Why do marketfags seem to believe that any meddling with the economy betrays a lack of understanding of economics? Wouldn't understanding economics enable one to manipulate an economy more effectively?
Not if the economy works best with 0% meddling.
>>75262511
>manipulate the economy more effectively
Shut the fuck up commie
>>75262511
Are you trying to advertise crypto-jewing, provided you have a high understanding of jewing to begin with?
A market should be left alone, otherwise you create problems.
>>75262599
Yeah but this betrays a lack of perspective. Who does an unregulated market work best for? Certainly not everybody.
>>75262684
Yeah but leaving an economy alone also creates problems. You should bear in mind that what is and isn't a problem is fundamentally subjective.
>>75262511
Because every other system too complex for humans to fully understand does bad things to us when we try to manipulate it.
>>75263030
Not really. We don't fully understand the human body, not by a long shot, but this isn't a reason to not use doctors. Unless you're going to discontinue the use of basically all technology.
>>75262812
>Yeah but leaving an economy alone also creates problems.
..like?
>what is and isn't a problem is fundamentally subjective.
Don't think red numbers are subjective.
>>75262812
>Certainly not everybody
>Duh ebil capitalism shits on the little guy
Please go retard. These regulations and taxes I presume you are for to "even the wealth disparity" are the problems. They are barriers to new comers and they destroy competition. The only businesses that can remain sustainable and comply with new regulations and taxes are the ones already in place. It just leads to further consolidation. Liberals really have no clue. Subjected to such ridiculous propaganda and actually believe it.
>>75263668
Actually. The ones I like the most aren't directly about wealth disparity. I'm more a fan of quality control on things, like pharmaceutical manufacturing, or R&D for things the market just isn't interested in, like space travel, or publicly funded infrastructure projects, like a municipality offering Wi-Fi to their citizens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOQb7Y5QVO8
Oh boy socialism!
if marketfags are against centralized, top-down management of a country via government, then how can they support centralized, top-down management of entire industries via monopoly?
>>75262511
theres no such thing as a good manipulation of the free market
>>75264407
We wouldn't see monopoly if there weren't these asinine regulations and taxes
>>75262511
>stalin ripping a cone
simple humor is the best. saved
>>75262511
Rational constructivism. Aka, you think you can control outcomes. More often than not, you can't because you don't have all the necessary information to make daily plans like say an individual or firm would.
Example: Department of Education has had a 500% increase in its budget and test scores for nig nogs still have gone down.
>>75262511
You get thee back to plebbit or I'll box your ears
>>75264992
>I found an example where it didn't work
Whelp, looks like we can't touch that anymore. Also, there were early attempts at the aeroplane that didn't work. Gg no re wright brothers
>>75262511
The second sentence is true.
However
The first sentence doesn't relate to the second.
The economy IS being manipulated by people who "understand" the economy.
> They do it for profit.
>>75264992
This is exactly right. Biases shouldn't be acted upon in the market because people who assume they can make things better often times destroy the very thing they're trying to improve. Take the $15 minimum wage. All it did was destroy small businesses and increase automation. Cumulatively it destroyed jobs.
>>75265360
>Implying automation is a bad thing
Luddite plz
>>75262511
Because theoretical economics works differently from real life. As a free market liberal, I recognize many of the Keynesian assertions particularly having to do with SRAS are completely true. However, these theories on paper don't take into account the difficulties involved with directly interfering, especially wealth redistribution. Creating a bureaucratic infrastructure wastes money, how do you determine who to give money to, what standards renders you deserving of receiving transfers.
>>75265427
I did not mean to imply that automation was bad. I was trying to convey that pushing market manipulation based on raw emotion produces unforeseen consequences and can backfire spectacularly. As in, you think that you are doubling your wage but in reality you're completely destroying sections of the economy and replacing them with sections that are less friendly to you.
>>75262511
Your position relies entirely upon the person doing the meddling being a pure being who puts the good of all before himself given absolute power. Nobody vying for political power is such a man. You appear to believe that government is a benevolent God. Government is not a benevolent God, but a self-serving devil that must be kept in check.
>>75265848
>>75262511
You also have to take into account that in the assumption filled supply and demand graphs it doesn't matter whose spending the money or where it's going, while it real life that makes all the difference. When examining a SRAS graph the only thing it tells you is the quantity sold and the price, while its important to know what the government is actually spending the money on. For example, in the case of China, the government has accumulated huge debt to find infrastructure. While it increases GDP, it didn't actually help anything because the Chinese is out of touch with the demands of the organic economy. China is now famous for ghost cities with no occupants due to subsidized building. While on a graph it would look like a success, in reality it's not actually helping anybody.
