It's the End of the World As We Know It . . .

twenty02

Hall of Famer
Jan 28, 2011
18,169
18,191
113
You need to get out of Cliff Notes economics 101.

Social prosperity and economic growth is driven by creativity, entrepreneurship and innovation. Those are only possible in a free market. Electricity lept into the economic and social structure in the late 19th century because of free markets and the creativity and innovation of people. It wasn’t a government program.


I think you are talking right past what he is saying...... and hell may freeze over with me defending IGW's post...... but I believe he is referring to the desire for aggressive anti- trust action via the govt. We had the robber-barron era where we had a truly free market. Which does tend to inevitably end up with monopolistic domination of industries.
 

bub-rub

Recruit
Dec 6, 2020
50
38
18
Did you read my link? The history of the post WWII German economy is very enlightening. It not only succeeded with feee markets while France snd the U K we’re still fooling around with various government programs, it absorbed the economic basket case of East Germany with barely a hiccup.

i did. just one paragraph for the US's MASSIVE economic and security programs that cut a generation's time off Germany's rebuild? my man, that's prob 90% of your miracle right there. we let them ship to us tax free but didn't expect the same from them. a deal we were willing to make if it all got transacted in US dollars and we got to make all the calls on security. not that they were calling a lot of their own shots for some time after WW2. you get that, right?

the rest, again, is germany being germany. loosen up money supply, support domestic spending, get the factories humming (, and almost no defense bill! "helluva deal. i'd take that deal." lol). good land allows for that. UK and France? good land but not like germany's, so their govts made and still make more plays. just like our govt is more hands off than germany's. our land, blessed beyond compare for generating capital, just needs less coaxing, coordination.

investopedia article? i imagine they are all in on the markets? so there is your slant. whitewash history, create the narrative that loose fiscal policy will cure your ills, get rich. i totally get that. my 401k has been good to me but there is more to the story. lol
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: Sope Creek

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
I think you are talking right past what he is saying...... and hell may freeze over with me defending IGW's post...... but I believe he is referring to the desire for aggressive anti- trust action via the govt. We had the robber-barron era where we had a truly free market. Which does tend to inevitably end up with monopolistic domination of industries.
I don’t.think the robber baron era was a totally free market. Neither Hayek nor Friedman argued that unconstrained monopolies were an example of free markets. IGW, didn’t learn what he thinks he knows about free markets by studying those two.
 
Last edited:

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
11,562
3,842
113
You need to get out of Cliff Notes economics 101.

Social prosperity and economic growth is driven by creativity, entrepreneurship and innovation. Those are only possible in a free market. Electricity lept into the economic and social structure in the late 19th century because of free markets and the creativity and innovation of people. It wasn’t a government program.

you're a liar and a troll.

lmao

by definition, no new invention can come about in a free market or any other kind of market, because until it first exists, there literally is no "market" involved at all.

and that has absolutely nothing to do with what i said in your quote box, and this is just you trying to change the subject after being made a fool of, for not knowing what a "free market" actually means, and wanting to pass it off as meaning a "competitive market", when it actually means the exact opposite..

and again, a free market and a competitive market can literally never co-exist at scale, because a free market at scale will never allow a competitive market, because it doesn't have to, thus won't..

only a monopoly can exist in a free market. (as is the case with your electricity BS dodge).

and spinning a free market as a competitive market, will never make it so. yet is the go to strategy of the right who want the two to be confused, because no one who understands what "free market" actually means, would want them.

as i stated above and shot down all your lying and idiocy, a competitive market and a free market can never coexist at scale, because a free market will never allow for a competitive market.

trying to pass off "free markets" as being "competitive markets" is what liars and propagandists like you do, when in reality, the are both polar opposites of each other, and mutually exclusive of each other, and can never be any other way.

if you're going to flat out lie, i will flat out call you out as a liar.

and you will never be in my league or anywhere even close, on economics.

i suggest you stick with lobbying 101 and false propaganda 101, which is all you know and all you exist for..

how sad you couldn't do more with your life.

you want to make this personal, i can do that if that's how you want it.
 
