Comments on: The great race for jobs http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/ Wed, 07 Oct 2015 17:23:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-374 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:58:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-374 Mr Haddas, please remove one of those posts – that was a mistake. It didn’t look like I had submitted it properly.

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-373 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:55:04 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-373 Why are you commenting on my post at all OOTS? You have nothing to add to it but tell me what I already know. I didn’t mention you once in this one, did I? I’m simply saying that if the ship is sinking then it might be a good idea to build a few rafts. And can the patronizing tone you always use.

BTW – You don’t know any truths. You haven’t once said what you believe is the truth you talk around it. Maybe you think you are but I don’t see it. If you were a religious person you would no doubt believe your creed was the truth, the way and the light etc. You would likely disbelieve the “truths” of other religions.

If you were a politically active person you would tend to believe your party or government was the truth and disbelieve the others. In business – the health and welfare of you firm would be the truth; or most likely it’s the most expedient way to get what you want out of life. For many that’s truth enough. Many see their families as the most important truth in their lives. It’s their most immediate and demanding concern.

A lot of people kill each other defending their “truths”. I tend to think of all of them as “information”. I don’t know how anyone can rationally disagree with that? We tend to expect others to get over their sectarian or personal or mythical truths, whether they care to fight or die for, but I’ve seen enough of them I have defaulted to the notion that they are all just “belief systems”. That makes me a kind of philosopher I suppose? You die soon enough anyway. We have a world where people are rigging themselves to blow up for their beliefs or to defend their way of life. Others are more than willing to blow anyone away if they believe they are a threat to their interests. Many will kill or die for their way of life because that is the truth for them. They all think they are the truth somehow.

Do you think what they all do is in the service of Truth? And don’t obfuscate or change the subject as you usually do. You like to blow smoke more than I like to smoke cigarettes.

The Shaker communities were a very good idea for their time and they died because they clung to a truth that was very limiting for them. They more or les went extinct and knew they would actually. There are a few holdouts in Maine as I understand it – perhaps 6 or 7 – but the number is far too small to really be considered a viable solution for anybody but their very exclusive, and quite possibly snobbish, sense of community. They probably can’t even fill a single house and a field. They are committed Christians – for them the point of the Shakers is their belief in the teaching of Jesus Christ. I have a warm spot because I was raised a Catholic but when I was first indoctrinated the Catholics called them, in fact any non-Catholics heretics. But I also like to read Hindu and Buddhist literature and am not at all exclusive now. I know religious people who are not exclusively one sect or another. They don’t all tell the same truths.

I’ve actually tried to write a book on alternative community development models and have even sent it to some professional bodies in this state and some architects I have worked for. It was a very rough draft with my own text and contained hundreds of sketches. It would take thousands of hours and more hands than I have to complete it properly. They didn’t laugh at it put they couldn’t help much either. I sent it to one state planner and didn’t even get an invitation to meet him and talk about it in person over a cup of coffee. I have a library of related books on this idea and it is by no means a new idea. It just can’t make it competitive in the market place because it needs to answer so many questions that contemporary practice, and the marketing of real estate up here doesn’t want to deal with. They usually opt for the simplest approach because they can take their money ands run. They leave the towns to deal with the more problematic issues. I tried to come up with a denser development model for rural areas that would allow for conservation, more attractive and substantial developments and built-in work and leisure opportunities that also used as little land area as possible to permit continued use of the available open space for faming etc. I actually started it as a diversion and then it started to look serious.

The impact of real estate speculative bubbles was just what I most feared when trying to create a sustainable community development. I tried to address about fourteen issues I thought were worth combining in a single model. Developers tend to leave most of the difficult issues unanswered. It is so much more difficult to try to design a more self-sustaining residential environment that also builds in conservation, and some employment prospects. That is too much to talk about here. I try to get people to look it over and suggest ways to simplify the puzzle.

