the free market: does it work or is it flawed

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

mod hatIn post 38 appears: "The rich do not need to care like you the rich basterd!" and Read-only has registered a complaint, presumably for being called a "rich basterd."

As B&E is mine to moderator, I tried to issue a warning, but find I cannot as kmrugu is also a moderator. Name calling is quite atypical for kmrugu, but each instance is still unjustified.

It is also strange behavior as kmrugu is usually logical and makes well supported statements, but I doubt he has any way to know of Read-Only's financial status, and surely no way to know about the marital status of Read's mother. (I understand kmugu probably was not being literal.)

I recommend that kmrugu apologize or at least try to defend / justify his presumptions about Read-Only AND that Read only do the same. (see post 40, where kmrugu makes the valid point that "young punk" is not respectful also. Nor is it founded on information Read-Only could know.) I can do no more.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I respect your position and suggestions, Billy. And I must add that my "young punk" question was in regard to his having called me an "old man" in a very obvious derogatory fashion. On that basis, I see nothing that I've done that calls for any apology on my part.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OK. "young punk" and "old man" do seem to be off-setting mildly offensive comments. "Basterd" seems to b some what of an esculation as at least I do not understand any figurative meaning in it. ("Young punk" could and probably does imply one is a rebel and not well versed in the subject. "Old man" probably means that one's POV is rigid and perhaps out of date.) "Basterd" seems to me to be purely insulting.

In any case, both of you make many valuable contributions to B&E threads, so lets keep these posts free of insults.

 

I can agree with that, Billy. And since you're here, perhaps you'd tackle explaining to him exactly what "free market" means. He's thrashed about in all directions rather than addressing something so simple as the actual topic.

And since I'm cutting off discussing anything with him anymore, maybe you'd like to give him a hand at understanding the basics.

Thank you.

 

"As the nation’s unemployment figures continue to reach new heights, Chief Executive magazine's 2009 "Best & Worst States" survey took CEO's pulse on what the best and worst places for jobs and business growth are. For the fourth year in a row, CEOs rated Texas as the #1 state to do business and California as the worst.

Chief Executive's fifth annual survey asked 543 CEOs to evaluate their states on a broad range of issues, including proximity to resources, regulation, tax policies, education, quality of living and infrastructure. Providing additional insight to the evaluations, CEOs were also asked to grade each state based on the following criteria: 1) Taxation & Regulation, 2) Workforce Quality, and 3) Living Environment."

The free market works, folks. It's no wonder why the lowest-tax smaller gov't states are successful and growing and the states like New York and California are increasingly expensive, higher taxed, and regulatory nightmares and businesses are leaving and the debt is bombing (like in California).

"Texas maintained its #1 spot in the ranking for the fourth year in a row, as North Carolina, Florida, Georgia and Tennessee all jumped up in ranks, taking the #2, 3, 4 and 5 spots, respectively."

http://www.chiefexecutive.net/ME2/A...3253A6&AudID=F242408EE36A4B18AABCEB1289960A07

 

Government regulation is neccesary to protect individual rights.

 

More than that, regulation is necessary to provide a consitent rule book by which trade can grow. Additionally, regulation and government action is required to keep the pipes of capitalism from clogging (monopolies and excessive accumulation of wealth).

Free trade works, but it needs a foundation in law and government. Unfortunately, what happens too often is that special business interests like to use government to keep the scales of trade perpetually skewed to their benefit. (e.g. China's currency manipulation, US healthcare industry, etc).

 

By free trade do you mean things like NAFTA?

 

Only a severely deluded imbecile would consider NAFTA Free Trade.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Let me rephrase my question

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Do you support the elimanation of tarrifs, border controls and the like with agreements such as Schengen, and the Maastricht Treaty?

 

I support the general idea of free trade. However, from the US perspective, I do not support the total elimination of tarrifs and border controls for the following reasons. I don't think it is fair or correct to export pollution to other countries as has and continues to happen. Two I don't think it is fair to avoid certian labor laws like child labor by exporting the job to another country like India. And trade should be reciprocal. If the US drops its barriers, then so should the other country. Our trade agreements for the most part are nonsense giveaways to special interests.

And I think our trade negotiators need to negotiate trade agreements from the perspective of the average Joe American versus, the "if I give this concession I can go work for X at huge salary when I leave government" perspective of the trade negotiator.

And finally, we need to enforce our trade agreeements. Obama is making a much needed start in this areana. But a lot remains to be done.

 

Hooray! someone rational on free trade!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

America should go back to the time were we had low-tech industry....


The truth is that free trade is not really free trade, because it supports the country with the cheaper overhead (wages, labor laws etc.) to the detriment of countries with laws.

I would support reneging our trade agreements with several countries especially China.

 

There is an aspect of "free trade" related to production scale that should be mentioned. It BTW was reason why the last Nobel Prize in economics was awarded. It is obvious that the world can only support a few makers of large airplanes. They could be made anywhere, perhaps cheaper in lower labor cost areas than where they are made for historical reasons. China is in fact just now making it first large passenger liner. Brazil is the number 3 maker and tends to dominate the 100 +30 to -20 seat market, plus is doing very well in the corporate jet field.*

It is more obvious why some items are produced where there is a natural advantage. For example Brazil is world's largest exporter of orange juice as has cheap fertile land, cheap labor for picking and longer growing season and lots of rain when needed with no frosts. Even though US can and does grow oranges in three states, it imports a lot of concentrate from Brazil - Read the small print on the next box or jug you buy.

*This fact is due in part** because a few years ago one of Embraer’s corporate jets collided with a big Boeing at high altitude. Post collision the Embraer flew on for half an hour and landed safely with only damage to tail and one wing. The Boeing immediately broke into two pieces and more than 300 in it died. (Most were dead, or unconscious, before they hit the ground.) A couple of months after that Embraer’s used corporate jets sold for more than new ones as there was several years wait on the order list if you ordered a new one. Now production capacity has been expanded and the wait is only a few months, I think.

** Also they are cheaper, very high quality, and more fuel efficient than most competitor's corporate jets.

More directly on thread: It certainly works for bonus collecting CEOs, but is not really a "free market." USA has a highly regulated market -You need permits for most evey business you want to open*** and has many restrictive trade associations, not the least of which is the AMA (American Medial Association) - It controls / restricts the number of doctors graduated annually by controlling the medical schools.

*** They are almost always limited to keep prices higher - say the cost of a taxi ride, etc. I think NYC taxi permits are sold for > $30,000 dollars (more than the cost of the taxi anyway) You can not just paint your car yellow and put word "TAXI" on the sides as you could if it were a free market.