|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 3:31 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| sluggle wrote: |
| "Capitalism: A Love Story" is a misnomer for this movie. |
You bet your arse it is.
| Quote: |
Government intervention was in large scale the cause of the current economic crisis.
In America, for example, the government organized programs aimed at what it called �fair housing� to give all Americans the chance to own a home regardless of past economic or credit status. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were essentially the long arm of the government to carry-out these programs and were given a direct line of credit into the US Treasury.
The problem is that governments are not willing to leave anyone out, or have any losers, since their primary interest is in pleasing the masses and not turning a profit. The private sector may leave some people out, but it also doesn�t throw massive amounts of money to people that will never be able to repay either.
http://www.adamsmith.org/blog/ |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
misher
Joined: 14 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would go out on a limb that all of this mess IS because of unfettered capitalism. It is what happens when checks and balances are completely thrown out the window (IE no intervention and regulation).
People are greedy. They want more. They will do everything the can to keep what they have and make more. To hell with ethics. People are greedy and will screw each other for the mighty buck.
Capitalism works best when it is regulated. No pure system will work. If you think the less regulation the better, keep reading that chicago uni crap that has been proven over and over again that without regulation, Ponzi schemers, and corporate crooks will run the joint. IDEALLY no regulation would be great as everyone would be free to express their entrepreneurial spirit and would be encouraged to innovate. Too many people will screw one another though and cheat.
THe banking cartel also needs to be addressed but that is quite the opponent. They are the wealthy elite and tied into the corporatocracy and most of the federal government. Those are some effing powerful people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| misher wrote: |
I would go out on a limb that all of this mess IS because of unfettered capitalism. It is what happens when checks and balances are completely thrown out the window (IE no intervention and regulation).
People are greedy. They want more. They will do everything the can to keep what they have and make more. To hell with ethics. People are greedy and will screw each other for the mighty buck.
Capitalism works best when it is regulated. No pure system will work. If you think the less regulation the better, keep reading that chicago uni crap that has been proven over and over again that without regulation, Ponzi schemers, and corporate crooks will run the joint. IDEALLY no regulation would be great as everyone would be free to express their entrepreneurial spirit and would be encouraged to innovate. Too many people will screw one another though and cheat.
THe banking cartel also needs to be addressed but that is quite the opponent. They are the wealthy elite and tied into the corporatocracy and most of the federal government. Those are some effing powerful people. |
I love how counter-factual these hand full of paragraphs are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
misher
Joined: 14 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Care to enlighten me rusty?
No pure system works. Flaws in human nature will not allow it. That is all I am saying.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
misher
Joined: 14 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 6:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not arguing that the united states government's version of regulation needs more money. Obviously their version doesn't work as billions have been spent and crooks were still able to pilfer the coffers. How about, they need to MORE EFFECTIVELY regulate wall street so these types of shenanigans don't happen again?
All I am trying to point out that relaxing regulation and letting wall street fly at it would bring absolute disaster. You wouldn't agree? I don't know about you but I don't have too much faith in humanity when it comes to knowing that enough is enough.
I also never stated that we have ever had a "pure" system of any kind. I merely pointed out that as we move closer to a more socialist/communist or free market capitalist side of the spectrum, human nature always corrupts these ideologies. Advocating Friedman's system to stand alone is no more helpful than doing the same thing for Marx. They will both fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 6:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| misher wrote: |
| I'm not arguing that the united states government's version of regulation needs more money. Obviously their version doesn't work as billions have been spent and crooks were still able to pilfer the coffers. How about, they need to MORE EFFECTIVELY regulate wall street so these types of shenanigans don't happen again? |
Can you give some examples of good regulation? It's nice to say we can regulate, we just have to do it more effectively. But how do you do that? And what about the politicians, lobbiests and various special interest groups who raid the govt coffers?
