World Politics

[Alpe d'Huez]

It became fashionable in the 80s to believe in the magic of free-markets. And that anything that the govt does will make them less efficient. This has subsequently been shown to be wrong, but the idea of free-markets seems so simple and elegant that it has stuck around.

Well, it all depends on how "free" is free, isn't it? The US, at it's most economically laisse faire (or conservative), has always been at least somewhat both monitored, and defended. Capitalist markets are and must be, If they're not, they don't stay free for long. There are too many people who would like to take control of them by might for their own materialistic benefit at the the entire expense of others. Not every capitalist, no. But plenty enough to completely upset the system (ie. How many Bernie Madoff, Mark Stanford, or Ken Lay's does it take?), especially if it's legal to do so (as in AIG bonuses). To quote James Madison "If all men were angels, no government would be necessary."

I'm all for a truly free and fair market, within reason. But when there is no oversight, something will always attempt to fill the power vacuum. This is why when such predators want to attack what amounts to true democratic capitalism, they always try to convince people that the government is unnecessarily regulating their lives. To some extent, as Madison noted, because of the nature of government itself, that has to be true. But what's far more true is that government control "takes away the freedom" from predators to pillage their fellow citizens.

At its imperfect best, true freedom occurs somewhere along a continuum between a communist totalitarianism of total government control, to anarchy and no government control at all. It's a blend of freedom from governmental restrictions on individual behavior which we all dislike that "conservatives" consider evil, and freedom from social and financial thugs who will exploit everyone else to no end, which somehow many conservatives believe is acceptable as not all in power think this way.

With the way our government is set-up now, with both wealthy individuals and wealthy groups able to essentially buy access to politicians (now more legal than ever thanks to the Supreme Court), what we have isn't so much capitalism or democracy, as plutocracy or kleptocracy.

That's beside the point, anyway. I can quote Nobel Prize winning economists like Stiglitz and Krugman that say differently to these anonymous, "govt economists". And they don't mind having their names linked to their views either. A tad more credibility?

Stiglitz, yes. That man is brilliant, and doesn't simply carry on Keynesian thought without introspection. Krugman...hmmm.

To the flip side, Peter Schiff, who comes from the Austrian school of economics predicted the housing bubble, plus Fannie and Freddie going under, plus the bailouts, plus their failing. He hasn't been right on everything, but very forward thinking. (I should note that Schiff stops short of wishing to further deregulate large markets and Wall Street, focusing instead on limiting regulation on small and micro businesses in the US. He's also against both wars.).

As Keynes pointed out, markets will actually self-correct in the long-term, but how long? 10 years? 100? And at the expense of how much productivity, and how many jobs in the mean-time?

I've never fully ascribed to Keynes thinking, at least without strict rules in place, none the less, it's great that you bring this quote up, because hardly anyone gives him credit for expressing it, or analyzing it.

Maybe if the tea-baggers in your country actually believe this free-market fundie stuff, and then turf out Obama and implement this Palinomics, it might give little ol' NZ a chance to pass the US in per capita wealth again.

The sad part is that the term "Tea Bagger" no longer has any meaning, even if it ever did, it certainly didn't mean anything close to limited government conservativism (see: Andrew Bacevich). It's now been stretched further than "liberal" or "conservative". The truth is that Palin's thinking and suggestions are much more in line with the Washington neoconservatives who favor no market control, but have no problem at all with government bailouts of banking (which she supported) or nation building through military might (such as invading Iran, which she supports), and wars that completely destroy any potential balancing of budgets.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Bayh is free to vote as he choose for the next 8.5 months. So is he free to vote his conscience or will he vote what the party tells him to do? Or, odd as it may seem, will he vote for what his constituents want?

Don't always agree with you, but you're spot on here. If Evan Bayh really means what he says about the system being screwed up, here's his chance to take a stand. And being a senior member of the Senate, whose father once ran a strong Presidential bid, if he says something profound, people will listen. 50-1 odds he says almost nothing, and votes 10-1 in accordance with Reid, and never once stands on the Senate floor or goes on a major news show countering any bill from his own party (or either party, as they are both very similar these days anyway).

