What If The Republicans Win?

[lektrode]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

Serious question:

Is it possible for markets to be both "free" and "fair" simultaneously?

After all, in a purely free market society, people themselves may be bought and sold without restriction, just like anything else...what are restrictions on slavery except a way to regulate markets - namely regulating slave markets out of existence.

I'm not convinced that "free markets" with no rules or regulations are a good thing at all. From potato famine deaths to millennia of slavery and indentured servitude, to credit default swaps and payday loans, to poisoned baby formula and toxic waste dumped behind schools to child labor and miners with 10 year life expectancy - there's a whole lot about "free markets" that scares the living hell out of me.

I'll readily admit that regulations aren't always good, and they need to be watched and tuned and brought to heel by the people.

But free markets aren't always good either, and they need to be watched and tuned and brought to heel by the people too.

+1
"free" and "fair" simultaneously?
not the way things have 'evolved' in the US political economy, thats become quite evident and damn sure certain.

[vt]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

The American public is fed up:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/polit...ption-20141021

[vt]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pe...rticle/2555062

[LorenS]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pe...rticle/2555062

I've seen a whole bunch of stuff with my own eyes and I've done a whole bunch of stuff with my own hands. I just plain don't watch TV anymore, it's disgusting.

To paraphrase Mark Twain: If you get your "news" from a "news organization" you're misinformed.

Information is no substitute for wisdom. Too bad we live in an "information" age.

[shiny!]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

I've seen a whole bunch of stuff with my own eyes and I've done a whole bunch of stuff with my own hands. I just plain don't watch TV anymore, it's disgusting.

To paraphrase Mark Twain: If you get your "news" from a "news organization" you're misinformed.

Information is no substitute for wisdom. Too bad we live in an "information" age.

I wish there was a 'Like' button for this.

[Ghent12]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

Serious question:

Is it possible for markets to be both "free" and "fair" simultaneously?

After all, in a purely free market society, people themselves may be bought and sold without restriction, just like anything else...what are restrictions on slavery except a way to regulate markets - namely regulating slave markets out of existence.

I'm not convinced that "free markets" with no rules or regulations are a good thing at all. From potato famine deaths to millennia of slavery and indentured servitude, to credit default swaps and payday loans, to poisoned baby formula and toxic waste dumped behind schools to child labor and miners with 10 year life expectancy - there's a whole lot about "free markets" that scares the living hell out of me.

I'll readily admit that regulations aren't always good, and they need to be watched and tuned and brought to heel by the people.

But free markets aren't always good either, and they need to be watched and tuned and brought to heel by the people too.

Right, "free" means "slave" to some. I have to remind myself of that from time to time or things like your post will keep surprising me in their audacity to misidentify what the hell is being talked about. Night is day and up is down too, right? What other words mean their antonyms in your dismal view of the world?

I would like to point out that the key first principle of any "free market" is that you own your own body, and by extension all that is created from it (hence, property rights). Do you think you should own your own body, or that somebody else should own it? Do you think people should "collect rent" from your body (i.e. taxes)? These are fundamental philosophical questions you may have never even thought could exist. I invite you to engage them.

I do not know what potato famine deaths you are attributing to free markets. Is it the kind suffered by the Irish partly as a result of British policy?

I do not know what slavery you attribute to free markets. Perhaps the kind which was endemic to virtually all of human civilization?

I do not know what your opposition to payday loans is rooted in. Perhaps you think the mob is a better source of credit for those who are almost uncreditworthy? (If you want a separate discussion about "predatory lending" then I would be happy to oblige.)

I do not know what free market you credit for poisoned baby formula. Are you referring to the state-owned companies in China which produced it, such as the Sanlu Group? Or if it was sold in the US, are you referring to some FDA-approved poison?

I do not know what toxic waste dump you are referring to? The one by the Luoyang Zhonggui High-Technology Co in China where people have little authority to seek reparations for damages, similar to in the United States where people have little authority to seek reparations for environmental damage specifically? A free market may or may not leave arbitration to the state, but any variant of it would certainly respect people and their property while abhorring damage to either.


You want regulations? That is not a reason to be scared of a free market, which has its own kinds of regulations.

You say free markets need to be "brought to heel by the people too," but a free market is the people and what they create without the use of violence and force. A free market is just a label for what people would do if they were free from force or coercion. Companies or people forced or coerced into actions do not represent a free market. Organizations or individuals in black markets utilizing force or coercion do not represent a free market.

