[Mind's Eye] Re: Economy

I lack a vocabulary of economic terms to express myself so I "wing
it".

On Jun 27, 11:38 am, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Frankly, I wish there was an omnipotent surgeon who could cut out all
> "challenges" euphemisms in this world.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:53 PM, rigsy03 <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > They need to appear as a world player- frankly their investments in
> > the USA/Greece seem ridiculous as they have more than enough
> > challenges in their own country.
>
> > On Jun 27, 12:52 am, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > None of this austerity stuff makes any sense Allan.  I'm not even sure
> > > the Chinese have any money given the property bubble over there.  I
> > > think the banks should be taken over rather than letting our public
> > > sectors end up in their hands.
>
> > > On Jun 26, 2:27 pm, Contemplative <wjwiel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Does it serve man?  (I am not disagreeing, just questioning...)
> > > > I am going to suggest (for arguments sake) that the economy describes a
> > set
> > > > of
> > > > (system of)relationships and behaviors of man.  Those relationships and
> > > > behaviors would
> > > > exist regardless of how we chose to describe them.  That indicates a
> > > > 'natural system' to my
> > > > way of thinking.  From a broad perspective, such systems evolve in the
> > > > interest of the survival
> > > > of the species and therefor serve man.  However, there is a distinction
> > > > between serving man
> > > > at that level and serving man at the level of mans will.(using 'man' as
> > > > mankind here).  I presume
> > > > that your are speaking of it as serving mans will.(?)
>
> > > > Perhaps the problem I have is with the way we talk about the economy.
> >  We
> > > > talk about it as if it is a complex
> > > > machine that we can manipulate as we see fit and as such predict the
> > > > outcome.  That is plainly not
> > > > true as has repeatedly and painfully proven.  I guess I would like to
> > hear
> > > > it talked about and considered more
> > > > as a natural system which is better learned about through observation.
> > In
> > > > other words, something we live in instead
> > > > of a machine that we drive or operate.  I think we could learn a lot
> > more
> > > > about ourselves if we were to view it
> > > > that way.  I also think that we would likely make less drastic mistakes
> > > > regarding this system if we were to
> > > > approach it this way.
>
> > > > We need a way to balance between our holistic 'expert' view and the
> > view  of
> > > > the system as more holonic.
> > > > In other words, I don't trust experts.... :-)
>
> > > > By the way, the source of these wandering rants has been my endeavor to
> > > > consume and digest the contents of
> > > > the FCIC report which I downloaded and have been snacking/gnawing on
> > for a
> > > > couple of months now...  I recommend
> > > > it by the way.  It is not nearly as dry as I would have thought, and
> > > > reasonably informative, though I doubt
> > > > it could be described as comprehensive.  It has been and continues to
> > be a
> > > > source of thought provocation for me.
>
> > > > Once again, thanks for the opportunity...- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -