<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cheaponomics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/</link>
	<description>Website and Blog of writer, activist and academic, Raj Patel</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 21:46:35 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dominique</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-743</link>
		<dc:creator>Dominique</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2010 18:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-743</guid>
		<description>are there any cell phones out that do not use questionable materials such as coltan?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>are there any cell phones out that do not use questionable materials such as coltan?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mica</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-684</link>
		<dc:creator>Mica</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 04:48:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-684</guid>
		<description>Well, some very high brow type coments, I may be well out of my league but I will weigh in anyway. Labour, MOM&#039;S I read some where once the Anual Cost To Pay For The Services A Mother Provides Aproximates To $65,000 Per Year (Can) If you consider what is done on a daily basis by a mom, Consueler, Nurse, Coach, Teacher, Cook, House Keeper, Cabbie,ETC ETC ETC. No Small Feat! And Yet It Is So Often Overlooked. So Take A Minute After Reading My Post And Berating Me For A Sap, Then Phone YOUR MOTHER and tell HER &quot;Thank&#039;s MOM I Love You&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, some very high brow type coments, I may be well out of my league but I will weigh in anyway. Labour, MOM&#8217;S I read some where once the Anual Cost To Pay For The Services A Mother Provides Aproximates To $65,000 Per Year (Can) If you consider what is done on a daily basis by a mom, Consueler, Nurse, Coach, Teacher, Cook, House Keeper, Cabbie,ETC ETC ETC. No Small Feat! And Yet It Is So Often Overlooked. So Take A Minute After Reading My Post And Berating Me For A Sap, Then Phone YOUR MOTHER and tell HER &#8220;Thank&#8217;s MOM I Love You&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: max</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-641</link>
		<dc:creator>max</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-641</guid>
		<description>Re the daily telegraph google search thing - I thought about it and then asked my resident geek who said ....

it&#039;s too simplistic a way of looking at the world to warrant looking at such a statistic on an individual basis.

Google are better at power management than we are with our desktop machines.

What would we otherwise have done to get the information we searched for, taken a bus to the library? bought Encyclopaedia Brittanica every year?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re the daily telegraph google search thing &#8211; I thought about it and then asked my resident geek who said &#8230;.</p>
<p>it&#8217;s too simplistic a way of looking at the world to warrant looking at such a statistic on an individual basis.</p>
<p>Google are better at power management than we are with our desktop machines.</p>
<p>What would we otherwise have done to get the information we searched for, taken a bus to the library? bought Encyclopaedia Brittanica every year?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ellen</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-591</link>
		<dc:creator>Ellen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 15:32:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-591</guid>
		<description>&quot;Women&#039;s Work&quot; WTF??? SO TOTALLY SEXIST! This entry really pissed me off. What decade is the author from?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Women&#8217;s Work&#8221; WTF??? SO TOTALLY SEXIST! This entry really pissed me off. What decade is the author from?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: forrest1989</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-556</link>
		<dc:creator>forrest1989</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Apr 2010 11:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-556</guid>
		<description>The largest issue with the centrally-planned Technate is distribution of available resources versus the needs of those resources, as well as the allocation of capital goods and a social aspect of what is desired versus what is actually needed. Whenever I mention resources, you claim that technology will solve this problem because that’s it’s purpose and the modern world is different in this respect — not a very convincing argument.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The largest issue with the centrally-planned Technate is distribution of available resources versus the needs of those resources, as well as the allocation of capital goods and a social aspect of what is desired versus what is actually needed. Whenever I mention resources, you claim that technology will solve this problem because that’s it’s purpose and the modern world is different in this respect — not a very convincing argument.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rosemary</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-550</link>
		<dc:creator>rosemary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2010 05:03:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-550</guid>
		<description>In reference to bottled water, what about the issue of flouridated water? I&#039;m still trying to decide whether there is a negative long term effect on ones health because of flouridation. Could this subject be a clever marketing ploy for bottled water and expensive filters? Difficult to say, maybe someone could enlighten me on this? Read the first chapter of &#039;The value of nothing&#039; online and went an bought a copy that day!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reference to bottled water, what about the issue of flouridated water? I&#8217;m still trying to decide whether there is a negative long term effect on ones health because of flouridation. Could this subject be a clever marketing ploy for bottled water and expensive filters? Difficult to say, maybe someone could enlighten me on this? Read the first chapter of &#8216;The value of nothing&#8217; online and went an bought a copy that day!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-542</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2010 00:18:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-542</guid>
		<description>You still betray your general ignorance with the question and assertions you post here. You claim to see &#039;glaring holes&#039;, yet have no interest in researching this yourself, or explaining those holes? Why do you think they wrote the T.S.C.? I can&#039;t argue for something that you don&#039;t want to understand. You seem only interested in what you already know and post thesis on subjects you don&#039;t. That doesn&#039;t seem very creative, does it? 

