Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Of course capitalists love government when it's ....hey government, protect my patentsWhat happens when the free market acts on its own?
I invent the worlds greatest gizmo. Nothing like it in the world. But mega business does not want me to take their profits so they threaten my suppliers and tie me up in litigation until my patents expire. Then they come in and take over the market
Don't believe it? Look at Filo Farnsworth vs RCA and the invention of television
But you are describing tactics of the crony corporatists. That's not free market capitalism. The same thing happened to Preston Tucker and his car. Big Auto had powerful influence over politicians and they set out to destroy him.
Again, the problem is big powerful government in collusion with capitalists who are NOT practicing "free market" capitalism. The solution... really, the ONLY solution, is to eliminate the power of government. Let the forces of free market capitalism work and they will work brilliantly.
You know, as I read your posts more and more, it seems as the only environment in which "free market capitalism" of the sort you've been advocating can exist only in a theoretical construct, and that construct can only be described as a sort of "organized" anarchy. Of course "organized" and "anarchy" are oxymoronic in practice, which is why I say the conception of free market capitalism as you've been describing can only exist and operation "in theory."
Hey government, I need more tariffs
Hey government, provide me safety and security
Hey government, protect my interests abroad
But when government stands up for the safety of workers or the environment, it's.........Socialism
I do not want "limited government"Of course capitalists love government when it's ....hey government, protect my patentsWhat happens when the free market acts on its own?
I invent the worlds greatest gizmo. Nothing like it in the world. But mega business does not want me to take their profits so they threaten my suppliers and tie me up in litigation until my patents expire. Then they come in and take over the market
Don't believe it? Look at Filo Farnsworth vs RCA and the invention of television
But you are describing tactics of the crony corporatists. That's not free market capitalism. The same thing happened to Preston Tucker and his car. Big Auto had powerful influence over politicians and they set out to destroy him.
Again, the problem is big powerful government in collusion with capitalists who are NOT practicing "free market" capitalism. The solution... really, the ONLY solution, is to eliminate the power of government. Let the forces of free market capitalism work and they will work brilliantly.
You know, as I read your posts more and more, it seems as the only environment in which "free market capitalism" of the sort you've been advocating can exist only in a theoretical construct, and that construct can only be described as a sort of "organized" anarchy. Of course "organized" and "anarchy" are oxymoronic in practice, which is why I say the conception of free market capitalism as you've been describing can only exist and operation "in theory."
Hey government, I need more tariffs
Hey government, provide me safety and security
Hey government, protect my interests abroad
But when government stands up for the safety of workers or the environment, it's.........Socialism
You were doing well until the stupidity at the end. You described some of the responsibilities of a limited government then you ended it with your own ignorant rantings that are inconsistent with reality.
You assume that conservatives/capitalists are anarchists. We do not want NO government, we want a limited and fiscally responsible government.
I do not want "limited government"Of course capitalists love government when it's ....hey government, protect my patentsWhat happens when the free market acts on its own?
I invent the worlds greatest gizmo. Nothing like it in the world. But mega business does not want me to take their profits so they threaten my suppliers and tie me up in litigation until my patents expire. Then they come in and take over the market
Don't believe it? Look at Filo Farnsworth vs RCA and the invention of television
But you are describing tactics of the crony corporatists. That's not free market capitalism. The same thing happened to Preston Tucker and his car. Big Auto had powerful influence over politicians and they set out to destroy him.
Again, the problem is big powerful government in collusion with capitalists who are NOT practicing "free market" capitalism. The solution... really, the ONLY solution, is to eliminate the power of government. Let the forces of free market capitalism work and they will work brilliantly.
You know, as I read your posts more and more, it seems as the only environment in which "free market capitalism" of the sort you've been advocating can exist only in a theoretical construct, and that construct can only be described as a sort of "organized" anarchy. Of course "organized" and "anarchy" are oxymoronic in practice, which is why I say the conception of free market capitalism as you've been describing can only exist and operation "in theory."
Hey government, I need more tariffs
Hey government, provide me safety and security
Hey government, protect my interests abroad
But when government stands up for the safety of workers or the environment, it's.........Socialism
You were doing well until the stupidity at the end. You described some of the responsibilities of a limited government then you ended it with your own ignorant rantings that are inconsistent with reality.
