Charting our Economic Idealogies.

We are looking for discussions more then debates. Come with an open mind, maybe we all can grow.

Moderators: 4E Admin, 4E Mod

User avatar
Clazelle
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:00 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Clazelle » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:09 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:40 am
Eryk wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:26 am
To an idealist maybe the difference between socialism and fascism is huge. But to the commoner I don’t think it’s that important.
I think it's largely a matter of perspective. Which is what I'm playing with in this topic.

Welcome to Awkward Arguments and 4E.
I would support that inference. To the individual it probably doesn't matter whether it is the government directly through owning or administering goods and services or heavy-handed regulation through fascism telling people what to do or not do. They both are forces against individual and economic freedom.



User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:12 pm

Clazelle wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:09 pm
I would support that inference. To the individual it probably doesn't matter whether it is the government directly through owning or administering goods and services or heavy-handed regulation through fascism telling people what to do or not do. They both are forces against individual and economic freedom.
Calzelle! Welcome back I had thought you had given up on us. I'm really glad to see you posting again. And finally out of newbe jail.

User avatar
Procax Nothus
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2019 5:57 pm
Has thanked: 115 times
Been thanked: 175 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Procax Nothus » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:14 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:40 pm
What does that influence look like to you?
It would be very similar to the Canadian system. States would primarily fund and administer healthcare with guidelines and standards set by the federal government. There would still be private hospitals and private insurance but all medically necessary procedures would be covered under the "national healthcare."

I know I said elimination of insurance earlier but after thinking about it further. Some private insurance would be needed.

User avatar
Clazelle
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:00 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Clazelle » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:15 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:12 pm
Clazelle wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:09 pm
I would support that inference. To the individual it probably doesn't matter whether it is the government directly through owning or administering goods and services or heavy-handed regulation through fascism telling people what to do or not do. They both are forces against individual and economic freedom.
Calzelle! Welcome back I had thought you had given up on us. I'm really glad to see you posting again. And finally out of newbe jail.
The quality of some of the posts and posters here is lacking for my tastes, but I saw Arphaxad encourage someone to visit so I stopped by. I hope you don't mind the brutal honesty

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:17 pm

Clazelle wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:15 pm
The quality of some of the posts and posters here is lacking for my tastes, but I saw Arphaxad encourage someone to visit so I stopped by. I hope you don't mind the brutal honesty
It's a new forum and growing slowly. But if would rather find something already established to your tastes then help to mold something I don't see how anyone can fault you for that.

User avatar
Cat's Paw
Posts: 4482
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 12:59 pm
Location: SE Michigan
Has thanked: 3107 times
Been thanked: 2892 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Cat's Paw » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:18 pm

John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:09 pm
That's right. those who claim the economy is somehow immutable, unchangeable, and beyond the meddling of mere mortals are badly deceived...or in the case of Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan, and the entire universe of right wing think tanks deceptive.

The economy is nothing but a framework of rules, regulations, and laws within which people trade. When it becomes dramatically rigged to enrich the few at the expense of the many as it is now we have every right to demand a change in the rules.

Thank You.
Thank You. Thank You.
Thank You. Thank You. Thank You.

I have started a new thesis, Mr. Des Moines, The Constitution is a description of our economy. Marx, and his manifesto, are just are just his attempt to improve on the system. He brought some good ideas, but - Ours is first and oldest surviving ... If we can keep the nose up, and add a little power, we might not crash into the desert.

User avatar
Clazelle
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2019 3:00 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Clazelle » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:20 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:17 pm
Clazelle wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:15 pm
The quality of some of the posts and posters here is lacking for my tastes, but I saw Arphaxad encourage someone to visit so I stopped by. I hope you don't mind the brutal honesty
It's a new forum and growing slowly. But if would rather find something already established to your tastes then help to mold something I don't see how anyone can fault you for that.
There is a reason I have 200 blocked through disqus; preferences.

