The Parable of the Gold Prospectors and the Fishermen

[old_fogey_44]

(This one ogionally comes from Paul Krugman -- Economist and NY Times columnist)

Imagine two societies -- onw which relies on prospecting for gold and one which relies on fishing.

In the prospecting society, a few people will hit it very rich, most will fail. While effort certainly plays a small part, rewards are based more on luck. And the luck is permenant -- the "find" remains with the finder who stakes the claim.

In the fishing society, he who puts in the effort will fishes will catch some fish. Some folks will be lucky and find a large school and can sell off the excess, some will find only enough to feed their families. Either way, the next day both will start even again. In the end, effort (and skill) play a far greater role than luck.

In both societies, it is possible to imagine that the same effort is expended and the total rewards across the society are the same. The difference is in the consequences -- where a few benefit enormously and most benefit not at all, versus a society where all benefit.

Which would you rather live in?

[Saundra Hummer]

Where is Andy on this one? He must be off doing his seminars or traveling and telling everyone the virtures of existing peacefully.

[Tenorman]

And then one of the fishermen discovers that by using a different net, or by fishing in a different way, he can catch far more fish, and sell them more cheaply than anyone else. Shortly he is able to buy a second boat and perhaps a couple of outboards, and is selling his fish to several villages along the coast and inland as well. Many of the fishermen discover that they can no longer sell their fish at a reasonable price to buy such things as new nets, or pay for repairs to the boat, so they abandon their fishing to try and cultivate the land, only to discover that it is now owned by our inventive fisherman, who has bought up all the good farming land.

Our fisherman is now living in a large house and is running around in a luxury car and all those who were not quick enough to take on the new methodologies are on the poverty line.

Unless stagnation is being promoted, I don't see the difference :shrug:

[Saundra Hummer]

And then one of the fishermen discovers that by using a different net, or by fishing in a different way, he can catch far more fish, and sell them more cheaply than anyone else. Shortly he is able to buy a second boat and perhaps a couple of outboards, and is selling his fish to several villages along the coast and inland as well. Many of the fishermen discover that they can no longer sell their fish at a reasonable price to buy such things as new nets, or pay for repairs to the boat, so they abandon their fishing to try and cultivate the land, only to discover that it is now owned by our inventive fisherman, who has bought up all the good farming land.

Our fisherman is now living in a large house and is running around in a luxury car and all those who were not quick enough to take on the new methodologies are on the poverty line.

Unless stagnation is being promoted, I don't see the difference :shrug:

O.K Tenorman, where do I buy that net? Quick now, I need it!

[It Should be You]

Unless you have some recipes for gold, I think I will go with the fish.

This is some kind of Rohrshach test (sp?), isn't it?

[Tenorman]

Ahhh! Therein lies the catch. (Sorry I didn't spot that pun until after I had posted) The net has already been used and is now old hat. It was supeceded by the trawler, and that has now been superceded by the drag net and the fine mesh long drop drift net. Our seas are now empty of fish, dolphins, bottom dwelling molluscs and coral environments, all of which have been gathered into the nets of our fisherman, in search of yet more profits.

Can I suggest a Soylent Green manufacturing plant?

[old_fogey_44]

And then one of the fishermen discovers that by using a different net....

No disagreement here. There is a natural tendency to the concentration of wealth. Simply put, it's the gamblers paradox -- in an even odds game, he with the most chips actually has the advantage. The reason? He can afford to lose and stay in the game, while he with fewer chips can be knocked out with a single loss. Two losses and out vs one loss and out (even in an even odds game) gives the one who can withstand two losses twice the chance of winning. Ford survived the Edsel, Delorean didn't survive the DeLorean.

Microsoft never had a noticeable better spreadsheet or word processer, it just had the deaper deeper pockets so it could drive Lotus and Ami Pro out of the business.

The problem is that destroys Adam Smith's model of a truly free market (a case he acknoledged could not exists except in an ideal model). And the question is what to do about a less than perfect market. Doers the government step in and rebalance the market, or does it let certain players achive sufficient status that they can manipulate to suit themselves? Bush seems to opt for the latter.

[old_fogey_44]

Unless you have some recipes for gold, I think I will go with the fish.

This is some kind of Rohrshach test (sp?), isn't it?

No raw shock -- unless you go for the gold and don't find it.... :)

Real quetion is how much we reward luck.

The history of Microsoft (Gates is, on most days the richest person in
America) is the history of a second choice who hit the jackpot because:

a) he was available, and
b) IBM didn't nail down the rights to the operating system

Before MSDOS was CPM -- Digital Research's version of a primative Unix for small processors. They wouldn't meet with IBM on IBM's schedule and Gates would -- and hence the gold mine that made him the richest man in America. Gates also didn't "invent" Windows. Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) did. Gates wasn't even the firt to use it -- Apple was. But Gates had the hegemony on the IBM clone market, so he could reap the benefits.

