Not All Economists Agree

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Bush and McCain are staunch believers in the free market? When did this happen?

 

[sealybobo]

The sky isn't falling sealy, you don't have to go all Chicken Little on us.

Oh, and I'm not a conservative.

Let AIG go down along with Merryl, Goldman, Citi, Bank of America, Wells, Morgan, and Detroit and yeah, the sky would be falling.

Any company that couldn't stand on it's own needed to go out of business, all we've done is make things worse by propping them up.

The American auto manufacturers are vital to the American economy. Do you not get that?

Half the cars sold in America are American cars.

We gave Toyota and Honda billions to set up shop down south.

With your way of thinking, we should have never given Toyota or Honda a fucking dime.

If they couldn't pay to set up their own factories and train their own employees, fuck em.

But the south wanted those jobs, so they paid billions in federal and state taxes.

So fuck not giving GM and Chrysler money.

Even though I don't like it either Kevin. I think the exec's at GM and Chrysler are going to go bankrupt after taking the billions from the government.

AND, they're going to make the union workers take cuts???

Then watch next year the CEO's will get $20 million dollar bonus'.

This is what is pissing me off. Companies asking employees to take pay cuts are paying their CEO's even more. That's fucked up.

 

[sealybobo]

Bush and McCain are staunch believers in the free market? When did this happen?

All the way up until October.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

If they were vital to the economy they wouldn't be going to Washington with their hands out because people would be buying their products.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Bush and McCain are staunch believers in the free market? When did this happen?

All the way up until October.

Utter nonsense.

 

[Iriemon]

The sky isn't falling sealy, you don't have to go all Chicken Little on us.

Oh, and I'm not a conservative.

Let AIG go down along with Merryl, Goldman, Citi, Bank of America, Wells, Morgan, and Detroit and yeah, the sky would be falling.

Any company that couldn't stand on it's own needed to go out of business, all we've done is make things worse by propping them up.

And it would make the "sky fall".

I agree with you that we need to let companies that cannot compete fail.

That's why I'm sure you'd agree with me that we need to cut mega-corps down to pieces, so that our economy is never again vulnerable to companies that are too big to let fail without dragging our economy down.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Let AIG go down along with Merryl, Goldman, Citi, Bank of America, Wells, Morgan, and Detroit and yeah, the sky would be falling.

Any company that couldn't stand on it's own needed to go out of business, all we've done is make things worse by propping them up.

And it would make the "sky fall".

I agree with you that we need to let companies that cannot compete fail.

That's why I'm sure you'd agree with me that we need to cut mega-corps down to pieces, so that our economy is never again vulnerable to companies that are too big to let fail without dragging our economy down.

No, we don't need to cut any businesses down, we need to allow the free market to operate.

 

[sealybobo]

If they were vital to the economy they wouldn't be going to Washington with their hands out because people would be buying their products.

No one is buying anything. And did you miss it when I said 50% of the cars bought in America are American cars?

Even the foreign companies are struggling. And I'm sorry, but before the southern politicians gave billions to the foreign auto companies to lure them to their states, the Big 3 were doing alright.

So right now the Big 3 are struggling with legacy costs. I can't believe you are in favor of letting corporations renig on those promises. If it was you, you would not be promoting this.

And I'm all for letting the exec's at every company fucking burn in hell. But I don't want the employees getting fucked. It seems like the direction you want to go, and the direction we are headed, is a direction where employees/workers/labor makes less.

And when things get better, they will not give us employees back what we lost. But you will see executive pay spike again.

And I'm all for executive pay being high, as long as the employees are not getting fucked.

Anyways, here is a good article on why not let the banks, AIG or the Auto companies fail. I'll just post the auto one.

Business & Technology | Live or let die? What would happen if US pulled the plug on bailed-out companies | Seattle Times Newspaper

PS. I like the alternative for the bank bailout that is mentioned here. Lets nationalize the banks instead.....

But for the car companies:

The failure of either of the two would set off a chain reaction that could ultimately cost 3 million jobs and suck $400 billion out of the economy over three years.

That's because hundreds of companies that supply parts to the Big Three, not to mention dealerships, would also be hurt. In fact, the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich., heavily funded by the auto industry, contends that just 239,000 lost jobs would come from the automakers themselves.

The industry contends that if just one of the Big Three failed, 1.5 million jobs would disappear in a year. Ilhan Geckil, senior economist for the Anderson Economic Group, which also studied the impact of losing an automaker, said Michigan's unemployment rate would probably rise from the current 11.6 percent to as high as 14 percent.

 

[Iriemon]

Any company that couldn't stand on it's own needed to go out of business, all we've done is make things worse by propping them up.

And it would make the "sky fall".

I agree with you that we need to let companies that cannot compete fail.

That's why I'm sure you'd agree with me that we need to cut mega-corps down to pieces, so that our economy is never again vulnerable to companies that are too big to let fail without dragging our economy down.

No, we don't need to cut any businesses down, we need to allow the free market to operate.

No thanks! I for one am not willing to live thru another great depression while we wait for the markets to operate.

We tried that strategy already.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

And it would make the "sky fall".

I agree with you that we need to let companies that cannot compete fail.

