PKT
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: Method
On Wed, 28 Aug 2002 14:00:39 -0600,
Brett Haselton <haselton@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>First of all, poverty is not an economic concept. It is a social
>reality. Under Natural Law everyone would live in poverty. basic
>needs for survival attainable by the individual/micro group.
Who passed that particular Natural Law? This sounds more like
nineteenth century pseudo-science than the best the nineteenth
century had to offer, let alone the greatest hits of the last
hundred years.
Furthermore, if there was any such natural law, why didn't
this natural law kick in until the last four or five millenium?
What were people doing that was so unnatural before then?
--
Dr. Bruce R. McFarling, PhD
Bus. Office 1.72 -- (02) 4348-4078
School of Business
Faculty of the Central Coast
Newcastle University, Ourimbah
- Thread context:
- Re: Method, (continued)
- Re: Method,
Esteban Perez Wed 28 Aug 2002, 15:39 GMT
- Re: Method,
Forstater, Mathew Thu 29 Aug 2002, 14:11 GMT
- Re: Method,
Harry L. Cook Thu 29 Aug 2002, 14:14 GMT
- Re: Method,
Gunnar Tomasson Thu 29 Aug 2002, 16:43 GMT
- Re: Method,
Bruce McFarling Thu 29 Aug 2002, 16:47 GMT
- Re: Method,
Dr. Bruce McFarling Sat 31 Aug 2002, 15:56 GMT
- Babel and babylonian,
David Dequech Tue 27 Aug 2002, 15:22 GMT
- Re: heterodoxers are crackpots AND logic,
Andrew Mearman Tue 27 Aug 2002, 14:45 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]