patrick.net

HrhJuliet

I've responded to your counter points to the ones I made:

hrhjuliet says

well do you trust corporations to tell the truth any more than the government?

Nope, but the difference is in a free market I (we) have more control over corporations than our government. A company caught lying can be boycotted or if they committed a crime prosecuted (unless they are a TBTF bank)

What happens when we catch the government lying? NOTHING. They get reelected whether you vote for them or not. You can't sue them and you can't boycott them by not paying your taxes without getting thrown in jail. You can, however, boycott Walmart

Government, when it is the largest in the world is inherently corruptible. Many politicians are in it not to serve, but to better themselves, but have no good or service to offer other than their access to favors.

Its the worst case when governments and corporations work together- fascism- there is no where to turn. At this point government serves its corporate constituents so asking them to help falls on deaf ears. Democrats used to be the party of the consumer advocacy of Ralph Nader and the Republicans of big business. Now Democrats are the party of the bankers and Republicans the party of the oil companies.

hrhjuliet says

Second, you say the media and other knowlegable sources would help educate the public on the corporations, but what good would it do if people do absolutely nothing with the knowledge.

Currently we have a media that is in the back pocket of the corporations. If people do nothing with new knowledge afforded by additional media sources there is not much you or I can do about it.

As to the other counter arguments I'll let the other respond. I would say that creating jobs is not a valid excuse to commit crimes or atrocities.

jazz music says

Now that the powerful have our society utterly rigged to their murderously selfish delight, they want you to call that a FREE MARKET --THIS PRISTINE INVISIBLE HAND WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO DELIVER OPTIMAL RESULTS AND NEEDS NO REGULATION and oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink oink is all that is.

So you are against free trade, against corporations, anti capitalism, a system that creates tremendous wealth for all.
Welfare recipients in this country have a better standard of living compared to the average working citizen of communist Soviet Union, old communist China and Castro's Cuba.
Almost everything invented to improve our standard of living, from life saving drugs to that little iphone in your pocket has been invented by capitalist countries.
People risked their lives to get out of communist countries and into the freedom provided by capitalist countries. No one even bothered to attempt emigrating to the likes of Cuba.
The fact is what we have today in this country is the best ever system devised by mankind. If you have problems with it, please show us a better way, and we will gladly embrace it.

Comparing the system we have now to fascist systems masquerading as communism is really no comparison. (China, North Korea, Soviet Union, etc.)

Just because this is the "best system" mankind has had since we can remember, does that not mean we can't make a better system? Our system existed on the lie of capitalism/free markets and has slowly disintegrated into something that more closely resembles fascism.

The "If it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality" is further away from fixing the "democractic" and "capitalistic" society than if you could turn your self around a bit and admit the system is broken. It is inherently unjust and does not represent the vast majority of humans.

All systems that has existed so far in this world have always bettered an elite group, whatever name you give it. Right now we are seeing that dynamic accentuated. So you are right, Cuba and China do not have a better model than the USA. But this ain't working so well either. Who has a better system? No one, yet. We have to create it.

jazz music says

You argue against government regulating, but that is precisely what corporations lean on to begin with. They are by nature never satisfied.

That is true. Many regulations are written supposedly to keep the large companies in line but instead their impact is to keep competitors out who can't afford to comply.

Many of the items on your list are indeed examples of how governments favor large corporations, and give them an unfair advantage over smaller ones.

Numbers 1, 2, 4 and 5 are available to all corporations equally.
3, 6 & 7, 8 and 9 clearly are special favors for larger corporation and I would favor eliminating them. 9 is a mess.

The corporate structure of 1 & 2 are probably necessary for a functioning economy except in an anarcho capitalist regime and perhaps can be administered better.

4 is up for a lengthy debate.

5 capital gains should be lower or non existent as should income taxes but that is outside this discussion but ties into my theory that if the Federal govt weren't so large it wouldn't be so corruptible. Better for taxes to be levied at the state and local level where the spending also should take place. Doesn't make sense to send more money to Washington than to your state or local governments where the services are administered.

