The end of the EU

[new_trader]

A major problem of free markets is that a few are very rich and then there is a huge gap down to the majority who are very poor. Markets have no feelings of sympathy etc. It takes good Govt. to redistribute the wealth fairly enough to prevent revolution.

That is a B.S conclusion based on a B.S premise. Governments redistribute wealth to win votes. If what you say is correct, who would be bothered to work if they can get everything from Government? Who would the Government steal from? Do you see the problem with your theory?

 

[Pat494]

That is a B.S conclusion based on a B.S premise. Governments redistribute wealth to win votes. If what you say is correct, who would be bothered to work if you can get everything from Government? Who would the Government steal from? Do you see the problem with your theory?

The toxic elements should be gone soon NT

 

[Pat494]

The Democracies of the world are just about all bankrupt. Why ? Because the people who get elected are not of sufficient calibre and the 2 party system has severe limitations imho. Whether it is the NHS. education, foreign policy or whatever they never agree on a sensible path and so it gets changed and rechanged regularly by Left and Right.

The obvious solution is to have a 1 party state of centre politics.

 

[new_trader]

The toxic elements should be gone soon NT

Yes, thanks to an entrepreneur who I hope gets very,very rich from his/her invention. I'm sure you would prefer to drink dirty, Government provided water, because the idea of someone getting rich disgusts you...not sure why you even have a distiller, that goes against your ideals doesn't it? Government knows best!

Tell me, seriously, if what you said is correct or that you genuinely believe it, what is the difference between Government and a gang of thugs forcing you to pay 'protection' money?

Like someone once asked, would you rather be equal and live in Slavery or unequal and live in Freedom?

 

[Atilla]

Calculation and Socialism | Joseph T. Salerno



I'm afraid I only watched the first few minutes as he talks about socialism.

Kicking socialism communism and command economy etc doesn't make the argument for Free Markets.

Don't get me wrong as I'm all for free markets but without some form of regulation and control that also has its own unique set of problems.

Does anybody believe that our executive numeration is determined by the free market? It is set by a very small bunch of similar individuals. This is like letting the Trade Union leaders determine wages at the expense of shareholders (who own the company).

Market abuse can take place on both sides. By Trade Unions and Management.

I also recognise Government policies often skew and disrupt the market S and D, hence prices. But so does the free market place. If one looks latin America and land rights, who ever buys more guns takes the land or has is way. No point in saying well that's simply illegal the rule of law must be upheld. It doesn't work that way.

Issues with both sides. Suggesting some hypothetical 'free market' silver bullet solution and then saying well it has never really been tried fully is not on.

 

[Pat494]

Calculation and Socialism | Joseph T. Salerno



. Suggesting some hypothetical 'free market' silver bullet solution and then saying well it has never really been tried fully is not on.

Don't see why not. There must be something better than the clapped out old democracy nonsense.

 

[Atilla]

Don't see why not. There must be something better than the clapped out old democracy nonsense.

I'm sure system will improve with one step back and two steps forward stroll.

I'm not against it but as soon as an aspect of the free market capitalistic system is commented on its issues, it is defended by the statement well the system was not really FREE as it should be.

Just as socialists live in a utopia world of pure assumptions on human behaviour so do fans of free market puritans.

We need balance. Tipping the scales one or the other leads to a rocky world. In summary the current failure of excessive numeration, risk taking, lack bank controls and massive debt have nothing to do with socialism. More to do with tax havens and free market movement of labour and capital. People are still in denial.

 

[Pat494]

and massive debt have nothing to do with socialism. More to do with tax havens and free market movement of labour and capital. People are still in denial.

Really At ?
All the democracies plundered by the Socialists in recent times have run up huge debts. Surely you haven't forgotten Gordon " the plonker " etc. already. John Major left a surplus.

 

[Atilla]

Really At ?
All the democracies plundered by the Socialists in recent times have run up huge debts. Surely you haven't forgotten Gordon " the plonker " etc. already. John Major left a surplus.

Pretty much pales into insignificance compared to bank bailout!

John Major left when all was rosy with the World. :idea:

 

[Pat494]

Yes, thanks to an entrepreneur who I hope gets very,very rich from his/her invention. I'm sure you would prefer to drink dirty, Government provided water, because the idea of someone getting rich disgusts you...not sure why you even have a distiller, that goes against your ideals doesn't it? Government knows best!

Tell me, seriously, if what you said is correct or that you genuinely believe it, what is the difference between Government and a gang of thugs forcing you to pay 'protection' money?

Like someone once asked, would you rather be equal and live in Slavery or unequal and live in Freedom?

Tory was a term to describe a Scottish or Irish bandit I forget which. So yes very similiar except nowadays they are elected unlike the Kray twins etc.
The question isn't really about slavery or freedom but something much more basic and that is paying for food etc. to stay alive. No good being " free " and starve to death, is it ?
The Govt. should be the servant of the people not the opposite.

 

[Pat494]

Pretty much pales into insignificance compared to bank bailout!

John Major left when all was rosy with the World. :idea:

John Major left before Tony Blair and Gordon got going. Even the USA copied his disastrous policies and are now $17 trillion in debt. They can't help it and did the same in the 20s, 40s and 70s. No sorry or anything !!
Like stubborn asses they keep going !

 

[libertas]

I'm not against it but as soon as an aspect of the free market capitalistic system is commented on its issues, it is defended by the statement well the system was not really FREE as it should be.

I can only comment on what IS not how you would like it to be.