[dcarrigg]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

Totally disagree. Slave markets were real. Excuse them however you want. They were still markets.

Total market freedom means turning everything to property. And property comes from dominion. And dominion comes from domination. It's all right there in Genesis. You only have to read The Book.

George Washington could have accepted that King George's property included the whole of the United States and never used violence and force to free his people from Monarchy. But he didn't.

There's a reason why the phrase "free markets" is nowhere in the Constitution, nor in the Declaration of Independence.

But you know what is in the Constitution?

Article 1 Section 8:

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To Promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

[dcarrigg]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

Agreed. +1

[don]

Dynasties or just Dysfunctional?

like a once-popular TV show well past its sell date, our political dog & pony shows appear equally exhausted

When asked last year about the prospect of having yet another son run for the White House, former first lady Barbara Bush said she thought it was a bad idea. “There are a lot of great families,” she said. “It’s not just four families, or whatever. There are other people out there that are very qualified. We’ve had enough Bushes.” If Jeb Bush, Barbara’s second son, does run he might well be up against former first lady Hillary Clinton, making Barack Obama’s tenure an eight-year interlude in an otherwise unbroken 36-year stretch in which either a Bush or a Clinton was on the presidential ticket.

“I think this is a great American country,” Barbara said in a more recent interview. “And if we can’t find more than two or three families to run for high office, that’s silly.”

In that case these midterm elections are not just silly but quite ridiculous. The US seems to be drawing its political leadership from an increasingly shallow puddle of genes. For the sake of brevity this can be illustrated solely by the Senate races that are considered “in play” this year. The race in Georgia is between Michelle Nunn, whose father used to be a Georgia senator, and David Purdue, whose cousin Sonny Purdue was once Georgia’s governor; Alaska Democratic senator Mark Begich’s father, Nick, was the state’s congressman; Arkansas Democratic senator Mark Pryor’s father David was himself once senator.

It goes on: Louisiana senator Mary Landrieu is the daughter of former New Orleans mayor Moon, and sister of current New Orleans mayor Mitch; Kentucky Democratic senate candidate Alison Lundergan Grimes is the daughter of Jerry Lundergan, former chairman of the Kentucky Democratic Party; Colorado Democratic senator Mark Udall is the son of late Arizona congressman Morris, and cousin of current New Mexico senator Tom, who is himself the son of late interior secretary Stewart; Kansas Republican senator Pat Roberts is the son of Charles, who was briefly the chairman of the Republican National Committee; North Carolina Democratic senator Kay Hagan is the niece of former Florida senator Lawton Chiles.

Such are the dynasties; such is the democracy. This, remember, is just from the senate races in play. It says nothing of the senate races that are not closely contested (In West Virginia, Republican Shelley Moore Capito, daughter of former governor Arch Moore, is likely to fill the seat vacated by retiring Democrat Jay Rockefeller, whose uncle Nelson was vice-president and New York governor) and the gubernatorial races (Georgia Democrat Jason Carter, grandson of former President Jimmy; New York Democratic governor Andrew Cuomo, son of governor Mario; California Democratic governor Jerry Brown, son of former governor Pat).

One might imagine that the candidates in question might find these connections a liability – struggling to keep a silver spoon in their mouths as they ride parental coattails. In some places Republicans have sought to exploit the vulnerabilities in these family connections. In Colorado the National Republican Senatorial Committee released a video called “The Mark Udall Dynasty” that spoofs the opening credits of the hit 1980s TV show Dynasty as the narrator says: “Wealthy, comfortable and established. Out of touch but eager to stay in power. We now present the saga of the Mark Udall dynasty.”

But for the most part these candidates are happy to showcase their dynastic pedigree. In many cases they campaign on the stump with their fathers, appear in ads with them and have them solicit donations to their campaigns. Jerry Lundergan is, reportedly, running his daughter’s campaign. One of Mary Landrieu’s earlier ads, called “Father Daughter Part 1”, starts with her and her father, engaging in playful banter in the family living room. “When you have nine children one of them’s bound to be hardheaded,” says Moon. “Dad, you’re one to talk,” quips Mary, before Moon continues about how his daughter will put her “hardheaded” ways to the service of Louisiana voters. “I know how BP felt when Mary fought to get billions for Louisiana,” and how she “took on the president” to try and get the Keystone XL Pipeline approved, he says.

