More from my inbox

Chris and Steve,

Don't worry about the nay-sayers.  Here's what Arthur Clarke had to say about them:

 Arthur C. Clarke characterized the four successive stages of response to any new and

revolutionary innovation as follows:

   1. It's crazy!

   2. It may be possible -- so what?

   3. I said it was a good idea all along.

   4. I thought of it first.

The Aharonov-Bohm effect, predicted in 1959, required nearly 30 years after its 1960

demonstration by Chambers until it was begrudgingly accepted. Mayer, who discovered the modern thermodynamic notion of conservation of energy related to work, was hounded and chastised so severely that he suffered a breakdown. Years later, he was lionized for the same effort Wegener, a German meteorologist, was made a laughing stock and his name became a pseudonym for "utter fool," because he advanced the concept of continental drift in 1912. In the 1960s the evidence for continental drift became overwhelming, and today it is widely taught and part of the standard science curriculum. Gauss, the great mathematician, worked out nonlinear geometry but kept it firmly hidden for 30 years, because he knew that if he published it, his peers would destroy him. In the 1930s Goddard was ridiculed and called "moon-mad Goddard" because he predicted his rocketry would carry men to the moon. Years later when the Nazi fired V-1 and V-2 rockets against London, those rockets used the gyroscopic stabilization and many other features discovered and pioneered by Goddard. And as everyone knows, rocketry did indeed carry men to the moon. Science has a long and unsavory history of severely punishing innovation and new thinking. In the modern

world such scientific suppression of innovation is uncalled-for, but it is still very much the rule rather than the exception.

Arthur C. Clarke, in "Space Drive: A Fantasy That Could Become Reality,"

Nov./Dec. 1994, p. 38.

What's true and just will prevail in the end, especially when ordinary people lose faith in their current leaders.

Norm

-- 
Norman G. Kurland, J.D.
President
Center for Economic and Social Justice (CESJ)
P.O. Box 40711, Washington, DC 20016
(O) 703-243-5155 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            703-243-5155      end_of_the_skype_highlighting, (F) 703-243-5935 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting            703-243-5935      end_of_the_skype_highlighting
(E) thirdway@cesj.org
(Web) http://www.cesj.org

"Own or be owned."

On 1/28/13 6:00 PM, hotmailchrisdorf wrote:

Steve,

I share that the need is/has been there for a paradigm overhaul for a long time, but are these realities enough to allow the need for new paradigms get into the mainstream infprmation clearinghouse?  You know as well as I do, that there are great levers of power that want to squash discuss of such scenarios that call for changes; will these times allow those ideas, such as CESJ's get traction in the news cycles?

I always wonder until I see it happening.

Maybe sooner than latter...

chris dorf

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Steve Nieman

To: KELSO_BINARY_ECONOMICS@LISTSERV.KENT.EDU

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 3:47 PM

Subject: Re: Technology is eliminating more middle-class jobs

Chris,

This is great news!  No more menial tasks or "make work" for humans to justify an income to exist on.

Binary economics and Capital Homesteading have a huge lead on any other economic paradigm-overhaul that can properly address this new reality.

Unfortunately, things gotta probably get worse before they can improve.  But I am reading in a lot more places exactly what this article points out.

Once more people realize we're in the middle of this transition, everybody can get more serious about how society is going to properly keep human life alive.

What's not to like? about everybody sharing in owning the means of production and gaining a capital income therefrom?

Especially when the means of production is exiting the human era and entering the machine/technology one.

Happy New Year to all,

Steve Nieman

~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Jan 28, 2013, at 1:25 PM, hotmailchrisdorf wrote:

Dear CESJ,

After reading this study, you bet people now wish something like Kelsonian economics was instituted in the '60s...

 

http://www.northjersey.com/news/188528721_Technology_is_eliminating_more_middle-class_jobs.html?page=all

http://www.journalnow.com/business/columnists/article_f6bb1a88-6778-11e2-87a5-001a4bcf6878.html

Technology is eliminating more middle-class jobs

The numbers startle even labor economists. In the United States, half of the 7.5 million jobs lost during the Great Recession paid middle-class wages, ranging from $38,000 to $68,000. But only 2 percent of the 3.5 million jobs gained since the recession ended in June 2009 are in that range. Nearly 70 percent are low-paying jobs; 29 percent pay well.
Experts warn that this "hollowing out" of the middle-class workforce is far from over.