Deleted User 54

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Deleted User 54 » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:42 pm

Clazelle wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:20 pm
GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:17 pm
Clazelle wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:15 pm
The quality of some of the posts and posters here is lacking for my tastes, but I saw Arphaxad encourage someone to visit so I stopped by. I hope you don't mind the brutal honesty
It's a new forum and growing slowly. But if would rather find something already established to your tastes then help to mold something I don't see how anyone can fault you for that.
There is a reason I have 200 blocked through disqus; preferences.
Can't speak for the other "houses" on this BB but E4 will be kept clean of trolls. I hope to see you create some OPs or add comments to the ones already here. You know I've always respected your point of view on things. We just need to get Ike more active again. Guide has been solid as well.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:46 pm

Clazelle wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:20 pm
There is a reason I have 200 blocked through disqus; preferences.
If you have a low tolerance for internet shenanigans 4E and ZZZ are probably the places for you around here. The other houses can get a bit rough at times.

LivingRock
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by LivingRock » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:52 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:39 pm
LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:19 pm
I think I'd have to put myself at around a 1.5. As previously mentioned on this thread, Adam Smith's Invisible Hand is there but it ain't magic. Some range of control is at least required. The goal should be reconciliation of the economy's need for control with the Invisible Hand's drive in a way to give the order needed (but no more) with as much "Lasissez faire" as possible. Depending on situational circumstances, and sectors of the economy the reconciliation can fall on a range of this scale, but probably should stay somewhere between 1 and 2.75.
What sectors would you consider a 1 and what sectors would you consider a 2.75?
1 - Most of the "service" sector. Barbers, drivers, and even consultants. To me, this segment is too frequently over-regulated (nanny statism and protectionism). That's bad for consumers and workers.

2.75 - The energy sector. Scalability, vast equal distribution, and environmental factors are paramount here. Ironically enough, the Green New Deal framework, still basically seems to rely on a range of number 2 with government involvement controlling the economy to the "Crony Capitolism" framework of number 3 on our chart in order to reduce emissions from power generation. They want to pick the preferred private renewable companies to have advantage in the market. Based on historical evidence, the better model to maximize energy demands with environmental concerns is through centralized public power. E.g. Less Solyndra, and more Tennessee Valley Authority which as an agency looks like 2.75 with the "Progressive" profit regulation and even a slight distant pull from 4 in socialized production.

User avatar
Cat's Paw
Posts: 4482
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 12:59 pm
Location: SE Michigan
Has thanked: 3107 times
Been thanked: 2892 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Cat's Paw » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:54 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:43 pm
Cat's Paw wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:10 pm
No ... Econ-101
I'm removing this too. while live rock was out of line responding in kind doesn't help. In the future it would make a lot less work for me if you flagged such posts instead of trying to go blow for blow.


OK... Without the sarcasm.

Definitions are established by convention.
... such as the conventional left right political spectrum. While there are many, I only have the ability to respond to conventional views.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:55 pm

LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:52 pm
2.75 - The energy sector. Scalability, vast equal distribution, and environmental factors are paramount here. Ironically enough, the Green New Deal framework, still basically seems to rely on a range of number 2 with government involvement controlling the economy to the "Crony Capitolism" framework of number 3 on our chart in order to reduce emissions from power generation. They want to pick the preferred private renewable companies to have advantage in the market. Based on historical evidence, the better model to maximize energy demands with environmental concerns is through centralized public power. E.g. Less Solyndra, and more Tennessee Valley Authority which as an agency looks like 2.75 with the "Progressive" profit regulation and even a slight distant pull from 4 in socialized production.
The Green New Deal is rather confusing to me in part becasue of what you mention. If they goal is to reduce emissions and we believe it is an immanent threat if we don't do so, the market manipulation seems like the wrong way to go about it. As I read the bill I can't help but feel like it is really an economic bill using the environment as an excuse.

LivingRock
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by LivingRock » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:01 pm

Cat's Paw wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:54 pm
GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:43 pm
Cat's Paw wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:10 pm
No ... Econ-101
I'm removing this too. while live rock was out of line responding in kind doesn't help. In the future it would make a lot less work for me if you flagged such posts instead of trying to go blow for blow.


OK... Without the sarcasm.

