Free Market Failures

[Disir]

Logic dictates that you cannot prove negatives. If you have no criteria for success, then failure is the default. Like it or not, that is how real logic works.

In the case of the IMF, World Bank, so forth and so on, they are banking monopolies.

Claiming that the "free market" fails when it is under the thumb of banking monopoly is a contradiction. There is no free market, when your money belongs to a monopoly issuer.

Sorry that it is too deep for you to grasp, but there it is.

It's actually quite shallow and more bumper sticker crap.

You don't even know what the functions are of those federal bureaucracies.
You're doing a macabre dance to avoid even going there and down to repeating rhetoric.


I have provided examples of those failures. I can do privatization failures in the US if you like.

Get an argument and get back to me. Right now...........you have nothing.

And they’ll always have nothing if they continue to adhere blindly to black and white rightwing/libertarian dogma that everything government is ‘bad.’

It's much worse than that. How do you miss 60 years of recent history? How do you not know who Milton Friedman is? Cato didn't have a problem with the IMF until they started to bail countries out. In fact, the primary argument provided to shut down the IMF is that it didn't have the capacity to operate as a central bank. This is the same group of people that literally bullshit their way into claiming success in these countries where frankly there is none and when you point it out then it's the IMF's fault. It's easy to do when your entire world is nuttin' but theory.

 

[bedowin62]

you're right leftardz; everythin government cant be bad. they are after all the ones who bail out corporations who contribute to their campaigns

left-wngers are ESPCIALLY good at this

it's laughable who the loony Left associates' only the Right with corporations

corporations LITERALLY never had it so good as they do now with the boy-king community organizer in charge

 

[bedowin62]

in the history of the world; who has imprisoned and slaughtered more; corporations or governments?
and when governments slaughter it isnt in the name of corporations; it is usually in the name of left-wing, all-powerful government


idiots and hypocrites

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And they’ll always have nothing if they continue to adhere blindly to black and white rightwing/libertarian dogma that everything government is ‘bad.’

I'll issue you the same challenge, show me a single example of a government bureaucracy that has succeeded. It should be simple, if you ignore the DEA, DoE, VA, and all the other departments that have failed.

First, lost in the current rancor about the VA is the recognition that the VA healthcare system has consistently out-performed the non-VA/private sector in quality of care and patient safety. In response to criticism in the 1990s about its quality of care, the VA initiated a major reengineering effort, whose principal components included better use of information technology, measurement and reporting of performance, and integration of services. In this respect, the VA system was far ahead of a US healthcare system that was yet to embrace information technology and in the nascent stages of performance measurement. By 2000, patients in the VA system were more likely than those treated in the non-VA/private sector to receive better care for a wide range of indicators from cancer screening to diabetes treatment to inpatient care. And this trend has continued. And there is ample evidence that outcomes are at least comparable

Second, the VA healthcare system has been a model for accountability. The issue of wait times exists because the VA decided to measure it. The VA has been an early adopter of electronic records and accountability measurement. It is not proper to evaluate the VA in isolation. For example, with respect to wait times – any idea how that compares to the non-VA/private sector? That is not to say that the VA should not have absolute standards – and seek to improve – but I bet that wait times elsewhere are also often quite long.

And for those decrying the wait times that are the result of the lack of doctor appointments, will more resources be available to the VA to make more appointments available? And would that even improve health? The VA is experiencing a huge influx in Veterans and only a modest increase in staff. David Brooks reported that over the last 3 years the primary care visits went up 50% while the number of primary care doctors increased 9%.

3 Things To Know Before You Judge VA Health System - Forbes

So, you still have nothing I see.

That was funny, I really liked the claim that the VA is a model of accountability. Got anything else from the Onion?

Just an FYI, you cannot point to a totally fucked up system like VA and calim that, because it decided to measure the wait times, and then bury the results, that it is working right. The VA is what you get when the government works, a completely screwed up system that kills people. The fact that, when challenged to find a single example of success,, you pointed to the worst government scandal in history, is proof I am right.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'll issue you the same challenge, show me a single example of a government bureaucracy that has succeeded. It should be simple, if you ignore the DEA, DoE, VA, and all the other departments that have failed.

WHO has been successful in eradicating small pox. Whether that organization is governmental or quasi-governmental is debatable though.

I guess that depends on your definition f eradicated.

Smallpox was declared eradicated, yet still infects humans today. By Viera Scheibner, PhD | International Medical Council on Vaccination

 

[Disir]

I'll issue you the same challenge, show me a single example of a government bureaucracy that has succeeded. It should be simple, if you ignore the DEA, DoE, VA, and all the other departments that have failed.

