Clavis_Apocalypticae: I'm not a pussy; I'm just on your side. Hence, no argument from me. I'm sure Vlad will be happy to spar with you come Monday, though.

LOki: HAHAHA! I'm sure he won't. At least not with any passion of conviction.

It does seem, however, that Vlad has kicked some sand into your pussy. You shouldn't hold hard feelings about it, he always kicks with the noblest of intentions.

Clavis_Apocalypticae: Nah, Vlad's good people. He just thinks wrong

"When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators."

LOki: explain to me why greed is incompatible with good economics

AcheronDCS says:
"Lets be clear here: The definition you're throwing around here for free-market capitalism is NOT whats being applied in the world currently."

And then AcheronDCS continued:"Free market capitalism, in the pure sense that your talking about it, is NOT neoliberalism."

And then AcheronDCS concluded with:"Neoliberal, psuedo free trade bullshit exists. REAL free trade does not - Its not even on the agenda. All this free market stuff is based around forms of protection."

mundhra:

because greed precludes the creation of a true free market.

Pchimp: "Far from being the bane of free markets, appropriate regulation enables them to thrive (not to be interpreted as supporting the current “regulation” involving subsidies and other corporate handouts – these are anathema to free markets). The role of regulation is not to “level the playing field,” but rather to ensure that everyone plays by the same rules."

Pchimp: "You’ll claim that free markets are intrinsically self-correcting, but this is only true in the fairy tale of John Galt’s dreamland."

Pchimp: "The problem with strict laissez-faire implementation of free markets is that, when implemented by real people, they are unstable and self-corrupting. It requires that members of society act not just in self-interest, but rational self-interest. An educated, foresightful society. Fat chance. To advocate this as a serviceable economic system is to deny the reality of certain human fallibilities. If humans were to act in rational self-interest, it would be the perfect system."

Pchimp:"And if lions weren’t carnivores vegetarianism would be the perfect diet, eh?"

Pchimp: "Now, I imagine you’re the type of thoughtful person who follows ideas, rather than people, but it is worth noting that Adam Smith himself warned of self-corruption of free markets by corporate hegemony."

Pchimp: "Hope is not lost, though. We can create a rational society. Cull the herd. Get rid of the irrational non-productive fucks. Manage our own evolutionary destiny to create a rational transhuman race."

LOki: Right. In so far as what Socialists and Communists point at and complain about as being Free-Market and Capitalist are not actually Free-Market Capitalism, yes. I am using the actual definition of Free-Market Capitalism rather than accpting economic AIDS to be the definition of Free-Market Capitalism so that those same Socialists and Communists can make a valid point.

Are you trying to trick me? I won't fall for it.

Did one or both of the articles I linked to make this assertion? I know I didn't.

What are you up to?

Are you attempting to pull the "anarchy" gambit with this? I will not capitulate on the point that theft can (and must) be made illegal without regulating commerce. I am ready for this.

What are you thinking?

AcheronDCS:

??

I was commenting strictly on the WTO type institutions, saying that they too are based on what you would call "theft". You are ready for what? "Anarchy gambit"? Are you putting words in my mouth? The point was merely that when you say "free market" its very different then when Alan Greenspan says "free market" ; you are talking about totally different things. I know you know it. I'm clarifying. What are YOU thinking?

Vladtweano:
ahahahaha. this is how almost every argument with loki devolves, provided you care to argue with him. count yourslef lucky that it's on the interweb, so you'll be spared the drunken hugging later.

Loki said
You're not talking about Free-Market Capitalists operating in free-markets. I will not allow you to point at Socialists and Fascists and declare them to be Free-Market Capitalists engaging in free-trade in a free-market for your purposes of argument.

dragonstaff:

No, I am talking about trade agreements the United States have tried in the very recent past to force onto their prefered trading partners.

As an aggregate, humans definitley can act not just in self-interest, but rational self-interest.

"People refuse to be persuaded of the merits of the free market because they don't want to be persuaded. They don't want to be persuaded because that would mean admitting to themselves just how wrong they've been and just how culpable they are. They avoid admitting their errors by reacting emotionally instead of listening and thinking, and by predictable evasions."

And this is only to mention the economic benefits of capitalism. It is also an expression of freedom. It is not so much a social system but the natural result of a society wherein individual rights are respected, where businesses, families, and every form of association are permitted to flourish in the absence of coercion, theft, war, and aggression.

Capitalism protects the weak from the strong, granting choice and opportunity to masses who once had no choice but to live in a state of dependency on the politically connected and their enforcers."

