Another Take on Our Question

Is a "thriving economy" in itself a proper goal or should we be

demanding more?  For example, if we have full employment but a

totalitarian state where jobs are assigned and free expression is

inhibited, the monetary economy could be great but most of us wouldn't

want to be part of it.



A thriving economy that pollutes our environment might seem to be

doing well in a short term glance but could be quite negative (even in

strictly monetary terms) long term.



Another example is that of mega-corps.  Let's say we have ADM, food

supplier to the world.  Their economic contribution is cheaper and

more plentiful food - very "thriving".  But what if they screw up and

introduce a serious problem into the food chain - something that ends

up in a big mess of chain reactions that leave us with a lot of

starving people - again, the short term benefits looked good, but a

more enlightened view might have realized that we would have been

better off with small,  inefficient and more expense individual farms.



I think I'd rather investigate what we need for a thriving society in

general.





Tony Lawrence