First, lost in the current rancor about the VA is the recognition that the VA healthcare system has consistently out-performed the non-VA/private sector in quality of care and patient safety. In response to criticism in the 1990s about its quality of care, the VA initiated a major reengineering effort, whose principal components included better use of information technology, measurement and reporting of performance, and integration of services. In this respect, the VA system was far ahead of a US healthcare system that was yet to embrace information technology and in the nascent stages of performance measurement. By 2000, patients in the VA system were more likely than those treated in the non-VA/private sector to receive better care for a wide range of indicators from cancer screening to diabetes treatment to inpatient care. And this trend has continued. And there is ample evidence that outcomes are at least comparable

Second, the VA healthcare system has been a model for accountability. The issue of wait times exists because the VA decided to measure it. The VA has been an early adopter of electronic records and accountability measurement. It is not proper to evaluate the VA in isolation. For example, with respect to wait times – any idea how that compares to the non-VA/private sector? That is not to say that the VA should not have absolute standards – and seek to improve – but I bet that wait times elsewhere are also often quite long.

And for those decrying the wait times that are the result of the lack of doctor appointments, will more resources be available to the VA to make more appointments available? And would that even improve health? The VA is experiencing a huge influx in Veterans and only a modest increase in staff. David Brooks reported that over the last 3 years the primary care visits went up 50% while the number of primary care doctors increased 9%.

3 Things To Know Before You Judge VA Health System - Forbes

So, you still have nothing I see.

That was funny, I really liked the claim that the VA is a model of accountability. Got anything else from the Onion?

Just an FYI, you cannot point to a totally fucked up system like VA and calim that, because it decided to measure the wait times, and then bury the results, that it is working right. The VA is what you get when the government works, a completely screwed up system that kills people. The fact that, when challenged to find a single example of success,, you pointed to the worst government scandal in history, is proof I am right.

Just as a heads up it is because the VA has to have documentation that records are retrievable. You can't lead, you can't follow, get the fuck out of the way:
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/s-1982-summary?inline=file

 

[Quantum Windbag]

3 Things To Know Before You Judge VA Health System - Forbes

So, you still have nothing I see.

That was funny, I really liked the claim that the VA is a model of accountability. Got anything else from the Onion?

Just an FYI, you cannot point to a totally fucked up system like VA and calim that, because it decided to measure the wait times, and then bury the results, that it is working right. The VA is what you get when the government works, a completely screwed up system that kills people. The fact that, when challenged to find a single example of success,, you pointed to the worst government scandal in history, is proof I am right.

Just as a heads up it is because the VA has to have documentation that records are retrievable. You can't lead, you can't follow, get the fuck out of the way:
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/s-1982-summary?inline=file

Just for the record, the VA shredded files that made them look bad.

VA hospital officials shredded documents to hide existence of secret waiting lists that killed U.S. veterans - NaturalNews.com

Keep pointing to the VA as an example of how good the government is, it makes my day.

 

[Disir]

That was funny, I really liked the claim that the VA is a model of accountability. Got anything else from the Onion?

Just an FYI, you cannot point to a totally fucked up system like VA and calim that, because it decided to measure the wait times, and then bury the results, that it is working right. The VA is what you get when the government works, a completely screwed up system that kills people. The fact that, when challenged to find a single example of success,, you pointed to the worst government scandal in history, is proof I am right.

Just as a heads up it is because the VA has to have documentation that records are retrievable. You can't lead, you can't follow, get the fuck out of the way:
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/s-1982-summary?inline=file

Just for the record, the VA shredded files that made them look bad.

VA hospital officials shredded documents to hide existence of secret waiting lists that killed U.S. veterans - NaturalNews.com

Keep pointing to the VA as an example of how good the government is, it makes my day.

Here let me jog your memory:

George W. Bush Reaches a New Low in Support of the Nation's Veterans
By Dave Curry, Joe Miller and Barry Romo

[Printer-Friendly Version]

George Bush is not a veteran, and he is not concerned about our needs. When he's not pretending to be a jet pilot, Bush pretends to be just another veteran. At the American Legion National Convention, before he began his speech, Bush called attention to a veteran from "his old legion post." The message was a reach for solidarity. "We're all vets here."

In the speech that followed, Bush laid claim to "the largest discretionary increase for the Department of Veterans Affairs ever requested by a president." Bush also claimed that under his leadership the VA has made "major progress in reducing the backlog of veterans' disability claims and the number of veterans waiting for health care. And (we will) continue to work to make sure those backlogs are eliminated."

