No System of Government Works (by itself)
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
There is no problem with that, because things balance themselves out. Products, services, and wages will be set to their true value. If however the government interviens, that causes imbalances, and some people are going to get screwed without choice because of the way the law fucks them over.
Very true... And what's the "true value" of someone who works an assembly line in a factory? How about a pizza delivery boy? Janitor at a department store? If companies could get away with paying these people less, they could lower the prices of their products and better compete in the marketplace. That's how unregulated capitalism works, and that's why we have things like minimum wage and government-supported trade unions. Explain to me how the "free market" would fix that little snafu.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. Sir Winston Churchill British politician (1874 - 1965)
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
-
riced wrote:
I studied economics for eight years (two degrees) and lectured in economics for six years.
Keynesian economic theory no doubt. Ben Bernake knows a bit about that, and look at the economy now.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
Actually both Keynesian and Monetarist along with a whole bunch of other stuff, including general equilibrium theory and welfare economics. You may be surprised to learn that fundamentally there is no difference between Keynes' and Friedman's prescriptions as far as monetary policy is concerned. Where they differ is in the their views on the role of government in the economy, and that's politics not economics. If you think there is I suggested reading 'The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money', followed up by a 'Treatise on Money'. You might also try Alex Leijonhuvfud's 'On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes'. The alternative is to accept the popularizations of politicians, the media and self publicists such as Friedman.
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
There is no problem with that, because things balance themselves out. Products, services, and wages will be set to their true value. If however the government interviens, that causes imbalances, and some people are going to get screwed without choice because of the way the law fucks them over.
Very true... And what's the "true value" of someone who works an assembly line in a factory? How about a pizza delivery boy? Janitor at a department store? If companies could get away with paying these people less, they could lower the prices of their products and better compete in the marketplace. That's how unregulated capitalism works, and that's why we have things like minimum wage and government-supported trade unions. Explain to me how the "free market" would fix that little snafu.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Man I hate coming in on his side.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Explain to me how the "free market" would fix that little snafu.
The problem is that you are not describing a free market, where goods and information can flow freely. You are discussing the construction of monopolies, and the government regulation that keeps them in place. Often, regulations made with the best intent end up going awry. What ever regulations you make, people game. Even if it did not 'distort' the market, originally, someone will run with it make it distort the market. If people have free flow of information, they know about the risk of funds backed by subprime mortgages the government is generating. They know where jobs pay more. They know where people want more of a product. Free market is not the same as monopolistic capitalism.
Opacity, the new Transparency.
-
People who have degrees are the stupidest of them all. You have to unlearn everything after you enter the real world.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
People who have degrees are the stupidest of them all. You have to unlearn everything after you enter the real world.
And yet you worship Milton Friedman who is a prime example of an academic whose theories did not work in the real world.
Bob Emmett New Eugenecist - The weekly magazine for intelligent parenting.
-
riced wrote:
I studied economics for eight years (two degrees) and lectured in economics for six years.
Keynesian economic theory no doubt. Ben Bernake knows a bit about that, and look at the economy now.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
Ben Bernake knows a bit about that,
But Ben Bernanke is not practising Keynesian economics. As you would know, had you ever read Keynes, rather than parroting from InfoWars, St. Paul, etc. 'Keynesian Marxist' economy, indeed. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: The sad thing being that you can't understand just how foolish that is.
Bob Emmett New Eugenecist - The weekly magazine for intelligent parenting.
-
Actually both Keynesian and Monetarist along with a whole bunch of other stuff, including general equilibrium theory and welfare economics. You may be surprised to learn that fundamentally there is no difference between Keynes' and Friedman's prescriptions as far as monetary policy is concerned. Where they differ is in the their views on the role of government in the economy, and that's politics not economics. If you think there is I suggested reading 'The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money', followed up by a 'Treatise on Money'. You might also try Alex Leijonhuvfud's 'On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes'. The alternative is to accept the popularizations of politicians, the media and self publicists such as Friedman.
Regards David R --------------------------------------------------------------- "Every program eventually becomes rococo, and then rubble." - Alan Perlis The only valid measurement of code quality: WTFs/minute.
-
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
You are thinking of corporatism. Where the corporations lobby government to pass legislation and regulation that favors certain corporations in the name of "fair trade" and all that. No-bid contracts, federal reserve lending, corporate welfare (bailouts).
No, I know exactly what I'm thinking of. With unregulated markets, minimum wage removed, and no labor regulation, companies can make their own rules. If you take the government out of the picture, nothing stops companies from exploiting workers any way they see fit.
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
What system of government works is a Constitutional Republic based on the principles of liberty and free-markets. When the Constitution is enforced correctly; and people are keen on what their government is doing at all times, the system works.
You don't even know what any of that means. You're just regurgitating what you've read on Ron Paul's website.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Ian Shlasko wrote:
If you take the government out of the picture, nothing stops companies from exploiting workers any way they see fit.
Except for the unions. (Or Guilds as they were called in the middle ages). Anyway, back to yuor post. An anarchic system needs its members to behave responsibly to succeed. And they didnt. They fucked it up, and ripped us off, while getting away clean themselves. The only way a system such as todays works is with the occasional revoloution to get back at the bastards who fucked us in the first place.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Man I hate coming in on his side.
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Explain to me how the "free market" would fix that little snafu.
The problem is that you are not describing a free market, where goods and information can flow freely. You are discussing the construction of monopolies, and the government regulation that keeps them in place. Often, regulations made with the best intent end up going awry. What ever regulations you make, people game. Even if it did not 'distort' the market, originally, someone will run with it make it distort the market. If people have free flow of information, they know about the risk of funds backed by subprime mortgages the government is generating. They know where jobs pay more. They know where people want more of a product. Free market is not the same as monopolistic capitalism.
Opacity, the new Transparency.
RichardM1 wrote:
The problem is that you are not describing a free market, where goods and information can flow freely.
What makes you say that? We live in a society where information flows freely. People do know where jobs pay more. So do employers. An employer will reduce the rate of pay for new hires, if aware that others pay a lower rate for the same job. (Also, existing job holders may be laid off and re-hired at lower rates.) Conversely, where there is a skill shortage, the rate of pay is increased, to attract new hires and retain existing employees. Either way, pay rates for similar work will cluster around a norm.
RichardM1 wrote:
You are discussing the construction of monopolies
Can you explain how a free market prevents monopolies and cartels? We have seen Microsoft attain a virtual monopoly for nearly 30 years, simply by providing what its customers wanted, and for the 30 years preceding Microsoft, IBM likewise. How would they have fared in a free market?
Bob Emmett New Eugenicist - The weekly magazine for intelligent parenting.
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
If you take the government out of the picture, nothing stops companies from exploiting workers any way they see fit.
Except for the unions. (Or Guilds as they were called in the middle ages). Anyway, back to yuor post. An anarchic system needs its members to behave responsibly to succeed. And they didnt. They fucked it up, and ripped us off, while getting away clean themselves. The only way a system such as todays works is with the occasional revoloution to get back at the bastards who fucked us in the first place.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
An anarchic system needs its members to behave responsibly to succee
Exactly... That's the big hole in the libertarian agenda... Absolute freedom only works if you trust in the "goodness" of human nature. In the real world, that's a pretty bad assumption.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)