Last edited:

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
i did. just one paragraph for the US's MASSIVE economic and security programs that cut a generation's time off Germany's rebuild? my man, that's prob 90% of your miracle right there. we let them ship to us tax free but didn't expect the same from them. a deal we were willing to make if it all got transacted in US dollars and we got to make all the calls on security. not that they were calling a lot of their own shots for some time after WW2. you get that, right?

the rest, again, is germany being germany. loosen up money supply, support domestic spending, get the factories humming (, and almost no defense bill! "helluva deal. i'd take that deal." lol). good land allows for that. UK and France? good land but not like germany's, so their govts made and still make more plays. just like our govt is more hands off than germany's. our land, blessed beyond compare for generating capital, just needs less coaxing, coordination.

investopedia article? i imagine they are all in on the markets? so there is your slant. whitewash history, create the narrative that loose fiscal policy will cure your ills, get rich. i totally get that. my 401k has been good to me but there is more to the story. lol
Ordoliberism: “is the German variant of economic social liberalism that emphasizes the need for the state to ensure that the free marketproduces results close to its theoretical potential.[1]”. This free market approach is what drove the German economy. This is to be contrasted with the U K and France which focused on high taxes and welfare state economics.

If you doubt the power of autonomy and free markets, look what China is doing today with its Special Economic Zones. They recognize the power of free markets and they are commies.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
you're a liar and a troll.

lmao

by definition, no new invention can come about in a free market or any other kind of market, because until it first exists, there literally is no "market" involved at all.

and that has absolutely nothing to do with what i said in your quote box, and this is just you trying to change the subject after being made a fool of, for not knowing what a "free market" actually means, and wanting to pass it off as meaning a "competitive market", when it actually means the exact opposite..

and again, a free market and a competitive market can literally never co-exist at scale, because a free market at scale will never allow a competitive market, because it doesn't have to, thus won't..

only a monopoly can exist in a free market. (as is the case with your electricity BS dodge).

and spinning a free market as a competitive market, will never make it so. yet is the go to strategy of the right who want the two to be confused, because no one who understands what "free market" actually means, would want them.

as i stated above and shot down all your lying and idiocy, a competitive market and a free market can never coexist at scale, because a free market will never allow for a competitive market.

trying to pass off "free markets" as being "competitive markets" is what liars and propagandists like you do, when in reality, the are both polar opposites of each other, and mutually exclusive of each other, and can never be any other way.

if you're going to flat out lie, i will flat out call you out as a liar.

and you will never be in my league or anywhere even close, on economics.

i suggest you stick with lobbying 101 and false propaganda 101, which is all you know and all you exist for..

how sad you couldn't do more with your life.

you want to make this personal, i can do that if that's how you want it.
I really don’t care what you think a free market is as compared to a competitive market. If you really think a monopoly is the same as a free market, or that only a monopoly can exist in a free market, we have nothing to discuss.

Buh bye.
 

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
11,562
3,842
113
Ordoliberism: “is the German variant of economic social liberalism that emphasizes the need for the state to ensure that the free marketproduces results close to its theoretical potential.[1]”. This free market approach is what drove the German economy. This is to be contrasted with the U K and France which focused on high taxes and welfare state economics.

If you doubt the power of autonomy and free markets, look what China is doing today with its Special Economic Zones. They recognize the power of free markets and they are commies.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism

more lies, propaganda, and misrepresentation of terms, and you know it..

other than in the dictionary, a competitive market cannot exist at scale in a free market, because by definition, a "free market" is free to make sure a competitive market doesn't exist.

and when free to do so, free markets will always quash competitive markets, because capitalism demands so.

if what you actually want is "competitive markets", then stop lying and misidentifying competitive markets as free markets, when in practice they are effectively exact opposites, and mutually exclusive at scale.

now whether a free market can also be a competitive market in a non capitalistic environment is a different debate, but in a capitalistic economy, the two cannot co exist.

so in a capitalistic setting, if you want a free market, then you don't want a competitive market. and vice versa.

trying to make an end run around me on this won't change the opposing forces behind "free" and "competitive" markets under capitalism..

under capitalism, at scale, competitive markets can only exist when markets are not free to eliminate competition, but mandated by regulation, or the threat of, to allow it.
 
Last edited:

Stuffshot

All-American
Feb 20, 2008
9,011
4,023
113
I think you are talking right past what he is saying...... and hell may freeze over with me defending IGW's post...... but I believe he is referring to the desire for aggressive anti- trust action via the govt. We had the robber-barron era where we had a truly free market. Which does tend to inevitably end up with monopolistic domination of industries.
If we had a truly free market, with no government regulation, wouldn't we still have
the Cuyahoga River catching on fire from pollution?
Cleveland%2BCuyahoga%2BRiver%2B1969.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,814
2,420
113
Government becomes more disconnected from the people by the day. The people want paved roads and safe bridges. The government won’t allow that without dealing with everything from abortion to elections to immigration at the same time. . We no longer have public debate and public input obout anything. Government is all about acquiring or keeping power, big donors, and special interests. When I hear politicians bitch about January 6 being an assault on democracy I want to vomit. Congress itself is an assault on democracy. passing multi-trillion dollar spending bills that nobody debates let alone reads? C’mon man!
CoH, interesting take on government.

