The Real Hawkeye
member
Malone, I think I have covered my views on this topic pretty thoroughly. I will stand on what I've already written.
Conservatives have historically stood for fiscal responsibility and personal responsibility. The lines are being blurred by the difference between stated platforms and the results we see. Administrations under Reagan, Bush and Bush managed to reduce tax rates, increase tax revenues, and outspend any "tax and spend" liberals in history. Conservatives have been willing to surrender personal freedoms under the assumption the government's defensive powers, even if used proactively, will make them safer, even if less free. Vis. preemptive forays into foreign countries, ignoring warrants for wiretaps, nation building on the backs of our children (deficits).Keith, the corruptibility of human beings is a given for conservatives/classical liberals/libertarians. That's why conservatives et al favor small, decentralized government, and minimal if any regulation of industry.
Sorry, but markets are not a "natural" force. They are a human creation, the product of social interaction. You could argue that every human product is "natural" because we are essentially a part of nature too, but the fact is that we use the word natural to mean something that is categorically different from humankind and our creations. Politics, government, laws, taxes, and markets aren't "natural," nor are the clothes on our backs or the houses we live in.I acknowledge that there are a lot of real natural forces in the world, markets aren't the only one.
Note: Apologies to all for resurecting this thread. I will not beat the equine cadaver, which we can all agree is quite dead. I just wanted to respond to this post.Sorry, but markets are not a "natural" force. They are a human creation, the product of social interaction. You could argue that every human product is "natural" because we are essentially a part of nature too, but the fact is that we use the word natural to mean something that is categorically different from humankind and our creations. Politics, government, laws, taxes, and markets aren't "natural," nor are the clothes on our backs or the houses we live in.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree. I think that a whole lot of people spend a whole lot of effort on creating market behavior. You can even get a college degree in creating market behavior.No one sets out to create market behavior, it is cumulative impact of the way people act.
Something as simple as what time to go to bed in order to get up and milk the cows is a market decision. Is another hour quilting more valuable than another hour sleeping?We were recognizably human for many millennia without a market economy.
That's only a market decision if the value in "valuable" is a cash value. Otherwise you're really stretching the meaning of "market."Is another hour quilting more valuable than another hour sleeping?
There were trade markets before there was any such thing as coined money.That's only a market decision if the value in "valuable" is a cash value. Otherwise you're really stretching the meaning of "market."
Not at all. Economics is simply human action and interaction. The resource to be traded might be paper, it might be gold, it might be an extra hour of sleep. Same thing.That's only a market decision if the value in "valuable" is a cash value. Otherwise you're really stretching the meaning of "market."
Believing that businesses will never use force to keep their competition or their workers down in a perfect free market is like an anti believing that he doesn't need to know how to defend himself because the world is a happy place where bad things don't happen to good people.
One of the greatest failings of command economies is the inability of a small number of people to have enough knowlege to make decisions for everybody in the country. If 5 individual citizens can't find out what they need to know to make an informed decision, why do you think 5 bureaucrats will do better? If one of the individuals makes a mistake, only one person suffers. If one of the bureaucrats screws up, how many millions will suffer for it?
I do think that the greatest long term weakness of any free market system is the realization by the powerfull that it is easier to make money by controlling the govt than it is by making a better wiget. The biggest blind spot that almost all liberal types seem to have is to think that making the govt more powerfull will somehow stop this. All you really do is make the takeover of govt even more attractive.
When robber barons hired the Pinkerton detective agency to terrorize and kill workers who were suspected of labor organizing activities, government had nothing to do with it.
SLAPP suit
I don't argue in favor of command economies. I argue in favor of an economy with a balance between state control and free enterprise
How about: Sometimes admiration for free markets does approach religious fervor, because there is recognition that no matter its flaws freedom of action is the most likely way to provide the most good for the most people.Sometimes admiration for free markets does approach religious fervor, but mostly it is a recognition that no matter it's flaws freedom of action is the most likely way to provide the most good for the most people.
Of course, but the decisions are made the same way, whether consciously or otherwise.Trade is one form of human interaction. Wouldn't you say there are others?
Wrong. Capitalism can be "purified" by simply leaving it alone.These two principles are like sodium and chlorine; they are stable when together but volatile in their pure forms, and they can only be purified by highly artificial means.
Wow. So many fallacies in one paragraph.When mining companies paid their employees in company scrip, making them completely dependent on their employer and unable to do business anywhere else, government had nothing to do with it. When robber barons hired the Pinkerton detective agency to terrorize and kill workers who were suspected of labor organizing activities, government had nothing to do with it. When smelters pollute land and hit anyone who publishes about it with a SLAPP suit, government has nothing to do with it. When Microsoft opted to buy out and beat down its competitors instead of building better software, a practice that continues to this day, the government had nothing to do with it. It would be nice if economic success were determined simply by who built the best widget or provided the best service, but that's sadly untrue. Just ask the makers of Betamax video tapes or the 10mm cartridge.
I am working my way through college
How about: Sometimes admiration for free markets does approach religious fervor, because there is recognition that no matter its flaws freedom of action is the most likely way to provide the most good for the most people.
OK, I'm done.When capitalism is left alone, the result will eventually be the same as Soviet-style communism.
QE:QuestionEverything said:When capitalism is left alone, the result will eventually be the same as Soviet-style communism.
If I said that, I misspoke. What I should have said was that conservatism is based on observations of human nature, history and tradition, while leftism is ideological in character. In fact, I believe that's just about what I did say, but I will refrain from calling you a liar.Questioneverything said: Anyone who believes "Conservatives see in black and white, and are reality-based, while liberals see in shades of gray, and are ideology-based" is an utter, utter fool.