My opinion about the Economy

[Arthur Dent]

WIth all due respect, I feel I'm more than generous when the government steals 30+ percent of my income to pay for other people. Why the **** should I have to give more on top of that?

I'm not saying you need to give more. Where did you read that?

Every business's goal is to maximize profit. Period. A good product and employing people are the means to that end, not the goal itself. The beauty of producer and consumer being free top operate solely with each other is that either one can refuse to do business with the other if he doesn't like the terms the other is offering. Which means the other will have to change his terms or seek another party willing to accept his terms.

Yes, the goal of business is to maximize profit. But at what cost? What is missing in business now is ethics.

If enough consumers refuse to purchase a product or service it will have only two possible effects in a free economy: put the businessman out of business or force him to change his terms to attract the consumers.

Depends on the product or service. If it's a non-essential then you are correct. If it's an essential then consumers don't have much choice, right? Take a look at the price of gasoline.

No, it's not the opinion that inefficiencies in the system need to be addressed that earns your the appropriately applied slander of the day. It's the idea that the government is the solution and it somehow can create a better result than free people.

I never said the government is the solution. It is part of the solution. Government intervention helps to temper the profiteering that has become so prominent.

You belong in a Rand novel.

That supposed to be a putdown?

The free market has failed. Miserably. Wake up, folks! Businesses haven't had it this good since the time of the robber barons. All that's happened is prices have gone up, wages have either stagnated or decreased and unemployment has gone nearly out of control. Tax cuts for the rich because otherwise they can't help create jobs? They've had those tax cuts for years and where have all of those promised jobs gone? Where have they materialized? If being on umemployment is a job then they have succeeded beyond all expectation. Otherwise they have failed. So which is it?

 

[dross]

I think the free market is a great idea. I just wish we would give it a try.

 

[Garb]

The free market has failed. Miserably. Wake up, folks! Businesses haven't had it this good since the time of the robber barons. All that's happened is prices have gone up, wages have either stagnated or decreased and unemployment has gone nearly out of control. Tax cuts for the rich because otherwise they can't help create jobs? They've had those tax cuts for years and where have all of those promised jobs gone? Where have they materialized? If being on umemployment is a job then they have succeeded beyond all expectation. Otherwise they have failed. So which is it?

I would hardly call the current economy based around a free market. A free market means the government has nothing to do with it. Would you call minimum wage and corporate welfare a free market? I think not.

 

[88GT]

The free market has failed. Miserably. Wake up, folks! Businesses haven't had it this good since the time of the robber barons. All that's happened is prices have gone up, wages have either stagnated or decreased and unemployment has gone nearly out of control. Tax cuts for the rich because otherwise they can't help create jobs? They've had those tax cuts for years and where have all of those promised jobs gone? Where have they materialized? If being on umemployment is a job then they have succeeded beyond all expectation. Otherwise they have failed. So which is it?

You're an idiot or you're yanking our chains. I haven't decided which yet.

 

[Stschil]

For some reason, the public in general seem to be under the understanding that we live in a 'free' society. This really is not the case and those days are long gone.

We do ourselves and our children a huge disservice by not teaching them our TRUE history. Libtards with tenure have been brainwashing young minds since the 60's. Social Studies, Government, and US History curriculums no longer tell the truth, they tell nice 'stories' to make us feel good about where we've been and where we are going.

At the risk of offending some of the readers here, some of you have fallen vicitm to this and don't even know it. You stand firm on liberal talking points because that is how you were taught things were supposed to be in good old school. Do yourselves a HUGE favor. Go to the VFW sometime and talk with some of our WWII and Korean War vets (while they are still on this plane of existance, as they are leaving us for better pastures at the rate of over 2500 per day), sit with them, talk with them, ask some questions. Learn some things from folks who have lived more than 2 or 3 decades.
Go to the library, look up some old texts on history and them compare to what you were taught and what your children are being taught today, I guarantee that you will see some very striking omissions and some flat out lies.
Another very good book on the market today is more recent. "Broke", by Glenn Beck is an excellent read. He lays bare the mindset of the so called 'progressives' who have sought power and wealth by changing the publics' mentality to be dependant on the government.

