I just want to say that I really really appreciate the diversity of
perspectives on this topic. I have been in too many echo chambers and this
is quite refreshing. It does feel like we are all grasping at a part of the
elephant here and it will take such a long time to learn enough about
different ideas to come to some cross-paradigmatic model that takes into
account different levels of reality. This has been a humbling experience
for me.

As someone who grew up in a working class setting, I relate to Alexander's
point that sometimes intellectuals don't get it and are out of touch with
real life problems. Yet, now that I got my PhD and am feeling more and more
like an "expert" as the years go by, I believe I have something to
contribute to society at large. I think the key is an open mind and
continuous dialogue between different groups of people.

Best,
Helen

On Fri, Oct 11, 2019, 3:35 PM Alexander Bard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Dear Friends
>
> I honestly believe that all these hierarchical pseudo-Wilberian models are
> total and utter middle class bullshit with no bearing at all in real life.
> Pure fantasy based on an enormous need to show intellectual superiority
> when there is absolutely none whatsoever. Or else give me throrough and
> exact answers.
> I agree stringly with Camille Pagliga that I trust any Puerto Rican mother
> of five a thousand times more than any of the (always) male middle class
> proponents of these models.
> Come back to down to earth, boys! You can't hionestly believe that any of
> this nonsense has any bearing in real life. Really???
> Change diapers, then talk about "superiority of paradigms" or whatever
> crap you can come up with. No wonder that working class people loathe this
> kind of nonsense.
> Or did you ever meet a female Puerto Rican mother of five who cared one
> bit about Ken Wilber's autistic fantasies of the world? All they see are
> boys who can't even feed themselves for "watching the world from their
> fairytale towers".
> And I have not even started to look at what Freud and Jung would make of
> these "hierarchies". Did I say Karl Marx?
>
> Big love, and I mean it
> Alexander
>
> Den fre 11 okt. 2019 kl 18:00 skrev Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
> [log in to unmask]>:
>
>> Thanks, Cory, this is helpful.
>>
>>
>>
>> The concepts that Cory raises are addressed in similar ways in Hanzi
>> Freincht’s metamodern political philosophy, which is laid in his two books,
>> The Listening Society and Nordic Ideology. I am halfway through the second
>> book. I am generally a big fan. Attached is a copy of the page with the
>> basic message of the Listening Society, and some links to metamodern
>> philosophy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Gregg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <
>> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *Cory David Barker
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 11, 2019 11:52 AM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: podcast with Andrew Yang
>>
>>
>>
>> @ All
>>
>>
>>
>> Along with Zachary, I also bring a developmental psychology point of
>> view. It is a bit long winded because I use a stage model to contextualize
>> what is underpinning the large scale debates that go beyond this forum.
>> TLDR at the bottom.
>>
>>
>>
>> ( @ Zak, feel free to amend if I have made any errors )
>>
>>
>>
>> Individual and collective worldviews and their political structures, are
>> outputs of cognitive and moral behavioral stage functions. The general idea
>> behind sociocultural developmental psychology, is that people can’t think
>> and feel about the social challenges we face any differently than they do,
>> because people and groups haven’t grown into the capacities to do so. And
>> people don’t grow into those capacities because they haven’t had diverse
>> enough experiences to see the world in any other way.
>>
>>
>>
>> The model of hierarchical complexity is a general stage model that says
>> that for every domain, people go up stages of development by synthesizing
>> disparate ways of thinking and doing at one stage, into a more complex
>> one-stage-higher way of thinking and doing. E.g. abstractions are formed
>> from coordinating across concrete ideas, and formal logics are formed from
>> coordinating across abstractions. Through this lens:
>>
>>
>>
>> *Most people hit a ceiling at formal and systematic stage. *This means
>> that while a person can coordinate basic formal logic within or across a
>> given system one at a time, the person(s) lack the skill to coordinate
>> uniformly across a multiplicity of systems simultaneously. People cannot
>> see how actions they and others take in one system adversely effects
>> another system (or don’t care), and misrepresent causes and effects.
>> Instruments from multiple models with different approximation what this
>> stage is about, suggest it is somewhere around 40-50% of populations.
>> Kegan, Torbert, and Commons have all run instruments on this.
>>
>>
>>
>> *A smaller number of people behave meta-systematically (5%)*, which is
>> to say they can fully understand and coordinate principles and work across
>> multiple systems. But the issue is that people disagree on which principles
>> are more appropriate fits to circumstance, and use their meta-systematic
>> capacities to strategize against each other to outplay their opponents
>> instead of strategizing together to find shared solutions.
>>
>>
>>
>> *An even smaller number of people can behave paradigmatically (1%)*.
>> This is when people are capable of coordinating multiple disparate
>> principles together at the same time, across multiple systems relations.
>> Again, there is an issue, because people fight over which paradigms are
>> best. When attempting to construct a universal paradigm for social systems,
>> we still will see meta-systematic challenges, such as people creating
>> secret alliances and trying to game the paradigm as it is being created.
