Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!harpo!eagle!alice!rabbit!jj From: jj@rabbit.UUCP Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Govt and Agriculture (mucho expansion on original) Message-ID: <1643@rabbit.UUCP> Date: Wed, 29-Jun-83 13:30:17 EDT Article-I.D.: rabbit.1643 Posted: Wed Jun 29 13:30:17 1983 Date-Received: Wed, 29-Jun-83 22:07:04 EDT Lines: 84 Tim Sevener points out the alledged "cobweb" effect in the farm and produce market. He then points out that our current socialist government eliminates that effect, and argues that a republican government (in the sense of governing a republic, not a government run by the republican party) that supports capitalism wil not. He clearly misses one point, namely that the CAUSE of the cobweb effect is an ill-considered behavior on the part of the producers. Ill-considered behavior is clearly not capitalistic behavior, because, even though SOME producers will make more money in the shortage market, most will be broken in the surplus market, and losing one's business is clearly not a practice encouraged by a capitalistic society. I think that Mr. Sevener's comments inadvertantly point out the real problem with today's government and today's economy, specifically the lack of LONG TERM PLANNING. I am certainly aware of Drucker, et. al., and the "five year payoff" management style, I just don't believe in it. Some of the industries that do are: The steel industry. | referring | The automobile industry. |to the U.S. | The consumer electronics industry. | companies | The recent performance of these companies should leave no doubt as to the results of this style of management. While the individual farmer, steel executive, or what have you, may see the promise of huge profits in the next five years, just by eliminating those wasteful research facilities, engaging in a little circumspect market manipulation, etc, (all of which are BIG wins according to the current economic theories) the problems of obsolescence (What say GM, RCA, TI, INTEL, IBM, DEC?), market instability (as someone else, or the government, steps in to take advantage), etc, will destroy the ill-considered gains very quickly. The US is currently on an anti-science, anti-research, anti-technonogy, anti-business kick that has cleanly removed it from the forefront of both economic and scientific leadership, and is continuing to affect the US (look at the derivatives, they are still negative, but at least less so, in the last 2-3 years). This trendiness (both in management and social behavior) is encouraged by the illusion that the government can, and will, make good on any dislocations that are caused by the current trend(s). This illusion is brought to us, of course, by politicians (Tip O'Neil and Alan Cranston come to mind, as do Jesse Helms, James East, Strom Thurmond, and Ted Kennedy) who know that we, the public, are unwise and stupid enough to believe that their short term malificence (which is ONLY intended to buy votes, a process that used to be called bribing) can last. The difficulty, of course, is that the government has no means of production, and can merely continue spreading the diminishing wealth farther and farther, making us all poorer. This illusion of government ability is the root of the current economic and social instability. /* FLAME ON FULL */ Wake up, you damned fools! It's not the fault of the government, the schools, the businesses, the big companies, or the Arabs, it's your own fault. It's you (anti-business liberals, anti-science conservatives, anti-technology naturists, labor unions, nihilists all in the long run) who are reaping the results of your own stupidity. You must be willing to sacrifice some of your comfort and smugness for a while to bring the country (hmm, world, it certainly isn't just the US that's like this) back on its feet. There's enough for all, if you follow the philosophy of making more instead of destroying what you now have. The idea of "I want more, to hell with the other guy" just won't work in the long run, because the other guy will just fight for his share, instead of working with you to build more, just as the idea of sharing without regard to productivity will discourage any production at all, as the individual will be willing and able to sit back and let someone else do the necessary work, since it doesn't matter how much that individual produces. Well there you have it. Capitalism requires the human organism to overcome shortsighted greed, a difficult prospect. Communism, on the other hand, (even in a pure form) requires not only setting aside greed, but the willingness to work without any visible reward, an even more difficult prospect. A republican government has the ability (through its economic systems) to encourage farsighted behavior, while a socialist one does not. It also (as contrasted with the socialist government) has mechanisms that provide rewards for ingenuity and hard work. A communist government does not even admit to the existance of problems in human behavior, let alone provide for a reward mechansim, an even more shortsighted view. Up the republic!