Dubai's free market capitalism

[Bern80]

Resources – the question of the the ownership of those resources goes to the heart of the differences between capitalism and socialism. I think we probably won't agree on that point so perhaps we declare that one as undecided?

Fine. Last shot. My question was, is it your position that all should have an equal claim to resources?

Planned economy/power/corruption – corruption occurs where there is a chance of personal benefit. It can be dealt with in the usual manner (I'm not advocating the Chinese method).

Right. As a general rule people consider it in their benefit to stay in power. When that corruption does rear it's head you want some entity to turn to to correct it. Since you seem to acknowledge that it will occur under a privitized system or government run one the question which is easier to deal with. My contention is that in a state run economy you have no one to turn to because THE STATE RUNS THE ECONOMY.

Socially valuable. Easy, that which enhances human existence – and no I don't mean films like “Avatar”. Education and healthcare should be available at no cost to the consumer. If you want a widescreen televisio then you pay for it.

How do yo compensate those that provide those things?

Poor. Of course capitalism requires the poor. Someone has to be on the bottom of the heap. Capitalism requires class structure, the ones at the top get most, the ones at the bottom get the least, they're called the poor. An economy doesn't “punish” anyone, it's not a moral code.

Depends if you assume that 'bottom of the heap' is the same as poor. It isn't. Poor to me implies a difficulty in meeting day to day needs. Too many of that type and a capitalistic society fails. One of the obvious benefits of capitalism is that it has proven to be able to provide people far more than just the things we need. Along with providing those luxuries, jobs are produced to provide them. You may not find these 'things' produced to be socially valuable, but in this case the ends justify the means because the jobs created, and the high end salaries that go with them are extremely socially valuable to people. Socialism simply isn't capable of that wealth potential. Which goes back to what pros and cons you will accept. Socialism - relative safetery for all, but little opportunity to attain a high SOL or capitalism - more risk due to less social safety net, but opportunity for high SOL.

Standard of living pre and post socialism and healthcare. I know the US heatlthcare system has its problems but one characteristic of it is that it has to be paid for. It differs from socialism in that way. My reference to the Soviet Union and Cuba was to point out something much broader though. That is that socialism improved the standard of living in those societies.

Involuntary deprivation of property under capitalism happens when someone bigger than you wants what you have. Eminent domain.

I'm not up on the laws, but I don't believe a private company can claim eminent domain. If they can it is exceedingly rare and thus not a very good point. The only entity I've ever heard claim it is government for roads, infrastructure, etc.

 

[Shogun]

I'm not being obtuse at all. It is YOU who is making a HUGE assumption about why the man was layed off in a really lame attempt to cover up for the fact that you cited an article that has ZERO to do with what you continue to piss and moan about. Are you so stupid that you think the only reason people get laid or lose their jobs is because the job goes overseas. Oh, I forgot. In your fucked up world people are garunteed jobs for life no matter what.




yea BE$N! when I post articles that say, specifically, that IT jobs have a pattern of being outsourced and reduced due to global free market bullshit it probably REALLY means that some giant alien beamed down from Foctar 9 and is gobbling up opportunity like the cookie monster devouring a plate of cookies!



and no, pussy, people are not guarenteed jobs for life... but companies who live off of American consumptions have an obligation to protect the very consumption they take for granted. As i've said, I don't have a problem with domestic competition.. but, again, WE ALL KNOW what your kind means when it hides behind the "must become more competitive with beggars in the street India".




Yes certain skill set, dipshit. Like the ability to repair a heart. Or program a computer. Or fix a car. It isn't a question of whether we are equipped to teach those things. Of course we do. The issue dense boy, is that we don't have the people willing to be taught. Hence a lack of supply.


riiiiiiiight... because there are no heart surgeons being produced in America.. sure, dude! sure! Because no one in AMERICA CAN PROGRAM A FUCKING COMPUTER! It must take a special kind of fucking education to install ram these days. or FIX A FUCKING CAR? Seriously, are you really that stupid today? But hey.. go ahead and condemn the American populace as somehow inferior to a Mexican's ability, or DESIRE, to learn just because the mexican will work for pennies on the dollar. PLEASE do this. It's going to make usurping your silly ass all that much easier. After all, those droves of fucking unemployed IT people sure as FUCK show how unwilling they are to be taught by.. uh... getting degrees in computer science.