>> This is what we see happening all the time in democratic law systems.
>>
>>
>>
>> *A very tiny minority of the population can coordinate
>> cross-paradigmatically (<.5%). *This is where people attempt to
>> synthesize multiple paradigms together, and in shared social contexts it
>> means everyone involved genuinely caring for all stakeholder interests.
>> When people come together cross-paradigmatically, this is where the real
>> positive change happens. It is very complex, a person needs to know about a
>> lot of things in order to do it, and one needs to be flexible as new
>> information is presented. It takes a lot of mutual respect and trust for
>> people coming from different points of view to work together. This is
>> constantly undermined as people who hit ceilings at meta-systematic and
>> paradigmatic reasoning can see such attempts as serious threats to
>> preservation of their identities, beliefs and profits, and try and
>> undermine large-scale bipartisanship. People systematic stage or under end
>> up getting gamed by rhetoric.
>>
>>
>>
>> *TLDR: *Some emphasis here should be placed on how to foster cognitive
>> and moral development in people, because people will come to better
>> conclusions themselves as a natural function of having more developed
>> cognitive and moral capacities, which means less people needing to be
>> convincing about the way forward.
>>
>>
>>
>> If anyone is interested in this kind of lens, here are some references
>>
>>
>>
>> Commons’ hierarchical complexity >>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Model-5Fof-5Fhierarchical-5Fcomplexity&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ER4kE_xWN2hMMfqRBGKnmXH1HaZDxxOt8mkOTUFDgUI&s=Mqo32xaqzpHH89huOLPSe2_92bPIPXnnfLw80sa1sTM&e=>
>>
>> Kegan’s orders of consciousness >>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Robert-5FKegan&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ER4kE_xWN2hMMfqRBGKnmXH1HaZDxxOt8mkOTUFDgUI&s=VUSKlvFH90OzBONYSVUB5YSAqHdWKCc1px-JieiMuU4&e=>
>>
>> Kohlberg’s moral stage theory >>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__en.wikipedia.org_wiki_Lawrence-5FKohlberg-27s-5Fstages-5Fof-5Fmoral-5Fdevelopment&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ER4kE_xWN2hMMfqRBGKnmXH1HaZDxxOt8mkOTUFDgUI&s=h7juNiVqatSUiGvXrZpZxzMv56H1nDGUcwjx8gSTcvg&e=>
>>
>> Torbert’s action logics >>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__drive.google.com_open-3Fid-3D0B08MvGKqEtbNcUhoQjZXejlSY3M&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ER4kE_xWN2hMMfqRBGKnmXH1HaZDxxOt8mkOTUFDgUI&s=uVO3HwbpqR1sgXhtSwaRQjt2G-XANPJ27dmwkDQtkB0&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cory
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 11, 2019, at 9:16 AM, nysa71 <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Helen,
>>
>> Hence, why the Job Guarantee proposal entails being federally funded, but
>> locally administered.
>>
>> Right now, we have the federal government controlling inflation via a
>> buffer stock of unemployed people. JG proponents turn that on its head by
>> proposing that we control inflation via a buffer stock of employed people
>> in their community.
>>
>> I certainly don't trust corporations to be the arbiters of human value.
>> But that's what government currently has as a default position.
>>
>> Ultimately, it is the federal government which determines the
>> unemployment rate via its policies, particularly its fiscal policies. JG
>> proponents say this is illogical, economically unsound, impractical, and
>> morally unjustifiable. The federal government, (or any national government
>> that issues its own currency, for that matter), should have a policy of
>> full employment.
>>
>> Indeed, the JG would be a necessary prerequisite to effectively
>> transition to a more just society.
>>
>> ~ Jason Bessey
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, October 11, 2019, 08:36:00 AM EDT, Helen Wu <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Jason, guaranteed jobs would be great if jobs are tailored to the
>> individual and are helpful to the world. I think I just don't trust the
>> government to implement a large program like that properly.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Helen
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:45 AM nysa71 <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Helen,
>>
>> Your concerns about providing basic needs and engaging in meaningful
>> activities are (along with other concerns) precisely addressed with the Job
>> Guarantee proposal. It's about setting a minimum standard for how workers
>> will be treated in society, and engaging in meaningful work in their
>> community that is tailored to the individual that's not about generating
>> profit, (as opposed to tailoring individuals to the work needed by those
>> who are trying to generate a profit)...all within the context of sound
>> macroeconomics.
>>
>> ~ Jason Bessey
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, October 10, 2019, 11:43:19 AM EDT, Helen Wu <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks Gregg for your reminder.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think everyone here hopes for a world in which everyone have the
>> opportunity to live peaceful lives, have fulfilling careers, good
>> relationships, etc. How we are going to get there seems to be the source of
>> disagreement. I really believe in a person-centered approach in that if
>> basic needs are provided most people will naturally move towards growth and
>> self-actualization. Just basic needs, not spoiling. From an attachment
>> perspective as well, it is hard to move forward/take risks without a secure
>> base to go back to.
