Jump to content

51 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Timeline
Posted
The market is not perfect, and I doubt anyone is proclaiming it to be. However, it is just and fair; Unlike government schemes where some benefit at the expense of others. In this case, high cost renewable energy corporations will benefit at the expense of consumers, and those wicked carbon-emitting corporations.

I know this is a whole other topic, but I'd like to know how the market is fair and just, but outside forces on the market that come from governmental regulations is a scheme? :)

Think of it as a basketball game. It's a minimalistic analogy, but the basic principle remains.

What if an external force determined that one basketball team must play with one hand tied behind their back; or, if for every 4 points they score, they must give up 2 to the opposing team? This arrangement wouldn't be very fair, would it? Sure, it may be sad that without such coercive handicaps the other team wouldn't win, but the system is fair, and just; And nobody disputes it.

The same principle applies to the market.

It's easy to get clouded with the complexity of our economy, but everything boils down to the same economic axioms. Any genuine unjustness or unfairness must be layed at the doorstep of external forces; just as it would be basketball.

It's playoffs, so I figured basketball was appropriate. :)

The market itself sets it up that way, though. One side sets the rules and - if left alone - will set them to the disadvantage of the other team (and the nation at large) as long as it can. Manchester all over.

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
Posted
Right. January 1848. My edition was copyrighted in 1948.

if you have one of those, then you must be a communist :huh:

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Posted
The market is not perfect, and I doubt anyone is proclaiming it to be. However, it is just and fair; Unlike government schemes where some benefit at the expense of others.

I don't know but when productivity increases outpaces wage increases then one might question how fair and just that market really is. It would then appear much more like a scheme where some benefit at the expense of others. And that particular market dysfunction usually ends in economic disasters.

You can't dispute that wages have increased, in the long-run, albeit inflation has severly diluted it's purchasing power. However, you can't assume that manual labor solely led to the productivity increase. I doubt that people physically work harder today than they did in the early 19th century. Labor saving devices are, however, the more appropriate culprit. It's the reason a car can be manufactured in around 8 hrs, as opposed to the hundreds it took in the early days of car manufacturing.

Most importantly though, labor services are voluntary. If the wage was unfair and unjust, you must assume that no one would've agreed to the voluntary exchange. That Das Kapital model of thought has been thoroughly debunked.

21FUNNY.gif
Posted
The market is not perfect, and I doubt anyone is proclaiming it to be. However, it is just and fair; Unlike government schemes where some benefit at the expense of others. In this case, high cost renewable energy corporations will benefit at the expense of consumers, and those wicked carbon-emitting corporations.

I know this is a whole other topic, but I'd like to know how the market is fair and just, but outside forces on the market that come from governmental regulations is a scheme? :)

Think of it as a basketball game. It's a minimalistic analogy, but the basic principle remains.

What if an external force determined that one basketball team must play with one hand tied behind their back; or, if for every 4 points they score, they must give up 2 to the opposing team? This arrangement wouldn't be very fair, would it? Sure, it may be sad that without such coercive handicaps the other team wouldn't win, but the system is fair, and just; And nobody disputes it.

The same principle applies to the market.

It's easy to get clouded with the complexity of our economy, but everything boils down to the same economic axioms. Any genuine unjustness or unfairness must be layed at the doorstep of external forces; just as it would be basketball.

It's playoffs, so I figured basketball was appropriate. :)

The market itself sets it up that way, though. One side sets the rules and - if left alone - will set them to the disadvantage of the other team (and the nation at large) as long as it can. Manchester all over.

One side sets the rules? So the Chicago Bulls should just instate a rule, forcing the Celtic's Ray Allen to wear a blindfold, and not attempt 3-point shots? The "one side sets all the rules" is absolutely not true.

In the two sides of every market, the buyer and seller; each compete amongst each other. The buyer competes with the other buyers, bidding up the price; the seller competes with other sellers, bidding down the price.

If the seller set the rules, then a hotdog would cost 3,000 dollars; and you would be compelled by force to buy it. Clearly, that's outrageous, and untrue.

21FUNNY.gif
Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Posted (edited)

Matt, since we're using the NBA analogy - there is a Commissioner and a governing board that determines the rules and regulations regarding game play, including salary caps. Teams can trade players to get under the cap, which they do often. So basically, the NBA does have a cap and trade system in place and they aren't singling out certain teams - all teams fall under the same regulations, which also will hold true for any cap on CO2 emissions. :)

Edited by Col. 'Bat' Guano
Filed: Timeline
Posted
The market is not perfect, and I doubt anyone is proclaiming it to be. However, it is just and fair; Unlike government schemes where some benefit at the expense of others. In this case, high cost renewable energy corporations will benefit at the expense of consumers, and those wicked carbon-emitting corporations.

