Another 10 products that every one wants to have/use!

[Rhodes]

http://uk.green.yahoo.com/blog/environmentalgraffiti/10/10-radioactive-products-that-people-actually-used.html :D (note that this smiley is using product number 10, from top to bottom)

I like few, possibly my favorit is the Suppositories, chocolate and the one above this last...:har:

[Schroeder]

Ouch.:doh:

[HunterICX]

What we have been made to believe back then :haha:

HunterICX

[SteamWake]

A perfect exampl of the statement "A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing." :03:

[Raptor1]

This stuff really works!, I've trie...ugh *faints*

[HunterICX]

This stuff really works!, I've trie...ugh *faints*

Look... Look!!! Raptor1 is glowing green stuff!

HunterICX

[Skybird]

That naivety regarding radioactivity reminds of our today's mass consumption of free as well as prescribed medical drugs, or our ways to bring our neutransmitter-balances into disorder by damaging them by changed social behavior, and excessive computer-interaction affecting the latter as well. we know for example that certain neurotransmitter-substances in the brain get produced in certain mutually related ammounts when we interact socially with people, say the salesman in the shop, or the teacher and pupils in class. If these events get deleted by robo-shopping in automatted shops (they make us believe it to be "event shopping"), or home-schooling via internet and computer only, then this affects our biological homeostasis of such neuratransmitters. And that could lead to psychological suffering like depression, changed and degraded personalities, and who knows what psychological diseases at higher age. We just have become aware of the tremendous importance of a healthy neutransmitter balance, and the far-reaching long-time-consequences of damages in there. Seen that way, we still use radioactive face-powder, so to speak. And still we think it makes us younger.

Technical and scientific progress is not bad in itself. just when we lack the knowledge and insight to make responsible use of it, and therefore abuse it uncritcially and excessively - then it becomes a danger indeed. But in this modern world you often get called a "progressophobic" or a fool wanting to move back into the stoneage, when you say that, or indicate that you refuse to follow that path uncritically and undiscriminatory. Totally uncritical believe in technology and a technological future where all options are good and fine - this is what the industrialised modern system wants us to be, so that we shall be uncritial consumers, matching the stereotype of the most ideal consumer who does not ask questions but just buys, buys, buys, and where products no longer get designed to match the needs of the consumer that replaced the citizen in importance, but where "educated" (=trained) consumers have been drilled to fulfill the needs of products, production and procedures.

Modern citizenship means: being an uncritical consumer. That is your primary function you have been reduced to: to consume and to buy. If you don't believe that, imagine one moment what would happen if all of a sudden peopole would refuse to be like that. Everything would collapse and break down immediately.

[SteamWake]

That naivety regarding radioactivity reminds of our today's mass consumption of free as well as prescribed medical drugs, or our ways to bring our neutransmitter-balances into disorder by damaging them by changed social behavior, and excessive computer-interaction affecting the latter as well. we know for example that certain neurotransmitter-substances in the brain get produced in certain mutually related ammounts when we interact socially with people, say the salesman in the shop, or the teacher and pupils in class. If these events get deleted by robo-shopping in automatted shops (they make us believe it to be "event shopping"), or home-schooling via internet and computer only, then this affects our biological homeostasis of such neuratransmitters. And that could lead to psychological suffering like depression, changed and degraded personalities, and who knows what psychological diseases at higher age. We just have become aware of the tremendous importance of a healthy neutransmitter balance, and the far-reaching long-time-consequences of damages in there. Seen that way, we still use radioactive face-powder, so to speak. And still we think it makes us younger.

Technical and scientific progress is not bad in itself. just when we lack the knowledge and insight to make responsible use of it, and therefore abuse it uncritcially and excessively - then it becomes a danger indeed. But in this modern world you often get called a "progressophobic" or a fool wanting to move back into the stoneage, when you say that, or indicate that you refuse to follow that path uncritically and undiscriminatory. Totally uncritical believe in technology and a technological future where all options are good and fine - this is what the industrialised modern system wants us to be, so that we shall be uncritial consumers, matching the stereotype of the most ideal consumer who does not ask questions but just buys, buys, buys, and where products no longer get designed to match the needs of the consumer that replaced the citizen in importance, but where "educated" (=trained) consumers have been drilled to fulfill the needs of products, production and procedures.

