@averagejoe1 saidSelf interest is neither good or bad; it's a law of nature like gravity. Everyone has a drive to breathe, eat, have sex and be safe and warm in a shelter.
Im not denying that, but it is not the issue of the moment.
Is self interest good or is it bad. I say, and have Shown above, that it is good
Problems start to arise when I get greedy and decide to steal your shelter, or food, or pollute your water, or enslave your whole family to perform labor for me until you drop dead.
17 Dec 21
@averagejoe1 saidAdam Smith's an interesting person to quote. He definitely wasn't a conservative, at least to the skewed standards of modern American conservatives.
"Self-interest refers to actions that elicit the most personal benefit. Adam Smith, the FATHER of modern economics (Y'all have chided me on my Econ references), explains that the best economic for ALL can usually be accomplished when individuals act in their own self interest.......Self Interest is arguably the single larges motivator of economic activity."
I didn't ...[text shortened]... nd services are created that benefit consumers and producers.
Now, I'm open for questions 🙂 🙂
Smith argued against policies, subsidies, handouts that favor one business over another. He did NOT argue for lower regulation ala Reagan. In fact, he understood that the merchants needed governmental constraints, fetters. The self interests of the merchants was a big potential problem for runaway, crony capitalism in which the business succeeds at the expense of the nation.
The huge increase of $40 billion in handouts to farmers comes to mind as a modern conservative idea that Adam Smith would have strongly disapproved of. Oil subisides, propping the Lockheed-Martin stock, Smith would've clearly hated the current American conservative. The entire philosophy surrounding capitalism falls apart if the government decides who gets the resources.
Self interest is sort of irrelevant from a political perspective. It's obvious. There's nothing a political philosophy can do about self interest except admit that it exists.
@sh76 saidyeah, wokism is the problem.
===What happened to American Conservatism?===
We're in exile.
We'll be back when wokism runs out of steam and stops pushing the center-right into the arms of the reactionaries.
a bunch of republicans tried to overtake an election by storming the Capitol because some kid is complaining about people not using their correct pronoun.
republicans are blocking every bill that might help people because people aren't saying merry christmas enough.
republicans are blocking voting rights laws, have immense fun drawing more and more ludicrous district lines because some children got offended Witcher doesn't have more black people
yep, wokism is the problem and you poor snowflakes are in exile through no fault of your own. It's nothing you can do about it, really.
What these kids should do is shut the fuk up about happy holidays, environment, commedians doing naughty jokes, pronouns and whatever them kids are whining about. Then and only then will you poor snowflakes be comfortable enough to NOT VOTE FOR FUKIN FASCISTS.
17 Dec 21
@averagejoe1 said"self-interest is a bad thing"
Strange for me to read that, Zhalanzi. You are saying, then, that self-interest is a bad thing. Probably the strangest thing that I have read, written by anyone.
If we all lived on an island, and each of us endeavors to improve his lot in life by 'self-interest', in a perfect world (no losers and wastrels) the island would thrive,,,,,the envy of all islands.
Wh ...[text shortened]... ld otherwise happen on the island? What is the better premise?
Please give me an honest answer.
Self interest at the expense of others is a bad thing. We learn that in kindergarten with concepts like "sharing" and "don't hit Johnny over the head with that train, Timmy you lunatic, it hurts him".
"If we all lived on an island, and each of us endeavors to improve his lot in life by 'self-interest', in a perfect world (no losers and wastrels) the island would thrive"
No it won't. There won't be any schools, any roads and nobody will pay someone to be a firefighter 24/7 because they would perceive to not be in their best interest to pay someone to put out fires (because I didn't have my hut catch fire so why should i pay to put out someone else's fire, they should have been more careful)
"What do you think should otherwise happen on the island? What is the better premise?"
There are personal goals and there are societal goals. One may not benefit from education immediately and personally (assuming he is done with it) but educating a future generation will benefit him in the long run as well. Building a road by oneself is not in any one person's best interest but if it is done collectively everyone benefits.
The most prosperity is achieved when people do what's best for the group as well as what's best for them.
17 Dec 21
@averagejoe1 said"Adam Smith, the FATHER of modern economics (Y'all have chided me on my Econ references), explains that the best economic for ALL can usually be accomplished when individuals act in their own self interest"
"Self-interest refers to actions that elicit the most personal benefit. Adam Smith, the FATHER of modern economics (Y'all have chided me on my Econ references), explains that the best economic for ALL can usually be accomplished when individuals act in their own self interest.......Self Interest is arguably the single larges motivator of economic activity."
I didn't ...[text shortened]... nd services are created that benefit consumers and producers.
Now, I'm open for questions 🙂 🙂
Adam Smith never got to see how Bezos acting in his own self interest leaves others dead in collapsing warehouses or pissing in bottles because their own self interest was diminished by others.
It's not Adam Smith's fault that idiots quote him 200+ years after his death and not update his ideas to modern economy. Or even understand the caveats that come with the theory. Even you added a "usually".
