.
As I play with new information gadgets, I'm awestruck by the fast approach of the Brave New World. Many Americans thought we were going to become the service, high tech, information economy. Well, with some of these gadgets, one wonders what high tech industry is going to be needed, apart from the Cloud. And much of the service for it seems to be moving outside America. There doesn't seem as much use now for theaters, newspapers, magazines, books, libraries, TV's, cable TV services, video rental services. We'll be so saturated with entertainment, who will have time for sex, drugs, rock and roll, procreation, killing trees, or despoiling the envirionment? Will population and environmental problems be solved by the Cloud, no big sacrifices needed? Once the Cloud suffuses all, will despots, fearful of losing their own access to entertainment devices, decline war adventures that would entail magnetic pulse bursts and satellite attacks? Once most people are satiated with entertainment and diversions, who will remain interested in liberty? No doubt, much of coming fights for power will center around how to monopolize the Cloud for purposes of filling minds with soothing propaganda and diversions. Who will want that job? Who's thinking ahead about coming consequences and the kinds of less foreseeable conflicts that will arise? Once access to most needs for diversions can be met with machines and devices, how will variations in wealth for that access continue to be based on merit, as decided by any fair or decent marketplace? Up to now, no machine or computer could allow a central despot efficiently to divide and incentive labor.
.
By what legitimate means can civilization avail ways for spreading disposable monies in order to incentive excellence, apart from crony-market-based incentives of wealth, power, and ostentatious opinion leaders? Can civilization find legitimate and effective means to disperse a safety net for its least foresightful and most addicted and ignorant, while still fairly financing excellence, such as in charities, humanities, literature, fashions, arts, crafts, hobbies, sports, hiking, contests, gardening, husbandry, medicine, science, and inventions? Even as one who despises central rule that confounds liberty, I have to ask: Is the rush to centralized rule under moralists, elites, or despots becoming unavoidable? Set aside all Isms and ask: As populations and productions derivative of liberty run up against sustainability, where should the responsibility or burden lie to restore sustainable balance: with the caring foresight of moralists, the cliff racing of elitists, or the indifferent market incentives of the jungle? How, in logic based empiricism or innate empathy, should the law of society balance sustainability against markets that are so often based more in cronyism than in merit?
.By what legitimate means can civilization avail ways for spreading disposable monies in order to incentive excellence, apart from crony-market-based incentives of wealth, power, and ostentatious opinion leaders? Can civilization find legitimate and effective means to disperse a safety net for its least foresightful and most addicted and ignorant, while still fairly financing excellence, such as in charities, humanities, literature, fashions, arts, crafts, hobbies, sports, hiking, contests, gardening, husbandry, medicine, science, and inventions? Even as one who despises central rule that confounds liberty, I have to ask: Is the rush to centralized rule under moralists, elites, or despots becoming unavoidable? Set aside all Isms and ask: As populations and productions derivative of liberty run up against sustainability, where should the responsibility or burden lie to restore sustainable balance: with the caring foresight of moralists, the cliff racing of elitists, or the indifferent market incentives of the jungle? How, in logic based empiricism or innate empathy, should the law of society balance sustainability against markets that are so often based more in cronyism than in merit?
5 comments:
.
As I play with new information gadgets, I'm awestruck by the fast approach of the Brave New World. Americans thought we would become the service, high-tech, information-economy. Well, with these gadgets, one wonders what high-tech industry will be needed, apart from the Cloud. Service for the Cloud is moving outside America. Who will much need theaters, newspapers, magazines, books, libraries, TV's, cable TV services, video-rental services? Saturated with entertainment, who'll have time for sex, drugs, rock-and-roll, procreation, killing trees, or despoiling the envirionment? Will population-environmental problems be solved by The Cloud, no big sacrifices needed? Once The Cloud suffices, will despots, fearful of losing their own entertainments, decline adventures with magnetic pulse bursts and satellite attacks? Once most are satiated with diversions, who'll remain interested in liberty?
.
Coming fights will concern how to monopolize the Cloud for indenturing minds with propaganda and diversions. Who'll want that job? Who's thinking ahead about foreseeable conflicts? Once needs for diversions are met with machines and devices, how'll wealth for access be based on merit, as decided by any fair or decent marketplace? Up to now, no computer could allow a central despot efficiently to divide and incentive labor.
.
Apart from crony-or-lottery-based-markets, can civilization avail ways for spreading disposable monies in order to incentive excellence? Apart from incentiving wealth, power, and ostentatious-opinion-leaders? By what means will a safety net be availed for the least foresightful, most ignorant, and addicted, while still fairly financing excellence? Even as one who despises central rules that too often confound liberty, I have to ask: Is more centralized rule under moralists, elitists, or despots becoming unavoidable? Set aside all Isms. Ask: As populations and productions derivative of liberty run up against sustainability, where should the responsibility or burden lie to restore sustainable balance: with caring foresight of moralists, cliff racing of elitists, or indifferent market incentives of the jungle? How, in logic-based-empiricism or innate-empathy, should the law-of-society balance sustainability against markets that are so often based more in cronyism and lotteries than in merit?
.
Bottom-line: Gadgets will soon be powerful enough to facilitate extreme cornyism under any Ism.
.
