Supplements

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Supplements

Post by Benko »

doodle wrote:
Benko wrote:
doodle wrote: Is it not true that the profit motivated corporations are the most powerful source of social engineering in existence today?
No.  it is anti-capitalist minded university professors who brainwash a large percentage of the population e.g. you.
Capitalism is broken....didn't you get the memo?
"All joking is at least half serious".  Someone wise once said that.

The people with that point of view have been running the country.  Perhaps they should start smaller and try running a lemonade stand first ;-)
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Supplements

Post by doodle »

Who is joking?

Haven't you been following the breakdown between labor and capital discussions? How does capitalism (in a traditional sense) function in a world where human labor is increasingly obsolete to the process of production?

Maybe we will begin to compensate people for tasks like cooking dinner or raising children....
All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. - Blaise Pascal
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: Supplements

Post by flyingpylon »

Pointedstick wrote: "what is to become of the people who can't 'cultivate a skeptical attitude and a resilient mind'?" Well I'm just gonna say it: they're fucked. And nothing can unfuck them. That's just the way the world works today, and we can't put the genie back in the bottle. In the ancient times, you were fucked if you were physically weak; today, you're fucked if you're mentally weak. The only thing that doesn't change is that life is unfair.
I think I'm going to use this the next time my kids complain about... well, anything.  ;D
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8885
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Supplements

Post by Pointedstick »

doodle wrote: Who is joking?

Haven't you been following the breakdown between labor and capital discussions? How does capitalism (in a traditional sense) function in a world where human labor is increasingly obsolete to the process of production?

Maybe we will begin to compensate people for tasks like cooking dinner or raising children....
I have been following it, extensively so. It's a challenge, that's all. It doesn't signal that capitalism is "broken" any more than Obamacare or NSA spying or the drug war signals that government is broken.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Supplements

Post by Benko »

doodle wrote: Who is joking?

Haven't you been following the breakdown between labor and capital discussions? How does capitalism (in a traditional sense) function in a world where human labor is increasingly obsolete to the process of production?

Maybe we will begin to compensate people for tasks like cooking dinner or raising children....
Doodle,

1. Marx believed what he believed long before robots, etc were around.  Possibly you are an admirer? 

2. Your...."worship of central planning" (best term I can come up with) has nothing to do with robots or poor people or dishonest advertizers or people lacking health insurance.  These are all excuses to allow you (and your fellow central planning worshippers) to do what you wish i.e. impose central planning.

3.  Capitalists e.g. gardeners, janitors all the way up to people like ROmney know how to get stuff done.  They deal with REALITY.  Shit happens, they deal with it and get stuff done.  See his company.  I gather he also deal with and trouble  shooted some stuff related to the Olympics i.e. he is a manager (well +).

4.  Intellectuals are the problem. e,g, They have a theory that says e.g. the globe is warming.  They live in their head which is more real to them the what is actually happening.  Since they live in their own head, and tend to be resistant to reality, they are not good managers.  The world could stop warming, the glaciers could start to advance south, and they would not notice/believe.

Obama and entourage is a supurb example of this.  How incompetent do you have to be to have a major project with your name on it, not have any idea how far along it is, have it be incompletely non-functional and to still have it go on line as scheduled.
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Supplements

Post by doodle »

2. Your...."worship of central planning" (best term I can come up with) has nothing to do with robots or poor people or dishonest advertizers or people lacking health insurance.  These are all excuses to allow you (and your fellow central planning worshippers) to do what you wish i.e. impose central planning.
So capitalism is not a form of "central planning"? Is it not a artificial system which organizes the lives of men in a certain fashion?
All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. - Blaise Pascal
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8885
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Supplements

Post by Pointedstick »

doodle wrote:
2. Your...."worship of central planning" (best term I can come up with) has nothing to do with robots or poor people or dishonest advertizers or people lacking health insurance.  These are all excuses to allow you (and your fellow central planning worshippers) to do what you wish i.e. impose central planning.
So capitalism is not a form of "central planning"? Is it not a artificial system which organizes the lives of men in a certain fashion?
You may be thinking of "corporatism".

