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.
no such thing as a pure free market. only in theoretical texts does it exist.
now, what we should strive for is fair markets so workers and companies through the world have equal opportunity to compete instead of undercutting the market either through exploitation or subsidies.
It isn't possible for The Free Market System to fail. It works exactly as it was intended. In addition to answering the three basic questions, What shall we produce? How shall we produce it? and For whom shall we produce?, the Free Market also addresses the issue of scarcity and fairly distributes resources that are scarce.
Yeah, and all the while they are ferreting all those huge profits away for the politicians, shareholders, CEO's, company directors and family's personal bank accounts. Free Market to me means 'free to make as big a profit as I can at the expense of the less well off'.
Within the context of the intention of the original posting, I believe that the actual complaint is that we don't have sufficient protectionist policies in place (tariffs on imports) to make foreign production for many products less desirable.
Complaining against lack of sufficient tariffs and trade restrictions is really a more accurate way to frame the issue, vs a "purist" discussion about free markets.
we do not have a free market and never did. we just opened the american market to the world. we are being carved up like a roast when you have monster trade deficits bad stuff happens.
The bulk of the profits the corporations have made from this "free market" are staying at the top; none of these profits are being passed down to the employees of the companies nor to the consumers of their products.
This is very similar to the economic situation that lead up to the Great Depression.
Does this sound like our situation today? :
"An enduring agricultural depression, the grossly inequitable distribution of wealth, massive consumer debt, tax cuts for the rich and what historian Robert S. McElvaine called "the wild speculation of the decade's orgy of greed," all made matters worse."
Most people are familiar with the Great Depression and it's recovery but not many people have gone off on their own to find out what caused the Great Depression.
Yeah, and all the while they are ferreting all those huge profits away for the politicians, shareholders, CEO's, company directors and family's personal bank accounts. Free Market to me means 'free to make as big a profit as I can at the expense of the less well off'.
The bulk of the profits the corporations have made from this "free market" are staying at the top; none of these profits are being passed down to the employees of the companies nor to the consumers of their products.
This is very similar to the economic situation that lead up to the Great Depression.
Does this sound like our situation today? :
"An enduring agricultural depression, the grossly inequitable distribution of wealth, massive consumer debt, tax cuts for the rich and what historian Robert S. McElvaine called "the wild speculation of the decade's orgy of greed," all made matters worse."
Most people are familiar with the Great Depression and it's recovery but not many people have gone off on their own to find out what caused the Great Depression.
All economic systems, the Free Market, Command, Mixed, and Traditional answer the three basic questions: What shall we produce? How shall we produce it? and For whom shall we produce?
The answer to each of those questions is the economic system, like this:
What shall we produce?
1) Market Economy: The Market will decide.
2) Command Economy: The Group/Bureaucracy/Oligarchy/Committee will decide.
3) Traditional: Tradition will decide.
Your position is silly.
What shall we produce? Shall we produce computers?
Duh, yeah, because the Market has decided to so because YOU demanded it.
How shall we produce tomatoes? Well there's a market for traditionally or neo-traditionally grown tomatoes, and a market for organically grown tomatoes. And it's because YOU the CONSUMER demanded it.
How shall we produce computers? En masse or individualized? You have both options, because YOU the CONSUMER demanded it. You can get a massed produced Gateway or Dell, or you can go to a private company who will build you a computer to your exact specifications with respect to hard drive capacity, RAM, Video RAM, audio and video cards etc etc (there are two such privately owned businesses with a few blocks of me). Perhaps you might pay a wee bit more, but then you're getting exactly what you asked for.
You're saying markets are created, well yeah, by YOU the CONSUMER.
If it isn't sustainable, then it's because YOU the CONSUMER no longer have a demand for that product or service.
You want to subsidize buggy whip manufacturers? How about manufacturers of 8-Track Tape Decks? What the hell for? YOU the CONSUMER no longer demand those items.
That's exactly how the Free Market is supposed to work. If you had a company that made cassette tapes, then hopefully your market research saw the demand for compact discs, and you then went out and raised the capital to purchase machinery and equipment to make compact discs and to retrain your workers to operate the machinery and equipment. If you didn't, then you'd end up like the buggy whip manufacturers.
The housing market? It's sustainable only so long as YOU the CONSUMER continue to demand new housing. When that demand ends or curtails, the market drops off.
How many new houses are you going to build? How many new houses can you build?
Are you going to build a new house for me? Why? I don't want a new house. You couldn't give me one. I don't want the responsibility or the headache or the higher cost, especially for property taxes, insurance, utilities, maintenance etc. Besides, I have a house elsewhere.
Who seriously thought they would build 1,500,000 new homes per year, year after year after year? Who are they building them for, because not everyone wants a home, or can physically handle a home, or has the money, or has the credit for one.
Only a moron wouldn't understand that it was unsustainable. That's one of the beautiful things about markets, you can do research to understand them and their sustainability. Obviously they failed to do that in the housing market.
huh???? my position is silly? what position are you referring to? is it the belief that the only sustainable market is the free market?
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.
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.
