Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-16-2013, 09:09 PM
 
19,036 posts, read 27,599,679 times
Reputation: 20273

Advertisements

I think, that's pretty good description of what the REAL market is. One f-king test ground for shock testing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-17-2013, 10:13 AM
 
20,724 posts, read 19,363,240 times
Reputation: 8288
I like the short answer. Power creates the market. Who creates the American football market? The power of the NFL to enforce the rules. Who creates the chess market? FIDE. Who crates the basket ball market? Why not just punch good shooters? Isn't the best wrestler the best basket ball player?

There are the powers:

Politics and Rhetoric - Examples are Cicero and Demosthenes. We are social animals.
Money - Examples are Crassus and Rothschild.
Military - Caesar, British Empire.
Land - The landed gentry and the church. Mortgage industry.


These are powers. They create the market. They make the rules. The idea behind democracy is to link these powers with what we call "the market". Without democracy, the populace isn't the market.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 12:01 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,791,608 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by celcius View Post
So if you revere Smith and Keynes and have read their respective work, what does that make you?
Well educated?

Depends upon your conclusions, I suppose ...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 12:03 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,791,608 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by oregonwoodsmoke View Post
So, you are hoping that someone will distill an entire semester of university level economics into 25 words or less, for you?
Looking for some kind of consensus regarding the nature of "the market". I have assumed that my basic question / observation would make more sense where is some kind of agreement on the nature of "the market".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 12:08 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,791,608 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwynedd1 View Post
Certainly not. Adam Smith is Genesis. And according to Conservatives, Scylla made Eve eat the bacon of the Crommyonian Sow even though Väinämöinen warned them of the evil Eduskunta.
Wow... I dont know whether to revere you or write you off as a crackpot. You might be surprised, but I know who Väinämöinen is. Among other things, he is the archtype whom Tolkien turned into Tom Bombadil I'll have to look up some of those other names ...

PS I want to give you rep on this post but alas you have earned far too much from me already
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 12:26 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,791,608 times
Reputation: 2587
I suppose the time has come to express the premise from which I derived my original question.

OK so let's begin with the speech. I have no reason to believe the Founding Fathers were morons, dunces, or airheads. Several served as governors of colonies. Many served in the colonial legislatures. This leads me to believe that the Founding Fathers understood the value of, the necessity of "government".

So step forward into "the market".

Government of necessity employs people. Government of necessity buys things, be that pens, paper, and, yes, even automobiles. This is why it is impossible to back out Government spending from GDP. Government buys things and Government pays employees who buy things.

Thus, government is also a consumer in the marketplace. As with all consumers, government can demand goods that it wants, rather than just accept what producers offer, be that pencils, paper, and even automobiles.

Now to my point.

A couple three years ago, syndicated radio host Bob Brinker wrote an open letter to Obama, suggesting that Obama use the power of executive order to instruct the federal government to buy only natural gas powered vehicles effective today plus three years. Why? To jump start the market for natural gas vehicles, thus reducing our need to import oil, and with the side effect of beginning the process of creating the economies of scale that would make such vehicles less expensive. This idea was endorsed by SF longtime host Bill Wattenburg, who bought a full page in the Wall Street Journal. I agree that this is something that should be done, for reasons named above.

I stated this in one of the threads on a different blogsite a few months ago, and my nemesis there n was immediately on my case, saying "government shouldn't do things like that. The market should decide". Never mind that no one complains when government participated in the building of canals and railroads in the early 19th century, road building and bridge building and dam building in the 20th century, including the US highway system in the 30's and the Interstate highway system in the 50's-60's. Those things would never have happened if people had waited for "the market" to act and the prosperity subsequently generated would never have happened. Never mind personal computers and the internet, both the result of government action. Never mind that people have no problem with government interfering with the market by building sports stadia for professional sports teams.

But I digress. My point is that government is a consumer, just as you and I. As such, government can order red paper clips instead of silver ones, and natural gas vehicles instead of gasoline ones. This is not interfering in the marketplace, and is perfectly acceptable. And yes, a greater good is accomplished, to whit, less dependence on foreign oil.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 03:18 AM
 
4,765 posts, read 3,732,475 times
Reputation: 3038
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
...Never mind that no one complains when government participated in the building of canals and railroads in the early 19th century, road building and bridge building and dam building in the 20th century, including the US highway system in the 30's and the Interstate highway system in the 50's-60's...
I suspect that the type same folks who fight every government action today were arguing against all of those things yesterday. Did not many folks argue against the US Treasury funding the building of the intercontinental railroads?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 10:01 AM
 
20,724 posts, read 19,363,240 times
Reputation: 8288
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckmann View Post
Wow... I dont know whether to revere you or write you off as a crackpot. You might be surprised, but I know who Väinämöinen is. Among other things, he is the archtype whom Tolkien turned into Tom Bombadil I'll have to look up some of those other names ...

PS I want to give you rep on this post but alas you have earned far too much from me already
I am pleasantly surprised.

I was going for the sea monster serpent (liquidity) and the sow(pork barreling) while also using the socialist idealistic paradise of Finland...as parody on how a certain body politic runs on a perverted mythology. Adam Smith would despise neo liberals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 09:51 PM
 
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
10,930 posts, read 11,725,051 times
Reputation: 13170
Let's keep it simple.

A market is a "place" where individuals trade goods and services for money or other goods and services.

"The Market"? Which "The Market"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2013, 07:19 AM
 
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
10,930 posts, read 11,725,051 times
Reputation: 13170
To ukrkoz: The aggregate welfare effects of an exogenous shock in a complete general equilibrum context can be measured entirely in any single market as long as the supply and demand curves in the chosen market reflect general equilibrium adjustments in all other markets.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:42 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top