Otherwise, the only way I can possibly imagine that a system in which people freely buy and sell goods without government interference could be called an "artificial system" is if everything but living in a technology-less hunter-gatherer tribe is artificial.
Simonjester wrote: nope even hunting skill, the ability to make primitive weapons, fashion clothing from skins, the ability to gather more than you need for yourself, becomes capitalism the moment they barter or trade with each other, tough sell to call something "artificial" when it is one of the first results of thinking and tool use....
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8885
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Supplements

Post by Pointedstick »

Actually, perhaps we should use the term "free enterprise" to denote what we're talking about since "capitalism" is a term that has negative connotations to people like doodle.

The point is, people freely trading with one another is hardly an "artificial system."
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Supplements

Post by doodle »

Pointedstick wrote: Actually, perhaps we should use the term "free enterprise" to denote what we're talking about since "capitalism" is a term that has negative connotations to people like doodle.

The point is, people freely trading with one another is hardly an "artificial system."
I don't need to reinvent the wheel. This topic has been discussed at length by people much more qualified than me. http://www.governmentisgood.com/article ... 13&print=1

Government Rules Make Markets and Capitalism Possible

Markets, like governments, are very much social constructs. The market is a set of behaviors that is structured by rules, and many of the most important rules have been developed and enforced by government. Without these rules, our prized free-market economy would be a stunted and feeble version of what we see today. To see how this is the case, lets looks at these essential “rules”? – the vast infrastructure of laws and policies that make a modern capitalist economy possible.

•Limited Liability Laws. Capitalism requires capital – lots of it. But without limited liability laws, investors are unlikely to risk investing their money in businesses. In the 19th century, before the passing of laws that limited the liability of investors, anyone who put money into a business that then went under could be held liable for the debts of the company. They could have their personal assets seized and could be financially ruined. Needless to say, this discouraged investment. Without limited liability laws, the economy would not have access to the capital it needs to grow and prosper.1

•Property Rights. Without the right to own property and dispose of it as you wish, capitalism as we know it could not exist. These legal rights are created and protected by the government. Moreover, in the U.S., the federal courts have extended to corporations the same property rights given to citizens. Corporate property rights – one of the main legal instruments that insulate business from government power – can be created and maintained only by government.

•Law and Order. A market system cannot work well without a functioning criminal justice system. Otherwise, organized crime would easily take over large sectors of the business community. Extortion, bribery, kidnapping, and murder would become the reigning corporate model. Without the rule of law, our economy would resemble the “mafia capitalism”? that Russia has suffered from in its transition to capitalism.

•Bankruptcy Protection. Business is inherently risky and one of the largest risks is business failure, particularly during recessions and depressions. In the 19th century, before the creation of bankruptcy laws, business failures would usually saddle entrepreneurs with large and ongoing debts, making it impossible for them to make a fresh start and often putting them in debtors’ prison. Investors and creditors also often failed to get any of the money due to them. Bankruptcy laws protected otherwise healthy businesses that were temporarily short of funds. And these laws allowed entrepreneurs to be eventually freed from crushing debts. Along with limited liability, bankruptcy rules formed a crucial financial safety net for entrepreneurs. It is important to note, however, that bankruptcy laws were passed not simply out of concern or sympathy for failed entrepreneurs, but also as a way to lessen economic risk and therefore encourage more investment and economic growth.2

•A Stable Money Supply. Without reliable money, markets would be based primarily on barter and thus be extremely limited. In the U.S., before the Civil War, almost all paper money was issued by private banks – not the government. This was an unreliable and incredibly chaotic system. Sometimes merchants would not even accept certain currencies. It also meant there was no real control over the money supply – which has a crucial impact on inflation and economic growth. Widespread commerce and a stable economy both require a stable and dependable money system – one in which consumers and merchants have faith. This can only be provided and maintained by the federal government.

•Patents and Copyrights. Large portions of our economy would grind to a halt if the government did not grant patents and copyrights. Without this massive intervention into the free market, the drug, music, publishing, and software industries could not exist. Bill Gates likes to think of himself as a self-made man, but he would not be one of the richest men in the world if the government did not make it illegal for anyone but Microsoft to copy and sell Windows.

