***----------------------> Original Mail From <----------------------***
"John Lozier" <JLISTS@wvnvm.wvnet.edu>
Thanks to Jim Quinton for a comment that doesn't reflect simple prejudice.
How, indeed, do we get to greater equality by a dynamic process that
would end in sustainability?
Well, I'm not going to offer a complete answer, but I think a big part of
the problem is the immortality of corporations and the lengthening and
broadening of intellectual property rights.
Patents and copyrights have been theoretically limited to the life of the
creator plus some number of years (50?). So how do you end the intellectual
property rights of corporations that never die?
This is off the cuff, so forgive me if it is also off the point.
John Lozier, West Virginia University.
On 09/04/98 at 09:46:23 Jim Quinton said:
>It seems to me there is a simpler thread in all of these observations:
>Workers have become more and more specialized. Agricultural enterprises
>have also become more and more specialized. Regulators have become more and
>more specialized. None of us sees all of the elements of our economic
>system anymore because we're all so focused on such narrow little facets of
>the whole system. As specialization proceeds, we all chase after economies
>of scale. Labor unions get more powerful as their membership achieves
>domination in the labor market (scale economies apply); mega-livestock
>farms achieve feeding efficiencies and monopolize wholesale channels (scale
>economies apply); regulatory bureaucracy grows until nothing can be
>approved on its merits, but faulty products and programs are fostered which
>conform to the political agenda of the day (scale economies apply to
>Inequality is a problem. If sustainable economics would distribute wealth
>and income more happily, how might it supplant the system we've got? If it
>has to be dynamic in order to replace the current economic system, how
>could it become static afterward in order to be sustainable?
>At 08:07 AM 9/4/98 -0400, Frederick R. Magdoff wrote:
>> I enjoyed your comments about capitalism and think your summary is
>interesting........ But another important aspect is that the system
>produces striking inequality among people............. the inequality
>reaches unconscionable levels. A sustainable economic system would strive
>to decrease the inequaltites of wealth and income
>On Fri, 4 Sep 1998, BILL DUESING wrote:
>>> Living on the Earth. September 4, 1998: Real Work
>>> For most of our history, humans have had to work in order to live. For
>the vast majority of that time, the work was varied.......... In this
>century, work has become increasingly abstract........This economic system
>won't lead us to a sustainable future because it has gone so far beyond
>supplying our basic needs. Now, its basic need is for ever-more growth,
>and finding consumers for increasingly enormous quantities of low-cost,
>subsidized goods that pour off the production lines all over the world.
>Agricultural Conservation Innovation Center (ACIC)
>2234 S. Hobson Ave.
>Charleston, SC 29405-2413
>phone: (843) 740-1327
>fax: (843) 740-1331
>To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
>To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
***---------------------> End of Original Mail <---------------------***
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command