| Moderated by: Joe Kelley | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Joe Kelley Administrator
|
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/rallo2.html Socialism was once a rose like this: http://classicalliberalism.blogspot.com/2006/04/science-of-society-no_10.html Defined as: What remains to be done, then, for wise men, is clearly this: to attempt to penetrate the future by investigating the past and the present to ascertain whether there be no elements of calculation capable of fixing with tolerable certainty the precise point in the sidereal heavens of human destiny toward which our whole system is confessedly verging with accelerated velocity. To penetrate the gloom which encircles the orbit of our future progression might, at least, end the torture of suspense, even to those who may be least content with the nature of the solution. “If,” says Carlyle again, “the accused nightmare that is crushing out the life of us and ours would take a shape, approach us like the Hyrcanian tiger, the Behemoth of Caos, or the Archfiend himself,--in any shape that we could see and fasten on,--a man can have himself shot with cheerfulness, but it needs that he shall clearly see for what.” There is more to it of course. One would have to read and add. Observe and deduct Test for validity Observe and deduct The process is called science. There is a method. The Science of Society, in fact, was a synonym for Socialism. Now I think there is a generic term for The Science of Society, or socialism, and that new term is called Economics. The rose: What's in a name? That which we call a rose http://www.enotes.com/shakespeare-quotes/what-s-name-which-we-call-rose The Economics professors tend to claim that Economics is an objective science. The real funny part is that they are apt to begin their objective science based upon a value principle. I'd call that subjectivism from the start. I'm not sure. The proof is in the pudding. The real question, the one that science is supposed to help answer, goes like this: To be, or not to be: that is the question: http://www.artofeurope.com/shakespeare/sha8.htm The smart guys appear to know what the real question is and also they appear to understand the the real answer is an INDIVIDUAL answer. Individuals are subjective beings. It may be a good idea to keep that in mind. On to the Rose offered by one individual who apparently doesn't understand the term socialism (before it became synonymous with evil) P.S. I wonder why that obfuscation occurred? On to the Rose: Followign the NEF’s egalitarian argument, we could also say that in case that some people consume 5000 calories per day, those who just consume 1500 should be close to starving to death. A calorie is a measurement of something. I like going here to find out things about measurements: http://www.onlineconversion.com/ Calories falls under the category: Energy. Anyone seeking to apply science to society may wish to get on the same page concerning how to measure economy. The calorie is pretty good. Let's see if the calorie converts to currency. I looked. Calories are not listed under Power at that site on that site's first page. Here is what I mean: Watts, BTU/hour, foot-lbs/second, Horsepower, kilowatts, More... Power is currency. Power is mass, motion, and the transfer of one form of energy into another form of energy or "work". Time must be included in the calculation. Like: how much time does it take to pay off my mortgage or how much time does it take a despot to fleece the flock. Here is Energy: Joules, Btu, calories, electronvolt, erg, watt hour, therm, toe, tce, More... Calories won't work if the idea is to get all those complicated calculations so favored by the professors into something a simple minded person like me can understand without having to spend years in the effort. Time One more thing: Dyne, gram-force, poundals, newtons, pounds, kgm-force, More... The leading contenders for a standard measure of economic value, in my estimate, are Watts, Joules, or Newtons. If the question is: How many BLANK does it take to screw in a light bulb? One might choose to fill in the blank with "Austrian Economists" and I'd have a joke on my hands. I like Watts because that is already a very common measurement in economic circles (were the real economy thrives). I'm thinking usable energy. Like human brains directing human hands only a little more up to date. Why work so hard when a machine can do almost all the work automatically? The Watt however is limited to Electricity. Favoring that unit of measure, a prejudice for it, may cause more trouble when the Electricians try to exchange with the transporters, producers, buyers, and sellers. Not to mention the workers. Oh, I forgot again, damn falsehood creeps in if you are not vigilant, we are all workers even the thieves. We all burn calories. The Joule, unlike the Watt, is missing the factor of time. Like this: As a rough guide, 1 joule is the absolute minimum amount of energy required (on the surface of Earth) to lift a one kilogram object up by a height of 10 centimetres.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joule http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watt
