Can we have a civil, thoughtful discussion on this?

Discussion in 'Economics & Trade' started by Kode, Jan 11, 2017.

  1. james M

    james M Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,916
    Likes Received:
    858
    Trophy Points:
    113
  2. james M

    james M Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,916
    Likes Received:
    858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sent from my iPhone
    upload_2017-6-21_21-11-17.gif
    JOURNAL ARTICLE
    Human Territoriality: A Theory
    Robert D. Sack
    Annals of the Association of American Geographers
    Vol. 73, No. 1 (Mar., 1983), pp. 55-74
    Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of the Association of American Geographers
    Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2569346
    Page Count: 20
    Topics: Territoriality, Territories, Parents, Government bureaucracy, Capitalism, Children, Social interaction, Geography, Social theories, Prisons
    Were these topics helpful?
    Thumbs up. These topics are helpful.
    Thumbs down. These topics are not helpful.
    See something inaccurate? Let us know!
    Access
    Log in through your institution.


    Item Type
    Article
    References
    Viewing page 55 of pages 55-74

    PREVIEW

    upload_2017-6-21_21-11-17.gif




















    Abstract
    Territoriality is a means of affecting (enhancing or impeding) interaction and extends the particulars of action by contact. Territoriality is defined here as the attempt to affect, influence, or control actions, interactions, or access by asserting and attempting to enforce control over a specific geographic area. A theory of territoriality is developed that contains ten potential consequences and fourteen primary combinations of consequences to territorial strategies. It is hypothesized that any instance of territoriality will draw from among these. Specific consequences and combinations are predicted to occur in particular social-historical contexts.
    Annals of the Association of American Geographers © 1983 Association of American Geographers
    Request Permissions
    =
     
  3. james M

    james M Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,916
    Likes Received:
    858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    time to find a less liberal whacko theory???
     
  4. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ability = means or market?

    Should not the seller make that decision?

    I would be more interested in seeing a reasoned/rational answer to "WHY?"

    But it was also once written "From each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution."
    And while I find that much more reasonable and rational, it appears quite difficult if not downright impossible to achieve conclusively to everyones acceptance especially when inflation does not affect everyone equally. While government may present a 2% average cost of living increase from the previous year, some persons may find their cost of living had risen 10% based on their needs/wants increasing their debt, while others may find their cost of living unchanged, and still others may find their cost of living to have decreased 10% as a result of adjusting their needs/wants increasing their savings/investments.

    It would appear that our Federal government has gradually and relentlessly been trying to mandate the former "according to needs", communism, while the people constantly argue over the latter "according to contribution", socialism. While I find neither acceptable as a basis of operation of our Federal, or even our State governments, I would have no problem with their implementation at a local level of government with the consent of the society it governs.
     
  5. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean, like John Paulson acquired $2 billion overnight during the GFC, while many lost their lifesavings, pension plans, and homes?

    er, you'd better change that last figure....

    But there you go, insisting that all wealth acquired by individuals is a measure of a person's qualities, creativity, and ability to change society for the better, not to mention personal effort. Paulson manipulated a dysfunctional financial system and created wealth for his investors, as part of a process that resulted in 50 million losing their jobs world wide. And that example of 'honest' wealth acquisition is benign in comparison with various types of 'rewarding' criminal activitie.s

    Gosh, those poor billionaires, they must be terrified by not knowing if they will be able to afford their next meal!


    Money is only a means of exchange. We have had this debate about 'value' not long ago. It's irrelevant, given it's possible to devise an economy, worldwide, that pays above poverty wages for universal productive participation in the economy.

    No-one likes paying tax; Obama couldn't even raise taxes on people earning more than $2million a year. (That's why the left in in total disarray). That's why public infrastructure such as bridges collapse in the world's wealthiest nation, through lack of maintenance.