 

[ihavenolimbs]

To the flip side, Peter Schiff, who comes from the Austrian school of economics predicted the housing bubble, plus Fannie and Freddie going under, plus the bailouts, plus their failing. He hasn't been right on everything, but very forward thinking. (I should note that Schiff stops short of wishing to further deregulate large markets and Wall Street, focusing instead on limiting regulation on small and micro businesses in the US. He's also against both wars.)

I watched a long talk, that he gave a few months ago, on YouTube. He does seem to understand the issues a bit better than the average Austrian Schooler, he's clearly a very smart guy. But when it comes to solutions in a crisis he still doesn't seem to have anything.

In a crisis, we need better answers than "sit back and hope that the market will sort it out." Markets will sort it out, but maybe not in a way we'd like.

 

[ravens]

I thought Herbert Hoover was dead?

Isn't one Great Depression enough?

We need another stimulus obviously.

BTW, I thought you were out and going to keep your silliness to yourself?

no idea what if anything you are responding to, said i was taking a break, not leaving

reading really is fundamental

 

[ravens]

The reason why I mentioned three mainstream economists (maybe not mainstream enough to the fringe right) is because I doubt that you've heard of Robin Hahnel or Dean Baker, a couple of very perceptive economists.



I have yet to see him offer any concrete solutions to the current crisis. Feel free to point out if I'm wrong. I am genuinely interested to here plausible arguments for other means of escaping recession.



P.S. Thomas Sowell is the intellectual who's just written a book telling us all that we should ignore intellectuals, and apparently not getting the irony of it.

and our daily whack-a-mole ritual begins, yawn.

 

[rhubroma]

Awesome. I spit up my Raisin Bran when I read this.

Well, that's better than choking on it I suppose...

 

[rhubroma]

...

I'm all for a truly free and fair market, within reason. But when there is no oversight, something will always attempt to fill the power vacuum. This is why when such predators want to attack what amounts to true democratic capitalism, they always try to convince people that the government is unnecessarily regulating their lives. To some extent, as Madison noted, because of the nature of government itself, that has to be true. But what's far more true is that government control "takes away the freedom" from predators to pillage their fellow citizens.

At its imperfect best, true freedom occurs somewhere along a continuum between a communist totalitarianism of total government control, to anarchy and no government control at all. It's a blend of freedom from governmental restrictions on individual behavior which we all dislike that "conservatives" consider evil, and freedom from social and financial thugs who will exploit everyone else to no end, which somehow many conservatives believe is acceptable as not all in power think this way.

With the way our government is set-up now, with both wealthy individuals and wealthy groups able to essentially buy access to politicians (now more legal than ever thanks to the Supreme Court), what we have isn't so much capitalism or democracy, as plutocracy or kleptocracy.

...


I've never fully ascribed to Keynes thinking, at least without strict rules in place, none the less, it's great that you bring this quote up, because hardly anyone gives him credit for expressing it, or analyzing it.


The sad part is that the term "Tea Bagger" no longer has any meaning, even if it ever did, it certainly didn't mean anything close to limited government conservativism (see: Andrew Bacevich). It's now been stretched further than "liberal" or "conservative". The truth is that Palin's thinking and suggestions are much more in line with the Washington neoconservatives who favor no market control, but have no problem at all with government bailouts of banking (which she supported) or nation building through military might (such as invading Iran, which she supports), and wars that completely destroy any potential balancing of budgets.

Bravo. A couple of further observations:

A market without rules means that greed takes over where reason and proper measure should be the guiding principles to decision making. Greed which, like a venom, endangers the health of the body: in this case the general economy at large and thus the social classes. Consequently absolute deregulation promotes the financial interests of those individuals and individual entities (the financial gurus and banks of Wall Street) who stand to make the most money from a market without rules, even when they are in conflict with the collective well-being, or outright place the working classes in peril (just as has been the case with the recently exploded stock market bubble). Conservative capitalism and conservative government (though also, unfortunately, liberal political leadership as well) has found it much more politically expedient to take the government's hand out of the financial markets, since they nurish its political life, rather than put the necessary pressure on the financial establishment so as to behave more responsibly towards society as a whole (ie. the collective). A class struggle which democracy was supposed to have corrected, but hasn't.