But I certainly don’t expect a guy like you, who’s road to riches involved kissing the ass (and bribing him for the privilege apparently) of a potentate who was really only a splashier dressed version and more of a raconteur at the Four Seasons, than Saddam Hussein. At 60 years old I don’t see the “truth” in any political leaders. Some are better or worse than others but you can dig all you like and you won’t find the truth about any of them or anyone else for that mater. You won’t ever find the truth about “good government but we all seem to know the n bad ones. I’m convinced that truth only looks like the truth if you don’t think about it too much. I can’t understand why you have a difficult time realizing that. I tend to think that honesty beats truth any day. But don’t think about that too much either.

You may claim you know the truth but you aren’t an honest man so why should I give a tinker’s damn about your charming notions of the truth? I may as well listen to Adolph Hitler trying to teach Sunday school. This world is loaded with some of the most self-righteous idiots claiming they know the truth and I still say – that’s an interesting bit of information. That’s all you really have.

BTW, I can’t remember a single “truth” about correct punctuation except where to put periods. .

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-372 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:55:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-372 Why are you commenting on my post at all OOTS? You have nothing to add to it but tell me what I already know. I didn’t mention you once in this one, did I? I’m simply saying that if the ship is sinking then it might be a good idea to build a few rafts. And can the patronizing tone you always use.

BTW – You don’t know any truths. You haven’t once said what you believe is the truth you talk around it. Maybe you think you are but I don’t see it. If you were a religious person you would no doubt believe your creed was the truth, the way and the light etc. You would likely disbelieve the “truths” of other religions.

If you were a politically active person you would tend to believe your party or government was the truth and disbelieve the others. In business – the health and welfare of you firm would be the truth; or most likely it’s the most expedient way to get what you want out of life. For many that’s truth enough. Many see their families as the most important truth in their lives. It’s their most immediate and demanding concern.

A lot of people kill each other defending their “truths”. I tend to think of all of them as “information”. I don’t know how anyone can rationally disagree with that? We tend to expect others to get over their sectarian or personal or mythical truths, whether they care to fight or die for, but I’ve seen enough of them I have defaulted to the notion that they are all just “belief systems”. That makes me a kind of philosopher I suppose? You die soon enough anyway. We have a world where people are rigging themselves to blow up for their beliefs or to defend their way of life. Others are more than willing to blow anyone away if they believe they are a threat to their interests. Many will kill or die for their way of life because that is the truth for them. They all think they are the truth somehow.

Do you think what they all do is in the service of Truth? And don’t obfuscate or change the subject as you usually do. You like to blow smoke more than I like to smoke cigarettes.

The Shaker communities were a very good idea for their time and they died because they clung to a truth that was very limiting for them. They more or les went extinct and knew they would actually. There are a few holdouts in Maine as I understand it – perhaps 6 or 7 – but the number is far too small to really be considered a viable solution for anybody but their very exclusive, and quite possibly snobbish, sense of community. They probably can’t even fill a single house and a field. They are committed Christians – for them the point of the Shakers is their belief in the teaching of Jesus Christ. I have a warm spot because I was raised a Catholic but when I was first indoctrinated the Catholics called them, in fact any non-Catholics heretics. But I also like to read Hindu and Buddhist literature and am not at all exclusive now. I know religious people who are not exclusively one sect or another. They don’t all tell the same truths.

I’ve actually tried to write a book on alternative community development models and have even sent it to some professional bodies in this state and some architects I have worked for. It was a very rough draft with my own text and contained hundreds of sketches. It would take thousands of hours and more hands than I have to complete it properly. They didn’t laugh at it put they couldn’t help much either. I sent it to one state planner and didn’t even get an invitation to meet him and talk about it in person over a cup of coffee. I have a library of related books on this idea and it is by no means a new idea. It just can’t make it competitive in the market place because it needs to answer so many questions that contemporary practice, and the marketing of real estate up here doesn’t want to deal with. They usually opt for the simplest approach because they can take their money ands run. They leave the towns to deal with the more problematic issues. I tried to come up with a denser development model for rural areas that would allow for conservation, more attractive and substantial developments and built-in work and leisure opportunities that also used as little land area as possible to permit continued use of the available open space for faming etc. I actually started it as a diversion and then it started to look serious.

