addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwchatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrosseditemptyheartexportfacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgoogleimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo
A former member
Post #: 392
Kyle Becker has published A Moral Case for Capitalism

Economists have been known throughout time as moral philosophers, and studiers of "the dismal science." Truly what interests do the members of Plato's Cave have in discussing Economics as a meetup topic?
A former member
Post #: 393

A former member
Post #: 394
There is also, counter economics. However this appears, to me, to be yet another way to make a house divided.
A former member
Post #: 395
Seems I am operating in cycles: Here is a review of George Gilder's Wealth and Poverty

[Disclaimer: there is no such thing as a conservative or a liberal; only ways of thinking]
A former member
Post #: 396
The second link in my query classic wealth creation brought the Wikipedia article Wealth.
A former member
Post #: 397
Grepping through the search results for the word poor, I came across thesaurus.com/browse/poor­ and noticed there are many more words to describe the poor than the affluent. [Perhaps there is an economy of language going on? Those who are rich don't need to talk so much about their estate or lack thereof...] The noted difference reminded me of the pyramid classification a particular computer science teacher taught in a lecture one morning showing us several hundred students where approximately we would fit into the society.

Stripped of material wealth I wonder what differentiates the rich person from the poor one: for instance would the rich person, by wealth of experience or some special knowledge, be able to work their self out of poverty more quickly than the person who never knew wealth; Or, would the wealthy having had and lost be held back by a certain quality of having been crestfallen, while the poor person having no such weight of history be unencumbered and therefore more capable to find their fortune?

This gets into questions of Potentiality and actuality.
A former member
Post #: 398
Ben Forbes G.
Epicurean306
Kissimmee, FL
Post #: 246
A major consideration when debating between various economic models is the ideal size (and roles) expected of government.

I think Rawlsian ethical philosophy (specifically, "the veil of ignorance") can be helpful in moral evaluations of the consequences of various economic systems.

Personally, I support a mixed economy over socialism — albeit with quite progressively liberal fiscal and social government policies. I think measures to ensure equality of opportunity (especially educational) and meritocracy as much as possible are crucially important (and I definitely favor progressive taxation, a strong social safety-net, and a decent living wage required for all workers).
A former member
Post #: 400

A former member
Post #: 402
heard on my drive home today, a thoughtful interview of Charles Murray regarding his new book American Exceptionalism: An Experiment in History
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy