

Is this true? Just when you thought the climate change fun was over
Jazz at Club Miles in Gwangju
Korea Business Central.com
Zapiro nails it again.
The problem that is North Korea
The culture of Korean English instruction
That's so gay, Zimbabwe style
The Mariana Trench
My view of American healthcare, courtesy of Greg Mankiw
Feathers in the Wind (깃)
At this time the objections to this idea that I am interested in hearing about are not procedural/practical ones or ethical ones. I’m not suggesting that these are unimportant aspects of this hypothetical but for the moment I’m only interested in hearing why this would destroy our economy in a functional sense. In other words, I don’t want to hear that such a rule is “unfair” or “unworkable” but that it would wreck havoc on the American economy for reasons a, b, and c.
And pre-emptively I think it should be said that arguments about this hypothetical ushering in socialism or communism are non-starters. Remember the government isn’t getting any of the wealth that will be redistributed, unless the self-employed decided they wanted to give it to them. It is simply imposing a pay ceiling.
I am a libertarian by instinct but I also firmly believe that power corrupts and that in the modern world (always?) money = power. I am also convinced that pure market competition leads to high GINI coefficients, but that government regulation beyond a certain amount, usually makes this situation worse, not better. And so my question arises. What’s so bad about a pay ceiling? And again, for now, ethical, and practical objections are not allowed.
My suspicion is that this is a stupid idea but I am not economically intelligent enough to know why.
Why is this a stupid idea?
"But apart from sanitation...and the fresh water system what have the Japanese ever done for us?"*
"Fat Boy" and his big mouth.
Michael Lewis on those who saw the financial crisis coming
"....it appears that the choices in how one approaches a recalcitrant local government structure are: a) win their favour (which in some cases is possible only by offe[r]ing kickbacks), b) wave a big stick at them, if there is indeed a big stick to wave, and c) facilitate the formation of a pressure group which hopefully, through democratic processes, will ultimately bring about a change in the local government structure."
In other words option C. is better than options A. or B. and therefore justified. And here is part of my response to that response-
"Notice that in none of the abc options are we as ICM proponents called upon to do any self-reflection upon our own ICM objectives or to understand further the objections of resistant groups. Instead each option, though programmatically very different, takes for granted that ICM objectives are unequivocally "the right thing to do."
Yet given the diverse cultural, social, and political settings in which ICM proponents work, such a self-assured paradigm doesn't seem suitable for number of reasons.
1. Such a paradigm severely limits the amount and character of negotiations that ICM proponents will have with resistant groups. If we are right, the rationale for any negotiations cannot be to achieve inter-subjective satisficing, but merely to persuade. Resistant groups are likely to "smell," and be resist to engaging with, such close-mindedness.
2. It also tends to demonize "recalcitrant" groups by casting them as (a.) greedy and therefore susceptible to bribes, or (b.) irrational/childish and therefore in need of punishment, or (c.) illegitimate and therefore ethically sidestepped by the formation of new organizations and power groups.
3. It also limits ICM proponents’ ability and desire to be adaptive to local contextual realities.
4. And finally it tasks ICM proponents with a role more similar to that of an ideologically-driven political campaigner (we have even adopted political terminologies such "pressure group" "constituency building," etc.) than that of a problem solving coastal manager."
I hope she responds. What do you guys think?
The "ABC" approach to ICM project implementation
The (unintended?) consequences of committee formation in ICM projects
Narrative Research: An Excuse for Historicism or a Voice for the Marginalized?
The Gods Must be Crazy
Is Korean "business (bars) as usual" an impediment to Gender Equality?
Welcome to Dongmakgol
King of Kong
Korea Inc., more on Korea's economic development
Gender discrimination prevalent in Korea
The Death of Western Civilization?
Too much of a good thing: when democracy becomes the enemy of development
Senegalese Wrestlers
Super K
The Difficulty of Inter-cultural Dialog: The Case of Korean Blogs.