tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24992235.post5928823337655615271..comments2024-03-11T05:59:48.984-05:00Comments on Costanza Book Club: Economics and HumanPacifist Vikinghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16630996018868040440noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24992235.post-87525191086155376052008-01-07T10:31:00.000-06:002008-01-07T10:31:00.000-06:00This is a serious suggestion. Read Naked Economic...This is a serious suggestion. Read Naked Economics. Not so you become an economist, but so that you know the economic field a little more and can criticize and debate them via a mutual language.<BR/><BR/>The one thing I have been running through my head lately is the fact that both economics and religion have the same viewpoint of humanity: that somehow humanity only cares about itself. Religion explains it via "original sin" while economic theory just says that is the way it is, so lets put a system in place that feeds of that desire in a way to help the most people. <BR/><BR/>It doesn't try to change the person like religion does via the "grace" of God, but rather tries to use the fault to create some sort of "good" Greed fuels economies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24992235.post-12904380471108604492008-01-06T21:25:00.000-06:002008-01-06T21:25:00.000-06:00Note: I could either delete the post or revise the...Note: I could either delete the post or revise the post, deleting the quote that I misinterpreted (but leaving the central ideas). I'll leave it up (with the note apologizing for my misunderstanding) as a testament to my ignorance.Pacifist Vikinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16630996018868040440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24992235.post-62896331423263523652008-01-06T20:57:00.000-06:002008-01-06T20:57:00.000-06:00Indeed--this all may be a misunderstanding based o...Indeed--this all may be a misunderstanding based on my ignorance of economics terminology. At wikipedia:<BR/><BR/>"In economics, utility is a measure of the relative satisfaction or desiredness from consumption of goods. Given this measure, one may speak meaningfully of increasing or decreasing utility, and thereby explain economic behavior in terms of attempts to increase one's utility."<BR/><BR/>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility<BR/><BR/>Indeed, I don't recant the larger meaning of my post. However, I must note that all Berri was doing was transferring "laymen" terminology into economics terminology.<BR/><BR/>I'm glad, however, that RK quoted Arthur Miller, who was much more eloquent on the dehumanization of the business world (if you haven't read it, RK, I recommend "All My Sons," which is about a war profiteer). What I once wrote about "Death of A Salesman is a shorter summary of what I write here:<BR/><BR/>""You can't eat the orange and throw the peel away--a man is not a piece of fruit!" Willy Loman cries as he's getting fired. And in this line we see the dehumanization of capitalism. In "Death of a Salesman," Miller explores the marketplace value of humanity, where all that matters is what a man can produce and acquire, where the economic value of the man is seen as the whole value of the man...and what is lost in such a value system.<BR/><BR/>In various places, I get to see how economists and capitalists think. And I wish for them all to read "Death of a Salesman." I wish for us to see that human dignity matters more than marketplace capitalism, and that humans have value beyond their economic value. In a country where more and more economics define the value of a human, "Death of a Salesman" is the most necessary--and the most tragic--of American plays."<BR/><BR/>http://costanzabookclub.blogspot.com/2007/10/two-most-significant-plays-in-american.html<BR/><BR/>So my apologies to Berri--I see his shift in terms from "happy or sad" to "utility" was merely a semantic terminology shift. However, I wouldn't recant my critique of economics and the business world, which does tend to define people by their production.Pacifist Vikinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16630996018868040440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24992235.post-53414114501310071812008-01-06T20:41:00.000-06:002008-01-06T20:41:00.000-06:00I believe his use of utility we meant slightly dif...I believe his use of utility we meant slightly differently then the "utility" you think.<BR/><BR/>In the book I am reading I get a sense that "utility" within the economic field is similar to happiness.<BR/><BR/>That does not mean that your critique of economics is off, but just a comment on that aspect.<BR/><BR/>I would suggest reading "Naked Economics" which I am reading right now. Wheelan as and economist seems really down to earth and explains complicated economic theory in layman terms.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24992235.post-4932619653924612262008-01-06T18:41:00.000-06:002008-01-06T18:41:00.000-06:00You can't eat the orange and throw away the peel.You can't eat the orange and throw away the peel.Pacifist Vikinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16630996018868040440noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24992235.post-23035417936696943302008-01-06T07:47:00.000-06:002008-01-06T07:47:00.000-06:00Man is not a piece of fruit. RKMan is not a piece of fruit. <BR/><BR/>RKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com