Talk about living in a goldmining society....

[3pointdeli]

And then one of the fishermen discovers that by using a different net, or by fishing in a different way, he can catch far more fish, and sell them more cheaply than anyone else. Shortly he is able to buy a second boat and perhaps a couple of outboards, and is selling his fish to several villages along the coast and inland as well. Many of the fishermen discover that they can no longer sell their fish at a reasonable price to buy such things as new nets, or pay for repairs to the boat, so they abandon their fishing to try and cultivate the land, only to discover that it is now owned by our inventive fisherman, who has bought up all the good farming land.

Our fisherman is now living in a large house and is running around in a luxury car and all those who were not quick enough to take on the new methodologies are on the poverty line.

Unless stagnation is being promoted, I don't see the difference :shrug:

you just gave up your right to complain about cd burners.

[Andy D]

Sound like a political broadcast from free market economics!

Is it always a case for either or? Communism Vs Democracy?; Islam Vs Christianity? etc

Personally I would rather live in a world in which opportinity was open to all, and not based on the luck of the draw. Any Gold found, any fish found should be for the good of us all and not for those that have the resources, the technology or the know-how. In my world no one should have the right to buy and sell land for private gain, and wealth in all its forms should be more evenly distributed.

Am I in danger of taking this too seriously ? :laugh:

Regards

Andy D.

[Tenorman]

you just gave up your right to complain about cd burners.

Run that one by me again. The logic went straight over my head

[Saundra Hummer]

Under early leaders, kings, queens warrior kings, warrior queens, they evidently collected taxes, they demanded tribute, they demanded grain, leather, cloth, animals ,geese, chickens, cattle, etc., anything their subjects owned or made. These taxes were paid by all. These kings and queens or military leaders, couldn't have possibly used it all, eaten it all, so it had to have been shared, making the lives of their subjects, while not as grand as their own, much improved, than if they were to try to acquire everything on their own. It would have probably been impossible for them. They then recieved their kings protection, and you served to protect as well, and would be handsomely rewarded for doing so.

Why is it today that people don't believe there is any responsibility on the part of governments to better our lives. Earliest man knew that to prosper, things, wealth, must be shared, or perish. The greed of kings were often times their downfall, greed and cruelty. This took many forms and in the end these charactoristics instaid of being for the good, it could be a destructive force.

I'm not a socialist as you are Andy, as I like to see a division between Socialism and Capitalism, I like to see them join up, not to totally take over, one or the other. I think that this is the best way, however both are ripe for abuse, as like we've discussed before, that's just human nature.

[Saundra Hummer]

Run that one by me again. The logic went straight over my head

Too rich, can afford to buy? Or like I've done, a wrong thread altogether???

[Andy D]

I'm not a socialist as you are Andy, as I like to see a division between Socialism and Capitalism, I like to see them join up, not to totally take over, one or the other. I think that this is the best way, however both are ripe for abuse, as like we've discussed before, that's just human nature.

You do not have to be a socialist, a capitalist or anything else for that matter to care about human rights, the state of the planet etc etc just a human being. It is to easy to become indifferent to the suffereing of people who are a long way from you, or indeed in your own country and the danger of this is that one day the human rights abuses etc happen to you!

Human nature, in my view at least is not formed by dictators, by totalitarian regimes it is formed at birth. We all have a ,human nature, to care, to be loved, to feel valued, to contribute in some way etc. But many become indifferent, stop questioning, allow their respective governments to do almost anything in their name.

Regards

Andy D.

[old_fogey_44]

Human nature, in my view at least is not formed by dictators, by totalitarian regimes it is formed at birth. We all have a ,human nature, to care, to be loved, to feel valued, to contribute in some way etc. But many become indifferent, stop questioning, allow their respective governments to do almost anything in their name.

Andy, I's like to be more idealist, but my personal suspicion is that homan nature is very me-centric. We want to be loved and feel valued. We want food, shelter and clothing and acquisitions as well. We want control over events. It has to do with basic survival in a state of nature.

No small proportion of us have developed a more "we-centric" set of values-- some as idealists and some as pragmatists who understand being a "we" is more productive (and safer) than being only a "me." But I'm not at all sure those are values we are born with. If it were, we wouldn't have to spend so much time trying to instilling them in ourselves and others.

[Andy D]

Old Fogey.

I do not think thank human nature is 'me- centric', we as human beings are much more than this. We are different from other species, in that we have the ability to think, to reflect, to have choice etc, and we are not always driven by basic need. Of course as experiments in the 60's suggest and William Golding's book 'Lord Of The Flies' shows, we are all capable of thinking about ourselves and our personal survival.