•Banking Regulation and Insurance. As we have seen recently, a capitalist economy depends heavily on stable banks to finance growing businesses. But banks are inherently vulnerable to “runs”? – where worried depositors all seek to take out their money at the same time. Banks cannot survive runs because they have loaned out most of the money deposited with them and therefore cannot pay it out to a large number of depositors at once. Before the passage of banking regulations and federal deposit insurance, banks regularly had runs and failed. The main reason that we had no disastrous runs on banks (and money market funds) during the financial panic of 2008 was that government was there to guarantee those deposits.

•Corporate Charters. Capitalism today is corporate capitalism. But the corporation itself is a creation of government. Corporations can come into being only through charters: the legal instruments by which state governments allow businesses to incorporate. These charters and state business laws define what a corporation is, how it is organized, how it is governed, how long it may exist, who has a say in decision making, the rights of stockholders, the extent of its liability, and so on. Most states also retain the right to revoke the charters of corporations that break the law or harm the public interest, though this power is seldom used these days.

•Commercial Transaction Laws. Businesses could not operate effectively without laws governing commercial transactions. Few would risk doing business on a wide scale unless there was some way of making and enforcing contracts. Who would sell goods if they couldn’t be sure they would be paid, and who would buy goods if they couldn’t be sure they would receive them? The Uniform Commercial Code is a set of legal rules that determines, among other things, what a valid contract is, how contracts can be enforced, and various remedies for fraud, default, etc. It is over 800 pages long and covers every aspect of commerce in great detail, including laws governing the sales of goods, payment methods, receipts, warrantees, titles, shipping of goods, storage of goods, how sales are financed, and the leasing of goods. It is the legal infrastructure that allows business to be conducted smoothly and reliably.

•International Trade Law. Global capitalism would be impossible without trade. Governments create the legal frameworks – the treaties and international trade laws – that facilitate and make this trade possible. “Free trade”? is a misnomer because it implies that it is international trade that exists free of any political framework. But this is hardly the case. The North American Free Trade Agreement, for instance, takes up two volumes and is over 900 pages long – covering such things as tariffs, customs, dumping, corporate and investor rights, intellectual property rights, financial services, government procurement, and dispute resolution procedures. It also establishes a secretariat, a commission, dispute panels, scientific review boards, eight industrial sector committees, and six working groups to oversee implementation of this agreement. It turns out that free trade requires a great deal of regulation.

•Enforcement of Laws. All of these rules and laws that facilitate business and markets have to be enforced, otherwise they are worthless. Just as international trade treaties require elaborate enforcement mechanisms, so do all our national laws that facilitate the business process. And this is no small effort. We and our governments spend billions of dollars every year to provide police to protect private property, courts to interpret and enforce contracts, and agencies to protect patents, oversee banks, and act as watch dogs in the stock and bond markets. It is revealing that most civil suits are not brought by individuals harassing corporations – as conservatives would have it – but by businesses suing other business. The courts are indispensable for resolving business disputes and thus ensuring the smooth operation of the economic system.

To see how just how essential these government contributions are to the workings of a free market system, you merely have to imagine what it would be like if these measures didn’t exist. Or if we didn’t enforce these laws. Imagine that investors were liable for all debts of a company, that there were no patents, copyrights, or property rights, that contracts couldn’t be enforced legally, that there was no official and stable money supply, and so on. In such a world, markets would be very limited, and economic growth severely stunted. It would hardly resemble the economic world we now live in.

Conservatives would like us to think that there can be a strict boundary between public and private in modern economies. But this is impossible. As the points above make clear, markets and capitalism are quasi-public entities – made possible by a myriad of government rules and laws that establish many of their basic inner workings. We may think of the “private market”? as existing separately from the public sphere, but it does not.
Last edited by doodle on Fri Dec 20, 2013 12:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. - Blaise Pascal
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8885
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Supplements

Post by Pointedstick »

Needless to say, doodle, I and others disagree very emphatically with a large number of those arguments. It's true that our present system is in many ways a creation of government, but I think you will find most libertarian-minded types agreeing with you that many of these acts of government systematically tilt the playing field in favor of the wealthy and powerful. We have a corpocratic system in which big government and big business work together to enrich each other. That's hardly what we have in mind when we envision a system of free exchange.