For starters, I think we focus too much on the federal government and overlook the importance of state/local government on our everyday lives. Education and crime, which get considerable play at The Cooler are actually the chief domain of state and local governments for the most part.

Then when I look at the federal government, I focus on where the money goes. The budget connection with the people has for some time been primarily mandatory spending on Social Security, Medicare, and debt service along with discretionary spending on defense.

I agree our politicians spend too much time raising money for their reelection, in doing so, the big donors and special interests gain power. But aren't these guys also part of the free market? In other words they influence both the free market and government. If we revere the captains of the free market as being key to our capitalist economy along with consumers, why do we think badly of the people who the captains of the free market along with We the People elect?
 

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
11,562
3,842
113
I think you are talking right past what he is saying...... and hell may freeze over with me defending IGW's post...... but I believe he is referring to the desire for aggressive anti- trust action via the govt. We had the robber-barron era where we had a truly free market. Which does tend to inevitably end up with monopolistic domination of industries.

the total and deliberate misrepresentation of "free markets" being "competitive markets", as opposed to the enemy of competitive markets which free markets absolutely are, has been a cornerstone lie of the investor class's very successful war on the working class since Reagan.

and as for why the races are being pitted against each other all day every day by corporate media, that's to keep the working class fighting a manufactured enemy, as opposed to their real enemy, the one that's successfully been waging war on them since Reagan.

and it wasn't Russia or Iran that shipped our manufacturing base offshore, and all the jobs and tax bases and self sovernty and supply chains with it.
 
Last edited:

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
If we had a truly free market, with no government regulation, wouldn't we still have
the Cuyahoga River catching on fire from pollution?
Cleveland%2BCuyahoga%2BRiver%2B1969.jpg
Government regulation is not necessarily inconsistent with a free market. As is the case with anti-trust and some other government interventions, government regulation of the business community can actually preserve free markets for all of us. . I’ve posted a couple of Links about post WWII Germany that explained this.
 

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
11,562
3,842
113
Government regulation is not necessarily inconsistent with a free market. As is the case with anti-trust and some other government interventions, government regulation of the business community can actually preserve free markets for all of us. . I’ve posted a couple of Links about post WWII Germany that explained this.

you're a weaver of lies, and totally FOS.

that said, a free market is absolutely free to buy govt regulators to help it quash competition, and unions, and reward it for shipping our manufacturing base offshore, and pay less taxes, and charge $70,000 a yr for a life saving pill that costs a dollar a day to manufacture, and whose development was heavily subsidized by taxpayers and universities.

govt regulation is only effective when it operates in the public's and country's best interests, rather than the best interests of those it's supposed to be regulating.

a free market is free to make sure that DOESN'T happen.

thus govt regulation only works in a non free market, where industry isn't free to buy off the regulators and the law makers.
 

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
you're a weaver of lies, and totally FOS.

that said, a free market is absolutely free to buy govt regulators to help it quash competition, and unions, and reward it for shipping our manufacturing base offshore, and pay less taxes, and charge $70,000 a yr for a life saving pill that costs a dollar a day to manufacture, and whose development was heavily subsidized by taxpayers and universities.

govt regulation is only effective when it operates in the public's and country's best interests, rather than the best interests of those it's supposed to be regulating.

a free market is free to make sure that DOESN'T happen.

thus govt regulation only works in a non free market, where industry isn't free to buy off the regulators and the law makers.
My take away from all your posts in this thread is that the term “free market” triggers you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
COH have you read anything about thorium? I've read several articles about it, including this one, and find it interesting.
Don’t know anything about that. A brief look at the Gen IV materials don’t show thorium as a useful fuel.
 

i'vegotwinners

Hall of Famer
Dec 1, 2006
11,562
3,842
113
My take away from all your posts in this thread is that the term “free market” triggers you.

your take is that you've been called on your lies, so your response is more lies.

Trump and your puppet masters have taught you well.

not the lesson anyone with any self pride should aspire to though.
 

bub-rub

Recruit
Dec 6, 2020
50
38
18
Ordoliberism: “is the German variant of economic social liberalism that emphasizes the need for the state to ensure that the free marketproduces results close to its theoretical potential.[1]”. This free market approach is what drove the German economy. This is to be contrasted with the U K and France which focused on high taxes and welfare state economics.