>>
>>
>>
>> I do believe that there is a deep human need for contribution and reward,
>> but this reward does not have to be money. It could just be seeing that you
>> have contributed to other people's happiness and as as result receive
>> recognition and status. That's why I am not as afraid of a UBI destroying
>> people's motivations as some people here. Time is a very valuable resource
>> and as a society I think we overemphasize money-generating work. If I can
>> just work 20-30 hours a week and make a middle class salary, I would. And I
>> would spend my free time doing other things that I find meaningful.
>>
>>
>>
>> I also want to make the point that even if poverty rates are decreasing,
>> I don't think people are having easier lives. The lives of people just
>> above the poverty line are really really hard. Our life expectancy is
>> actually decreasing in this nation. Think about that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Helen
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 10:24 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>>
>>
>>   Just want to send out a reminder that this list is fine with sharp
>> disagreements, but also to keep in mind that, perhaps because the list is
>> populated by therapists, it has less of a “swashbuckling” culture than some
>> other lists. I think a basic principle that we should all endorse is that
>> the “real world” is far more complicated than either our particular
>> perspectives or theories can account for. As such, I don’t know that
>> sweeping generalizations are helpful. Rather, attempting at understanding,
>> even while agreeing is probably preferred. Consider, that the idea that
>> there are massive inequalities and that they might be both indicative of a
>> problem and that it is a problem of human fairness is not fundamentally
>> inconsistent with the idea that taking people’s money via governmental
>> force is not a good solution.
>>
>>
>>
>>  At the general level, I would encourage folks to operate from the frame
>> that what they are sharing is that it is their “version of reality” and
>> that we operate off of “justification systems”. For a paper on the linkage
>> of the concept of justification systems and versions of reality, see
>> this paper by my colleague Craig Shealy, especially, the first half
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.gregghenriques.com_uploads_2_4_3_6_24368778_justifying-5Fthe-5Fjustification-5Fhypothesis.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=gvgczc8qVRdRblZrCs_0DRm5dCsCZq0aHTxLOHJiW-c&s=E66bEm-UcJ34hgBOC1QpYOi9nZvMXwPfjjE7nUWB_e4&e=>.
>> He is known in our C-I program for what I think is a helpful, *humbling
>> adage to live by…We are all full of sh*t, just to different degrees and
>> different degrees of awareness
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201602_humbling-2Dhelpful-2Dadage-2Dlive&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=gvgczc8qVRdRblZrCs_0DRm5dCsCZq0aHTxLOHJiW-c&s=w5aWyLpCUvYPKBFIYWBSj5nUDLHovKih975po2bSuCk&e=>.*
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks to everyone for their contributions.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Gregg
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <
>> [log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of *Zachary Stein
>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 10, 2019 10:58 AM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: podcast with Andrew Yang
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Alexander Elung,
>>
>>
>>
>> Perhaps I have mistaken you for someone else on the IDW list. Sorry.
>>
>>
>>
>> My sense is if we slowed down we would agree on a few things:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1). There are very significant skill and capability differences between
>> people.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2). These are differentially rewarded by the market, such that a certain
>> amount of economic inequality is necessary.
>>
>>
>>
>> So far so good.
>>
>>
>>
>> My sense is we think differently about:
>>
>>
>>
>> 3). The dynamics of how the market rewards various skills, especially the
>> extent to which there is a strong correlation between the amount of money
>> someone has and their skill levels. ….. I don’t think it is all that strong
>> of a correlation.
>>
>>
>>
>> 4). The amount of inequality that is necessary for the social system to
>> reflect skill differences clearly/functionally, as opposed to amounts and
>> forms of inequality that are result in a misrepresentation of skill
>> differences. …. I think we are in the latter situation.
>>
>>
>>
>> But it is possible to read 3 and 4 in terms of a “pure/perfect
>> meritocracy” —as I think you do — which says that people get what they
>> deserve based on their skills and efforts. I wish this was true, and hold
>> it as an ideal. But I do not believe that such a society has ever existed
>> historically. Although, I think we have lived in social systems that
>> perpetrated the idea of a pure meritocracy as if it was true....
>>
>>
>>
>> My notion of *extreme* or “bad” inequality has to do with my take on 3
>> and 4. I think that the market does not reward skill differences in
>> coherent ways, to the extent that the social system as a whole is beginning
>> to suffer under the strain of over-valuing the wrong things/people.
>>
>>
>>
>> Envy is not really the issue (although when it comes to the mob/pitch
>> forks, that is an issue). My concern is with the economy as a kind of
>> sensor network or distributed intelligence, the coherence of which is an
>> aspect of social reproduction; and I am saying that we are in an
>> increasingly confused and incoherent economic situation, *extreme*
>> inequality being one of many bad signs.
>>
>>
>>
>> zak
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2019, at 10:27 AM, Alexander Elung <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I have never used name-calling over arguments in disagreements.  However,
>> you seem to do so right out of the gate.  Calling something “introductory
>> level political science level stuff” is not an argument at all and you are
>> also dead wrong.
