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 : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (8014)	4/14/2006 11:34:37 AM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24758

The question is, just what is meant by "moving along lines of force"? I’ll take at shot at it. Individuals are moved to act by their needs – this is the field. Collective individual action combine to create complex lines of force. We can think of a social structure as being created by a particular configuration of individual action (eddies in the complex field), with any particular configuration partly determined by random chance, but also determined by exogenous factors such as geography and the abundance of natural resources. For many individuals, these “eddies” take on the property of a permanent structure such that it begins to exert its own field. Society can develop along the lines of force as determined by our needs, or along lines of force as determined by the “rule of law.” That is the basic conflict, i.e. do we act to satisfy our needs or to satisfy this era's dogma. Needs eventually supplant dogma.

To: ahhaha who wrote (8014)	4/17/2006 11:46:41 AM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

I've earned a lot from reading gpowel but he's not weighing in on the question that was asked first, which country is structured more capitalistic, US or China. Certainly there are other forms of capitalism but there is a reason why the British/American form rose above the rest. A lot of historians would attribute the increasing riches in the US to it's military power, but it's military power is more likely a result of it's rising wealth. Countries who aren't capitalist always assume riches are stolen with military might rather than created. The thing that secure property rights along with the rule of law provide for is the ability to transact with strangers, even enemies. This is especially true if those property rights are attached to land because the security isn't moveable and the value is more readily public information. Something as simple as getting utilities to your home become problematic in a country without free title to land. China is getting its day in the Sun precisely because they impoverished their people with their anti-capitalism. Now they give a few of those rights back (the ones we take for granted and our forefathers died for) causing an explosion of industrial development. They've made some progress moving up to the level of the rest of the world but they can hardly be called the best example of capitalism at work. The biggest reason they are working is because they are working for us! They are working for us not because they are the most productive or most efficient but because they are so poor and destitute in comparison.