    .
    Better not tell 2.5 billion Chinese and Indians they can industrialise via coal! We will all require gas masks

    Keynes described a system of global trade (Bretton Woods 1944) that would allow all nations to trade and prosper regardless of resources and current level of economic development. Greed, great power rivalry, paranoia about international rule of law etc etc, ..all your (apparently) preferred bed fellows - ensured dismissal of his ideas.

    Like you, politicians do not even recognise they are labouring under outdated econ101 policies - why should they, when the silly adversarial game they are playing is so profitable for themselves.
     
  6. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, that was an excellent decision but the $2 billion was not taken from life savings, pension plans, and homes, but from other investors who bet against him, and lost.


    You're right, I meant Trillion.

    Where in my post have I insisted what you are accusing me of?
    Had you given thought that some of Paulsons' investors may have been some who suffered losses as a result of the GFC?


    I often wonder why you, and a number of others who post feel a need for sarcasm. It detracts from anything that might otherwise be taken as reasoned and worth pursuing.



    The 'fact' that it is the medium with which we exchange labour/goods/services makes it quite relevant.
    Not every job is worth paying an above poverty wage, and some people find those types of jobs useful when they are allowed to exist as a way to increase their means.

    What happened to all those shovel ready jobs?
    .
    There you go, start a business making gas masks.


    Did he, really now?


    You're entitled to your views, but I've yet to be convinced in any way reasonable or rational to accept them as my own.
     
  7. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Forcible animal possession is not property. All your recent posts thus stand refuted.
     
  8. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can't see the madness in the system? 40 million workers lost their jobs worldwide as a result of the fallout from that particular round of casino-like financial industry "betting" activity.

    Frustration, mainly. I pointed out the distribution of wealth which is beyond insane - with your own figures showing a couple of thousand individuals worth 7 trillion, while 2 billion individuals are 'living' on a few bucks a day, with no chance of accumulating wealth. You chose to comment on 'paper' billionaires and daily fluctuations in asset values........

    Full-time working age participation in the economy - a birthright of all - is always worth above poverty level compensation.

    The government could not 'afford' to fund them. In reality, eg, every household in the US could be connected by fibre optic cable, starting today, instantly creating millions of jobs across the entire country, (beginning with the necessary training of currently unemployed local labour).
    .
    That's the answer I expected. True entrepreneurship (if you will excuse the sarcasm...)

    Yes, but his (Keynes') vision doesn't compute with your world view, so you dismiss it.

    Your world view based on the same variations on the theme: Ted in the Shed , with his Anarchism based on a fantasy of 'voluntary co-operation'; you with disdain for rule of law that might override the primacy of individual freedom, and hence rejection of international rule of law; James with his last three posts attempting to 'prove' to bringiton that instinct rules the world.......I know that already.

    All based on an incapacity to recognise that the evolution of the human cerebral cortex enables management of the nature's ordained predation, warfare and competition for resources (provided instinct, in the nuclear age, doesn't destroy the world beforehand. "Civilisation is a race between education and catastrophe": HG Wells)

    The reptilian brain (source of survival-driven instinct) is exceptionally powerful in both individual and world affairs; the cerebral cortex, source of reason and awareness of transcendence, is yet to triumph on this planet.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2017
  9. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course there are some basic truths in Econ.101, such as supply and demand determining price, and the equation you gave above, etc etc, but as a tool for solving real world problems Econ101 is practically useless - you only have to look at the globe {Venezuela, Angola, the developed world 'rust belt', farmer debt-driven suicides in India, and countless examples of economic dysfunction - which is why economics students the world over are demanding more real world relevance from their economics classes.

    You have already seen my Keynesian-type proposal (eg along the lines of his 1944 Bretton Woods scheme) for national governments to be granted debt-free money printing powers via a world bank, to enable public sector funding of socially desirable activity in each nation (while taking into account actual resources available), given that the personal-profit-driven private sector will never achieve, by itself, the best public outcomes. Again, look at the real world.
     
  10. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, I have in part addressed this in my previous post.

    Well, I of course agree with all of this.