Indiana Jones says

All systems that has existed so far in this world have always bettered an elite group, whatever name you give it.

That is true. My argument is that pure capitalism provide the greatest opportunity for the largest number of people. When government coddles large companies that advantage is gone.

One could argue that capitalists when they get large enough will seek political influence and protection- after all why compete if you don't have to and can buy consistent market share and keep your costs low through favorable tax and labor regulation. Remove the government's ability to grant these favors and dumber, abusive, more expensive companies that don't respond to consumer needs best will fall by the wayside.

Indiana Jones says

The "If it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality" is further away from fixing the "democractic" and "capitalistic" society than if you could turn your self around a bit and admit the system is broken. It is inherently unjust and does not represent the vast majority of humans.

All systems that has existed so far in this world have always bettered an elite group, whatever name you give it. Right now we are seeing that dynamic accentuated. So you are right, Cuba and China do not have a better model than the USA. But this ain't working so well either. Who has a better system? No one, yet. We have to create it.

Im with you. Here is the last sentence I wrote:
Strategist says

The fact is what we have today in this country is the best ever system devised by mankind. If you have problems with it, please show us a better way, and we will gladly embrace it.

Because we are a democracy we can slowly evolve into a better and better system with the power of the vote.

Strategist says

Because we are a democracy we can slowly evolve into a better and better system with the power of the vote.

Democracy is meaningless in a country of 330 million people. It can only be effective on a much smaller level.
The New Hampshire state legislature has over 400 representatives for a state of just a few million compared to the US which has roughly the same amount of representative for 330 million people.

smaulgld says

Democracy is meaningless in a country of 330 million people.

And that is the rub. Might work with a federal government born and subservient to the states. Otherwise it is the tyranny of the democracy.

indigenous says

And that is the rub. Might work with a federal government born and subservient to the states. Otherwise it is the tyranny of the democracy.

That danger exists in any democracy- its an inherent flaw without safeguards. In a large democracy its inevitable.

If you think big corporations "force" you to buy their junk, compare it to your obligation to pay for things that the Federal government spends money on that you may or may not approve of or want:

NSA, wars, welfare, farm subsidies, corporate welfare, TSA, food stamps, foreign aid, bailouts, Obama care, congressional health care, Presidential vacations, Department of Education etc.

But hey you had a right to vote!

In reality you have no say as to whether these programs get funded or not-you pay for them no matter what.

smaulgld says

indigenous says

And that is the rub. Might work with a federal government born and subservient to the states. Otherwise it is the tyranny of the democracy.

That danger exists in any democracy- its an inherent flaw without safeguards. In a large democracy its inevitable.

If you think big corporations "force" you to buy their junk, compare it to your obligation to pay for things that the Federal government spends money on that you may or may not approve of or want:

NSA, wars, welfare, farm subsidies, corporate welfare, TSA, food stamps, foreign aid, bailouts, Obama care, congressional health care, Presidential vacations, Department of Education etc.

But hey you had a right to vote!

In reality you have no say as to whether these programs get funded or not-you pay for them no matter what.

The thing is that in small groups the individual functions and prospers, really just an organizational problem. This does not occur with a centralized government.

Corporations answer to the customer, it is a fallacy that they last forever on their own. The market is the ultimate in accountability and ethics. Montgomery Ward begets Sears, who begets Walmart, who begets Amazon.

With government or cronies accountability is gone, despite tv portraying the opposite. Evil is the accumulation of indifference.

The only real chance is to shrink the government, which means no chance as the accumulation of indifference is too far gone.

APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch says

until corporations have unlimited license to kill 'customers' that threaten its owners, including unions and elected officials and terrorists known as regulators and tax collectors.

Give corporations the same rights as the government?

jazz music says

Indiana Jones says

Comparing the system we have now to fascist systems masquerading as communism is really no comparison. (China, North Korea, Soviet Union, etc.)