You assume that conservatives/capitalists are anarchists. We do not want NO government, we want a limited and fiscally responsible government.
I want the right sized government. right sized to protect the interests of business and We the People
It is up to We the People to decide on the detailsI do not want "limited government"Of course capitalists love government when it's ....hey government, protect my patentsBut you are describing tactics of the crony corporatists. That's not free market capitalism. The same thing happened to Preston Tucker and his car. Big Auto had powerful influence over politicians and they set out to destroy him.
Again, the problem is big powerful government in collusion with capitalists who are NOT practicing "free market" capitalism. The solution... really, the ONLY solution, is to eliminate the power of government. Let the forces of free market capitalism work and they will work brilliantly.
You know, as I read your posts more and more, it seems as the only environment in which "free market capitalism" of the sort you've been advocating can exist only in a theoretical construct, and that construct can only be described as a sort of "organized" anarchy. Of course "organized" and "anarchy" are oxymoronic in practice, which is why I say the conception of free market capitalism as you've been describing can only exist and operation "in theory."
Hey government, I need more tariffs
Hey government, provide me safety and security
Hey government, protect my interests abroad
But when government stands up for the safety of workers or the environment, it's.........Socialism
You were doing well until the stupidity at the end. You described some of the responsibilities of a limited government then you ended it with your own ignorant rantings that are inconsistent with reality.
You assume that conservatives/capitalists are anarchists. We do not want NO government, we want a limited and fiscally responsible government.
I want the right sized government. right sized to protect the interests of business and We the People
On the surface, I agree with that statement t, but knowing you, we differ greatly in the details.
What happens when the free market acts on its own?
I invent the worlds greatest gizmo. Nothing like it in the world. But mega business does not want me to take their profits so they threaten my suppliers and tie me up in litigation until my patents expire. Then they come in and take over the market
Don't believe it? Look at Filo Farnsworth vs RCA and the invention of television
But you are describing tactics of the crony corporatists. That's not free market capitalism. The same thing happened to Preston Tucker and his car. Big Auto had powerful influence over politicians and they set out to destroy him.
Again, the problem is big powerful government in collusion with capitalists who are NOT practicing "free market" capitalism. The solution... really, the ONLY solution, is to eliminate the power of government. Let the forces of free market capitalism work and they will work brilliantly.
You know, as I read your posts more and more, it seems as the only environment in which "free market capitalism" of the sort you've been advocating can exist only in a theoretical construct, and that construct can only be described as a sort of "organized" anarchy. Of course "organized" and "anarchy" are oxymoronic in practice, which is why I say the conception of free market capitalism as you've been describing can only exist and operation "in theory."
What happens when the free market acts on its own?
I invent the worlds greatest gizmo. Nothing like it in the world. But mega business does not want me to take their profits so they threaten my suppliers and tie me up in litigation until my patents expire. Then they come in and take over the market
Don't believe it? Look at Filo Farnsworth vs RCA and the invention of television
But you are describing tactics of the crony corporatists. That's not free market capitalism. The same thing happened to Preston Tucker and his car. Big Auto had powerful influence over politicians and they set out to destroy him.
Again, the problem is big powerful government in collusion with capitalists who are NOT practicing "free market" capitalism. The solution... really, the ONLY solution, is to eliminate the power of government. Let the forces of free market capitalism work and they will work brilliantly.
You know, as I read your posts more and more, it seems as the only environment in which "free market capitalism" of the sort you've been advocating can exist only in a theoretical construct, and that construct can only be described as a sort of "organized" anarchy. Of course "organized" and "anarchy" are oxymoronic in practice, which is why I say the conception of free market capitalism as you've been describing can only exist and operation "in theory."
Well... There is a reason that no other human civilization has ever made it work as well as our own. It requires a few other things in place to work optimally. Namely, a constitution endowing individual liberty from our Creator and minimal government interference. So it is a combination effort.
You'll have to elaborate on what the hell you mean by "anarchy" with regard to free voluntary trade, because it doesn't comport with rational logic to me.