>>75264407
Monopolies come to exist by gaming political systems via bribes and regulations they can exploit to prevent competition.
>>75266546
That's what commiefags fail to notice. Monopolies always use market manipulation to maintain themselves.
>>75262812
This is true. Any policy choice or lack of a interfering policy creates winners and losers. However, with most interventionist policies, the consequences are greater than the benefits. While rent control awards some lucky people with lower rent, you force other people out onto the street by limiting supply. This is the reason landlords set unprofitable apartment buildings on fire in New York.
>>75263997
You have a good heart but here's the problem. It's not your job or place to decide for other people what cost and quality of product they will pay money for. If u want to save money and buy a McDonalds cheeseburger instead of a Waldorf Astoria steak, than that's a fundamental freedom just as important as freedom of speech. It's also not true that the free market isn't interested in space, Richard Branson is heavily investing. But that's not even the point. When the government decides something and makes something artificially important rather than corresponding to the free market, it creates a situation in which the cost of things is more than the benefit conferred. I'll refer you to government subsidy graphs that show this.
>>75262511
You don't get it. Libertarianism is a RELIGION, not a philosophy. It's literally a cult and it's beliefs are faith-based, not fact based. You have to start with the a priori belief that the market is desirable to begin with (it's not) and that it's more important to seek profit than be concerned with the wellbeing of life itself (it's not). Libertarians can't even address these points and when then do, through circular reasoning, they just claim again that the market is the best way to run things, when it isn't and has been proven to not be for literally centuries.
>>75265427
That's not what he was saying. Strawman inc. He' saying correctly that the minimum wage made humans more expensive than investing massive funds into a new line of robots to replace them. That's the severity of the fuck up that was committed. People should take this view to more things. When most people look at outsourcing, they frown on the corporations for anti-american practices. However, the truth of the situation is that it is a failure on our part. The United States has made it so expensive and overly regulated to do business,(eg. minimum wage, corporate taxes, income taxes, worker's right laws. etc) in the United States that it would be more profitable to do everything that comes along with moving to a different country rather than stay here in a far more civilized and intelligent country to conduct production.
>>75267249
>It's not your job or place to decide for other people what cost and quality of product they will pay money for.
Oh look, yet another faith-based view with no backing.
Why isn't it? You have to prove that the market is the best determiner of what is best. And you can't, because it's not. You cockgobblers make the mistake of believing that freedom is a universal good. It's not either. Too much freedom is chaos. And if you honestly believe that freedom is always good - remove all laws and watch what happens.
>>75262511
Read Hayek.
>>75262511
Yes, but information economics suggests, that a decentralised system of agents is best suited to adjust for stachastical shocks, which leads to the conclusion, that an economy ruled by one or few agents is more likely to be overwhelmed by unexpected events.
This means, that market economies are more stable.
>>75268130
You've got it backwards. He's saying that he has the right to do this, and I'm saying that maybe he doesn't. The burden of proof is on him; I'm not the one with the faith-based view.
>You have to prove that the market is the best determiner of what is best. And you can't, because it's not.
I think you misunderstand the meaning of "best"
the definition you are using implies that the "best" is the perfect product that will never harm anybody and perfectly fulfills all functions. You're probably thinking x product had x effect and screwed over this person, for example the ford pinto. However, the real "best" product is the one that the consumer considers his money worth it to buy in his specific circumstances. Even if there are drawbacks, consumer choice outweighs that. Only from an elitist view where its the best or nothing would say that people can never make or buy these products.
>>75267873
You are clearly not white.
>>75268750
how do you prevent well disguised propaganda corporations influencing consumer opinion on what is "worthy of their money"?
How Jew-proof is the free market?
>>75268130
Also I didn't say that I don't believe in laws, or that total freedom is the best. Complete freedom is actually less than slightly limited freedom, because complete freedom would allow someone to limit the freedom of others: "my freedom to move my fist must be limited by the proximity of your chin." You're making a lot of assumptions and ascribing to me beliefs that i don't have.
>>75268432
Actually, don't. Austrian economics has routinely failed in every effort to institute them. And after every failed effort its acolytes blame the fed, banks, government, jews etc. for why it did not work rather then admitting that Hayek was basically wrong about everything when it came to how the economy works in practice.
>>75262511
It's because half the people on /pol/ are 2nd year business students with C averages and the other half are anime weeaboo autistics who have only read "Art of the Deal."
NEVER come to /pol/ for reasoned academic discussion.
>>75267873
But it existed for centuries and continues to do so. Kind of reminds of the argument statists always use, when they defend the state agianst libertarians/ancap faggots. Wich is it now? Does existence proof some kind of validity or should it be changed?
>>75268750
>He's saying that he has the right to do this, and I'm saying that maybe he doesn't
And I'm saying rights are fantasies and you're a fucking idiot.