As far as truth goes, what is proposed and concluded is supported by facts which is published in the T.S.C. which can&#039;t be said about Austrian economics, or other belief systems. The price system is a throwback idea for a low energy conversion society. It no longer functions adequately in todays modern world, which is acknowledged by many well known economist and educators. Look up Thermo-economics for starters. Choose not to believe it, I don&#039;t care, facts are facts. 

What you think about Technocracy Technate, I can&#039;t say much, you are entitled to your opinion. I would caution you to take the time to research and understand the subject before glancing and naming it pseudoscience, among other things, which you have done. 

Technocracy Technate uses a science administration as the decision making process along with Energy Accounting as the distributive method. It uses knowledge from all fields to determine what is the most efficient and sustainable use of materials. Hence, the organizational structure proposed in the Study Course can only work well with energy accounting. Energy and resources can be measured. Money cannot. Understand how the question is irrelevant?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You still betray your general ignorance with the question and assertions you post here. You claim to see &#8216;glaring holes&#8217;, yet have no interest in researching this yourself, or explaining those holes? Why do you think they wrote the T.S.C.? I can&#8217;t argue for something that you don&#8217;t want to understand. You seem only interested in what you already know and post thesis on subjects you don&#8217;t. That doesn&#8217;t seem very creative, does it? </p>
<p>As far as truth goes, what is proposed and concluded is supported by facts which is published in the T.S.C. which can&#8217;t be said about Austrian economics, or other belief systems. The price system is a throwback idea for a low energy conversion society. It no longer functions adequately in todays modern world, which is acknowledged by many well known economist and educators. Look up Thermo-economics for starters. Choose not to believe it, I don&#8217;t care, facts are facts. </p>
<p>What you think about Technocracy Technate, I can&#8217;t say much, you are entitled to your opinion. I would caution you to take the time to research and understand the subject before glancing and naming it pseudoscience, among other things, which you have done. </p>
<p>Technocracy Technate uses a science administration as the decision making process along with Energy Accounting as the distributive method. It uses knowledge from all fields to determine what is the most efficient and sustainable use of materials. Hence, the organizational structure proposed in the Study Course can only work well with energy accounting. Energy and resources can be measured. Money cannot. Understand how the question is irrelevant?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-528</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 03:11:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-528</guid>
		<description>It has become a pattern that when I try to argue with you in terms of reason and in terms of principle you send me the same or similar links and suggest that I just don&#039;t understand. I have read them. I understand what the documents say (I have no interest in reading the entire TSC, but I did read the design chapters on the Technate Design you provided to me). I will not just accept what they say as truth, especially when I see glaring holes in the system. So please -- stop being condescending.

I have fundamental objections to the system and have voiced them repeatedly with no answer other than a link to something else. If you do intend to reason with me -- I need you to engage in a conversation about the principles themselves and show me how the Technate can work (yes, it&#039;s annoying to have to explain them yourself but I can&#039;t get both the ideas and their context from the same sort of literature). 

PS, how would the Technate resolve the economic calculation problem?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It has become a pattern that when I try to argue with you in terms of reason and in terms of principle you send me the same or similar links and suggest that I just don&#8217;t understand. I have read them. I understand what the documents say (I have no interest in reading the entire TSC, but I did read the design chapters on the Technate Design you provided to me). I will not just accept what they say as truth, especially when I see glaring holes in the system. So please &#8212; stop being condescending.</p>
<p>I have fundamental objections to the system and have voiced them repeatedly with no answer other than a link to something else. If you do intend to reason with me &#8212; I need you to engage in a conversation about the principles themselves and show me how the Technate can work (yes, it&#8217;s annoying to have to explain them yourself but I can&#8217;t get both the ideas and their context from the same sort of literature). </p>
<p>PS, how would the Technate resolve the economic calculation problem?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-527</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 01:42:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-527</guid>
		<description>Yes I have, unfortunately you&#039;re missing the point. 

