Fw: [Peace-discuss] socializing an industry -- good but also bad
E. Wayne Johnson
ewj at pigs.ag
Thu Dec 11 00:19:08 CST 2008
It's really a lot of leaping to a lot of conclusions about what you
think that I really think. :-)
But a lively discussion is good.
You don't seem to be attacking any my points other than the one about
prisoners.
Oh, and maybe whether or not China is better off now than in the '60s,
'70s, '80s, or '90s.
I do believe that able-bodied persons who are imprisoned should work for
their keep rather than have
the full burden of their provisioning placed on the backs of those not
incarcerated. It seems to me to be
more immoral and unfair to have them waste their lives in incarceration
than it to impress them into
productive service. I do think that we have too many people uselessly
and meaninglessly
imprisoned in this country wasting their useless and meaningless lives
and I suspect that the majority of them should be freed.
I am persuaded that we are all too quick to incarcerate in this country
and the incarceration
does little to provide the "Corrections" that are advertised by that
peculiar line of business.
*
So you haven't you been to China. Where do you get your information?
Do you have any idea what IS the cost of health care in China? What do
the Chinese pay for college tuition?
Does the US of A jail its dissidents? Does it torture them? Does it
murder them?
Do we jail journalists?
*
Seriously, what business is it of yours what China does with its
prisoners and dissidents, particularly
since your own country (of which you are a citizen, one of the WE in the
"we the people") treats its
prisoners and dissidents so shabbily and deceitfully and horribly?
It seems to me that your morality on the issue is relative and related
to your concern about American workers
not anything that is happening to the 1,300,000,000 souls in the PRC.
Where is the morality in material wealth?
The good do not have a lot. Those who have a lot are not good.
It seems that your main concern about China is that the American worker
with infinite wants and needs
is upset and obsessed with the fact that Chinese worker, who can
tolerate some hardships with joy,
is outcompeting the US in manufacturing. Why is that?
*
On to your liberatarianism.
Ok, so you believe in social liberties. What about economic liberties?
Why shouldnt American workers have the freedom to go out on their own
and start a shop applying their own ideas and knowledge? Should workers
just wait
for their employers to leave these non-competitive blighted
regulation-stricken lawyer-ridden environs and ask the
nannystate for more bailouts? Your American workers are not indentured
servants. They
can leave any time they would like to do so.
I still have to work for a living too. There's nothing wrong with that.
While you're at it, please explain how personal responsibility
(dog-eat-dog as you put it)
destroys the Common Good. I see it as we all should help bear the burdens
of others, particularly those in need, but in the final analysis every
man will bear his own burden
in some fashion.
Wayne
unionyes wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* unionyes <mailto:unionyes at ameritech.net>
> *To:* E. Wayne Johnson <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2008 11:04 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] socializing an industry -- good but
> also bad
>
> Well,
>
> Obviously you are not aware of all of the riots and labor unrest in
> China in the last several years. This is WELL documented.
> Or the fact that Chinese workers cannot get access to health care or
> even education for their children without paying for it. Not to
> mention the jailing and murdering of political dissidents by the
> government.
> That is NOT progress !
>
> And yes, I do have a problem with prison SLAVE Labor, especially when
> it puts American workers out of a job and trans-national corporations
> profit from it.
> This system is what existed in NAZI GERMANY.
>
> I also have Libertarian beliefs, HOWEVER, mine are social Libertarian
> beliefs, that is, that the State should not interfere in people's
> privacy and personal liberties ( ie. drug use, prostitution, gambling,
> etc. ).
> But the Libertarian " principles " you seem to advocate are basicly a
> " dog eat dog " economic model that does nothing to help and in fact
> destroys the Common Good.
> In other words ; " I have mine, fuck the rest of you " !
>
> David Johnson
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* E. Wayne Johnson <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>
> *To:* unionyes <mailto:unionyes at ameritech.net>
> *Cc:* Peace-discuss List <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:55 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] socializing an industry -- good but
> also bad
>
> "Jing di wa."