I know this is a whole other topic, but I'd like to know how the market is fair and just, but outside forces on the market that come from governmental regulations is a scheme? :)

Think of it as a basketball game. It's a minimalistic analogy, but the basic principle remains.

What if an external force determined that one basketball team must play with one hand tied behind their back; or, if for every 4 points they score, they must give up 2 to the opposing team? This arrangement wouldn't be very fair, would it? Sure, it may be sad that without such coercive handicaps the other team wouldn't win, but the system is fair, and just; And nobody disputes it.

The same principle applies to the market.

It's easy to get clouded with the complexity of our economy, but everything boils down to the same economic axioms. Any genuine unjustness or unfairness must be layed at the doorstep of external forces; just as it would be basketball.

It's playoffs, so I figured basketball was appropriate. :)

The market itself sets it up that way, though. One side sets the rules and - if left alone - will set them to the disadvantage of the other team (and the nation at large) as long as it can. Manchester all over.

One side sets the rules? So the Chicago Bulls should just instate a rule, forcing the Celtic's Ray Allen to wear a blindfold, and not attempt 3-point shots? The "one side sets all the rules" is absolutely not true.

In the two sides of every market, the buyer and seller; each compete amongst each other. The buyer competes with the other buyers, bidding up the price; the seller competes with other sellers, bidding down the price.

If the seller set the rules, then a hotdog would cost 3,000 dollars; and you would be compelled by force to buy it. Clearly, that's outrageous, and untrue.

It isn't. The growing income disparity shows quite impressively that the market doesn't function all that well. A market that rewards failure (talking about them golden parachutes) as is the case in today's corporate world cannot be called functioning. It's out of whack. And it hurts the nation.

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Posted
The market is not perfect, and I doubt anyone is proclaiming it to be. However, it is just and fair; Unlike government schemes where some benefit at the expense of others. In this case, high cost renewable energy corporations will benefit at the expense of consumers, and those wicked carbon-emitting corporations.

I know this is a whole other topic, but I'd like to know how the market is fair and just, but outside forces on the market that come from governmental regulations is a scheme? :)

Think of it as a basketball game. It's a minimalistic analogy, but the basic principle remains.

What if an external force determined that one basketball team must play with one hand tied behind their back; or, if for every 4 points they score, they must give up 2 to the opposing team? This arrangement wouldn't be very fair, would it? Sure, it may be sad that without such coercive handicaps the other team wouldn't win, but the system is fair, and just; And nobody disputes it.

The same principle applies to the market.

It's easy to get clouded with the complexity of our economy, but everything boils down to the same economic axioms. Any genuine unjustness or unfairness must be layed at the doorstep of external forces; just as it would be basketball.

It's playoffs, so I figured basketball was appropriate. :)

The market itself sets it up that way, though. One side sets the rules and - if left alone - will set them to the disadvantage of the other team (and the nation at large) as long as it can. Manchester all over.

One side sets the rules? So the Chicago Bulls should just instate a rule, forcing the Celtic's Ray Allen to wear a blindfold, and not attempt 3-point shots? The "one side sets all the rules" is absolutely not true.

In the two sides of every market, the buyer and seller; each compete amongst each other. The buyer competes with the other buyers, bidding up the price; the seller competes with other sellers, bidding down the price.

If the seller set the rules, then a hotdog would cost 3,000 dollars; and you would be compelled by force to buy it. Clearly, that's outrageous, and untrue.

It isn't. The growing income disparity shows quite impressively that the market doesn't function all that well. A market that rewards failure (talking about them golden parachutes) as is the case in today's corporate world cannot be called functioning. It's out of whack. And it hurts the nation.

It behaves in the way the NBA would if you eliminated referees or did away with salary caps.

Filed: Timeline
Posted
The market is not perfect, and I doubt anyone is proclaiming it to be. However, it is just and fair; Unlike government schemes where some benefit at the expense of others. In this case, high cost renewable energy corporations will benefit at the expense of consumers, and those wicked carbon-emitting corporations.

I know this is a whole other topic, but I'd like to know how the market is fair and just, but outside forces on the market that come from governmental regulations is a scheme? :)

Think of it as a basketball game. It's a minimalistic analogy, but the basic principle remains.

What if an external force determined that one basketball team must play with one hand tied behind their back; or, if for every 4 points they score, they must give up 2 to the opposing team? This arrangement wouldn't be very fair, would it? Sure, it may be sad that without such coercive handicaps the other team wouldn't win, but the system is fair, and just; And nobody disputes it.

The same principle applies to the market.

It's easy to get clouded with the complexity of our economy, but everything boils down to the same economic axioms. Any genuine unjustness or unfairness must be layed at the doorstep of external forces; just as it would be basketball.

