The Free Market

[ihopehefails]

HA.

I actually considered putting it in the Econ forum. But that place doesn't see much action.

Not to mention that economic theory and political theory go hand-in-hand.

It really shouldn't because how does the decision to buy a home, start a business, get a job, and etc have anything to do with politics? I know it does but only because the government is so integrated into our economy that now those things are no longer independent decisions but political ones such as housing tax credits. Now people wait to buy a home based on if they are going to get the housing tax credit or a business may not expand depending on the tax and regulatory policies of the government.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Social Security is bankrupt. Which is what you get when you can't respond to market incentives. The Market ain't just a profit machine... it's a cold and cruel mother f*cker. You mess up, you're out of luck.

Unless of course you get a bailout from Mr. Obama... but that ain't exactly free market capitalism now is it.

Social Security is not 'bankrupt'. The trust fund is stable to 2035 using the worst case assumptions and stable to 2045 using assumptions that the economy gets better in the next 25 years.

The better news is that as of 1984 newly hired federal workers were hired under SSA instead of Civil Service, so as soon as we get rid of deadwood like McCain, Hall, Murtha, Byrd, Specter and the rest of the 24 Senators and 48 Congressmen who are over 70 and been suckin' the government tit for the last 30 years, our leaders will have a personal, vested interest in fixing Social Security.

Social Security is a great program... it serves everyone equally without regard to race, religion, or political affiliation.

Social Security is dependent on the government being able to pay back what it stole.

This is true. It is a whole separate issue in my opinion, but it is true.

How DO 'We, The People' feel about our chances of still governing ourselves in 50 years?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Social Security is a bigger ponzi scheme than Madoff was running.

 

[manifold]

HA.

I actually considered putting it in the Econ forum. But that place doesn't see much action.

Not to mention that economic theory and political theory go hand-in-hand.

It really shouldn't because how does the decision to buy a home, start a business, get a job, and etc have anything to do with politics? I know it does but only because the government is so integrated into our economy that now those things are no longer independent decisions but political ones such as housing tax credits. Now people wait to buy a home based on if they are going to get the housing tax credit or a business may not expand depending on the tax and regulatory policies of the government.

I was referring to macro-economic theory. I assumed that was understood but I'll be sure to be clear about it next time.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Private Business has shown time and time again that it is superior to beauracratic management in every way (practically and ethically). So why wouldn't that apply to defense?

Bullshit. Your friendly neighborhood Social Security office is part of the largest bureaucracy on the planet and it is run by The Federal government at 1.2% efficiency, meaning that for every dollar you pay in FICA wages only 1.2 pennies is spent on administration and overhead. The best private insurance can boast is 20%.

It actually makes sense when you remove million dollar executives and demanding share-holders from the equation.

Bwa aha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....and in effect...Social Security is subsidized. Of course they're "efficient".....

Do you know how much money the U.S. government has borrowed from the SSA? Hint: Trillions!!!!!

True and a major problem, but also a separate issue. My thesis is that if you want an efficiently run bureaucracy government is the cheapest way to go because there is no profit motive.

Can you imagine what the value of the Social Security data base would be on the open market?

Who do you want managing the financial and medical data that is 'insurance' in this country - a middle class bureaucrat or a million dollar executive looking for bonus with share holders breathing down his neck looking for ROI?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Private Business has shown time and time again that it is superior to beauracratic management in every way (practically and ethically). So why wouldn't that apply to defense?

Business is interested in making money. Governments have to provide services. Some things are better done by business, some by government. Claiming one is superior to the other is probably not defensible.

The Government is a parasite. They steal our money and force their services down our throat.

I can argue from a practical perspective all day... but when it comes right down to it, I oppose all Government on principle. It's theft and slavery... pure and simple.

Government isn't a parasite! It is an idea. One day a few neighbors decided to collaborate and between themselves and keep a common pathway open and 'government' was born.

We could not live the way we do without government.

Why do we not hear of more cases of tainted food getting through the food system via mistake, neglect or greed?

Government.

Ain't the interstate cool? Based on what cars you people drive, you appear to appreciate the interstate system that You, The People of The United States built.

Cement plant not dropping ash on your elementary school? - Thanks Government!

There is a time and place for government.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Social Security is a bigger ponzi scheme than Madoff was running.

It has been running since 1935 and serves more people more efficiently than anything in human history.

Do you have a couple of hundred a month to contribute to the 'make sure Granny has enough to eat' fund?

Ain't it great that she and Gramps paid a little something out each paycheck to insure against disability and provide a monthly stipend should God see fit to let them grow old together? Ain't it great that nobody is profiting from our disability insurance / retirement program?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Social Security is a bigger ponzi scheme than Madoff was running.

It has been running since 1935 and serves more people more efficiently than anything in human history.

Do you have a couple of hundred a month to contribute to the 'make sure Granny has enough to eat' fund?

Ain't it great that she and Gramps paid a little something out each paycheck to insure against disability and provide a monthly stipend should God see fit to let them grow old together? Ain't it great that nobody is profiting from our disability insurance / retirement program?

Except they haven't insured anything. So long as there's enough people paying into the system Grandma and Grandpa are okay with Social Security. But what about those of us in our twenties who are the ones paying in now? When we're playing Grandma and Grandpa is there going to be enough people paying in to fund us? That's the problem with a ponzi scheme.

 

[Contumacious]

Social Security is a bigger ponzi scheme than Madoff was running.

