Free Market or State Control?

[PoliticalChic]

1. Milton Friedman asked, “Who makes the decisions?” Well, in some cases, the government:
a. The only entity capable of serving and protecting individual liberty, as in defense.
b. The administration of justice.
c. The maintenance and oversight of federal infrastructure: roads, waterways, parks, etc.

2. But…government in education? Healthcare? Automobile production? And dubious and absurd programs designed to bring about “equality”? Shouldn’t these decisions be left to the individual, or to the free market, in which forces compete to serve the individual, who will be the arbiter of their success?

3. But what about the abuses of the free market?
a. Some will be corrected by the law, and if there is no current law, the citizenry will demand such.
b. Some abuse run afoul of custom….these will be corrected by censure, withdrawal of custom, or may be criminalized.
c. Alas, some must be endured, as they would be under any system of government, business or administration.

4. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new.
a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.

5. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.
a. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.

6. In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!

7. Hayek points out that there are no solutions, merely tradeoffs. Come up with a way to provide healthcare insurance to all the uninsured…but at the cost of dismantling the healthcare system to the remaining millions? Rationing, shortages, abuse, delay and injustice.

8. All civilizations need and get government. And many of these began as welfare states, dedicated, supposedly, to distributing the abundant good things to all. The results can be seen in the failures of communist states, socialist states, with the resultant costs, rationing, dissolution. We get to choose between liberty- the freedom from the state to pursue happiness- and some imaginery ‘equality’ which would require a state capable and empowered to function in all facets of life, which means totalitarianism, dictatorship.

9. The individual must demand the reduction of state, and state powers to the point necessary to carry out legitimate purposes. We have the instructions, called the Constitution.
Mamet, “The Secret Knowledge,” p. 58-61

 

[Supposn]

Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage

Warren Buffett’s concept to significantly reduce USA’s trade deficit.

I’m a proponent of a market (rather than a government) driven Import certificate, (IC) trade policy. It grants government no policy discretion; (assessment of goods is a technical rather than a policy determination). Expenses are eventually and entirely borne by U.S. purchasers of foreign goods,

The proposal excludes values of specifically listed scarce or precious minerals integral to goods being assessed and it completely eliminates the aggregate trade deficit of all assessed goods.

The basic concept is for exporters who choose to pay the federal fees to acquire TRANSFERABLE IMPORT CERTIFICATES, (ICs) for the assessed value of their goods leaving the USA.

Importers would be required to surrender ICs for the assessed value of their goods entering the USA. Surrendered certificates are cancelled.
This may seem as a boon to exporters of USA goods but it’s actually an indirect and effective export subsidy.

Refer to:
The topic of “Warren Buffett's concept to significantly reduce USA's trade deficit”
Posted at 8:10PM, August 30, 2009;
or www.USA-Trade-Deficit.Blogspot.com
or Google: “wikipedia, import certificates “.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Supposn]

Political Chic, the Import Certificate proposal is not pure free trade but it’s certainly pure free enterprise. It may not be perfect but it is superior to all other proposed or existing trade policies.

This trade policy would significantly decrease USA’s trade deficit of goods and increase the aggregate sum of USA’s imports plus exports and our GDP more than otherwise. The GDP bolsters the median wage.

Wage earning families benefit from cheaper imported goods but every day of every year they’re dependent upon their U.S. wages. Regardless of how small the additions to imports’ prices due to Import Certificates, (unlike tariffs) USA’s assessed imports could never exceed that of our exports. USA consumers will be able to purchase cheap, (but not the absolute cheapest) imported goods. We cannot afford the absolute cheapest.

Refer to: www.USA-Trade-Deficit.Blogspot.com
or Google: “wikipedia, import certificates “.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Widdekind]

Prices reflect Supply vs. Demand. Prices mandated "too low" anger Producers; those mandated "too high" anger Consumers, e.g. "minimum wages" anger businesses, who must "consume" the labor (cp. Prohibition-inflated prices, of drugs-and-alcohol). Ipso facto, prima facie, wielding of "Government" (i.e. Force), to mandate Prices, reflects extra-economic politicking by Producer or Consumer interest groups, cp. "bullying".

 

[uscitizen]

What happens when too big to fail corporations mostly control our government?
When many of our people think that whatever is good for Wall Street is good for America?

For one thing all the old economic rules are thrown out the window.

 

[Crackerjack]

Crony capitalism ≠ free market capitalism.

 

[percysunshine]

What happens when too big to fail corporations mostly control our government?
When many of our people think that whatever is good for Wall Street is good for America?

For one thing all the old economic rules are thrown out the window.

Like General Motors, General Electric, Goldman Sachs, and Solyndra?

Does it bother you that you voted for a Fascist in 2008?

 

[uscitizen]

What happens when too big to fail corporations mostly control our government?
When many of our people think that whatever is good for Wall Street is good for America?

For one thing all the old economic rules are thrown out the window.

Like General Motors, General Electric, Goldman Sachs, and Solyndra?

Does it bother you that you voted for a Fascist in 2008?

Enron, Goldman Sachs, etc as well?

Yes it does bother me but it did not take me nearly 8 years to see the truth now did it?

Both parties are now basically politicorps

 

[percysunshine]

Enron donated their political influence cash to Clinton.

What a hoot.

