[GJM] Fw: "Capitalism" and "Appropriate use of Technology"
mary rose
maryrose333 at att.net
Wed Jun 18 16:20:26 MDT 2008
----- Original Message -----
From: ecotort at gn.apc.org
To: algae5636 at aol.com
Cc: jacklancaster at sbcglobal.net ; maryrose333 at att.net ; apfn at apfn.org ; chuckles at chuckbrucks.com ; evedemian at verizon.net ; tdietlin at sbcglobal.net ; olfriend at nwinfo.net ; poetforever at yahoo.com ; everestlf at yahoo.com ; investigativeexpose at hotmail.com ; sorchafaal at fastmail.fm ; jefffisherandalgore at gmail.com ; majorhart at sbcglobal.net ; happyharper at shaw.ca ; ndhayes at att.net ; sirgareth at shaw.ca ; alexjamesnews2 at gmail.com ; saltboxherbs at comcast.net ; grahamjukes at blueyonder.co.uk ; kathelee at verizon.net ; doctorexhaust at yahoo.com ; dakotarose at wbaccess.net ; emaillist at peerservice.org ; freedomlover911 at yahoo.com ; medfly1 at cox.net ; editor at mercedsun-star.com ; ricniemela at earthlink.net ; observer at coldreams.com ; new_world_orderlies at yahoo.com ; realcountscount at gmail.com ; support at freeadvertisingforum.com ; robertamidkiff at gmail.com ; maryleeandcharley at yahoo.com ; modesto.rosario at gmail.com ; rosegojda at aol.com ; macdill1547 at yahoo.com ; radu_seserman at yahoo.com ; nadiasindi at gmail.com ; cals at valornet.com ; juliusstreikern at thenewsturmer.com ; ssutton23 at gmail.com ; rbtaft at rtconnect.net ; ummyakoub at yahoo.com ; allan39 at prodigy.net.mx ; jurisnot2 at yahoo.com ; wolfeyes at hisurfer.net ; kcaj22 at aol.com ; K95388 at aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 5:17 AM
Subject: Re: "Capitalism" and "Appropriate use of Technology"
my point is rather:
99% of money is virtual (millivolts of electricity in a computer somewhere...)
-as such it does not really have any intrinsic power, except that which we give it...
It has all been fraudulently created "out of nothing" by the banks, initially due to the practice of fractional reserve banking, latterly by all manner of deceptions which are presently being exposed...
At present, this virtual money (and/or the lack of it!)
is criminally influencing and coercing millions of working people
to damage and destroy the environment in their employment.
I can really see no good reason for this to be so...
Why can we not use that same virtual money
to lawfully pay people to benefit the environment in their employment?
mary rose:
Nick, what seems to be the problem is "employment" itself. Let's consider
again that it takes only 30% of the presently available worldwide labor force to
provide all the goods and services necessary for the 6+ billion people of the
world.
And, if we go "technologically-green" using nanotechnology in order to reduce
emissions to "0" percent and prevent any further damage to the environment,
then we will need only about 4 - 5% of the presently available laborfoce to
provide all of the goods and services necessary for the 6+ going to 8 billion
people on the planet. (Source - End of Work - Rifkin)
And, as I pointed out in another recent post, the U.S. has been employing
75% of the presently available labor force even though only 30% is necessary.
And, we do so by producing "luxury goods" at the expense of environmental
concerns. So, human labor is increasingly looked upon as superflous. A fact
which is leading to ever greater attempts at genocide by the industrialized
countries in an attempt to reduce population. One has to look at the fact that
the employed are responsible in one way or another for maintaining the well
being of those unemployed whether as family members through direct support,
or by taxation programs, e.g., social security, etc. And, the burden is simply
too great when the number of people unemployed so far surpass in numbers
those that are employed.
Part of the problem lies with the capital investors not wanting to conribute to
the support of the numbers of unemployed, but demanding a high rate of return
on their investment or they don't invest here in the U.S. and will take their dollars
to the Euro. Yet their ROI increases through the use of technology rather than
through the use of human labor. When you talk about the advantages of robotics,
computers, etc., human labor can in no way compete. And, I feel that one of the
needs for war now is that even with advanced technology there is still a need for
the foot soldier.
And, as I have said previously, this factor led to the delinking of human labor
from the markets back in the mid to late 1990's as more profit was made through
passive investment into the stock market than was made from human labor. .
