The "No Problem" Attitude

[mRx 16]

I did have a serious point, one you avoided answering the last time. I'll ask again, In your opinion, should agriculture be included in this unfettered economy? Bearing in mind, that most agriculture in developed countries relies on artificial means to provide food at low prices.

LOL! So you're sidestepping the reply I just gave to your "debunking" of sound economic theory, in favor of digging up something I apparantly didn't answer about agriculture? Let me dig through some of our stimulating debates in search of this elusive and serious question that I avoided.

Not really, yes, I didn't put my point of view across very clearly. While what is being argued is probably true, the type of world that would result is one where currency is given more value than human life. Not the sort of world I would care to live in.

Yes, really. Agriculture had absolutely nothing to do with this thread. Neither does any preposterous and absurd notion that currency has more value than human life. You truly have a kaleidoscoped vision of what function currency actually serves in an economy.

[Peikko 1,575]

Maybe I do. It could certainly be ture. I am not an expert on economic theory. However, you have quite bluntly suggested that if the economy drives people to seek rather extreme survival methods, such as sending children out to work, that's ok, in your view.

It is quite possible that I misunderstood that however, and that is not exactly what you meant.

Agriculture is relevant simply because if you allow for regulation in one area of the economy, to not allow it in others surely perverts the economic model?

[mRx 16]

Do I think child labor is wonderous? Absolutely not. It's extremely sad that families are faced with such unimaginable decisions. But I do understand that in some cases, this is the better choice of the options they face; those options could be as extreme as life or death.

You're right in your assumption that if I was pro intervention in certain markets, then it would pervert the model. But I'm not.

Intervention is, at core, a coercive restriction of peaceful and voluntary exchange amongst individuals.

In regards to agriculture; I don't see how the market is better off if the government buys millions of pounds of produce, only to let it go to waste. Or to pay farmers a subsidy to let a portion of their land go to rot. These asinine policies have been mainstream staples of the agriculture market since the days of Hoover. It's economically wasteful. It's destructive. It's subsidies.

All for what? So farmers can keep a higher price for their goods than what would allow through peaceful and voluntary exchange.

[PhiLandShiR 18]

All in all? would you care to go live in a society that operates on the premise that its population is expendable? That is not the premise of the USA, nor most of Europe, though I am sure it quite certainly could be.

While it may not be the premise... it is, sadly, the reality....

-P

[Peikko 1,575]

Do I think child labor is wonderous? Absolutely not. It's extremely sad that families are faced with such unimaginable decisions. But I do understand that in some cases, this is the better choice of the options they face; those options could be as extreme as life or death.

You're right in your assumption that if I was pro intervention in certain markets, then it would pervert the model. But I'm not.

Intervention is, at core, a coercive restriction of peaceful and voluntary exchange amongst individuals.

In regards to agriculture; I don't see how the market is better off if the government buys millions of pounds of produce, only to let it go to waste. Or to pay farmers a subsidy to let a portion of their land go to rot. These asinine policies have been mainstream staples of the agriculture market since the days of Hoover. It's economically wasteful. It's destructive. It's subsidies.

All for what? So farmers can keep a higher price for their goods than what would allow through peaceful and voluntary exchange.

The reasoning appears to be that not doing so, one runs the risk of losing agriculture to other parts of the world, thus leaving the country exposed in terms of the ability of hostile governments to hold the country to ransom. That being said, I have no idea how likely that is. I never have liked the idea of agricultural subsidy.

[Peikko 1,575]

All in all? would you care to go live in a society that operates on the premise that its population is expendable? That is not the premise of the USA, nor most of Europe, though I am sure it quite certainly could be.

While it may not be the premise... it is, sadly, the reality....

-P

No, no it's not. The system may not be perfect, indeed it is pretty flawed, but the basic concept is that the US undertakes to maintain certain rights for its citizens which is why, despite not having a national health service, people are still given emergency medical treatment, etc, etc, etc.

[mawilson 2,133]

All in all? would you care to go live in a society that operates on the premise that its population is expendable? That is not the premise of the USA, nor most of Europe, though I am sure it quite certainly could be.

While it may not be the premise... it is, sadly, the reality....

-P

No, no it's not. The system may not be perfect, indeed it is pretty flawed, but the basic concept is that the US undertakes to maintain certain rights for its citizens which is why, despite not having a national health service, people are still given emergency medical treatment, etc, etc, etc.

True - the premise of the USA is that the rest of the world is expendable.

[PhiLandShiR 18]

No, no it's not. The system may not be perfect, indeed it is pretty flawed, but the basic concept is that the US undertakes to maintain certain rights for its citizens which is why, despite not having a national health service, people are still given emergency medical treatment, etc, etc, etc.

You are correct here as far as you go but you need to also add RICH citizens.

The poor people of the US, hell, for the world for that matter, the US could give a $hit less about...

Read your history, the US never wanted anyone but rich upper class to have any say what so ever in how the country was run.

-P