<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Self-Reliance</title>
	<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/</link>
	<description>n. the principle of good order "Observe the strange inversion of all order and sense! Dignity debased; how vilely is the function of a consul prostituted!" ~The Craftsman</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 18:37:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: R Duquette</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8640</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 19:39:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8640</guid>
					<description>If a laid off Detroit auto-worker were truly self-sufficient, he'd pick up stakes and move somewhere where there were jobs.  But that would break one of the tenets of Crunchy Conservatism, being tied to the community. Please explain to me how Crunchy Conservatism isn't itself a form of serfdom, community serfdom? I'd say it's more in line with historic serfdom, with its emphasis on the unbreakable bond between the serf and the land. Your imagined self reliance of the small community is an illusion. Unless the small community can defend itself from all invaders, then it will be dependent on the state for security.  And unless it can grow and produce all the food and goods it needs internally, it will be dependent on extended business networks for trade. 

You can't avoid interdependence with others, unless you are a hermit. Human beings are social animals.  Why do you Crunchys try so hard to deny it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If a laid off Detroit auto-worker were truly self-sufficient, he&#8217;d pick up stakes and move somewhere where there were jobs.  But that would break one of the tenets of Crunchy Conservatism, being tied to the community. Please explain to me how Crunchy Conservatism isn&#8217;t itself a form of serfdom, community serfdom? I&#8217;d say it&#8217;s more in line with historic serfdom, with its emphasis on the unbreakable bond between the serf and the land. Your imagined self reliance of the small community is an illusion. Unless the small community can defend itself from all invaders, then it will be dependent on the state for security.  And unless it can grow and produce all the food and goods it needs internally, it will be dependent on extended business networks for trade. </p>
<p>You can&#8217;t avoid interdependence with others, unless you are a hermit. Human beings are social animals.  Why do you Crunchys try so hard to deny it?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Anthony King</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8604</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 22:18:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8604</guid>
					<description>This is the most maddening blindspot of mainstream conservatism.  Economic and political centralization go hand in hand and both work against liberty and self-reliance.  Mainstream conservatives champion the former and pay nothing but lip service opposition to the latter.

I hope I'll be excused for speaking personally here.  Centralized corporate and state power is consistently on my mind as the owner of a small business.  I am hurt less than your typical bicycle business, but the affect of Wal-Mart and Target cheapo-bikes on independent bike shops is very significant.  If we were on a fair, level playing field it would be one thing.  But when Wal-Mart is heavily subsidized through welfare and other forms of government subsidy (I'm not as familiar with Target's situation but I'm expecting they get lots of favors independent bike dealers don't) it leaves a less than palatable taste in the mouth.  Not only do they cut into the sales of small business, the small business owner gets the privilege of having his pay docked to provide corporate welfare the big boys get from the state.  After you add in taxes for a school system I'd never send my children to, wars that further secure the corporate interests of the big boys, etc, my accountant tells me I have to take out 30% of my profit to make sure I have enough stashed away for tax-man.  (It gets better--I just moved to a state that has an income tax, so my new accountant will likely tell me I have to set aside an even higher percentage.)

Of course, most people assume that if you own your own business you're doing pretty well.  You do well in many ways to work for yourself, but most of those ways can't be measured financially.  That 30% cut isn't for someone making six figures, of 60K, or 50K, or 40K.  How about 24K for a household with a wife and child.  Again, there are many, many advantages to owning your own business and I'm not looking for pity, but the tax burden on people who are trying to achieve self-reliance and foster the wide distribution of capital is ridiculous.  And as I said, the extra kick in the nether-region is that you can be certain the money will be largely used in ways that work against your interest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is the most maddening blindspot of mainstream conservatism.  Economic and political centralization go hand in hand and both work against liberty and self-reliance.  Mainstream conservatives champion the former and pay nothing but lip service opposition to the latter.</p>
<p>I hope I&#8217;ll be excused for speaking personally here.  Centralized corporate and state power is consistently on my mind as the owner of a small business.  I am hurt less than your typical bicycle business, but the affect of Wal-Mart and Target cheapo-bikes on independent bike shops is very significant.  If we were on a fair, level playing field it would be one thing.  But when Wal-Mart is heavily subsidized through welfare and other forms of government subsidy (I&#8217;m not as familiar with Target&#8217;s situation but I&#8217;m expecting they get lots of favors independent bike dealers don&#8217;t) it leaves a less than palatable taste in the mouth.  Not only do they cut into the sales of small business, the small business owner gets the privilege of having his pay docked to provide corporate welfare the big boys get from the state.  After you add in taxes for a school system I&#8217;d never send my children to, wars that further secure the corporate interests of the big boys, etc, my accountant tells me I have to take out 30% of my profit to make sure I have enough stashed away for tax-man.  (It gets better&#8211;I just moved to a state that has an income tax, so my new accountant will likely tell me I have to set aside an even higher percentage.)</p>
<p>Of course, most people assume that if you own your own business you&#8217;re doing pretty well.  You do well in many ways to work for yourself, but most of those ways can&#8217;t be measured financially.  That 30% cut isn&#8217;t for someone making six figures, of 60K, or 50K, or 40K.  How about 24K for a household with a wife and child.  Again, there are many, many advantages to owning your own business and I&#8217;m not looking for pity, but the tax burden on people who are trying to achieve self-reliance and foster the wide distribution of capital is ridiculous.  And as I said, the extra kick in the nether-region is that you can be certain the money will be largely used in ways that work against your interest.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: OldNewEngland</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8600</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8600</guid>
					<description>Ugh, don't get me started on the goddamn invasive highway system. They're snaking it through my old home town as we speak. Absolutely ruining the place, and it's not even half-done. I can't imagine how busy, noisy, and unsightly the area is going to be when it's 100% complete. 

At least it did a little (unintentional) good, by isolating the most underdeveloped part of town . . .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ugh, don&#8217;t get me started on the goddamn invasive highway system. They&#8217;re snaking it through my old home town as we speak. Absolutely ruining the place, and it&#8217;s not even half-done. I can&#8217;t imagine how busy, noisy, and unsightly the area is going to be when it&#8217;s 100% complete. </p>
<p>At least it did a little (unintentional) good, by isolating the most underdeveloped part of town . . .
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Daniel Larison</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8595</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:03:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8595</guid>
					<description>Quite right.  That makes the point much better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quite right.  That makes the point much better.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: expertlaw</title>
		<link>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8594</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://larison.org/2008/01/16/self-reliance/#comment-8594</guid>
					<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;... but that he is not going to make the auto industry in Michigan competitive with production facilities &lt;strong&gt;in other countries&lt;/strong&gt; simply through deregulation and research subsidies.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
He's not even going to make the auto industry &lt;em&gt;in Michigan&lt;/em&gt; competitive with production facilities in many other &lt;em&gt;states&lt;/em&gt; where labor costs are lower. Well, I suppose he could work to repeal the National Labor Relations Act, but....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>&#8230; but that he is not going to make the auto industry in Michigan competitive with production facilities <strong>in other countries</strong> simply through deregulation and research subsidies.</p></blockquote>
<p>He&#8217;s not even going to make the auto industry <em>in Michigan</em> competitive with production facilities in many other <em>states</em> where labor costs are lower. Well, I suppose he could work to repeal the National Labor Relations Act, but&#8230;.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
