Re: Socialism, cosmology, etc

[Guest guest]

I think these are different issues. I ain't no expert ... but the little that I

think I understand about Buddhist philosophy is that we are all both insignificant

AND significant. Thus the importance of absolute and universal

compassion, and the importance of being non-attached and full appreciation of

impermenence.That said, I caution that words used by one person may not

have the same meaning for another if they belong to different groups. The

words " compassion " and " non-attached " will trigger different

thoughts to a Buddhist than to others. Thus conversations run the risk of a

lot of mis-communication.Same would be true of the word

" socialism " . I for one have never lived in a totalitarian regime

that was labeled as " socialist " but never really had a system that was

anything like what Marx/Engels imagined. I would argue that socialistic ideals

is what has allowed the USA to have a middle class and so much wealth this

past century -- consider the benefits of the GI Bill after WW2 which I believe

changed everything for American education and economy, and it's definitely an

example of socialistic planning. But that's just my opinion in light of what I

think I know about history.So, I suggest we be very cautious with any

words that might have significantly different meanings for others. TimPS -- Tim's amateur explanation of the dukkha/samsara thing

(warning, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing, so read on at your own

risk!!! ) ----Dukkha is a Sanskrit word loosely interpreted as

" suffering " which can be psychological, physical, spiritual, etc ... but

lessening it, for EVERYONE, is the central goal of Buddhism. Samsara relates

to rebirth and the unity of all " souls " in what Buddhism calls

" mind " . If we appreciate our own insignificance and stop

seeking " more " for ourselves, we may be able to help others to lessen

their suffering and all our rebirths can be better from all the good kharma and we

can all move closer to full understanding (ie Buddha-hood).... thus

perhaps we can see the common thread of Buddhism and socialism ... Next

week ... how a better understanding of String Theory can lead to a National Health

Plan!!;-)))On Fri, January

18, 2008 7:21 am EST, Pedro Ballester wrote:

The moment one accepts insignificance is

the first step in the long road to reduce dukkha and maybe understand the concept of

Samsara.

No one is insignificant! Certainly not your children, and not the wonderful

people on the listserv.Philosophy according to Jacques

,_._,___

" ...when one realizes that prominent atheist cosmologists and humblebuddhist monks agree that we are insignificant, there has to be someUniversal truth behind that belief. "

-- Pedro

Ballester, M.D.Warren, OH

---------------------------------------- Malia, MDMalia

Family Medicine & Skin Sense Laser6720 Pittsford-Palmyra Rd.Perinton

Square MallFairport, NY 14450 (phone / fax)www.relayhealth.com/doc/DrMaliawww.SkinSenseLaser.com--

Confidentiality Notice --This email message, including all the attachments, is

for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contains confidential information.

Unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,

you may not use, disclose, copy or disseminate this information. If you are not the

intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by reply email and destroy

all copies of the original message, including attachments.----------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

And maybe we can also tackle consciousness and high temperature quantum computing... -- Pedro Ballester, M.D.Warren, OH

[Guest guest]

There are some " beautiful minds " on the listserv. I really love ya'll.

Jacques L. Guillot, MD

Mandeville, LA

And maybe we can also tackle consciousness and high temperature quantum computing... -- Pedro Ballester, M.D.Warren, OH

[Guest guest]

ph 's work can be of interest:MythosThe Power of Myth (with Bill Moyers)Sukhavatihttp://www.jcf.org/index2.php

-- Pedro Ballester, M.D.Warren, OH

[Guest guest]

I would argue that socialistic ideals is what has allowed the USA to have a

middle class

and so much wealth this past century -- consider the benefits of the GI Bill

after WW2

which I believe changed everything for American education and economy, and it's

definitely an example of socialistic planning. But that's just my opinion in

light of what I

think I know about history.

You confuse social policy with socialism.

The historical definition of socialism is very clear (Wikipedia) :

" Socialism refers to a broad array of ideologies and political movements with

the goal of a

socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are

subject to

control by the community. This control may be either direct—exercised through

popular

collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the

people by

the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state,

worker, or

community ownership of the means of production, goals which have been attributed

to,

and claimed by, a number of political parties and governments throughout

history. "

Socialism refers to ownership and distribution of goods : the goods are

distributed equally

among all individuals and there are no individual owners.

American education excels through it's private universities, not the public

school system,

which is mediocre at best.

I thought american economy was the result of free enterprise, not socialism.

What is the

whole IMP if not free enterprise ?

I strongly agree that there has to be a safety network for older and sick people

.. All I can

see now in the US is how the ones who need help the most are rejected because

the

system is overwhelmed by parasites. If you throw more money in the system, all

you'll get

are more parasites.

