----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- I was aware of the partially rather abstract formulation of the contribution from Sam Bostaph. This is why I deliberately stated the potential conclusions from that formulation - as far as Keynes was concerned - in the subjunctive mood: "...it _would be unfair_ etc.". It was not my intention to attribute the potential conclusions one _could_ draw from that reasoning as actual conclusions which anybody particular _did_ draw. I apologize if unintentionally I gave that impression with regard to Sam Bostaph. But since the ongoing debate was about historical people - Keynes in particular - I think one should not just stick with abstract possibilities but one should evaluate historical and biographical facts. If the biographical facts which I related in my last posting concerning Keynes are not in dispute, I see no reason to return - as far as Keynes is concerned - to unspecific reasoning. It will always be open to dispute which evidence is considered to be compelling but at least one should take note of evidence and wheigh the known facts. I think it is not very iluminating to state abstract possibilities concerning negative motives when one notices Keynes' plain deeds of help and assistance. On balance, _my_ conclusion is that Keynes was motivated by a sober sense of justice and by humane compassion. Best regards Michael Ambrosi ------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]