Many factors contribute to a companies ability to be competitive, yes, one of them is cost of labor. I am not insisting at all that their hasn't been an increase in American firms hiring people in other countries.


many factors, my ass. labor is the PRIME factor when moving labor overseas. I work in HR, buddy. Don't forget that I'm pretty fucking clear on the relative cost of labor in a US that values a minimal SOL verses locations that still have a thriving population of beggars and pauper classes. And, this is the very reason that every single company that takes advantage of being an "american" company while using us like a disposable cup should be jettisoned to those very oversea locations that they seem to love pulling labor from. I bet you wouldn't last 5 fucking years in MEXICO, BE$N. And, if you did, you'd sure as FUCK be ready to do what it takes to come back to the US.



4th thing you suck at: metaphors.


You'd like to think so. But, I guess that is a typical reaction for a guy getting harpooned by the laughable bullshit of his own FMC opinions. If only you could outsource USMB users to india, eh BE$N?

 

[antagon]

We didn't have a genuine gold standard during the Great Depression, but an inflationary gold-exchange standard.

what, gold coins now kevken?

 

[antagon]

What is a "mixed capitalist economy"?!?

.

I think he means a mixed economy

OK, but a mixed economy is a FASCIST economy.

.

...that would be a chiefly capitalist economy mixed with socialist policies. what ain't fascist, socrates?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

We didn't have a genuine gold standard during the Great Depression, but an inflationary gold-exchange standard.

what, gold coins now kevken?

What?

 

[antagon]

you advocate golden tender, then? ...im not up on the 101 types of gold standard, buddy. the whole kiboodle is garbage. at least for our economy.

 

[sealybobo]

If this system heralded by "conservatives", republicans and corporatists is so unshakably sound and the best system out there - and self-correcting... what the heck happened? Dubai is the "shining Jewel" of free market capitalism in the middle east. Now it is pretty much bankrupt and having to be bailed out by the Saudis.

Also, this came out today:

BBC NEWS | Special Reports | Free market flawed, says survey

When Americans No Longer Own America

The Dubai Ports World deal is waking Americans up to a painful reality: So-called "conservatives" and "flat world" globalists have bankrupted our nation for their own bag of silver, and in the process are selling off America.

Then came the flat-worlders, led by misguided true believers and promoted by multinational corporations. Do away with those tariffs, they said, because they "restrain trade." Let everything in, and tax nothing. The result has been an explosion of cheap goods coming into our nation, and the loss of millions of good manufacturing jobs and thousands of manufacturing companies. Entire industry sectors have been wiped out.

These policies have kneecapped the American middle class. Our nation's largest employer has gone from being the unionized General Motors to the poverty-wages Wal-Mart. Americans have gone from having a net savings rate around 10 percent in the 1970s to a minus .5 percent in 2005 - meaning that they're going into debt or selling off their assets just to maintain their lifestyle.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

you advocate golden tender, then? ...im not up on the 101 types of gold standard, buddy. the whole kiboodle is garbage. at least for our economy.

If that's what people want to use then yes I support gold coins, or silver coins. Or any other coins people want to accept. I'd also accept paper money defined in a weight of gold or silver. But that's not what I meant. The gold-exchange standard was an inflationary system setup between Great Britain and the United States. Great Britain was worse off than the U.S. when it came to inflation under this system, but both nations were printing more money than they should have been.

I would say fiat money has historically shown to be "garbage," and has certainly once again proven that it's garbage with our current recession.

