tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3077210.post6333055136163155941..comments2024-03-28T08:37:58.136+01:00Comments on Limited, Inc.: 1979 - a flashbackRoger Gathmannhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11257400843748041639noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3077210.post-15333371095315088242008-01-23T04:17:00.000+01:002008-01-23T04:17:00.000+01:00Proceeding in order of points in the post:-Not all...Proceeding in order of points in the post:-<BR/><BR/>Not all Libertarians are like that. Those are the sort <A HREF="http://mutualist.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">Kevin Carson</A> calls "Vulgar Libertarians". But he managed to get some of his material covered by the Journal of Libertarian Studies, with the help of editor Roderick Long.<BR/><BR/>Was John Law actually little, or is this description the artist at work?<BR/><BR/>The US middle class of the 1980s wouldn't have been comparing their lot with that of their equivalents a decade earlier, but with that of their parents - not necessarily middle class - a generation earlier. There may well have been an uneven increase of difficulties over those years (I don't know). Notional increases in their wealth weren't relevant; they couldn't cash in on those (then). To the extent that those raised their mortgage service costs, they even hurt. It was all jam tomorrow; what counted was their accessible resources. Those notional increases are spurious in another way too: you get those by multiplying the size of the middle class in households by the marginal gain when one household liquidates. That's not the same as the absolute increase in value of the total housing stock but probably far greater.<BR/><BR/>"‘middle class altruism’ – the willingness to spend taxes on helping the lowest income group" is inherently self destructive, because of the lack of nexus in taxation. It's always at someone else's expense without any point of purchase for altruism. Contrariwise, the taxpayer is never the decider. Fellow feeling erodes. This does not require any envious feeling that the poor were <I>gaining</I> on the middle class, rather a feeling that the middle class was being dragged under. That applies whether it was being dragged under <I>as well as</I> or <I>instead of</I> the poor.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3077210.post-24564575158894686872008-01-19T23:16:00.000+01:002008-01-19T23:16:00.000+01:00AZ 73 = ACCIDENT INSURANCE = DOUBLE INDEMNITY = LO...AZ 73 = ACCIDENT INSURANCE = DOUBLE INDEMNITY = LOCKMAN, DOORGUARD.<BR/><BR/>AZ {1979-1848=131} = THE <A HREF="http://www.ancestry.com/facts/Gathman-name-meaning.ashx" REL="nofollow">GATEMAN</A> STEPS DOWN FROM THE GATE = THE RIFF WAS SUPER, SUPER SIMPLE = HISTORICAL PATTERNS OF MEANING = ACHIEVING THE METHARME EFFECT = <A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvuKxL4LOqc" REL="nofollow">HELL'S VENGEANCE BOILS IN MY HEART</A>.northangerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02124226438327229521noreply@blogger.com