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.
A Capitalist system requires a Free Market to properly allocate resources in an efficient manner. It is very difficult to make any money if you cannot have some control over your costs or prices so you can purchase below "real" or sell above the "real" free market value. Businessmen work very hard to lower costs and raise prices. They even enlist the government to aid them in these endeavors. Most businesses actually operate as some form of monopoly in order to maximize their profits. These profits would not be realizable in an actual open market.
Our current system operates as a politically protected monopoly at the very top where risk is effectively eliminated and profits nearly guaranteed. The rest of the system operated as a source of profits for the monopolists at great risk to the participants that do not have the resources to buy economic protection from the government. The bailouts of the world banking system are examples of reducing or eliminating the risk inherent in their business. They gambled on housing based derivatives and lost. We paid for those losses without gaining anything in return.
I think many of the biggest corporations are scared of real regulation based on what's best for citizens, but love 'regulation' that they pay big bucks for that eliminates their competition and gives them huge tax breaks.
iow, do big corporations mind being heavily regulated if those regulations eliminate most of their competition?
Oh they fear a true free market because then their state backed cartels would be over. Giant corporations don't mind regulations, they can either afford to bear them, or find loopholes. Regulations kill off smaller competition.
A Capitalist system requires a Free Market to properly allocate resources in an efficient manner. It is very difficult to make any money if you cannot have some control over your costs or prices so you can purchase below "real" or sell above the "real" free market value. Businessmen work very hard to lower costs and raise prices. They even enlist the government to aid them in these endeavors. Most businesses actually operate as some form of monopoly in order to maximize their profits. These profits would not be realizable in an actual open market.
Our current system operates as a politically protected monopoly at the very top where risk is effectively eliminated and profits nearly guaranteed. The rest of the system operated as a source of profits for the monopolists at great risk to the participants that do not have the resources to buy economic protection from the government. The bailouts of the world banking system are examples of reducing or eliminating the risk inherent in their business. They gambled on housing based derivatives and lost. We paid for those losses without gaining anything in return.
You know, you do some very astute, very spot on posting. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you support President Obama? If so, how can someone who understands economics so clearly such as you do, support Obama who is clearly a crony capitalist? I mean Obama doesn't even pay lip service to the free market, at least most Republicans do that.
Regulations, by any means are not considered economic freedom.
It is all about control, instead of the free market deciding what is good and what is bad.
When a corporation's "economic freedom" threatens other people's freedom, then we need regulations. To argue that regulations in general means a lack of economic freedom would mean that because we have laws regulating daily life means that no one has personal freedoms.
When a corporation's "economic freedom" threatens other people's freedom, then we need regulations. To argue that regulations in general means a lack of economic freedom would mean that because we have laws regulating daily life means that no one has personal freedoms.
No regulations (laws)=/= freedom, only on big government fantasy island is that the case. If a government engages in a legitimately illegal activity they will be punished by law. If they engage in behavior society finds distasteful they will be punished by a greater force: the market. Monopolies and "predator" firms only exist because through the instrument of the state. If the state didn't interfere in the market there would be no monopolies, and if there was it would only be because the people want them to be because they offer a superior product at superior price.
Big businesses LOVE regulations because they can buy off Congress to write them in such a way to leave them a loophole so all it does is crush the competition. And even if they have to abide by the regulation they can afford it, their smaller competition can't. State intervention into the marketplace creates cartels and rackets. A business left to it's own devices can't use force legally to muscle out it's competition, it can only survive and expand if consumers choose allow it to by using their product or shopping at their store, etc. Only one entity in society has the monopoly on force, and that's the state. Only the state can legally use force, and when it butts into the market it uses it's force to favor certain businesses and industries at the expense of others.
We need regulations and true competition to foster growth and innovation.
true competition and regulation are a contradiction in terms
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.