Political Theory

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Andrew Cain — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:07:31 GMT

Esuric:
Yeah, probably a good idea.

And stop assigning pieces of economic theory to body parts Next we will be talking about reverse inequality of value between the reproduction organs. An exchange must take place!

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Esuric — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:40:31 GMT

johnclonts:
Was there another post somewhere I missed?

Yeah, I deleted most of it when I realized I got carried away...

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

johnclonts — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:21:26 GMT

Laughing Man:

Esuric:
What they fail to understand is that the ventures of the businessmen are more profitable because they service the needs of the majority, while intellectual's produce something desired only by the very few

Not necessarily.

Esuric:
The castrated price system hides or undermines actual warranted economic activity, and redirects investments towards future crises

Why did you use the word castrated?

Esuric:
Blaming Wall Street and speculators for the crises is as absurd as blaming a thermometer for your fever.

I think there is something to be said concerning moral hazard and the actions of Wall Street.

This is very strange forum behavior to me. I do not see any reference to castrated or Wall Street or thermometer in Esuric's letter. All I saw in the original post was:

Esuric:
I had to sit through an entire semester of garbage in complete silence in order to get the grade I desired. I noticed early on that she had no patience for "primitive bourgeois positions," so I gave way. This is the letter I want to send her, tell me what you think (I'm trying to remain as civil as possible for obvious reasons):

Intellectual's see themselves as the creators of truth--the most valuable commodity. When they see the average businessman earning a much higher income, for doing something as "trivial" as producing steel, glass, or whatever, they blame the "evil" capitalistic system. What they fail to understand is that the ventures of the businessmen are more profitable because they service the needs of the majority, while intellectual's produce something desired only by the very few. Thus, when the intellectual's criticize capitalism, they're really criticizing the majority--the very group they wish to "liberate."

Was there another post somewhere I missed?

John

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Sieben — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:59:58 GMT

You're apologizing for rich people. I hate rich people. In a capitalist system, they're great because if they really are that rich its because they've made everyone else even richer. But in the status quo its just a bunch of government granted monopolies.

You should pick out one of the major themes of the course and give a libertarian perspective on it. Include somewhere in your letter a critique of governmental incentive structures. She's probably under the impression that there can be good government. Smash that myth.

Re: A comment to my Sociology professor.

DD5 — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:59:40 GMT

Change "because they service the needs of the majority" to "because they service the more urgent wants of the public"

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Esuric — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:49:16 GMT

Laughing Man:
Best to wait a day and reread what you wrote. I do it all the time. I type out something I think is great then go back and think 'What the hell is that?'

Yeah, probably a good idea.

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Andrew Cain — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:42:55 GMT

Esuric:
Yeah, but can we say that the majority is actually interested in such things? Or that they act on them?

I think in economics people act without fully knowing. History is a bit harder. Politics yes.

Esuric:
Yeah, I probably got carried away.

Best to wait a day and reread what you wrote. I do it all the time. I type out something I think is great then go back and think 'What the hell is that?'

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Esuric — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:38:10 GMT

Laughing Man:
Are there not intellectuals in history? politics? dare I say economics?

Yeah, but can we say that the majority is actually interested in such things? Or that they act on them?

Laughing Man:
Well remember you are talking to a sociologist which is like a psychologist who likes to generalize people. Plus she is female so projecting prices as an impotent man...yea

Yeah, I probably got carried away.

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Andrew Cain — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:35:43 GMT

Esuric:
I don't think the average person is interested in Rortian Neo-Pragmatism, or in dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models, nor should they be. Intellectual's always cater to the few; you don't see 100 million people walking around reading articles or books about quantum mechanics, analytical metaphysics, or whatever.

Are there not intellectuals in history? politics? dare I say economics?

Esuric:
I mean, I don't have to. I just wanted to demonstrate my point, namely that the price mechanism is rendered useless.

Well remember you are talking to a sociologist which is like a psychologist who likes to generalize people. Plus she is female so projecting prices as an impotent man...yea

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

mouser98 — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:29:21 GMT

i like the intent but i would expand on your first paragraph and make that the focus of the letter.

basically tell the woman that what she is getting paid reflects how much the market values her service and suggest that it probably wouldn't be as much if it wasn't subsidized by the government. i would save this as the punch line though and use the bulk of the letter just explaining how the market determines prices.

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Esuric — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:26:35 GMT

Laughing Man:
I think the individual rationally seeks out information which can better his/her situation therefore they seek out the advice/teachings of intellectuals. This means that the intellectual does not necessarily cater to the few.

I don't think the average person is interested in Rortian Neo-Pragmatism, or in dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models, nor should they be. Intellectual's always cater to the few; you don't see 100 million people walking around reading articles or books about quantum mechanics, analytical metaphysics, or whatever.

Laughing Man:
Why personify prices? And why must it be male?

I mean, I don't have to. I just wanted to demonstrate my point, namely that the price mechanism is rendered useless.

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Andrew Cain — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:20:01 GMT

Esuric:
What do you mean?

I think the individual rationally seeks out information which can better his/her situation therefore they seek out the advice/teachings of intellectuals. This means that the intellectual does not necessarily cater to the few.

Esuric:
Testicles, like the price mechanism, serve a very important and specific function. Castrating a man renders him useless, and manipulating the price mechanism renders it useless.

Why personify prices? And why must it be male?

Esuric:
The moral hazard is created by the government. I don't blame Wall Street for the cirses at all, and anyone who does is making an unnecessary concession.

It works both ways. It is not as if bailouts are some new craze.

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Esuric — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:01:08 GMT

Laughing Man:
Not necessarily.

What do you mean?

Laughing Man:
Why did you use the word castrated?

Testicles, like the price mechanism, serve a very important and specific function. Castrating a man renders him useless, and manipulating the price mechanism renders it useless.

Laughing Man:
I think there is something to be said concerning moral hazard and the actions of Wall Street.

The moral hazard is created by the government. I don't blame Wall Street for the cirses at all, and anyone who does is making an unnecessary concession. You can make the argument that they're fueling the government and legitimizing its destructive policies, but can you really blame them? Their jobs depend on government assistance.

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Andrew Cain — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:48:29 GMT

Esuric:
What they fail to understand is that the ventures of the businessmen are more profitable because they service the needs of the majority, while intellectual's produce something desired only by the very few

Not necessarily.

Esuric:
The castrated price system hides or undermines actual warranted economic activity, and redirects investments towards future crises

Why did you use the word castrated?

Esuric:
Blaming Wall Street and speculators for the crises is as absurd as blaming a thermometer for your fever.

I think there is something to be said concerning moral hazard and the actions of Wall Street.

Re: A letter to my Sociology professor.

Prashanth Perumal — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:03:49 GMT

Nice! It would be interesting to know whether she replies.