SEE! something other than free market capitalism DOES work!

[elvis]

OSLO - When capitalism seemed on the verge of collapse last fall, Kristin Halvorsen, Norway’s Socialist finance minister and a longtime free market skeptic, did more than crow.

As investors the world over sold in a panic, she bucked the tide, authorizing Norway’s $300 billion sovereign wealth fund to ramp up its stock buying program by $60 billion — or about 23 percent of Norway ’s economic output.

“The timing was not that bad,” Ms. Halvorsen said, smiling with satisfaction over the broad worldwide market rally that began in early March.

The global financial crisis has brought low the economies of just about every country on earth. But not Norway.

With a quirky contrariness as deeply etched in the national character as the fjords carved into its rugged landscape, Norway has thrived by going its own way. When others splurged, it saved. When others sought to limit the role of government, Norway strengthened its cradle-to-grave welfare state.

And in the midst of the worst global downturn since the Depression, Norway’s economy grew last year by just under 3 percent. The government enjoys a budget surplus of 11 percent and its ledger is entirely free of debt.

NYT: Thriving Norway’s economics lesson - The New York Times- msnbc.com

Another socialist post. European countries have enjoyed CONSISTENT double-digit unemployment over the past 10-15 years. I pray to God socialism doesn't come here.

Steven Colbert made fun of you right wingers last night. You guys don't even know the difference between socialism and fascism.

Stop using words you don't understand.

Uh, I know the difference, you daft ****. I didn't mention fascism in this post, so shove it up your ass, you lazy fat fuck.

 

[Agnapostate]

This is probably the most ridiculous thing I've seen you say on this board yet when it comes to economics.

You said there was no existence of free market capitalism that works, and I showed you that there is. When I take my items and put them out on my lawn to sell to passersby, that is the free market in action. No regulations, no taxation, just two people making a transaction. If that's not good enough for you as an example of the free market at work, then there's really no hope for you, and you're just obviously blinded by your OWN partisan ideological thought.

And that's just as fallacious as me claiming that socialism works because a single kibbutz works. Economic structure cannot be reduced to the single economic agent or small groupings of such agents, which is why "witty" rightist comments advising socialists to live in collectives merely expose their ignorance. Market exchange is also not equivalent to capitalism. The "market = capitalism" myth is just as fallacious as the "government = socialism" myth.

On the real Agna, why do you live in this country? You seem to like so many other little microcosms of your economic ideology that have existed in other countries. Why waste your time here? You're going to look back at your life and wish you had spent your time doing something else.

What "other little microcosms"?

 

[sealybobo]

Another socialist post. European countries have enjoyed CONSISTENT double-digit unemployment over the past 10-15 years. I pray to God socialism doesn't come here.

Steven Colbert made fun of you right wingers last night. You guys don't even know the difference between socialism and fascism.

Stop using words you don't understand.

Uh, I know the difference, you daft ****. I didn't mention fascism in this post, so shove it up your ass, you lazy fat fuck.

Did you see this? Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006 — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Gotta love the internet. So while corporations were making record profits, our wages were going down. And you approve? Who's the **** now pussy?

 

[elvis]

Steven Colbert made fun of you right wingers last night. You guys don't even know the difference between socialism and fascism.

Stop using words you don't understand.

Uh, I know the difference, you daft ****. I didn't mention fascism in this post, so shove it up your ass, you lazy fat fuck.

Did you see this? Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006 — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Gotta love the internet. So while corporations were making record profits, our wages were going down. And you approve? Who's the **** now pussy?

Right so let's fix it by implementing communism. you like waiting in line for hours for a loaf of bread, you stupid fuck?

 

[Agnapostate]

Right so let's fix it by implementing communism. you like waiting in line for hours for a loaf of bread, you stupid fuck?

More inaccurate reference to state capitalism. Just solidifies my point that rightists almost never understand the accurate definitions of socialism/communism.

 

[elvis]

Right so let's fix it by implementing communism. you like waiting in line for hours for a loaf of bread, you stupid fuck?

More inaccurate reference to state capitalism. Just solidifies my point that rightists almost never understand the accurate definitions of socialism/communism.

