Excellent points at 4.08pm, Clint. And I take the points you made earlier, in response to mine.

I could make little sense of Amos however. To say it was stability and not communism that worked for Yugoslavia seems a fine distinction, considering it was under communism that the stability was achieved. Not communism in any pure sense, maybe, but at least a hybrid command/market economy, somewhat akin to China's now. But I was, after all, making the point (which Amos seems to accept) that both command and capitalist economies come in different shapes and sizes.

Amos seems spiritlessly resigned to his theory that human nature will always bring down anything but "me, now!" economics. This ignores the evidence of some other capitalist countries that manage their affairs differently, and finish up with societies much more stable and contented than America's.