[ExI] Is unemployment the future?
Sockpuppet99@hotmail.com
sockpuppet99 at hotmail.com
Sat Nov 7 21:04:47 UTC 2009
All this indicates, Mike, is that engineers are imbedded in the social
context of their time and you are no more likely to get a good result
out of an engineer than out of anyone else. In fact, I would argue
that Carter was a horrible, micromanaging president precisely because
he was an engineer.
Tom D
Sent from my iPod
On Nov 7, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Michael LaTorra <mlatorra at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Spike,
> In our system of tripartite government structure, our presidents do
> not wield the same unchecked power that the Chinese leaders do. The
> US Congress (mostly lawyers) and the Supereme Court (entirely
> lawyers) can block, undo, or dillute whatever a president proposes
> to do.
>
> In the case of President Carter, we had a man who understood the
> long-term energy problem and tried to take steps to avert it. He had
> solar panels installed on the roof of the White House.
> "In 1977, Carter convinced the Democratic Congress to create the
> United States Department of Energy (DoE) with the goal of conserving
> energy. Carter also signed the National Energy Act (NEA) and the
> Public Utilities Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA). The purpose of these
> watershed laws was to encourage energy conservation and the
> development of national energy resources, including renewables such
> as wind and solar energy." (from Wikipedia.org)
>
> In the case of President Hoover, we had a man who eschewed the
> engineer's penchant for design and process control, opting instead
> for minimal government the time of the Great Depression, when
> precisely the opposite was needed. Hoover acted too-little like an
> engineer when he most needed to.
> "President Hoover's stance on the economy was based largely on
> volunteerism. From before his entry to the presidency, he was a
> proponent of the concept that public-private cooperation was the way
> to achieve high long-term growth. Hoover feared that too much
> intervention or coercion by the government would destroy
> individuality and self-reliance, which he considered to be important
> American values. Both his ideals and the economy were put to the
> test with the onset of The Great Depression. At the outset of the
> Depression, Hoover claims in his memoirs that he rejected Treasury
> Secretary Mellon's suggested "leave-it-alone" approach. Critics,
> such as liberal economist Paul Krugman, who wrote The Conscience of
> a Liberal, contend that Hoover shared Mellon's laissez-faire
> viewpoint." (from Wikipedia.org)
> Regards,
> Mike
> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 12:04 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> ...On Behalf Of Michael LaTorra
> ...
>
> I'd like to see more scientists and engineers in our
> government,
> rather than the lawyers and bankers who control the United States of
> Goldman
> Sachs.
>
> Regards,
> Mike LaTorra
>
>
>
> Mike I would agree in principle, but our experience with it so far
> has been
> mostly bad. We have had two presidents which could properly be
> credited
> with a background in engineering and sciences: Herbert Hoover and
> Jimmy
> Carter. Both were failures.
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20091107/59f3bdb4/attachment.html>
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list