    However, as I noted in a previous post, NO-ONE LIKES paying tax. The upshot is that, after all the silly adversarial political theatre seen all around the world (in the democracies), governments are always cash-strapped to one degree or other, and many socially desirable programs languish due to lack of funding, and so we have eg, the defunding of services that enable the elderly to remain in their own homes for as long as possible - madness, along with the austerity-driven Greek 'debt' madness, and countless other such examples
    --------
    Education - as you say, vital in the Information age. Interestingly, it's mostly a process of transfer of knowledge from teachers to students - absolutely minimal resources involved other than time (labour) and effort on the part of teacher and student is required, so theoretically 4 billion students could be educated "for free" (ie, funded by world-bank money printing) without causing any resource-demand inflation in the global economy. (However, there will always be a level of, and demand for, unskilled labour, so I wouldn't put all my eggs in the education up-skilling basket.}

    You mention US (in particular) defense spending. Of course it's a hideous waste of resources (not to mention the terrible loss of innocent life that continues in unabated fashion since the end of WW2).
    But that sad situation is partly the result of - as I have noted in previous posts - instinctive paranoia re international law, and the consequent failure of the UN to eradicate the legality of war as a dispute settlement mechanism.

    Anyway, if you feel you can achieve free tertiary education in the US, within the parameters of the present global political and economic system....

    {btw, it's interesting to see Trumpy putting out mixed messages over health-care funding eg 'health-care with heart"......
    Hm. Nothing like a politician appealing to both sides of an exceedingly polarised electorate)
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2017
  11. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Madness? no.
    Perhaps it would help for you to present your view of the cause and effect more clearly.


    First, wealth is not distributed. It is acquired.
    While some may appear to accumulate wealth quickly, they are the exception not the rule. Wealth accumulation for most takes time, even generations. Like jobs, the chances of getting one is much less if you don't actively seek one.


    Everyone has a 'right' to participate, but that's all. Compensation should be equal to the value of the work being performed which in some cases may be well below poverty level.


    What about the bridges near collapse?


    It was a rational answer none the less.


    For the most part yes.

    Baseless accusations are not worth the time or effort to respond to.
     
  12. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is a central government in all civilized nations on earth, and its workings must be sustained by taxable income. (I.e., "taxation".) Still, that comment opens up the discussion to "what kind of taxation?"

    And my take on that question is not unique, but different from the prevalent opinion in the US. You see, most of Europe believes in taxation as a justifiably means to certain ends. And to do so, it has a far higher level of total taxation as a percentage of GDP than the US. (See here.)

    So, what's the difference? The appreciation of what the country should be doing for its citizens. (I.e., what are the justifiable ends of taxation?)

    After all, we elect our representatives, so they should be doing what we, the sheeple, want. And that's the problem. They aren't because all three chambers of governance (the Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial) are heavily influenced by Replicant Majorities. What's their major Chop-Job of the week? Taking down ObamaCare. (What sheer idiocy in a developed country that has a privatized HealthCare system of highly questionable efficacy nationwide.)

    Like it or not, that's a fact of this last terrible, drastic election in the US.

    Well, yes and no. Not all countries. That is a particular affliction of the US, however.

    The French have just gone through a grueling election period (Executive and Legislative) that has renewed from the roots France's political governance. A previously non-established party (and founder of the party) won hands down. Macron (the president) has a substantial majority in the legislature.

    Will he be able to change France? We shall see. He has a very heavy absolute majority - but can he dump the Work Code that was first established 6 decades ago. No, but he must change it significantly since it is stifling employment-creation in France.

    Nobody in their right mind would open up a factory to build whatever-widget in France because of work laws that give France a bad reputation for industrial output. (France stoopidly adopted the same-pay 35-hour workweek in 2004, down from 39.5 hours. And, yet, lo and behold, the actual productivity per unit of work is the same as Germany! (105.6, See here: OECD GDP per total hours worked.)