| Quote: |
All I am trying to point out that relaxing regulation and letting wall street fly at it would bring absolute disaster. You wouldn't agree? I don't know about you but I don't have too much faith in humanity when it comes to knowing that enough is enough. |
Any worse than what it is now? Do you know what caused the mortgage crisis? The USD to devalue by 95% in less than a hundred years. And myriad other economic disasters. I'll give you a clue, it wasn't free markets.
| Quote: |
| I also never stated that we have ever had a "pure" system of any kind. I merely pointed out that as we move closer to a more socialist/communist or free market capitalist side of the spectrum, human nature always corrupts these ideologies. Advocating Friedman's system to stand alone is no more helpful than doing the same thing for Marx. They will both fail. |
The problem with this logic is, free markets are more "natural". They are the opposite of socialism which is completely human guided and therefore fallible. A free market more resembles an ecosystem where no single part of that system can hope to dominate. So, it doesn't really follow that humans corrupt the market. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BQ-RN28bkY&NR=1
Also this is very good. Poor quality audio, but stick with it to the end as it is an eye opening speech from an intellect 20 times larger than Friedman, Keynes, Krugman(snicker) and Marx combined. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
misher
Joined: 14 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Can you give some examples of good regulation? It's nice to say we can regulate, we just have to do it more effectively. But how do you do that? And what about the politicians, lobbiests and various special interest groups who raid the govt coffers? |
Good question. You are arguing for a more lax approach are you not? I admit that I cannot answer the question as to how to regulate financial market effectively. I just believe there should be mechanisms put in place to stop people from getting away with theft. If you disagree with that, I do not see why.
lobbyists and special interest groups are a pure product of the free market.If anything has eroded faith in the united states government, it is that it has sold itself out to too many lobbyists (mainly corporate conglomerates that would like nothing better than any type of intervention whatsoever)
| Quote: |
| Any worse than what it is now? Do you know what caused the mortgage crisis? The USD to devalue by 95% in less than a hundred years. And myriad other economic disasters. I'll give you a clue, it wasn't free markets. |
Mortgage brokers being encouraged to sell unrealistic mortgages to boost their commission? That is quite free market. You get while the getting is good and piss on everyone else. The USD devalued because of people living far beyond their means which was facilitated by greed from lenders.
| Quote: |
| he problem with this logic is, free markets are more "natural". They are the opposite of socialism which is completely human guided and therefore fallible. A free market more resembles an ecosystem where no single part of that system can hope to dominate. So, it doesn't really follow that humans corrupt the market. |
I fail to see how a free market utopia would have no single party (or group of parties) dominating. Not everyone can have a piece of the pie and people on top will ensure that they get more while many get less. THey will also use any method available to them whether it is corrupt or not. You assume everyone can win and human nature wants everyone to win. There will always be loser too and in a completely free market society, the losers will far outnumber the winners. Survival of the fittest isn't it?
In theory, globalistion would be a great thing. Free markets for all. Unfortunately free markets for all just means more for who is currently in control (us) and less for those that aren't (Africa et al.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rusty Shackleford
Joined: 08 May 2008
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oh dear. Where am I to begin with this? You have come up with a big load of counter factuals, once again. I was about to hit the hay, but I had better quickly debunk them or I won't catch a wink.
| misher wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Can you give some examples of good regulation? It's nice to say we can regulate, we just have to do it more effectively. But how do you do that? And what about the politicians, lobbiests and various special interest groups who raid the govt coffers? |
Good question. You are arguing for a more lax approach are you not? I admit that I cannot answer the question as to how to regulate financial market effectively. I just believe there should be mechanisms put in place to stop people from getting away with theft. If you disagree with that, I do not see why.
lobbyists and special interest groups are a pure product of the free market.If anything has eroded faith in the united states government, it is that it has sold itself out to too many lobbyists (mainly corporate conglomerates that would like nothing better than any type of intervention whatsoever) |
Where do you propose the theft would take place. You do realize that a free market presupposes strong rule of law? Can I simply role in and steal your goods? Of course not. Property rights are a fundamental foundation of free markets.