 

[uscitizen]

If this system heralded by "conservatives", republicans and corporatists is so unshakably sound and the best system out there - and self-correcting... what the heck happened? Dubai is the "shining Jewel" of free market capitalism in the middle east. Now it is pretty much bankrupt and having to be bailed out by the Saudis.

Also, this came out today:

BBC NEWS | Special Reports | Free market flawed, says survey

When Americans No Longer Own America

The Dubai Ports World deal is waking Americans up to a painful reality: So-called "conservatives" and "flat world" globalists have bankrupted our nation for their own bag of silver, and in the process are selling off America.

Then came the flat-worlders, led by misguided true believers and promoted by multinational corporations. Do away with those tariffs, they said, because they "restrain trade." Let everything in, and tax nothing. The result has been an explosion of cheap goods coming into our nation, and the loss of millions of good manufacturing jobs and thousands of manufacturing companies. Entire industry sectors have been wiped out.

These policies have kneecapped the American middle class. Our nation's largest employer has gone from being the unionized General Motors to the poverty-wages Wal-Mart. Americans have gone from having a net savings rate around 10 percent in the 1970s to a minus .5 percent in 2005 - meaning that they're going into debt or selling off their assets just to maintain their lifestyle.

Ohh it is quite obvious to me. Seriously.
I have seen all this coming since NAFTA. Although it is not the only cause by any means.
WE are also a big cause. LIving off of credit, upside down on our cars, using our home equitity to buy toys. Buying lots of cheap Chinese stuff just so we could have more stuff.

 

[antagon]

i think US fiat is shining right now. $17,000,000,000,000 contraction without outrageous deflation. just about the only thing to indicate weakness in the dollar is gold, and quite mildly. i dont see how a gold standard would have prformed nearly as well or as efficiently for the US in this dip.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

i think US fiat is shining right now. $17,000,000,000,000 contraction without outrageous deflation. just about the only thing to indicate weakness in the dollar is gold, and quite mildly. i dont see how a gold standard would have prformed nearly as well or as efficiently for the US in this dip.

If we had a genuine gold standard the Fed wouldn't have been able to manipulate interest rates and we wouldn't have had a recession in the first place. The market would set interest rates and there would have been no malinvestment on the scale that we saw before the collapse.

 

[Dr Grump]

The reason those other systems fail is because people tend to want freedom and those other systems are not free. Some others like Shogun and possibly yourself will CLAIM you want freedom, just so long as you dont have to be burdened by its inherent risks. Sorry freedom is one of those things you can't have both ways.

The problem with capitalism, which is simply economic freedom, is that it requires active participation and effort by everyone. It requires self accountability. The second we get people that piss and moan and complain about unfairness wear there is none or think it's someone elses job to provide for them, THAT is when capitalism fails.

I really don't understand why you and Shogun keep pointing to Cuba. Does it not bother you that their government sacrafices the very FREEDOM of its citizens to accomplish that?

But are you more free than them. Look at all the regulations you have....

...and there are a tonne of happy Cubans - especially those who can remember Batista....

 

[antagon]

Ohh it is quite obvious to me. Seriously.
I have seen all this coming since NAFTA. Although it is not the only cause by any means.
WE are also a big cause. LIving off of credit, upside down on our cars, using our home equitity to buy toys. Buying lots of cheap Chinese stuff just so we could have more stuff.

kinda butting in sideways here, but having seen NAFTA in action, I believe it to be a great policy for the US. Bush took office and knocked the wind out of it by extending the same benefits aimed at US/Mexico border commerce to china and india, et al. San Diego, for example, had tens of thousands of high-paying jobs in telecom, electronics, and biomed, which cooperated with maquilladoras for the labor-intensive assembly and packaging, while extrusion, boardprinting... the high-tech end, was handled stateside.

many of those US jobs vanished in the last decade. the mexican ones, too. theyre standing around at your local home depot. the US jobs went overseas.

