A new world without rules, good or bad?

Books, television programs, films, magazines or music to share, counselor to discover ... Talk to news affecting in any way the econology, environment, energy, society, consumption (new laws or standards) ...
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 13/07/12, 19:51

Yes, what must be disputed is that it is the powerful who make the rules ..... true equity, we are not there yet : Mrgreen:
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 13/07/12, 20:35

The main thing that needs to be challenged is the power ...
Changing camp power will not bring equity.

The paradox of power is that it mainly resides in the belief of those who are subject to it and their voluntary servitude ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 13/07/12, 21:06

Ahmed wrote:The main thing that needs to be challenged is the power ...
Changing camp power will not bring equity.


I see what you mean, but it's dead tail ... without giving a solution.

The paradox of power is that it mainly resides in the belief of those who are subject to it and their voluntary servitude ...


Strange paradox indeed, but the power above all makes voluntary servitudes without the knowledge of their own free will. : Mrgreen:
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.

[Eugène Ionesco]

http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 13/07/12, 21:57

The idea that I approve of is that there must be applicable and applied rules (according to Chatelot who forces the line on this but who is right) ... I also often advocate for it .

Only we need rules wisely and human and not a Manichaean system that will clean everything at the karcher ...

I see it about like this:
The main target should be brought gradually around the criminalization of acts of economic predation. And there it will be difficult to place the cursor in a world where we encourage competition at all costs.

Adjustment variables must also be applied to the real economy (and not only to the very virtual economic world). A kind of right opposable to demagogic economic practices.

A law which, in its application, would demonstrate that a sector which may be more profitable in the medium term, could become so again later. In particular for questions of cost of OM or other type of dumping on raw materials.

So there should be rules of the game capable of fluctuating with the indices. Taking into account in particular the real problem of the cost of transport (which is underestimated in view of a fanciful oil price). Ditto for energy. I do not know if such mechanisms exist (there must be some), but in any case I do not see them applying.
And obviously, the main difficulty would be to make sure that these variables escape any mechanism of speculation. This is why I have been saying it for a long time: we would have to find a way, through law, to decouple the real economy from the virtual economy (and that would mean redefining what “raw material” is, as well as of its cost and its fair price payment with regard to a kind "Of renewable index").

The possibilities would then be great to reestablish a more realistic operating framework for human activity ...

All that we have seen "innovative" for a good ten years, they are only endless regroupings (even the municipalities end up regrouping ... while their primary destination is decentralization power ... cf => power) it is the one who will be the biggest, not to be eaten and / or absorb the others. And we have seen that in hyper-profitable sectors like banking, insurance or chemicals! It's cold in the back.

We have entered a sort of hellish spiral (in fact we have been there since the Second World War, which we do not finish paying for). And it is true, as many of you hammer it, that the flight ahead is a dead end.

The abuse of power leads to impotence! : Mrgreen:

As it stands, the margin of progress should be made in any optimization of the existing (since only the control of environmental cycles by respect for nature have an intrinsic growth perspective. It is a realistic ideal amha. And not the exponential and limitless growth, mirage of industrial civilization This is where the challenges of econology become logical as well as economic in the best sense of the word.
Last edited by Obamot the 13 / 07 / 12, 22: 02, 1 edited once.
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 13/07/12, 22:02

Flytox you write:
I see what you mean, but it bites its tail ... without giving a solution.

We approach a solution when we give up an illusory fight.

An image: two deer who have embedded their antlers in each other and died together because they could not separate ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 13/07/12, 22:16

@ Obamot: to echo your wishes, here is a (pessimistic) analysis of the specificity of the German economy, by Wolfgang streek.
http://www.mpifg.de/pu/mpifg_dp/dp95-5.pdf
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 13/07/12, 23:16

Ouch ... of real-ökonologik : Lol: Another Planké?

I'm going to need the weekend to learn some modest lessons from this approach which seems to me a priori well observed, which I find relatively founded around the similar "Swiss compromise " (but from theory to practice, there's a hell of a chasm, we also have our rotten with the "first cousins"). I want to say: and Décartes in all this ?! To stir a little more, because here we are far from touching the fundamentals, hoping that we do not simply turn the knife in the wound while hurting ourselves as little as possible ...

