Talk:Palace economy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The last sentence "According to press and U.S. government reports, the North Korean state also engages in a wide array of illicit activities in order to fund the ruling elite's lifestyle." is irrelevant to the discussion on palace economies, as arguments could be made to show that the U.S. engages in similarly illicit or illegal activities. An explanation of palace economies has little to do with who's élites are committing "illicit activities".

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg

Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Legitimacy

There is a concept of the palace economy current, which began as a description of some economies in the ancient world, especially Mycenaean Greek. Typically it seems to have become common coin with reference to modern economies. I am sure out there somewhere is a legitimate theorist who knows what he meant and came up with some legitimate modern examples - after all, most economies began in ancient times and modern paradigms exist, so why should this one be any different? But he seems to have escaped this article so far and instead we get a bunch of non-NPOV material some of which already have been hacked out and the remainder questioned. Apparently what was there reflected the article's initial author's personal opinion. Let me say this. Wikipedia I believe is not interested in political or ideological propaganda except insofar as the article is actually about it. Right-wing - left-wing - forget it! Similarly anyone's personal ideas of a palace economy are not of interest here unless they happen to be the published opinions of a noted author respected in the field. We aren't interested in what you may think of the economy of North Korea or of Russia or of anyone's palace economy. What we want to know primarily is "what is it?" and that answer should evidence as much as possible freedom from bias. In other words, no slanting please. I can help out with some of the ancient palace economies but we really need someone with an unbiased view of the modern. The concept is perfectly valid and legitimate in case you were beginning to wonder.Dave (talk) 14:27, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The leisured class etc.

Rather than waiting around for any attempts to justify this, which may not ever happen, I removed it to here:

The division of labour in such an economy leads to a leisured elite, a class of bureaucrats, and a class of subsistence farmers.[citation needed] This system can be seen as a combination of a command economy and a subsistence economy.[citation needed]

My reason is that these consequences are not in the ancient palace economy theory and you would have to do some pretty high stepping to show that they follow from the modern, if any such are actually credibly found. In other words, such a statement requires a credible theorist, scientific data, or both. "Everyman"'s opinion does not do it.Dave (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)