That's why I'm sure you'd agree with me that we need to cut mega-corps down to pieces, so that our economy is never again vulnerable to companies that are too big to let fail without dragging our economy down.

No, we don't need to cut any businesses down, we need to allow the free market to operate.

No thanks! I for one am not willing to live thru another great depression while we wait for the markets to operate.

We tried that strategy already.

No, we didn't remotely try that strategy. The fact that the Federal Reserve exists means there's no free market, let alone all the government regulations imposed on businesses.

 

[sealybobo]

Any company that couldn't stand on it's own needed to go out of business, all we've done is make things worse by propping them up.

And it would make the "sky fall".

I agree with you that we need to let companies that cannot compete fail.

That's why I'm sure you'd agree with me that we need to cut mega-corps down to pieces, so that our economy is never again vulnerable to companies that are too big to let fail without dragging our economy down.

No, we don't need to cut any businesses down, we need to allow the free market to operate.

Here are a couple of headlines for those who haven't had the time to study both economics and history:

1. There is no such thing as a "free market."

2. The "middle class" is the creation of government intervention in the marketplace, and won't exist without it (as millions of Americans and Europeans are discovering).

The conservative belief in "free markets" is a bit like the Catholic Church's insistence that the Earth was at the center of the Solar System in the Twelfth Century. It's widely believed by those in power, those who challenge it are branded heretics and ridiculed, and it is wrong.

In actual fact, there is no such thing as a "free market." Markets are the creation of government.

Governments provide a stable currency to make markets possible. They provide a legal infrastructure and court systems to enforce the contracts that make markets possible. They provide educated workforces through public education, and those workers show up at their places of business after traveling on public roads, rails, or airways provided by government. Businesses that use the "free market" are protected by police and fire departments provided by government, and send their communications - from phone to fax to internet - over lines that follow public rights-of-way maintained and protected by government.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

 

[sealybobo]

And it would make the "sky fall".

I agree with you that we need to let companies that cannot compete fail.

That's why I'm sure you'd agree with me that we need to cut mega-corps down to pieces, so that our economy is never again vulnerable to companies that are too big to let fail without dragging our economy down.

No, we don't need to cut any businesses down, we need to allow the free market to operate.

No thanks! I for one am not willing to live thru another great depression while we wait for the markets to operate.

We tried that strategy already.

Democracy - Not "The Free Market" - Will Save America's Middle Class

Wanted to get your feedback on this too.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No, markets are not the creation of governments. Markets can exist without government.

 

[Iriemon]

No, we don't need to cut any businesses down, we need to allow the free market to operate.

No thanks! I for one am not willing to live thru another great depression while we wait for the markets to operate.

We tried that strategy already.

No, we didn't remotely try that strategy. The fact that the Federal Reserve exists means there's no free market, let alone all the government regulations imposed on businesses.

De-regulate and let even more Madoffs run wild? No thanks! Gold standard so now interest rates would be sky high? Not thanks!

Not a good economic plan.

 

[Agnapostate]

No, markets are not the creation of governments. Markets can exist without government.

Markets can potentially exist without traditional "government," but capitalism cannot. In a capitalist economy, governments often play a critical role in facilitating market development and generally act as stabilizing agents. For instance, I've previously mentioned the development of infant industries in regards to strategic trade policy. Governmental protection of infant industries facilitates their development free from premature competition against previously developed industries. Dynamic comparative advantage is thus maximized in this manner, since these infant industries are effectively permitted to "grow up."

 

[Iriemon]

No, markets are not the creation of governments. Markets can exist without government.

Sure. The Madoffs of the world would think that's great!

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

No thanks! I for one am not willing to live thru another great depression while we wait for the markets to operate.

We tried that strategy already.

No, we didn't remotely try that strategy. The fact that the Federal Reserve exists means there's no free market, let alone all the government regulations imposed on businesses.

De-regulate and let even more Madoffs run wild? No thanks! Gold standard so now interest rates would be sky high? Not thanks!

Not a good economic plan.

Madoff committed fraud, and that was within a highly regulated market. You're going to have people who try to take advantage of others regardless of the system you use. If anything Madoff constitutes a failure of our highly regulated system and of the SEC.

If interest rates were high that would mean that's where the market needs them to be, by artificially tampering with interest rates the Fed creates the business cycle which led to our current recession.

 

[sealybobo]

No, markets are not the creation of governments. Markets can exist without government.

Wow, Thom took all that time to explain this to you and you come back with, "no they aren't".

Can you show me one market that ever existed without being regulated by a government?

 

[Agnapostate]

Can you show me one market that ever existed without being regulated by a government?

Any market that could ever exist without direct state regulation would likely be socialist in nature, as with Pierre-Joseph Proudhon's mutualist economy, for instance.

 

[sealybobo]

No, markets are not the creation of governments. Markets can exist without government.

Governments provide a stable currency to make markets possible. They provide a legal infrastructure and court systems to enforce the contracts that make markets possible. They provide educated workforces through public education, and those workers show up at their places of business after traveling on public roads, rails, or airways provided by government. Businesses that use the "free market" are protected by police and fire departments provided by government, and send their communications - from phone to fax to internet - over lines that follow public rights-of-way maintained and protected by government.

And, most important, the rules of the game of business are defined by government.