17 Dec 21
@zahlanzi saidA 'bunch of democrats' are trying to do away with voter ID." Do you really want to go there, zahlanzi? Repubs are indeed blocking bills which will run the USA into hell, based on the Biden lie that it costs 1.9T when the CBO says he is lying and that the number is more like 4.9T. Thankyou repubs.
yeah, wokism is the problem.
a bunch of republicans tried to overtake an election by storming the Capitol because some kid is complaining about people not using their correct pronoun.
republicans are blocking every bill that might help people because people aren't saying merry christmas enough.
republicans are blocking voting rights laws, have immense fun drawing m ...[text shortened]... t. Then and only then will you poor snowflakes be comfortable enough to NOT VOTE FOR FUKIN FASCISTS.
The rest of your post falls on deaf ears
@zahlanzi saidWith respects, this post is stupid.
"self-interest is a bad thing"
Self interest at the expense of others is a bad thing. We learn that in kindergarten with concepts like "sharing" and "don't hit Johnny over the head with that train, Timmy you lunatic, it hurts him".
"If we all lived on an island, and each of us endeavors to improve his lot in life by 'self-interest', in a perfect world (no losers and was ...[text shortened]... ost prosperity is achieved when people do what's best for the group as well as what's best for them.
17 Dec 21
@wildgrass saidYou can tell us what Adam Smith would disapprove of, but don't stop there! He would also disapprove of allowing our sovereignty being breached by illegal alien/immigrants, referred to as undocumented migrants by liberals. He would disapprove of Biden's non-enforcement of immigration laws.
Adam Smith's an interesting person to quote. He definitely wasn't a conservative, at least to the skewed standards of modern American conservatives.
Smith argued against policies, subsidies, handouts that favor one business over another. He did NOT argue for lower regulation ala Reagan. In fact, he understood that the merchants needed governmental constraints, fetters. T ...[text shortened]... ious. There's nothing a political philosophy can do about self interest except admit that it exists.
He would disapprove of Biden's nob-handling of inflation, amounting to a cruel tax on the poor and lower income. Do you ever think of that? Smith would not like that.
He would disapprove of Biden trying to spend trillions more, making inflation worse. He would disapprove of high energy prices, the principal cause of inflation. This has happened due to Biden energy policies. Adam Smith would decry closing the pipeline. Hie would disapprove Biden approving the Nord Stream pipeline. Wildgrass??
Smith would disapprove Federal control of elections, which is being pushed by your lot but is not in the Constitution.
He would disaprove of politicizing the military. He would HATE what the dems did in Afghanistan.He would disapprove of you and me having a president who lies, as follows:
Hunter's biz dealings with China, influence peddling
Lied about what Trump said about Charlottesville
Lied about Rittenhouse
Has plagiarized throughout his life (google it)
A lifetime of failures and no successes as president . Adam Smith wojld not approve. Sorry to sound like the SHouse rant machine, sometimes you fellers just need to see the big picture.
17 Dec 21
@averagejoe1 saidNow that is a little picture.
You can tell us what Adam Smith would disapprove of, but don't stop there! He would also disapprove of allowing our sovereignty being breached by illegal alien/immigrants, referred to as undocumented migrants by liberals. He would disapprove of Biden's non-enforcement of immigration laws.
He would disapprove of Biden's nob-handling of inflation, amounting to a cru ...[text shortened]... Sorry to sound like the SHouse rant machine, sometimes you fellers just need to see the big picture.
Long rant, little picture. 🤔
17 Dec 21
@jimm619 saidBut I have a different take of my own, if I may. There is no 'other' father of modern economics, so your post fails.
Funny, the other 'FATHER' of
modern economics, John Maynard Keynes,
has a completely different take;
https://www.studymode.com/essays/John-Maynard-Keynes-And-Adam-Smith-481110.html
17 Dec 21
@zahlanzi saidTo not say 'usually' would imply that ours is a perfect world. Usually is properly used.
"Adam Smith, the FATHER of modern economics (Y'all have chided me on my Econ references), explains that the best economic for ALL can usually be accomplished when individuals act in their own self interest"
Adam Smith never got to see how Bezos acting in his own self interest leaves others dead in collapsing warehouses or pissing in bottles because their own self interest w ...[text shortened]... odern economy. Or even understand the caveats that come with the theory. Even you added a "usually".
17 Dec 21
@averagejoe1 saidI read Wealth of Nations and it is available online for anyone to read.
But I have a different take of my own, if I may. There is no 'other' father of modern economics, so your post fails.
https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/3300/pg3300-images.html
I find that conservatives who appeal to the authority of this book rarely have read it.
17 Dec 21
@sonhouse said===That is all well and good but how do you think we now no longer have 10 year old children working in mines?
@quackquack
That is all well and good but how do you think we now no longer have 10 year old children working in mines?
Or any kind of medical help from an accident at work?
Or a mining company dumping toxic waste in our rivers?
Do you seriously think the regulations designed to stop exactly that kind of abuse should now be rescinded because YOU want them to be gone? H ...[text shortened]... always SO altruistic.
Sure, and JFK and son will appear at one of those wackathons going on now.
Or any kind of medical help from an accident at work?===
Right. But curbing those things were GOOD ideas.
Dumping on police in general because of a tiny handful of bad apples, doxxing and getting people fired to Tweeting that natural immunity is a thing and enormous deficit spending programs to pay people not to work are BAD ideas.
See the difference?