You are correct. I was talking about Marxist/Leninism. Lenin didn't think Russia was ready for communism, so he basically took Nicholas' place and outlawed private enterprise. Every Soviet leader claimed the country was never "ready" for the Utopian vision of Karl Marx, so they held onto dictatorship.

Socialism allows some free ownership but has a lot more central planning than capitalism.

 

[Agnapostate]

Socialism allows some free ownership but has a lot more central planning than capitalism.

That's not necessarily true. Post-Hayekian market socialism, for instance, is based upon reducing the excessively centralized role of hierarchy in the firm through the establishment of democratic management, while participatory varieties of libertarian socialism are dependent upon decentralized planning.

 

[Paulie]

And that's just as fallacious as me claiming that socialism works because a single kibbutz works. Economic structure cannot be reduced to the single economic agent or small groupings of such agents, which is why "witty" rightist comments advising socialists to live in collectives merely expose their ignorance. Market exchange is also not equivalent to capitalism. The "market = capitalism" myth is just as fallacious as the "government = socialism" myth.

Here's you:

Considering that free market capitalism is a nonexistent and utopian fantasy, it would be exceedingly more difficult to identify instances of its own functioning.

Now, when you say "instances" perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you're looking for. Are you looking for instances of an entire country's economy, or just individual instances in a community? I got the impression of the latter based on your context. If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected. You've mentioned several times around here that there were certain collectives in various countries throughout history that have utilized your school of thought. I'm merely giving you the same kind of example.

What "other little microcosms"?

You tell me. Like I just said above, you've mentioned various instances throughout history where societies have utilized your school of economic thought, albeit briefly.

There's no rational reason why if the individual example of the free market works within a community in the form of a yard sale, a swap meet, etc, that it can't work as a whole. The problem lies in the bigger it gets, the more potential there is for corruption. If you, or anyone else for that matter, feels that regulations are the only way to handle that, then so be it. I simply don't agree.

 

[Agnapostate]

Now, when you say "instances" perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you're looking for. Are you looking for instances of an entire country's economy, or just individual instances in a community? I got the impression of the latter based on your context. If I'm wrong, then I stand corrected. You've mentioned several times around here that there were certain collectives in various countries throughout history that have utilized your school of thought. I'm merely giving you the same kind of example.

That's not "the same kind of example." I've reference regional federations of collectives that involved millions of people, not yard sales. So yes, it's thus my point that I'm referring to widespread economic structure, not anything so trivial as individual economic agents.

You tell me. Like I just said above, you've mentioned various instances throughout history where societies have utilized your school of economic thought, albeit briefly.

There's no rational reason why if the individual example of the free market works within a community in the form of a yard sale, a swap meet, etc, that it can't work as a whole. The problem lies in the bigger it gets, the more potential there is for corruption. If you, or anyone else for that matter, feels that regulations are the only way to handle that, then so be it. I simply don't agree.

Your problem is the maintenance of excessively utopian and superficially optimistic beliefs about economic structure. For instance, you seem to treat the labor market as a mere collection of various factors of production. And you seem to maintain a utopian belief in a neoclassical synthesis of perfect competition (even considering the conflicts of neoclassical economics with the Austrian school and its heterodox elements). But have you considered the role of dynamic monopsony? Oligopsony? These odd-sounding terms have legitimate relevance to market structure, yet are too often ignored by proponents of capitalism who lack familiarity with the realities of imperfect competition.

 

[Paulie]

That's not "the same kind of example." I've reference regional federations of collectives that involved millions of people, not yard sales. So yes, it's thus my point that I'm referring to widespread economic structure, not anything so trivial as individual economic agents.

Millions of people every year participate in yard sales Agna, not that it's the only example available of course. Many people have come to make it their living.

Sadly though, the examples are diminishing with each passing day.

Your problem is the maintenance of excessively utopian and superficially optimistic beliefs about economic structure. For instance, you seem to treat the labor market as a mere collection of various factors of production. And you seem to maintain a utopian belief in a neoclassical synthesis of perfect competition (even considering the conflicts of neoclassical economics with the Austrian school and its heterodox elements). But have you considered the role of dynamic monopsony? Oligopsony? These odd-sounding terms have legitimate relevance to market structure, yet are too often ignored by proponents of capitalism who lack familiarity with the realities of imperfect competition.