If you doubt the power of autonomy and free markets, look what China is doing today with its Special Economic Zones. They recognize the power of free markets and they are commies.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordoliberalism

not sure what you are arguing here. agree germany runs a free-er market than UK/ France but my argument is that its land allows for that. what "drove" germany's economy post war was the US. what's driven it since is falling back on great geography, allowing it to move to the top of the supply chain and become a great exporter (again, for like the 3rd or 4th time after a major war). UK and France would be this if they could. but they can't and their policies reflect that. again, you are thinking in the wrong direction. land shapes economic policy (though there certainly is a feedback loop) and more often than not shapes political systems.

eh -- i doubt very much that China's Special Economic Zones are what they want us to think they are. china basically bribes it's coastal cities to remain part of china through subsidies and concessions but don't ask for too much (see hong kong). china has an amazing diversity of geography that is hard has hell to hold together (see the last 3000 years of Chinese history). it's done, and has always been done, by a strong and active central govt that throws nickels at the plebs in the countryside and gold at the traders on the coasts, while keeping a close watch on everyone. and china does all this for harmony and not wealth though at times it is a very rich country. american minds are shaped by things like pearl harbor and the Depression, China's psyche is shaped by Nanking and the boxer rebellion. they'll never be a free market as an american would envision it and that makes sense because their national imperatives are very different


i'm calling cognitive bias here, my man. just because something says "free market" doesn't mean it's the american model. and just because one of the more user~friendly economies like the US has thrived on free markets its land affords it doesn't mean disabling the brakes gets us more. results on those experiments have been mixed and not sure who can deny that. lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sope Creek

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,814
2,420
113
not sure what you are arguing here. agree germany runs a free-er market than UK/ France but my argument is that its land allows for that. what "drove" germany's economy post war was the US. what's driven it since is falling back on great geography, allowing it to move to the top of the supply chain and become a great exporter (again, for like the 3rd or 4th time after a major war). UK and France would be this if they could. but they can't and their policies reflect that. again, you are thinking in the wrong direction. land shapes economic policy (though there certainly is a feedback loop) and more often than not shapes political systems.

eh -- i doubt very much that China's Special Economic Zones are what they want us to think they are. china basically bribes it's coastal cities to remain part of china through subsidies and concessions but don't ask for too much (see hong kong). china has an amazing diversity of geography that is hard has hell to hold together (see the last 3000 years of Chinese history). it's done, and has always been done, by a strong and active central govt that throws nickels at the plebs in the countryside and gold at the traders on the coasts, while keeping a close watch on everyone. and china does all this for harmony and not wealth though at times it is a very rich country. american minds are shaped by things like pearl harbor and the Depression, China's psyche is shaped by Nanking and the boxer rebellion. they'll never be a free market as an american would envision it and that makes sense because their national imperatives are very different


i'm calling cognitive bias here, my man. just because something says "free market" doesn't mean it's the american model. and just because one of the more user~friendly economies like the US has thrived on free markets its land affords it doesn't mean disabling the brakes gets us more. results on those experiments have been mixed and not sure who can deny that. lol
When it comes to supporting economic zones the executive branch under whoever is president can promote zones under the guise of say helping the poor.

Unfortunately federal money into these zones can benefit not the less affluent but investors who support whoever sits in the Oval Office.

So money made in the "free market" can be used to influence government for their own special interests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamieDimonsBalls

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
not sure what you are arguing here. agree germany runs a free-er market than UK/ France but my argument is that its land allows for that. what "drove" germany's economy post war was the US. what's driven it since is falling back on great geography, allowing it to move to the top of the supply chain and become a great exporter (again, for like the 3rd or 4th time after a major war). UK and France would be this if they could. but they can't and their policies reflect that. again, you are thinking in the wrong direction. land shapes economic policy (though there certainly is a feedback loop) and more often than not shapes political systems.

eh -- i doubt very much that China's Special Economic Zones are what they want us to think they are. china basically bribes it's coastal cities to remain part of china through subsidies and concessions but don't ask for too much (see hong kong). china has an amazing diversity of geography that is hard has hell to hold together (see the last 3000 years of Chinese history). it's done, and has always been done, by a strong and active central govt that throws nickels at the plebs in the countryside and gold at the traders on the coasts, while keeping a close watch on everyone. and china does all this for harmony and not wealth though at times it is a very rich country. american minds are shaped by things like pearl harbor and the Depression, China's psyche is shaped by Nanking and the boxer rebellion. they'll never be a free market as an american would envision it and that makes sense because their national imperatives are very different


