I think between this and the Amazon review of the book, points to something that I think most of us are missing (although I have not read every post here yet). This guy says basically that in order for developing countries to raise the capital needed to get their economies going, they need to turn their current 'dead' capital into 'liquid' capital, essentially taking out loans on their properties. This would be how the US has done it since WWI and has acheived its amazing economic success. Of course, it has also resulted in the biggest debt of all time, which is increasing every day. This is not indicitive of a 'healthy' or 'successful' economy, but rather one that is on life support. We've been waiting for decades for the US gov to come up with a 'magic plan' that will eliminate the debt, and they have yet to make much of a dent in even the rate of its increase, so I don't see it happening any time soon.
The real reason that the US has been so 'successful', aside from it willingness to spend debt money, is that fact it resides on the most resource rich continent in the world (a fact that the US is trying very hard to change), as well as its willingness to embrace technological change. This conclusion (among others) was discovered by the research of not one individual, but a team called the Technical Alliance, now called Technocracy Inc. They seem to have a firmer grasp of our economic situation that do most economists.
Really, you can't blame the advertisers. They too are simply products of their environment. Our current society rewards those who do well at accumulating money. This has caused corporations to be the dominant species since they have traits that are advantageous in this environment, such as indefinate life spans, multiple intelligences (employees of various expertise) and in some cases better legal protection than most people. It's simple biology and evolution.
Corps have found advertising to be an advantageous trait, so those that do it best are rewarded (more money). So you can't blame biology. You could, I suppose, blame people who are unaware of this effect and where it is leading. The only actual way to change this behaviour is to change the environment totally, i.e., one that does not simply reward the greatest accumulation of money. Unfortunately, this is hard to do and still have a stable economy. So far the only people I know of that have solved this is that Technocracy group (http://www.technocracyinc.org).
Slashdot Mirror
The real reason that the US has been so 'successful', aside from it willingness to spend debt money, is that fact it resides on the most resource rich continent in the world (a fact that the US is trying very hard to change), as well as its willingness to embrace technological change. This conclusion (among others) was discovered by the research of not one individual, but a team called the Technical Alliance, now called Technocracy Inc. They seem to have a firmer grasp of our economic situation that do most economists.
-Murdoc
Really, you can't blame the advertisers. They too are simply products of their environment. Our current society rewards those who do well at accumulating money. This has caused corporations to be the dominant species since they have traits that are advantageous in this environment, such as indefinate life spans, multiple intelligences (employees of various expertise) and in some cases better legal protection than most people. It's simple biology and evolution. Corps have found advertising to be an advantageous trait, so those that do it best are rewarded (more money). So you can't blame biology. You could, I suppose, blame people who are unaware of this effect and where it is leading. The only actual way to change this behaviour is to change the environment totally, i.e., one that does not simply reward the greatest accumulation of money. Unfortunately, this is hard to do and still have a stable economy. So far the only people I know of that have solved this is that Technocracy group (http://www.technocracyinc.org).