Comments on Adam Smith's 'Invisible Hand'

Go to Loosely SpeakingAdd a commentGo to Adam Smith's 'Invisible Hand'

Ciel and Taps

LOL - interesting issues. I am almost tempted to start another series - but I shall resist. And tonight it's late anyway, and I'm tired.

Ciel, you mention China (frequently, as a matter of fact, lol) and rightly so. (Actually, pretty soon you can add India, and several other countries.) There are some fundamental changes taking place, and there are no easy answers. The reason I reject the idea that 'greed' is responsible for our position right now is that the term carries too much emotionally negative baggage, and predisposes us to look for someone to blame. On the other hand, if we adopt the view that yes,  greed is responsible, but we're all greedy, the 'condemnation' becomes so general as to be virtually meaningless. In that case, one might as well blame 'the human condition'...   

If we really need someone to blame, we can start by blaming China for not adequately re-valuing it's currency, but that's an easy one...

Anyway, enough for tonight...

posted by Nautikos on October 17, 2008 at 8:17 PM | link to this | reply

Re: TAPS, what I would do --
LOL, Ciel.  With me, it depends....if they start the torture, I would turn into a super grass mighty quickly.  hahahaha

posted by TAPS. on October 17, 2008 at 7:02 PM | link to this | reply

TAPS, what I would do --

 It would depend on whether I actually was guilty or not...  and on whether we both were, or not.  What if one confesses without implicating the other? What if each one confesses, without implicating the other?

And what kind of prison would it be?  There are places that would be like hell, and others that are closer to summer camp.

If they get mad at me for asking too many questions, I would tell them you started it...

posted by Ciel on October 17, 2008 at 6:54 PM | link to this | reply

You prompted me to read more about that "Invisible Hand" for myself so I googled it and then somehow segued into the "Prisoner's Dilemma".  Two people, who are suspected of being accomplices in a crime, are held prisoner in separate, non-communicating cells. The police visit each prisoner, and tell both that if neither confesses, each will be sentenced to two years in jail. However, if exactly one prisoner confesses, implicating each other, the one who confesses will get off scot-free as a reward, and the other, who didn't confess, will receive a punitive sentence of five years. If each confesses and implicates the other, both will be sentenced to three years.
It got me to wondering what I would do if I were one of the prisoners and you were the other. LOL.  Then I got to wondering about other bloggers here and would my decision be different for different bloggers.  See what you get me into.

posted by TAPS. on October 17, 2008 at 4:29 PM | link to this | reply