>>
>> I completely agree with Bards point  "Don't fiddle with the deep deep
>> human connection between contribution and reward “  but inheritance does
>> not fiddle with that.  Creating an inheritance for your children is a giant
>> motivation for many people, when trying to earn money.   You claiming that
>> is makes inequality “ extreme” is not an argument.   The people who has
>> inherited money are also not at all the problem.  The problem Bard was
>> pointing out was that giving a universal income to people might discourage
>> them to work and thus deflate the economy, .  People who inherit money,
>> often still works and even if they didn’t they wouldn’t drain the system
>> for resources.  You have completely, since the money has to come from
>> something.  You have misunderstood the “contribution/ rewards” connection
>> I’m afraid – all I’m hearing is that you are envious that some people
>> inherit money, without any argument as to why that should be a problem,
>> other than you just subjectively think it’s bad for some people to have
>> more than others.  That’s not an argument. That’s childish envy.
>>
>>
>> I on the other hand, just gave you a lengthy argument, that poverty
>> actually had been decreasing for three decades and inequality therefor was
>> meaningless in that context.  You can’t just add “ extreme” to that, and
>> expect it to cover the glaring lack of coherence in your non-argument.
>>
>> And yes Zac , there are actually skill differences which make people able
>> to make over million times the amounts of money as other people. It’s about
>> how much value you provide and how much the market deems that to be worth.
>> If you are able to invent something like paypal – that is indeed worth a
>> million times or more than an average worker. If you are able to write
>> harry potter, that might make you a billionaire, because people value your
>> work that much more than the next fantasy writer.   If you don’t understand
>> that, you don’t understand the basics of economy.
>>
>> So no, Zak, social inequality is not fundamentally different – you just
>> don’t understand how the market works.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Elung
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> *Fra:* tree of knowledge system discussion <
>> [log in to unmask]> på vegne af Zachary Stein <
>> [log in to unmask]>
>> *Sendt:* Thursday, October 10, 2019 3:31:33 PM
>> *Til:* [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>> *Emne:* Re: podcast with Andrew Yang
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Alexander Elung,
>>
>>
>>
>> Fancy meeting you here.
>>
>>
>>
>> Given how I have seen you and Bard interact on other lists, I’ll keep
>> expectations for reasoned discourse low (and instead anticipate some name
>> calling and hand waving as a way of side stepping clear argumentation) ;-)
>> [It seems to me you guys just love freaking out the liberals and leftists
>> and the" church-lady environmentalists and social justice warriors,” as you
>> have called them. I am sometimes all for this, but it leads you to make
>> some not so great arguments sometimes.]
>>
>>
>>
>> Obviously inequality is not “bad" in principle. Inequality, by some
>> definition, is a kind of ontological given in the structure of things,
>> including human societies.
>>
>>
>>
>> But I should not have to point out how flawed your basic argument is;
>> this is like introduction to political science level stuff.
>>
>>
>>
>> Individual differences in e.g., the ability to run fast are naturally
>> occurring, physiologically based differentials in human capability.
>>
>>
>>
>> Socially mediated economic and political inequalities are fundamentally
>> different.
>>
>>
>>
>> Socially mediated forms of inequality are not a proxy for naturally
>> occurring skill differentials. [This is the myth of *pure meritocracy.*]
>>
>>
>>
>> I am a developmental psychologist, so I understand this dynamic of
>> individual capability differences quite well, and have written about it at
>> length. Indeed, these naturally occurring differences in ability are one of
>> the reasons we need to ease up on how extreme we make the socially created
>> asymmetries of choice-making power.
>>
>>
>>
>> I.e., are there *any* skill differentials as great as the economic
>> differentials we see in our society, e.g., can someone be a million times
>> faster than me in a foot race? Can they even be a hundred times faster? See
>> where this goes?
>>
>>
>>
>> If we want to represent naturally occurring skill differentials in
>> socially mediated economic terms that is a great idea, let's do that. But
>> this strategy would begin with *drastically* chopping the (ridiculous,
>> unconscionable) salaries of CEOs and financial service worker, and
>> drastically raising the (shamefully low) salaries of people like teachers
>> and nurses, etc....
>>
>>
>>
>> The other Alexander hit the nail on the head, then I hit it again, but
>> you went and missed it:
>>
>>
>>
>> "Don't fiddle with the deep deep human connection between contribution
>> and reward is my suggestion.”
>>
>>
>>
>> Extreme inequality (not *all* inequality) disrupts the connection between
>> contribution and reward. Total absence of inequality—i.e., pure
>> equity—also disrupts this, which is your moment of truth. (Yes, we know: If
>> everyone gets a gold star, this makes gold stars are worthless.)
>>
>>
>>
>> But radical economic inequality (especially when
>> based largely on inheritance), is in effect, a situation where the most
>> empowered classes are signaling that there is no connection between
>> contribution and reward.