Just because this is the "best system" mankind has had since we can remember

We now have a fascist system masquerading as something noble just as all fascist systems have ever done. Like I said, the moral high ground is as crucially important for propaganda as are the myths of meritocracy and free market.

Listening to that siren song you can all sleep well, talk smug, and get back to work unfazed by the reality of living in the most perfected servant state system ever so happily accelerating toward massive conversion to prison industries.

Jazz, you are complaining a lot without offering a solution.
What is your solution?

Strategist says

Jazz, you are complaining a lot without offering a solution.

What is your solution?

I think you just posted it above. I'll read it.

Strategist says

Strategist says

Jazz, you are complaining a lot without offering a solution.

What is your solution?

I think you just posted it above. I'll read it.

You know there is always something to complain about. Isn't it nice you are completely free to do so, without the fear of jackbooted gestapo coming to drag you in front of the firing squad.
You are still not providing a solution. :(

jazz music says

Government is a tool. Government has no motive without someone to drive it.

That is a fallacy. The government is NOT a monolith, it is a bunch of individuals who follow their self interest, without any regard to the greater good. This is NO different than the private sector. This is human nature.

Cept the private sector is held accountable.

To deify government is an absurd fantasy. One that if followed will ALWAYS lead to misery. You gotsa to have accountability, there ain't none in state government and less than none in federal government, to think otherwise is childish in the extreme.

indigenous says

none in federal government, to think otherwise is childish in the extreme.

There is no way possible a federal government 3000 miles away with trillion dollar budgets can even hope to be responsive to its citizens- there is just too much going on and too much money.
It's hard enough for the local school board to be responsible to its community

smaulgld says

There is no way possible a federal government 3000 miles away with trillion dollar budgets can even hope to be responsive to its citizens

Xactly, is it possible more can get this idear?

indigenous says

smaulgld says

There is no way possible a federal government 3000 miles away with trillion dollar budgets can even hope to be responsive to its citizens

Xactly, is it possible more can get this idear?

And if you have too much government you get bigger deficits, bigger bureaucracy and more inefficiency.
Anyway, its time to have some wine at Macaroni grill.
See ya tomorrow.

sbh says

The free market is not beholden to consumers

Sure it is, as I indicated by the examples of Montgomery Ward, Sears, Walmart, Amazon.

sbh says

If it could get way with violent coercion

And that is why we need the rule of law.

sbh says

To be sure, consumers and competitors can be, and have been, ripped off, lied to, killed and bankrupted by market participants in the search of profit.

And that is why companies go out of business, as the consumer votes with his feet and buys from a competitor.

sbh says

In the same way that conservatives only want "freedom" to be the freedom to be conservative, capitalism only wants markets to be free to seek profit, and not to serve consumers.

The greediest person in the world will not make a dime more because of his greed. He will only make money based on this ability to aide his customers in their endeavors.

You have made your ignorance abundantly clear.

sbh says

capitalism only wants markets to be free to seek profit, and not to serve consumers

A company can only seek profit lawfully by serving consumers with a product or service at a price the consumer is willing to pay.

If a company "rips off, lies to, kills" it won't be profitable unless the government does not enforce the laws that allow it to profit from such unlawful acts.

smaulgld says

Capitalism puts the consumer in charge- it is the ultimate form of democracy

Don't like a product don't buy it. Like it buy it.

The only poorly run companies that provide bad products are government sponsored. In a free market they would be driven out

This works right up to the point where the production of corporations move overseas where the value of their labor is gained by outside markets and the profit is shared only between a very small minority. It's ok for the minority to profit, but when production moves outside the target market, said market will always be buying the product at a loss, no matter what price they pay for it. It's a fundamental rule of economics that consumers must have money to be consumers. When you take away their jobs, you remove their ability to consume, and thus cut down the tree of the economy at its root.

Quigley says

This works right up to the point where the production of corporations move overseas where the value of their labor is gained by outside markets and the profit is shared only between a very small minority.

The production raises the standard of living of the other country, as it did with China, in the last 10-15 years the per capita income has gone from $500 to $7000.