>
> I have spent a fair amount of time walking down dirt roads in
> China and in its cities working and
> living just like the Chinese do, to the point that some of them
> were thinking that was sort of Chinese minority
> from Xinjiang rather than a "lao wai" or "guillou".
> There is no doubt that the Chinese people are better off than they
> used to be.
> (I do have a resident expert here at home that I can consult on this.)
> Hardly any of the Chinese think that they are working for "The
> Man", but rather generally enjoy
> their work. Work really is more fun than fun, you know.
>
> I would not say that the Chinese are insecure. Their government
> does not send itself around
> the world in search of new monsters to thwart, and therefore their
> people have no
> reason to fear blowback from the evil deeds of its military as we do.
>
> I am not sure why it is that the use of labour in Chinese prisons
> is held up as evil
> while here we spend thousands of dollars per head to incarcerate
> people who sit around
> and do not much of anything that is productive as far as I know.
> The US has by far
> the largest prison population in the world and the highest
> incarceration rate per capita.
> I don't find any occasion for us to be throwing rocks at what
> China does prisoner-wise.
>
> *
> In 1989 I was told that manufacturing ("Widgets" they called it)
> was "dead" in Illinois, and that there was
> a near zero chance of getting an operating loan for a new
> manufacturing facility in Illinois
> that a group of farmers here wanted to start. Seeing how that
> Agriculture is the
> the largest business sector in the state of Illinois and how it is
> that our Agriculture is
> still competitive world-wide, it might have done the Illinois
> bureaucrats well to encourage
> farmers to run a factory....
>
> *
> I am not sure that I would dare to say that Social Security is
> working considering the gaping hole
> that the program has. It is a bit like those cartoons where the
> character runs off the cliff
> and then notices that there is nothing below him but air. I dont
> think that the administration
> is going to run back to terra firma on thin air like Bugs Bunny,
> no matter how hard they
> try to fill the money hole by running the "printing machine".
>
> Government ownership is not quite so much a problem of tyranny as
> it is stupidity, but I
> would also agree that large corporations are oft bureaucratic and
> stoopid too which is
> why when they get to that point on the Sigmoid curve, we just need
> to let them die.
>
> *
>
> A lot of the problem of import and export and US jobs is due to
> the currency
> exchange rate. In the year 2000, 1 (one) RMB yuan would buy as
> much or more in China
> as 1 (one) US dollar would buy in ChampaignUrbana. But one could
> take that
> same US dollar and exchange it for 8.26 yuan at the Bank of China
> and perhaps
> 10 yuan on the "grey" market. So in real economic terms, the RMB
> was greatly undervalued
> relative to the US dollar, and it should be easy to understand why
> goods would flow
> in the direction of the higher valued (and overvalued) American
> currency.
> *
>
> The health care system in the US is dependent upon government
> regulations to stymie competition.
> Americans think they need insurance what they really need is "good
> health". Big difference. I am not sure where
> you start because I am pretty sure that most of the folks
> entrained into the system are quite unwilling to listen
> any more. They dont even respond when you wave the truth in front
> of them, they just keep marching,
> that is if you dont offend them to the point that they kick you.
>
> *
>> *the bottom line that I believe we all can agree on is that
>> citizens in this country and in most places around the world have
>> lost control of their governments.*
> *Absolutely!
>
> ...and the only thing that they are going to understand is if the
> people of this country hit the government
> where it hurts, which is in the pocketbook. Write letters, carry
> signs, make t-shirts and bumperstickers,
> vote, scream, holler, chain yerselves to the sidewalks and
> doorsteps and columns, spray paint their walls,
> disrupt their meetings.... They don't care about any of
> that...(It's just the 'ground noise'...)
>
>
> unionyes wrote:
>> The problem with your example of China, is that it is NOT a
>> success story for Chinese Working people.
