tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2850977918787367334.post7356564384326253969..comments2024-02-23T09:18:10.084-08:00Comments on Icono-Curmudgeon-Clast - Loring Wirbel's Rants: Transient Craft Guilds and the Future of WorkLoring Wirbelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11764834150305763077noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2850977918787367334.post-37419014332452183932009-12-20T16:39:40.365-08:002009-12-20T16:39:40.365-08:00I linked you in a post that I did. I know that I h...I linked you in a post that I did. I know that I have not commented here in ages, but you are still on my reader. I have gotten away from political stuff and pretty much write fiction stories now. I hope that you have been doing okay!Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03158978490041796686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2850977918787367334.post-13290348110296899052009-12-17T21:45:22.575-08:002009-12-17T21:45:22.575-08:00And you, Ruth - I never thought about applying bio...And you, Ruth - I never thought about applying biomimicry ideas here. What a fun synergy and synchronicity! But every time I hear "survival of the fittest" just below mention of Ayn Rand, I hasten to remind people that there are both selfish and altruistic genes. Rand never believed in the latter, and they've been proven.Loring Wirbelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11764834150305763077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2850977918787367334.post-10591732977329780862009-12-17T21:15:44.837-08:002009-12-17T21:15:44.837-08:00Strangely (is it?) I found this post exciting, not...Strangely (is it?) I found this post exciting, not depressing. It's beautifully conceived, and I just had to laugh at the dinosaur! I don't know, it just made me feel very hopeful that we the people will do what we need to do (sort of like blogging that takes on its own life, or the Internet itself, the longest running machine that can't be tamed).<br /><br />Through your pace I kept hearing the word <i>biomimicry</i> in the back of my head and I couldn't stop thinking about Janine Benyus. Whether or not we learn and design from Nature as her design concept teaches, what we design jobs-wise and economy-wise as things keep changing will be out of the survival of the fittest model, no matter what, this quickly evolving morphing state of things. <br /><br />So, while scientists use biomimicry to make "new" adhesives, etc., how can we learn from Nature to design "new" economies (that are also humane)?<br /><br />You get me thinking, old dawg.Ruthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14204074161539605133noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2850977918787367334.post-31611040449923047142009-12-17T07:45:33.862-08:002009-12-17T07:45:33.862-08:00Egad, Mildred, is Brian showing signs of becoming ...Egad, Mildred, is Brian showing signs of becoming Ayn Rand? Should we put him out his misery?<br /><br />Seriously, it was interesting to see that Obama's smackdown of the banks garnered the most bipartisan popularity of any act of his administration - Graham, Hatch, and other Repubs were falling over themselves to say that Obama for once was doing the right thing. I don't think this was just a kneejerk pitchfork-and-torch action, but an intuitive recognition by people of all parties that financial executives have reached such a level of abstraction, they couldn't practice "moral hazard" rules if they wanted to. You can say they're just serving shareholders, but NY Times' front-page article on Goldman Sachs on Dec. 16 points to what I mean. Those wanting to manipulate ethereal financial instruments are just looking for higher rates of return, and don't even realize how they are gutting the economy. Like I said in the post, regulation won't work. But maybe we could simply ban the entire financial industry, and go back to a barter economy. Might be fun to try, and it fits with the craft-guild thingie.Loring Wirbelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11764834150305763077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2850977918787367334.post-73646077013475764842009-12-16T20:57:01.125-08:002009-12-16T20:57:01.125-08:00A lovely rant, and it's too bad I wasn't t...A lovely rant, and it's too bad I wasn't there to share a beer with you at the creation. <br />Change is a bitch, no doubt. It's always darkest before dawn, etc. But there is little way to build moral boundaries for the future. <br />The moral hazard concept is spot on. Most people are rational and rational people by and large don't make irrational decisions, unless, for example, the Congress is complicit in believing that low-cost housing (Clinton era) would pave the way to social equality.And the only way to do that is look the other way on 60 years of post-Depression risk assessment philosophy. <br />Too big to fail? The only reason you can't let them all fail (at least the banks) is that there would be no capital to grease the economy's skids. (If you believe Bernanke's analysis of the reasons the Depression was so deep and prolonged). <br />But Detroit? That's a political bailout, plain and simple. No one bails out a semiconductor company (which arguably delivers more value to the world than GM) when it screws up. <br />It may sound Ayn Randian, but we shouldn't be in the business of rewarding stupidity or reckless risk, but we have. <br />On labor, while I tend to eat a lot of my own dog food on the changing nature of labor, it won't happen nearly as fast as we think. It's human nature. <br />And it's good to note that every "jobless recovery" I've ever been a part of seems a return to 2-3% employment levels within a few years. <br />Painful? Yes. Apocalyptic? No.<br />Now, if Obama would only stop demonizing the banks for a few hours, maybe they'd start lending again. We have nothing to fear except...Greeley's Ghosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09277152913548239048noreply@blogger.com