Here it is again. The price system is anything that employs any form of commodity valuation, or debt tokens. Technocracy Technate is against Austrian economics, Gold standards, central-bank managed, etc. The flaw is the Price System. It&#039;s basic characteristics make it unmanageable in a high technological society. I do not want to argue this, it is well known the imbalance socially and physically the price system afflicts. Understand?

http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfx7rfr2_70cmz88f

The energy accounting system is a medium of distribution. It is not in any way part of a price system. The energy units are non negotiable and are canceled at the end of the balance load period if not spent. It is only an account of what CAN be consumed by the citizens. If something like a toaster oven was not consumed, then it(energy cost) would be transfered to the next balance load period. You obviously have a hard time understanding this. I would suggest you read the entire T.S.C., that&#039;s its purpose anyway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes I have, unfortunately you&#8217;re missing the point. </p>
<p>Here it is again. The price system is anything that employs any form of commodity valuation, or debt tokens. Technocracy Technate is against Austrian economics, Gold standards, central-bank managed, etc. The flaw is the Price System. It&#8217;s basic characteristics make it unmanageable in a high technological society. I do not want to argue this, it is well known the imbalance socially and physically the price system afflicts. Understand?</p>
<p><a href="http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfx7rfr2_70cmz88f" rel="nofollow">http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfx7rfr2_70cmz88f</a></p>
<p>The energy accounting system is a medium of distribution. It is not in any way part of a price system. The energy units are non negotiable and are canceled at the end of the balance load period if not spent. It is only an account of what CAN be consumed by the citizens. If something like a toaster oven was not consumed, then it(energy cost) would be transfered to the next balance load period. You obviously have a hard time understanding this. I would suggest you read the entire T.S.C., that&#8217;s its purpose anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://rajpatel.org/2010/02/05/cheaponomics/comment-page-1/#comment-524</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rajpatel.org/?p=1537#comment-524</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve been thinking about this issue and reflected on the technocratic documents you&#039;ve provided... and realized that the energy units simply cannot be considered anything but a highly-restricted form of currency -- you receive items made by others based on your energy units. This is a medium of exchange by definition! That is all money needs to be (and in a metaphysical sense, it can certainly be considered analogous to language -- language is a medium of exchange).

In order for this system to work, it needs to take into account the utility provided by price signals, and a solution for the economic calculation problem. The largest issue with the centrally-planned Technate is distribution of available resources versus the needs of those resources, as well as the allocation of capital goods and a social aspect of what is desired versus what is actually needed. Whenever I mention resources, you claim that technology will solve this problem because that&#039;s it&#039;s purpose and the modern world is different in this respect -- not a very convincing argument. 

Again, the core argument of all the anti-capitalism Technate writing you&#039;ve linked me to is against a regulated, central-bank managed market where banks get special interest, and the market prices do not reflect reality. I will agree that the system is f*ed up and unsustainable, but it is not a flaw of using capital (and maintain that energy units are a highly regulated, centrally-distributed capital) -- it is a flaw of a centrally-managed economy.  The great strength of modern technology is in bringing a heightened consciousness and awareness to people of their world and themselves -- this does not need to be overemphasized. 

Please, consider the differences between a free market in the modern world, and a corporatist, bank-centered market.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve been thinking about this issue and reflected on the technocratic documents you&#8217;ve provided&#8230; and realized that the energy units simply cannot be considered anything but a highly-restricted form of currency &#8212; you receive items made by others based on your energy units. This is a medium of exchange by definition! That is all money needs to be (and in a metaphysical sense, it can certainly be considered analogous to language &#8212; language is a medium of exchange).</p>
<p>In order for this system to work, it needs to take into account the utility provided by price signals, and a solution for the economic calculation problem. The largest issue with the centrally-planned Technate is distribution of available resources versus the needs of those resources, as well as the allocation of capital goods and a social aspect of what is desired versus what is actually needed. Whenever I mention resources, you claim that technology will solve this problem because that&#8217;s it&#8217;s purpose and the modern world is different in this respect &#8212; not a very convincing argument. </p>
<p>Again, the core argument of all the anti-capitalism Technate writing you&#8217;ve linked me to is against a regulated, central-bank managed market where banks get special interest, and the market prices do not reflect reality. I will agree that the system is f*ed up and unsustainable, but it is not a flaw of using capital (and maintain that energy units are a highly regulated, centrally-distributed capital) &#8212; it is a flaw of a centrally-managed economy.  The great strength of modern technology is in bringing a heightened consciousness and awareness to people of their world and themselves &#8212; this does not need to be overemphasized. </p>
<p>Please, consider the differences between a free market in the modern world, and a corporatist, bank-centered market.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