>>
>>
>>
>> As I said, this is a ticking social time bomb. Whether it is “wrong” in
>> some ethical sense is another matter. Just look at the work of Peter
>> Turchin, and you’ll see an undeniable correlation between major
>> socio-economic inequality and major social strife, war, and
>> revolution—especially during the recent history of the
>> modern capitalist world system.
>>
>>
>>
>> zak
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 10, 2019, at 8:06 AM, Alexander Elung <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> I really think people need to get around the idea that inequality is the
>> problem.  There is nothing inherently wrong with inequality. If we looked
>> at human “Running speed” we would also find a very high degree of
>> inequality, where a very little group of athletes run faster than everyone
>> else. That doesn’t mean there is a system of oppression keeping the average
>> person from running fast.   What it means is, that people are different and
>> some people will do better than others. All systems has inequality, it’s
>> part of how systems functions.   The graph about inheritance shows nothing
>> relevant to whether or not the degree of inequality is a problem or not.
>>
>> The problem is poverty, not inequality and poverty has reduced
>> drastically in the last three decades. The poorest people in the west have
>> access to smartphones, they for the most part aren’t starving and have
>> access to health care.  When you start measuring the things that actually
>> matter, we actually live in a time where real poverty is almost completely
>> eliminated in the west.
>>
>> So can we stop with the “ inequality has never been higher” narrative ?
>> It’s meaningless.
>>
>> -
>>
>> I agree with Bard regarding cancelling welfare systems and replacing it
>> with negative income tax. Governments are not good at spending money
>> efficiently, so the less money the government can spend on anti-poverty
>> programs, the better for the poor. Give them the money in hand.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Elung
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Fra: *Alexander Bard <[log in to unmask]>
>> *Sendt: *9. oktober 2019 17:33
>> *Emne: *Re: podcast with Andrew Yang
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Zak
>>
>>
>>
>> I have no problem whatsoever with a negative income tax för the poor
>> (meaning they get money, not pay taxes).
>>
>> I actually think it is a lot lot better than current welfare systems.
>> Because the poor as much as anybody know best how to spend their own money.
>>
>> Then kill the rest of the welfare systems. Excellent.
>>
>> As for Piketty, he promotes massively taxing the rich. That's not UBI.
>> But then there is the issue of feasibility. I fins his ideas interesting
>> but niave in lack of realism and dynamism. But a great and much needed
>> voice.
>>
>> What pisses me off the most is the tech giants and their babble about
>> UBI: While they are the biggest tax avoiders ever in history.
>>
>> Have we ever seen anything more hypocritical than Silicon Valley?
>> Currently full of "climatists" who refuse to give up even on their branded
>> mineral water bottles.
>>
>> The techlash has hopefully only just begun.
>>
>>
>>
>> Big love
>>
>> Alexander Bard
>>
>>
>>
>> Den ons 9 okt. 2019 kl 15:24 skrev Zachary Stein <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>> Totally Helen. Thanks for this. I hear you, and to be clear, I am a
>> supporter of a properly implemented set of radical socio-economic policy
>> changes, including a UBI.
>>
>> The problem on this thread is that there are a few things unfolding. One
>> concerns the presidential election and what is being said, by who, and what
>> could actually be done by any elected official, etc. The other issues
>> concern foundational problems in political and economic theory.
>>
>> I have very little to say that is not utterly radical about the 2020
>> election situation...
>>
>> So I am sticking to the topics in political economy.
>>
>> Alexander hits the nail on the head:
>>
>> "Don't fiddle with the deep deep human connection between contribution
>> and reward is my suggestion.”
>>
>> But, my dear Alexander, our fiddling with this connection is already the
>> heart of the problem. We have already deeply fucked it up... This was my
>> point about the *the massive and ever increasing economic inequality.*(!)
>>
>> Consider this data from Piketty:
>>
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__piketty.pse.ens.fr_files_capital21c_en_pdf_F11.11.pdf&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=GnlnhKhfaXgzXHtv49mZRgbwzURspoigX2ZFwCDpoh4&s=aP0bq0H5DEi5te-21S342-ceKeAdEMTx75cCTWwWwoc&e=
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Furldefense.proofpoint.com-252Fv2-252Furl-253Fu-253Dhttp-2D3A-5F-5Fpiketty.pse.ens.fr-5Ffiles-5Fcapital21c-5Fen-5Fpdf-5FF11.11.pdf-2526d-253DDwIFaQ-2526c-253DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn-5F5nBEmmeq0-2526r-253DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-2DUOpybo6Cfxxz-2DjIYBgjO2gOz4-2DA-2526m-253DGnlnhKhfaXgzXHtv49mZRgbwzURspoigX2ZFwCDpoh4-2526s-253DaP0bq0H5DEi5te-2D21S342-2DceKeAdEMTx75cCTWwWwoc-2526e-253D-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897030978-26sdata-3DhPGaeIidJwlrAk4teZlwWB5rRQlTh4iPdkqjhynXtTQ-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3DaRswGTRZFzmVp4jPXCLfn23agS9dAuKqmSD84YQMus4%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857653564&sdata=yjIBATv%2FDNQYBWogTJ%2F54J%2F8OTtw776IsIgMtvS5xJk%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>  "Within the cohorts born around 1970-1980, 12-14% of individuals receive
>> in inheritance the equivalent of the lifetime labor income received by the
>> bottom 50% less well paid workers.”   [Let that one sink in.]