In the last year my property taxes increased by 2000 $. I did not see one social

project

going on, just some politicians hiring more of their relatives. They were not

able to

sponsor at least a free clinic in town, even when physicians offered free labor.

We have a

new public golf course, figure that !

Well, I deviated the conversation too much and maybe I bothered some of you,

sorry about

that. I just don't want my kids or grandkids to become immigrants like me

because I kept

my mouth shut.

But I promise it is my last intervention about this subject.

[Guest guest]

I am serious when I say I absolutely love your contribution to the conversation. You give a perspective that I would not otherwise have access to.I subscribe to the liberal Northern Californian notion (though I bet there are others out there with it) that most of us would be better off if there were less "socialism" (by this I mean welfare/government handouts) for corporations and more of a safety net for those whom we serve every day.valeazinelor wrote: I would argue that socialistic ideals is what has allowed the USA to have a middle class and so much wealth this past century -- consider the benefits of the GI Bill after WW2 which I believe changed everything for American education and economy, and it's definitely an example of socialistic planning. But that's just my opinion in light of what I think I know about history. You confuse social policy with socialism. The historical definition of socialism is very clear (Wikipedia) : "Socialism refers to a broad array of ideologies and political movements with the goal of a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community. This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such

as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state, worker, or community ownership of the means of production, goals which have been attributed to, and claimed by, a number of political parties and governments throughout history." Socialism refers to ownership and distribution of goods : the goods are distributed equally among all individuals and there are no individual owners. American education excels through it's private universities, not the public school system, which is mediocre at best. I thought american economy was the result of free enterprise, not socialism. What is the whole IMP if not free enterprise ? I strongly agree that there has to be a safety network for older and sick people . All I can see now in the US is how the ones who need help the most are rejected because the system is

overwhelmed by parasites. If you throw more money in the system, all you'll get are more parasites. In the last year my property taxes increased by 2000 $. I did not see one social project going on, just some politicians hiring more of their relatives. They were not able to sponsor at least a free clinic in town, even when physicians offered free labor. We have a new public golf course, figure that ! Well, I deviated the conversation too much and maybe I bothered some of you, sorry about that. I just don't want my kids or grandkids to become immigrants like me because I kept my mouth shut. But I promise it is my last intervention about this subject.

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Guest guest]

Reasonable points I think. But I wasn't contending the USA was fully socialistic.

Rather, I said " socialistic ideals " helped. The example of the GI

Bill was a huge transfer of money to support education for vets after WW2 carried

out by the government (the Marshall Plan was perhaps even larger, but that's another

discussion). And that had a massive effect on education, including public

college education ... and that totally changed our nation (when we entered WW2, 30%

of the recruits were turned away due to illiteracy until they changed the criteria

in early 1942!). And actually, I feel the public college education in the USA

today is pretty fantastic considering how many people are part of it. And a huge

portion of that education is paid by the government. Of course

free enterprise has had a great effect on the USA. But, from my perspective, the

greatest advancements in our country are when we find that balance point of

supporting free enterprise and supporting those in the most need. And actually

that is the traditional perspective of liberal government, which has many, many

different definitions around the world, but which generally sits between the

opposing radical ends of the political spectrum-- communism and fascism.

Socialism was traditionally defined as a step toward full communism (an imperfect

step), but the modern practice of it does not fit that perspective as the modern

world has studied economics much more in detail and we now have things like large

" middle classes " around the world.So, yeah, the definitions

blur, but I still think that " socialistic ideals " have played a big part

in making our country (and others too) great. And, also, I do support free

enterprise (I'm an " entrepreneurial, hybrid, solo-solo, IMP-aesthetic

office " ), I also support finding that right balance of our government

re-distributing some wealth to help those in need ... or support public education,

since my daughter my be attending a state school in 3 years(!) ;-)And,

though I live in northern NY, perhaps I fit the northern California socialism model

better (see post from Dr. Larsh).... and this is what is great about

this list, and this country, we can disagree in public, and vote, and write letters,

and march and (usually) not go to jail!Go Giants!Tim > On Sat, January 19, 2008 7:57

pm EST, valeazinelor wrote:> > > > > I would argue that socialistic ideals is what has

allowed the USA to have a middle> class> and so much wealth this

past century -- consider the benefits of the GI Bill after> WW2>

which I believe changed everything for American education and economy, and it's> definitely an example of socialistic planning. But that's just my opinion in

light> of what I> think I know about history.> >

> > You confuse social policy with socialism.> >

The historical definition of socialism is very clear (Wikipedia) :>

" Socialism refers to a broad array of ideologies and political movements with

the> goal of a> socio-economic system in which property and the

distribution of wealth are subject> to> control by the community.

