Says Keynes thought that there would come an age of plenty where material needs were no longer lacking – and that this would come around 2030. Keynes did not account for 1. explosive population growth and 2. the substitution of wants for needs. The idea of money as a means to an end has eroded in popular culture, oftentimes becoming a means in itself, a way to keep score, something to do – and deeply rooted in human nature (competition, showing off, etc). Says that philosophical explanations of the scarcity of sex are overly simplistic in thinking that this is a product of capitalism – indeed, this is a problem that has plagued existence. Women, in the traditional sense, can use sex as a means to an end. The sexual revolution of the 60s was brought about by the material earnings of the Baby Boomers parents, and fear of capitalist crisis waned. Capitalism commoditized the sexual revolution, leading to 80s consumerism. In the end, suggests a paternalistic government which should inch people to what it calls “the good life”, which is, in sum, the abandoning of consumerism in favor of more “human” virtues (it claims 7, such as personality, friendship, etc). Suggests that a life of “leisure” of one where we would choose to do things were we had time to – sculpting, teaching an idea, making music, exploring science – things not based in “toil.” Any activity is perceived to be better than none, even toil (I.e. American Factory movie). People’s existing leisure time is spent getting their mind off their day-to-day, so people become passive consumers of content (Bertrand Russell) -- leisure has lost the meaning of spontaneous activity and become passive consumption, thus, as the lesser of two evils, people work. Shifts in the landscape: increase in the hours of the working rich, increase in paid vacation (Europe), women in the workforce, more time on householdwork and commuting. Also, people work for the benefits of companionship, or to avoid a family life they do not like. Many surveys purport that people do actually want to work less, but this is not a realistic option for most people with full time jobs. As people reach material well being, boredom grows, and people seek out escapes from the boredom. Also, psychologically, people want “the best”, and go on striving for it, but “the best” things will always have limited access (oligarchic wealth can attain these positional goods)– thus, striving continues in perpetuity, everyone can not have front row seats, so to speak. People also don’t want to be different from other people, particularly not children, putting pressure on society for conformity of wants. Also, many expensive items are desirable for status – a Rolls Royce is no longer cool if everyone can have one. The United States was the the place where you would work and get rich – European lower classes had no hope of getting rich, and the upper classes thought work to be below them. Adam Smith says we are driven by natural desire for self improvement – which manifests under capitalism as “MORE.” Charity was discouraged because it promoted idleness. Freud said the progress of wealth required the repression of our human instincts. Smith said repetitive tasks led us to become “stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become.” Marx did not account for the increase of productivity of labor by technology, and also the dynamism of capitalism (I.e. globalization) -- capitalism has ceased to explode in the way he predicted. Repression of death instinct is inherent in humans, says Freud (I.e. religion which offers life after death). Aristotle says the meaning of life is to perfect life. Indian Dharmasutras say a man who gives up desire for wealth and immortality is one who finds happiness. “He who is without desire, who is freed from desire...--he goes to Brahma” (Nirvana in Buddhism). Eastern morality prioritized education, “only studying is high.” Sima Qian, alive around the time of Christ, said, “The desire for wealth does not need to be taught; it is an integral part of all human nature...” “Thus men apply all their knowledge and use all their abilities simply in accumulating money. They never have any strength left over to consider the question of giving some of it away.” The state has moved from tolerance, which does not tolerate the intolerable, to a state of neutrality, assuming nothing is better than the other. Cultural biases and how surveys on happiness are performed both lead to inconsistent results in happiness analysis. Happiness is an outlook (or not). Points out that climate radicals are, oftentimes, haters of greed, luxury, and civilization in general (Puritanical/Calvinist), and this manifests in their back to nature/good of mother nature-ness. “Her balance”, thus she assumes a dogma-like being, like that of a God. “The truth is that some cultures – including of course, our own – might be wrong about ethical matters. Even dogmatic value-relativists are usually brought up short by mention of such stock examples as female circumcision in North Africa or foot-binding in China.” Says that all cultures value health, respect, security, relationships of trust, and love, at some level. Catholic, papal dogma favors everyone having the means to support themselves, and thus favors private property to induce people to become owners and not become infantile. Economic Growth-ism from the 80s stemmed from the arms race with the Soviets, and a way to improve the position of the poor without taking it away from the rich. Rightly points out that before stagflation, the power of unions had grown too large, and taxation rates had become punitive – and the straw that broke the camel’s back was the oil crisis, which effectively reduced the wealth of the rich and business. Proposes many reforms in the state similar to Bregman, such as reduced hours (without a reduction in productivity), UBI (“negative income tax” Milton Friedman), and more ethical decisions on the part of the state; book says the state is never neutral (i.e. sin taxes, consumption taxes to create the desired path of consumption for the “good life”). Also suggests the possibility of taxation on financial instruments. Chief flaw of all this logic is “people should first of all get what they need, not what they want.” Which presumes a “We know better approach.” Says that all rich nations have become rich through isolation and subsidies – that free trade is not how to build a rich nation.
Comments
No posts