Subject: The Economics of Slack

Date: 22 May 1996 00:00:00 GMT

From: s3033469@student.anu.edu.au (AusPope Shortt)

Organization: NO DHMO

Newsgroups: alt.slack

 

 

I was in kind of a Slack downswing recently, until I bought a couple

of books for damn good prices. Now I still have a Slack downswing, but I

have some MATERIAL POSSESSIONS to take my mind off it.

 

Which poses the question: does an increase in aggregate demand (ie

splurging your money on useless crap) stimulate Slack? Was Keynes a

SAecret Slackmaster? Or am I just very very tired? I hear voices ...

 

Cheers,

AusPope Shortt

 

---------------------AusPope Robin Shortt-------------------------

"Throw some more SLACK on the Barbie, OR KILL ME."

'FROP Lager: AusSubGenii woudn't give a FUCK for anything else.

 

 

 

Subject: Re: The Economics of Slack

Date: 23 May 1996 00:00:00 GMT

From: dynasor@infi.net (Dennis McClain-Furmanski)

Organization: InfiNet

Newsgroups: alt.slack

References: 1

 

On 05-22-96, s3033469@student.anu.edu wrote:

> I was in kind of a Slack downswing nrecently, until I bought a

> couple of books for damn good prices. Now I still have a Slack

> downswing, but I have some MATERIAL POSSESSIONS to take my mind off

> it.

> Which poses the question: does an increase in aggregate demand (ie

> splurging your money on useless crap) stimulate Slack? Was Keynes a

> SAecret Slackmaster? Or am I just very very tired? I hear voices ...

Individual differences. I get enormous Slack-awareness from buying all

kinds of goofy shit. Others might get completely up-ended by the same

thing. As Nenslo so recently pointed out, it actions/objects don't give or

take Slack, they increase or decrease your awareness of it.

 

Unless that's NOT WHAT HE SAID, which may well be the case.

But it's still right.

* 2qwk! 2.0 * I have already not made that point

 

 

 

 

Subject: Re: The Economics of Slack

Date: 24 May 1996 00:00:00 GMT

From: blackmer@course1.harvard.edu (John Blackmer)\

Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts

Newsgroups: alt.slack

References: 1 , 2

 

 

Dennis McClain-Furmanski (dynasor@infi.net) wrote:

: On 05-22-96, s3033469@student.anu.edu wrote:

: thing. As Nenslo so recently pointed out, it actions/objects don't give or

: take Slack, they increase or decrease your awareness of it.

 

No, actually, objects and actions do not increase or decrease your

awareness of Slack, but they can trick you into thinking that they do so

that you do it yourself.

 

-QPM

 

Subject: Re: The Economics of Slack

Date: 27 May 1996 00:00:00 GMT

From: nenslo@teleport.com (NENSLO)

Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016

Newsgroups: alt.slack

References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4

 

 

Sophia Anifantakis (angela@Exis.Net) wrote:

: It still sounds like slack is a synonym for happiness/peace of mind. You

: don't necessarily get it from actions or objects, it can be yours at any

: time even in the worst situation and noone can take it away from you

: unless you let them. Are they the same thing?

 

Mwell... ummm... sort of. I mean, happiness and peace of mind are

SYMPTOMS of slack, but hideous screaming can be symptoms of slack too,

under certain circumstances.

Have you sent your thirty bucks to Box 140306 Dallas TX 75214?

There are just some things we really can't go into here, not in front of

"you know who."

 

 

 

 

Subject: Re: The Economics of Slack

Date: 28 May 1996 00:00:00 GMT

From: petehip@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Peter Hipwell)

Organization: HCRC/Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh

Newsgroups: alt.slack

References: 1 , 2 , 3

 

 

In article <4oal9l$7db@Grouper.Exis.Net> angela@exis.net writes:

 

>It still sounds like slack is a synonym for happiness/peace of mind. You

>don't necessarily get it from actions or objects, it can be yours at any

>time even in the worst situation and noone can take it away from you

>unless you let them. Are they the same thing?

>

 

Some people find that Essendi Slackae is to be found in the

state/process of AGITATION of mind. A person that is not happy or

peaceful in mind can slack slack* by using their own unbalanced

nature to unbalance them even further (the YING principle).

 

You may have noticed an emphasis on HATE, but any

emotion-thought-combination can slack slack. This is why Slack cannot

be "attached" to particular thoughts, objects or actions.

 

Now, it is possible to say that this very unbalance must, in some way,

make that person "happy". Then you will need to talk about different

pieces of the mind having different "attitudes" to existence, and it

will get very messy very quickly. It is more accurate to say that Mind

is All, and Slack is One.

 

* The phrase "slack slack" seems initially confusing because the

word "slack" is being used as both verb and adjective. This is,

however, a technically correct usage that describes the process with

precision.