JustARandomPanda

Here is the interview with Roubini from the Amazon page

I just checked out a book from the library I would like to share some excerpts from. Maybe someone else out there will find it interesting enough to check it out as well. I think Roubini has over-hyped himself a bit. Others were calling attention to the bubble mania too. Also the industry of financial advise is filled with One Hit Wonders. Nonetheless I'm impressed enough with the book so far I wanted to share a part of the intro. The book is Crisis Economics: A Crash Course in the Future of Finance by Nouriel Roubini and Stephen Mihm The following excerpt comes from the introduction - several pages into it:

Oh wow. I am excited. I don't own a copy of Chang Tzu so I'm going to be following the discussions in this forum quite a bit.

Something to think about. Worth going through all 6 vids for that sole person out there who will bother to watch. David Harvey's The Enigma of Capital

Twinner was describing a spiritually evolved society (and thus economy). Obviously, until the heavy mass of people get to this state of evolution on this planet it would be hard to implement these ideas on all but the very smallest and most local of scales. I don't agree with his assessment that OWS is trite and doomed to failure and that OWS is creating terror but we all have our own opinions. It just is what it is. As for speculation, it's a dynamic loop. Does the speculation create volatility or does volatility create speculation? Well in a loop it's both. There is volatility naturally in many systems including in stock prices but pure speculation feeds even more energy into the system that otherwise would be directed elsewhere - thus making deep swings even deeper. -K- Thanks for the vids. I'm still not as advanced as most folks in this thread when it comes to cultivation. I do wish something would go viral as to cultivation. Maybe if it became the Next Big Thing we might start seeing some interesting changes come about that wouldn't before. ********** Here's a vid for everyone's consideration. It's just a little under 1 hour. Take note of her expertise. ***edit*** One interesting little known thing - more children in any given year will live through their family filing for bankruptcy than will children in any given year live through their parents divorcing. My jaw hit the floor when I heard that. That is a shit load of bankruptcies going on.

Very, very true. I used to live in Germany for a while. I was so shocked. This must have been the way the U.S. was back in the 40s. Quiet. When public places still felt truly public. Back before the "monetize everything" mentality started to go viral in the U.S. No constant jingles, no freakin ads plastered all over creation (god don't even get me STARTED about the frickin ADS in many public restrooms. Man...you can't even take a dump in America without a damn AD staring you in the face.). There is almost nowhere left in America outside the home that isn't plastered with god damn ads, marketing PR, propaganda and spin doctoring of some sort everywhere you turn. People from other countries who haven't visited here often don't understand how rampant it really has become. LOL! This is also true. As is the popular image abroad about how Parochial Americans are that is sadly all too true as well.

Ok. Now that you have explained it better I finally understand where you are coming from and I would say I agree. Mainly because I believe there are certain "higher laws of nature" which we tap into when we act in the manner you describe. It's part of why I think we are all here at Taobums too. That higher law of nature gets expressed and realized in many different ways. So we have threads on assorted Inner Alchemy practices, Heartmind, Meditation, etc. OMG! I actually LIKE this. *makes mental note to read Civil Disobedience next* My one concern I wonder about is if the help you describe would be forthcoming in enough 'amount' or 'quantity' to cover the need. However, I understand that you are sketching out the outlines of an ideal society and not describing today's with their current distortions. Having read the above I seriously encourage you to read Max Stirner if you haven't already. I really think you would like his treatise a lot. Also check out Eisenstein. He is putting forth economic proposals that could help us get from 'here' to 'there' in such anarchist societies. Wow. I REALLY like these ideas. Thank you for explaining it better. You have given me many new things to seriously consider. Wow. Now I see why Thoreau almost single-handedly spawned his own branch of Anarchism! Cheers and goodnight.