Modern citizenship means: being an uncritical consumer. That is your primary function you have been reduced to: to consume and to buy. If you don't believe that, imagine one moment what would happen if all of a sudden peopole would refuse to be like that. Everything would collapse and break down immediately.


:o wow thats quite a diatribe.

[AVGWarhawk]

That naivety regarding radioactivity reminds of our today's mass consumption of free as well as prescribed medical drugs, or our ways to bring our neutransmitter-balances into disorder by damaging them by changed social behavior, and excessive computer-interaction affecting the latter as well. we know for example that certain neurotransmitter-substances in the brain get produced in certain mutually related ammounts when we interact socially with people, say the salesman in the shop, or the teacher and pupils in class. If these events get deleted by robo-shopping in automatted shops (they make us believe it to be "event shopping"), or home-schooling via internet and computer only, then this affects our biological homeostasis of such neuratransmitters. And that could lead to psychological suffering like depression, changed and degraded personalities, and who knows what psychological diseases at higher age. We just have become aware of the tremendous importance of a healthy neutransmitter balance, and the far-reaching long-time-consequences of damages in there. Seen that way, we still use radioactive face-powder, so to speak. And still we think it makes us younger.

Technical and scientific progress is not bad in itself. just when we lack the knowledge and insight to make responsible use of it, and therefore abuse it uncritcially and excessively - then it becomes a danger indeed. But in this modern world you often get called a "progressophobic" or a fool wanting to move back into the stoneage, when you say that, or indicate that you refuse to follow that path uncritically and undiscriminatory. Totally uncritical believe in technology and a technological future where all options are good and fine - this is what the industrialised modern system wants us to be, so that we shall be uncritial consumers, matching the stereotype of the most ideal consumer who does not ask questions but just buys, buys, buys, and where products no longer get designed to match the needs of the consumer that replaced the citizen in importance, but where "educated" (=trained) consumers have been drilled to fulfill the needs of products, production and procedures.

Modern citizenship means: being an uncritical consumer. That is your primary function you have been reduced to: to consume and to buy. If you don't believe that, imagine one moment what would happen if all of a sudden peopole would refuse to be like that. Everything would collapse and break down immediately.


So, how much are eggs in China?

[Blacklight]

I love the toothpaste idea. I wonder if it gave you a glowing smile ?:DL

[Task Force]

Amasing what they thought was healthy back then...

Raidation is only good for powerplants... NOT PEOPLE lol... Kind of reminds me of all these magic diet pills now days...

But (insert name here) and your a** will shrink 4 sizes in 3 weeks!

1 year later...

This is a medical alert.
People who took (insert name here) can have (list problems here)

People have died because of this Drug!!!

Call 555 - 5555 NOW!!!!

:rotfl:

[FIREWALL]

This just proves people will shove just about anything up their .... :roll: :O:

[Skybird]

:o wow thats quite a diatribe.
Less a diatribe by intention, more an unconvenient truth. Nobody wants to hear it, because everybody prefers to think of himself as a clever, self-determined individual that decides on the basis of facts, reason and logic.

But advertising-psychology as well as politics are about controlling the behaviour of crowds, both are sciences of manipulation. Crowds and intelligence are in inverse proportion to each other.

[Rhodes]

This just proves people will shove just about anything up their .... :roll: :O::haha::up:

[Frame57]

I hate using suppositories! Some invisible force takes it from my hand before I can insert it-WTFO?:woot:

[UnderseaLcpl]

Less a diatribe by intention, more an inconvenient truth. Nobody wants to hear it, because everybody prefers to think of himself as a clever, self-determined individual that decides on the basis of facts, reason and logic.