And this is because of the relationship that pure capitalism in the US has established between the political class, ie. government and the financial and industrial blocks (but also elsewhere around the globe, where globilazation has set in what I call today's prevailing "economic culture," whether it be in a democratic setting such as America and Europe or in the communist milieu as in China). And it is a rather perverse and, decidedly undemocratic, arrangement, whereby the politcal agenda is basically set not by the social desires and needs (like healthcare and education) of a voting public, but in accordance with the financial interests of the markets and those that rule over them. Yet when greed and irresponsibilty inevitably causes the various "system overloads", it is the collective that government calls upon to bear the entire burden of the breakdowns with their taxes. Thus we don't get regulations at the market, but rather a disgusting "regulation" of society which is made to clean up the broken pieces of a chronically unhealthy relationship. And this political-economic relationship, that basically promotes greed over responsibility, also accounts for the insalubrious state in which we find democracy today. Indeed you are correct in pointing out that in reality democracy now is a sham, though you did not use the word sham. Yet the plutocracy we have arrived at, I would argue, has in fact directly resulted from the relationship between politics and the economy that deregulated financial capitalism has caused.

So much has the ethical status of the political-economic system degenerated of late, that one begins, and legitimately so, to wonder if the bold experiment that has been democratic civilization over the past 250 years or so is not rapidly progressing to a new form totalitarianism or of a kind of post-modern fuedalism.

The democratic State of today suffers from a debilitating form of atrophy, caused by the symbiosis of politics and business, and would require an even greater revolutionary spirit now than that which gave rise to democracy 250 years ago to arrest this phenomenon. And that's because in no other historical period but today's, has the prevailing economic culture been able to control everything and everyone so thoroughly and so ruthlessly by having given folks just enough wealth and prosperity to be wheedled into passive compliance. While at the same time our times in the Western World, have convinced everyone to assume that democracy actually allows society to play a hand in matters directly related to its own fate: when in reality it is a complete farce in which the votes simply allow the elected to legitemize a preestablished and insidious form of neo-overlordship and neo-serfdom.

The anti-capitalist ideologies of the XIX and early XX centuries had hoped for much more of democracy, yet the democratic State as we know it today has prefered the old pragmatism of the mighty to the mad and just dreams of the revolutionaries.

Perhaps it was inevitable that it would have turned out so, but its causes lie in the symbiosis between the political class and business that has come about from the ideology of the deregulated market. An ideology which has been justifed by the economic growth it has generated, yet which has also created a phantom democracy of the people in direct conflict with a very real plutocracy of the commercial elite. This conflict of interests between democracy and capitalism has more often resulted in recently government being a complice in allowing the "predators to pillage their fellow citizens" as you suggest.

 

[ravens]

I watched a long talk, that he gave a few months ago, on YouTube. He does seem to understand the issues a bit better than the average Austrian Schooler, he's clearly a very smart guy. But when it comes to solutions in a crisis he still doesn't seem to have anything.

In a crisis, we need better answers than "sit back and hope that the market will sort it out." Markets will sort it out, but maybe not in a way we'd like.

Schiff is pretty interesting and says a lot that I agree with, but I am always a little jaundiced (well, I don't actually turn yellow) when guys like him have an interest, in other words, he seems to be selling his services. But that does not negate what he says. Just need to take it with a grain of salt.

his website, he has podcasts videos etc if you are not acquainted.
http://europac.net/

 

[Anonymous]

The reason why I mentioned three mainstream economists (maybe not mainstream enough to the fringe right) is because I doubt that you've heard of Robin Hahnel or Dean Baker, a couple of very perceptive economists.



I have yet to see him offer any concrete solutions to the current crisis. Feel free to point out if I'm wrong. I am genuinely interested to here plausible arguments for other means of escaping recession.

At least neo-classical and Keynesian economists have models and rules-of-thumb to cope with crises. Sowell's one trick is to claim that it is all the govt's fault and that the market will magically fix itself if the govt does nothing. (Without explaining why businesses will start investing in capital and hiring when consumer demand is low.)

