Government Meddling In The Economy

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
125,093
60,647
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
Question: does the consumer benefit from government choosing 'winners', or when the free market identifies same?



1. The epic battles between government economics and free enterprise go back as far as America's earliest times....but Cornelius Vanderbilt plays an important role. So does Robert Fulton. First of all, Fulton's "Clermont" was not the first steamboat....

....was the first commercially successful one.
Why?


2. The main reason for his success was the money and influence behind him: wealthy investor and politician Robert Livingston, and Livingston got Fulton a monopoly from the New York State legislature, he was to carry all steamboat traffic in New York for thirty years.
Maurice Baxter, "The Steamboat Monopoly: Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824," p.3-25.




3. The special efforts of government on his behalf identifies Fulton as a "political entrepreneurs, using taxpayer money rather than risking his own." Due to his monopoly, other steamboat operators could not sail in New York waters, and, guess what effect a monopoly had on ticket prices.

4. "...on November 24, 1817, a ferry entrepreneur named Thomas Gibbons asked Vanderbilt to captain his steamboat between New Jerseyand New York." Cornelius Vanderbilt - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

This meant breaking the Fulton monopoly!
First thing he did was lower the fares.

a. Gibbons brought the landmark case, (Gibbons v. Ogden), settled in 1824, with Chief Justice Marshall ruling that only the federal government could regulate interstate commerce.




5. "The triumph of free markets in steamboating led to improvements in technology....Once boatbuilders were freed from the Fulton-Livingston interests, they were quick to develop new ideas that before, had no encouragement from capital."
Folsom and Folsom, "Uncle Sam Can't Count," p. 36.

6. The immediate result of freeing the industry from government interference was a drop in the cost of traveling from NYC to Albany from $7 to $3. While Fulton's group went bankrupt, Gibbons and Vanderbilt adopted new technology, cut costs, and earned $40,000 profit each year during the late 1820's.
Wheaton Lane, "Commodore Vanderbilt: An Epic of the Steam Age," p. 43-49

7. Vanderbilt went on to branch out on his own, establishing trade routes all over the Northeast. And to the benefit of the customer: on the NY to Philadelphia route, he cut fares from $3 to $1; New Brunswick to NYC, he charged six cents and provided free meals.

a. In NY, the Hudson River Steamboat Association had 10 ships, the largest line at the time (1830). They fixed prices: Vanderbilt came in and cut the rate to Albany from $3 to $1, and then to ten cents...and finally....to free! He figured out it cost him $200/day to operate his ship, he could fill it with 100 passengers, and calculated that they would eat over $2 each of food and drink. Legend has it that Vanderbilt was involved in the invention of the potato chip! (Potato Chips History

b. The Steamboat Association made a deal with Vanderbilt: they gave him $100,000, plus $5,000/year for ten years, if he would stay out of the Hudson River for the next ten years. He agreed, and the Association promptly raised the fare back to $3. Seeing what Vanderbilt has accomplished, at least five other steamboat operators moved in- until they, too, were bought off. Lane, Op. Cit., p.56-62.




Of course, this was before the Sherman Antitrust Act....because, you know, only government can act in restraint of trade.


 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent
How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
 
9. The British had a long standing tradition of government subsidizing all kinds of commercial ventures: shipping, canals, shipbuilding, among others. The 1840's saw improvements in technology that changed steamboats into steamships, and trans-Atlantic routes became possible. First NY to England, then a NY to California (via Panama).
To kick-start the industry, many political entrepreneurs, what one might call 'lobbyists' today, argued for government subsidies and contracts.


a. Samuel Cunard got the English government to give him $275,000/year to run a semi-monthly mail and passenger service across the ocean. Cunard argued not just for the importance of carrying mail, but subsidized steamships would be a benefit for a merchant marine in time of war. Parliament provided the subsidy through the 1840's.
Royal Meeker, "History of Shipping Subsidies," p. 5-7



b. Shortly, American political entrepreneurs began arguing for similar subsidies.

10. Along came Edward K. Collins..."He received a government subsidy in 1847 and formed theUnited States Mail Steamship Companyto compete with theCunard Linefor transatlantic shipping."
Edward Knight Collins - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The subsidy was $3 million down, and $385,000 a year to deliver mail and "drive the Cunarders off the seas."



Great idea?
Have the government subsidize shipping?

I'll give you the answer......
 
11. With government subsidies and contracts in his pocket, Collins built ships with plush carpet, rose and olive wood furniture, elegant saloons, marble tables, and brought in French chefs...luxury, not economy.
After all, there was no reason to cut costs... In fact, his ships used almost twice the coal as the Cunard ships did.



Note this pattern as it applies not just to lobbyists using government funds....but to government itself: it's not their money, so no due diligence is in order!
Ever notice how regularly government projects go two-three times pre-project estimates?




Collins competed in politics rather than in shipping!
He hired William W. Corcoran, lobbyist, who got Congress to raise Collin's subsidy to $858,000



12. But, in 1855, Vanderbilt decided he could for less than half of what Collins was getting. Collins was getting $33,000 per voyage- Vanderbilt told Congress that he could do it for $15,000 per.
Lane, Op. Cit., p. 143-144.

