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.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: hoyasaxa who wrote (708)	3/12/1999 2:35:00 PM
From: Frank Buck	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36921

<<Free the economy and you free man by giving him an equal chance to become unequal; the invisible hand is the only fair and impartial judge, jury and executioner.>> The "Invisible-Hand" concept continues to be an excellent analogy that aptly defines the role of business... along with subsequent benefits to mankind. While granted the existing capitalist system has its weaknesses.... it is still better than the alternatives. The market system has proven itself repeatedly over the likes of centralized planning, monarchy, despotism, fascism to name a few. A critical component in a market system is the role of developmental technology as a vehicle for creating profits. Technology being roughly defined as the higher utilization of existing resources. As an example... At one time whale oil was used to illuminate darkness: Should we abandon coal and or fossil fuels to revert back to whale blubber? Of course the answer is:.... No way can the existing whale population support the needs of society. Yet whaling in its time was a viable short term alternative that yielded to the next best alternative. At some point we can only hope the current system will also adapt and become more refined... without dire long term and terminal environmental consequences. The Invisible-Hand of business, with its built in compensatory reward system guarantees a better, cheaper, alternative looms in the thoughts of someones grey matter. The one thing that anyone can take to the proverbial bank is.... "human nature never changes". Greed, lust, envy, desire, love, hate, compassion, has and will continue to exist. It is the very nature of man to desire. It is this desire which creates opportunity that propels man to perpetuate his existence and attempt to maintain equilibrium for an environment that has been altered through developmental transitions. If mankind can minimize the intervals between the transitions... perhaps we can halt and reverse the environmental damages we have bestowed upon ourselves. If not... the bees and the cockroaches will take over what is left of the remaining planet. At this point perhaps the danger lies in allowing developing nations to follow in our past footsteps and repeat the same environmental damages that we have learned were consequences of the learning curve. Unfair ??? Yes... but certain rewards go to those who are in early and certain consequences to those in late in the game. After all where is it written that the game should be fair? The right of might still exists yet on a higher level.

To: hoyasaxa who wrote (708)	3/12/1999 3:07:00 PM
From: Elmer Flugum	Respond to of 36921

Mr.Roark was a fictional mess.

To: hoyasaxa who wrote (708)	3/12/1999 7:50:00 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 36921

Prolific poster A bad sign, that. Time to reduce again... I would argue that what we call "capitalism" today has little in common with the theoretical laissez-faire capitalism that prevailed in the US from 1880-1929. A quick look at the boom/bust cycles of those days gives a ready view of what that system produces. The problem is that industry, given sufficient power, will mess with the invisible hand to create advantage for itself. Every "capitalist" society since has recognized that government must serve as a counterweight and an enforcer of economic rules of engagement. The actual amount of power that government holds, and the restrictions under which it wields that power, are still a matter of intense debate, and will continue to be: it is an evolutionary process. Capitalism and Socialism are the end points on a sliding scale. All functioning systems lie somewhere in between, and one of the main jobs of the political process is determining what point on that scale any system ought to be at any given point in time. In America, certainly, I'd prefer that point to be well slanted to the right, in economic affairs at least. In the Philippines, where I live, it is a little different: we still have major feudal vestiges to contend with, and central government, for all its faults, is the only force that can control them. I do not like to define the debate with the assumption that it is necessary to choose between those two end points. Economic absolutism is as bad as political absolutism. I read Rand a long time ago, the philosophy seemed simplistic and one-sided; from a literary perspective... well, better left unsaid. That is a distant memory, though; it might do with another look. My politics have steered a good distance rightward over the years. JMO, obviously.