Re: The Foundation of Understanding
From: Johnny Marcos (johnny5_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 07/05/04
- Next message: Johnny Marcos: "Re: The 'working poor' scam"
- Previous message: Johnny Marcos: "Re: The pharmaceutical industry and free markets"
- In reply to: Mark Monson: "The Foundation of Understanding"
- Next in thread: RueTheDay: "Re: The Foundation of Understanding"
- Reply: RueTheDay: "Re: The Foundation of Understanding"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 08:20:56 GMT
"Mark Monson" <m_monson@ztech.com> wrote in
news:Mp%Fc.979$jJ3.492@bignews5.bellsouth.net:
> First comes the foundation, then the building above. In economics,
> first we must understand the basics of production and distribution of
> wealth (goods), before we start with money and higher math.
Right, first came euclid, then einstien.
> It's been over 100 years since Henry George published the 600 page
> book that barely mentions money and math, yet his explanation of the
> production and distribution of wealth remains concise, consistent, and
> timeless.
And when he wrote it the concept of usufruct was used in many small non
market economies.
> "Progress and Poverty" http://www.henrygeorge.org/chp1.htm
> will never be outdated because economics will always be about
> producing and consuming the products of labor: the real goods and
> services made by human beings. The analysis is the same no matter how
> sophisticated the production tools. Money is never the object in
> itself. Rather, money is the means to an end.
You don't get a rocket to the moon talking to newton.
> The Neo-classical school attacked George because he concentrated on
> real goods and showed how parasites were consuming the labor of
> producers. The Neos sought to make economics an exercise in
> mathematical formulae divorced from reality and man made law - hence
> the change from "political economy" to economics". They succeeded
> in making economics a confusing mess, and not by accident. Their
> paymasters are well pleased that students can't see the free-riders.
http://anthro.palomar.edu/economy/econ_2.htm
In Societies with non-market economies, land and other property rights
are usually restricted by the overriding rights vested in the community
as a whole. Ownership is based on the concept of usufruct . This is
very different from the concept of proprietary deed that is common in
large-scale market economies.
Newton can help you pick that apple off the tree - but not get that
rocket to the moon - Henry George can help your small farm down in guinea
with 20 kinsman in a closed loop - he can't run the modern global
economy.
- Next message: Johnny Marcos: "Re: The 'working poor' scam"
- Previous message: Johnny Marcos: "Re: The pharmaceutical industry and free markets"
- In reply to: Mark Monson: "The Foundation of Understanding"
- Next in thread: RueTheDay: "Re: The Foundation of Understanding"
- Reply: RueTheDay: "Re: The Foundation of Understanding"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|