn't it be amazing if one day the world could not be governed primarily by "self-interest"? As Agent Smith says in the Matrix "me, me, me". OK, this could be a bit wacky, but my personal thesis is that humanity is ultimately going to have to deeply question the nature of "self", or the individual "ego" construct. That is, we will have to revisit some very basic questions such as "who am I"? I don't consider myself a card-carrying Buddhist or anything (as if there could be such a thing), but Buddhism's questions of the primacy of the "self" or "ego construct" (e.g. atman) to my mind is right on the money. If "I" inherently exist, then "I" may very well take the occupation of "securing my existence" very seriously. I will be very concerned that my "self image" projects what it must to get the kind of social status I want, the partner I want, etc. I will view my social and economic relations primarily in the context of "what's in it for me", and I will not deeply consider the consequences of my actions for my society or world. On this level, Capitalism to my mind has some really deep flaws. Communism equally so. Who ultimately secures their existence, the owners of capital, or the laboring class? It's a battle for power. "Me", "me", "me". Or, perhaps free-market commerce or solidarity of the proletariat won't fundamentally secure my existence. Perhaps I need to secure my existence on some deeper "greatness" of my clan or people, you know "viva la France", the "American Way", or the superiority of the Germanic race. "Me", "me", "me". Seems to me a deep frickin' case of mistaken identity. Who "am" I anyway? Is there a deeper continuum of existence whereby "me" and "you", "mine" and "yours" are not fundamentally opposed? Or in the end, do we live in a world of scarce resources and inevitable conflict, and the only way to survive is to "fundamentally" secure my existence in a brutal Darwinian game of the survival of the fittest? Dunno. Food for thought though perhaps. My apologies for going so far O/T. I will try to refrain from such a post again and stick to economic matters such as how to get richer in a world going mad. ;) Regards, Glenn