What we are talking about here is the ability of advanced technology to
replace human labor at ever increasing rates, while at the same time providing
for greater efficiency. .
One of the things that I just got in touch with is that the problem is mainly
associated with providing sufficient employment for money in order to enable people
to purchase food and other necessities. Its the price of food that they cannot
afford -- it is not that there is not enough food to feed the world. And, if you recall
when we were discussing if all could be fed last week, Anup Shah's figures
showed that this was possible.
So, what we get into here is the Protestant work ethic that says you aren't worth
the powder to blow you up if you aren't working and earning your keep. But if
there isn't enough work to go around the way the present deck is shuffled, then
what do we do now?
Someone who has considered these questions in depth is list member Robley
George, founder and director of The Center for the Study of Democratic Societies.
And, Rob's solution to this dilemna is to create a "Universal Guaranteed Personal Income as well as some form of Maximum Allowable Personal Wealth, with both the lower bound on personal material poverty and the upper bound on personal material wealth set and adjusted democratically by all society." http://www.centersds.com/thebook.htm
But, I have had some questions as to how this system could work as we move into the nanotech and bio-mimicry age which will get us into the zero pollution area we need to be in for environmental protection and the need for human labor is reduced to 3 - 4%. In this state there aren't enough working people to come near to being able to support the number of people that will become unemployed. And, I feel in this circumstance, the large corporations are certainly going to be diminished in size as there will be no need for them.
However, if we had small local communities based in sustainable practices and self-reliancy, using local currency, and not controlled by a national monetary system, they could live quite well through producing their own food and other necessities. We would have a return to "family-oriented values" and a simpler way of life, that, however, might be intrinsically more rewarding than that of society based in modernity. And, I feel we have to consider such cultures as the Amish in this respect. Here is a website for learning about them. http://www.clark-cty-wi.org/historya&m.htm .
One of the things taking place in the U.S. (and perhaps other industrialized countries) but largely unrecognized due to no media attention being given to the movement is the "Voluntary Simplicity Movement.http://www.simpleliving.net/main/
This a movement in which large number of people are dropping out of the conventionally-employed society and are adopting simpler lifestyles, many starting their own businesses and working out of their homes. A motto of this movement is:
"How you spend your money is how you vote on what exists in the world."
and I consider myself to be a member of this movement as are some of the people in this community.People in the VS movement are followers of both Duane Elgin, who wrote a book by the same name, and of Vicki Robbins, one of the authors of the book: "Your Money or Your Life,".which is about living frugally in order to have more happiness and less stress in one's life. And, of course, VSers do not have a religious belief system as do the Amish, but are nevertheless consciously responsible people who might be consideed to be "free thinkers'". An article on Simple Living by Duane Elgin may be found here: http://www.simpleliving.net/content/custom_garden_of_simplicity.asp
One of the things leading to the employment dilemna is that in a time when entrepreneurial skills are in high demand in order to become self-employed, education is still mainly directed toward obtaining a corporate job or work in the service sector at a time when both of these sectors are in decline.
Another factor is that more people are simply living longer lives and are dependent upon retirement plans and social security to get them through the "Golden Years." Where social security is set up in such a way that all money paid into the plan is paid out in 3.5 years, many recipients are living as long as 15 to 20 years or more after the legal retirement age of 65, although early retirement is permitted at age 62. And, since these retirement funds have not been invested, but borrowed by the government in order to finance wars, the fund has difficulty keeping up with pay-outs. In addition, due to the Baby-Boom here in the U.S., we currently have a large number of people who will become dependent upon the system in the coming decade -- people who will be making huge demands up Medicare programs to answer their health needs.
And, as exposed by Dr. Kenneth Dychtwald in his book: Age Power, there is no way that the present medical system can provide for all of the needs of the number of people who will be needing medical care in the coming years. The American Diabetic Association itself has said that due to the number of diabetics alone that will be requiring care, the system would crash under this demand, let alone the demands of others for long term care, e.g., heart and cancer patients, and those suffering from Parkinsons's Disease, etc. According to Dychtwald, this factor alone could be severe enough to cause the U.S. economy to crash and pull the rest of the world down with it. It appears that Univesal Health care is not the answer -- especially when we consider the statistics given us by Bruce Lipton on the number of deaths annually caused by the medical profession itself. The only viable option is to swing into a "preventive health care program" with those not participating voluntarily being taxed at a higher rate for non-complicity and thus causing others to be unfairly burdened with the expenses of long term care.
