>Welfare is a pork barrel program used to buy votes. It is an attempt to
>suspend evolutionary principles but only serves to exacerbate the
>problems that these programs claim to address. When you create these
>programs you create an incentive to qualify for them.
>These programs take from those who have demonstrated successful memetic
>adaptation and gives to those who are dysfunctional. An economy,
>like an ecosystem is much too complex for technocrats to bend to their
>will. Welfare like many government programs is used for political
>purposes which are divorced from the rhetoric that surrounds them. I need
>to see a better justification of these programs before I can countenance
>them.
While I agree with you that welfare is all these things, I do not believe it
is _just_ these things. My mother was on welfare for nearly the entire time
she raised my brother and I. Welfare gave us food and a place to live.
Since then I've gone on to serve 5 years in the military, including writing
software for the pentagon which helped them track Russian ships during the
Cold War, I've helped to implement a corparate-wide database for US West,
I've written software for two interactive TV corporations, and products for
the folks here at Sybase. I think the government's help during my youth was
money well spent. Without welfare, I don't know what my mother would have
done. In fact, as a single mother with two childern and no education, I
shudder to think of the alternatives to welfare.
However, welfare never enriched my mother's memes. I was able to improve my
situation because I was young. She was not so lucky.
>These programs take from those who have demonstrated successful memetic
>adaptation and gives to those who are dysfunctional.
This statement stinks of Social Darwinism, and I simply cannot support it.
>I would challenge this in that the "Capitalist" meme complex does much
>better than many other meme complexes such as "Socialism" and "Communism".
>What would you suggest as an alternative. Government regulation does not
>have the greatest track record and as Tyson Vaughn has already pointed
>out we are living in mixed economies.
All current economic meme complexes have problems. It is likely that all
future ones will as well. What I'm hoping is that we can take an honest
look at the current problems and at human nature. Based on this we may be
able to come up with ideas that build on our strengths, accept our
weaknesses as humans, and provide a better environment for mankind. The
"Capitalist" meme complex may be the best we have right now, but it still
sucks.
>> Combined with the "Medicine" meme complex, it has produced
>> massive over-population because people now live longer, but (most) remain
>> poor. The poor reproduce much faster than the middle or upper income
>>people
>> do.
>
>This is due to a whole host of cultural and moral issues.
While there are cultural and moral issues involved, reseach has shown that
improved economic well-being leads to lower growth rates in population, even
when the cultural and moral issues remain.
> Should medical
>care be withheld from countries with high population growth? An
>evolutionary argument could be forwarded to do so but what about
compassion?
I never proposed withholding medicines from poor people (or anyone else). I
don't think this would solve the problem even if it were done. I see the
problem of hyperbolic population growth as economic in nature. Medicines
are just making the problem worse. This doesn't mean medicine is "bad".
What's bad is there are just to damn many people on this planet. What
should we do about it? I don't know.
>The capitalist countries are stagnant or declining in population growth.
I'm not sure what you mean by "capitalist country". Industrial nations are
having exponential growth in population.
>BTW it has been shown that the most effective forms of birth
>control are education and literacy and specifically for women.
Then I believe Virus should support these efforts.
Thanks,
Dave Leeper
dleeper@sybase.com
--------------------------
On Mon, 6 Nov 1995, David Leeper wrote:
> >welfare,
>
> Welfare is an attempt by our memes to compensate for the brutality of our
> genes and the environment in which we live. I see it as needed in some
> form, but (in the USA at least) it is counter-productive in its current
> form. Changes in the welfare system should attempt to enable recipients
to
> enrich their memes, not just continue on their gene lines. The
memes/genes
> of the recipient cannot be made dependant on the welfare system by the
> welfare system.
Welfare is a pork barrel program used to buy votes. It is an attempt to
suspend evolutionary principles but only serves to exacerbate the
problems that these programs claim to address. When you create these
programs you create an incentive to qualify for them.
These programs take from those who have demonstrated successful memetic
adaptation and gives to those who are dysfunctional. An economy,
like an ecosystem is much too complex for technocrats to bend to their
will. Welfare like many government programs is used for political
purposes which are divorced from the rhetoric that surrounds them. I need
to see a better justification of these programs before I can countenance
them.
> Here's one I'd like to add to the list:
>
> >environment.
>
> Humans are destroying the environment at an amazing rate. This
destruction
> is directly or indirectly a result of our memes.
Is it memetic or genetic replication that causes the peril to the
environment?
> The "Capitalism" meme
> complex directly destroys the environment through the exploitation of
these
> resources.
I would challenge this in that the "Capitalist" meme complex does much
better than many other meme complexes such as "Socialism" and "Communism".
What would you suggest as an alternative. Government regulation does not
have the greatest track record and as Tyson Vaughn has already pointed
out we are living in mixed economies.
> Combined with the "Medicine" meme complex, it has produced
> massive over-population because people now live longer, but (most) remain
> poor. The poor reproduce much faster than the middle or upper income
people
> do.
This is due to a whole host of cultural and moral issues. Should medical
care be withheld from countries with high population growth? An
evolutionary argument could be forwarded to do so but what about
compassion?
The capitalist countries are stagnant or declining in population growth.
BTW it has been shown that the most effective forms of birth
control are education and literacy and specifically for women.
> Clearly some "Memetic Engineering" is desperately needed in this area.
Yes, convincingly packaged rational arguments would serve well.
Here are some questions for the FAQ
How does one implement rational principles such as those embodied in Virus?
What is the economic model that corresponds to Virulent Principles?
Duane Hewitt