As for your second paragraph in this quote, dear oh dear. How do you come to the conclusion that lobbiests are a free market product? Most free market proponents denounce the influence of narrow special interest groups. These groups can only proliferate when there is an over flowing public trough to hover around. If the govt didn't have so much to sell the incentive to become a lobbyist would surely diminish.
The part in parentheses is pure fantasy. A dominant market player wants nothing more than to influence policy so that he may entrench his position. The very last thing market participants want is competition. Especially those firms that have a lot to lose.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Any worse than what it is now? Do you know what caused the mortgage crisis? The USD to devalue by 95% in less than a hundred years. And myriad other economic disasters. I'll give you a clue, it wasn't free markets. |
Mortgage brokers being encouraged to sell unrealistic mortgages to boost their commission? That is quite free market. You get while the getting is good and piss on everyone else. The USD devalued because of people living far beyond their means which was facilitated by greed from lenders. |
Who really encouraged them to sell the products? The US govt has had a policy of "Home Ownership For All", since the Clinton administration. Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac were govt owned banks that bought up all those dodgy loans. If there weren't a market (govt created) for those loans, the lenders never would have written the loans, as they would've lost their shirts when the debtors, enevitably started defaulting.
Once again, you are dead wrong. The USD devalued because of price fixing in the market for money. If you hold the price of a good below its market level, people will consume too much off it. The price of money is interest and the federal reserve has been manipulating it for a long time now.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| he problem with this logic is, free markets are more "natural". They are the opposite of socialism which is completely human guided and therefore fallible. A free market more resembles an ecosystem where no single part of that system can hope to dominate. So, it doesn't really follow that humans corrupt the market. |
I fail to see how a free market utopia would have no single party (or group of parties) dominating. Not everyone can have a piece of the pie and people on top will ensure that they get more while many get less. THey will also use any method available to them whether it is corrupt or not. You assume everyone can win and human nature wants everyone to win. There will always be loser too and in a completely free market society, the losers will far outnumber the winners. Survival of the fittest isn't it? |
I could basically swap "free market utopia" for govt "utopia" and make the same assertions. It wouldn't make them any more true. I suggest you find out what a market is, as you seem confused as to what the term actually means. Don't worry, it is far more benign than you would imagine.
| Quote: |
| In theory, globalistion would be a great thing. Free markets for all. Unfortunately free markets for all just means more for who is currently in control (us) and less for those that aren't (Africa et al.) |
I'm not sure what the relevance of this is. [/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| misher wrote: |
I would go out on a limb that all of this mess IS because of unfettered capitalism. It is what happens when checks and balances are completely thrown out the window (IE no intervention and regulation).
|
I've already shown how this is false |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| eamo wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| eamo wrote: |
| Capitalism can work fine.......if it's controlled. |
The less controlled, the better. |
Because? |
Because nearly all corruption and monopolies (especially that of the US money supply, issued by the private Fed, which is nothing more than legalized fraud, backed by government fiat) are a result of over-reaching government control.
The government should merely defend the Constitution and no more. A free market (something we haven't seen for a century) will always be more effective than government intervention in keeping the economy prosperous and stable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sluggle wrote: |
| Sergio Stefanuto wrote: |
| eamo wrote: |
Capitalism can work fine.......if it's controlled. |
Why were they drunk? Greenspan poured the alcohol, the Fed got everybody drunk and the govt helped out with their moral hazards - all the various ways which they interfered with the free market and removed the necessary balances that would've existed and kept all this from happening.
. |
Right-- this is a great response to the reason for this financial crisis. I feel that "Capitalism: A Love Story" is a misnomer for this movie. This financial crisis is NOT indicative of a failure of the free markets. Wall St did what they did because Greenspan kept the interest rates at 1% and encouraged cheap credit.
