X-Message-Number: 28072
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 09:28:51 -0600
From: "Anthony ." <>
Subject: Re: economics and cryonics

On 6/21/06, egg plant <> wrote:
> >My point is that the vote is larely uninformed and
> >driven by certain irrational needs and beliefs in the value
>  > of consumer items.
>
> That is the exact same dismal song every tyrant sings,

How this leap from regulation, law, and foresight to tyranny? Don't
you realise that a "free-market" and a massive rich-poor gap is it's
own tyranny? The idea of democracy is that people have a part in
making informed decisions regarding how our economics works out
between us. No regulation means no democracy means no protection -
protection which the poor and the environment need. Indeed, rich-boy
wannabes like yourself need it too, unless you're immune to
pollutants.

As I've already pointed out, it has been clear to me during my work on
remediation in the oil & gas sector that prior to regulating something
like, say, waste disposal, the dangerous and polluting practices of
O&G were astonishing in their carelessness in pursuit of the profit
margin. Regulation stopped this flagrant disregard for human life and
ecosystem. Well, it stopped a lot of it, but O&G companies like
breaking or bending rules for an extra $.

> trust me I know
> better than you do how to spend your own money,

People do not spend their money very well. This is a natural tendancy
made worst by consumerism. What I suggest is not controlling people,
but working towards changing our current attitudes towards
consumption.

For example, "primitive" peoples, e.g., Native American tribes of the
Pacific coast from Oregon to Alaska, held potlatches on special
occasions to display their wealth and emphasize their superiority over
their peers. "The festivities began with dancing, feasting, and
speechmaking. The host would then distribute gifts, usually in the
form of food and blankets. The host might even destroy money and
verbally abuse his guests to indicate his financial and social
superiority. Guests who received gifts were obliged to hold potlatches
of their own at a later date. They would usually try to give gifts of
an even greater value than those they had received in an attempt to
establish their own superiority and wealth." (Microsoft Encarta,
2000).

This kind of excess in universal among human cultures. The problem now
is that the excess is beyond that which we have ever had to cope with
before.

>  You can trust me I'm from the government.

This is the exact same "dismal song" every coporate pig or wannabe-pig
sings, "trust me I'm from an honest-to-god corporation".

You think that people should spend and consume wantonly, if for no
other reason than it is their inalienable right to do so in pursuit of
the life, liberty and happiness as asserted in the Declaration of
Independence, the document which inspired the formation of the United
States of America.  I disagree, for three reasons.
		
First, people with lots, and often enormous amounts of money, are,
contrary to common sense folk wisdom, actually no happier than their
less wealthy counterparts, and are statistically more prone to
depression and other forms of psychopathology. I can send anyone who
is interested a list of the psychological research which lends heavy
empirical weight to this opinion.

No doubt you will simply object to this painstaking, peer-reviewed,
scientific research because it does not jive with your rich-boy
aspirant world-view. I don't blame you that much, it is typical.

Second, obsessive superfluous consumption now permeates all levels of
American society, creating a culture of mindless greedy
acquisitiveness (e.g., The Prayer of Jabez, based on a passage in the
Old Testament interpreted by Evangelical Christians suggesting that
greed is Godly, has sold four million copies in America) to the
economic detriment of many middle and lower class citizens:

"Marketing experts have shown the value of associating success and
social standing with a product, and that this technique can be
successfully used to captivate a market share of lower-class urban
families. As a result we often see lower-class individuals spending
their money needlessly on expensive cars, pagers, cell phones, and
designer shoes rather than learning to grow their money through smart,
safe investments 

"Western marketing's most important principle is to encourage the
consumer to buy with as little reflection as possible On the day after
Thanksgiving 1999, the San Antonio Express News reported that
thousands of shoppers began lining up outside of WalMarts, Best Buys,
and Targets at 2 am for the new "tradition" of after-Thanksgiving
shopping. The newspaper reported that most shoppers said they had no
idea what they wanted to buy. They were simply lured out by the
promise of sales."

(quote from www.consumerzone.org, 2001)

Of course, you will keep hollering that it is our right to keep this
up because that is Liberty. Unfortunately it is libertine.

Third, wanton consumption is not a good idea for human beings' because
our insatiable lust for money and consumption leads to massively
inequitable distribution of the world's wealth and natural assets,
fostering economic and political instability, and at present, the very
real danger of self-imposed extinction of the human race by fatal
depletion of natural resources

You've already made it clear that your skeptical about this point,
depite the actual facts. But denial is a powerful tool, and it is why
we are here today.

As I've said, this isn't just due to capitalism or corporate culture,
it is naturally human to seek an abundance, and their are clear
psychological underpinnings which support this (again, I'll send you a
list of research if anyone wishes to see it).

> Mao Tse-tung and Stalin had ideas much like yours and
> their great leap forward lead to the starvation of tens of millions of
> people.

The Red Threat on Cryonet again! Actually, their ideas are nothing
like mine, but because you have not read the ideas of Mao, you would
not know this.

The truly human market place will require a delicate balance of
"enlightened" self-interest, reason, and empathy with, and compassion
for, our fellow human beings. The primary goal of the human market
should be the satisfaction of individual and collective needs and
desires determined by educated people through the democratic process,
rather than by "market forces."  A healthy economy would be reflected
by maximum satisfaction of basic and genuine needs (not artificial
needs created by commercial forces to boost sales) and desires within
a social context that provides value and meaning to as many people as
possible.

The human market place would be limited, not by capital constraints,
but by technology and resources (a quantitative measure of human
stupidity is the difference between what we are technologically able
to accomplish and what we actually choose to do), accompanied by
concern for preservation of the physical environment upon which our
survival always ultimately depends.

Unfortunately, the U.S. is perhaps the most imbalanced of all
societies because it is so focused on the mythic value of
individualism.  In most places in the world, even relatively
individualistic cultures like Germany and the Netherlands, there is a
sense that fellow countrymen and women are part of a family or
community, and the needs of one's people must be met.  Americans may
be the only people who widely embrace a "dog eat dog" mentality
regarding their own ingroup.  A prominent example of this is the
resistance to implementing national health insurance, despite the
ample resources to do so.   Although Americans are undoubtedly more
collectivistic than they think they are, a substantial shift toward a
communal orientation regarding each other will be needed to even
approach this sort of optimal balance.

Anthony

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=28072