Conquer Club

I would like to conduct an experiment. I want to post the link to this article here:

http://www.econlib.org/library/Essays/rdPncl1.html

as well as in the coffee house. I am expecting two completely different threads to emerge, but this is what I am asking: if you post in one, please do not post in the other. I think that you will find the article interesting and thought provocative, I know that I did.

thanks,

Personally, I think a lot of it was BS. It didn't mention who government services are run by the people, and their goal is helping the people. Whereas in private corporations, the goal is $$$$$$. And eventually, one company will create a monopoly and take over, and then will raise prices beyond what they efficiently are, charging people more than the government would've. Sometimes the government charges more because there's an externality that the private service would not make you pay because they're in it for themselves, but in the long term, the government service is better for the economy. But they did have a point to some extent. We all know what it's like to take socialism way too far, then you have the Soviet Union. But you can also take capitalism way too far. The Soviet Union is the far extreme on one side, the far extreme on the other side would be anarchy. (It is the ultimate capitalism) You need to have a balance between the two. Consumer goods have proven to be better under capitalism, but if they aren't regulated at all you get a monopoly. I would've said pretty much the same thing in the coffee shop, but I wouldn't have said BS. BTW, are you guys still not letting anyone from GH join?

Let me guess, you're going to count the number of rude comments in this thread versus the one in Coffehouse, whatever that is?

Or trying to see if there's a political slant of who they let in.

pimpdave wrote:Let me guess, you're going to count the number of rude comments in this thread versus the one in Coffehouse, whatever that is?

no expectations... just observing

please feel free to comment on the essay.

Ok my main thought on this is :don't they go on!
I was going to expand on that thought and may well do so if this goes anywhere, but the comments I was going to make immediately became as wiffle-waffly as the core essay, so I stopped. As should Mr Pencil have done.

jonesthecurl wrote:Ok my main thought on this is :don't they go on!
I was going to expand on that thought and may well do so if this goes anywhere, but the comments I was going to make immediately became as wiffle-waffly as the core essay, so I stopped. As should Mr Pencil have done.

could you expand on what you mean by "wiffle-waffly" because i didn't find the essay that way at all, if i understand what you mean.

Summary:
The world is interconnected. When you manufacture something it is part of a large process. Several pages of wiffle-waffle.

jonesthecurl wrote:Summary:
The world is interconnected. When you manufacture something it is part of a large process. Several pages of wiffle-waffle.

huh. i really was impressed with the article. it was a bold statement that Read made when he said "not a single person on the face of this earth knows how to make (a pencil)." absurd I thought at first. but as the story unfolded, the complexity of our species became apparent to me, even in light of all the things that we all take for granted, like a pencil. if he were to have said "The world is interconnected." then there would not have been much to understand, the summary that you offer as a single caption for the whole piece is proof that we are so easily willing to take things for granted. and whats more is that we can imply that all of that which we consider to be the reality around us is intrinsically balanced upon everything else around us. that is a little more fragile than merely being interconnected, i think.

But the fact remains it is just mostly wiffle-waffle. Its a nice analogy that could have been easily conveyed in a fifth of the prose that raises attention to something which we all already know and take for granted because as much as its great there are far more interesting things to be thinking about.

Bertros Bertros wrote:...there are far more interesting things to be thinking about.

highly subjective, don't you think?

There actually was a point to the essay (see my earlier post). If a nuclear war started, and after it was over, every town was for most purposes isolated with not as much technology, they'd make their own pencils. The whole point of the essay is capitalism vs socialism and free trade vs regulated/taxed imports.

black elk speaks wrote:

Bertros Bertros wrote:...there are far more interesting things to be thinking about.

highly subjective, don't you think?

Simon Viavant wrote:There actually was a point to the essay (see my earlier post). If a nuclear war started, and after it was over, every town was for most purposes isolated with not as much technology, they'd make their own pencils. The whole point of the essay is capitalism vs socialism and free trade vs regulated/taxed imports.

Yes my point exactly, but it is a nice analogy so maybe jones is a little harsh, shall we say most of it is just piffle instead?

