Re: Mixed economy??? - Was: Gintis:TINA

[Trond Andresen <Trond.Andresen@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

First: This IS an interesting discussion.

Now just some short comments (the weather is fine - 25 degrees
centigrade which is a seldom occasion here in trondheim - and it is
Sunday 1 PM and I am soon going for a bike trip):

Herb says:
> BTW, the Italian
> system has for many years had public financing of electoral campaigns,
> and also has one of the most corrupt and inefficient systems around.
>

This is not an argument against strong legislation to stop rich
candidates using their money to dominate election campaigns. Of course
a system can be corrupt even if they have good legislation in a specific
area. To quote yourself, Herb:  "You are confusing necessary and
sufficient conditions".

Herb says furthermore:

> 	The notion that material and moral incentives are substitutes in
> motivating individuals is a mistake. They go together, and systems that
> have tried to substitute have not worked. The evidence on this point
> is quite overwhelming.
>
(me:)
> >...talented pople are what we really should fill all places of power with,
> >and then the egoists can have ordinary jobs. Self-seekers should in
> >fact be quarantined from places of power.
>
> 	This is an indefensible position, Trond. You should rethink this,
> because it is central to your analysis of social life, and it is quite
> wrong. There does not exist as stable, healthy, society in which this
> principle is followed. The socialist countries foundered precisely on
> this point.

I have followed the Chinese experiment carefully for the last 23 years.
And I am not that naive that I believe that you can motivate workers
and peasants with banners and medals to compensate for minimal wages. I
hoped that the distinction was made clear in my former message, but let
me make it clearer:

I am talking exclusively of motivating factors for people IN POSITIONS
OF LEADERSHIP AND POWER, be it public or in an enterprise. Such a job
is - because of the power, the freedom to act, the accompanying trust
and respect that it implies - a reward in itself. From what I know of
human material at least in my society, I can point to very talented
people in private or public institutions that do not need exceptionally
high wages do do just as good or an even better job than what the
talented self-seeker is doing.

(One acquaintance of me is manager of a small but successful soft-drinks
plant and brewery here in trondheim, and has been that for 10 years, in
fact he inherited the plant from his father, so he is a real
capitalist! the plant has 30+ employees. He could have taken out a
million kroner (170.000 USD) a year from the plant, but he has instead
set his own wage to 200.000 NOK and no fringe benefits. Everything else
is plowed back into the plant. He pays union wages and the employees
are all organized. He explains this strange modesty by the following "I
love my job, I am 32 years, I have no kids, my partner also works, I
don't need more money". He is a happy guy.)

Additionally, the self seeker is (also pointed out by Doug) more
dangerous in a power position, since he has a strong additional motive
(greed) besides having talent for the job.

> There does not exist as stable, healthy, society in which this
> principle is followed. The socialist countries foundered precisely on
> this point.

If Herb by this means that the leaders were too poorly paid and that
this is the reason for the collapse of socialism, I disagree.


Trond

 ----------------------------------------------
| Trond Andresen (Trond.Andresen@xxxxxxxxxxx) |
| Department of Engineering Cybernetics       |
| The Norwegian Institute of Technology       |
| N-7034 Trondheim, NORWAY                    |
|                                             |
| phone (work)  +47 73 59 43 58               |
| fax   (work)  +47 73 59 43 99               |
| private phone +47 73 53 08 23               |
-----------------------------------------------