RE: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise

From: Dan Glover (daneglover@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Jul 09 2004 - 18:00:50 BST

  • Next message: Arlo J. Bensinger: "Re: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise"

    Hello everyone

    >From: "Mark Steven Heyman" <markheyman@infoproconsulting.com>
    >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    >To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    >Subject: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise
    >Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 14:06:09 -0700
    >
    >On 8 Jul 2004 at 13:01, Dan Glover wrote:
    >Good points all. Let me ask you though, if one day someone from
    >Microsoft contacted you with a: Dear Mr. Heyman, we at Microsoft
    >Corp. would like to extend an offer of employment with our firm. The
    >work is right up your alley, starting salary somewhere in the middle
    >six figures along with all the perks a large corporation can offer.
    >Will you accept this position?
    >
    >msh says:
    >Hi Dan. Funny you should ask. I started IPC in 1983. I was, and
    >continue to be, the only employee. I was lucky enough to be born
    >with a certain amount of brain power and knack for abstract
    >reasoning, and luckier still to be born at a time and place where I
    >would be able to take advantage of it. The PC boom of the early
    >eighties created a tremendous demand for programmers so I was able to
    >make a living as an independent contractor, the only way I can see to
    >exist in our society without either being exploited, or directly
    >exploiting others.
    >
    >Anyway, in the late 80's, I was working for Ashton Tate, best known
    >as the creators of dBASE II, III, IV. I passed up several chances to
    >join AT as a full-time regular employee, preferring to retain my
    >independence. Had I accepted their offer, I almost certainly would
    >have ended up at Microsoft, along with almost every other AT
    >programmer, when AT went under. All of this was writing on the wall,
    >and no surprise to anyone. I knew that by turning down AT I was also
    >turning down Microsoft.
    >
    >If I didn't follow up these opportunities in the 80's, when I needed
    >the work, I see no reason why I would give up my independence now,
    >six figures or no.

    Hi Mark

    Actually it's not that funny I should ask -- I checked out your website. I
    like your answer though. Thank you.

    >
    >dan:
    >Of course there are. But right now I'm having difficulty trying to
    >come up with one or two. Perhaps you could outline a few reasons. And
    >that job offer from Microsoft doesn't count!
    >
    >msh says:
    >I thought I already did. In our current system, someone might make
    >a moral choice to avoid the exploitation of others by renting herself
    >for wages. Or, maybe, by starting a business with herself as the
    >sole employee.

    Your answers before seem a bit specious which is why I asked again. The
    first, avoiding exploition of others, is impossible in our current society,
    IMO, unless you happen to be a butterfly or Pollyanna. The second is not
    working for someone else, it's working for yourself.

    >dan:
    >What do you mean by the south? Are you talking the southern
    >hemisphere? Mexico? Alabama? Please clarify.
    >
    >msh says:
    >Sorry. I'm using north-south in the economic sense. Over time, the
    >phrases 'First World', 'Second World' and 'Third World' have become
    >synonymous with 'first', 'second' and 'third best'. With the
    >disappearance of most communist nations, new terminology has emerged
    >to replace the first-second-third world distinctions. The terms
    >'Economic North' and 'Economic South' refer to the northern
    >countries being richer and the southern countries being poorer, as a
    >rule. So, in the western hemisphere, everything south of the US is
    >Economic South.

    Oh I see, you're being politically correct. I get it now.

    >
    >dan:
    >I think this is an extremely complex issue. So far as I know no one
    >is putting guns to the illegal immigrants' heads and forcing them
    >across the borders. They come to better themselves. And I can't see a
    >thing wrong with that. As long as better opportunities abound
    >elsewhere, or even rumors of better opportunities, the Dynamic and
    >morally sound vision is to follow those opportunities.
    >
    >msh says:
    >Well, if you stay you starve, if you move you have a chance: Not
    >quite a gun to the head, but...
    >
    >BTW, this is exactly the way it's intended to work. Arlo's example
    >of Coca Cola in Tijuana, as well as his discussion of the Eco-South
    >in general, is well worth thinking about.

    Who is behind this conspiracy? The CEO of Coke? All the CEO's of all the
    corporations who have moved to the eco-south? Who intends things to work
    that way? Sounds to me like they might all get together and conspire to
    conspire.

    I think you are failing to see the big picture. You're thinking short term,
    not long term. There's an old house I bought a number of years ago in a poor
    and violent neighborhood. It sits on a busy avenue that leads to what was
    then a new shopping mall. All those cars going to the mall don't just drive
    by, they bring something to the community it didn't have before. I guess you
    could call it "hope" for lack of a better word. I sold the house early this
    year at a very handsome profit as the property values have skyrocketed in
    the old neighborhood.

    Thank you for your comments,

    Dan

    _________________________________________________________________
    MSN 9 Dial-up Internet Access helps fight spam and pop-ups – now 2 months
    FREE! http://join.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 09 2004 - 18:04:01 BST