"If we say "capitalist" they hear "selfish and greedy". If we say "socialist" they hear "well-meaning". If we say "welfare state" they hear "compassionate society". If we say "laissez faire" they hear "doesn't care". If we say "compulsory school attendance" they hear "a proper education". If we say "competition" they hear "dog-eat-dog". If we say "democracy" they hear "all things bright and beautiful". If we say "private enterprise" they hear "law of the jungle". Never mind that all of this is piffle. It's what goes on in their heads that counts."

"In the absence of the capitalist economy and all its underlying institutions, the world's population would, over time, shrink to a fraction of its current size, with whatever was left of the human race systematically reduced to subsistence, eating only what can be hunted or gathered. Even the institution that is the source of the word civilization itself--the city--depends on trade and commerce, and cannot exist without them."

LOki submitted at the top of this thread: And we can consider this interesting explaination of why the arguments for free-market capitalism are dismissed:
"If we say "capitalist" they hear "selfish and greedy". If we say "socialist" they hear "well-meaning". If we say "welfare state" they hear "compassionate society". If we say "laissez faire" they hear "doesn't care". If we say "compulsory school attendance" they hear "a proper education". If we say "competition" they hear "dog-eat-dog". If we say "democracy" they hear "all things bright and beautiful". If we say "private enterprise" they hear "law of the jungle". Never mind that all of this is piffle. It's what goes on in their heads that counts."

"People refuse to be persuaded of the merits of the free market because they don't want to be persuaded. They don't want to be persuaded because that would mean admitting to themselves just how wrong they've been and just how culpable they are. They avoid admitting their errors by reacting emotionally instead of listening and thinking, and by predictable evasions."

Mofo:
I think that, by looking at our election of Bush, you may be slightly wrong on the point of acting in rational self-interest, as also shown by militarism, imperialism, and all the economical/political ideas we invent and argue over instead of just doing the right thing.

Mofo: And I doubt we'll ever get to an agreement, because one side (loki) feels that no one deserves anything from someone else,...

Mofo: ... where as others (dragonstaff) feel it is our responsibility to support others in need.

Mofo:Two opposites won't ever agree.

Mofo: And, from past uses of laissez-faire that I have seen, mainly of the Industrial Revolution, people on top get corrupted just as easily, if not easier, than anyone one else in any other system.

Mofo: Most systems of government and economics - socialism, free market capitalism, others - have good points and bad points. ... I'll agree that in practice capitalism is a better practice, but it still has its downfalls.

Mofo: And charity, true charity not forced at all, will never create or produce enough money or supplies to take care of the less fortunante.

Mofo:
You could say the same about people failing to see the good of socialism, or communism, or facism, or anarchy, or dictatorships.

Mofo: From what I've seen, capitalism seems to strive on war and aggression. Look what WWII did for the US economy. And why bring up social aspects when discussing economical systems?

Mofo:
How so? In capitalism, the strong gets stronger, while the weak gets weaker.

Mofo: If anything, communism/socialism would do more to protect the weak from the strong, by making everyone weak, where as capitalism just divides them more.

Mofo: When was the last time you saw a homeless person get a fair chance at a job compared to a well-off person?

Mofo:
The paper provides no facts or evidence of why this would happen. And I want to know why, without capitalism, everyone would suddenly die?

Mofo! Glad you could chime in!

If you allow that the vast majority of people hold to a principle that accepts a measure of slavery necessary for a free society, then the election of GWB is perfectly rational.

This is not my position. I belive people can deserve a great deal from one and other. I believe I just have a morally superior notion of what "deserve" means.

It goes much farther than that--for these folk need = deserve.

Why not?

So, inventory the the "bad points" and "downfalls" of Free-Market Capitalism.

What you have seen is not Free-Market Capitalism. Capitalism cannot thrive on the destruction of capital, and free-markets cannot be achieved at gun point. As I have already told Dragonstaff, "I will not allow you to point at Socialists and Fascists and declare them to be Free-Market Capitalists engaging in free-trade in a free-market for your purposes of argument."

Not so. The capitalist creates greater capital in the form of industrial infrastructure such that the work that was formerly that of 10 men can now be accomplished by 1 man. The work that could only be done by brute force, can now be done by machine provided the operator is smart enough to operate it. Capitalism, which is driven by the ownership of value, neccessarily develops the value of greater merit, and greater return, ie. intellect.

Well-offness and homelessness are irrelevant. What value does one have to offer that the other does not is what is relevant. The vast, vast majority of homeless are not the victims of caprice or malice, but their own lack of merit.

No. Embitterment derived from baseless entitlement is far more divisive than merit envy.

It does not claim that everyone will suddenly die. It asserts that civilization would collapse under the burden of slavery and warfare inspired by looting. There's no point in owning anything if you cannot own yourself. There's no point in creating value when you are not entitled to benefit yourself with it. And you cannot force innovation and industry at gunpoint.