But advertising-psychology as well as politics are about controlling the behaviour of crowds, both are sciences of manipulation. Crowds and intelligence are in inverse proportion to each other.


Really, Sky? Don't tell me that's all the thought you have put into that argument, and I include your so-called "diatribe' in that statement.:DL

Firstly, I will say that I am a proponent of the Nuerobiological school of Psychology myself, but you assume too much. You're neglecting the body's capcity for adaption, as well as the type of social stimulus we might require when you suggest that modern e-interaction might damage us socially.
Perhaps it is you who is using scientific progress irresponsibly. There are legions of psychyatrists who claim to be able to fix behavioral problems through medication and counselling, and yet the number of people diagnosed with clinical psychological problems as a percentage of population grows every year. (in this country, anyway. Maybe it is different in Germany?)
If they can't accurately diagnose and treat such problems ona case-by-case basis, can you really offer such a universal diagnosis? The human machine is a lot more complex than that. There is far too much we do not know about human physiology to begin offering universal diagnoses, especially in theoretical neurobiology. Perhaps you're peddling radium to people who don't know what it is:hmmm:

Secondly, I have some points you may wish to consider concerning your stance that "modern citizenship requires being an uncritical consumer".
I think that nothing could be further from the truth. The continued advancement of society, the markets it has created, and the general standard of living say otherwise. Obviously, wise choices have been made, and they have been made by the market. That is, those people who like to view themselves as "clever", "self-determined" individuals. For the most part, they choose products that are good, and reject those that are bad, and it doesn't take them long to figure out which is which. Self-interest is a very powerful force, one that I do not think you have enough respect for.
As an example, let's look at these radioactive products. How many people were ever harmed by them? Their very existence is a curiosity. Sure, a few idiots may have killed/harmed themselves with them, but was there ever a great cancer outbreak linked to them? Perhaps a crisis on the scale of thalydimide or dioxin, or even Chernobyl? No. Just a handful of case-studies. That is because the market policed itself and they disappeared. They were dumb products that few people wanted, just like enzyte and electric spoons, and breast supplements and all the rest. By contrast, the "crises" I mentioned were all either caused by or exaggerated/exacerbated by, the state.
Imo, you place too much faith in your foresight and in that of people like you. Not only will your message be overpowered by self-interest, but it will be perverted by the self-interest of people with the political power to realize it.

I don't think that you are a technophobe or a progressophobe, however. Like you, I think that we must not progress too rapidly. However, the market, in as pure a form as possible, is the only force capable of realizing that aim, and the only one that should be entrusted with it. The market can't really outpace GDP and inflate the currency, but the state sure as hell can. It has fiat power over currency.

Finally, I will address this:
That is your primary function you have been reduced to: to consume and to buy. If you don't believe that, imagine one moment what would happen if all of a sudden peopole would refuse to be like that. Everything would collapse and break down immediately.

You use the terms "consuming" and "buying", which makes it sound like a bad thing, but really, it is trading. Trade is the fundamental principle upon which all great societies are based. The exchange of something of lesser value for something of greater value. Everybody wins, as long as there is no fraud or stupidity. And while you cannot prevent or control stupidity, you can do something about fraud....penalize it when it crops up. The market does that already. The government can strengthen that power, so long as it doesn't go to great lenghts to prevent fraud from occuring in the first place.

That's my piece:salute:

[Murr44]

I like the Atomic Energy Lab. "Fun, Easy & Exciting".:D It reminds me of the time when we were little and my brother blew up our bathroom with his chemistry set.:har: Mom wasn't too pleased with him that day...:nope:

[Jimbuna]

I hate using suppositories! Some invisible force takes it from my hand before I can insert it-WTFO?:woot:

I reckon if anything was stuck up my rectum the last thing I would feel like would be to ‘bubble over with joyous vitality' :o

[Murr44]

I reckon if anything was stuck up my rectum the last thing I would feel like would be to ‘bubble over with joyous vitality' :o

If you think that's bad check this out...

http://www.infomercialscams.com/scams/dual_action_cleanse.