This control may be either direct—exercised through> popular> collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on

behalf of the people> by> the state. As an economic system,

socialism is often characterized by state, worker,> or> community

ownership of the means of production, goals which have been attributed to,>

and claimed by, a number of political parties and governments throughout

history. " > > Socialism refers to ownership and distribution

of goods : the goods are distributed> equally> among all

individuals and there are no individual owners.> > American

education excels through it's private universities, not the public school>

system,> which is mediocre at best.> > I thought american

economy was the result of free enterprise, not socialism.. What> is the> whole IMP if not free enterprise ?> > I strongly agree that

there has to be a safety network for older and sick people .> All I can> see now in the US is how the ones who need help the most are rejected because

the> system is overwhelmed by parasites. If you throw more money in the

system, all> you'll get> are more parasites.> In the last

year my property taxes increased by 2000 $. I did not see one social>

project> going on, just some politicians hiring more of their relatives.

They were not able> to> sponsor at least a free clinic in town,

even when physicians offered free labor. We> have a> new public

golf course, figure that !> > Well, I deviated the conversation

too much and maybe I bothered some of you, sorry> about> that. I

just don't want my kids or grandkids to become immigrants like me because I> kept> my mouth shut.> But I promise it is my last

intervention about this subject. > > > > > > > >

[Guest guest]

I disagree that socialism made America anything of the sort. I agree with less

socialism, if we are talking about ecomomics. In our lives we did experience the

greatest comparison of socialism v. free markets in Germany while the wall was

up. East Germany with top down government driven economy was a total wreck, with

wide spread poverty, poor output and a general degeneration in the standard of

living. This compared to the same ethinic population on the other side of the

wall, which was one of the strongest world economies there was. No comparison.

The same was found in China and USSR, where the production of " private " farms

and business supported the government cooperatives for decades.

Why would we want to give it up?

Corporations are certainly not perfect and there needs to be government

regulation, but the results of free markets, speak for themselves. I have often

thought that it would be good for subspecialists to have some cap on income,

with a direction to us primary care types but we would just be next in line.

Back in the 80's when managed care set limits on hospital reimbursement, then

subspecialist, then " they came for us. "

Any reformation of health care finance, dose need to include primary care

payment reform in a big way.

________________________________

From: on behalf of Lonna Larsh

Sent: Sat 1/19/2008 7:22 PM

To:

Subject: Re: Re: Socialism, cosmology, etc

I am serious when I say I absolutely love your contribution to the conversation.

You give a perspective that I would not otherwise have access to.

I subscribe to the liberal Northern Californian notion (though I bet there are

others out there with it) that most of us would be better off if there were less

" socialism " (by this I mean welfare/government handouts) for corporations and

more of a safety net for those whom we serve every day.

valeazinelor wrote:

I would argue that socialistic ideals is what has allowed the USA to have a

middle class

and so much wealth this past century -- consider the benefits of ! the GI Bill

after WW2

which I believe changed everything for American education and economy, and it's

definitely an example of socialistic planning. But that's just my opinion in

light of what I

think I know about history.

You confuse social policy with socialism.

The historical definition of socialism is very clear (Wikipedia) :

" Socialism refers to a broad array of ideologies and political movements with

the goal of a

socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are

subject to

control by the community. This control may be either direct-exercised through

popular

collectives such as workers' councils-or indirect-exercised on behalf of the

people by

the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state,

worker, or

community ownership of the means of production, goals which have been

attributed to,

and claimed by, a number of political parties and governments throughout

history. "

Socialism refers to ownership and distribution of goods : the goods are

distributed equally

among all individuals and there are no individual owners.

American education excels through it's private universities, not the public

school system,

which is mediocre at best.

I thought american economy was the result of free enterprise, not socialism.

What is the

whole IMP if not free enterprise ?

I strongly agree that there has to be a safety network for older and sick

people . All I can

see now in the US is how the ones who need help the most are rejected because

the

system is overwhelmed by parasites. If you throw more money in the system, all

you'll get

are more parasites.

In the last year my property taxes increased by 2000 $. I did not see one

social project

going on, just some politicians hiring more of their relatives. They were not

able to

sponsor at least a free clinic in town, even when physicians offered free

labor. We have a

new public golf course, figure that !

Well, I deviated the conversation too much and maybe I bothered some of you,

sorry about

that. I just don't want my kids or grandkids to become immigrants like me

because I kept

my mouth shut.

But I promise it is my last intervention about this subject.

________________________________

Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs>