On Mar 30, 6:44=A0pm, "ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 8:39=A0pm, "fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 29, 11:21=A0pm, "ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 29, 10:17=A0am, "fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
" <fyfp...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>
> > > > The Beijing government of China, for being of being accused of
> > > > destroying Tibetan culture or carrying out 'cultural genocide',
has
> > > > been heavily subsidizing religious activities inside colossal
> > > > structures such as Potala.
>
> > > > Government subsidy to Tibetan Buddhism is a form of price sup****t,
> > > > which produces a price level higher than the equilibrum level. At
th=
at
> > > > higher level, the quantity of lamas supplied has been greater than
> > > > that demanded. This amount of excess lama has been found in the
> > > > streets of Lhasa protesting and throwing stones....
>
> > > > Thus the way to eliminate this excess and to reduce the amount of
> > > > trouble makers is to reduce government subsidy to religious
> > > > organizations. =A0Let the lamas get jobs outside, earn their own
kee=
p
> > > > and help finance Potala. =A0The quantity of electicity, water and
fo=
od
> > > > consumed each month in Potala must be running up some awful bills.
>
> > > > Perhaps I could teach an introductory course to microeconomics at
th=
e
> > > > University of Lhasa ... but at the risk of being chopped up by the
> > > > 'peaceful and benevolent' lamas who prefer round the clock
meditatin=
g
> > > > to working.
>
> > > Or help them to emmigrate. May be the Chinese government should
malke
> > > it clear to all foreign governments that unless they agree to accept
> > > 5,000 to 10,000 of them each year, these government have no moral
> > > right to critize China. In some sense, all these monk are religious
> > > fundamentalists.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > The best answer so far..........
>
> The diagnosis on more monk is right. However, "price sup****t" also
> comes from development. China cannot let Tibet under or undeveloped.
> Ideally speaking, development means more Tibetan youths will not see
> the priesthood as their future. However, in the short run, development
> means Tibet can afford more monks.
That is silly on the part of the government. The government should
subsidize modern education but not lama education. The excess lamas
end up in the streets throwing rocks and burning down shops...
The probalem is analogous to
> development and population growth. In the long run, economic
> development leads to lower fertility rate. But in the short run,
> development allows parents to have more kids. Emmigration can help
> reduce the short run popluation pressure. So, if wsstern countries are
> going to complain, they may as well help China by letting some monks
> into their countries.
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
>
>
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