The Fed not only bought the alcohol, but cracked open the bottle and poured it into a frosty mug. |
Not only that, but there is no real "capital" in the system anymore at all. Ever since the Fed came into being, literally every single dollar in circulation has been created as debt. That's right - fractional reserve banking allows banks to lend out money they don't have, all at interest. Legalized fraud, passed into law by the government (so that it can borrow from the Fed by issuing bonds anytime it wants).
Capital is supposed accumulate, and be invested as a surplus. Some debt is fine, but under the Fed, we have an overall net debt (in fact every single dollar in existence, plus all the interest that's been attached since day 1) which can never, ever be paid off, and in fact requires an escalation of debt just to pay off the interest on previous debt ad infinitum. This is not capitalism at all. This is just plain fraud, and total madness.
We live in a world where banks treat debt as an actual commodity to be bought and sold, swapped back and forth, when if fact it is all just worthless. This is why the the derivatives black hole is now in excess of $1 quadrillion and the banks are looting the economy to get as many hard assets as they can before the inevitable collapse (which Obama is handing over to them on a silver plate). It's an absolute farce. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| misher wrote: |
I would go out on a limb that all of this mess IS because of unfettered capitalism. It is what happens when checks and balances are completely thrown out the window (IE no intervention and regulation).
People are greedy. They want more. They will do everything the can to keep what they have and make more. To hell with ethics. People are greedy and will screw each other for the mighty buck.
Capitalism works best when it is regulated. No pure system will work. If you think the less regulation the better, keep reading that chicago uni crap that has been proven over and over again that without regulation, Ponzi schemers, and corporate crooks will run the joint. IDEALLY no regulation would be great as everyone would be free to express their entrepreneurial spirit and would be encouraged to innovate. Too many people will screw one another though and cheat.
THe banking cartel also needs to be addressed but that is quite the opponent. They are the wealthy elite and tied into the corporatocracy and most of the federal government. Those are some effing powerful people. |
You are partly right, and partly confused. You are right that the banking cartel (ie. the privately owned Federal Reserve) is the problem. But it is the government that actually enables the Fed. The Fed doesn't need regulation, it needs to be abolished, plain and simple.
You mentioned "ponzi schemes". Are you aware that the entire monetary system of the USA, since the Fed was created, is literally a gigantic ponzi scheme? Wallstreet, Social Security, and basically the entire FIRE economy were all ponzi schemes in turn. Look up the definition of ponzi scheme, and you will see that that is what we have. The current crisis is all that fake finance unraveling, as it inevitably must. What was Obama's solution? To inject trillions of dollars of MORE fake money (this time guaranteed by tax payers however) at the zombie banks to inflate the ponzi scheme some more and buy themselves some time.
We are now in the midst of the biggest financial bubble of all time - the 'bailout bubble'. When it burst, the world as you know it will be turned upside down. You can thank your government for allowing, and even encouraging it to happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
misher
Joined: 14 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
You mentioned "ponzi schemes". Are you aware that the entire monetary system of the USA, since the Fed was created, is literally a gigantic ponzi scheme? Wallstreet, Social Security, and basically the entire FIRE economy were all ponzi schemes in turn. Look up the definition of ponzi scheme, and you will see that that is what we have. The current crisis is all that fake finance unraveling, as it inevitably must. What was Obama's solution? To inject trillions of dollars of MORE fake money (this time guaranteed by tax payers however) at the zombie banks to inflate the ponzi scheme some more and buy themselves some time.
We are now in the midst of the biggest financial bubble of all time - the 'bailout bubble'. When it burst, the world as you know it will be turned upside down. You can thank your government for allowing, and even encouraging it to happen |
I completely agree with this. I am not a fan of Obama and his stimulus "band-aid."
I guess regulation is the wrong word. I'm just talking about mechanisms to prevent theft that should work.
And as much as I don't like being a downer like asmith, I completely agree that when the stimulus bubble pops, things are going to get a lot uglier than last year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