Maybe this is an outright lie or maybe reducing "backlogs" and "lists" is simply a matter of reducing benefits, facilities, and eligibility. No benefits, no facilities, no eligibility, therefore no lists, no backlogs. And of course there must be administrative costs associated with all this streamlining.

Under current leadership, the administration intends to drop more than half a million veterans from medical eligibility by 2005. At the same time, House Republicans have passed a White House proposal to charge veterans enrollment fees of $250 a year and double the amount they now pay for prescription drugs. This is at a time when it already takes an average of six months to get an appointment at a VA medical center.

VA secretary Anthony Principi has said: "This is not about closing hospitals. This is about transforming the VA health care system into a patient-focused health care system that adapts to medicine in the 21st century. ... Sometimes, leaders have to make difficult decisions."

The mechanism for reducing veterans' benefits and services has an ironic name: Capital Asset Realignment for Enhanced Services, or CARES. Under the CARES plan, an unspecified number of VA hospitals will be closed or transformed into outpatient clinics. The VA plans to provide the specific list of hospitals for closing in December 2003.

According to the New York Daily News, closing one hospital in Manhattan will deny access to VA medical care for thousands of veterans with no other options. The VA is not the only federal agency wielding the budget ax on veterans' health benefits. Earlier this year, Under Secretary for Health Dr. Robert Roswell released a list of 18 VA hospitals to be converted from 24-hour medical facilities to 8-hour-a-day outpatient clinics.

A meeting of representatives of traditional veterans' organizations at the Capitol Hill headquarters of the Veterans of Foreign Wars concluded that "the praise for troops by the president, other top administration officials and Republican congressional leaders is 'ringing hollow' because they have broken promises to veterans and active-duty soldiers about benefits and services." The Army Times has labeled Bush administration praise and promises for veterans and active duty troops "nothing but lip service." "We strongly believe that Congress and the administration have to do better by veterans," said Dennis M. Cullinan, legislative director of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Republicans have proposed new legislation that will limit what constitutes a service-connected health problem. Representative Lane Evans of Illinois, the ranking democrat on the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, has pointed out that the new legislation would have denied benefits to the atomic veterans and the victims of Agent Orange. In reaction to the proposed legislation, the Disabled American Veterans in a press release have accused Congress of "declaring war against disabled veterans" and showing "callous contempt for the sacrifices of America's defenders."

The American Gulf War Veterans Association doesn't want the public to lose sight of the fact that nearly half of the 697,000 Gulf War I veterans are now ill. While over 200,000 of those serving in the first Gulf War have requested disability for "mysterious illnesses," they have received no adequate diagnosis or treatment from either the Department of Defense (DOD) or the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). For the Association, "repeated lack of diagnosis unfortunately translates into lack of treatment, and lack of compensation for the veteran."

Treatment of veterans of the current Gulf War has bordered on the macabre. Warnings from military experts about the dangers to health of depleted uranium armor-piercing ordnance are getting attention in the press but not at the VA or DOD. There is no shortage of new mysterious illnesses similar to those found among Gulf War I vets turning up among those who are serving in Gulf War II. Several cases have figured prominently in the media. Army Sgt. Vanessa Turner barely escaped death from a "mysterious" ailment only to have to fight for medical treatment from the VA. "It's easier to stay a soldier and be in harm's way than to come home and get care," said Turner, a six-year army veteran. In September, she was still waiting for an appointment to see a doctor at a Boston VA hospital in mid-October. According to his parents, Josh Neusche became ill with a mystery illness on 6/26/03, entered a coma on 7/01/03, and was "medically retired" from the Army that day. The retirement classification allowed the DOD to deny any obligation for assisting his family to see him before he died on 7/12/03.

Through their foreign policy, the Bush administration has made all of these new veterans. Will they treat these new veterans with the same disdain they have demonstrated toward the rest of us veterans since taking office? How can we expect anything else?

Vietnam Veterans Against the War: THE VETERAN: George W. Bush Reaches a New Low in Support of the Nation's Veterans

This is what makes you look altogether silly. You're a neoliberal that sides with a bunch of gangbangers that shuts down clinics, denies health care and in general weasels through AND then when you screwed it to the point that it lurches instead of running in the manner that it should..........you sit there like you have rocks in your head.

Fund it.

 

[bripat9643]

It's actually quite shallow and more bumper sticker crap.

You don't even know what the functions are of those federal bureaucracies.
You're doing a macabre dance to avoid even going there and down to repeating rhetoric.


I have provided examples of those failures. I can do privatization failures in the US if you like.

Get an argument and get back to me. Right now...........you have nothing.