But as an example of what makes us different, and to illustrate my point, I would suggest that you read the prison diaries of Dietrich Bonhoeffer or the books 'If This Is A Man' and 'The Truce' by Primo Levi.

Kind regards

Andy D.

[old_fogey_44]

But as an example of what makes us different, and to illustrate my point, I would suggest that you read the prison diaries of Dietrich Bonhoeffer or the books 'If This Is A Man' and 'The Truce' by Primo Levi.

Just ordered both (The Diary" -- in it's various printings -- is out of print, but ordered from a reseller). You aren't going to be a cheap date.... :)

[Andy D]

Both books can be obtained in the UK.

I have the complete 'diary' and the abridged version and both Levi books can be obtained in one volume.

Regards

Andy D.

[Saundra Hummer]

I enjoy watching little babies that have just learned to sit up and react to other babies their size and age, they are so sweet one moment, then like little bear cubs the next, they are all that we are in a more rudimental way, they are learning their subsequent behavior.

Some will be sweet little souls, hugging and cooing, next they will be screaming an crying and hitting. This is when we have to step in an encourage the good behaviour, kind behavior, or even witty comical fun loving behavior (can't pull up the word I need, blanking) . Humor is what I was looking for. Helpinjg them develop a sense of humor. Babies are all about themselves, and that's perfectely normal, and that is as it should be, but it is we adults that teach them by expample and if we haven't had those types of lessons in life, and early in life, we stay the selfcentered little child ourselves, not wanting to share, not knowing empathy, and not carring to. I have seen children come from pretty bad conditions that have overcome their environment, and I have seen children who have come from wonderful environments who have turned into monsters. Then there is the middle of the road and any direction is possible, but basically wanting to be good, wanting to do the right thing wins out more than not, but Andy, it is human nature for the Stalins of the world to exist, the Hitlers to exist, and any other type of person who is out for themselves. Their carring for others isn't in their makeup, and never will be. They will jump on any gravy train, or go on any power trip that is available to them. It is human nature and it's often times the good hearted people who don't have the fight in them to prevent it from happening untill it is too late, as they only see the good in people, not the potential for harm. I know, a lot of us tend to overlook every fault imaginable in people, that's human nature too.

[Andy D]

Just ordered both (The Diary" -- in it's various printings -- is out of print, but ordered from a reseller). You aren't going to be a cheap date....

You know the first few dates with my wife seemed expensive, but 16 years later it sometimes seems worth it :angel

Warm regards

Andy D.

[Saundra Hummer]

Sometimes??? comeon now Andy! Let's be real here, ha!

[Andy D]

Sandi.

Well of course I am not such an idealist :D

But of course you are right!

Warm regards

Andy D.

[Saundra Hummer]

Give her my regards, and tell her I love her pretty smile!

[old_fogey_44]

Just ordered both (The Diary" -- in it's various printings -- is out of print, but ordered from a reseller). You aren't going to be a cheap date....

You know the first few dates with my wife seemed expensive, but 16 years later it sometimes seems worth it :angel



My experience was the opposite. The first dates were cheap, neither of us had any money. The later ones cost a fortune. (As we got older, she seemed to think "dinner out" meant traveling all the way across the country to where she grew up for it...)

[Andy D]

Hey Sandi what about my smile? :laugh:

Kind regards

Andy D.

[Saundra Hummer]

Hmmm! I think it's the Rugby photo that's the cutest, muscles and all! I love the one with Che, now that's a happy face, a happy smile in that one! The Santa Monica picture just made me envious of your trip there and I wish I could have shown you some of the old places and some of the good places to eat, that would have been fun.

[Andy D]

Sandi.

I can see I will have to send you some more pictures, that highlight my full potential :wink2:

You know here I am one eye on the computer, and the other on my eldest son watching WWF Wrestling and I feel so small :)

Regards

Andy D.

[Saundra Hummer]

Are all of your children tall? Your wife is tall too, so just wonder? I have a girl cousin that is 6'2 1/4".

I envy tall people, 5' just doesn't get it, makes it too hard to do the things I was always interested in doing, and clothes, well the tall girls always look the best.

[Saundra Hummer]

Andy and everyone, WEST COAST GHOST tells of the Count Basie program being broadcast tonight on Indiana U's online radio program tonight. Go and look it up, it's a really good program, I caught part of it last week, and I highly recommend it, you would regret not hearing it if you knew what all was on it, interviews and his music. Really a lot of fun. Of course it has my old friends from the Lighthouse on it and some of their recordings, so it is a double treat for me.