Jeffersonian Nightmare

[ebacon]

Jeffersonian Nightmare - that is the latest phrase that echoes though my head.

As a defender of Jeffersonian economics, what I think of as "the logic of the farm", I must admit that landowners are not always the best caretakers of their land.

How much of your land would you be willing to give to a better caretaker? At first the concept is scary.

[merrylander]

I wont give it to anyone but if someone wants to come here and mow the grass, all 3.8 acres they are more than welcome.

[JJIII]

I wont give it to anyone but if someone wants to come here and mow the grass, all 3.8 acres they are more than welcome.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyp9fh-u4w8

:D

[donquixote99]

Jeffersonian Nightmare - that is the latest phrase that echoes though my head.

As a defender of Jeffersonian economics, what I think of as "the logic of the farm", I must admit that landowners are not always the best caretakers of their land.

How much of your land would you be willing to give to a better caretaker? At first the concept is scary.

I wonder what 'Jeffersonian Nightmare' you have in mind. I googled the phrase, and come up with Chuck Norris (or whoever wrote what appeared under his name) saying it was "material prosperity without character."

The next thing returned was historian Thomas Flemming saying Jefferson's nightmare was of a 'race war,' as exemplified by the massacre of whites in Haiti. (While this was a very influential nightmare in the South, I don't know that there's much reason to call it 'Jefferson's,' in particular....)

As for your topic, some farmers will be good stewards, some will be bad. The same is true of anyone with the power to decide on such matters. The greater the centralization, the greater the power of good stewards to do good, and bad stewards to cause harm. It's an example of the general dilemma of power.

There is no one easy global solution. There are many situations in which mass decisions in the individual interest cause general havoc. Agriculture provides classic examples. Individual farmers are motivated to maximize their production, but the general effect is surpluses that crash the market price and impoverish all farmers. Individual farmers must use large quantities of fertilizer for economic viability; the general effect is runoff that leads to toxic algae blooms in lakes. Governmental response seems called-for, but altogether satisfactory solutions remain elusive.

[nailer]

I wont give it to anyone but if someone wants to come here and mow the grass, all 3.8 acres they are more than welcome.

Do you pay a living wage?

[merrylander]

Do you pay a living wage?

We do as a matter of fact.:)

[Pukka Sahib]

Thomas Jefferson had a significant influence on the founding of the nation; albeit his ideas were not adopted by the framers of the Constitution. Jefferson was serving as Ambassador to France at the time of the Constitutional Convention; and except for his correspondence with some of the delegates, what resulted was largely the work of James Madison. (Even his draft Constitution and Declaration of Rights for Virginia was rejected in favor of the model of George Mason.) Jefferson’s main contribution was the Louisiana Purchase, which opened the way to westward expansion, and the rise of America to become one of the great nations of the world. The epitaph on his tomb recites: "Here was buried Thomas Jefferson, Author of the Declaration of American Independence, of the Statute of Virginia for religious freedom, & Father of the University of Virginia." He died bankrupt; but he nevertheless left a rich legacy for all of us.

[ebacon]

I wonder what 'Jeffersonian Nightmare' you have in mind. I googled the phrase, and come up with Chuck Norris (or whoever wrote what appeared under his name) saying it was "material prosperity without character."

The next thing returned was historian Thomas Flemming saying Jefferson's nightmare was of a 'race war,' as exemplified by the massacre of whites in Haiti. (While this was a very influential nightmare in the South, I don't know that there's much reason to call it 'Jefferson's,' in particular....)

As for your topic, some farmers will be good stewards, some will be bad. The same is true of anyone with the power to decide on such matters. The greater the centralization, the greater the power of good stewards to do good, and bad stewards to cause harm. It's an example of the general dilemma of power.

There is no one easy global solution. There are many situations in which mass decisions in the individual interest cause general havoc. Agriculture provides classic examples. Individual farmers are motivated to maximize their production, but the general effect is surpluses that crash the market price and impoverish all farmers. Individual farmers must use large quantities of fertilizer for economic viability; the general effect is runoff that leads to toxic algae blooms in lakes. Governmental response seems called-for, but altogether satisfactory solutions remain elusive.

When I use the phrase "Jeffersonian Nightmare" I am thinking in a most simple sense -- a theory that people that own land tend to make the best use of it. Like farmers.

I noticed a weakness with the "owner=best steward" concept when I moved into a wealthy neighborhood for the first time. That was when I saw that the proportion of homeowners that bit off more than they could chew was disappointingly high. Seeing wealthy superiors with big subdivision houses suffering with weeds and peeling paint made me realize that there is a poor correlation between affording land and caring for it for the better of community value. No one wants to live next to a weed patch. Not even someone that lives in a weed patch.

It makes me wonder if people would be willing to support legislation that lets weed patch owners admit defeat and trade their large lots for apartment living. I realize that there is a myriad of details in such an arrangement. Just thinking out loud about a kind of "I would give up my too big tent for a right sized apartment" idea.

[donquixote99]

I tend to ponder collectivist solutions, like 10 neighbors tear down their fences, buy a very fine lawn tractor together, and take turns with mowing shifts?

[ebacon]

I tend to ponder collectivist solutions, like 10 neighbors tear down their fences, buy a very fine lawn tractor together, and take turns with mowing shifts?

Understandable. In the world of math such ends of the rainbow are binned as overly simple solutions. I forget the terms. Degenerative. Zeros. Something like that. Don't be offended by the words. I am searching for the math term.

In any event it seems that you and I think about similar things with politics. I would mow your yard once a year while you are away. But I would not want to deal with your yard nor you with mine every day.

There is a dance to be made in the middle of that. That is where artists have real value. They convert the everydayness of our trivia into living forms -- without making a mess of concrete.

[donquixote99]

I don't even want to deal with my yard every day. My group thing has me running the tractor maybe for four hours once a month. That's more like it.

But of course the lawn-mowing cooperative would turn into a herd of cats, create big drama, and probably 10 weed patches ultimately.

In a wealthy suburb here, I hear they have Lawn Nazis with dire powers. That's another approach. But I don't like encouraging those sorts either.

Easing people out of underwater McMansions is not a social problem I would have thought high on government-solution-needed list, in any case. But I do like the way you describe the ultimate solution as a 'work of art.' Suggests both creativity, and aesthetic appeal, as prime ingredients for problem-solving, and those are both great things we always need more of.