P.S. Thomas Sowell is the intellectual who's just written a book telling us all that we should ignore intellectuals, and apparently not getting the irony of it.

Here is some basis for you to look at that strongly suggests govt bailouts and 'stimulus' lead directly to less economic freedom and less overall prosperity;

Responding to Crisis: Government Intervention Hurts

In their responses to the financial crisis and recession, many countries have adopted policies that limit economic freedom. The negative effect of these policies on future growth rates is predictable and certain, and it is already beginning to be manifest in the data and in countries’ Index of Economic Freedom scores.
The recession’s impact was muted in countries that moved to a higher category of economic freedom and exacerbated in countries that moved lower. As shown in Table 2, 15 countries moved from a higher to a lower category of economic freedom or vice versa in this year’s Index. Countries that slipped from one economic freedom category to another (such as from “mostly free” to “moderately free”) experienced considerably lower economic growth than did their counterparts that moved up to the next higher category.
The impact of government fiscal stimulus on growth rates will be fully measurable only in future years. However, the early data available for the countries that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) show that countries with higher levels of government spending continued to grow more slowly during the crisis. This would seem to confirm the view of many economists that the deadweight loss from government inefficiency, the various burdens associated with financing government deficits, and the crowding-out effects of government spending on private-sector demand and investment combine to make fiscal stimulus a poor policy choice in a recession.

http://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2010/Index2010_Chapter1.pdf

Much more info on the Index of Economic Freedom can be found here;

http://www.heritage.org/adserver/abmc.asp?b=142&z=38



Before you accuse me of wanting no govt regulation of 'free markets' let me just say that is not the case. But this idea that govt is the only solution and that obscene spending is somehow the only answer just doesn't cut it.

 

[buckwheat]

Before you accuse me of wanting no govt regulation of 'free markets' let me just say that is not the case. But this idea that govt is the only solution and that obscene spending is somehow the only answer just doesn't cut it.

Another Herbert Hoover.

Nice strawmen!

"only" "no"

No one is suggesting what you're so hysterical about, but I love how you "trolls" always blame the people who are living from paycheck to paycheck rather than the "people" who were supposed to be leading the country.

GWB and his lackeys may well have succeeded in destroying the economy of this country for years and the Democrats are too wimpy to call him and his ilk, those like you, out on it.

 

[buckwheat]

Schiff is pretty interesting and says a lot that I agree with, but I am always a little jaundiced (well, I don't actually turn yellow) when guys like him have an interest, in other words, he seems to be selling his services. But that does not negate what he says. Just need to take it with a grain of salt.

his website, he has podcasts videos etc if you are not acquainted.
http://europac.net/

I thought you were the big capitalist?

Isn't that the idea? To sell your services?

Please come up with more illogic!

 

[fatandfast]

New price for ind medical insurance policy....$1605 per month paid quarterly. No dental or vision included

 

[buckwheat]

no idea what if anything you are responding to, said i was taking a break, not leaving

reading really is fundamental

Yeah, history too.

Go back 81 years and take a look at what the laissez fair crap you subscribe to precipitated.

I love to see how you "people" reframe the causes of the Great Depression.

Whatever dude.

 

[buckwheat]

New price for ind medical insurance policy....$1605 per month paid quarterly. No dental or vision included

Pull yourself up by your bootstraps fella!

I hope they don't deny you if you come down with something that's going to cost actual money to treat or cure.

 

[buckwheat]

I don't think Scott Socal or Central Cali are trolls..

I was trying to give them a way out. The answers are very clear.

They just have different views on economics to us...

That are mostly about myths and lies and how they're self made and pulled themselves up by their bootstraps. Funny about how "pride goeth before a fall," and what do you know? The Republicans claim to be the party of Christian values, another abomination of the truth.

It became fashionable in the 80s to believe in the magic of free-markets.

Just a rehash of Trickle down economics of the 20's which GHWB relabeled VOODOO ECONOMICS. Didn't work then, won't work now.

Let them eat cake indeed!