Michelle Nunn, who like her father played basketball in high school, ran an ad this spring, in which she said she “tries to follow in his footsteps” on the court but not politics. Then, as though to immediately undercut the claim, her dad comes on screen with a basketball and says, “I think you’ve got a pretty good shot.” She’s referred to him as “a great role model”.

One of Begich’s first ads is called “Alaska’s Son”. It features scenes of his late father, who is presumed to have died in a plane crash in 1972, getting into a small plane and visiting his constituents, followed by news footage about his disappearance. “Begich goes to the people, wherever they are,” his wife, who is narrating. “Mark was 10 when he lost his father,” she adds. “We’ve lost too many Alaskans this way. But Mark is clearly his father’s son … I love my husband. But I’m prouder still of him as a father and what he learned from his own.”

Hillary and Bill Clinton in 1997, who both continue to be (ir)relevant in American politics nearly 15 years after his presidency.

President Bush and first lady Laura Bush in 2005.

[LorenS]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

You can have free and fair markets if the participants in the markets have suitable SHARED morals (the shared part is important, maybe even more so than the particular morals). There is no way that government can sufficiently replace shared morals and norms with legislation and enforcement. It is not possible. Government is very important, but it is not all important.

Crime is bad, organized crime is worse, but government crime easily tops them all. That's why government, must be restrained. There is no person or corporation in history that can compete with the mass crimes against humanity of the 20th century.

You can boycott Walmart, or Google you cannot boycot the IRS or NSA. Slavery occurs all the time, even now, slavery only prospers with state support.

I want the Republicans to take the senate. Not so much because I have any hope that they will improve things, but rather for the mere fact that they will slow things down. Obama and a Democrat senate are a looming disaster.

If we get a Republican president I'm not terribly concerned. Republicans don't do much when they are in the majority (or ever for that matter).

We have millions of words of laws and regulations. Seriously, how much of it is in dire need of change? What are the odds that a change will be for the better?

Believing that new legislation is going to improve your life is like expecting radiation to improve your DNA. The odds are not in your favor.

I believe the problem is a whole lot less Republican vs Democrat than it is people expect way too much from government and way too little from themselves and their neighbors.

[dcarrigg]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

The idea that all negative outcomes of classifying the world and everything in it as tradeable property would disappear if it weren't for government is just wrong.

Slavery doesn't need state support. Only the entrepreneurial spirit of a pimp.

Scumbag dealers and sex slave traders and other low-lifes operate outside of the state every day. The state goes out of its way to try to stop them. It doesn't always succeed.

But you can't blame all negative outcomes of profit-seeking, commoditizing, financializing, market behavior on the state.

The state ain't perfect. But neither is the market.

Until we can get people to just agree that neither the state nor the market are a panacea, we'll continue to talk past each other.

There are many negative, negative things about the unrestricted buying and selling in the market and unrestricted private property in general.

And if you if you think that's not true, then you're just out of your mind.

[LorenS]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

The idea that all negative outcomes of classifying the world and everything in it as tradeable property would disappear if it weren't for government is just wrong.

The state ain't perfect. But neither is the market.

Until we can get people to just agree that neither the state nor the market are a panacea, we'll continue to talk past each other.

So why is it wrong to put bounds on the power of the state?

All I'm asking for is that vigilance and restraint be applied in direct proportion to the ability to do harm.

[don]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

All I'm asking for is that vigilance and restraint be applied in direct proportion to the ability to do harm.

and you have leverage with the people "that matter" ?

[dcarrigg]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

So why is it wrong to put bounds on the power of the state?

It's not.

All I'm asking for is that vigilance and restraint be applied in direct proportion to the ability to do harm.

All the while I just think you are probably drastically, by orders of magnitude, underestimating non-state actors' ability to do harm.

[Ghent12]

Re: What If The Republicans Win?

Totally disagree. Slave markets were real. Excuse them however you want. They were still markets.

Total market freedom means turning everything to property. And property comes from dominion. And dominion comes from domination. It's all right there in Genesis. You only have to read The Book.

George Washington could have accepted that King George's property included the whole of the United States and never used violence and force to free his people from Monarchy. But he didn't.

There's a reason why the phrase "free markets" is nowhere in the Constitution, nor in the Declaration of Independence.

But you know what is in the Constitution?

Article 1 Section 8:

Cap and trade markets are real. Black markets are real too. Healthcare exchange markets are markets. None of those are free markets (though some black markets come close). Not all markets are free markets--that's pretty basic.

Your definitions are a bit odd, and completely at odds with The New Book. Maybe that's why the colonists rejected your notions of King George's claims.