>>
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__piketty.pse.ens.fr_files_capital21c_en_pdf_F8.8.pdf&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=GnlnhKhfaXgzXHtv49mZRgbwzURspoigX2ZFwCDpoh4&s=tlL1o8rQ1HMEolMt9enzpYEYuuZ38fNp0x_zj2l0MGU&e=
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Furldefense.proofpoint.com-252Fv2-252Furl-253Fu-253Dhttp-2D3A-5F-5Fpiketty.pse.ens.fr-5Ffiles-5Fcapital21c-5Fen-5Fpdf-5FF8.8.pdf-2526d-253DDwIFaQ-2526c-253DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn-5F5nBEmmeq0-2526r-253DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-2DUOpybo6Cfxxz-2DjIYBgjO2gOz4-2DA-2526m-253DGnlnhKhfaXgzXHtv49mZRgbwzURspoigX2ZFwCDpoh4-2526s-253DtlL1o8rQ1HMEolMt9enzpYEYuuZ38fNp0x-5Fzj2l0MGU-2526e-253D-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897030978-26sdata-3DLsvCNmgYNWMGibvCaH6z7qxeGgMhkG1Tu-252FG-252Bw3q4iFM-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3DRINbrrPUocBfy4x8Mlyla2L0TIWKuPZM7V9mgTKFnt8%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857663576&sdata=gjvcqcA7THScyqY8srrqu7B6KVkUg%2BWdo5XWu%2ByN5W8%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> "The rise in the top 1% highest incomes since the 1970s is largely due to
>> the rise in the top 1% highest wages” [Note that we have nearly surpassed
>> the Gilded Age in inequality and its speeding up.]
>>
>> This way of arranging the connection between contribution and reward
>> (i.e., having the most empowered classes signal that there is no
>> connection) is a ticking social time bomb.
>>
>> I would say that this kind of inequality is way worse in its net effects
>> than a UBI.
>>
>> However, what if a UBI is rolled out and the rest of the situation
>> described in the figures above does not change? Then it is like the
>> aristocrats using cash to pay off a mob wielding pitch forks, knowing full
>> well there is no plan to change the overall arrangement, and that in a few
>> years they will have better defenses.
>>
>> A far as I can tell no President is capable of or interested in changing
>> this overall arrangement (sorry Bennie, you’ll need to sell that house in
>> Grand Isle VT). But now we are back to my radical ideas about 2020…
>>
>> Crisp morning in the Green Mountains.
>>
>> zak
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 9, 2019, at 8:34 AM, Helen Wu <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >
>> > This discussion makes me frustrated. $1000 a month is not enough to
>> cancel work. We are not talking about a $50,000 per year UBI here. It is
>> just enough so you are not going to end up on a downward spiral if there
>> are sudden financial difficulties. Saudi Arabia has a lot more problems
>> than UBI. Not sure if that's the best example. Half of my family is working
>> class and I know so many people who need some money now. They are not lazy
>> and they are not going to lose their souls/spirit. They don't have the time
>> for education. They just need some help so that they can have some
>> breathing space to move on towards their goal.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Helen
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:54 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > Zak,
>> >
>> >   What I think we should be investing in is an education of the human
>> soul toward the spirit…now that is a collective universal I could get
>> behind!
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Of course, as a psychotherapist, most of my work is soul work, so I
>> will leave the truly spiritual stuff to the real gurus.
>> >
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Gregg
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: tree of knowledge system discussion <
>> [log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Alexander Bard
>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 9, 2019 3:26 AM
>> > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > Subject: Re: podcast with Andrew Yang
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree 100% with dear Zachary.
>> >
>> > There actually already exists one massive UBI experiment in the world
>> and you may study it to see how it all went.
>> >
>> > It is called Saudi Arabia.
>> >
>> > Shopping centers full of 29-year-old obese diabetics while foreigners
>> do all the meaningful paid work in the country.
>> >
>> > Is that the sort of society you would want to create?
>> >
>> > Don't fiddle with the deep deep human connection between contribution
>> and reward is my suggestion. And forget that there won't be any jobs in the
>> future. There will tons of them. The question what kind of experiemtial
>> quality they will provide though. But that's an entirely different matter
>> and not a case for UBI (which still has to be paid, massively paid, by
>> somebody as well).