No, YOUR problem is assumption. You assume I believe there's perfect competition when I simply don't. I don't have illusions that ANYTHING is perfect. I choose capitalism because it makes the most sense to me. It requires people to educate themselves to thrive in it, and to me that is what is most important. You can have your ideology all to yourself, if you feel it insulates society the most. I don't need anyone protecting me from myself or anyone else when it comes to business. I succeed and fail on my own merits, and I'm completely fine with that.

 

[sealybobo]

Uh, I know the difference, you daft ****. I didn't mention fascism in this post, so shove it up your ass, you lazy fat fuck.

Did you see this? Share of National Income Going To Wages and Salaries at Record Low in 2006 — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Gotta love the internet. So while corporations were making record profits, our wages were going down. And you approve? Who's the **** now pussy?

Right so let's fix it by implementing communism. you like waiting in line for hours for a loaf of bread, you stupid fuck?

How you gonna fix it then? You don't have any answers, which is why we voted your party out of office.

In fact, you think this is great. You think the corporations and CEO's deserve all the money and we don't.

You think that labor doesn't deserve anymore. You think the only way we should make any more is if we go out and risk and start our own business.

And by the way, under GOP rule, it has become harder to start a business and get a loan. Do I need to prove that to you too stupid?

Remember Bush wanted an ownership society? How many foreclosures have we seen in the last few years? Bravo Republicans.

That is not how America became great. It became great because the masses were doing well. They did well because corporations hired them and paid them well.

Now we are being pitted against foreign labor because of free trade.

Don't take my word for all this. Just look at the last election. You guys got taken to the electoral woodshed. There are literally no more Republicans in the north east. They are confined to the red states down south. So it isn't like your message is catching on. Now ou can call us all socialists or just admit your way was a failure.

 

[Agnapostate]

Millions of people every year participate in yard sales Agna, not that it's the only example available of course. Many people have come to make it their living.

Sadly though, the examples are diminishing with each passing day.

That is not an equivalent example. The participatory federations that I mentioned were consciously created horizontal establishments of collectives, whereas "millions of people" participating in yard sales are individual economic agents engaging in isolated market activity.

No, YOUR problem is assumption. You assume I believe there's perfect competition when I simply don't. I don't have illusions that ANYTHING is perfect. I choose capitalism because it makes the most sense to me. It requires people to educate themselves to thrive in it, and to me that is what is most important. You can have your ideology all to yourself, if you feel it insulates society the most. I don't need anyone protecting me from myself or anyone else when it comes to business. I succeed and fail on my own merits, and I'm completely fine with that.

More anecdotal speculation, but the empirical literature indicates that intergenerational transfers play a major role in aggregate capital accumulation and that conditions of American social mobility remain fairly limited. When we add this to capitalism's propensity toward market concentration, we have both injustice and inefficiency.

 

[manu1959]

OSLO - When capitalism seemed on the verge of collapse last fall, Kristin Halvorsen, Norway’s Socialist finance minister and a longtime free market skeptic, did more than crow.

As investors the world over sold in a panic, she bucked the tide, authorizing Norway’s $300 billion sovereign wealth fund to ramp up its stock buying program by $60 billion — or about 23 percent of Norway ’s economic output.

“The timing was not that bad,” Ms. Halvorsen said, smiling with satisfaction over the broad worldwide market rally that began in early March.

The global financial crisis has brought low the economies of just about every country on earth. But not Norway.

With a quirky contrariness as deeply etched in the national character as the fjords carved into its rugged landscape, Norway has thrived by going its own way. When others splurged, it saved. When others sought to limit the role of government, Norway strengthened its cradle-to-grave welfare state.

And in the midst of the worst global downturn since the Depression, Norway’s economy grew last year by just under 3 percent. The government enjoys a budget surplus of 11 percent and its ledger is entirely free of debt.

NYT: Thriving Norway’s economics lesson - The New York Times- msnbc.com

uh she used capitalisim and the free market to finance he system........