 

[uscitizen]

Enron donated their political influence cash to Clinton.

What a hoot.

Of course they did he was president during their rise.

I did say both parties.

And the selling of our government is tragic, not a hoot.

We have the best government that money can buy and that is why we are such a mess with no clear way out.

 

[percysunshine]

I think we should mimic Zimbabwe.

Confiscate all private property and burn the food.

Wait ...that is our ethanol policy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control.

The either/or extremism of the conservative ideologue adhering blindly to dogma is the bane of American prosperity.

The answer is both: a pragmatic approach blending private and public sectors.

In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!

Perhaps in the 18th Century.

But this is the 21st Century, where in the free market, every corporation is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune, even if at the expense of every man, woman and child.

The individual must demand the reduction of state, and state powers to the point necessary to carry out legitimate purposes. We have the instructions, called the Constitution.
Mamet, “The Secret Knowledge,” p. 58-61

Mr. Mamet’s metamorphosis into a rightist is now complete, he exhibits the conservative’s typical ignorance of the Constitution, and contempt for its case law.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

In the complexity theory, the law of diminishing returns plays an integral role in the operations of government vs. a free, unchained market. The more complex the system, the greater the risk of collapse.

Economics isn't a mathematical endeavor, it's a human behavior one. This civilization, free of correction is bound for collapse.

 

[regent]

Free market or state control, that's an either-or argument. Why does it have to be one or the other?
As Milton Friedman said, capitalism runs on greed. That same greed led captialists from the free market system to monopolies, mergers, trusts, holding companies and every method capitalists could create to eliminate the best characteristic of capitalism--competition. And it was a Republican that began the war against the trusts, even he wanted to save capitalism. But that was 100 years ago and people forget, and soon the sweet words of greed begin again, and people think, yeah, as soon as we rid of the regulations, we will have utopia again.

 

[Widdekind]

every corporation is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune, even if at the expense of every man, woman and child.

sometimes i feel, that hostile influences, are able to 'wield' money, to mask "at the expense of", with "better products & services". cp. "business is war"

 

[Widdekind]

capitalism runs on greed. That same greed led capitalists from the free market system to monopolies, mergers, trusts, holding companies and every method capitalists could create to eliminate the best characteristic of capitalism--competition. And it was a Republican that began the war against the trusts

Standard Oil (SO) has been deceptively mis-represented, e.g. SO improved market efficiency, benefiting (oil) consumers -- "refined oil prices fell from over 30 cents per gallon in 1869, to 10 cents in 1874, to 8 cents in 1885, and to 5.9 cents in 1897", i.e. -80% price reduction, in 30 years (for American consumers). Who would complain (qui bono?) ? Ipso facto, "bust the trusts" was an "assassination" of legitimately successful firms, harming Americans "in their economic wallets".

 

[Crackerjack]

capitalism runs on greed. That same greed led capitalists from the free market system to monopolies, mergers, trusts, holding companies and every method capitalists could create to eliminate the best characteristic of capitalism--competition. And it was a Republican that began the war against the trusts

Standard Oil (SO) has been deceptively mis-represented, e.g. SO improved market efficiency, benefiting (oil) consumers -- "refined oil prices fell from over 30 cents per gallon in 1869, to 10 cents in 1874, to 8 cents in 1885, and to 5.9 cents in 1897", i.e. -80% price reduction, in 30 years (for American consumers). Who would complain (qui bono?) ? Ipso facto, "bust the trusts" was an "assassination" of legitimately successful firms, harming Americans "in their economic wallets".

English, please?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control.

The either/or extremism of the conservative ideologue adhering blindly to dogma is the bane of American prosperity.

The answer is both: a pragmatic approach blending private and public sectors.

In the free market, every man, woman and child is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune!

Perhaps in the 18th Century.

But this is the 21st Century, where in the free market, every corporation is scheming to find a better way to make a product or service that will make a fortune, even if at the expense of every man, woman and child.

The individual must demand the reduction of state, and state powers to the point necessary to carry out legitimate purposes. We have the instructions, called the Constitution.
Mamet, “The Secret Knowledge,” p. 58-61

Mr. Mamet’s metamorphosis into a rightist is now complete, he exhibits the conservative’s typical ignorance of the Constitution, and contempt for its case law.

(Sigh)....if only you has the gift of irony, Torte-boy.....

I recommend that you peruse Article I, section 8...the enumerated powers, with the possibility that careful study and consideration might....might....allow you to see the value in "The individual must demand the reduction of state, and state powers to the point necessary to carry out legitimate purposes. We have the instructions, called the Constitution."

Best of luck in your studies.

 

[regent]

"The Constitution is what the Court say it is." Justice Hughes

 

[Dragon]

Well, that was an interesting little dance, PC. Someone brought up already the point I was going to raise, namely that you were employing a version of the sole-alternative or false-dilemma fallacy. Instead of answering that, you changed the subject from what the best way is to organize the economy, to what is allowed under the Constitution.

I'll just note in passing that in doing this you have effectively surrendered on your original point, and then give you a quote from Article I, Section 8, pertinent to federal regulation of the economy.

"The Congress shall have the power . . . To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; . . . And To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

This is a very broad power, these two clauses taken together, and gives Congress the authority to regulate the economy as it sees fit, with very few exceptions.