It is up to We the People to decide on the detailsI do not want "limited government"Of course capitalists love government when it's ....hey government, protect my patentsYou know, as I read your posts more and more, it seems as the only environment in which "free market capitalism" of the sort you've been advocating can exist only in a theoretical construct, and that construct can only be described as a sort of "organized" anarchy. Of course "organized" and "anarchy" are oxymoronic in practice, which is why I say the conception of free market capitalism as you've been describing can only exist and operation "in theory."
Hey government, I need more tariffs
Hey government, provide me safety and security
Hey government, protect my interests abroad
But when government stands up for the safety of workers or the environment, it's.........Socialism
You were doing well until the stupidity at the end. You described some of the responsibilities of a limited government then you ended it with your own ignorant rantings that are inconsistent with reality.
You assume that conservatives/capitalists are anarchists. We do not want NO government, we want a limited and fiscally responsible government.
I want the right sized government. right sized to protect the interests of business and We the People
On the surface, I agree with that statement t, but knowing you, we differ greatly in the details.
Seems we had quite a bit of government interference to make our country as great as it is
It took government to build the canals, ports, bridges, roadways, water systems, sewage lines to create and link our great cities
It took government to establish a stable monetary system
Government to provide security
Government to provide and educated workforce
It's the governments job if We the People say it isSeems we had quite a bit of government interference to make our country as great as it is
It took government to build the canals, ports, bridges, roadways, water systems, sewage lines to create and link our great cities
It took government to establish a stable monetary system
Government to provide security
Government to provide and educated workforce
Sorry, but nothing you cited is government interfering with free market capitalism. I disagree with many of those things being the responsibility of government because they're not listed in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. It's not the government's job to educate people. It's not the government's job to build roads and bridges. The people can decide if they want their tax dollars spent building things.
National security? Sure... that's the foremost responsibility of government. A stable monetary system... Okay, no problem with that. Government can certainly do things to assist free market capitalism but that's not what we're debating here.
You'll have to elaborate on what the hell you mean by "anarchy" with regard to free voluntary trade, because it doesn't comport with rational logic to me.
They don't want government except in the areas they want itYou'll have to elaborate on what the hell you mean by "anarchy" with regard to free voluntary trade, because it doesn't comport with rational logic to me.
I mean that for free trade to happen, there must also be some form of organization -- however heavy or light be the organization's influence -- that facilitates the trade's taking place freely.
- Property Rights: If you invent something, should I be able to "reverse engineer" it and compete with you, selling the exact same thing, or perhaps an enhanced version of it but nonetheless relying on your work as the foundation for my product? Should I instead be required to innovate 100% on my own to produce a competing product? Where does one draw the line between what constitutes one's own innovation vs. what's just common knowledge? Some organization must be the arbiter of such matters.
- Safety: Say you and I are members of the "Hodo" and "Gogo" groups/tribes. We want to engage in trade, but the "Nono" group doesn't want us to do so so they interdict our shippers, sellers and/or production operations. Either there comes to exist some organization that protects us from the "Nonos" as we go about producing/trading or trade doesn't happen.
- Barriers to entry: Assume a innovation/product comes about that consumers demand; however, the costs of producing the product and delivering it are so high that while one provider can produce and deliver the good profitably, were there competition in doing so, neither producer could do so profitably, thus neither produces it. The only way that product gets produced and provided is if some organization ensures monopoly status to a single producer or if consumers directly spend their own money to somehow subsidize the cost of producing or delivering (or both) the product.
Think about receiving potable water, for example, when one's home/office doesn't have immediate access to an aquifer and/or one lacks the means to tap into it even if one does.
- In an environment where everyone needs to possess some quantity of the medium of exchange -- paper and minted money, gems, gold, dirt, woodchips, hair, blades of grass, whatever be the medium -- the downsides of capitalism eventually manifest themselves. Some organization must step in to counteract those excesses.
Those are just a few simple examples of the role an organization must play in facilitating free trade. The following documents provide additional ones along with more comprehensive discussions of them.