And to get back to the Occupy Wall Street I present an Op Ed link I cut out a big chunk of the Op Ed but here's some of it

There was no change in definition of Anarchism. There have always been different strains. These differences go back to the beginning when Anarchist thought was first starting to come together as an identifiable philosophy. From Wikipedia So based on Twinner's recommendations in this thread he is an Anarcho-Pacifist (note his stating Thoreau heavily influenced him). Hence his continual urging that we all need to focus on PEACEFUL means of creating change in the world. Speaking only for myself it would not be wise to dismiss this stance out of hand before first seeking to understand exactly what persuaded him to this line of thinking. People usually don't believe something 'just because'. There are always reasons - usually justifiable reasons in their mind.

Well I think anyone who thinks it through wouldn't disagree with that. Big Gov isn't an answer I'm in favor of so I am right with you there. But I also want to seek balance on the other side of the equation...start breaking up the power of corporations too. Especially the very largest. In any case a Collective is a Collective and holds rank and power as a Collective within society no matter whether you call that Collective Big Government, Big Corporation, Big Military, Big Finance...whatever. If only Right Leaning Libertarians would see many they label in the Middle and Left as 'the enemy' aren't really their enemies after all we could accomplish so much more. Well...to be fair many on the Left were just as incredulous and critical of Obama winning the Nobel as those on the Right. As I said before I don't think there are as many differences between us as you might at first think. You're starting to sound like a Closet Anarchist, Vortex.

You know... It's amazing what one can find on the web if you just throw oddball words together. I just found the following site tonight and figured WTH - share it with everyone. I present: DeepBlackLies.co.uk Apparently it is a site devoted to gathering actual evidence of "Conspiracies" (their term) or as I call it "Gaming the System". Now one might normally dismiss such as another wacko Conspiracist nut job site. Except for one thing... You can actually download the detailed reports the actual meeting elite participants themselves had created. So for example, You can download the entire report created for the participants of the Bilderberg meeting in 1973. - that is - the actual transcript/minutes of what was discussed at that meeting. Some rather interesting things revealed in that 1973 Bilderberg report...a general agreement among all the participants to jack the price of oil to 400% to help out Oil Companies who were having financial difficulties from too much debt. Another interesting point the group discussed...the possible creation of a Worldwide Federal Reserve who's purpose would be to act for the world banking and finance system what The Fed does in the U.S. today. The whole site is like that. Pick a report...download it. You can look at reports to download here and articles to check out here On a separate note I do not know what to make of this energy book either. I started to dismiss it - until I started to read it and now I'm wondering....wth is going on Things that make you go hmmm..

Yes. I am aware that Anarchism is all of the above and not about chaos and have been for some time. Did you enjoy reading Max Stirner's The Ego and His Own? I think it's a really good book. Wouldn't mind hearing your thoughts on it. I get the feeling after seeing all the huge threads devoted each week in the Tao te Ching forum that it's like the Bible. If you look for it there's going to be a way to interpret it to support one's view. Personally I am not inclined to holding to a 'this is the TRUE meaning of these lines'. But that's just me. Others may think differently. I love how everyone each week has A ) different translations and even more fascinating B ) interprets the exact same chapter differently. Pretty amazing. And wonderful. Shows wonderful flexibility and adaptability in such an ancient document! Everyone reading this thread PLEASE spend time in the Tao te Ching forum going over each chapter's threads. You will be amazed at all the beautiful and varied ways people can interpret the exact same lines. Fascinating discussions. Lots of thoughtful responses. Varied ways of interpreting the same Chinese characters. So yes, I'm sure one legitimate way to interpret some of the chapters is the way you do Aaron. Who am I to say your interpretation is incorrect? (besides...I think that'd be rather un-Taoist of me). Sweet dreams and good cheer Aaron.

I hope TaoMeow will not mind if I link to her posts in the Taoist forum (scroll down to posts #12 and #18). Surprisingly it touches on some of the very things discussed in this thread. Especially in reference to the back and forth between me and Twinner. It's my understanding that TaoMeow has been trained by Taoist priests and shamans directly so when she speaks things "Taoist" I tend to listen closely. However naturally, YMMV.