The impact of real estate speculative bubbles was just what I most feared when trying to create a sustainable community development. I tried to address about fourteen issues I thought were worth combining in a single model. Developers tend to leave most of the difficult issues unanswered. It is so much more difficult to try to design a more self-sustaining residential environment that also builds in conservation, and some employment prospects. That is too much to talk about here. I try to get people to look it over and suggest ways to simplify the puzzle.

But I certainly don’t expect a guy like you, who’s road to riches involved kissing the ass (and bribing him for the privilege apparently) of a potentate who was really only a splashier dressed version and more of a raconteur at the Four Seasons, than Saddam Hussein. At 60 years old I don’t see the “truth” in any political leaders. Some are better or worse than others but you can dig all you like and you won’t find the truth about any of them or anyone else for that mater. You won’t ever find the truth about “good government but we all seem to know the n bad ones. I’m convinced that truth only looks like the truth if you don’t think about it too much. I can’t understand why you have a difficult time realizing that. I tend to think that honesty beats truth any day. But don’t think about that too much either.

You may claim you know the truth but you aren’t an honest man so why should I give a tinker’s damn about your charming notions of the truth? I may as well listen to Adolph Hitler trying to teach Sunday school. This world is loaded with some of the most self-righteous idiots claiming they know the truth and I still say – that’s an interesting bit of information. That’s all you really have.

BTW, I can’t remember a single “truth” about correct punctuation except where to put periods. .

]]>
By: OneOfTheSheep http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-369 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 07:22:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-369 @paintcan,

“I was educated in Architecture and Urban design and the problem with the field is it can only react to demand and the conditions of the economy.”

Viable opportunities in every field of endeavor are largely determined by economic conditions which can expand or contract demand. The rules are there, but generic; not specific. They are flexible, of necessity.

What is “appropriate” in terms of human density depends on the society of a proposed development, zoning (where applicable) and building site cost. Urban designers, developers and/or speculation builders must make competent research and evaluation of applicable conditions before an economically viable business plan/project is possible.

Compensation, productivity, compensation, rest and recreation aren’t in any recipe for “success”. They
are what they are where you are. At some point you have a “go or No Go” decision you must live with, win or lose.

I would love to hear how a person who believes “truth” indistinguishable from “information” would define “honest” economic forces. You clearly yearn for guarantees that life doesn’t offer, and so you play the game of “what if”. Good luck with that.

]]>
By: paintcan http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-367 Mon, 13 Feb 2012 02:53:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-367 I think Peter Murphy makes a big mistake in thinking that population pressure is something that can be objectively measured. The only things that are “real” (for lack of a better word) in an economy are the human beings in it. Everything else is a kind of work of art. There is nothing particularly real about money, whether paper or metal. And bookkeeping does not maintain an endless chain of unbroken links reaching back into history. There is also no clear correlation between man hours worked and income. It is quite possible to exist at both ends of the spectrum of work and leisure and draw either enormous income from little work or little income from difficult and long hours of work.

Cities are amazing multipliers of space. The World Trade Center buildings were many times larger in area than the area of the superblock it occupied. Manhattan office and apartment towers can contain usable floor areas as much as 40 times their actual footprint. Not even the space people inhabit is actually limited. Not even agricultural land is strictly limited either. Vast areas can come into and out of production depending on demand.

Those little subsistence plots may grow a great deal of what that family eats each year. You really should include the weight or volume of production of those plots in your analysis. The large farms you talk about may only produce single specialty crops like coffee, tea, or bananas etc. They may not even be growing food crops. Rubber trees, used for tire production, are not a food crop. The future may not need rubber tree plantations as large and the land can be used for other purposes.