If we want to see REAL CHANGE, we must first take the country away from the government and give it back to the people. I have a few ideas on this matter.

1st: Stop printing money. The Fed is printing day and night, it is all Fiat with nothing to back it. Our National debt is out of control. The reason our banks loaned out so much money to people who couldn't afford to pay it back is because they were REQUIRED to. Yes,,,,the Clinton administration gave banks a quota. This was done because the Fed wants the value of the the dollar to plummet because we have too much debt. Inflation is the vehicle they believe will carry them out of this debt. It is a hidden tax. http://mortgagesecretpower.com/Readings/1007/aTWOlb.pdf

2nd: Stop the government entitlement programs. All of them, to include politicians' paychecks. Our Founders did not rely on a paycheck from the government, they were businessmen prior to taking office, and continued while in office. Our leaders go to college to learn how to be politicians. That's akin to a thief going to prison to learn how to not get caught again. Once they are in office, they will do nearly anything to stay on the dole. Term limits, term limits, term limits.

3rd: Get us back to a Constitutional Government. Roll back all the so called 'progress' and let the people of this country be the ones who actually run it.

Just a few ideas that I have....

 

[Garb]

For some reason, the public in general seem to be under the understanding that we live in a 'free' society. This really is not the case and those days are long gone.

We do ourselves and our children a huge disservice by not teaching them our TRUE history. Libtards with tenure have been brainwashing young minds since the 60's. Social Studies, Government, and US History curriculums no longer tell the truth, they tell nice 'stories' to make us feel good about where we've been and where we are going.

At the risk of offending some of the readers here, some of you have fallen vicitm to this and don't even know it. You stand firm on liberal talking points because that is how you were taught things were supposed to be in good old school. Do yourselves a HUGE favor. Go to the VFW sometime and talk with some of our WWII and Korean War vets (while they are still on this plane of existance, as they are leaving us for better pastures at the rate of over 2500 per day), sit with them, talk with them, ask some questions. Learn some things from folks who have lived more than 2 or 3 decades.
Go to the library, look up some old texts on history and them compare to what you were taught and what your children are being taught today, I guarantee that you will see some very striking omissions and some flat out lies.
Another very good book on the market today is more recent. "Broke", by Glenn Beck is an excellent read. He lays bare the mindset of the so called 'progressives' who have sought power and wealth by changing the publics' mentality to be dependant on the government.

If we want to see REAL CHANGE, we must first take the country away from the government and give it back to the people. I have a few ideas on this matter.

1st: Stop printing money. The Fed is printing day and night, it is all Fiat with nothing to back it. Our National debt is out of control. The reason our banks loaned out so much money to people who couldn't afford to pay it back is because they were REQUIRED to. Yes,,,,the Clinton administration gave banks a quota. This was done because the Fed wants the value of the the dollar to plummet because we have too much debt. Inflation is the vehicle they believe will carry them out of this debt. It is a hidden tax. http://mortgagesecretpower.com/Readings/1007/aTWOlb.pdf

2nd: Stop the government entitlement programs. All of them, to include politicians' paychecks. Our Founders did not rely on a paycheck from the government, they were businessmen prior to taking office, and continued while in office. Our leaders go to college to learn how to be politicians. That's akin to a thief going to prison to learn how to not get caught again. Once they are in office, they will do nearly anything to stay on the dole. Term limits, term limits, term limits.

3rd: Get us back to a Constitutional Government. Roll back all the so called 'progress' and let the people of this country be the ones who actually run it.

Just a few ideas that I have....

I agree with all of your points, however, I would be curious how you define liberal. These days, I would define a liberal as a socialist or a progressive. I lean liberal on some issues, but am neither of those things. By definition, I guess you could call me a libertarian, although I don't necessarily hold on to one party as the end all solution to the problems facing our country. Of course, to a few members on here, I am still just a "libtard."