How does one start applying Wuxing to one's own life? Especially if one does not have the luxury of a birth certificate that lists the hour/minutes of one's birth?

There's been no contradiction. You read contradiction in me that isn't there. I have been unclear about how I see things and so you jumped to conclusions that are fundamentally incorrect about me. My current thinking is actually very Taoist-leaning. Wu Wei includes both action and rest phases because the Tao includes both. It's about the appropriate response arising to whatever situation is around one locally. If the appropriate reaction is action - that's what will arise (assuming one has achieved Wu-Wei). If it's non-action - that too will bear out. Both are included. It also happens to be Systems oriented. That's why I included Archdruid's report. I also think Taoism is very 'evolution' oriented. I-Ching, Wuxing (what little bit I've studied of it), that sort of thing. Change does not exist if there is no rest to move out of/into or action to move out of/into. *scratches chin* Yes. This is why I'm currently fascinated with Anarchist thought. I'm just not convinced yet that it is even possible for a society to evolve (taoism - ie. change - again) without some sort of authority to arise. Can anyone help me out here and actually demonstrate some societies (especially complex ones) that had no authority structures evolve? Now...even if no one can provide such a case historically evolving I will not categorically dismiss Anarchist thought as pie-in-the-sky. As an example there are complex arrangements that have arisen in history that had no antecedent. I give one: Capitalism. Prior to it's arrival Capitalism as we know it today simply didn't exist. So unlike with many, for me it is not an automatic dismissal if society has never evolved a network structure, economy, etc that can be Anarchistic. This is also one reason why I think Capitalism (probably in the exceedingly far far future) will someday be replaced by something else. Only that which has no beginning need never fear an end. Someday Capitalism will be replaced (if we don't kill ourselves first). Very Taoist. What arises will undergo change and so Capitalism will someday also change enough that it will no longer be seen by anyone as Capitalism but rather as something new. Agree with all of it until I hit the sentence 'If not they move on'. My only question about that one is that it glosses over a lot of issues that come into play that may not make 'moving on' possible. Now I realize you are talking about free people. But the Tao includes those who are not 'free to move' and 'free to choose' as well. And so I try to look at that too. Here's one question I am curious to see how Anarchists and especially Anarcho-Capitalists would answer. Example: There is a shadow international trade market in the trafficking of people as chattel. I read a detailed expose once on how Abu Dhabi keeps itself supplied with low cost slave labor - especially in demand are slaves for construction projects. One reporter went in and described the links in the free market chain of how Abu Dhabi supplies itself with slave labor. It is quite sophisticated and good money can be made in the slave trade. Unfortunately I can't find that expose or I would gladly provide the link so people can judge the source for themselves. So instead as an alternative I provide this link with regards to the United Arab Emirates. If there are real realities I'm not addressing please point them out! I admit I am not omniscient. If you see realities I'm failing to address (please be specific - one or two will do) then I want to know. Odd. Coulda sworn there are instances in history of non-governmental terror instituting lasting change every bit as much as compassion does. Islam certainly helped itself being spread via the sword. Prior to that - if I understand it correctly - Arabic societies were polytheistic. But maybe I've got my Islamic history incorrect.

A quick note. You are correct. I should not have mentioned Marblehead and I apologize to him. I only mentioned MH because I actually did remember a very specific post he made where he said one of the reasons he didn't think highly of some Buddhists is because too many are pacifistic and apathetic when sometimes the proper wu-wei response is action - as the Tao includes both (something I agree with MH about).

Another resource because I believe in trying to offer ideas For anyone who does not want to rely solely on modern goods or services to improve lives locally check out: Society of Primitive Technology I used to belong to it myself and still think it's a good one as it preserves skills that have not yet been subsumed into the 'monetize everything' mentality. I am curious to see if any of these skills will come back into general need if petroleum slowly becomes more scarce. Also everyone needs to check out Dmitry Orlov's slide presentation - "Closing the Collapse Gap: The USSR was Better Prepared than the US" It's funny and sobering at the same time And here's his slide presentation Our Future and the End of the Oil Age: Building Resilience in a Resource Constrained World And last I present Arch Druid's Systems Theory and remember in part what he is discussing bears on economics - Taoists out there should find it particularly interesting

I know I linked to this earlier but I figured wth...go ahead and post this here.