This is not a simple situation but one in which complexities abound -- just adjusting the debt-based monetary system
is not the answer. Overall, going to local currencies appears to be the most viable answer in the interim as this would provide equitably for the greatest number of people while at the same time protecting the planet from further exploitation from competitive investors.
Returning the land to the people for permaculture use, so that all may be fed is a viable option, but how to divest the large agri-businesses of their large land holdings in order to do so is another question
And, putting the geni back in the bottle of advances in technology is not easily accomplished either. It may well be that global climate change is the only thing forceful enough to create the mega changes the human family must make in order to continue life on Earth.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the poverty-stricken and those in search of a mission continue to volunteer to fight in the horrors of wars, and take their risks there, as job opportunites diminish by the day, and they somehow must find a way to make a living, even though it be for a bogus cause.
with love and in gratitude for all that we do together, this certainly is not easy and we all need to commend ourselves for our participation.
mary rose
We must be the change we wish to see in our lives. M Gandhi
. . .
algae5636 at aol.com wrote:
Capitalism per se is the direct descendant of colonialism, and like its parent is inherently exploitative. No "capitalist" country has ever been a successful stand-alone economic system.
The US practice of fostering "banana republics" is a classic example of a "capitalist" economy deliberately setting up other countries to operate monopolistically-- non-competitively-- as parts of its economic base. NAFTA is much the same. Asking developing countries to allow "foreign competition" is like requiring little leaguers to play the NFL.
"Level playiang fields" favor the biggest, baddest players, and steamrollers. To capitalism, the "appropriate use of technology" is to use it to win-- not to compete, nor to cooperate.
Regards,
Al J
-----Original Message-----
From: ecotort at gn.apc.org
Sent: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 3:24 am
Subject: "Capitalism" and "Appropriate use of Technology"
>capitalism could help many things including
> environmentalism
Unlawful abuse of "virtual" money/capital is not (necessarily) to be confused with capitalism....
....when the "True Cost" of an item or service is reflected in it's "virtual monetary cost" there will be green capitalism...
-people competing (and co-operating!) with one-another to benefit the whole world environment.....
>We need to seriously consider what is "appropriate technology"
"Appropriate Technology" or "Permaculture" could be expanded into "The appropriate use of Technology for the benefit of Humankind, as intended by its Inventors".
This may be done under the Duty of Care, (which is a potentially Appropriate Technology...) through using the Law to invoke a state of emergency for the environment., money is no object...(which may be an Appropriate USE of Capital Technology)
Jack Lancaster wrote:
mary rose <maryrose333 at att.net> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "robert searle"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 12:01 PM
Subject: [GJM] THE NEW ECONOMY.
>
> Dear All,
>
> By chance I came across a magazine entitled The New Economy which
> seems to show how capitalism could help many things including
> environmentalism. There is a wikipedia account about this "new" term not
> ofcourse to be confused with the New Economics Foundation ofcourse!!
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economy
>
>
> The link to the magazine (somewhat glossy) is..
>
>
> http://www.neweconomymagazine.com/
Robert, I Googled this site, and found an interesting
article on making oil out of bug excrement from a
link from New Economy to the online Times.
>From The TimesJune 14, 2008
Scientists find bugs that eat waste and excrete petrol
Silicon Valley is experimenting with bacteria that have been genetically
altered to provide 'renewable petroleum'
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece
Thanks a lot for this link, the mag is too glitzy for me, but it will
titillate the interest of many.
One of the things about glitz is that it is too often directed toward the
promotion of products
and services which belong to the era of modernity, but are promoted as being
"green," like
the Nova town concept in Las Vegas. The past is an era which we have found
to be filled
with "tech items" that can't and don't fill the hole where soul use to
reside. And the result
of too much emphasis on tech has been dissociation. Somehow we need to
integrate the
basic qualities of life that provided us with soul with the emergent
qualities that give us
greater power in the world so that we have balance. .
We need to seriously consider what is "appropriate technology" before we
even get to the
design stage to ensure that it is also infused with soul as well as being a
useful tool. We
need to consider whether robots on an assembly line are really producing the
equal of
hand-crafted quality items created with love. Do we want quantity or
quality? .
IMHO,
With love and in gratitude for all that you do, Robert, and all that we do
together. .
mary rose
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news, & more!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://globaljusticemovement.net/pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20080618/0b0aa145/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Discussion
mailing list