Other places on the planet may be more suitable for bulk production of corn, wheat, soybeans etc. and wouldn’t grow in some of the hotter or dryer places. And the land may not be suitable for human populations either. American corn production is so large now it sits in giant mounds waiting for buyers. SA countries produce enormous quantities of food that must be eaten or large amounts will be wasted.

How can you talk about overpopulation when, as far as I know, there is no way to determine what the correct population level of the planet should be at any given time?

No one has yet come up with a single definition of a proper or good standard of living either. Building code requirements only try to define a minimum adequacy.

The problem isn’t so much overpopulation but the inadequate ways human beings try to organize themselves into societies and economies.

I was educated in Architecture and Urban design and the problem with the field is it can only react to demand and the conditions of the economy. What urban designers should do is try to define sustainable economies within their developments. And it will be very difficult to do that because there are no clear rules regarding human density, adequate productive hours, proper compensation, the necessary amount of rest and recreation. They are all left to the vague forces of the market and those forces aren’t necessarily honest either.

Some Utopian experiments were tried in the late 18th and early 19th centuries and the one that lasted the longest and was the most successful were the Shakers. But they did so by limited their births to zero and adopting foundlings when necessary. They conformed to a strict religious rule and were a kind of monastic community that could create a very high standard of living. They lived with extremely well maintained buildings and grounds, did not work themselves to death or live lives that anyone could really claim were abused. They ate well and dressed comfortably if plainly. They could have actually lived with more elaborate grounds and buildings but believed in functional adequacy more than ostentation. Actually, the quality of their built environment would probably be considered luxurious by today’s construction standards. They did not believe in conspicuous consumption for its own sake. But European monastic communities did indulge in conspicuous displays of consumption and were frequently lavish even if the members tended to live plainly. But European societies were wealthier overall and could indulge.

It is possible that sane, rational and very stable people could try to start their own economic communities that are not Jonestowns or Koresh compounds. If they were successful in solving the basic issues of providing a decent and fulfilling physical life and providing for their needs and, better still, producing a marketable surplus they would have mastered the largest difficulty of life on earth. They do not have to practice family planning by fiat but individuals might choose to. They do not have to be communal but might create hybrid communities of shared and private activities. They should be able to use their imaginative creativity. Western societies tend to build marketable artifacts, even houses and neighborhoods as though they were cars or furniture. They tend to leave the community and economic development needs to the chance of the market place.

The greatest economic conflicts today seems to be the conflict of free market economics versus planned socialist economics. The socialist economies like China have a lot to recommend them. But they live with severe restrictions on birth rates. The free market economies have low birth rates as well because it is imposed by standard of living choices at the individual level. I personally could never afford a family and live alone. That means someone else could have the child or two to make up for what I didn’t, if zero population growth were a target. But why should it be? There is always the off chance that a super plague or some other disaster could severely reduce human populations. Not everyone wants to breed. Restrictions on birth rates do not have to be a matter of law but could very easily be a matter of choice. Many people, gay and straight, want relationships sans children.

There’s always the porn channel for satisfying sexual urges. Of course the Shakers wouldn’t have approved.

]]>
By: Pete_Murphy http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-351 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:07:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-351 “So let’s have more of them (churchmen, lawyers, physicians, men of letters of all kinds; players, buffoons, musicians, opera-singers and opera-dancers), and more employment in similar professions.”

Surely you jest. This is one of the most ridiculous suggestions I’ve heard yet for dealing with the employment crisis. These sorts of jobs are the kinds of things people pay for out of their surplus of wealth. And that’s just the problem: fewer and fewer people have a surplus of wealth. What little illusion of prosperity they’ve been able to maintain has been built on a growing mountain of debt. And that mountain of debt includes the debt at the federal level – the very reason that there is no further capacity to pay for the kinds of infracture projects you mentioned earlier in the piece.