Having and exercising free trade, no matter how free one wants it to be, requires there be some organization to manage the process at a high level. Some organization has to maintain the "playing field" as it were. That organization, as we understand it now, is government. The absence of government is anarchy. Under anarchy, even if free trade commences, it won't endure. So the point I was making about your comments and anarchy is that the level of governmental non-intervention, non-participation, non-facilitation for which you seem to advocate strikes me as being commensurate with a state of anarchy.
- Roles for State Government in International Trade
- GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
- THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- The Role of International Trade and Investment in Business Growth and Development
- What is Free Trade? -- This paper answers the question in a specific context; however, the overriding concepts are applicable to others. (Note this paper seems long, but it's not. Most of the length comes from the references not the prose.)
- The Political Economy of Capitalism
- Domestic Regulation and International Trade
"Not all regulation is inimical to public interests, and some that will be under pressure as a result of trade could be regulation that is relatively helpful to public welfare. These instances in the main will involve spillover effects captured to different degrees in various nations. In such settings, there is a clear role for international agreement to regulate harms that are not sustainably regulable by individual nations with open trade."
As for the other "ill" you've been "on about," crony capitalism...To the extent there is an organization that serves to manage the downsides and challenges of capitalism, no matter whether that organization is government or some other organization having the authority and power to enforce its "fixes," capitalists will seek to influence the decisions that organization makes. It seems to me that in the model you've been describing, pretty much any successful effort to influence the decision making will be deemed "crony capitalism" if it doesn't align with your own interests, or what you think "should be," and will not be deemed thus if it does align with the way you think the decision should go. The thing is that no matter which way the decision goes, it goes "that" way because of interested/affected parties acting to exert influence in pursuit of protecting their own interest. Accordingly, it seems that merely attempting to exert influence over a decision that differs with the decision you'd make is what qualifies for you as one's behaving in a "crony capitalist" manner. Well, there's a solution for that. It's called "make you the absolute monarch."
They don't want government except in the areas they want itYou'll have to elaborate on what the hell you mean by "anarchy" with regard to free voluntary trade, because it doesn't comport with rational logic to me.
I mean that for free trade to happen, there must also be some form of organization -- however heavy or light be the organization's influence -- that facilitates the trade's taking place freely.
- Property Rights: If you invent something, should I be able to "reverse engineer" it and compete with you, selling the exact same thing, or perhaps an enhanced version of it but nonetheless relying on your work as the foundation for my product? Should I instead be required to innovate 100% on my own to produce a competing product? Where does one draw the line between what constitutes one's own innovation vs. what's just common knowledge? Some organization must be the arbiter of such matters.
- Safety: Say you and I are members of the "Hodo" and "Gogo" groups/tribes. We want to engage in trade, but the "Nono" group doesn't want us to do so so they interdict our shippers, sellers and/or production operations. Either there comes to exist some organization that protects us from the "Nonos" as we go about producing/trading or trade doesn't happen.
- Barriers to entry: Assume a innovation/product comes about that consumers demand; however, the costs of producing the product and delivering it are so high that while one provider can produce and deliver the good profitably, were there competition in doing so, neither producer could do so profitably, thus neither produces it. The only way that product gets produced and provided is if some organization ensures monopoly status to a single producer or if consumers directly spend their own money to somehow subsidize the cost of producing or delivering (or both) the product.
Think about receiving potable water, for example, when one's home/office doesn't have immediate access to an aquifer and/or one lacks the means to tap into it even if one does.
- In an environment where everyone needs to possess some quantity of the medium of exchange -- paper and minted money, gems, gold, dirt, woodchips, hair, blades of grass, whatever be the medium -- the downsides of capitalism eventually manifest themselves. Some organization must step in to counteract those excesses.
Those are just a few simple examples of the role an organization must play in facilitating free trade. The following documents provide additional ones along with more comprehensive discussions of them.
Having and exercising free trade, no matter how free one wants it to be, requires there be some organization to manage the process at a high level. Some organization has to maintain the "playing field" as it were. That organization, as we understand it now, is government. The absence of government is anarchy. Under anarchy, even if free trade commences, it won't endure. So the point I was making about your comments and anarchy is that the level of governmental non-intervention, non-participation, non-facilitation for which you seem to advocate strikes me as being commensurate with a state of anarchy.