i'm calling cognitive bias here, my man. just because something says "free market" doesn't mean it's the american model. and just because one of the more user~friendly economies like the US has thrived on free markets its land affords it doesn't mean disabling the brakes gets us more. results on those experiments have been mixed and not sure who can deny that. lol
I’m under no illusion of what the Chinese SEZ’s are. They are set up for different purposes (manufacturing, tech, etc.) mostly to attract foreign investment. I doubt Apple would be in China without them. They enrich the central government. They are working. The general Chinese economy and population is as regulated as ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bub-rub

hoot1

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
15,814
2,420
113
I’m under no illusion of what the Chinese SEZ’s are. They are set up for different purposes (manufacturing, tech, etc.) mostly to attract foreign investment. I doubt Apple would be in China without them. They enrich the central government. They are working. The general Chinese economy and population is as regulated as ever.
Have talked to active investors who visited China and were anxious to invest in Chinese stocks as they were impressed with much of what was happening in China.

Now these guys are not what you might say are fond of the U,S. government SEC rules on such things as a corporate prospectuses. However the secrecy involving Chinese securities turned them off.

Heck, our government agencies such as the SEC may not be all bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bub-rub

Sope Creek

Hall of Famer
Feb 5, 2003
44,023
8,519
113
As near as I can tell, the authors of this study fall for the notion that the future will be nothing but an extrapolation of the present. That has never been reliable.

We have just begun with bio-engineering and bio-chemistry. We have no idea what future resources that can produce. We will have massive desalination with the plants and pumps run by mini-nukes. We will never run out of water. We have enough fissionable material for at least 50,000 years. Breeder reactors even produce fuel.

Not sure what you mean by “grab all you can” economy. But I am more scared about grab all you can government.

Post WWII Germany was in much worse shape than the post-pandemic present. Germany turned itself into the dominant European economy with free markets. If government will get the hell out of the way, and allow free market to flourish, we will be fine.

Hmmmm . . . I can't tell whether you are ignorant or just willfully obstinate. Doesn't matter. Here's a link to stories about what some things the government actually has done, without markets: https://servicetoamericamedals.org/.

And for the rest of you I provide you a link to Michael Lewis' The Fifth Risk. If you must . . . hell, even if you can't . . . ignore the criticisms about the Trump administration's unpreparedness to govern, and use the book to understand what the US government does . . . it manages risks, in a big way. And it serves as the financial backer of primary science and science investments that prove to be highly beneficial to Americans. Investments that no private investment house would dream of considering.

Want one example? Mo Brooks' wearing of Kevlar at the January 6 "rally". Without governmental funding into the basic science of body armor, private business wouldn't have been able to produce the Kevlar vest that Brooks wore that day.

 
Last edited:

CO. Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 29, 2001
37,719
8,989
113
No, it's not. It still consumes a fuel. Granted, we have an abundance of this fuel.
Eh, I dunno about that.

The amount of deuterium present in one litre of water can in theory produce as much energy as the combustion of 300 litres of oil. This means that there is enough deuterium in the oceans to meet human energy needs for millions of years.​
In addition, hydrogen is found throughout the universe. I don’t think we can ever get to “after nuclear”.
 

Aloha Hoosier

Hall of Famer
Aug 30, 2001
29,272
10,964
113
always a good laugh when those who obviously know zero about economics talk about "free markets", as they inevitably not only have zero grasp of economics, but have absolutely zero grasp of what "free markets" actually are, and what our economy would look like if we actually had them.

without going into detail, if we actually had "free markets", we would have,

one national bank.

one national telecom/internet company

one media company

one national electric, gas, water, company.

one airline

one parcel delivery company

one social media company

one healthcare provider

one pharmaceutical provider.

and so on.

and none would be regulated in any way other than by the owner, and all services would be priced only by how much they can bring.

having more than one of anything just doesn't fully utilize natural synergies and efficiencies capitalism so loves.


and btw, the one bank would own the one telecom/internet company, the one media company, the one healthcare company, the one pharmaceutical company, the one electric/gas/water, company, the one airline, the one parcel delivery company, the one social media company, and so on.

and said one bank would have one shareholder.

and of course, none of this inevitable natural evolution of a "free market" would have been "personal", even in the slightest.

it's just business.
Buy some capital letters and grammar lessons. I don’t know why you think anyone would consider you a SME on anything given your incredibly ridiculous writing style. I assume you know nothing about anything because of that. It’s why I stopped trying to read anything of yours years ago. You rate skim throughs at most and scroll throughs without reading 90% of the time.

Why do you post the way you do? You answer that question, honestly, and I’ll never respond to you again and a WC mystery would be solved as well. It would make my day. My birthday is coming up. It would be an awesome gift. ;)