Can someone tell me what this is about I lost my teeth in this thread and all I get is
"This post was made by black elk speaks who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post."

Spooky.

Well, to sumarise BES's post:
"I, Black Elk Speaks, would like to conduct an experiment. I have posted an article here and in the "coffee house" sub-forum. I am expecting two completely different threads to emerge".

Which was an interesting idea really, but fundamentally flawed because telling your subjects that they are part of an experiment is 100% guaranteed to de-naturalise their behaviour. In other words, this experiment isn't going to prove anything useful because it's not measuring our true behaviour, it'll only reveal how we choose to react to people trying to study us.

Furthermore, that's true of the old coffeehousers as well. If they know that their version of this thread is one-half of an experiment, then their behaviour will be de-naturalised also. Ultimately all that will come of this little game will be two threads on the same topic each filled with random people doing random stuff in an effort to either conform to or rebel against the hypothesis they imagine BES holds. What larks eh?

So, instead of reading the article and discussing it I have immediately posted "Tits and cooters" in an effort to lampoon the expectations that I imagine coffeehouse regulars probably have for this thread.

Wilfully destructive? Unhelpful and annoying? Yeah, sure it is... that's just how I roll.

Ah I get it.

Have you seen my teeth? I think I spat them out laughing at Big Elk Shit.

To be fair, I think the idea here is a good one (and I don't personally have a problem with BES), I just think that the execution was a bit dubious...


Also, I think that 'The Mighty Boosh' is a load of wank. Who's with me?

Have you ever seen the film about Richard Proenneke. They show it on PBS from time to time, I believe it's called Alone in the Wilderness.

http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=2456246

When I am bored, I will sometimes ask myself what I would require to be able to construct a clickable pen. I am not talking about going all the way down the chain to the petroleum refiner that produces plastic, or the ore smelter than produces the spring. Just simply: what would I need to build this pen again if I really wanted another one and this one stopped working, and I didn't have the option of buying another one.

I'm sure you don't believe me. But I do. And there is a reason. Not all clickable pens are equal. Some just write better and feel better in your hand. And in fact, they will often last so long that by the time the one I'm using runs out of ink, and I go down to the store to buy another one, I find I cannot replace my pen. It is "obsolete" by several model years (thank you auto industry for teaching us all how to stimulate demand). And then I say to myself, "What would it take for me to rebuild my favorite pen?" And then I say to myself, "Most of the stuff on that list is in the pen I have!" Then, if possible, I take apart the pen, store the parts, and wait for the next pen to break.

This syndrome used to be called being a child of the depression (which I'm actually not). I doubt any of you share it. It is a sure-fire way to piss off your wife. Until her favorite pen breaks.

Dancing Mustard wrote:Well, to sumarise BES's post:
"I, Black Elk Speaks, would like to conduct an experiment. I have posted an article here and in the "coffee house" sub-forum. I am expecting two completely different threads to emerge".

Which was an interesting idea really, but fundamentally flawed because telling your subjects that they are part of an experiment is 100% guaranteed to de-naturalise their behaviour. In other words, this experiment isn't going to prove anything useful because it's not measuring our true behaviour, it'll only reveal how we choose to react to people trying to study us.

Furthermore, that's true of the old coffeehousers as well. If they know that their version of this thread is one-half of an experiment, then their behaviour will be de-naturalised also. Ultimately all that will come of this little game will be two threads on the same topic each filled with random people doing random stuff in an effort to either conform to or rebel against the hypothesis they imagine BES holds. What larks eh?

So, instead of reading the article and discussing it I have immediately posted "Tits and cooters" in an effort to lampoon the expectations that I imagine coffeehouse regulars probably have for this thread.

Wilfully destructive? Unhelpful and annoying? Yeah, sure it is... that's just how I roll.

well, that is a fair point, however, I thought that it wouldn't be very fair if only half of the subjects of my sinister little experiment knew that there was an experiment in play. another time i will probably try that, but this time i thought it more fair to have everyone aware.