This has raised the standard of living of the American consumer by a lot.

The underlying cause of this situation has been mercantilism, this has artificially kept the value of the Yuan lower than the market would have been if left to the market. The US did the same thing in the early 20's which led to the boom at that time. The real losers in this situation was Chinese consumers as the house hold income went down. Same thing for the US in the early 20s.

Without government intervention this would not have occurred as the market would have kept the value of the Yuan higher and the dollar higher in the US in the early 20s.

sbh says

The greediest person in the world will not make a dime more because of his greed. He will only make money based on this ability to aide his customers in their endeavors.

This is the most naive piece of bullshit you've ever spewed. You have to say it over and over because without it you have only the pointless sociopathy of capitalism as it eats its seed corn for the sake of one quarters growth rate.

Read the legalese in your credit card agreement. Buy internet and cable TV with ATT and find out how they've fucked you not with their advertised product but with the "registration" of it. None of this is consumer service, it's entirely consumer exploitation. Then you'll say that's the fault of government. You're an intellectual coward.

SBH, your entire comment completely made my day. I can now go to bed not feeling that the world is overrun by sociopathic ignoramuses. It truly does help me sleep. It is rather comforting to know that there are people in the world with a conscience and an intellect. Cheers.

sbh says

Implicit in the lawful market is the government. Businesses cheat.

And you don't think government does?

sbh says

Otherwise my law trumps your law when I have more money or greater willingness to use violence.

I'm sure willingness, ability I doubt.

sbh says

fact that when the cheating succeeds it is because of government inefficiency or corruption.

So you do not blame government for bailing out the TBTF banks? Who's fault was that? It was a corrupt government Bush, Obama, and Bernanke, Paulsen, Geitner and the cronies.

sbh says

Companies live for years lying and delaying legal action and counter suing, unethically destroying consumers and competitors.

Generally the companies pay the government to regulate the companies who are successful so they can gain market share. Or they just go out of business, usually because of the burden of government.

sbh says

Business doesn't give a fuck about consumers, it only cares about profit.

So the willingness to satisfy customers is just a charade? At the very least the company has the goal of getting more market share. Your statement here is truly stupid. By that definition Bernie Madhoff should be very successful right up until the govt caught him, except they didn't the SEC was told 5 times by a financial analyst about the fraud and they ignored him.

Your idea on this is naive bullshit.

sbh says

Buy internet and cable TV with ATT and find out how they've fucked you not with their advertised product but with the "registration" of it. None of this is consumer service, it's entirely consumer exploitation.

sbh says

Buy internet and cable TV with ATT and find out how they've fucked you not with their advertised product but with the "registration" of it. None of this is consumer service, it's entirely consumer exploitation.

The customer can simply stop buying the cable service, which is not possible with government.

sbh says

Then you'll say that's the fault of government. Y

Yes, you are a dumb ass

hrhjuliet says

I can now go to bed not feeling that the world is overrun by sociopathic ignoramuses.

Whether you think so or not you are economically illiterate.

indigenous says

hrhjuliet says

I can now go to bed not feeling that the world is overrun by sociopathic ignoramuses.

Whether you think so or not you are economically illiterate.

Your opinion, not a fact. Good for you for having the self-esteem to believe you are the judge of who is economically literate. Alas, if we could all be so very confident.

hrhjuliet says

“we have put excessive emphasis on owner-occupied housing for social objectives,.

Who are "WE" ? The Govt, media, community groups ?

so some blame capitalism...

hrhjuliet says

SBH, your entire comment completely made my day. I can now go to bed not feeling that the world is overrun by sociopathic ignoramuses. It truly does help me sleep. It is rather comforting to know that there are people in the world with a conscience and an intellect. Cheers.

