I think I view the system the same way that Ayn Rand views the system - that it really oppresses those that create, if you will, and tries to take away from those that produce and give to the non-producers.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I think anytime that you go to the extreme of any mode of economics, be it capitalism or communism, you have these feedback mechanisms that make the system turn in on itself.
I'm not after a closed system, I mean I'm after a complicated system in structure, but as far as watching it, I don't think that everything should be decided.
Most of the producers don't know what they do. The misconception of the producers' function is really not a misconception. Most producers don't do a very good job.
Systems are to be appreciated by their general effects, and not by particular exceptions.
I criticize by creation - not by finding fault.
The system has for its object an increase of persons that are to intervene between the producer and the consumer, living on the product of the land and labour of others, diminishing the power of the first, and increasing the number of the last.
If I can feel that actual people made the thing, and that they have deeply felt opinions about it, and care about this, and don't care about that and so on and so on - then I think it falls into the 'independent' file.
The problem with a purely collective system is not only that it requires economic growth, and the right sort of demographic trends, but that it prevents people thinking about their futures in a responsible way.
I've always thought of the project as a sort of sexually driven digestive system, that it was a consumer and a producer of matter. And it is desire driven, rather than driven by hunger or anything like that.
Mother Nature comes up against reality, and the reality is that the system doesn't work.