It's playoffs, so I figured basketball was appropriate. :)

The market itself sets it up that way, though. One side sets the rules and - if left alone - will set them to the disadvantage of the other team (and the nation at large) as long as it can. Manchester all over.

One side sets the rules? So the Chicago Bulls should just instate a rule, forcing the Celtic's Ray Allen to wear a blindfold, and not attempt 3-point shots? The "one side sets all the rules" is absolutely not true.

In the two sides of every market, the buyer and seller; each compete amongst each other. The buyer competes with the other buyers, bidding up the price; the seller competes with other sellers, bidding down the price.

If the seller set the rules, then a hotdog would cost 3,000 dollars; and you would be compelled by force to buy it. Clearly, that's outrageous, and untrue.

It isn't. The growing income disparity shows quite impressively that the market doesn't function all that well. A market that rewards failure (talking about them golden parachutes) as is the case in today's corporate world cannot be called functioning. It's out of whack. And it hurts the nation.

It behaves in the way the NBA would if you eliminated referees or did away with salary caps.

To free market fetishists, this would be welcome and enhance the sport.

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Posted

It behaves in the way the NBA would if you eliminated referees or did away with salary caps.

To free market fetishists, this would be welcome and enhance the sport.

Well, to be fair to Matt, I don't think he has a fetish about free markets. I think his ideas have evolved and continue to evolve. I am optimistic that they will continue to evolve progressively. :)

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
Posted
Right. January 1848. My edition was copyrighted in 1948.

if you have one of those, then you must be a communist :huh:

I am a college graduate. Does that answer your question, comrade? :P

i musta missed that on my book issue. :unsure:

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
Posted
Right. January 1848. My edition was copyrighted in 1948.

if you have one of those, then you must be a communist :huh:

I am a college graduate. Does that answer your question, comrade? :P

i musta missed that on my book issue. :unsure:

It's required reading in the PRC.

well #######, that explains it. i was in the netherlands at the time. :ranting:

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Filed: Country: Brazil
Timeline
Posted
Right. January 1848. My edition was copyrighted in 1948.

if you have one of those, then you must be a communist :huh:

I am a college graduate. Does that answer your question, comrade? :P

i musta missed that on my book issue. :unsure:

It's required reading in the PRC.

well #######, that explains it. i was in the netherlands at the time. :ranting:

drinking the beer?

Posted
The market is not perfect, and I doubt anyone is proclaiming it to be. However, it is just and fair; Unlike government schemes where some benefit at the expense of others. In this case, high cost renewable energy corporations will benefit at the expense of consumers, and those wicked carbon-emitting corporations.

I know this is a whole other topic, but I'd like to know how the market is fair and just, but outside forces on the market that come from governmental regulations is a scheme? :)

Think of it as a basketball game. It's a minimalistic analogy, but the basic principle remains.

What if an external force determined that one basketball team must play with one hand tied behind their back; or, if for every 4 points they score, they must give up 2 to the opposing team? This arrangement wouldn't be very fair, would it? Sure, it may be sad that without such coercive handicaps the other team wouldn't win, but the system is fair, and just; And nobody disputes it.

The same principle applies to the market.

It's easy to get clouded with the complexity of our economy, but everything boils down to the same economic axioms. Any genuine unjustness or unfairness must be layed at the doorstep of external forces; just as it would be basketball.

It's playoffs, so I figured basketball was appropriate. :)

The market itself sets it up that way, though. One side sets the rules and - if left alone - will set them to the disadvantage of the other team (and the nation at large) as long as it can. Manchester all over.

One side sets the rules? So the Chicago Bulls should just instate a rule, forcing the Celtic's Ray Allen to wear a blindfold, and not attempt 3-point shots? The "one side sets all the rules" is absolutely not true.

In the two sides of every market, the buyer and seller; each compete amongst each other. The buyer competes with the other buyers, bidding up the price; the seller competes with other sellers, bidding down the price.

If the seller set the rules, then a hotdog would cost 3,000 dollars; and you would be compelled by force to buy it. Clearly, that's outrageous, and untrue.

It isn't. The growing income disparity shows quite impressively that the market doesn't function all that well. A market that rewards failure (talking about them golden parachutes) as is the case in today's corporate world cannot be called functioning. It's out of whack. And it hurts the nation.

Not to be condescending, but you clearly have no idea what brought about the economic turmoil we're in.

Did these corporate executives that you so loathe have a monopolistic stranglehold on US credit creation and use it to hurt the nation? Money doesn't grow in a big pot, and it doesn't grow in executive suites. It comes from one place.

Was it these confusing derivitives that caused the credit crash or was it the underlying loans from which the derivitives derived their value?

21FUNNY.gif
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...