LOL, SBH is a sociopathic ignoramus. He wants to structure your life. He thinks he is a great orator like Hitler.

sbh says

it boggles the mind of a sentient being that some people would lay our fate at the feet of a sociopathic system that values only efficiency and profit.

no.. it makes alot of sense... eventually the profits get plowed back in further expansion and growth of business. Other industries benefit from consumer savings/spending. Else no profit not savings no economic growth! thus shortages will ensue. Its no wonder USSR one found only long lines of shoppers and shortages....

hrhjuliet says

Your opinion, not a fact.

Ok a few questions about the facts.

1 What is the cause of inflation? Is it good or bad?

2 Does war boost the economy?

3 Does minimum wage raise aggregate income?

4 Does government spending increase aggregate economic activity?

5 Is monopoly a method for business to control the market?

6 Has government healthcare raised the standard of living of the people in Britain?

7 Is it better to have fiat currency or a gold backed currency?

8 Do tariffs protect the people of a country?

9 What is the 1.5 multiplier?

Since you have a superior British education these questions should be easy for you to answer.

indigenous says

By that definition Bernie Madhoff should be very successful right up until the govt caught him, except they didn't the SEC was told 5 times by a financial analyst about the fraud and they ignored him.

To have gone to the SEC would have been the wrong move.. better go to FBI since SEC doesnt regulate non public entities... when was the last time the SEC reviewed a non-public companies (like a SV start up) as they often review publicly traded companies ?

thomaswong.1986 says

To have gone to the SEC would have been the wrong move.. better go to FBI since SEC doesnt regulate non public entities... when was the last time the SEC reviewed a non-public companies (like a SV start up) as they often review publicly traded companies ?

Maybe so but an analyst is who caught him.

sbh says

It boggles the mind of a sentient being that some people would lay our fate at the feet of a sociopathic system that values only efficiency and profit.

That would be socialists trying to plan an economy according to their own visions of efficiency. Whereas in a relatively free market place, individual participants express their wishes and relative orders of importance through their purchase decisions. "Profit" in a relatively free market place means satisfying more of other people's "wants" at the cost of less "sacrifices" by other people. That may indeed be anathema to people who desire to build their own political grandeur at the expense of other people's blood and sweat.

I am an archetypal Scot: I revere thrift. But, as a world participant, and not a mere pedant, I recognize that government is not subject to the rigors of markets.

What's that supposed to mean? Are you saying that the person wearing government costumes should be able to extract resources at will from others for free? without consent from the victims?

Conversely, who in their right mind conditions markets to the benefit of government?

That would the government officials regulating the market place to their own benefit. That's the bulk of the current law making process: proposing a law that threatens the livelihood of an industry then wait for the industry to cough up political donations; once the existing firms are paying up, they may as well pay to have laws in place that would limit competition. The ultimate loser in this game are the consumers. The corporations are essentially being tax-farmed by the politicians, to extract political donations.

Only the simple-minded see the two as having the same goals or the same set of demands. Only government can stand up to the power of capitalism.

The government has no goals, nor do corporations per se. Both are artificial entities, puppets. Real people use government and corporations to gain advantage over other real people. Often times it's the same people going through the revolving doors between government and corporations.

Only capitalism can give virtuous life to the stored labor of human industry.

Do you really think the craftsmanship that went into the horse carriage had less "stored labor" than the stamped steel auto body shell? "Stored labor" is irrelevant just like Marxist Labor Theory of Value is irrelevant and wrong. The value of an object is in the eyes of the beholder and relative to other objects. That's why central planners making decisions on other people's behalf are doomed to failure. Individuals have to be empowered to make decisions and make choices for himself and herself.

a href="http://patrick.net/?p=1241619&c=1075529#comment-1075529">indigenous says

Ok a few questions about the facts.

1 What is the cause of inflation? Is it good or bad?

2 Does war boost the economy?

The causes of inflation are varied, and whether or not it is good or bad is an opinion.
I think printing money is the largest offender and believe it's bad. Does that make my answer correct? No, it's my opinion.

Does war boost the economy? Seriously, what a pathetic question. Is rain wet? Of course war boosts the economy. When companies like Lockhead Martin gain, the stock market gains. Is it good for our economy in the long run? No, it is not. Your remedial questions are only meant to patronize me. Just because I was a science major please don't assume I didn't study economics.