- Roles for State Government in International Trade
- GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
- THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- The Role of International Trade and Investment in Business Growth and Development
- What is Free Trade? -- This paper answers the question in a specific context; however, the overriding concepts are applicable to others. (Note this paper seems long, but it's not. Most of the length comes from the references not the prose.)
- The Political Economy of Capitalism
- Domestic Regulation and International Trade
"Not all regulation is inimical to public interests, and some that will be under pressure as a result of trade could be regulation that is relatively helpful to public welfare. These instances in the main will involve spillover effects captured to different degrees in various nations. In such settings, there is a clear role for international agreement to regulate harms that are not sustainably regulable by individual nations with open trade."
As for the other "ill" you've been "on about," crony capitalism...To the extent there is an organization that serves to manage the downsides and challenges of capitalism, no matter whether that organization is government or some other organization having the authority and power to enforce its "fixes," capitalists will seek to influence the decisions that organization makes. It seems to me that in the model you've been describing, pretty much any successful effort to influence the decision making will be deemed "crony capitalism" if it doesn't align with your own interests, or what you think "should be," and will not be deemed thus if it does align with the way you think the decision should go. The thing is that no matter which way the decision goes, it goes "that" way because of interested/affected parties acting to exert influence in pursuit of protecting their own interest. Accordingly, it seems that merely attempting to exert influence over a decision that differs with the decision you'd make is what qualifies for you as one's behaving in a "crony capitalist" manner. Well, there's a solution for that. It's called "make you the absolute monarch."
Then they scream enumerated powers
It's the governments job if We the People say it isSeems we had quite a bit of government interference to make our country as great as it is
It took government to build the canals, ports, bridges, roadways, water systems, sewage lines to create and link our great cities
It took government to establish a stable monetary system
Government to provide security
Government to provide and educated workforce
Sorry, but nothing you cited is government interfering with free market capitalism. I disagree with many of those things being the responsibility of government because they're not listed in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. It's not the government's job to educate people. It's not the government's job to build roads and bridges. The people can decide if they want their tax dollars spent building things.
National security? Sure... that's the foremost responsibility of government. A stable monetary system... Okay, no problem with that. Government can certainly do things to assist free market capitalism but that's not what we're debating here.
I mean that for free trade to happen, there must also be some form of organization -- however heavy or light be the organization's influence -- that facilitates the trade's taking place freely.
Nonsense. You are making an excuse for government control over free markets. No one is being forced to participate in a free market capitalist exchange. It is a perfectly natural and self-sufficient condition... I have something you need-- you have something I need... we trade voluntarily.
Yes, they are laid out in the Constitution and if our legislative branch exceeds its authority our judicial branch will let them knowIt's the governments job if We the People say it isSeems we had quite a bit of government interference to make our country as great as it is
It took government to build the canals, ports, bridges, roadways, water systems, sewage lines to create and link our great cities
It took government to establish a stable monetary system
Government to provide security
Government to provide and educated workforce
Sorry, but nothing you cited is government interfering with free market capitalism. I disagree with many of those things being the responsibility of government because they're not listed in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution. It's not the government's job to educate people. It's not the government's job to build roads and bridges. The people can decide if they want their tax dollars spent building things.
National security? Sure... that's the foremost responsibility of government. A stable monetary system... Okay, no problem with that. Government can certainly do things to assist free market capitalism but that's not what we're debating here.
Well no... things are laid out in the constitution and if "we the people" want to change it we can. Now you are acting like our framers established a democracy and they didn't. They realized democracies could be dangerous because it's mob rule. They intentionally established a republic and in a republican system, "we the people" don't always get what they want.
Yes, they are laid out in the Constitution and if our legislative branch exceeds its authority our judicial branch will let them know
As in Citizen's United.
Nonsense. You are making an excuse for government control over free markets. No one is being forced to participate in a free market capitalist exchange. It is a perfectly natural and self-sufficient condition... I have something you need-- you have something I need... we trade voluntarily.
To bad there is no free trade in common sense. You could get some. But crony capitalists have taken all the available common sense from your market and left you living in la la land.
You ever figure out the difference between "how" and "what"?