I liked Nan Hai-Chin's Working Toward Enlightenment, To Realize Enlightenment and Tao and Longevity.

Just to so how utterly conflicting I am in my own view of things I don't think some of the things Twinner advocated were all that off course. Anarchists have some good points and criticisms of the way society functions. And ultimately I think he's right. Somewhere, somehow people are going to have to evolve spiritually. I just think society will evolve to a Type 1 economy long before it evolves to have the kind of spiritually based economics that Twinner advocates. But I agree with him in this...I would like to see people start creating "gift economies" locally around them more. I've actually been trying to implement some of these things into my own life - especially since beginning Meditation/Inner Alchemy practices. I have a hunch Twinner might like some of Eisenstein's economic proposals. check out this essay

Cheer up Ralis. I try to always be open to revising my opinions if it can be shown there are situations where my beliefs don't match. I am a big proponent of trying to poke holes in my own beliefs and am quite willing to concede when it can be shown my statements are not supported or show a hidden bias. As John Maynard Keynes once said when someone pointed out he had been inconsistent: I do think there are areas where regulations have counterproductive consequences. I guess it was the word "overburden" in the quoted text I was agreeing with. Vortex was describing a situation (I think) where a system begins to tip over into an extreme. My guess is that you extrapolated an extremism into my statements that is not there. Mainly what I was thinking about is Mancur Olson's book. It is a very good book! Basically it is about how factions arise within societies to game the system to their advantage. They lock advantages in - whether via laws, contracts, financial flows, etc that in the beginning were actually (sometimes) good for society overall. However, societies are dynamic and when conditions change what once might have been good becomes detrimental instead. The lock ins change far more slowly and are recalcitrant to change. This is NOT to discount all the other things that go into effecting our society. For example, I'm beginning to look into New Trade Theory and other areas that effect overall business climates in the U.S. I think the founding father Alexander Hamilton and the economist Friedrich List made a good case for "infant industry" protection for example. But what is needed at the infant and toddler stage might become detrimental at a mature one. Many people knowing the above about me now would label me as "socialist" or "anti-free trade" (ie reading an extremism in that I have not advocated).

I've been providing plenty of specific examples to back up that statement. Example: Contract Law. *shakes head* So if Tea Partiers protest it's ok but if Non-Tea Partiers protest it's not? I at least have been presenting evidence of exactly how specific sections of our system have been gamed. Hell I actually support many Libertarian proposals because many see how the system is being gamed too. I just don't find myself impressed with some Libertarian/Minimalist's 'critical thinking' skills. Namely...a lack of willingness to test where their beliefs fall down. This is a human trait. It's why the Peer Review process was set up in the first place in academic journals - because people can't see all the holes in their own conclusions from reality. It's not weak at all. You just don't like it. It's describing exactly how I see current Holy Trinity proponent's arguments. We had smaller government before when society had smaller companies before. History shows one grew along with the other. The scale to both have changed and it ripples throughout the system on both sides. I see an unwillingness by the Right to acknowledge this. I see an unwillingness to critically examine or question the evidence from either side presented online. But at the moment I see too many Libertarians/Conservatives engaging in 'blame' games when imo they don't need to do that. I don't see them trying to see the holes in their own theories. I'm talking real world here - not just relying on the Blogosphere and Media (MSM and alt). For example, have you yourself studied Contract Law as I have? It will have a real world effect upon implementation of Minimalist Government theories and it should be accounted for but from what I see from the Online Ideologues currently is not. That's only one area. But it's a big one and it will only grow bigger.