It has been running since 1935 and serves more people more efficiently than anything in human history.

CBS 60 Minutes

U.S. Heading For Financial Trouble.

Comptroller Says Medicare Program Endangers Financial Stability

 

[SmellyLemmings]

well, i definitely agree with the founding fathers; govt is needed to regulate commerce (free market). the problem is gov't wanting more power to influence free market. But the pros are definitely the freedom to create your own business under govt regulation without the govt influencing or controlling your business.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Social Security is a bigger ponzi scheme than Madoff was running.

It has been running since 1935 and serves more people more efficiently than anything in human history.

Do you have a couple of hundred a month to contribute to the 'make sure Granny has enough to eat' fund?

Ain't it great that she and Gramps paid a little something out each paycheck to insure against disability and provide a monthly stipend should God see fit to let them grow old together? Ain't it great that nobody is profiting from our disability insurance / retirement program?

Except they haven't insured anything. So long as there's enough people paying into the system Grandma and Grandpa are okay with Social Security. But what about those of us in our twenties who are the ones paying in now? When we're playing Grandma and Grandpa is there going to be enough people paying in to fund us? That's the problem with a ponzi scheme.

Social Security has issues, certainly.... but that is no reason to scrap a program that successfully helped 3 generations and counting have a few bucks per month between work and death.

Our ancestors would be so jealous.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It has been running since 1935 and serves more people more efficiently than anything in human history.

Do you have a couple of hundred a month to contribute to the 'make sure Granny has enough to eat' fund?

Ain't it great that she and Gramps paid a little something out each paycheck to insure against disability and provide a monthly stipend should God see fit to let them grow old together? Ain't it great that nobody is profiting from our disability insurance / retirement program?

Except they haven't insured anything. So long as there's enough people paying into the system Grandma and Grandpa are okay with Social Security. But what about those of us in our twenties who are the ones paying in now? When we're playing Grandma and Grandpa is there going to be enough people paying in to fund us? That's the problem with a ponzi scheme.

Social Security has issues, certainly.... but that is no reason to scrap a program that successfully helped 3 generations and counting have a few bucks per month between work and death.

Our ancestors would be so jealous.

That's not a reason to scrap a fraudulent system?

 

[Diuretic]

I heard a clip from BBC radio describing some recent amendments to agricultural policy in Cuba. In Camaguey province some state-owned land has been given to some farmers to work for themselves. Apparently the land has been let go and is covered with a very tough weed that the farmers are having to clear themselves. But apparently they're doing it and making the land productive again. Anyway good to see ideology making way for common sense.

 

[midcan5]

Beware of the witch doctor promising this product cures all .... the free market is an abstraction, an ideal, it has never existed, but like all ideals its goals are lofty. Believe in me and you shall be free and prosperous. How often has man sold that dream. People die daily believing fantasy. Just this week, many died sweating, how odd is that. But markets are still good things if open and transparent and guided by saints. Saints there are few of though. Anyone here remember when Microsoft had real competition particularly in the application area? Proof free sometimes only benefits the biggie.

Taming the Savage Market

 

[Contumacious]

well, i definitely agree with the founding fathers; govt is needed to regulate commerce (free market). t.

You are correct, Founding Father Karl Marx, did want the Free Market regulated.

.

 

[Diuretic]

Yes, Marx wrote about child labour laws in England in the first volume of Capital, not requiring children to work is probably an interference in the "free market".

 

[manifold]

Yes, Marx wrote about child labour laws in England in the first volume of Capital, not requiring children to work is probably an interference in the "free market".

No probably about it. It absolutely is an interference in the free-market. As is the 40 hour work-week, worker's compensation, unemployment insurance, paid time off and minimum wage laws. All ghastly perversions of rightness at the expense of the disadvantaged wealthy.

 

[Charles Stucker]

No probably about it. It absolutely is an interference in the free-market. As is the 40 hour work-week, worker's compensation, unemployment insurance, paid time off and minimum wage laws. All ghastly perversions of rightness at the expense of the disadvantaged wealthy.

Any time you have government and laws you have an infringement on the free market. One of two cases invariably exist. Either the government gives preferential treatment to the workers and small business owners, on the theory that big business can take core of itself, or they give preferential treatment to the big business, on the theory they give better campaign contributions oops I mean that they provide wealth to the lower levels through trickle down theory or some such. Alas most of the government advances for the common worker are long in the past and now both major parties understand political reality, which is to say they know which side of big business their campaign is buttered (oops I mean funded) on. It's unfortunate that it is so difficult to make people aware of the reality or give them real options, as the only losers if small business were favored is a handful of overpaid executives. Really, who needs a billion dollars? How long would it take to spend it all? Why do they keep grasping for more?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Social Security is a bigger ponzi scheme than Madoff was running.

It has been running since 1935 and serves more people more efficiently than anything in human history.

CBS 60 Minutes

U.S. Heading For Financial Trouble.

Comptroller Says Medicare Program Endangers Financial Stability

All very good points that need to be addressed, and sooner would be better than later.

Those issues are separate from the concept of insuring workers and their families against disability and early death while creating a retirement savings program for those of us that make it through to the golden years.

In spite of congressional buffoonery and outright theft, no private company could have done better with the billions of dollars and priceless information that Social Security continues to protect on our behalf.

Why? Nobody, and I mean NOBODY makes a million dollars a year administrating the SSA fund. Private insurance and investment companies cannot make that claim.