Re: ECON: What Jim Legg doesn't understand

Michael Lorrey (
Mon, 03 Feb 1997 18:53:48 -0500

Jim Legg wrote:
> Yesterday I changed to Office 97 and lost my inbox. Now several extropy posts will have to go unanswered, sorry. Because of the reply format in Outlook, it may take me awhile to disable the indent.
> Mlorrey:
> #1 I haven't heard you state any reasonable alternatives to price
> signals.
> Transactionally complete intrinsic quantity/quality assessments in EVERYONE'S deficit accounting systems will do the trick.

All you are doing here is making a long, hopefully to you,
incomprehensible to others, rephrasing of what is commonly known as a
price signal!!!

> #2 Who or what's safety is jeopardized by price signals?
> The unplanned collapse, caused by loss of confidence, of an economic system is an unsafe environment.

For a market to lose confidence, it must be ignorant, lack information,
on the data they need to make the decisions that send price signals in
return. A quick collapse is simply a break in the constant flow of price
signals, which can be caused by many things, a loss of confidence being
merely one of them. AFAIAC, it ain't broke, so don't try to fix it. If
it needs fixing, the past few decades have shown that, with
communication, the market can learn how to fix or evolve itself.

> #3 Given there are a finite nuber of people on this planet, each with a
> finite number of hours in the day to do work, and with a finite level
> of skills, as well as with a finite amount of resources to apply those
> skills and hours to to increase or add value, it is obvious that there
> would be a finite source of money. To think otherwise would be to risk
> the sort of chaotic insanity seen in the "print more if we run out"
> attitude of the idiots running formerly communist states like Russia,
> who have no concept of rational economic management.
Jim says:
> Nanotechnology is quite capable of reusing so-called waste and we are emerging from the conditions you describe to its opposite, so I don't accept your givens need to exist for reasons other than for harsh reasons. All deficits can be infinitely adjusted. Don't accept the Hegelian Russian experiment has validity unless you are feigning to the mundanes.

Mike's reply...

I concur that with nanotech the economy for material resouces, will
slowly recede in significance, but it will never completely die out.
THis is rather obvious to most here on the list, however you have been
talking in the present tense, so I cannot help it if you are

The Russian experiment is a fine example of people attemting to ignore
true reality, and paper it over with legislation of their own self
deceptions. The fact that it has failed while the capital based system
that has been evolving for several thousand years is stronger than ever
is evidence that trying to ignore that history of development is simply
self deception, self feigning...

> 1) because since cash is mostly in a form
> that wears out (the average paper dollar bill has an average life of
> less than one year, due to its flimsiness) they need to track its flow
> and maintain a healthy supply of said forms of money.
> What's this got to do with a future cyber culture? Your arguments sound a little out of place on the extropy list. I came down in the last shower, right?

WIth cyber cash, and hyper privacy, unless some body capable of
influencing money markets is able to accurately read price signals, and
analyse the money supply, as well as supplies of material and
information resources (which they are doing rather poorly at right now),
we risk entering the sort of chaos we thought we had left behind pre

> I HIGHLY recommend that you first take a few REAL courses in economics
> before you go spouting off about its supposed obsolescence.
> Please don't patronize as a way to side-step the vast structural damage caused by old systems. First take a few REAL courses in ruling class conspiracy.

Believe me when I say I've studied them all. I know the ways of
mindfuck. I always look over my shoulder when someone says "there is no
hidden agenda here..." However, I also have a keen sense of the
practical. The faild russian experiment is a prime example of what you
get when you try to turn the existing system on its head too quickly.
Getting from here to there does not take a revolution, because given the
right stimuli, the market will get there all by itself.


Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ President Northstar Technologies Agent Inventor of the Lorrey Drive

Website: Now Featuring: Mikey's Animatronic Factory My Own Nuclear Espionage Agency (MONEA) MIKEYMAS(tm): The New Internet Holiday Transhumans of New Hampshire (>HNH) ------------------------------------------------------------ Transhumanist, Inventor, Webmaster, Ski Guide, Entrepreneur, Artist, Outdoorsman, Libertarian, Arms Exporter-see below. ------------------------------------------------------------ #!/usr/local/bin/perl-0777---export-a-crypto-system-sig-RC4-3-lines-PERL @k=unpack('C*',pack('H*',shift));for(@t=@s=0..255){$y=($k[$_%@k]+$s[$x=$_ ]+$y)%256;&S}$x=$y=0;for(unpack('C*',<>)){$x++;$y=($s[$x%=256]+$y)%256; &S;print pack(C,$_^=$s[($s[$x]+$s[$y])%256])}sub S{@s[$x,$y]=@s[$y,$x]}