The stage was set: Collins, the subsidized lobbyist vs. Vanderbilt, the market entrepreneur. Vanderbilt warned "private enterprise may be driven from any of the legitimate channels by means of bounties." Essentially, subsidized ships have a monopoly.

Who do you think politicians would back? Yup.
Luckily, the 14th President spoke up!



President Franklin Pierce vetoed the subsidy bill, saying it would "deprive commercial enterprise the benefits of free competition, and to establish a monopoly in violation of the soundest principles of public policy, and of doubtful compatibility with the Constitution." http://www.gutenberg.org/files/11125/11125.txt



(But Congress attached the subsidy to a naval appropriations bill...wouldn't ya' know?)
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?

More like history-gazing. It is one of the better uses of history. Is it possible that businessmen would attempt to create monopolies, manufacture shoddy unsafe products, or even attempt to create a monopoly on a product if not regulated? Well let's check our history and see if anyone has ever tried it.
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?

More like history-gazing. It is one of the better uses of history. Is it possible that businessmen would attempt to create monopolies, manufacture shoddy unsafe products, or even attempt to create a monopoly on a product if not regulated? Well let's check our history and see if anyone has ever tried it.





Have you heard this: "Warning: past performance does not necessarily predict future results."

Big government devotees generally believe human nature to be static.....in reality it is dynamic.


1. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

2. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.



3. But what about the abuses of the free market?

a. Some will be corrected by the law, and if there is no current law, the citizenry will demand such.

b. Some abuse run afoul of custom….these will be corrected by censure, withdrawal of custom, or may be criminalized.

c. Alas, some must be endured, as they would be under any system of government, business or administration.



4. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new?

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.
Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge," chapter ten.
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?

More like history-gazing. It is one of the better uses of history. Is it possible that businessmen would attempt to create monopolies, manufacture shoddy unsafe products, or even attempt to create a monopoly on a product if not regulated? Well let's check our history and see if anyone has ever tried it.





Have you heard this: "Warning: past performance does not necessarily predict future results."

Big government devotees generally believe human nature to be static.....in reality it is dynamic.


1. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

2. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.



3. But what about the abuses of the free market?

a. Some will be corrected by the law, and if there is no current law, the citizenry will demand such.

b. Some abuse run afoul of custom….these will be corrected by censure, withdrawal of custom, or may be criminalized.

c. Alas, some must be endured, as they would be under any system of government, business or administration.



4. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new?

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.
Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge," chapter ten.
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?

More like history-gazing. It is one of the better uses of history. Is it possible that businessmen would attempt to create monopolies, manufacture shoddy unsafe products, or even attempt to create a monopoly on a product if not regulated? Well let's check our history and see if anyone has ever tried it.





Have you heard this: "Warning: past performance does not necessarily predict future results."

Big government devotees generally believe human nature to be static.....in reality it is dynamic.


1. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

2. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.



3. But what about the abuses of the free market?

a. Some will be corrected by the law, and if there is no current law, the citizenry will demand such.

b. Some abuse run afoul of custom….these will be corrected by censure, withdrawal of custom, or may be criminalized.

c. Alas, some must be endured, as they would be under any system of government, business or administration.



4. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new?

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.
Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge," chapter ten.



(Psssssttt.....you forget to post anything.)
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?

More like history-gazing. It is one of the better uses of history. Is it possible that businessmen would attempt to create monopolies, manufacture shoddy unsafe products, or even attempt to create a monopoly on a product if not regulated? Well let's check our history and see if anyone has ever tried it.





Have you heard this: "Warning: past performance does not necessarily predict future results."

Big government devotees generally believe human nature to be static.....in reality it is dynamic.


1. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

2. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.



3. But what about the abuses of the free market?

a. Some will be corrected by the law, and if there is no current law, the citizenry will demand such.

b. Some abuse run afoul of custom….these will be corrected by censure, withdrawal of custom, or may be criminalized.

c. Alas, some must be endured, as they would be under any system of government, business or administration.



4. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new?

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.
Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge," chapter ten.

So what nation or nations practice your ideal of free market capitalism? I'm delighted you have noticed that people can learn and change their values, and someday greed may be be a capitalistic discard. But I got a feeling greed still lurks in the heart of many capitalists.
 
But the story didn't end there:



13. Vanderbilt challenged Collins even without a subsidy, saying: " “The share of prosperity which has fallen to my lot is the direct result of unfettered trade and unrestrained competition. It is my wish that those who are to come after me shall have the same field open before them.” Entrepreneurs and the State The Freeman Foundation for Economic Education

Vanderbilt singing the praises of the free market!

How'd he do?

He slashed the fare from Collins' $200 to $110...then to $80. Still...the first year was very difficult for Vanderbilt, who said " It is utterly impossible for a private individual to stand in competition with a line drawing nearly one million dollars per annum from the national treasury, without serious sacrifice." T.J.Stiles, " The First Tycoon: The Epic Life of Cornelius Vanderbilt ," p. 257-265

Yet....Vanderbilt prevailed.