Definitions are established by convention.
... such as the conventional left right political spectrum. While there are many, I only have the ability to respond to conventional views.
Respectfully, I think the confusion here might be that the relevant context convention for the definition of "socialism" and "fascism" is established in OP under 4. At least that's how I'm seeing it.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:05 pm

Cat's Paw wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:54 pm
... such as the conventional left right political spectrum. While there are many, I only have the ability to respond to conventional views.
Then perhaps you are not well suited to a topic that is discussion politics in an unconventional way. There is nothing wrong with that, but when you try to reshape the conversation, it isn't really at all helpful.

LivingRock
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by LivingRock » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:08 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:55 pm
LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:52 pm
2.75 - The energy sector. Scalability, vast equal distribution, and environmental factors are paramount here. Ironically enough, the Green New Deal framework, still basically seems to rely on a range of number 2 with government involvement controlling the economy to the "Crony Capitolism" framework of number 3 on our chart in order to reduce emissions from power generation. They want to pick the preferred private renewable companies to have advantage in the market. Based on historical evidence, the better model to maximize energy demands with environmental concerns is through centralized public power. E.g. Less Solyndra, and more Tennessee Valley Authority which as an agency looks like 2.75 with the "Progressive" profit regulation and even a slight distant pull from 4 in socialized production.
The Green New Deal is rather confusing to me in part because of what you mention. If they goal is to reduce emissions and we believe it is an immanent threat if we don't do so, the market manipulation seems like the wrong way to go about it. As I read the bill I can't help but feel like it is really an economic bill using the environment as an excuse.
And imho, from an energy sector emissions reduction standpoint it gets the economics wrong. I think the GND overall is economic in a broad sense because it seeks to shape labor and capital markets to meet climate goals.

John B Des Moines
Posts: 594
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:39 pm
Has thanked: 2044 times
Been thanked: 1190 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by John B Des Moines » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:09 pm

Arphaxad wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:25 pm
John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:09 pm
Cat's Paw wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:37 pm
We control the economy. For Example, We print currency, and protect it from counterfeiting.
Now that is low on the scale perhaps, but the economy is a human invention. It behaves as we make it behave.
We just don't know what we're doing. We can measure it.
That's right. those who claim the economy is somehow immutable, unchangeable, and beyond the meddling of mere mortals are badly deceived...or in the case of Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan, and the entire universe of right wing think tanks deceptive.

The economy is nothing but a framework of rules, regulations, and laws within which people trade. When it becomes dramatically rigged to enrich the few at the expense of the many as it is now we have every right to demand a change in the rules.
The economy happens if there are rules or not. It is wishful thinking you can control an economy. Look at Soviet era Russia, they had immense control over their economy and the black market was vast.

My wife visited Moscow in the 80s. She commented to a Russian police officer she liked his hat. He offered to sell it to her. Russian citizens offered to buy her denim jeans for 10x what she paid for them in the US.

The more you try to control the economy, the more the real economy will prove you impotent.
I'm not talking about a centrally planned economy. Nonetheless the economy operates just as I described...as a framework of rules, regulations, and laws within which people trade. We were on the Gold Standard until we weren't. People could be paid with company scrip until they couldn't. Children could work in factories until it was outlawed. The Dollar is the standard currency for much of the world economy because so many people recognized the Dollar as stable and secure. Economic inequality is at record levels because we under tax the rich and destroyed worker protections.

Change the rules and we get different outcomes. We changed the rules with the advent of Reaganomics/neoliberalism. Ever since then economic growth has slowed and economic inequality has skyrocketed. That's neither coincidental nor accidental. We deliberately instituted policies designed to move wealth upward with the assumption it would increase economic growth so dramatically we wouldn't care that we're getting smaller pieces of a much larger pie.

It didn't work. We were fools to imagine policies designed to redistribute wealth upward would result in any other outcome. It's time to change the rules.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:18 pm

LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:08 pm
And imho, from an energy sector emissions reduction standpoint it gets the economics wrong. I think the GND overall is economic in a broad sense because it seeks to shape labor and capital markets to meet climate goals.
Precisely, and I can't for the life of me understand why someone who believes climate goals are the most important issue facing humanity would do that. It actually creates barriers to the bills passing. I just don't get it.