[Rhodes]

I like the Atomic Energy Lab. "Fun, Easy & Exciting".:D It reminds me of the time when we were little and my brother blew up our bathroom with his chemistry set.:har: Mom wasn't too pleased with him that day...:nope:

Look for it here in the forum! I ve posted a thread with it, it was somtehing like "I want this for birthday"! Also from a site of "past toys that today one can not buy/use" etc. Go check because you will enjoy what that lab had to do experiments....

[Skybird]

Firstly, I will say that I am a proponent of the Nuerobiological school of Psychology myself, but you assume too much. You're neglecting the body's capcity for adaption, as well as the type of social stimulus we might require when you suggest that modern e-interaction might damage us socially.
Perhaps it is you who is using scientific progress irresponsibly. There are legions of psychyatrists who claim to be able to fix behavioral problems through medication and counselling, and yet the number of people diagnosed with clinical psychological problems as a percentage of population grows every year.

when I was at university, our profs repeatedly pointed out that if strict methodology and solid statistical criterions get applied in therapy evaluation (analysis that tries to assess how effective a therapy school is in therapising), the number of such robust analysis is surprisngly low, and the overwhelming majority of such studies suffer from tremendous methodologic problems and flaws. In principle, if somebody is labelled a depressive patient and gets for example a therapy by Carl Rogers, and after some time he is less depressive, we still do not know if the therapy has had an influence in that, or if he became better despite the therapy, and would have become better even without therapy anyway. Same could be said about Psychoanalysis. The data is a bit better regarding Behavior Therapy and some individual symptoms and problems.Nevertheless, the scope of this school imo must be seen as limited, it has no universal claim to make.

Also, I am not an excessive neurobiologist, by far not. As I said, the tremendous effects of neurotransmitter balances get realised in full since just a couple of year only - after I finished university. The social feedback you mentioned should not be minimised, however, tendency today is to exaggerate it. Social environments get formed and created by - humans. And humans form these by their behavior which they show and form on the basis of - neurological processes again. So what you oversee is the possibility that the social environment feeding back on the individual behavior, got created by man driven by neurological processes again. How could it be any different?

A sidestory, have you ever realised how much of our "civilised" behavior and our shopping habits - are related to most elemental ritualised mating behavior? :D And to what degree biologistic drives that once were essential for man'S survival - still control the behavior of both individuals and groups? If you do not believe me, keep this hint in mind next time you see TV clips from europe and south America from a football match, both what the teams do, and what the crowd does. ;)

Also most fundamental in controlling our life: sexuality. That should be obvious, but for many it isn'T, it seems. Many think they make a decision to live a sexual life this or that way, be liberal on it, and that they have it under control.But the simple truth is, that at the beginning, sexus has man under it's control, and man stuggles ver yhard to win some temporary independance from it. Not only the core of the issue itself I mean, but also all related, surrounding action patterns and behavior. That leads to things as far related as table manners, and or things as close as one partner cheating the other. There is a funny book I recommend, though it is not for a prudish reader, Robin Baker: Sperm Wars. In it he describes a situation or tells a story in each chapter that represents a certain aspects of human sexuality or an inter-human event related to it, and then explains it from an evolutional, biologistic standpoint. Before reading this book, I was a naive believer of free will and how self-determined we are, myself, and that civilisation is controlling primitive drives undisputed. But I found it extremely tough to argue with the man, and then started to go back to some stuff from the university and read a bit more on the biologistic approach on psychology. Even Freud pointed out that civilisation is nothing more than an extremely thin layer of paint on the surface of the deep troubled waters that are our biologic drives.