>> >
>> > Best intentions
>> >
>> > Alexander
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Den tis 8 okt. 2019 kl 21:49 skrev Zachary Stein <[log in to unmask]>:
>> >
>> > Hi ToK list,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Having published about UBI as a non expert (I am a philosopher of
>> education [UBI is one of my “social miracles”]), I will say that it is
>> dangerous when taken up in isolation from other social programs and
>> especially educational initiatives.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Indeed, there are scenarios where the UBI is a true nightmare, and I am
>> not talking about inflation and other economic fallout — I am talking about
>> meaninglessness, de-skilled apathy, addiction, suicide, i.e.,
>> total/catastrophic mental health crisis. (The same holds for a so-called
>> "guaranteed work program," if done in isolation from related social
>> programs and educational initiatives).
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > UBI is as much (more so?) an educational/cultural issue then a math
>> problem in economics.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Even if we can make the numbers work the real hard problem is making
>> the idea work as a part of the current human identity structure  (i.e., as
>> part of our self-system's role-taking and social justification dynamics).
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Who am I if I am not a wage laborer? That is the question. If the
>> culture and individual can’t answer that but the economists and politicians
>> go ahead and take away the category of wage labor, well, there will be a
>> society wide equivalent of an identity crisis or nervous breakdown.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Of course, the elephant in the room is *the massive and ever increasing
>> economic inequality.* Remember when Piketty was a best seller? The math he
>> laid out is still true. The whole compounding interest thing still holds.
>> UBI may be a nonstarter but something (somebody?) has to give.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Instead of justifying UBI to people taking issue, I often ask "what
>> else sounds good that is as radical in its admission of the need for
>> redistribution?” My answer has something to do with an education
>> renaissance/revolution, but that is another story.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Fall colors in Vermont.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > zak
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Oct 8, 2019, at 2:55 PM, nysa71 <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Gregg,
>> >
>> > Here's a link to the Job Guarantee FAQ by Pavlina Tcherneva, Associate
>> Professor of Economics at Bard University and research scholar at the Levy
>> Institute. She specializes in Modern Monetary Theory and public policy, and
>> is one of the foremost experts on the Job Guarantee proposal. Besides the
>> FAQ, there's all kinds of publications and videos on the JG, (plus other
>> topics, including Pavlina's issues with the UBI).
>> >
>> >
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.pavlina-2Dtcherneva.net_job-2Dguarantee-2Dfaq&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=GnlnhKhfaXgzXHtv49mZRgbwzURspoigX2ZFwCDpoh4&s=s1KIakCBK5p7I-6c0En59v_9nhxsdbJLzDPkw4NeI0w&e=
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Furldefense.proofpoint.com-252Fv2-252Furl-253Fu-253Dhttps-2D3A-5F-5Fwww.pavlina-2D2Dtcherneva.net-5Fjob-2D2Dguarantee-2D2Dfaq-2526d-253DDwIFaQ-2526c-253DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn-5F5nBEmmeq0-2526r-253DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-2DUOpybo6Cfxxz-2DjIYBgjO2gOz4-2DA-2526m-253DGnlnhKhfaXgzXHtv49mZRgbwzURspoigX2ZFwCDpoh4-2526s-253Ds1KIakCBK5p7I-2D6c0En59v-5F9nhxsdbJLzDPkw4NeI0w-2526e-253D-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897040983-26sdata-3DHH9yeFd7U1BzqvYWGNL20lIMqn0geBD4yK-252Fig2tconc-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3Dp2kxJNSbi1ORlsPeU2LX-Mgba2MTJUBQLk7fIAymN8Q%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857673585&sdata=PDu5tH9qCSTtvXWFQRKBClr3isXCvD%2FE3K1Ct7kILYs%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>> > ~ Jason Bessey
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Job Guarantee FAQ | pavlina-tcherneva
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tuesday, October 8, 2019, 09:41:00 AM EDT, Peter Lloyd Jones <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Bad email program…
>> >
>> > Should be:
>> >
>> > Beyond that there is no substantive threat.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Peter Lloyd Jones
>> > [log in to unmask]
>> > 562-209-4080
>> >
>> > Sent by determined causes that no amount of will is able to thwart.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Oct 8, 2019, at 9:37 AM, Peter Lloyd Jones <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you Joseph for your note about tempering expectations.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > As a former mediocre road racer, I have a lot of experience in riding
>> around on race tracks during races. Yang is using his
>> presidential-candidate platform to promote certain ideas. Beyond that there
>> is  substantive threat. O’Rourke has stated that he will take away our
>> guns. They are both introducing progressive concepts because, without
>> blood, politics moves slowly. You need to start somewhere. They know that
>> they have sacraficed their candidacies to mold allowable discussions moving
>> forward. Years ago if you just asked if weed might have medical uses, your
>> political career was over. Today...
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > This is about ideas, which might be good and bad ideas, but it’s not
>> about who will be the next president.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Vote early and often.