LivingRock
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by LivingRock » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:47 pm

GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:18 pm
LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:08 pm
And imho, from an energy sector emissions reduction standpoint it gets the economics wrong. I think the GND overall is economic in a broad sense because it seeks to shape labor and capital markets to meet climate goals.
Precisely, and I can't for the life of me understand why someone who believes climate goals are the most important issue facing humanity would do that. It actually creates barriers to the bills passing. I just don't get it.
Not to harp on the GND too much, but I think it's relevant to the discussion here. To answer you post, I think it's a worldview thing. To some, capitalism is the model that brought climate change and inequality basically to the point of causation. Since capitalism caused climate change and inequality, to them reshaping the economy more towards Progressive and socialist models away from capitalism is the way to fix climate change and inequality. Obviously, I'm not in line with that worldview, but apparently persistent it is these days.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:49 pm

LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:47 pm
Not to harp on the GND too much, but I think it's relevant to the discussion here.
Don't worry about going off topic here we have no rules about it. We really do want discussions and sometimes the best discussions are those that end up far from where they had started.
LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:47 pm
To some, capitalism is the model that brought climate change and inequality basically to the point of causation. Since capitalism caused climate change and inequality, to them reshaping the economy more towards Progressive and socialist models away from capitalism is the way to fix climate change and inequality. Obviously, I'm not in line with that worldview, but apparently persistent it is these days.
That is an interesting theory, and the only one I've heard that makes sense.

John B Des Moines
Posts: 594
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:39 pm
Has thanked: 2044 times
Been thanked: 1190 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by John B Des Moines » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:17 pm

LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:47 pm
GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:18 pm
LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:08 pm
And imho, from an energy sector emissions reduction standpoint it gets the economics wrong. I think the GND overall is economic in a broad sense because it seeks to shape labor and capital markets to meet climate goals.
Precisely, and I can't for the life of me understand why someone who believes climate goals are the most important issue facing humanity would do that. It actually creates barriers to the bills passing. I just don't get it.
Not to harp on the GND too much, but I think it's relevant to the discussion here. To answer you post, I think it's a worldview thing. To some, capitalism is the model that brought climate change and inequality basically to the point of causation. Since capitalism caused climate change and inequality, to them reshaping the economy more towards Progressive and socialist models away from capitalism is the way to fix climate change and inequality. Obviously, I'm not in line with that worldview, but apparently persistent it is these days.
On the contrary, it's not about moving away from Capitalism at all. It's about properly incentivizing Capitalism to be less destructive. I am a Capitalist. I just recognize that unfettered Capitalism has a streak a mile wide which leads to its own destruction.

LivingRock
Posts: 258
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:27 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by LivingRock » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:21 pm

John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:17 pm
LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:47 pm
GuideToACrazyWorld wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:18 pm


Precisely, and I can't for the life of me understand why someone who believes climate goals are the most important issue facing humanity would do that. It actually creates barriers to the bills passing. I just don't get it.
Not to harp on the GND too much, but I think it's relevant to the discussion here. To answer you post, I think it's a worldview thing. To some, capitalism is the model that brought climate change and inequality basically to the point of causation. Since capitalism caused climate change and inequality, to them reshaping the economy more towards Progressive and socialist models away from capitalism is the way to fix climate change and inequality. Obviously, I'm not in line with that worldview, but apparently persistent it is these days.
On the contrary, it's not about moving away from Capitalism at all. It's about properly incentivizing Capitalism to be less destructive. I am a Capitalist. I just recognize that unfettered Capitalism has a streak a mile wide which leads to its own destruction.
I get that. But in this case whether you think capitalism needs to be fixed back to a more Progressive version, or you think maybe we need to move on from capitalism, the motivations for the economic propensity of the GND are the same. So it doesn't matter if you're 3, 4, or 5 on our chart; the pull of the GND is towards that direction.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:23 pm

John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:17 pm
On the contrary, it's not about moving away from Capitalism at all. It's about properly incentivizing Capitalism to be less destructive. I am a Capitalist. I just recognize that unfettered Capitalism has a streak a mile wide which leads to its own destruction.
Do you fully support the Green New Deal? I don't think you and I have really talked about it much.