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I agree with all of your points, however, I would be curious how you define liberal. These days, I would define a liberal as a socialist or a progressive. I lean liberal on some issues, but am neither of those things. By definition, I guess you could call me a libertarian, although I don't necessarily hold on to one party as the end all solution to the problems facing our country. Of course, to a few members on here, I am still just a "libtard."

Yeah but it's OK. You're still in college. You've got time to grow out of it.

 

[Stschil]

I agree with all of your points, however, I would be curious how you define liberal. These days, I would define a liberal as a socialist or a progressive. I lean liberal on some issues, but am neither of those things. By definition, I guess you could call me a libertarian, although I don't necessarily hold on to one party as the end all solution to the problems facing our country. Of course, to a few members on here, I am still just a "libtard."

Liberal is a costume word for socialist and progressive. One little evil at a time is how indoctrination works. The Democrat party is made up of many different 'hot button' factions, each having their own following. None necessarily hold one united view on anything. The leaders of the party have learned to pander to each group by paying lip service to each factions 'hot topic' and get their support. A good example? the NRA endorsed a Dem for congress in Indiana. Was he liberal? Probably not, however, he now is under the control of people who call themselves liberals, but who really are socialists. Another? The Black Caucus. what, other than welfare and Nobama, has the Democrat party ever done for the black population? Yet this same group continually vote Dem because they are promised all sorts of stuff that has never happened. IMO neither of the major parties are worth the time it would take me to throw them out as if they were trash.
I personally would describe myself as about ten steps to the right of libertarian.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Liberal is a costume word for socialist and progressive. One little evil at a time is how indoctrination works. The Democrat party is made up of many different 'hot button' factions, each having their own following. None necessarily hold one united view on anything. The leaders of the party have learned to pander to each group by paying lip service to each factions 'hot topic' and get their support. A good example? the NRA endorsed a Dem for congress in Indiana. Was he liberal? Probably not, however, he now is under the control of people who call themselves liberals, but who really are socialists. Another? The Black Caucus. what, other than welfare and Nobama, has the Democrat party ever done for the black population? Yet this same group continually vote Dem because they are promised all sorts of stuff that has never happened. IMO neither of the major parties are worth the time it would take me to throw them out as if they were trash.
I personally would describe myself as about ten steps to the right of libertarian.

Free bus rides and cheesburgers on election day?

 

[Stschil]

Free bus rides and cheesburgers on election day?

 

[Garb]

Yeah but it's OK. You're still in college. You've got time to grow out of it.

Hey, I hope you're right. My fiance agrees with dems on social issues, and thinks welfare is necessary, so she claims that's her party. She's not socialist by any means, just fallen into some of the traps that liberals like to set. i.e. "If you cut welfare you will be kicking granny out on the street." But she's still in college too. So hopefully she'll grow out of it. lol I'm hopeful at least.

Edit: For the record, when I say I hope you're right, I mean I hope my fiance changes her mind. lol

 

[Garb]

Liberal is a costume word for socialist and progressive. One little evil at a time is how indoctrination works. The Democrat party is made up of many different 'hot button' factions, each having their own following. None necessarily hold one united view on anything. The leaders of the party have learned to pander to each group by paying lip service to each factions 'hot topic' and get their support. A good example? the NRA endorsed a Dem for congress in Indiana. Was he liberal? Probably not, however, he now is under the control of people who call themselves liberals, but who really are socialists. Another? The Black Caucus. what, other than welfare and Nobama, has the Democrat party ever done for the black population? Yet this same group continually vote Dem because they are promised all sorts of stuff that has never happened. IMO neither of the major parties are worth the time it would take me to throw them out as if they were trash.
I personally would describe myself as about ten steps to the right of libertarian.

Ok I was just curious. I've heard a lot of people say that libertarians are the same as liberals, and I've heard liberals say that they're the same as conservatives, which is simply not true in either case. Of course if you refute their arguments with common sense, then you're an anarchist. Of course, as SemperFiUSMC said, I'm still in college. lol

 

[Arthur Dent]

I would hardly call the current economy based around a free market. A free market means the government has nothing to do with it. Would you call minimum wage and corporate welfare a free market? I think not.

Read up on the effects of a free market. Quit swallowing the swill of big business like it has the antidote.