    Germany makes its money in industry, and France in tourism. Both have very different measurement dimensions, and are therefore both comparative and non-comparative at the same time. It is extremely difficult to compare specifically why one country has better cost-per-unit-of-output - because measuring output is very tricky.

    I'm not so sure. Let's not put the blame on just the UN.

    The UN has no army with which to "enforce the illegality of war". It has to wait for war to break out with a dimension that forces a group of countries to settle the matter at the UN.

    That is not a recipe for successfully intercepting the outbreak of war.

    The truth is that I don't, because both of the above parameters have very little impact upon the willingness to establish free tertiary education.

    You must remember that in the 20th century free secondary-education took 20/30 years (between 1910 and 1940) to finally be fully adopted/implemented by the individual states (and their cities).

    Free tertiary-education permitted Europe to play economic catch-up (in its post-WW2 years) to the US in terms of percentage of its population obtaining a Tertiary Level degree. And it did so by means of a program of government-sponsored free post-secondary education.

    If Americans want nearly 45% of their kids to be under-educated given the Information Age requirement for highly advanced skills, that's America's problem. I live in France, and all my kids went to university for the monumental cost of $1K per year (plus room 'n board) ...
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2017
  13. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No, the rules of Econ101 still apply. I can name two or three countries in Africa that have a reasonably good economy, but the percentage of the population represented is measly.

    It is not Econ101 that is faulty - so let's not blame the tool.

    Let's blame the person employing the tool. And in most of Africa, if its not religion it is a high level of corruption that assures that Econ101 does not function as it should.

    I've done business there, and know first hand the bribes necessary to get a government contract for IT-equipment ...
     
  14. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    THE COLOSSAL AMERICAN TAX RIP-OFF

    The above is just one example of the warped-BS in your commentary.

    As if Obama could raise or lower taxes without a Replicant HofR approving the measure!!!!!!!

    And the rest of your sniping is just a illogical. The principle objective of Acceptable Taxation is progressive resolution of the US's whacko Income Disparity.

    I could give a damn about the millions upon millions that the rich do indeed pay in taxation. What Replicants like you fail to understand is that the amount is irrelevant. What counts is the amount they keep by finagling the Tax System by means of (for instance) either Tax Avoidance or Tax Evasion. The former is legal (finagling tax returns) and the latter is punishable by law. As regards the latter, the sums are world records:
    [​IMG]

    The above is Tax Evasion, and the Tax Avoidance is about the same proportion. Estimates vary if you google the subject. But the total that avoids the Treasury's coffers between personal and corporate taxation) could be estimated at least at around a trillion dollars.

    Were taxation in the US sufficiently progressive, then upper-income taxes should be put back to where it was before LBJ signed JFK's last bill (before he died) to lower the rates from 90 to 70%. Reckless Ronnie took them down to 30% with the agreement of the Democrats who had had a collective loss of brain-matter. Ninety-percent is a damn fine confiscatory tax upon those who "work the market-economy" uniquely for their personal/individual benefit.

    The fact that 0.1% of Americans who own 20% of the nation's wealth - as much as the other 90% own - is a parting gift of Reagan's administration in the 1980s to America's super-rich.

    As if they needed one. And yet, they are still with us, and have managed to convince even the Supremes to unleash the limits on amounts of super-rich money can be employed to assure that "their candidates" (once elected) do not change the taxation status-quo.

    They've been ripping off tax-dollars for the past 30 years! Isn't that enough ... !!!!!

    NB: Tax Avoidance in the US - excerpt:
     
  15. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    40 million jobs lost as a result of financial industry machinations (during the GFC). Business as usual for you, I suppose.

    Well we have covered all these issues before; you refuse to debate the substantive issues eg your flippant reply (rational in your view) re lack of funding of public infrastructure and its proper maintenance.

    Baseless accusations? Your evident sensitivity around a discussion of 'worldview' might be indicative of where the 'rubber hits the road'......

