Re: Asimov Site

[pausch@saafNOSPAM.se (Paul Schlyter)]

In article <39AB50EC.A438EC4E@inetnebr.com>,
Roy and/or Janet Miller  <millers@inetnebr.com> wrote:
 
> Paul Schlyter wrote:
> 
>> In article <ovkq5.75185$rd1.13134486@typhoon-news1.southeast.rr.com>,
>> **** **** <***@***.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> What is corporatism? Where does it prevail? How, if at all, does it bear
>>>> upon capitalism? Please supply facts and sources.
>>>
>>> Ah. Nice way to change the subject. You see the flaws in capitalism, but
>>> rather than acknowledge anything I say, you simply ignore that I said it.
>>
>> Well, Roy always seems to be defending "his" system,
> 
> As any idiot would know, it isn't "my" system, but it is the system, greatly
> modified and distorted, used in the country which is my home,
 
Well, since you defend that system despite it's lack of freedom t0o
move around, you've made it "your" system.
 
 
> and frankly, I like it better than yours Paul.
 
Yes, I've understood that you don't enjoy moving around.
 
 
>> with flaws, rather tha acknowledging the benefits other systems may have.
> 
> When one has been attacked, they do not normally start applauding the attacker.
> but since Sweden has a long history of being an aggressor nation in Europe,
 
<BIG LAUGH>
 
How many wars did YOUR country involve itself in during the last 160 years?
 
THINK before you post, will you?  Our "long history" as an "aggressor nation"
in Europe ended more than 250 years ago, before your country even existed.
It ended when our king of that time, Karl XII, was defeated by Russia and
then shot to death, probably by one of his own people.
 
 
> perhaps Paul doesn't have the experience to know what it like to be attacked.
 
If you automatically view a disagreement as an "attack", and start to
invoke Swedish kings who acted like dictators some 300 years ago just
because of that, I think you have a problem.
 
 
>> Read
>> his response to my description of our "everybody's right", which
>> enables people to freely walk around as long as they don't destroy
>> and don't disturb.  Roy pointed out that this freedom to move around
>> has its restrictions because one isn't allowed to destroy or disturb
> 
> I believe you are referring to someone else's post. I just double checked, and I
> don't see any response that I have made to your comments on that issue. Midnight
> sun in your eyes? I have noticed however that you have a real streak of hatred
> toward the United States. Hatred isn't a positive value.
 
I don't have any "hatred" towards the US, but I don't unconditionally
admire it either.  It has its good as well as its bad sides - all
countries have their good and their bad sides.  Also, countries which
are superpowers of their time often tend to act in arrogant ways.
This applied to Sweden some 300 years ago, and it applies to the US
today.  As usual, power corrupts.
 
 
>> (which of course is correct, but it appeared he thought of it as a
>> disadantage rather than mutual care), and then he concluded that he
>> preferred to remain on his own land
> 
> Land, in English has more than one meaning. I do prefer my land, that
> is, my country, to any other that I know of. There is more freedom here,
> as I value it, than in any other country.
 
You're not referring to the freedom to hike out in the woods, are you?   <g>
 
 
> The sad thing is that it is gradually being taking away, as government
> takes more and more control of our lives, to protect us from ourselves,
> as though we were children.
 
Are you here referring to efforts towards increased gun ownership control?
Yep, it's indeed terrible to not have the freedom to shoot your fellow
human beings.....  <g>
 
 
>> and everyone else should remin on
>> theirs (a thought: many people don't have any land of their own --
>> where should they go?).  He didn't claim his system, was the ultimate
>> "freedom" though....
>>
>>> Corporatism could be said to be the extreme of capitalism, as Stalinism
>>> could be said to be the extreme of Marxism. In the most specific sense,
>>> corporatism is the philosophy that not only should the law allow business
>>> entities with no individual accountability, but that these same
>>> corporations are in some way arbitrarily superior to any other citizen. That
>>> these corporations have unwritten privileges to negotiate their own taxes,
>>> and an open door to the legislature that few citizens enjoy. Guess these
>>> aren't facts though. Well, blind or stupid, you'll still hurt as much as the
>>> rest of us. That kinda makes me feel better.
>>
>> I.e. it's just an example of "...money is justice..."
>>
>>>> 1. I don't think that capitalism "sucks", but some capitalists are rather
>>>> nasty people
>>>
>>> Ah. The idea that all things exist to be bought and sold, is ok with you.
>>> Even though it means people also, and discovered land whether or not there
>>> are indigenous people on it (they are just another resource to be exploited
>>> on said land anyway!). No, not "some" capitalists, MANY capitalists are
>>> nasty people. A large minority at least, and that is being generous.
>>
>> Perhaps Capitalism tranforms people to become like that?  Give any nice
>> ordinary fellow a very large amount of money, and watch him transform into
>> something else....
> 
> LOL, hey Paul, I've got news for you big boy, there are millions of capitalists in
> America,
 
There OUGHT TO be, in a country with 200+ million people and
Capitalism as its primary political system -- oughtn't it?
 
Likewise there are millions of Communists in Russia.  Yes, they are
still there: after some 10 years of savage Russian Capitalism, they
want the old system back.  It's understandable, because to them life
was better back then.  That's also why Michail Gorbachev, who became
quite popular in the west, isn't popular at all in Russia.
 
 
> and few of them have a very large amount of money. A capitalist is someone with
> capital,
 
Does that make the beggar who just got a few dimes a Capitalist?
He does indeed have a capital, even if it's quite small....
 
 
> and believes in investing it. Like people who open computer stores, or shoe
> repair shops, or who have an IRA or 401K that is invested in securities.
> They are all capitalists.
 
Not necessarily -- but if they mamage to get their stores into the stock market,
they become capitalists of course.
 
A capitalist isn't anyone who makes money on their own work.  The term "capitalist"
is somewhat fuzzy, but has at least two different meanings:
 
1. Capitalist - someone who supports Capitalism as a political system.
 
2. Capitalist - someone who has capital and invests it with the purpose to get
   still more capital.
 
 
> And in this country, the truly wonderful thing is that that is spreading.
 
Spreading WHERE?   Isn't it already around everywhere?
 
 
> Oh, in America
 
Where in America?  North America, Central America or South America?
 
This is one example of US arrogance: they call their country
"America", as if the other countries in America (like Canada, Mexico,
Brazil, Argentina, Peru, etc) just didn't matter.  True, the US is
the American country with the largest population.  Now suppose that
the European country with the largest population, Russia, started to
call itself "Europe" - what would you think about that?  Wouldn't you
consider that an arrogant behaviour by the Russians?
 
 
> Paul, the percentage of the population that owns it's own home (land) is at
> an all time high. I suspect that countries where the percentage is low are
> countries with differing economic systems.
 
....or countries which offers an alternative.  It's not necessary to own the
land you live on -- owning it has both advantages and disadvantages.  I own
a (small) piece of land too, so I know...
 
 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter,  Swedish Amateur Astronomer's Society (SAAF)
Grev Turegatan 40,  S-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se   or    paul.schlyter at ausys dot se
WWW:     http://hotel04.ausys.se/pausch    http://welcome.to/pausch