 

[Arthur Dent]

You're an idiot or you're yanking our chains. I haven't decided which yet.

In all seriousness look at the effects of free markets around the world.

 

[Arthur Dent]

Yeah but it's OK. You're still in college. You've got time to grow out of it.

You need to go back to college. Learn about something called ethics. You have none.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

In all seriousness look at the effects of free markets around the world.

I respectfully disagree - free markets around the world WORK... but they must be FREE... your earlier example of electricity "deregulation" is NOT an example of a FREE market! It is merely a "differently regulated" market! I gave some examples to that end. I will reiterate one right now - in the current market design used across the country (Locational Marginal Pricing) the SUPPLIER of electricity is differentiated based on their location in the grid. But the CONSUMER is NOT! So people in the Central Valley of California pay the same for their power that the libtards in San Francisco do - even though the SF crowd's NIMBY (Not in MY Back Yard) policies are what is causing the inefficiencies!. That ain't FREE - some consumers are penalizing others. Effectively I want Golden Delicious apples so all my neighbors get to pay more for ALL of the apples that are bought and sold!

That is but one example. There are many other reasons why the electricity market is NOT free. Just differently regulated. And that same market design is STANDARD throughout the land now... I know - the Texas market is pretty much the last major one to go to that design and they cutover Dec 1. I'm involved with the preparations for that for a major market player.

My point is this.. Free markets DO work. If I don't like your security practices, I can fly a different airline or drive a car or etc. Power ain't 'zactly so... necessarily - because it's GOTTA be all one grid...

Take our favorite topic - GUNS! If I think Glocks, or Hi Points or [insert your favorite brand here] sucks - then I don't support them with my money! And viola! It works! A few years ago - few people messed with Saigas... now you can get ALL MANNER of toys for your S12! Why - uhhh... because there was a FREE market and people found that you could blast the crap out of pumpkins with an S12 and it was AWESOME!. And they shelled out money for the privilege! And Cam over at Chaos, for example made a business out of it!

I respect the notion that sometimes the needs of the community demand action. This is especially true in cases where roads must go through to facilitate commerce. Same for power lines, etc. Without that infrastructure we would be not very well off as a country. That's why we have eminent domain... (WHEN CORRECTLY USED) That said, it can be abused as well. And there have been recent cases of this.


Bottom Line: I don't think that an electricity market (where keeping the grid up is VITAL for the operation of the country and society) is a fair measure of whether free markets work. That argument is invalid, in my opinion.

The freer the market, the more successful it is - historically that is true. Why? Because in a free market success and riches are DIRECTLY tied to quality and fit for purpose of what a person produces. If you don't like-a-da-fish-put-it-back-on-da-wagon....

Sounds like someone needs to go watch those Wendy's commercials from a bunch of years ago with the Soviet fashion show...

 

[Stschil]

You need to go back to college. Learn about something called ethics. You have none.

In all seriousness look at the effects of free markets around the world.

Read up on the effects of a free market. Quit swallowing the swill of big business like it has the antidote.

Not to resort to name calling and other childish games, but Wiskey Tango Foxtrot, Mr Dent? What have you been reading? If you advocate research, please do a little on your own. Read some authors who AREN'T followers of the Keynesian economic model. http://www.biorationalinstitute.com/zcontent/alpha_strategy.pdf. I will even suggest one to get started. Written by John Pugsley, "The Alpha Strategy" is available as a FREE download in PDF form. Pugsley offers the alternative view of the Austrian school of econmics.

Ok I was just curious. I've heard a lot of people say that libertarians are the same as liberals, and I've heard liberals say that they're the same as conservatives, which is simply not true in either case. Of course if you refute their arguments with common sense, then you're an anarchist. Of course, as SemperFiUSMC said, I'm still in college. lol

Unfortunately, Libertarians are kind of stuck in the middle. Both the GOP and Dems demonize them because they believe that Libertarian candidates 'steal' votes from their candidates. The R's point to Libertarians that support Abortion, for example, and cry foul to discredit and bring conservative voters to them and the D's accuse Libertarians who support the 2nd Amendment of being gun toting ultra right wingers who want to kill babies.