    The topic of the "disappeared" under the right-wing dictatorship of Argentina was discussed on local radio station today;
    the fathomless evil of the Junta's world view......

    Your 'baseless accusations' comment obviously requires further examination.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2017
  16. Ndividual

    Ndividual Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2013
    Messages:
    3,960
    Likes Received:
    638
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What 'financial industry machinations' are you claiming to have been the cause of 40 million jobs being lost?


    What, in your opinion, is the 'most' substantive issue we 'should' be discussing?


    Yes, simply derogatory baseless accusations which do little more than detract from a civil, thoughtful discussion of any issue in which disagreement exists, resulting more often than not in hardening of positions rather than searching for an agreeable means of solving a problem.
     
  17. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    [
    You certainly misconstrue my meaning at times (not sure who fault that is).

    I'm attempting to understand why it is that the UN was not constituted to ensure that war would be never again be considered as a legitimate means of dispute settlement, even after the experience of WW2.

    Hence my conception of instinctive paranoia re international law, ie, in nature, territorial instincts rule supreme; and a concept such as international rule of law will struggle to overcome this instinct. (Nevertheless, some people did indeed oppose adoption of the veto in the UNSC in 1945....)

    As for your subsequent comments on taxation, you have completely misread my position; there will be some people on this board chuckling at your identification of me with the "Replicants" (US Republicans).

    I'm just stating the obvious ie no-one likes paying more tax than necessary; and I have proposed a global financial system in which taxation of the private sector in each nation could in fact be greatly reduced or even rendered obsolete.

    When I said Obama wasn't able to raise taxes even on wealthy people, I assumed you would understand what I meant. ie, while HE wished to raise taxes on the wealthy - which I agree is necessary in this time of increasing wealth and income inequality, the political process determined that he was unable to do so. You have seen enough posts here to know Replicants are not interested in concepts of equality or wealth redistribution.

    But if there is another way to achieve prosperity for all......

    You hope Macron will improve the terrible (especially youth) underemployment situation in France?

    Experience suggests otherwise.

    We all - or the majority of people around the world, hoped Obama would bring "change we can all believe in", but the forces arranged against him were powerful indeed.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2017
  18. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    THE UN IS NOT TO BLAME

    The UN Charter, signed in 1945 - CHAPTER VI: PACIFIC SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES. Excerpt:
    The mechanism has been there for quite some time. But having the mechanism does not mean that nation's will employ it to settle disputes.

    Unfortunately, we, as a people, are not yet up to that standard. And with 54% of our national budget going just to the DoD, this mislaid largesse allows us to swagger around the world without the need of approval from anyone.

    And, from our side, nothing will change until the American people elect representatives to both their Legislature and their Executive to assure that National Budget Expenditures should have national priority objectives far above and beyond that of any international priority (with the sole exception being a war declared "official" by the United Nations).

    NB:
    *Military expenditure as a percent of GDP (from here, 2015):
    USA - 3.3%
    EU - 1.5%

    *Ok, Ok - Europe does not spend enough! Both Germany and France have decided to spend more. But let's all agree that 2%, shall we, is more than enough! We have economic objectives far more important than just National Defense. (Reducing the population incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold from 15% to 5% is the more important.)

    The mechanism is there in the UN. If men do not wish to avail themselves of it, then what is to be done?

    The failure is not in the mechanism (the institution, "UN"), but in our collective application of it ...
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  19. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, yes, when you look at the economic history as shown here:
    [​IMG]
    What in heaven's name made you believe that run-up can or should last forever? Because it is hourly comp-costs that decide whether a product/service is made in the US or elsewhere.

    Which is why, in terms of market sector, this happens: China floods our country with cheap hand-made goods*, and southeast Asia is obtaining monumental contracts for software development ...