The ratio of man, as well as free will, today get hopelessly overestimated. If we really were that reasonable and self-controlled, I wonder why the world is what it is.

this country, anyway. Maybe it is different in Germany?)
If they can't accurately diagnose and treat such problems ona case-by-case basis, can you really offer such a universal diagnosis? The human machine is a lot more complex than that. There is far too much we do not know about human physiology to begin offering universal diagnoses, especially in theoretical neurobiology. Perhaps you're peddling radium to people who don't know what it is:hmmm:

Lance, we know for sure that for example depressions are a resulting consequence if you reduce certain neutransmitter substance, and shift the balances between some of them. They do more than just transporting electric stimuli along neurons, leaving interpretation and felt result to others brain instances: neurotransmitters indeed directly affect our well-beeing. That is no big secret since long. What since just a few years we become aware of is that these balances, that the total ammount of neurotransmitters currently circulating inside the system of electric potential transportation can be affected not only by kognitive but experiences of social interaction indeed. the only surprise is that we did not focus on that any earlier, since the wide public knows that learning can be trained, that mental activity traisn the brain - and the lack of it leaves the brain detoriating. We feel well when talking with somebody close to us, in a comfortable situation. that feeling must have a physiological correlate in our body. We start to become bad in learning stuff, if socially isolated - that must have a physiological correlate in our body, else we would not feel it. We become aroused if meeting somebody by whom we get attracted - nobody will deny there is a physiologivcal correlate. Every thought that we have, must have a physiological correlate, in form of a reaction in neutransmitters changing in the brain, and neurons firing. Take away the brain, and we would not think, feel, be motivated, be intellectually capable. Take away the body component of our "being human", and you have no longer the idea of what it is that makes up a human - he is dead. What comes after that, is metaphysical speculation that we must not adress here. Indeed, long lasting dysbalances of neutransmitters seem to result in personality changes. I do believe indeed the unpopular theory that for example excessive computer gaming with kids diving into the virtual world for many hours per day, does chnage their personality and their social behavior, which becomes the more important if these gaming sessions are not counterbalanced by a compensating social life. Usually, the argument for assuming this is a vague cogntive one, wiothout expalining any further what it is in cognitions that is causing the change. I see tjhis story from a very hardware-related standpoint indeed.

Secondly, I have some points you may wish to consider concerning your stance that "modern citizenship requires being an uncritical consumer".
I think that nothing could be further from the truth. The continued advancement of society, the markets it has created, and the general standard of living say otherwise. Obviously, wise choices have been made, and they have been made by the market. That is, those people who like to view themselves as "clever", "self-determined" individuals. For the most part, they choose products that are good, and reject those that are bad, and it doesn't take them long to figure out which is which. Self-interest is a very powerful force, one that I do not think you have enough respect for.

Self interest. Another one of these unwanted biologistic, probably genetically encoded basic drives, deriving from the fight for survival in ancient times. :D A variation of "fight for survival": get as much meat from the prey as you can, stockpile food and water, keep your female mating partners away from male rivals.