And that anything that the govt does will make them less efficient. This has subsequently been shown to be wrong, but the idea of free-markets seems so simple and elegant that it has stuck around.

It's stuck around because we have a corporate media and rich people have a dispropotionate voice for their small numbers.

In Florida we have people on street corners selling the "Homeless Voice" newspapers. The biggest irony in the world. They have a tiny voice, one trillionth of the voice of some self involved, self interested, greedy billionaire scumbag.

(It takes only 5 mins to explain free-market ideology and a whole book to show where and why it is wrong.

5 minutes? I can explain it in 5 seconds with 4 seconds allocated to sleep.

Greed / Trickle down / Voodoo!

Raven's though, he just cut&pastes Rush Limbaugh talking points to get a rise out of people. Maybe he doesn't realise that we've all heard them before, and they were foolish then, just as now.

Why aren't these Republican "people" on here quoting Cheney quoting Reagan?

Cheney: "Reagan proved DEFICITS don't matter." page 291 The Price of Loyalty.

This to justify their second round of unjustified tax cuts to the rich.

Damn, I wish you right wing screwballs would stop lying every time you open your mouths.

 

[ravens]

Yeah, history too.

Go back 81 years and take a look at what the laissez fair crap you subscribe to precipitated.

I love to see how you "people" reframe the causes of the Great Depression.

Whatever dude.

wtf? try the decaf, it's the rage

never said laissez faire, I'm more or less on the same page as ScottSC and CCaliBike, but I refuse to waste time dealing with drones and don't care if they don't want to be bothered by me. If they want to spend their time playing whack-a-mole, that's their choice. I generally won't waste the energy on nuts like you.

" You 'people' "? Your bigotry precedes you....

whatever, indeed....

Reading really is Fundamental. I don't try and couch my beliefs hidden behind a lot of nuance, so I assume you are willfully misinterpreting what I say. Why should I take you seriously?

 

[buckwheat]

wtf? try the decaf, it's the rage

never said laissez faire, I'm more or less on the same page as ScottSC and CCaliBike, but I refuse to waste time dealing with drones and don't care if they don't want to be bothered by me. If they want to spend their time playing whack-a-mole, that's their choice. I generally won't waste the energy on nuts like you.

" You 'people' "? Your bigotry precedes you....

whatever, indeed....

Reading really is Fundamental. I don't try and couch my beliefs hidden behind a lot of nuance, so I assume you are willfully misinterpreting what I say. Why should I take you seriously?

Reagan proved deficits don't matter.

Weeks of your stupid arguments right down the toilet.

Game, set, Match.

Checkmate!

 

[buckwheat]

" You 'people' "? Your bigotry precedes you....

whatever, indeed....

Reading really is Fundamental. I don't try and couch my beliefs hidden behind a lot of nuance, so I assume you are willfully misinterpreting what I say. Why should I take you seriously?

Yes! You "people!"

I have very little regard for "people" who are selfish and greedy and who only care about themselves and to hell with others who haven't "made it."

"People" who kiss up and kick down" and always blame the little guy who's killing himself just to make ends meet.

Your greed and selfishness is hidden behind euphemism and high sounding blather and your ignorance of history is willful.

And I recognize that because of "people" like you and the others you mention that, "the world is ruled by violence," and that "all political power grows out of the barrel of a gun," and I'm going to call you people on that, and fight if I have to.

The quotes above are by Bob Dylan and Mao, so I hope the faint of heart don't choose to moderate them.

 

[ravens]

Reagan proved deficits don't matter.

Weeks of your stupid arguments right down the toilet.

Game, set, Match.

Checkmate!

I didn't even know we were having an argument. I think you have me confused with someone else.

 

[ravens]

Yes! You "people!"

I have very little regard for "people" who are selfish and greedy and who only care about themselves and to hell with others who haven't "made it."

"People" who kiss up and kick down" and always blame the little guy who's killing himself just to make ends meet.

Your greed and selfishness is hidden behind euphemism and high sounding blather and your ignorance of history is willful.

And I recognize that because of "people" like you and the others you mention that, "the world is ruled by violence," and that "all political power grows out of the barrel of a gun," and I'm going to call you people on that, and fight if I have to.