As I said to begin with, free market failures go out of business. Either that or they get bailed out, at which point there is no free market.

With government bureaucracy, there is no failure. You merely move the goalposts and demand more money. After all, you cannot be put out of business for failure to deliver the promised product, especially when your only product is more bureaucracy.

Again, I am sorry that you are too thick to accept that as the fact it is. Yet, there it is.

This has been tried in other countries. It's failed. Hence the thread. You are willfully ignorant.

What has been tried in other countries?

 

[bripat9643]

It is happening right now in America.

I am sorry that you are too ignorant and blindly partisan to recognize the fact, yet there it is.

No, the one that is ignorant here is you. You are merely parroting right wing talking points. That has become painfully obvious. You can't manage to defend your arguments because you don't have one.

Liberal Dictionary
==========================
Facts - right wing talking points.

 

[Indeependent]

It is happening right now in America.

I am sorry that you are too ignorant and blindly partisan to recognize the fact, yet there it is.

No, the one that is ignorant here is you. You are merely parroting right wing talking points. That has become painfully obvious. You can't manage to defend your arguments because you don't have one.

Liberal Dictionary
==========================
Facts - right wing talking points.

Your stupidity is only matched by the mindlessness of your avatar.

 

[bripat9643]

It's actually quite shallow and more bumper sticker crap.

You don't even know what the functions are of those federal bureaucracies.
You're doing a macabre dance to avoid even going there and down to repeating rhetoric.


I have provided examples of those failures. I can do privatization failures in the US if you like.

Get an argument and get back to me. Right now...........you have nothing.

And they’ll always have nothing if they continue to adhere blindly to black and white rightwing/libertarian dogma that everything government is ‘bad.’

It's much worse than that. How do you miss 60 years of recent history? How do you not know who Milton Friedman is? Cato didn't have a problem with the IMF until they started to bail countries out. In fact, the primary argument provided to shut down the IMF is that it didn't have the capacity to operate as a central bank. This is the same group of people that literally bullshit their way into claiming success in these countries where frankly there is none and when you point it out then it's the IMF's fault. It's easy to do when your entire world is nuttin' but theory.

Where is the evidence that "CATO didn't have a problem with the IMF until they started to bail countries out?" Even if that were true, that seems to be a good reason to have a problem with the IMF. Supporters of the free market have always had a problem with the IMF. They have a problem with the Federal Reserve, so what makes you think they would endorse the IMF? The IMF is just a giant black hole for the money of the industrialized nations. It's the creation of socialists, not capitalists. If it had a good track record, you would be lauding it as one of the great successes of socialism, but like all socialist boondoggles, it's a humongous debacle.

 

[bripat9643]

I'll issue you the same challenge, show me a single example of a government bureaucracy that has succeeded. It should be simple, if you ignore the DEA, DoE, VA, and all the other departments that have failed.

WHO has been successful in eradicating small pox. Whether that organization is governmental or quasi-governmental is debatable though.

I'll give you that one, and the WHO is obviously governmental.

 

[bripat9643]

In our state, State Parks are a very well known and basic entity that has been in existence and used by a very large part of the population of our state, and others. for many decades. Over the years those state parks generated little revenue to the state, but did generate a great deal of demand by the populace. And they put people in motion who visited parks and also needed restraunt services, gas station services, and shopped at locations they would not have visited. The private economic activity was substantial, but now mostly gone.
Enter the Republican state congress, who decided that it was time for users to pay for access to the state park. So, they set fees to use the park for any purpose. From short term parking to use of picnic areas to camping to DRIVE THROUGH fees. The net result has been a decline in usage of the parks, especially for short term stays. The person who used to stop buy for a picinic and be on his way has decreased dramatically. Because folks are not interested in forking out $25 to stay for a half hour and use a picnic table. But the demand is high still, just not at the price charged. And the well to do are a much larger percentage of the users, where the less well to do have stopped coming. If this is the result you want, then success has arrived. But most do not like the change, thank you very much. And the local merchants find the changes about as popular as a turd in a punch bowl.

Is that supposed to be an example of the failure of the private market?

 

[Indeependent]

In our state, State Parks are a very well known and basic entity that has been in existence and used by a very large part of the population of our state, and others. for many decades. Over the years those state parks generated little revenue to the state, but did generate a great deal of demand by the populace. And they put people in motion who visited parks and also needed restraunt services, gas station services, and shopped at locations they would not have visited. The private economic activity was substantial, but now mostly gone.
Enter the Republican state congress, who decided that it was time for users to pay for access to the state park. So, they set fees to use the park for any purpose. From short term parking to use of picnic areas to camping to DRIVE THROUGH fees. The net result has been a decline in usage of the parks, especially for short term stays. The person who used to stop buy for a picinic and be on his way has decreased dramatically. Because folks are not interested in forking out $25 to stay for a half hour and use a picnic table. But the demand is high still, just not at the price charged. And the well to do are a much larger percentage of the users, where the less well to do have stopped coming. If this is the result you want, then success has arrived. But most do not like the change, thank you very much. And the local merchants find the changes about as popular as a turd in a punch bowl.