 

[Dr Grump]

Ohh it is quite obvious to me. Seriously.
I have seen all this coming since NAFTA. Although it is not the only cause by any means.
WE are also a big cause. LIving off of credit, upside down on our cars, using our home equitity to buy toys. Buying lots of cheap Chinese stuff just so we could have more stuff.

kinda butting in sideways here, but having seen NAFTA in action, I believe it to be a great policy for the US. Bush took office and knocked the wind out of it by extending the same benefits aimed at US/Mexico border commerce to china and india, et al. San Diego, for example, had tens of thousands of high-paying jobs in telecom, electronics, and biomed, which cooperated with maquilladoras for the labor-intensive assembly and packaging, while extrusion, boardprinting... the high-tech end, was handled stateside.

many of those US jobs vanished in the last decade. the mexican ones, too. theyre standing around at your local home depot. the US jobs went overseas.

How much money is enough has always been my query..

..there is a social cost that none of the uber capitalists take into account - but it has to be IMO

 

[antagon]

i think US fiat is shining right now. $17,000,000,000,000 contraction without outrageous deflation. just about the only thing to indicate weakness in the dollar is gold, and quite mildly. i dont see how a gold standard would have prformed nearly as well or as efficiently for the US in this dip.

If we had a genuine gold standard the Fed wouldn't have been able to manipulate interest rates and we wouldn't have had a recession in the first place. The market would set interest rates and there would have been no malinvestment on the scale that we saw before the collapse.

there could be a fed and interest rate manipulation with a gold standard, depending on how you arrange your gold standard system. there would still have to be issuance of currency, whether you want the fed or the mint, or whoever to do so. the government would just have gold reserve policy to screw up.

the market still has its own interest rate facility. when everyone's ARM went up, that was market-rate interest, not libor. the fed had rates in the basement since '03.

make no mistake, there would have still been a recession. thats cookoo to assume you back dollars with gold and we dont have economic cycles anymore, c'mon. thats austrian fairydust economics.

but if the Fed rate was increased in 2004,5 that would have put us in a better position, i agree. <---thats economists trying to overrule an economic cycle on the equity side. better to buckle your seatbelt than tug at the wheel. the rate was also sympthomatic of dubyas off-budget borrowrama.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

i think US fiat is shining right now. $17,000,000,000,000 contraction without outrageous deflation. just about the only thing to indicate weakness in the dollar is gold, and quite mildly. i dont see how a gold standard would have prformed nearly as well or as efficiently for the US in this dip.

If we had a genuine gold standard the Fed wouldn't have been able to manipulate interest rates and we wouldn't have had a recession in the first place. The market would set interest rates and there would have been no malinvestment on the scale that we saw before the collapse.

there could be a fed and interest rate manipulation with a gold standard, depending on how you arrange your gold standard system. there would still have to be issuance of currency, whether you want the fed or the mint, or whoever to do so. the government would just have gold reserve policy to screw up.

the market still has its own interest rate facility. when everyone's ARM went up, that was market-rate interest, not libor. the fed had rates in the basement since '03.

make no mistake, there would have still been a recession. thats cookoo to assume you back dollars with gold and we dont have economic cycles anymore, c'mon. thats austrian fairydust economics.

but if the Fed rate was increased in 2004,5 that would have put us in a better position, i agree. <---thats economists trying to overrule an economic cycle on the equity side. better to buckle your seatbelt than tug at the wheel. the rate was also sympthomatic of dubyas off-budget borrowrama.

Yes, they technically could abuse the gold standard and not adhere to it, but that doesn't reflect on the gold standard. That reflects on the government.

If the market set the interest rates they wouldn't have been "in the basement" as you say. They would be based on actual savings, which means interest rates would have been high because nobody was saving. Without cheap money to loan out there never would have malinvestment on the scale that there was, and there wouldn't have been a recession.