The quotes above are by Bob Dylan and Mao, so I hope the faint of heart don't choose to moderate them.

I say this from the heart: Get Help. I really think this thread has gotten inside your head. Go rest, maybe a bike ride. Find your happy place. Maybe move out of your mom's basement to an apartment that has a window. Seasonal affected disorder can be terrible this time of year.

 

[Anonymous]

Another Herbert Hoover.

Nice strawmen!

"only" "no"

No one is suggesting what you're so hysterical about, but I love how you "trolls" always blame the people who are living from paycheck to paycheck rather than the "people" who were supposed to be leading the country.

GWB and his lackeys may well have succeeded in destroying the economy of this country for years and the Democrats are too wimpy to call him and his ilk, those like you, out on it.

So I am a "troll" now. I disagree with your economic beliefs and I'm a troll. I present a fair amount of reasoned ideas written by people a helluva lot smarter than either of us and I'm a troll.

Perhaps those living paycheck to paycheck may want to consider creating additional value for themselves or their ideas to prospective employers (or take an entrepreneurial risk themselves). I know that's extremely difficult for you to hear.

For the record, I don't know what GWB ilk is. I have stated over and over how disappointed I was with most of his economic policies.

The highlighted sentence is just lunacy. When this govt runs out of other people's money to spend on it's vast bureaucratic complex do you really think they won't come after yours? They are spending into oblivion and will tax to there too. This really amounts to this govt "blaming" people living paycheck to paycheck, not people like me.

 

[buckwheat]

The highlighted sentence is just lunacy. When this govt runs out of other people's money to spend on it's vast bureaucratic complex do you really think they won't come after yours? They are spending into oblivion and will tax to there too. This really amounts to this govt "blaming" people living paycheck to paycheck, not people like me.

By calling you a troll I was giving you a way out because looking at history and the previous administration, it's clear Republican politics don't work. I say politics because the Republican party doesn't have any policy. Their politics are all about lying and stealing.

You mean the below quote? That was Cheney talking about Reagans philosophy to justify Republican/Conservative fraud.

"Reagan proved deficits don't matter."

It was very cool of Cheney to say to justify tax breaks for the rich. Now the economy is destroyed, and you have to oppose Dems on everything, all you guys are deficit hawks. Get real.

Game, set, match.

Whoops, I see the quote you labeled lunacy. It wasn't this Administration which caused the problem. Remember not very long ago at the end of the GWB admin. we were on the precipice of a Depression with a complete banking meltdown. Well, guess what? It didn't happen! Even a hobbled ineffectual Obama has done some things right which just shows how resilient the economy is if not run by complete sociopaths.

 

[buckwheat]

I say this from the heart: Get Help. I really think this thread has gotten inside your head. Go rest, maybe a bike ride. Find your happy place. Maybe move out of your mom's basement to an apartment that has a window. Seasonal affected disorder can be terrible this time of year.

Bro, I say this from the heart. Find one for yourself. Really, having a heart and soul give a whole new perspective on what it means to be human.

BTW, I live in Miami so the weather is not a problem. Going out to enjoy the frigid 65 degree weather for a nice relaxed ride. But thanks for caring.

 

[ravens]

Bro, I say this from the heart. Find one for yourself. Really, having a heart and soul give a whole new perspective on what it means to be human.

BTW, I live in Miami so the weather is not a problem. Going out to enjoy the frigid 65 degree weather for a nice relaxed ride. But thanks for caring.

Enjoy the ride, the endorphins will make your mind right. Supposed to be 50 here this weekend finally, so time to unhook the bike from the dusty (spelled u-n-u-s-e-d) trainer and ride.

Be safe.

 

[buckwheat]

Enjoy the ride, the endorphins will make your mind right. Supposed to be 50 here this weekend finally, so time to unhook the bike from the dusty (spelled u-n-u-s-e-d) trainer and ride.

Be safe.

Well, you got your shot in.

Doesn't take much to disarm me.

The riding does make one's mind right. I guess we can agree on that.

The safety thing may be out of my hands. Have you ever ridden a bike in South Florida?

Prayers are welcomed though.