We both know from earlier discussion that we totally disagree regarding the self-regulation and reason of the so-called "market". The term "educated customer" to which I losely referred above, in fact is a special term that is common in marketing and business psychology today, it is not my invention. It means indeed to have a product, and then training people to raise their acceptance for it, to raise an interest and a buying motivation for it, and even - very actual - making people agreeing to change their own behavior so that it fits the need of the product, instead of wanting a product that fits their needs. This can include the way in which the product gets sold, and this is a very actual theme today, with the changes in modern life: back then, the bank was doing the work to fill the form, now we need to do it ourselves, and consider that our independence. In supermarkets they are testing cash systems where the customer does the job of logging the prices n himself, before: somebody else did it for us. They call that "event shopping". The gas station attendant is something that many young ones even do not remenber anymore: we fuel our cars, we check the engines and tires, and eventually we need to fiddle around with the automatic machine that replaces the cashdesk. That is called "economy service". When we need a ticket, or in Germany: a stamp, I see more and more people standing in line in front of ticket automats with complex touch screens, because they cannot get their acts together in learning in two minutes how to handle that damn and sometimes surprisingly complex thing, I admit I have failed myself repeatedly at these things, too. The German Railway calls that "customer-orientation". Internet sites time and again make us tailoring our behavior to their procedural demands. And when you do telelphone banking, over here you have a whole booklet of numerical commands and instructions (12 pages) what word you have to say at what occasion and when to hit what number, just to send you into a loop for a long time. The bak i am with calls that "progress". We behave like machines ourselves, doing what we are expected to do at times. And we buy what we are expected to buy, and we do it in masses. the latest mode is just the best example, the latest trend. Trends are not observed and then go into mass production - trends get constructed, go into mass production, and then the intended customer gets trained to accept them. It is not only that alone, it also is about raising acceptance for features, components, substances in food, etc. Coupled with it often is a massive lying and hiding of information thoiught to be critical and possibly raising concerns by the buying automats: us, for example regarding the ingredients of industrial food. when you do not know something contains what you do not want, you cannot make an educated decision of not buying it. The industry shows a very tremendous verbal creativity in hiding such key information. For example, glutamate. In europe, glutamate can hide behind 12 word constructions where the word glutamate does not appear anymore, and six numercial E-codes (E-codes identify certain ingredients in food) that all mean just this: 18 ways to fulfill the legal obligation to inform of glutamate without saying glutamate. In my book, that is fraud and a real criminal offence. But it is perfectly legal by the law. A law that has been heavily lobbied and tailored by the interested industry. Or this: since some time we have a socalled consumer ministry, that amongst others serves as cointrolling instance for food and as agricultrual ministry as well. We have had many scandals involving rotten meat in past years. The law now say that people can ask their information service about rotten meat. The law also says that companies and producers responsible for it, should not be identified to the consumer, which means their business interests got successfully lobbied to rank above the health interests of the consumer. You can know that somewhere rotten meat is cirulating, but you are not allowed to know where, and what producer's products are affected. Ehem, sorry...?

A liberal, free market last but not least is a market - that creates the law to its liking. Because it can do it, and because doing shelps its profit interests.



As an example, let's look at these radioactive products. How many people were ever harmed by them? Their very existence is a curiosity. Sure, a few idiots may have killed/harmed themselves with them, but was there ever a great cancer outbreak linked to them? Perhaps a crisis on the scale of thalydimide or dioxin, or even Chernobyl? No. Just a handful of case-studies. That is because the market policed itself and they disappeared. They were dumb products that few people wanted, just like enzyte and electric spoons, and breast supplements and all the rest. By contrast, the "crises" I mentioned were all either caused by or exaggerated/exacerbated by, the state.


And where is your market regulation regarding the massive mass abuse of popular drugs like for example Valium? Many others could be mentioned. especially in america, the incritical mass consummation of drugs and psychopharmaka has reached levels that make insiders shiver (although it is tried to establish that in Europe as well: especially companies with connections to american companies try to reach that). where is the market regulation concerning the selling of almost poisened food: food with bad fats, with excessive ammounts of salt or refined white sugar and produced in an intoxicating way creating toxical substance by overheating? the raising number of fat people, hilariously fat people, is not a random event only, and it is becasue how much people eat, but what kind of crap "food" they eat (and here education and social class comes into play). Where is the market-selfregulation towards lowering the ridiculous costs of your heavily lobbied health systems that is described to be not better than the Germn system, but costing you twice the bucks per bang than us with our "socialistic" nanny-state system? Where is your market regulation towards acting reasonably in developing fuel-efficient cars which already could be there since a long time? Where is... Well, stop. We could play this until the end of the day.

The market today is a lobbied market, more than anything else.

I don't think that you are a technophobe or a progressophobe, however. Like you, I think that we must not progress too rapidly. However, the market, in as pure a form as possible, is the only force capable of realizing that aim, and the only one that should be entrusted with it. The market can't really outpace GDP and inflate the currency, but the state sure as hell can. It has fiat power over currency.