>> >
>> > Best to all,
>> >
>> > Peter
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Peter Lloyd Jones
>> > [log in to unmask]
>> > 562-209-4080
>> >
>> > Sent by determined causes that no amount of will is able to thwart.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ############################
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] or click the following
>> link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897050993-26sdata-3DA-252FmuNQHSwb7AwTMF0kx4ko8FUygy3h7TWzJg4QrZrn8-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3D_gcjHx3cea9mfp9d4MqTe4ynd9C2cbnWEgUrFfLQiJM%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857683589&sdata=GnDkIgvl4tDuZJVc92OQRAAPK4CmoqK2K7YqTiL8Otg%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>> > ############################
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] or click the following
>> link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897050993-26sdata-3DA-252FmuNQHSwb7AwTMF0kx4ko8FUygy3h7TWzJg4QrZrn8-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3D_gcjHx3cea9mfp9d4MqTe4ynd9C2cbnWEgUrFfLQiJM%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857683589&sdata=GnDkIgvl4tDuZJVc92OQRAAPK4CmoqK2K7YqTiL8Otg%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ############################
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] or click the following
>> link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897050993-26sdata-3DA-252FmuNQHSwb7AwTMF0kx4ko8FUygy3h7TWzJg4QrZrn8-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3D_gcjHx3cea9mfp9d4MqTe4ynd9C2cbnWEgUrFfLQiJM%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857693602&sdata=FvNF40wRK7PmNx%2FkUOIJZDwZk99J0GN2y0mBYwwSk7Y%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>> > ############################
>> >
>> > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] or click the following
>> link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897060999-26sdata-3DQX-252Fd4iEvXYy4vIxAeoP7tzjsJ8w4bc36eXdi0g-252FSBDU-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3DV_5cnHPDBXsLkGHig9fFkIF7IQiWJIzpsUis7WeZFDY%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857703611&sdata=YwxxJCfS1sqqFurF4cl7SAzPaWAAs4K00v%2FAr87k9vQ%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>> > ############################
>> > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] or click the following
>> link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897060999-26sdata-3DQX-252Fd4iEvXYy4vIxAeoP7tzjsJ8w4bc36eXdi0g-252FSBDU-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3DV_5cnHPDBXsLkGHig9fFkIF7IQiWJIzpsUis7WeZFDY%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857713624&sdata=SYSpS6eTQRZYh3adQC1ZBXskz3CfScmyLMLdYcNSzKQ%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>> > ############################
>> > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:
>> [log in to unmask] or click the following
>> link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897071009-26sdata-3DJ7rYnXGGB7Pkfd3ERn3twMPQQv0FGGs7YeMsqjl8RIw-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3D-o52OQFStw2NPYgV1ExeVZ1ZLpEJBznAtVNA867kVsc%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857713624&sdata=DALBAGXfA%2B%2FObNK0GnQgs4pV05K6USGuIajUE3LTUP4%3D&reserved=0>
>> >
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
>> write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> or click the following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897071009-26sdata-3DJ7rYnXGGB7Pkfd3ERn3twMPQQv0FGGs7YeMsqjl8RIw-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3D-o52OQFStw2NPYgV1ExeVZ1ZLpEJBznAtVNA867kVsc%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857723628&sdata=fLRo1JF9aPErOFcJe1Xr109bTW9ZVG77T%2FVBRlrChAE%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.proofpoint.com%2Fv2%2Furl%3Fu%3Dhttps-3A__nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257C8e5574a3bec541883fa208d74ccdfcd3-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637062319897081014-26sdata-3DLcjyb9Cwoxh5Xu9VbtpsCm4HwOFo3cmrblAEtqceRGw-253D-26reserved-3D0%26d%3DDwMF-g%26c%3DeLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0%26r%3DHPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A%26m%3DSoi1vv5PlSKY4UvGgbeXe9Tg304k_-IruzOPeREvoWY%26s%3D6w8DdWfVEKEAMwcZl4gK2U8T9BHCt2BvIcfczuq6Hbk%26e%3D&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637063111857733641&sdata=cNT%2B8zYUGKifRpM3rQxtXcm1HiRm6jnsgJ2jmQfxk5E%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637063111857743645-26sdata-3Dv0HXTX8NHmR4w3fEkWnbQtIRqTp8nIeDOIi6ufmzXjg-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMF-g&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=o84KKtKHz719_S3TzEHuqek6xC0kvS1snlXKr9uP8Oc&s=hQbwir041aISb4-CcruyEtIUlh-g9YBPzljrauy7HpQ&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttp-253A-252F-252Flistserv.jmu.edu-252Fcgi-2Dbin-252Fwa-253FSUBED1-253DTOK-2DSOCIETY-2DL-2526A-253D1-26data-3D02-257C01-257C-257Cb654280f1f4643b0eab408d74d866134-257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa-257C1-257C0-257C637063111857743645-26sdata-3Dv0HXTX8NHmR4w3fEkWnbQtIRqTp8nIeDOIi6ufmzXjg-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMF-g&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=o84KKtKHz719_S3TzEHuqek6xC0kvS1snlXKr9uP8Oc&s=hQbwir041aISb4-CcruyEtIUlh-g9YBPzljrauy7HpQ&e=>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
>>
>>
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>> ############################
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
>> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
>> following link:
>> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link:
> http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1