Vortex, Please scroll up and read my statement about Ayn Rand. I agree there's nothing wrong with accepting SS. I just don't think it's a slamdunk case yet that taxation is theft which is one of the founding principles of modern Libertarians. Also agree with this! Mancur Olson has some interesting things to state about this particular problem. The things you describe are very real problems. I won't deny these things happen at all. I just wish Libertarians and Minarchists would be willing to see there are legitimate complaints on the other side too. Vortex, if you would read some of the resources I've provided I think you would see you and I are not that far apart after all. Many Libertarians love to say Socialism is a "stepping stone" to Communism but all around us today are many countries with varying degrees of economies who have not yet 'succumbed' to Communism. Some are more Socialist, some less so. Furthermore it's forgetting history. Communist sympathizers in the the late 19th-early 20th century were frustrated that the rise of the working class as Marx said would happen in das Capital simply wasn't happening. That's why a subset began agitating for change via violent means. Point out to me even one country who has gradually evolved from Socialism to the Communist state it is today. I actually agree with this! That's why my voting record is as it is.

Plenty of examples in history both support and do not support the above belief. Although, now that you've finally admitted you are an Anarchist I understand much better why you believe the above to be a Truth. I'm busy studying Anarchism right now myself. Been busy reading Max Stirner's The Ego and His Own (who is claimed as a founding father by both Leftist Anarchists and Rightwing Libertarians) and the philosophies of Proudhon, Bakunin, Kropotkin and Tucker. Been there, done that. I've had those same math classes, micro economics, macro economics, public policy classes, etc. The whole nine yards. Yes I think the Occupiers know that capitalism brings them goods and services (btw - we so often forget our history - Capitalism is not the only economic system societies have evolved to bring themselves goods and services). Anyway...you're statement above is moot because that's not what they're agitating against. No one is advocating the elimination of Capitalism or of that 1-3% (well other than a very small minority). They're protesting the gaming of the system by that 1-3%. If you are talking about large scale changes I might agree. But I'm not expecting large scale change to come out of it. The changes that might come would be smaller but potentially real. An example that disproves your statement above that small numbers can not create real change: The Tea Partiers have disproportionately influenced the outcome of Fiscal policy compared to their size in the total population. There actually aren't that many Tea Partiers compared to the entire population of the U.S. Yet they have had real influence because of their protests. To the point that not once, but twice, our government has come close to shutting down and the U.S. defaulting on its debt. They didn't achieve all their aims but their agitating for change achieved being heard. And it influenced U.S. policy and continues to do so. No mean feat for a small portion of the total population. Disagree with you on the 'worrying about things you have no control over'. No wonder Marblehead has such a poor attitude of many Buddhists. Too many of them take the path you yourself are advocating everyone in this thread wake up to. In short that particular philosophical spin permits this unintended consequence: That's what they're doing. You just don't happen to agree with the tactics. But at least I understand better why you advocate as you do. ********* Honestly - my biggest problem with most people (including myself at times!) have to do with a lack of critical thinking. Let me give an example. I think Friedriech Hayek's The Road to Serfdom serves much of the same role that Marx's das Capital did 6o+ years ago. Both are beautifully constructed, both have things in them that I believe give accurate descriptions of what goes on in the real world. If pressed to the wall most fans of both would admit their theory doesn't attempt to describe ALL human behavior. But their actions tell a different story. In short - these people's de facto behavior tells me something different. They are presenting a GUT - A Grand Unified Theory of human economic behavior when imo their beliefs holds no such status yet. Small Gov Conservatism imo holds the same status today that Super String Theory has in physics. It's elegant, it's beautiful, it explains so much,. And like Super String Theory - it's Untested. Just as we do not have a GUT in physics that unites the 4 forces (the electromagnetic, strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force with gravity) so we do not yet have an economic theory that unites the micro with macro. A true Economic GUT would be able to elegantly explain both individual behavior and aggregate behavior and account for ALL behavior seen at both scales. It would be a set of postulates that would scale. From it all things would flow. The Sir Isaac Newton of Economics who will write his Principia Economica that unites the individual with the planetary has not yet been born.