Comments on: How’s that work again? http://samadhisoft.com/2008/07/23/hows-that-work-again/ Transcending our biological imperatives - Theories of future history - Eden lost Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:16:18 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Dennis http://samadhisoft.com/2008/07/23/hows-that-work-again/#comment-16422 Dennis Sat, 26 Jul 2008 11:28:24 +0000 http://samadhisoft.com/2008/07/23/hows-that-work-again/#comment-16422 Yes, there is an element of bitterness in my piece. And yes, I am aware that I can choose how to "invest" my money; in a secured fashion or in an unsecured fashion. Indeed, my great aunt and her husband lived most of their adult lives as private "bankers" making loans to people who wanted to buy property. All of these loans were secured by liens on the properties involved. I suppose all of this has to do with contracts as well? When I sign a contract for a credit card, the only collateral I offer is the presumption that I will pay back any money I may owe them. But, if I fail to pay, they can come after me on the strength of that contract. There is, for most "investors" like those who invested in Hanover Finance, no such contract - just an unsecured presumption of good faith. Knowledge/information is power. And most folks have not thought through the consequences of these distinctions. It looks to me like many times those who have thought the logic through and understand it, use their knowledge against those who haven't understood it to separate them from their money. This begins to get at the deep distinctions between unconstrained Capitalism (that we have the right to profit from our fellows regardless of the consequences) and the core ideas of Socialism (that our governing organizations should be about creating and maintaining a decent quality of life for all of us). Is it too much compassion to protect the less intelligent against the consequences of their lack of knowledge and intellect? We teach our children that bullying is bad on the playground. But when we grow up, in some of our societies, it becomes the 'smart' thing to do - to use our extra intelligence, knowledge, information and understanding against our fellow citizens to separate them from their money? I know I am an over-the-top idealist. But when I see the credit card companies camped out on college campuses handing out credit cards to the students knowing full-well that many, if not most, of the recipients are going to crash and burn from not really getting how these cards work (in spite of supposedly being smart in that they are going to college), I find that I am disappointed in the predatory nature of some of my fellow human beings. We are not created equal. And I believe that those of us gifted with more intelligence have some responsibility to use this extra capacity compassionately with respect to our fellows rather than as a bludgeon to increase the economic disparity between them and ourselves. Yes, there is an element of bitterness in my piece. And yes, I am aware that I can choose how to “invest” my money; in a secured fashion or in an unsecured fashion. Indeed, my great aunt and her husband lived most of their adult lives as private “bankers” making loans to people who wanted to buy property. All of these loans were secured by liens on the properties involved.

I suppose all of this has to do with contracts as well? When I sign a contract for a credit card, the only collateral I offer is the presumption that I will pay back any money I may owe them. But, if I fail to pay, they can come after me on the strength of that contract. There is, for most “investors” like those who invested in Hanover Finance, no such contract - just an unsecured presumption of good faith.

Knowledge/information is power. And most folks have not thought through the consequences of these distinctions. It looks to me like many times those who have thought the logic through and understand it, use their knowledge against those who haven’t understood it to separate them from their money.

This begins to get at the deep distinctions between unconstrained Capitalism (that we have the right to profit from our fellows regardless of the consequences) and the core ideas of Socialism (that our governing organizations should be about creating and maintaining a decent quality of life for all of us).

Is it too much compassion to protect the less intelligent against the consequences of their lack of knowledge and intellect? We teach our children that bullying is bad on the playground. But when we grow up, in some of our societies, it becomes the ’smart’ thing to do - to use our extra intelligence, knowledge, information and understanding against our fellow citizens to separate them from their money?

I know I am an over-the-top idealist. But when I see the credit card companies camped out on college campuses handing out credit cards to the students knowing full-well that many, if not most, of the recipients are going to crash and burn from not really getting how these cards work (in spite of supposedly being smart in that they are going to college), I find that I am disappointed in the predatory nature of some of my fellow human beings.

We are not created equal. And I believe that those of us gifted with more intelligence have some responsibility to use this extra capacity compassionately with respect to our fellows rather than as a bludgeon to increase the economic disparity between them and ourselves.

]]> By: john k. http://samadhisoft.com/2008/07/23/hows-that-work-again/#comment-16417 john k. Sat, 26 Jul 2008 05:16:59 +0000 http://samadhisoft.com/2008/07/23/hows-that-work-again/#comment-16417 That's not an entirely accurate depiction of the markets. If I "invest," I do so--if I am aware at all of what I do--with the knowledge that I am not a creditor, that my investment is subject to the vicissitudes of the marketplace, and that if the company I have invested in goes belly-up, I am typically at the back of the repayment line. And, as a general rule, when I invest I am not putting my money in the balance sheet of the company; I am, however, lining the pockets of the brokers and traders of the underlying share. If you can structure your investment as an honest-to-goodness loan, then you have become a creditor and would have some recourse. That’s not an entirely accurate depiction of the markets. If I “invest,” I do so–if I am aware at all of what I do–with the knowledge that I am not a creditor, that my investment is subject to the vicissitudes of the marketplace, and that if the company I have invested in goes belly-up, I am typically at the back of the repayment line. And, as a general rule, when I invest I am not putting my money in the balance sheet of the company; I am, however, lining the pockets of the brokers and traders of the underlying share. If you can structure your investment as an honest-to-goodness loan, then you have become a creditor and would have some recourse.

]]>