Is that supposed to be an example of the failure of the private market?

It is impossible to measure how free of tax payer money our supposed private market is.

 

[bripat9643]

Logic dictates that you cannot prove negatives. If you have no criteria for success, then failure is the default. Like it or not, that is how real logic works.

In the case of the IMF, World Bank, so forth and so on, they are banking monopolies.

Claiming that the "free market" fails when it is under the thumb of banking monopoly is a contradiction. There is no free market, when your money belongs to a monopoly issuer.

Sorry that it is too deep for you to grasp, but there it is.

It's actually quite shallow and more bumper sticker crap.

You don't even know what the functions are of those federal bureaucracies.
You're doing a macabre dance to avoid even going there and down to repeating rhetoric.


I have provided examples of those failures. I can do privatization failures in the US if you like.

Get an argument and get back to me. Right now...........you have nothing.

And they’ll always have nothing if they continue to adhere blindly to black and white rightwing/libertarian dogma that everything government is ‘bad.’

It's not dogma. It's demonstrable fact. There is nothing good about government. Nothing good comes from the barrel of a gun.

 

[bripat9643]

No, the one that is ignorant here is you. You are merely parroting right wing talking points. That has become painfully obvious. You can't manage to defend your arguments because you don't have one.

Liberal Dictionary
==========================
Facts - right wing talking points.

Your stupidity is only matched by the mindlessness of your avatar.

Nothing stings like the truth, eh?

 

[bripat9643]

In our state, State Parks are a very well known and basic entity that has been in existence and used by a very large part of the population of our state, and others. for many decades. Over the years those state parks generated little revenue to the state, but did generate a great deal of demand by the populace. And they put people in motion who visited parks and also needed restraunt services, gas station services, and shopped at locations they would not have visited. The private economic activity was substantial, but now mostly gone.
Enter the Republican state congress, who decided that it was time for users to pay for access to the state park. So, they set fees to use the park for any purpose. From short term parking to use of picnic areas to camping to DRIVE THROUGH fees. The net result has been a decline in usage of the parks, especially for short term stays. The person who used to stop buy for a picinic and be on his way has decreased dramatically. Because folks are not interested in forking out $25 to stay for a half hour and use a picnic table. But the demand is high still, just not at the price charged. And the well to do are a much larger percentage of the users, where the less well to do have stopped coming. If this is the result you want, then success has arrived. But most do not like the change, thank you very much. And the local merchants find the changes about as popular as a turd in a punch bowl.

Is that supposed to be an example of the failure of the private market?

It is impossible to measure how free of tax payer money our supposed private market is.

State parks are run by the government. Bad management of state parks is a government failure, not a market failure.

 

[jasonnfree]

In our state, State Parks are a very well known and basic entity that has been in existence and used by a very large part of the population of our state, and others. for many decades. Over the years those state parks generated little revenue to the state, but did generate a great deal of demand by the populace. And they put people in motion who visited parks and also needed restraunt services, gas station services, and shopped at locations they would not have visited. The private economic activity was substantial, but now mostly gone.
Enter the Republican state congress, who decided that it was time for users to pay for access to the state park. So, they set fees to use the park for any purpose. From short term parking to use of picnic areas to camping to DRIVE THROUGH fees. The net result has been a decline in usage of the parks, especially for short term stays. The person who used to stop buy for a picinic and be on his way has decreased dramatically. Because folks are not interested in forking out $25 to stay for a half hour and use a picnic table. But the demand is high still, just not at the price charged. And the well to do are a much larger percentage of the users, where the less well to do have stopped coming. If this is the result you want, then success has arrived. But most do not like the change, thank you very much. And the local merchants find the changes about as popular as a turd in a punch bowl.

Has the park been turned over to a private concern yet for a cheap price to really squeeze the proles? You know the free market can run things better (and more expensive) than the goobermint according to some on the right.

 

[Indeependent]

Liberal Dictionary
==========================
Facts - right wing talking points.

Your stupidity is only matched by the mindlessness of your avatar.

Nothing stings like the truth, eh?

You are boring, but then again, Libertarians usually are.