We need balance. Tipping the scales one or the other leads to a rocky world. In summary the current failure of excessive numeration, risk taking, lack bank controls and massive debt have nothing to do with socialism. More to do with tax havens and free market movement of labour and capital. People are still in denial.

Lack of bank controls are you kidding me?! The big banks compliance departments employ more people then most FTSE350 companies.

Why do you think tax havens exist? If it wasn't for greedy governments these places would disappear overnight.

I agree with you about excessive numeration and risk taking but these again are side effects of misplaced government policies. If it wasn't for all the backstops put in by government, banks would have to behave.

 

[new_trader]

There is no point debating this with Atilla or pat494 because NEITHER are willing to learn and properly understand what a FREE-MARKET actually means.

eg/ "Kicking socialism communism and command economy etc doesn't make the argument for Free Markets."

Solerno ISN'T making an argument by kicking anything, he is using logical analysis AND HISTORY to show and explain the differences. He presents the arguments put forward by many Socialists and then explains how they have been refuted, using REAL WORLD EXAMPLES.

Anyway, I didn't post the video for Atilla or pat494, because they are clearly ignorant and will remain ignorant. I'm following duc998's policy of trying to educate those who are yet undecided and are WILLING to see all points of view.

Besides, there are trillions of examples of how Free-markets are operating today. Banking is about the only sector which isn't a free-market.

 

[new_trader]

If one looks latin America and land rights, who ever buys more guns takes the land or has is way. No point in saying well that's simply illegal the rule of law must be upheld. It doesn't work that way.

But in your vivid imagination, giving all the guns and power to Government does make it all work? Why do you think US citizens so strongly defend their right to bear arms? Could it be they don't want to be subjugated by the people who have ALL the guns?

Corrupt governments have impoverished and killed more people around the world than free-markets ever have or ever will.

 

[Atilla]

There is no point debating this with Atilla or pat494 because NEITHER are willing to learn and properly understand what a FREE-MARKET actually means.

eg/ "Kicking socialism communism and command economy etc doesn't make the argument for Free Markets."

Solerno ISN'T making an argument by kicking anything, he is using logical analysis AND HISTORY to show and explain the differences. He presents the arguments put forward by many Socialists and then explains how they have been refuted, using REAL WORLD EXAMPLES.

Anyway, I didn't post the video for Atilla or pat494, because they are clearly ignorant and will remain ignorant. I'm following duc998's policy of trying to educate those who are yet undecided and are WILLING to see all points of view.

Besides, there are trillions of examples of how Free-markets are operating today. Banking is about the only sector which isn't a free-market.

NT kindly keep some level of decorum

I know we have our rants but let's keep it formal please.

 

[Pat494]

Free -ish markets have been tried e.g. Milton Friedman's approach in the 90s and look what a disaster !
They did learn after The Great Depression and passed laws like the Glass Stiegal ones to combat free market investment frenzy etc.
The ignorant lot repealed them in the 90s under Clinton and whammo, it's never been the same since. It was like letting little Jimmy play with guns on a do as you like scenario.
I presume by what NT writes he has a fortune and is one of the "Haves ", trying to increase it. Look through history at the amount of greedy elites who took too much and sometimes lost more than their piles of dosh. But people hardly ever learn from the past unfortunately.

 

[new_trader]

Free -ish markets have been tried e.g. Milton Friedman's approach in the 90s and look what a disaster !.

Ok Pat494. Explain to a complete greedy have it all like me, precisely what it was about the '90's that resulted in a disaster. No sweeping statements like your usual vague "Greedy Capitalist" explanations because they aren't convincing and don't prove anything. Convince me using reason and logic and follow it up with examples. Can you do that? I bet you can't because as I said, both you and Atilla haven't got the vaguest idea (still) of what an economist means by free-market.

You don't 'try' free-markets because they aren't an invention or a design, they are a natural consequence of individuals seeking how to best satisfy their needs and wants. You saying that free-markets don't work is like a zoologist saying that nature doesn't work because some species are successful while others have become extinct. It is almost always a case of Governments trying to fight and contradict free-markets that lead to disaster, it is never a case of Governments trying free-markets against the natural forces of socialism

Nobody has said that in a free-market businesses don't fail, or companies don't go bankrupt. So, perhaps you can define what it is about a free-market that makes you think it doesn't work? Charity exists in a free market to help the needy and history has PROVEN that private charities are more successful than Government run welfare.

In a free-market you still have a Government, but their role is to PROTECT individual property rights and freedoms. They aren't there to plunder from the rich and give to the poor, nor are they there to prop up and protect industries that they think are important. That is, bad businesses fail and good ones prosper.

I get the impression from Atilla's posts and yours, that you both think free-market means Anarchy and you imagine some post apocalyptic "Mad Max" world dominated by leather clad gangs of thugs riding motorcycles plundering loot from the weak...nothing else can explain some of the incomprehensible nonsense I read from you both.

 

[Pat494]

Tried to listen to Salerno explaining Utopian Socialism etc. but within 5 mins it was more sleepo.
keep taking the pills NT

 

[Purple Brain]

new_trader, you certainly seem to have some strong views and a passion to educate. Forgetting for the moment the various links and references you have provided, interesting though they are, what would YOU do now to fix things if you had a completely free hand, but starting where we are now rather than with a blank sheet of paper? How would you create your Utopia?

 

[Pat494]

Mr Hollande of France says he has found a way to tax the rich earning over E1m .per year. This will amount to a 75% tax.

And yes he is a Socialist. Will (N)Eddy propose the same here ? I expect the rich are quaking in their boots. Watch out NT ! Perhaps he will find a hole to hide all his loot in.