Garb, don't be so hard on yourself. I can see by your posts that you have an active mind and are asking questions in search of answers. That in itself is commendable. Keep asking, keep reading, keep searching. As with everything, Life is a process of learning. It's those who refuse to continue to that search who are the losers in the end.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

You're an idiot or you're yanking our chains. I haven't decided which yet.

Or he's going for 50 posts... if so - yanking our chains here in Politics-land is an effective way to do it....

Please tell me that you're not REALLY drinking the socialist kool-aid, Arthur...

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

And I have posted this before - but I think it DEFINITELY is appropriate here...


YouTube - VINTAGE 80'S WENDY'S SOVIET FASHION SHOW COMMERCIAL

If this doesn't speak to the benefits of a free market I don't know what does. Sick part of this is that people that were behind the Iron Curtain will tell you that this was closer to the truth than anyone would like to imagine... stuff isn't funny unless there's a healthy dose of truth in it...

 

[Stschil]

I respectfully disagree - free markets around the world WORK... but they must be FREE... your earlier example of electricity "deregulation" is NOT an example of a FREE market! It is merely a "differently regulated" market! I gave some examples to that end. I will reiterate one right now - in the current market design used across the country (Locational Marginal Pricing) the SUPPLIER of electricity is differentiated based on their location in the grid. But the CONSUMER is NOT! So people in the Central Valley of California pay the same for their power that the libtards in San Francisco do - even though the SF crowd's NIMBY (Not in MY Back Yard) policies are what is causing the inefficiencies!. That ain't FREE - some consumers are penalizing others. Effectively I want Golden Delicious apples so all my neighbors get to pay more for ALL of the apples that are bought and sold!

That is but one example. There are many other reasons why the electricity market is NOT free. Just differently regulated. And that same market design is STANDARD throughout the land now... I know - the Texas market is pretty much the last major one to go to that design and they cutover Dec 1. I'm involved with the preparations for that for a major market player.

My point is this.. Free markets DO work. If I don't like your security practices, I can fly a different airline or drive a car or etc. Power ain't 'zactly so... necessarily - because it's GOTTA be all one grid...

Take our favorite topic - GUNS! If I think Glocks, or Hi Points or [insert your favorite brand here] sucks - then I don't support them with my money! And viola! It works! A few years ago - few people messed with Saigas... now you can get ALL MANNER of toys for your S12! Why - uhhh... because there was a FREE market and people found that you could blast the crap out of pumpkins with an S12 and it was AWESOME!. And they shelled out money for the privilege! And Cam over at Chaos, for example made a business out of it!

I respect the notion that sometimes the needs of the community demand action. This is especially true in cases where roads must go through to facilitate commerce. Same for power lines, etc. Without that infrastructure we would be not very well off as a country. That's why we have eminent domain... (WHEN CORRECTLY USED) That said, it can be abused as well. And there have been recent cases of this.


Bottom Line: I don't think that an electricity market (where keeping the grid up is VITAL for the operation of the country and society) is a fair measure of whether free markets work. That argument is invalid, in my opinion.

The freer the market, the more successful it is - historically that is true. Why? Because in a free market success and riches are DIRECTLY tied to quality and fit for purpose of what a person produces. If you don't like-a-da-fish-put-it-back-on-da-wagon....

Sounds like someone needs to go watch those Wendy's commercials from a bunch of years ago with the Soviet fashion show...

I'd like to take that one step further, if I may. Power is definately a very poor example of the Free Market, because it IS so heavily regulated. Our gubbamint has it's fingers so deeply entwined in the generation and delivery of power it's sickening.
There are many many other sources of electricity not provided by the major utility companies. More and more people are 'stepping off the grid' by using them, as this continues, we will see that a true free market in electricity begin to develop. We will also see the Major Distributors start to cry foul and call for tighter regulation of those alternative sources because they will be losing market share. When our government is willing to support the Level Playing field theory and step in with regulation, what incentive does a business have to truely advance and offer a superior product or service in order to be competative?