|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Democracy HighlanderDemocracy Highlander Date: Mar 29, 2008 07:29
ajames54 wrote:
> In my opinion is the stupid thing was all the morons defending the
> current system as though laissez-faire was what we had. To call what
> we have a free market is to indulge in Orwellian double speak of the
> first order.
It actually is. A common misconception it is that a free market can actually
exist and can actually work. Nothing more wrong. Any business/financial
system let loose it is going to crash. The reason is because the size does
mater and because of that, free market it is it own Nemesis.
If a sole proprietor wants to start a computer assembly business, he will
buy a harddrive for $65. Dell, buying directly from manufacturer, in bulk
of a million will be able to buy the same harddrive for $25 or less.
Just try to do the following experiment. Look at Walmart for a computer, get
the list of hardware and software then shop on the internet for the parts.
You will be surprised to find out that even if you price your work at 0
(better productivity that a 0 wage can not be achieved) the WalMart
computer it is still going to be cheaper.
|
| Show full article (2.78Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: EconotronEconotron Date: Mar 29, 2008 07:41
>>
>> you are correct.
>> here is a little peice i made up explaining conservative/libertarian
>> lunacy.
>> "libertarians/conservatives are the only group of people i know that
>> are constantly outraged at the results of their own polices, then they
>> blame government(the blaming government part was added by another
>> fellow, of course he is very smart.)."
>>
> Libertarians tend to think that they are "free thinkers"
>
>
> "Then, when you're driving on the Illinois toll way and you've picked up a
> Libertarian Hitchhiker he suddenly hits you up for more coin!"
>
> - Dee Dee Ramone
> ...
|
| Show full article (0.97Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: anonanon Date: Mar 29, 2008 07:59
"Econotron" hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1OrHj.120$gS1.112@trndny07...> I may offer an alternative here.
> 1. The market sets interest rate.
> 2. No reserve requirements. Deposit insurance is voluntary.
> 3. No oversight (well, may be very limited).
> 4. No lender of last resort (bankruptcy, as Andy pointed out).
> 5. Fed chairman can lecture, but should be required to wear an orange
> suit.
> e
1. how does new money enter the system?
the rest of the suggestions are politically impossible.
4, especially is only possible if the size of the institutions is kept
small. as soon as a bank is large, and can cause systemic instability, it
becomes Too Big To Fail and essentially blackmails the real economy.r
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Roy BattyRoy Batty Date: Mar 29, 2008 07:59
Econotron hotmail.com> wrote: > "Roy Batty" gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2257d02491f6f5ad98a565@news.individual.net...>>>
>>> you are correct.
>>> here is a little peice i made up explaining conservative/libertarian
>>> lunacy.
>>> "libertarians/conservatives are the only group of people i know that
>>> are constantly outraged at the results of their own polices, then they
>>> blame government(the blaming government part was added by another
>>> fellow, of course he is very smart.)."
>>>
>> Libertarians tend to think that they are "free thinkers"
>>
>>
>> "Then, when you're driving on the Illinois toll way and you've picked up a
>> Libertarian Hitchhiker he suddenly hits you up for more coin!"
>>
>> - Dee Dee Ramone ...
|
| Show full article (1.39Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: John GaltJohn Galt Date: Mar 29, 2008 08:04
> On Mar 28, 3:34 pm, Vide...@ tcq.net wrote: >> On Mar 28, 12:28 pm, Jerry Kraus yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> what i find hilarious, outside of a couple of complete libertarian
>> cranks, where have all of the defenders of laissez-faire gone?
>> where is their outrage, why are they not publicly, and proudly
>> announcing their adherence to libertarian dogma, and renouncing their
>> investments in the markets.
>> after all, they to are the indirect beneficiaries of the bailouts.
>> you would think that they would be fleeing the markets, whilst
>> proclaiming their beliefs. i see none of that.>
> Actually I would call myself a free marketer.
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.68Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Roy BattyRoy Batty Date: Mar 29, 2008 08:12
John Galt bluebottle.com> wrote: > Well, right. There hasn't been a laissez-faire system since prior to the
> Industrial Revolution.
>
> JG
>
>
>
And these days, all I see from Americans who are attempting to defend their
healh care system, are idiots pointing out the anecdotal weaknesses of others
like in Canada or the EU in fear of discussing their own problem.
Is that how people work through problems in the USA lately?
I don't get it.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Jerry KrausJerry Kraus Date: Mar 29, 2008 08:19
On Mar 29, 10:04Â am, "John Galt" bluebottle.com> wrote:>> On Mar 28, 3:34 pm, Vide...@ tcq.net wrote: >>> On Mar 28, 12:28 pm, Jerry Kraus yahoo.com> wrote:>
>>> Â what i find hilarious, outside of a couple of complete libertarian
>>> cranks, where have all of the defenders of laissez-faire gone?
>>> Â where is their outrage, why are they not publicly, and proudly
>>> announcing their adherence to  libertarian dogma, and renouncing their
>>> investments in the markets.
>>> Â after all, they to are the indirect beneficiaries of the bailouts.
>>> you would think that they would be fleeing the markets, whilst
>>> proclaiming their beliefs. i see none of that. ...
|
| Show full article (2.74Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Canuck57Canuck57 Date: Mar 29, 2008 08:52
> anon privacy.net> wrote:>>
>> "Econotron" hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:SXbHj.25$oE1.13@trndny09...>>>>
>>> Fed knows that there would be no rerun of 1929, for the reasons
>>> explained
>>> here and elsewhere.
>>
>> The problem is the current Fed chairman. He has spent his life studying
>> how
>> to prevent the 1930s. And he wants to use his solution regardless whether
>> the problem is similar. He sees deflation behind every corner. He has a
>> solution (helicopters) looking for a problem.
>>
> The beauty of the 1987 collapse of the stock market was how computers took
> over the trading.
> ...
|
| Show full article (1.95Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Canuck57Canuck57 Date: Mar 29, 2008 08:54
> I think a better idea would be to have NO lender of last resort.The last
> resort should be bankruptcy, just like in any other business.
Insightful.
If they just let that happen, the problem would have solved itself in 6
months.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Canuck57Canuck57 Date: Mar 29, 2008 09:02
"Econotron" hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1OrHj.120
>> The way out is to strip the Fed of its powers. Unfortunately currently it
>> seems the Fed will end up with more powers. The Fed caused this problem,
>> and they are giving more drugs to the peddler.
>>
>>
> Of course. I only hope there are enough reasonable people in some
> positions of power, who would call the current Fed activity for what it
> is - a large scale counterfeit operation to bail out financial
> speculators - to put a break on its activity.
Well put. And also send the FBI and RCMP to arrest the fraudsters.
> I may offer an alternative here.
> 1. The market sets interest rate.
> 2. No reserve requirements. Deposit insurance is voluntary.
> 3. No oversight (well, may be very limited).
> 4. No lender of last resort (bankruptcy, as Andy pointed out).
> 5. Fed chairman can lecture, but should be required to wear an orange
> suit.
> e
|
| Show full article (1.62Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
