19 Mar '13 14:02>
Agree or disagree?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Group_on_Financial_Markets
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Group_on_Financial_Markets
Originally posted by Metal BrainThe advocates of "central planning" which you wouldn't ordinarily associate with Reagan, but which include a great many neocons, and even traditional conservatives, all want to take the risk out of markets. When the risk is gone, it is no longer a market.
Agree or disagree?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Group_on_Financial_Markets
Originally posted by normbenignI think it is worse than you think. Max Keiser explains.
The advocates of "central planning" which you wouldn't ordinarily associate with Reagan, but which include a great many neocons, and even traditional conservatives, all want to take the risk out of markets. When the risk is gone, it is no longer a market.
What is both good and bad, is that it is impossible to remove the risk. One would have to know w ...[text shortened]... plications, and ability of big money players to "move" it, make it more risky for novices.
Originally posted by Metal BrainMax's reasoning is interesting. He may well be right. One thing for sure is that our markets are far from free, and whatever bad that happens can't be blamed of laissez faire.
I think it is worse than you think. Max Keiser explains.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_YKaHkKR74
Originally posted by normbenignSure it can. Laissez faire is inherently contradictory: if you leave corporations, magnates and captains of industry free to do what they want, that means you leave them free to rig the market. In particular monied interests can and will use their money to influence the government, and use government as their tool to gain control of sectors of the economy and financial institutions. It's fantasy to believe that there can ever be "small government" coexisting alongside "big business". You get what you pay for.
Max's reasoning is interesting. He may well be right. One thing for sure is that our markets are far from free, and whatever bad that happens can't be blamed of laissez faire.
Originally posted by SoothfastIf the market can be rigged, it is strictly due, as it always has been, to the interference of the State. Markets involve competition between producers for the business of consumers. The notion that all the so called captains conspire with each other, even when they are competing is quite naive. What they often do is to bribe or otherwise influence government to violate markets in their favor.
Sure it can. Laissez faire is inherently contradictory: if you leave corporations, magnates and captains of industry free to do what they want, that means you leave them free to rig the market. In particular monied interests can and will use their money to influence the government, and use government as their tool to gain control of sectors of the econo ...[text shortened]... ever be "small government" coexisting alongside "big business". You get what you pay for.
Originally posted by normbenignYour religious devotion is touching. And it's always interesting to see someone using the "Big Lie" technique as you constantly do regarding the causes of the Great Recession. Just because you've convinced yourself doesn't mean you'll be able to convince anyone else when the facts so obviously refute your hypothesis (not yours, of course, but far out right wing spin).
If the market can be rigged, it is strictly due, as it always has been, to the interference of the State. Markets involve competition between producers for the business of consumers. The notion that all the so called captains conspire with each other, even when they are competing is quite naive. What they often do is to bribe or otherwise influence gov e getting pay checks don't really care the size of the business whose name is on the paycheck.
Originally posted by no1marauderYou have done nothing to refute the so called "big lie". An argument without an argument.
Your religious devotion is touching. And it's always interesting to see someone using the "Big Lie" technique as you constantly do regarding the causes of the Great Recession. Just because you've convinced yourself doesn't mean you'll be able to convince anyone else when the facts so obviously refute your hypothesis (not yours, of course, but far out right wing spin).