Libertarian Economic Logic (chart attached)

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 07:18:49PM +1000, jamesd at echeque.com wrote:
> On 2019-09-19 11:39, Punk wrote:
> > 	lots of things can be done with little capital and no 'supervision'.
> 
> Lets see if you can make a pencil without a boss telling you how to do it.

"without a boss telling you how to do it" is in a real sense a sort
of non-sequitor or irrelevancy.

Why label the sharing of information, tutoring and/ or learning
process as one involving "a boss"?

If one or more sufficiently motivated individuals decide they need to
make pencils, can employ their ability and creativity to learn and
achieve many ends. Some things may be quite arcane, where very few
have "the deepest knowledge", and other things may be very well
guarded secrets - what the case is for pencil making IDK, but again,
there's no need to lump learning processes with the overloaded word
"boss".

And, today's home hobbyist may turn out to be tomorrow's
manufacturing powerhouse.

We may not make a pencil or build a house, right the first time, but
that can be part of the fun of living, learning, doing.

It is perhaps just ingrained and well schooled thinking that leaves
us holding to certain (outdated/ poverty conscious) ideas such as
that "abundant commercial productivity is only possible with a boss"
- that's far too general an assertion (or implication) and therefore
ain't gonna hold water with any but shallow thinkers.


Now, where is this "boss" concept useful or "an immoval object"?

When a group of humans wishes to achieve an outcome dependent on that
group, then coordination becomes very useful, perhaps vital even
(depending on the outcome sought).

  A competent vision keeper.

And when a group of humans wishes to work together frequently over
time, interpersonal matters naturally arise, and someone capable of
talking with those who find themselves having problems with one
another may be vital to team cohesion and therefore actually
achieving the outcome.

  A competent interpersonal arbiter/ communicator.

And one human who successfully embodies both vision keeper and
arbiter/ communicator, and has stamina/ persistence, and sufficient
IQ for the complexity of the goal, would be a human worthy of holding
in the position one might call "boss". At least, if you want to
achieve the goal.

There will always be hierarchies.

But over time, the base of technology we can rely upon, advances
(pending apocalypse of course), and so too therefore does the
practical capacity of even one individual to manifest his visions,
increase.

Which means the goals we might set can be greater (inter-planetary
travel looks like a worthy challenge for the most creative/ deepest
thinkers today).

Those who have great capacity on too many vectors have historically
(apparently) been crucified. First hand experience of being told
"intellectual capacity is a threat" by a close associate a few years
ago, shocked me to the core - my inclination is to create, and give
my creations away, and the ability to grok in ways to make certain
creations as computer programs, requires a certain IQ (not
necessarily high, but at least sufficient), and this capacity was
actually named (by a low IQ associate/ friend), as a threat.

Blew my mind.

Gotta watch out - those of low capacity may view you as a threat and
want to (literally) crucify you, even when you devote your life
(seemingly) to "giving" "creating" "fixing" and "trying to help"!

Strange humans in this world...