As I said, we totally disagree. that view of yours I consider to be extremely dangerous, having done a lot of damage already. Your past arguments to blame interference by the state for the failing market, i never found convincing, but extremely artificial.

You use the terms "consuming" and "buying", which makes it sound like a bad thing, but really, it is trading. Trade is the fundamental principle upon which all great societies are based. The exchange of something of lesser value for something of greater value.

Wrong!!! Only idiots or people in a weak position where they cannot resist to their "partner" would agree to a deal where they get something of lesser value for something they give that is of higher value. Trade is about giving what you do not need, and get something that you do need.

Everybody wins, as long as there is no fraud or stupidity. And while you cannot prevent or control stupidity, you can do something about fraud....penalize it when it crops up. The market does that already. The government can strengthen that power, so long as it doesn't go to great lenghts to prevent fraud from occuring in the first place.
I cannot buy that thought. Prevention is better than needing to do corrections. Favouring correction over prevention seems to be an amerixcan characteristic, I would say :D Tremendous troubles, losses, and millions of people in existential fear without the mess being their fault - right now that is the result of having favoured corrections over prevention.

Also, trade should be most direct, with as few intermediate traders as possible, because the more parties want their share of the cake, the more expensive it becomes - and that distorts the GDP statistics massively, in my understanding of what GDP should try to express. I also think trade should take place at the shortest distance possible, and long distance should only be accepted if items get traded that are not available in the other place. Why us in Germany need to trade potatoes with Egypt, and why german butter gets sold in Ireland and Netherlands, while Dutch and Irish butter is sold in German supermarkets, escapes my imagination - even more so since German butter in German supermarkets causes the smallest costs in transportation and thus is the cheaper butter over here anyway. especially hilarious it becomes if you buy "bio vegetables and bio fruits" - that got transported from Spain to Denmark, or from Marocco to Germany. Thinking of fuel and pollution, what is bio in this vegetables/fruits...?

Trading is not bad per se. What I brandmark is the uncritical, blind mass consumation. The cheating of the industry regarding it's products, and the drill of consumers to follow every twist and turn of the selling strategies of the business. what I criticise is if trade and production and business is no longer for the people, but the people are there for serving the needs of business, industry and trade.

Like repeatedly before, you described mechanisms that eventually can work on small scale communities. However, they fail on national, continental and global scale. the same problem I see with the basic idea of democracy: it has a chance to work uncorrupted only in relatively small communities. It sure as hell fails on national and international levels. Maybe we should copy the lecture from physics: newtonian physics are not wrong in itself just because quantum physics appeared. Quantum physics help you nothing when playing pool. But you can describe pool perfectly with Newtonian physics - but on subnuclear levels, Newton sucks, and quantum physics shine.

The distortions and to be criticised perversions I see today - have consequently formed up on the very basis of your model. They are not a contradiction to it, but the emerged because your model gives them the space and opportunity to emerge. The crisis and damage today, as well as the distortions in world trade and the exploitation of the third world, are only consistent consequences from this. the more oyu propagate your liberal self-regulating, un-monitored market, the more you help these things to grow, you cannot escape it. the theory - works well in theory only. The reality is something different, and less simple.

In the end, your toughts are as hypothetical as mine have been when mentioning in past discussions how it should be instead. You correctly pointed out that the political system is too much corrupted as if it could be trusted to serve as an honest broker, a neutral referee, and supervising monitor. I n the past I was more referring to the politial system how it should be according by the ideas of western constitutions, namely the American and German ones, since both are so very exemplaric in their idealistic intentions. However, the gap between the spirit of these ideas, and the reality man has formed from them, is already so wide that it is hard to see the other side when standing on the one side.

Which leaves us in a no-win-no-win situation. And indeed that's how I see the world. the phrase "it all just goes down the drain" may hide a very complex set of interacting processes and linked interdependencies, nevertheless it sums it all up correctly, it seems to me.