>>
>> It is a success for trans-national corporations and Chinese
>> government bureaucrats as well as their cronies, but not for the
>> average person.
>> In fact the Chinese people have the worst of both systems ; the
>> totalitarian control of state capitalism ( ie. communism... NOT
>> socialism ) and the insecurity / poverty of capitalism.
>>
>> The so called " success story " of China has also lowered the
>> standard of living of the average working person in the U.S..
>> It is difficult for U.S. companies to compete with 20 cents an
>> hour wages and Chinese prison slave labor as well.
>> In effect, the U.S. government under Clinton and Bush have
>> encouraged this de-industrialization of our country with their
>> corporate capitalist masters.
>>
>> I am all for free enterprise ( small businesses ), but I hate
>> capitalism.
>> Democracy and citizen control is the key. It doesn't matter what
>> percentage of your economy is in the public sector or the private
>> sector, the bottom line is democracy. Let the people deceide !
>>
>> We have seen in this country what a disaster private corporate
>> ; health care, the media and utilities are.
>> And of course we have seen what a real success ; Unemployment
>> Compensation, Social Security, and Medicare are, despite attempts
>> to sabotoge it via funding cuts.
>> On the other hand, I don't think it would be a good idea if the
>> government made and sold clothing and shoes.
>>
>> So my point is that there is nothing inherent in government
>> ownership and participation in the economy being equal to "
>> tyranny ".
>> Many countries in Europe that are a LOT more democratic than the
>> U.S. have a significant amount of the economy in the public
>> sector, which works extremely well for it's citizens in terms of
>> efficiency, access, and avoiding the tyranny of too
>> much corporate control.
>>
>> The old Soviet Union on the other hand was a total state run
>> economy ( which is communism, NOT socialism ) with a
>> brutal totalitarian government. And then we had the free market
>> paradise of Pinochet's Chile, which was a brutal Fascist military
>> dictatorship.
>> So public / private sector economics does NOT determine
>> democracy, citizen control determines democracy.
>>
>> I know we have gotten away from the main purpose of this list
>> serve with this thread, but since we are on the subject, I felt
>> compelled to contribute.
>>
>> But maybe this is not such a bad thing, because ambiguous words
>> like ; " Socialism ", are used by the corporate media and the
>> politicians to try to divide us.
>>
>> Regardless if I think it is tyranny for corporations to own a
>> communities water and power supply, or if Wayne thinks it is
>> tyranny for the government to own anything,
>> the bottom line that I believe we all can agree on is that
>> citizens in this country and in most places around the world have
>> lost control of their governments.
>>
>> If the citizens of this country had control of our government and
>> it's elected officials, and the corporate media I might add, we
>> would NEVER have invaded Iraq or Afganistan, or at the very
>> least, we would have by now withdrawn ALL U.S. troops in Iraq and
>> begun the process of ending the war in Afganistan.
>>
>> David Johnson
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* E. Wayne Johnson <mailto:ewj at pigs.ag>
>> *To:* Brussel Morton K. <mailto:mkbrussel at comcast.net>
>> *Cc:* Peace-discuss <mailto:peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2008 11:26 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] socializing an industry --
>> good but also bad
>>
>> I really cant find anything good to say about the government
>> bailout of industry. People have
>> short memories and don't seem to do their history homework.
>> The heavy hand of government
>> control led to genuine disaster and widespread starvation in
>> China in the 1960's and 1970's,
>> and since adapting a more capitalist
>> model they can truly say "Ming tian geng hao!" Tomorrow will
>> be even better.
>>
>> Socialism and its closely allied doctrine have been very
>> sadly discredited. Even
>> sadder is the notion that it should be tried here since it
>> has been already found
>> to be a horrible idea with horrific consequences.
>>
>> Liberty has worked well for us here. We should go back to it.