It immediately reminds me of that, in the socioeconomic concept:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banque_WIR
http://www.wir.ch/index.html

Of style, "we don't put all the eggs in one basket ..."

It's very detailed, next to my "little logorrhea" hihihihihi ...

Curiously I was waiting to come across such a document without daring to hope to get my hands on it one day! So a thousand thanks.
0 x
User avatar
Greg T
I learn econologic
I learn econologic
posts: 39
Registration: 03/06/12, 19:18
Location: Jehay, province of Liège, Belgium




by Greg T » 14/07/12, 07:10

If you allow me, I think fairness is just unnatural! It seems obvious to me that it is nature itself which imposes hierarchies! There are those who eat and those who eat, it is not more complicated than that. The animal kingdom is thus made and we are part of this animal kingdom ...

Many have tried to develop utopian doctrines where all men are equal. They all broke their teeth!

The planet itself is not intended for equity. Depending on where you are under the globe, it is either abundance or the desert.

Some powerful will choose to help the weak and this is completely normal. But from the moment they are themselves in danger, they will think only of themselves and that too is completely normal! It's called the survival instinct and this instinct was created by nature for the survival of species!

In short, there are strong and weak which gives natural selection!

We are only animals with a disproportionate ego to believe that we are not ...

ps: I let you put everything in order, I’m a little early for prose ... : Cheesy:
0 x
(Formerly known as Gregconstruct) Because every gesture counts ... I serve you a little 10 ???
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538




by Obamot » 14/07/12, 09:14

"Equity is simply unnatural!"

Not that much, there is surely a tug of war with the opposite of this idea : Arrowd:

: Arrow: Man is rather a social being! (notes on Wolfgang Streek I preamble)
First to say that it is nature that imposes hierarchies is both true and false. Because man too is part of said nature! And what makes its difference is precisely that it seeks to differentiate itself from the animal kingdom. So man is able to make "adjustments" (+/- utopian doctrines, etc. as desired, but depending on his needs). After I give up, because it becomes too Manichean (for someone who takes up the idea of ​​the ego on his own ... hey hey), because we would then ignore the commitment of each. It is also taking this into account, which is ethics.

Bubble meadow (with a little humor it goes better)

: Arrow: Some observations and simplifications (non-exhaustive list). Let's first talk about the OMBILICAL CORD because it is as much a beautiful metaphor as a strong symbol to say that humans are deeply social and ... mammalian!
If we physically cut the cord at birth
=> we try to make some adjustment all his life (so true that the child continues to believe that he is part of his mother for a certain time ...).
=> => in the spirit is strongly anchored for reference / s the image of father and mother.
=> => => schematically: the mother carries the child towards life, and the father towards society.
(Interchangeable roles except for the role of the mother : Cheesy: ).

From there, and this is why society is very complicated, it is only the interweaving of cycles and systems, operating more or less harmoniously between them.

But we often only repeat a model, the man has already tried cloning on himself for a long time, it should be called clown_age : Mrgreen: : Arrowd:

- It would start from birth, usually with "social acceptance of the new human being" (or not!) symbolized by baptism or any other symbolic act (and even before according to the cultural conformism of each one nested or not in a religious mold, directly or indirectly);
- then each time from near or far ... the human detaches himself to become better attached => with community life;
- school and training and all institutions of civil society;
- with permanently and in the background, the authority represented by administrations of all kinds, "contributions", laws, the police and even sometimes already banks or the pig / piggy bank;
- then comes the period of the army, diplomas and the big leap in the professional and business world ...
- The whole process is a series of "cord breaks", taking possession of the territory, arrangements around taking responsibility and developing autonomy as well as social integration (if at all) it is possible with everyone).

Then the cycle begins again with the birth of new families, with new births etc ... [to be continued]
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 14/07/12, 09:45

Greg T, you write:
If you allow me, I think fairness is just unnatural!

I allow! :D
The concept of equity is a human construction, therefore cultural.
However, it is culture which differentiates us * from nature and constitutes us as human beings and not only as animals "with a rather disproportionate ego".
If the hierarchy inside animal societies is a functional necessity, human societies would benefit from dispensing with it since they have superior aptitudes allowing it.
Nietzsche said: "Man is something that must be overcome".

* I did not write "oppose" ...
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Media & News: TV shows, reports, books, news ..."

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 257 guests