Many of those arguments are (IMHO) extremely flawed, especially the one about copyrights and patents, which I have extensive personal experience with. It's simply not true. There are many, many things that cannot by law be either copyrighted or patented--such as board game rules and fashion designs. The entire Android operating system is built on the open-source Linux operating system. Mac OS X and iOS are both built on the open-source UNIX operating system. Is there a lack of innovation in these fields? Did they "grind to a halt"? It's hogwash born of ignorance, plain and simple.
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Supplements

Post by doodle »

Pointedstick wrote: Needless to say, doodle, I and others disagree very emphatically with a large number of those arguments. It's true that our present system is in many ways a creation of government, but I think you will find most libertarian-minded types agreeing with you that many of these acts of government systematically tilt the playing field in favor of the wealthy and powerful. We have a corpocratic system in which big government and big business work together to enrich each other. That's hardly what we have in mind when we envision a system of free exchange.

Many of those arguments are (IMHO) extremely flawed, especially the one about copyrights and patents, which I have extensive personal experience with. It's simply not true. There are many, many things that cannot by law be either copyrighted or patented--such as board game rules and fashion designs. The entire Android operating system is built on the open-source Linux operating system. Mac OS X and iOS are both built on the open-source UNIX operating system. Is there a lack of innovation in these fields? Did they "grind to a halt"? It's hogwash born of ignorance, plain and simple.
I don't disagree with you, PS. I just don't think you can have it both ways. I don't believe an incredibly complex and large market economy, that is highly dependent on consistent and enforceable rule of law, and the amazing economies of scale that we enjoy today due to corporate structures are possible without a government.
All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. - Blaise Pascal
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8885
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Supplements

Post by Pointedstick »

doodle wrote: I don't disagree with you, PS. I just don't think you can have it both ways. I don't believe an incredibly complex and large market economy, that is highly dependent on consistent and enforceable rule of law, and the amazing economies of scale that we enjoy today due to corporate structures are possible without a government.
You may be right. But it might surprise you to learn that I'd agree with you that it might not be such a bad thing. Many of today's high-profile problems are a result of gigantic corporations and their government friends cooperating at the expense of the rest of us. Pollution, the zombie financial industry, the parasitic legal industry… I mean, practically everywhere you look, you find government/corporate collusion.

I mean, today's weapons of mass destruction wouldn't have been possible without the government, either. But is that really a good thing?
Human behavior is economic behavior. The particulars may vary, but competition for limited resources remains a constant.
- CEO Nwabudike Morgan
User avatar
doodle
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4658
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 2:17 pm

Re: Supplements

Post by doodle »

Pointedstick wrote:
doodle wrote: I don't disagree with you, PS. I just don't think you can have it both ways. I don't believe an incredibly complex and large market economy, that is highly dependent on consistent and enforceable rule of law, and the amazing economies of scale that we enjoy today due to corporate structures are possible without a government.
You may be right. But it might surprise you to learn that I'd agree with you that it might not be such a bad thing. Many of today's high-profile problems are a result of gigantic corporations and their government friends cooperating at the expense of the rest of us. Pollution, the zombie financial industry, the parasitic legal industry… I mean, practically everywhere you look, you find government/corporate collusion.

I mean, today's weapons of mass destruction wouldn't have been possible without the government, either. But is that really a good thing?
I don't claim to know what it best for mankind. Maybe we should have never transitioned from hunter gatherers to agriculture....in many respects this was the worst decision we ever made....but that is all water under the bridge now. There is no going back.

What irritates me is when people look at our advanced, sophisticated society and don't see that it is a symbiotic creation that is heavily reliant on the stability and rule of law that government provides...
All of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone. - Blaise Pascal
User avatar
Benko
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1900
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2011 9:40 am

Re: Supplements

Post by Benko »

doodle wrote: What irritates me is when people look at our advanced, sophisticated society and don't see that it is a symbiotic creation that is heavily reliant on the stability and rule of law that government provides...
I will agree with at least parts (perhaps large parts) of what you are getting at there, however
doodle wrote: I don't claim to know what it best for mankind.
One of the defining characteristics of many of today's "central planning worshippers"  is that they ARE SURE they know what is best for others and intend to impose it on them whether it is liked or not.  These are the people who IMHO need one way trips to Cuba ;-)
It was good being the party of Robin Hood. Until they morphed into the Sheriff of Nottingham
Post Reply