The rest of your questions can be answered by my many earlier threads and comments about monopolies, the fiat system, New Keynesian, naive Keynesian and mercantilism. Most of my economic posts are before 2014, if you are truly interested in my opinions on these economic systems

I don't have time to write what I have already written about before, because you see Sir, tonight I have a more important job: I am the Easter Bunny. (:

hrhjuliet says

I think printing money is the largest offender and believe it's bad. Does that make my answer correct?

Yes

hrhjuliet says

Does war boost the economy? Seriously, what a pathetic question. Is rain wet? Of course war boosts the economy.

No it does not. A similar situation would be spending money on fixing a broken window. If that is true could you keep breaking windows to boost the economy?

hrhjuliet says

Your remedial questions are only meant to patronize me.

Yup I learned it from you, I hope you did better in your science classes.

Wars often boost GDP. They do not boost the real economy, but usually destroy the economy or at least distort the economy into war production that has little peace time value in the eyes of individual consumers.

Keynes' main career achievement was conflating GDP with the real economy. The poisoning of mind has been carried out wide and deep. Before Keynes, GDP was a metric for debt service capacity, not the size of economy (except from the perspective of a bankster trying to extract from the economy).

I was just reading about the German mark tonight, and saw this:

"From 1900 to 1933, the United States adhered to a gold standard as well, with the value of the dollar being fixed at a price of approximately one-twentieth ounce (troy weight) of gold (one troy ounce of gold was actually valued at US$20.67)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_gold_mark

So gold is worth $1300 today, for an "inflation" of ~60X since that bad man took us off the gold standard.

Per the 1940 Census I see that the house I rented a room in in 1986-87 in West LA for $400/mo rented for $65 a month in 1940, and 60 x $65 is $3900, which is about right for that area (1B apartments go for half that)

But its neighbor 10763 W Rochester had a valuation of $8500 in 1940, and 60 x $8500 is $500,000 -- only about 40% what zillow says this SFH's valuation is.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/10763-Rochester-Ave-Los-Angeles-CA-90024/20504931_zpid/

So something more than inflation is going on with home prices. Which makes sense, since interest rates drive home prices more than rents.

(the cool thing is the lady I rented the room from in 1986 was on the 1940 census! She was such a nice lady, and looking back on it was a privilege that she was renting out a room to me)

(her husband made $4200 in 1939, so home values were about 2X incomes then, and rents were under 20%)

(ah, right, the two income trap explains a lot of this price differential)

Want government labeling? Walmart will be moving into organic foods.
I'm sure they'll do as good a job as the SEC does with ferreting out fraud
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-04-08/sec-goldman-lawyer-says-agency-too-timid-on-wall-street-misdeeds.html

sbh says

indigenous says

sbh says

Implicit in the lawful market is the government. Businesses cheat.

And you don't think government does?

Of course it does and you've heard me say as much. Both entities share the identical sins, hence they must lean against each other. Being simple minded you would destroy the one and claim the other is flawless. I would never be so naive.

Happy Easter Everyone. Now back to solving world problems.
I understand businesses cheat as there is a profit motive. How does the government cheat? And what is the motive? I just don't get it.

Strategist says

How does the government cheat? And what is the motive?

Government is not a monolith they are individuals who can hide behind the anonymity of "government".

Evil by definition is choosing to be complacent. Government is a culture of complacency. And individuals exploiting at the expense of the greater good. To greater or lesser degree this is treason.

They cheat by using unions to be overpaid and by not doing their jobs and by by stealing as with the case of the city of bell or paying cronies as with TBTF

Most do not realize they are stealing but they are stealing none the less.

Business does not steal as they are held accountable to the marketplace. They can cheat to some extent as sbh suggests but they are caught sooner than later and it hurts their business. They can cheat though government cronyism as Goldman Sachs does or by creating monopolies through government.