> "Daniel T." earthlink.net> wrote in news:daniel_t-
> C0EBE9.19312808092008@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net:
>

>> First, one cannot excuse the fact that they *cannot* make good on their
>> promises, by saying that they don't "anticipate" that they will have to.

>
> Sure they can. They just cannot repay all depositors at once. The
> depositors understand (or should understand) that, and thus accept some
> risk. Anyone who deems that risk unacceptable has the buried gold option
> (which poses risks of its own).
>

>> Second, there is an economic reason the risks are passed on to
>> non-depositors and non-investors. *All* of us buy into the trust. Even
>> those of us who don't, have to at least act like we do in order to make
>> ends meet. The system is inherently unsustainable, but it is so huge,
>> such a fundamental part of society, that if (when) if fails *all* of us
>> will suffer. Even non-depositors and non-investors have a vested
>> interest in trying to keep the banking system going, despite the fact ...

> Kucha, Arotiri, & Knossus were all highly developed urban architecture.
> Its not what is there, its what is not: slums. Tripolye, on the Dneiper
> below Kiev, is the oldest, mid 5th mil BC, and largest, but somewhat of a
> stretch to call it a city.
>
> It was a collection of villages and towns strung out along the river, all
> built of timber frame. The space between them was deliberate so that if
> one started on fire, which did happen, it didnt take out the whole damn
> thing like Chicago. It was a string of industrial zones, tannery, pottery,
> weaving, metal work, etc.
>
> But again, no slums. There's one community that is hundreds of years old
> in the Himalaya mtns of SW China that never had a slummy part of town
> either. But all of the above were very active in trade, operating in free
> markets, often dominating them. They were all also run by women.
>
> It does not matter whether a system is extreme socialism or far right wing
> capitalism, men will figure out how to corrupt it to get the status ...

> "Daniel T." earthlink.net> wrote in news:daniel_t-
> C0EBE9.19312808092...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net:
>

>> First, one cannot excuse the fact that they *cannot* make good on their
>> promises, by saying that they don't "anticipate" that they will have to.

>
> Sure they can. They just cannot repay all depositors at once. The
> depositors understand (or should understand) that, and thus accept some
> risk. Anyone who deems that risk unacceptable has the buried gold option
> (which poses risks of its own).

> On Sep 7, 12:43 am, Fred Weiss papertig.com> wrote:

>> But in business it is different and whatever other motives you might
>> have, the financial ones have to be front and center and primary
>> otherwise you won't stay in business for long.

>
> This is one of the problems with how free enterprise can hold up
> progress. Sometimes standards in products are kept alive longer than
> they should be and we have old technologies put upon us when there are
> better ways to do it. But the better ways sometimes don't make more
> money.

> All of the theoretical foundations of modern
> science and technology were laid in free-market economies during the
> 19th and early 20th centuries,

> On Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:23:19 -0500, Publius wrote:
>

>> All of the theoretical foundations of modern
>> science and technology were laid in free-market economies during the
>> 19th and early 20th centuries,

>
> The theoretical foundations of modern science and technology were laid
> well before the 19th century and can be found inside of monarchies,
> theocracies and most every other form of economic up to and including
> 1935 Germany and 1956 Russia.

> ZerkonX X.net> wrote innews:pan.2008.09.09.13.54.01@X.net:
>

>> On Sat, 06 Sep 2008 13:23:19 -0500, Publius wrote:

>

>>>  All of the theoretical foundations of modern
>>> science and technology were laid in free-market economies during the
>>> 19th and early 20th centuries,

>

>> The theoretical foundations of modern science and technology were laid
>> well before the 19th century and can be found inside of monarchies,
>> theocracies and most every other form of economic up to and including
>> 1935 Germany and 1956 Russia.

>
> Modern science has some very deeps roots, to be sure --- roots which extend
> back as far as ancient Greece and even prior. But the central organizing
> theories which characterize modern...

> No, here I think he has a valid point (up to a point). You're
> overlooking Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo and others - and Newton is too
> important to simply be waved away as an exception.
>
> Here the issue was the liberation of thought after centuries of being
> closed down by religious dogma. It was a continuation of the
> Renaissance and it was a process which built up such force that the
> dominant power of the previous millenium, The Catholic Church,
> couldn't stop it. It even included challenges to its own authority in
> religion, e.g. the Reformation. It appeared in almost all Western
> countries almost regardless of their political structure, though they
> were nearly all monarchies.

> On Sep 9, 1:13 am, Immortalist yahoo.com> wrote:
>

>> On Sep 7, 12:43 am, Fred Weiss papertig.com> wrote:

>>> But in business it is different and whatever other motives you might
>>> have, the financial ones have to be front and center and primary
>>> otherwise you won't stay in business for long.

>

>> This is one of the problems with how free enterprise can hold up
>> progress. Sometimes standards in products are kept alive longer than
>> they should be and we have old technologies put upon us when there are
>> better ways to do it. But the better ways sometimes don't make more
>> money.

>
> It can happen and I, too, can think of examples. But it rarely lasts
> long. Competition takes care of it - assuming of course that
> competition is allowed. But even then - when it is not - sometimes
> technology can leapfrog current limitations (telecommunications is a
> good current example).
> ...

> ... large corporations merging into one organization
> and then subsuming the state itself. AKA Corporatism, like with Hitler and Mussolini.

> ...Thus, for example, a
> steel corporation would be a cartel composed of all the business
> leaders in the steel industry, coming together to discuss a common
> policy on prices and wages. When much political and economic power
> rests in the hands of such groups, then a corporatist system is in
> place....