Gotta wonder how often it's not even the investor's (excuse me, contributor's) money. More like a rigged roulete wheel, where you can regularly hedge on both black and red and still win. Or a shell game, where the contributions are formally made by the contributors, but really paid by the citizens (in government pay-to-play kickbacks). To play well, all one needs to be is a really crooked and disloyal elitist. Rev. Wright only damned America; Elitists want to cannibalize America. McCain-Feingold did not show a way to fix this. Now, the game has caught on internationally. So America is being cannibalized and rotted out by foreigners, operating from within. If Americans want to preserve liberty at home, we will have to centralize some kind of control over corporations, in order to stop the international sell out of our country's resources and governance. Our trade borders are far more inviting to dangerous despots bent on cannibalizing us than are our porous territorial borders. We're going to have to apply intelligent central controls in order to avoid despotic central controls. Otherwise, we may as well resign to being eaten alive. We need not give up liberty to acquire security, but we do need to give up anarchic cronyism to preserve a nation. Unfortunately, too many people become permanently biased against the use of a form once they have been burned by its overuse. A person injured on a highway may forever be traumatized against highways. Or eugenics, leech blood letting, poll taxes. Or even representative governance and capitalism. Thinking people deploy comprehensive checks and balances to establish parameters for reasoned, decent use of most forms. Arbitrarily foregoing all poll taxes for voting will soon vote us into despotism, for which voting will thereafter become irrelevant.
We need reasoned controls to ensure voting rights are restricted to an informed base that is loyal to the fundamental American value of individual liberty. If the common goal is liberty, and if we're to keep some kind of progressive tax to protect against aristocracy, then the quid pro quo should be this: He or she who does not pay into that progressive tax (whether based on income or consumption) does not vote --- except upon paying a poll tax. Corporations ought not pay income taxes, but neither should they be allowed to make political contributions. Individuals should pay taxes, but should not be allowed to deduct political contributions. Political contributions ought to be progressively taxed as a form of consumption. All political contributions should be transparent. Tax immune foundations and charities for the general public ought not be owned, but instead run by officers elected by a membership that is open to the public upon payment of non-exorbitant dues. Charities that are found officially to engage in political speech of any kind ought to lose tax exempt status during the tax year. Charities should not be allowed to organize in corporate form. Exposure to personal injury tort liability should be limited. America is groaning under weight of accumulated deficits in vision. We need a voting base that can think comprehensively and intelligently.
Soon, there will be generic fire walls on the cloud that will be accessible only to different layers and levels of elites. For hire hackers will take on new flavors. Different groups, cults, and gangs will play defense and offense, preserving and exploiting firewalls and capacities to weaken or even eliminate entire levels of cloud use. Users will be required to sign on with two way cameras verifying identity based on thumbprints and retina pictures and verifying need to know based on current situational contexts. People left without means of cloud communication will be one step removed from social collapse into barbarism. People of foresight and means will have shelters provisioned with essentials: water, rations, seeds, arms, ammo, gold, maps, books.
From A.T. -- Re: "we could mandate that private funds may be used for political campaigns, but that they be donated to a pool, which is then split equally among the candidates to be added to the amount funded by the public"
.
I like the idea, but it doesn't resolve the problem of funders paying directly to broadcast their support when it's not directly coordinated through the candidate. We would still have the three-way graft of wink-wink-nod kickbacks. Expenditures on political messages ought not be allowed by corporations, and they ought not be deductible when made by individuals. Still, there's no air-tight solution. Corporations would still advertise their wares, sometimes consistent with conservative philosophy, sometimes not, sometimes for oil or energy production, sometimes to justify moving jobs overseas, usually at times and places calculated to tip voters. We'll never corral all the black sheep, but we can't afford just to ignore them, either.
Newt, Mitt, and Paul. It's not going to be Paul. Unfortunately, Cain's a goner. There's a point to bashing Newt and Mitt. It toughens them up. After awhile, though, things settle down. Any of the Republicans would improve the job picture better than Obama. But no one's going to return us to full employment. Many unskilled jobs are going to machines. Most graduates don't have skills for high tech jobs. High tech jobs are being consolidated. No one is going to advocate letting people die of hunger or exposure. So the safety net will have to be expanded, making it decent, without making it attractive or permanently indenturing. The electorate is not able to perform that degree of fine tuning. Elites will not perform it without a good deal of corruption. Some way of spreading a safety net will have to be found short of government printing millions to give to poor people and billions to kick back to international cronies. This will be impossible if government fails to rein in militant atheists. Church charities need to be encouraged. Crony, secular charities tend to be fronts for crony control and indoctrination. Church charities will need to stop discouraging attempts to slow third world population growth. Economists will need to fashion models for declining production, jobs, and populations. A responsible economy cannot be based on a never ending pyramid of what is labeled as "growth." Show responsible people a more sustainable vision, but don't regiment it with know-it-all government bureaucrats. The new ethos needs to be about people learning to live within their means. It's time for the American middle class, as Americans, to move beyond phony labels and crony party shibboleths, towards asserting common sense and adult supervision. This will necessitate taking some toys away from wannabe Rino aristocrats and fellow traveling Dino dopers. Bottom line: No rigid tactic is going to rescue America. More important than inane tags about flip-flopping, we need a smart, capable leader, who loves America, appreciates history, and understands economics.
Post a Comment