Now, the professors, the ones that I have read, will point out something very important concerning the economy. Too see this important stuff it helps to open the mind up to the very remote possibility that the human species doesn’t quite have everything all figured out yet. It also helps to add oneself to the category: Human species. That opens the mind up some; sometimes - depending upon the individual. The Joule has no time factor. The Watt has a time factor. The Newton has two time factors. I choose the Newton because it gathers up just about all the information needed in the endeavor to answer the question as human beings look at the rose. How many Newtons does it take to screw in a light bulb? That may appear to be a silly question. What if your life depended upon an accurate answer? What if your business could run just a little more efficiently if the answer was a little more accurate? Then: what if the more accurate answer managed to convert well to any other answer on the planet? Less fighting over the answer is my answer. I'm not a “professor” of economics. The quotation marks are used to highlight the fact that I do not have a “title” other than INDIVIDUAL. That “INDIVIDUAL” is the limit of my title like “human being”. That reminds me of something that I wish to revisit: http://www.thirdamendment.com/missing.html Now that is amazing and it measures something very important. When I first read about The Missing Thirteenth Ammendment it was buried in the annals of forgoten history. Now I simply Google. "If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them. I am wandering off topic some. However my main goal remains free from restriction of any sort so the progress is bound to be somewhat unconventional. Read this: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0839807937/002-7716953-7584837?v=glance&n=283155 That one is not "Open Source" and printed on-line to peruse at one's leisure quickly by simply performing a Google search, clicking the mouse, and opening one's mind to vigilent, critical, calculation. The book arrives in the mail. "Title" or "Franchise", whatever, I do not have any of that 'capital'. I have something better - an open mind subject to crtiical calculation internally. I am, so far, my own best critic. None the less: The Newton can convert just about anything having to do with anything and it is therefore a good candidate for economic/political critical analysis and scientific application. A request: If anyone reading this, I know it is a stretch of the imagination, would like to invest in Power-Independence, then, please consider doing me a favor. I need an html code that can produce an image for the web page. On the top of the image is this word: ECONOMY It needs to be a darker green. ECONOMY Directly under the dark green word is a thin blue line. Below the thin blue line is a red word: POLITIC The image will look like a mathematical fraction or 'division'. Economic/Politic "Economy" goes on top. It is the stuff that is divided up. Like people being forced onto the "trail of tears". There have been many. Some people do the marching and some people do the prodding. The thin blue line is the symbol for division. It is what separates the Economy from the Politic. It goes by man names I'll call it human conscience. Some peole call it the police. The Politic, in red, is 'the common denominator' and it usually is 'the least common denominator' i.e. either falsehood or violence or both. The least common denominator can be a noising kid in school or the bully. The image requested is dynamic. The red word starts out small in size and expands as time goes by. As the Politic grows larger the Economy shrinks. The image goes through cycles; Economy starts out big and the Politic is small. The Economy shrinks as the Politic grows. Soon they are even, then, the Politic is larger. The Politic grows larger than the economy. Eventually the Politic is much larger than the Economy. Then the Politic reaches the maximum size while the Economy is at a minimum. Then the Politic starts to shrink again, and, at the same time the Economy grows. The cycle repeats. That is a base formula. Based upon an Economic/Politic spectrum. On the far left is death to all human beings. On the far right is Maximum Prosperity. The static spectrum is not static. It is dynamic. It includes something called time. It is more than motion. It accelerates. The image requested also changes rate of change. In other words from the start, when the Economy is largest - the rate of change is slow. The economy shrinks slowly as the Politic grows just as slowly. As time goes by - the Economy shrinks faster and faster as the Politic grows faster and faster. The rate of change is subtle yet noticeable. At the peak of overgrown Politic, when the Economy is smallest, the cycle reverses and, again, the rate of change starts out slow. And agan the rate of change increases faster and faster. The image includes a changing thin blue line. The thin blue line starts out very large and thick when the Economy is largest and the Politic is smallest. It is healthy and powerful at the prosperity extreme. It shrinks as the cycle progresses toward Despotism, destruction, torture, murder, rape, and DEATH. The image requested can be edited for different word groups like: Liberty/Despotism Wisdom/Falsehood The thin blue line remains as conscience. The image does one more thing. The image blows up. The image cycles for 10 times and varies as to the peaks at each end. On the tenth time the cycle explodes at a very large peak when the economy is smallest, ever, and the politic is largest ever. More is requested. The image also recreates iteself. Not in the same place. The image appears somewhere else on the page. It does this randomly. How does one program radomly? Us a clock and a human key stroke. Whatever. When the new image appears the cycles start over again. This time the colors change. It must be random as to rates and peaks. What is not random is the relationship. The economy grows as the politic shrinks and it does so in direct proportion. So does the thin blue line, the concience, it shrinks as the politic grows. I won't hold my breath. That image would be nice. Here is one that works pretty well already: http://prisonersdilemma.groenefee.nl/ |
|||||||||||