 

[antagon]

Ohh it is quite obvious to me. Seriously.
I have seen all this coming since NAFTA. Although it is not the only cause by any means.
WE are also a big cause. LIving off of credit, upside down on our cars, using our home equitity to buy toys. Buying lots of cheap Chinese stuff just so we could have more stuff.

kinda butting in sideways here, but having seen NAFTA in action, I believe it to be a great policy for the US. Bush took office and knocked the wind out of it by extending the same benefits aimed at US/Mexico border commerce to china and india, et al. San Diego, for example, had tens of thousands of high-paying jobs in telecom, electronics, and biomed, which cooperated with maquilladoras for the labor-intensive assembly and packaging, while extrusion, boardprinting... the high-tech end, was handled stateside.

many of those US jobs vanished in the last decade. the mexican ones, too. theyre standing around at your local home depot. the US jobs went overseas.

How much money is enough has always been my query..

..there is a social cost that none of the uber capitalists take into account - but it has to be IMO

im a social-cost capitalist. i think the deal fails with an economy our size and 300,000,000+ folks if you dont add that cost at the government level.

im very capitalistic in my personal life, i find that it is of benefit to me and my crew, both. capitalism is not a deal by which one person benefits at the expense of everyone else. in fact, my bebefit is shared with my customers, my employees, and uncle sam on terms that we'd agreed to from the start. i try not to be evil. the devil factor people like to point out as a flaw in capitalism is the human factor. you cant escape that, man, and coming from a humble upbringing, i would say the evil nature is rife with the "lil' guy" as much as it is in the ranks of the tycoons. cant say for sure. ive not seen the tycoon life first hand.

 

[antagon]

If we had a genuine gold standard the Fed wouldn't have been able to manipulate interest rates and we wouldn't have had a recession in the first place. The market would set interest rates and there would have been no malinvestment on the scale that we saw before the collapse.

there could be a fed and interest rate manipulation with a gold standard, depending on how you arrange your gold standard system. there would still have to be issuance of currency, whether you want the fed or the mint, or whoever to do so. the government would just have gold reserve policy to screw up.

the market still has its own interest rate facility. when everyone's ARM went up, that was market-rate interest, not libor. the fed had rates in the basement since '03.

make no mistake, there would have still been a recession. thats cookoo to assume you back dollars with gold and we dont have economic cycles anymore, c'mon. thats austrian fairydust economics.

but if the Fed rate was increased in 2004,5 that would have put us in a better position, i agree. <---thats economists trying to overrule an economic cycle on the equity side. better to buckle your seatbelt than tug at the wheel. the rate was also sympthomatic of dubyas off-budget borrowrama.

Yes, they technically could abuse the gold standard and not adhere to it, but that doesn't reflect on the gold standard. That reflects on the government.

If the market set the interest rates they wouldn't have been "in the basement" as you say. They would be based on actual savings, which means interest rates would have been high because nobody was saving. Without cheap money to loan out there never would have malinvestment on the scale that there was, and there wouldn't have been a recession.

the government sets the fed funds rate. in fact, that is also a market-derived rate, based on the volume of cash offered and taken at the window. but surely youve heard of other market indexes for rates? ...bond20, 1yrLIBOR, 30yr mrtg/60.... this is your rate market.

as for malinvestment, much of that occurred in these secondary markets where banks found it more lucrative to trade in the commodities they derived from credit card and loan consumers, than to wisely lend in the first place.

while some point at government policy (the fed, the CRA, dismantling glas-steagal) as being the biggest player, i point to stan o'neal and the industry as a whole who made a concerted profit run on their own securitized debt vehicles without consideration for how and from what they were derived.

2<---- the amount of times kevken has claimed making money out of gold would have entirely overted the recession.

 

[antagon]

They would be based on actual savings, which means interest rates would have been high because nobody was saving.

thats certainly not how that works. no way!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

They would be based on actual savings, which means interest rates would have been high because nobody was saving.

thats certainly not how that works. no way!