14. So, wadda ya' think? The subsidy a good idea? Government largesse by way of the public fisc???
Would it promote efficiency?
Is the endeavor possible sans government subsidies? Would costs be inflated?

Does government have the ability to judge winners and losers in the market? Collins' poor management resulted in failure, and in 1858 his subsidies were revoked.

What is to be learned from this Vanderbilt saga?

Innovation and efficiency are in the nature of the free market. Government regulation produces quite the opposite.





15. " The individual must demand the reduction of state, and state powers to the point necessary to carry out legitimate purposes. We have the instructions, called the Constitution."
Mamet, “The Secret Knowledge.”
 
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?
Unlike many of government's chosen 'investments,' Vanderbilt's successes didn't end!



8. After the Hudson River, Vanderbilt moved elsewhere, and did the same things: on the NYC to Hartford trip slashed the $5 fare to $1; NYC to Providence, from $8 down to $4...and when he cut it to $1 the New York Evening Post called him "the greatest practical anti-monopolist in the country."
Folsom and Folsom, Op. Cit., p. 37.



a. One cannot help but see a comparison with Wal-Mart, a successful concern attacked by the Left for many of the same practices....those practices resulting in the same benefits to consumers: better deals!



It is the very definition of the free market:

" Why is Wal-Mart so successful? Millions of people voluntarily enter their stores and part with their money in exchange for Wal-Mart's products and services. In order for that to happen, Wal-Mart and millions of other profit-motivated businesses must please people.... The ruthlessness of the market discipline, which forces firms to please customers and thereby earn profits, goes a long way toward explaining big government devotee's hostility toward free market capitalism."
Economic Myths Fallacies and Stupidity by Walter E. Williams on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


How long would Wal-Mart remain a free capitalistic enterprise without the government ready to intervene if Wal-Mart drives its competition out of business or another enterprise drives Wal-Mart out of business? The problem is one of keeping capitalism, capitalistic.




So....now you are reduced to crystal ball gazing?

More like history-gazing. It is one of the better uses of history. Is it possible that businessmen would attempt to create monopolies, manufacture shoddy unsafe products, or even attempt to create a monopoly on a product if not regulated? Well let's check our history and see if anyone has ever tried it.





Have you heard this: "Warning: past performance does not necessarily predict future results."

Big government devotees generally believe human nature to be static.....in reality it is dynamic.


1. The answer is the free market. It is not perfect; it is simply better than state control. It is the one that has to respond quickly and effectively to dissatisfaction and to demand.

2. In the free market, if a product or service does not please, it is discontinued. Compare that to government persistence and expansion of programs that proven to have failed decades ago: farm subsidies, aid to Africa, busing, etc.



3. But what about the abuses of the free market?

a. Some will be corrected by the law, and if there is no current law, the citizenry will demand such.

b. Some abuse run afoul of custom….these will be corrected by censure, withdrawal of custom, or may be criminalized.

c. Alas, some must be endured, as they would be under any system of government, business or administration.



4. Now, here is the determining criterion as to which is better: which is better able to correct itself? This is the difference between, as Thomas Sowell would say, the free market (constrained) and the Liberal (unconstrained) view of the world. Either side may be wrong about plans, or about programs. But which system is better able to discard the failed and experiment to find the new?

a. The constrained view is that no human beings, nor any conglomeration of same, are omnipotent, nor omniscient, nor omnibenevolent. We are even incapable of knowing the true nature of the problems we face. This may be called the Tragic View. The values of one generation are seen later as absurd: slavery, phenology, lobotomy, women as property, etc.
Mamet, "The Secret Knowledge," chapter ten.

So what nation or nations practice your ideal of free market capitalism? I'm delighted you have noticed that people can learn and change their values, and someday greed may be be a capitalistic discard. But I got a feeling greed still lurks in the heart of many capitalists.



You have a deep and abiding misapprehension of the meaning of the word "greed."
Have no fear.....I'll correct it for you now.


1. The 'greed' is defined as follows:
An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, ....greed - definition of greed by The Free Dictionary


Focus on the "deserves" part.

In a free market, one accrues profits, wealth, based on voluntary transfer of funds from a public that desires his goods and/or services.

Therefore, it is deserved.

Or, to correct your usage.....it is not 'greed,' but, rather, ambition.


2. The greed is attributable to government officials who profit by giving lobbyists public funds....and then having it kicked back to them.
As Barack Obama has done numerous times, e.g., Lightsquared, and Solydra.

Unfamiliar?

"Welcome to LightSquared. It’s a toxic mix of venture socialism (to borrow GOP senator Jim DeMint’s apt phrase), campaign-finance influence-peddling, and perilous corner-cutting all rolled into one."
LightSquared Obama s Dangerous Broadband Boondoggle National Review Online


The weak-minded have been trained to see the corrupt as public servants, and the entrepreneurs as "greedy."

I sure hope you aren't one of those weak-minded.....

....are you?
 
So what nation or nations practice your ideal of free market capitalism?.

USA has had the most capitalism and so is the richest in human history while Red China and USSR had the least and so 160 million slowly starved to death.

Does the liberal understand now?
 

Forum List

Back
Top