>>
>> Suggested reading--- Bastiat, "The Law"
>> http://www.fee.org/library/books/thelaw.asp
>>
>> Brussel Morton K. wrote:
>>> Comment below.
>>>
>>> On Dec 10, 2008, at 3:05 AM, John W. wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 12:36 AM, Karen Medina
>>>> <kmedina at illinois.edu <mailto:kmedina at illinois.edu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Peace-discuss,
>>>>
>>>> I would like to discuss the US taking over an industry.
>>>>
>>>> Let us take the postal service as an example. The
>>>> postal service has always been
>>>> tied to the federal government. And has done well.
>>>>
>>>> But as an institution, it was extremely sexist and
>>>> racist clear into the 1980s. I
>>>> blame this on the fact that it was tied to the federal
>>>> government. For a very long
>>>> time, the postal service did not have to abide by
>>>> OSHA's safety guidelines, again
>>>> because it was a government institution. The postal
>>>> service used to be one of
>>>> the highest stress occupations -- again because it was
>>>> run by the government
>>>> and was managed top-down and so very close to the way
>>>> the military was run
>>>> that many ex-military people were employed by the
>>>> postal service.
>>>>
>>>> I am not saying that I think the postal service should
>>>> be privatized, I am just
>>>> saying that when the government runs an industry, it
>>>> tends to overlook human
>>>> dignity issues and is slow to change -- and it makes us
>>>> all guilty for the human
>>>> rights abuses done by the institution.
>>>>
>>>> It is good sometimes to be able to point to a CEO and
>>>> say that person is bad,
>>>> but it is really hard for the public to turn and look
>>>> at the way the public is
>>>> running an industry and say "we are bad".
>>>>
>>>> -karen medina
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess I'd like to take the opposite view.
>>>>
>>>> While I have heard about the stress involved in working for
>>>> the post office (particularly at "the Plant"), I doubt that
>>>> it's any worse than working for some private-sector
>>>> corporation, most of which are also managed in a top-down
>>>> style.
>>>>
>>>> Historically, government institutions like the military and
>>>> the post office have been among the LEAST racist and sexist
>>>> employers in America. In the black community of the 1940s
>>>> and 1950s, having a job at the post office was about the
>>>> best job that one could hope for. Teaching was also a
>>>> viable and desirable option in the black community. The
>>>> police and fire departments proved more difficult to integrate.
>>>>
>>>> An irony of history is that, because of the way the law has
>>>> evolved, public-sector unions have been for the past 30
>>>> years FAR stronger than private-sector unions, providing
>>>> public employees with far greater job protections. Of
>>>> course, it also helps that government jobs can't be
>>>> exported overseas.
>>>>
>>>> Again, due to the peculiar nature of our labor laws, the
>>>> government is in a position to mandate things like
>>>> affirmative action, a living wage, etc. not only in its own
>>>> employment practices but in instances where it contracts
>>>> with private-sector vendors. Legally, we have not seen fit
>>>> to extend the same level of government-mandated worker
>>>> protections to private-sector employers who do not do
>>>> business with government.
>>>>
>>>> There are pros and cons both ways, of course. But on
>>>> balance, I would MUCH prefer to work for the government,
>>>> and I think that basic industries having to do with food,
>>>> energy, and essential services should be nationalized for
>>>> purposes of national security and the public good.
>>>>
>>>> John Wason
>>>
>>> Amen to all that!, and I'd add to the list "food, energy and
>>> essential services" health insurance, the railroads. The
>>> profit motive (capitalism) in "essential institutions or
>>> industries" is not one which can be trusted to lead to the
>>> best and most efficient services for /all/ the people, and
>>> which will lead to a sustainable society. --mkb
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>>> <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG.
>> Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.9.16/1840 - Release
>> Date: 12/9/2008 4:53 PM
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database: 270.9.16/1840 - Release Date:
> 12/9/2008 4:53 PM
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081211/5f1c0478/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list