The reason for the decline in the labor force participation rate lies in the inverse relationship between population density and per capita consumption. As overcrowding intensifies with never-ending population growth, our ability to utilize products is steadily eroded. And since per capita consumption and per capita employment are inextricably linked, rising unemployment and poverty are the inescapable consequence. And attempting to combine our economy with the economies of badly overpopulated nations like Japan, Germany, China and a host of others through free trade only exacerbates the problem.

There is no way to gimmick our way out of the effects of this relationship. As long as the world grows more densely populated, so too will unemployment and poverty rise until finally, at some point, poverty begins to raise the death rate as it inevitably will.

Let’s have more “buffoons?” We have plenty already, masquerading as economists.

Pete Murphy
Author, “Five Short Blasts”

]]>
By: myownexperience http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-350 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:26:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-350 Many people would love to help others and would do so for little wages. But these are the things that they must have: A warm dry, quiet, private place to sleep and live. Nutritional food. Access to health care and medicine. Adequate clothing.

I didn’t say a luxurious house, a big car, face lifts and cosmetic surgery, teeth whitening, fancy nails, stylish haircuts,gourmet food and wine, designer clothing, fancy sports cars.

No, none of that is necessary for people who live from their creative and compassionate centers. But those who live from their base, pleasure seeking ambitious, aggressive centers are the ones who now rule the world. How’s that world. A narcissist will say great. Just give it time buddy. treating you?

]]>
By: matthewslyman http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-349 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:21:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-349 Some more ideas to consider:
http://www.slyman.org/m_politics_migrati on.php

Certain commenters have mentioned immigration/ globalisation. That’s an important subject, and a difficult one. But it’s a much smaller issue than those Mr. Hadas is discussing in this article. If not for the influence of technology, there would still be enough work to go around all the inhabitants of the world, and plenty to spare, without any warfare etc… Or, if only for a little more imagination on the part of our politicians and business leaders – we might soon again enjoy unimaginable economic growth and improvements in our real wellbeing, equality and happiness.

]]>
By: matthewslyman http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-348 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 22:16:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-348 Mr. Hadas,

It’s nice to see an article on the bigger picture!

> “Soviet-style communists. They excelled at wasted effort.”

Russian bureaucracy is not much better. It’s a wonder that Russian politicians don’t think to lighten the bureaucratic burdens of their people by copying some ideas from their more economically successful but less resource-endowed Western or Eastern neighbours.

> “lawyers – in theory at least – make the world a fairer place”

If lawyers TRIED to do their jobs properly, this might be the case. Usually only the rich can afford lawyers, but on those rare occasions when the poor receive legal service, they are again ill-served by the system because some judges and lawyers are too economically & socially privileged to see things from the perspectives of the people they’re supposed to be representing.

The yawning chasm between rich and poor is good for nobody. But that is the natural outcome of our economic system. Some people are just lucky in having the stars align or whatever, for them to get into the right line of work in the right expanding industry at the right time through no special ingenuity or planning of their own… But that’s not the way most Americans see things. If they’re rich, they usually think they earned it all themselves… They worked hard (good for all of us), but forget that they also surfed some favourable waves and winds on a wild economic ocean, and that their windfall should therefore be shared with the less fortunate.

All too often in economic downturns, politicians herald “job creation initiatives”. I cringe every time, knowing what they really mean:

> “Pointless jobs could be created by making the tax code more complicated, by requiring teachers to do more paperwork, by developing new financial instruments. The possibilities are endless.”

Usually they intend only a band-aid to give the cosmetic appearance of progress in time for the next election.

> “the United States has dilapidated highways and an army of unemployed construction workers, but it has not been able to match the two.”

If only for more of THIS kind of thinking in the halls of government…

]]>
By: transcend77 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/2012/02/08/ethical-economy-the-great-race-for-jobs/comment-page-1/#comment-347 Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:21:57 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/edward-hadas/?p=172#comment-347 Central (debt-based) fiat banking is an economic system that promotes self-interest and short-term thinking. This is not the only economic system that is possible. If the world’s people demand the right to create money, then they can create new social values where greed and self-interest are not the most rewarded character traits.

]]>