John B Des Moines
Posts: 594
Joined: Wed Aug 28, 2019 8:39 pm
Has thanked: 2044 times
Been thanked: 1190 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by John B Des Moines » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:24 pm

LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:21 pm
John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:17 pm
LivingRock wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:47 pm


Not to harp on the GND too much, but I think it's relevant to the discussion here. To answer you post, I think it's a worldview thing. To some, capitalism is the model that brought climate change and inequality basically to the point of causation. Since capitalism caused climate change and inequality, to them reshaping the economy more towards Progressive and socialist models away from capitalism is the way to fix climate change and inequality. Obviously, I'm not in line with that worldview, but apparently persistent it is these days.
On the contrary, it's not about moving away from Capitalism at all. It's about properly incentivizing Capitalism to be less destructive. I am a Capitalist. I just recognize that unfettered Capitalism has a streak a mile wide which leads to its own destruction.
I get that. But in this case whether you think capitalism needs to be fixed back to a more Progressive version, or you think maybe we need to move on from capitalism, the motivations for the economic propensity of the GND are the same.
Yes, the GND contains within it initiatives designed to improve education (including vocational training), reinvigorate the Middle Class, and build an economy from the middle out. That's an argument for, not against.

User avatar
GuideToACrazyWorld
Posts: 5563
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2019 1:31 pm
Location: California
Has thanked: 2501 times
Been thanked: 6497 times

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by GuideToACrazyWorld » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:26 pm

John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:24 pm
That's an argument for, not against.
For some it's an argument for, but for other's it's an argument against. If not what live rock said, why would you risk chasing off potential allies to mix economic changes into this bill beyond those that directly effect the environment?

Deleted User 54

Re: Charting our Economic Idealogies.

Post by Deleted User 54 » Thu Sep 19, 2019 10:52 pm

John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:09 pm
Arphaxad wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:25 pm
John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:09 pm


That's right. those who claim the economy is somehow immutable, unchangeable, and beyond the meddling of mere mortals are badly deceived...or in the case of Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan, and the entire universe of right wing think tanks deceptive.

The economy is nothing but a framework of rules, regulations, and laws within which people trade. When it becomes dramatically rigged to enrich the few at the expense of the many as it is now we have every right to demand a change in the rules.
The economy happens if there are rules or not. It is wishful thinking you can control an economy. Look at Soviet era Russia, they had immense control over their economy and the black market was vast.

My wife visited Moscow in the 80s. She commented to a Russian police officer she liked his hat. He offered to sell it to her. Russian citizens offered to buy her denim jeans for 10x what she paid for them in the US.

The more you try to control the economy, the more the real economy will prove you impotent.
I'm not talking about a centrally planned economy. Nonetheless the economy operates just as I described...as a framework of rules, regulations, and laws within which people trade. We were on the Gold Standard until we weren't. People could be paid with company scrip until they couldn't. Children could work in factories until it was outlawed. The Dollar is the standard currency for much of the world economy because so many people recognized the Dollar as stable and secure. Economic inequality is at record levels because we under tax the rich and destroyed worker protections.

Change the rules and we get different outcomes. We changed the rules with the advent of Reaganomics/neoliberalism. Ever since then economic growth has slowed and economic inequality has skyrocketed. That's neither coincidental nor accidental. We deliberately instituted policies designed to move wealth upward with the assumption it would increase economic growth so dramatically we wouldn't care that we're getting smaller pieces of a much larger pie.
We must agree to disagree for now. Maybe a separate topic about what an economy would give us a better public square to discuss it.
John B Des Moines wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:09 pm
It didn't work. We were fools to imagine policies designed to redistribute wealth upward would result in any other outcome. It's time to change the rules.
I'm sorry, that is just sounds like party rehetoric. What policies do you think tried to redistribute wealth upwards? (HINT: tax cuts are a wrong answer)

Post Reply