    *And not only cheap goods. When China has a modern manufacturing process, it brings that process (along with the machinery) to the US. Why? For two reasons:
    *The process is highly automated and needs minimum manpower to run, and
    *The owners' families can make claim to American citizenship ...
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  20. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    "The owners' families can make claim to American citizenship"

    By no means do I imply that this is intrinsically unfair.

    It has happened in the US since its inception, and will continue to happen given the immense market dynamics in play. That is, an homogenous market-economy of around 320M consumers.

    Not even the EU offers quite the same (even if larger by more than twice the number of consumers) due to cross-country language differences that imply a higher cost-to-market ...
     
  21. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One is at liberty to use an atom, which only nature can create, no matter where that atom it even it it has been moved by someone else. Atoms are a gift of nature, wherever they are, and each of us has a right to access them, wherever they are.
     
  22. james M

    james M Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,916
    Likes Received:
    858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    so true!! why spend so much on defense when all major countries have been conquered, killed and enslaved many times in their histories!! Defeat is inevitable so why not encourage it rather than waste money resisting it!!!!
     
  23. james M

    james M Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,916
    Likes Received:
    858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    simple, some people would rather die fighting for their cause than surrender to the will of the majority or the will of the UN. Peace on earth can only be secured when liberalism is illegal. As long as liberals think they can take over a govt and turn it into a magical force we will have war. This is what Jesus and conservatives believe.
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  24. james M

    james M Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2014
    Messages:
    12,916
    Likes Received:
    858
    Trophy Points:
    113
    thankfully so!! Obama was a simple libcommie and nothing more. It never works, in fact killed 120 million, but liberals lack the IQ to understand capitalism so they keep trying with one govt scam after another. Remember cash for clunkers? Remember the New Deal Great Depression: 16 years of liberal govt scams,depression, and world war!!
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017
  25. a better world

    a better world Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2016
    Messages:
    5,000
    Likes Received:
    718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I must say it is refreshing to be in complete and utter agreement with a posting on this board!

    However.....

    Article 33 of the UN

    1. The parties to any dispute, the continuance of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall, first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.
    2. The Security Council shall, when it deems necessary, call upon the parties to settle their dispute by such means
    Do you not see that article 33 ultimately relies on voluntary co-operation to solve international "disputes"?
    There is no mechanism, [eg a supreme court, to actually adjudicate and enforce such judgement aka rule of law] to settle the dispute in law, as there are mechanisms to settle disputes between individuals and commercial entities within individual nations.

    Given that rule of law - to promote well-ordered relations between individuals within nations - has been deemed necessary since the "Magna Carta", it's now way past time - in a technologically advanced global economy - to set up the same provisions for enforcement of international rule of law, if we are going to render war obsolete and illegal as a means of dispute settlement.

    Btw some far-sighted individuals saw this, and hence resisted adoption of a veto power by permanent members of the Security Council during the establishment of the UN Charter in 1945.

    Now its obvious from James response that universal education is likely an important part of the process to achieve international rule of law - although Trump has the power to enable its establishment today, simply by gaining agreement from the other 4 permanent members in the Security Council, to eliminate the veto, and to adopt some other machinery eg addition of Japan and Germany to the Council, and mechanisms for the deployment of military force etc.

    Would Trump encounter any resistance against agreement from Putin, May, Macron, or Li, considering the massive savings in resources, currently diverted to military programs, that would be instantly available to all of them, for the prosperous development of their own economies?

    But back to education: as a professor of economics, can you comment on my proposition that education, being a process of transfer of knowledge from teacher to student, could be supplied universally and free at all levels, commensurate with the individual's abilities, funded by 'money printing' through a World Bank, without running into problems such as resource-demand inflation, since in fact there is minimal requirement for additional use of physical resources?

    Footnote: despite James' comments, surely state-authorised false-teaching, in nations such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, that the Koran is the "final, perfect Word Of God" and must therefore be followed to the letter, above all other law - the fundamentalist position - is amenable to universal education, especially in the context of the UN with its capacity for enabling debate in the General Assembly.








     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2017

Share This Page