Well, once again my Asperger's has led me to social blunderland. Apparently what I consider to be a valid economic and scientific worldview, and what the editor of this blog did, are apparently very different things.
Part of this is the fact that I've lost all faith in the US Economy and Government at this point. I am no longer satisfied by the lies I've been told in the past, like the idea that the stock market exists to help companies be profitable and individuals invest in companies.
A large part of that is indeed that I am a Technocrat and a distributionist, which I had thought I had made clear, but I guess I didn't make it clear enough that I was coming from an entirely different set of axioms than either the Chicago or Austrian schools.
So here's my problem: First of all, no, I don't see human beings as being capable of self-governance in a macroeconomic system. Thus I see a need for any large open market to be STRONGLY regulated to eliminate fraud. ALL forms of fraud. And utterly eliminated- the only risk you should be taking by investing in a company, is the risk that their basic science is wrong. Risks of competition, risks of idiots playing gambling games and short selling, risks of running out of money because apparently no company is profitable enough to be self-sustaining, seem to me to be risks I would prefer not to take.
I will go ahead and do the requested reading in this post, but I fear that yes, my definition of risk is unrealistic to the point of not being willing to invest in a business that isn't already profitable enough to not need my investment.
In fact, I'd say investing in anything riskier than that, is indeed gambling to the point that one does not deserve to ever retire.