: Except 'they' pay for teh Political Parties, they are in charge of production, and their say governs economic policy- lest they throw their factories into eth Atlantic...
A self serving company would not enjoy a government which imposes upon it a plethora of regulations, taxes and conditions as all western govts do. Ofcourse one might think of a few dark suited people ala x-files running the show and taking some damage to keep the populace happy. I dont. I think company influence stretches only so far, as term limits on governments and voting (however bad, however unlimited the democracy is) inhibits runaway influence, and so does freedom of speech. That is why, if I were to support any state, it would be one whose remit is very simple (protection of individuals against force n fraud) and limited, so that any sudden changes in using force to favor an interest group are not hidden in a mealstrom of soundbites and pretending to do things for 'the good of the people'. A good governemnt is a tiny transparent one.
: Could it be that busses form a natural monopoly?
No, you can compete on routes, the same one if you want.
:And that some areas are just not 'economical' to run a bus service to, and that communities need bus services?
: But they could only produce such wealth because of teh social structures that allowed it,
Precisely, and note than in America at that time, where govt (though corrupt, it was nothing like today) largely sought to protect only life, liberty, property is the structure in which such people best create wealth. Those advances in wealth (in rail, steel, oil etc) would hav been hugely inhibted had America started out under a state-socialist premise - wheer pursuit of self interest and private property were not accepted.
: I do not denegrate individual ability, merely point out that teh abilities of many individuals are constrained by their position in teh working class
Precisely why America was a great place for the 'rags to riches' lives. None of those hugely famous millionaires (carnegie, hill, vanderbilt, rockefeller) started with any more wealth than the average immigrant or 'working class' American. Note also that in many of those companies the 'workers' who were most able becasme part owners.
If they werent constrained, nor were their peers.
One thing, from reading such history, is that I doubt its as easy now. Not because 'the big boys' have us all over a barrell, but because starting your own business, aquiring stock, employing people is now such a complex and massively more expensive thing than it used to be. There are you barriers to the workign class. I might suggest cynically that the intention of 'welfare states' is to keep their welfare voters from freeing themselves and thus keep them in power. After all what soundbites would Clinton or Blair spout if the 'poor underpriviliged' that they adore (the votes of) so much started opening businesses, becoming self employed an no longer needing mommy or nanny state to 'care' for them. Gosh, ive gone all conspiracy theory.
: Einstein couldn't just have 'dreamed up' relativity.
What he did do is consider the relavent current knowledge and perceive what was previously not perceived.
: But surely they are speculating on when teh next tech advance comes, and it'll need to be a big and far reaching one...
Why big? And yes its speculation, but this time based upon a long running trend.
: No, because that community would still ahve been devastated- that some new jobs might be found wouln't help the folk as kill themselves, as are forced to move, as never find work again. Leaving folk free to the dpreadations of the Market doesn't help them non niether.
I wasnt saying that the money wasted on rover would have otherwise resulted in a few shops, Im saying it may very likely have ended up invested in growing companies who would have employed, in sum, more than rover. What the govt did with rover (and in the US too, with some car companies) is pour fertilizer over a bad crop, thus depriving the good crops of the fertilizer they would have attacted had the money not had a political agenda.
: No, its part of teh ongoing crisis since 1973, some people never recover such things, they find their skills unsaleable, they have their pride and spririt shot to peices...
And many others now have jobs not even possible then. many others. and the std of living for a working man (hell, even a welfare man) has gone up (buy $100 worth of stuff now and compare to equivelent in 1973). what would you have? society held forever in stasis so as not to hurt anyone in that partical moment, whilst denying others their futures and choices? i cant imagine so.
: But their mind is only the product of their environment
(add a few genetics) - whats important is that the mind is distinct and unique to each person, and that it is specific to the individual, and belongs to them.
: But its true, no-one has an identity, beyond their society, inventors can only invent because of the shoulders of yada yadda yadda, they reconstitute elements in their mind, reoranise what allready exists
And you pass this off as a trifling point?? As a denial of the individual as the engine of creation?? That we stand on the shoulders of giants is testament to every indivual who took a step up, not a denial of that individuals importance in taking the step.
: I never said that each iondividual asn't unique, merely that they are *only* unique within their society, they are an individual only as much as society has made them individuals, as their life experieince has mae them feel their indivuality.
And you think that this means their individuality is somehow not real??? not specific and unique to them?? The same sentence above would make me think more in favor of individualism, not less.
: Do you agree the earth is round,a nd goes round the sun?
That is a fact. Deciding on what farmer jones can and cant do, if not based upon objective reality, is whim. It doesnt matter is a majority decides the earth doesnt go round the sun, it still will. It does matter if they decide farmer joe cant do this or that based on whim, because they can beat him up.