>I think you misunderstand the meaning of "best"
Oh no I understand it fine. I just realize your view is religious in nature, and therefore not worth bothering with taking seriously. You religiously believe profit is more important than life. Which is an objectively wrong idea and leads to widespread disaster.
>is the perfect product that will never harm anybody and perfectly fulfills all functions
Look at this brain cancer. You literally can't even think outside of economic terms. There is more to life than the movement of currency.
>consumer choice outweighs that
In your dumbass opinion. The problem with "consumer choice" are twofold 1: it's never actually voluntary - how Walmart became a monopoly by undercutting every other store's prices during a time of economic stress is the perfect example of this and 2: most people are fucking retards and any time you submit to the masses, you inevitably destroy everything, kind of like with modernity. Capitalism means Michael Vick makes many times more money than a physicist or agrarian. And it's even worse now because we stand on the brink of literal physical immortality. And who will have access to it? The Nikola Teslas of our time? Nope. Nicki Minaj and Justin Bieber. Literally immortal pop stars, while actually useful people die in the gutter. Capitalism, everyone. Because the market doesn't give two shits whats best for humanity or the planet for that matter. It only cares about what people WANT and what most people want is seriously stupid fucking shit. Capitalism is the perfect economic system if your goal is to end the human species by turning it into a time bomb that nukes the environment when it goes off.
>>75269015
I doubt this a serious reply especially considering you're from serbia but I'll bite anyway. It sounds like you're making an assumption that theres something intrinsically wrong with advertising. I don't necessarily think that's true. Information is important in a free economy.
>>75269103
>Complete freedom is actually less than slightly limited freedom, because complete freedom would allow someone to limit the freedom of others:
Yes but you're still acting fucking retarded because the only reason you don't want total anarchy is because you're STILL obsessed with freedom. Freedom is NOT inherently good. This is a LITERALLY RELIGIOUS belief. Not a fact-backed one. Sometimes people really need to be told what the fuck to do. They can't just eat candy until they die of malnutrition and diabetes. But if you let them have their way, that's what they'll do. Why do you think Americans are so disgustingly unhealthy and every capitalist society is moving in that direction?
>You're making a lot of assumptions
Oh boy look at the pot calling the supernova black.
>>75269404
>But it existed for centuries and continues to do so.
Do you mean capitalism? I don't know if you realize this or not, but history is basically the story of retards repeating the same mistakes endlessly to serve their own selfish, short-sighted desires instead of doing what is best for their people and the planet.
Once again, libertarianism is nothing more than a cult with a lot of a priori false beliefs that can be proven erroneous in seconds. But that doesn't matter because you can't convert the faithful with logic or facts. That's why christians are so god damned retarded that some of them still can't grasp the germ theory of medicine or evolution.
>>75262511
Because we were indoctrinated to believe liberty is always gud and nobody is allowed to disagree
>>75269197
Where was Austrian economics tried?
>>75269458
>rights are fantasies
maybe in your pseudo-profundic half-ass edgy mind "we all fundamentally don't matter", *hits blunt*, but we live in a country that has laws where rights are relevant.
>You religiously believe profit is more important than life
I believe that personal choice is most important, I never said that everybody should only do things in the name of profit.
>is the perfect product that will never harm anybody and perfectly fulfills all functions
i was using this satyrically sum up what I expect your expectations of a product is, but you're using it to criticize me...You still didn't answer that if consumers shouldn't have the right to pick a product, than what determines what that product should be
>in your dumbass opinion
of course its my opinion, you're talking to me, this is a meaningless statement that people bad at arguing use
>bad shit of the economy, michael vick etc.
I'll admit this is a drawback, the free market is determined by whatever people want, but that's not the only thing to consider. After you point out a flaw, you have to make sure that government intervention will actually make those things better. What would be the ramifications of a society where we can ban artists because we consider them to be frivolous. Or, forcibly creating a society where we only think completely practically and never have any fun?
>>75268841
>conform to my Jewish doctrine or you're not white
>>75269783
Capitalism =anything selfishly done ever
>>75269488
advertisement should be limited to letting consumers know the commodity exists and it's specifications
everything else is literally cancerous psychological "tricks" and kitsch
>>75271050
I can actually agree with that. Not a bad point Serb bro.
>>75271050
You're yalking to me on mobile that's why the tag is different. It's the same person you replied to.
>>75270675
Selfishness is an undesirable trait.
>>75269928
This. It's literally just this and nothing more than that. The propaganda of the age says muh freedumb so everyone falls in line without questioning the actual VALUE of freedom.
>>75270438
>maybe in your pseudo-profundic half-ass edgy mind
No. Rights are fantasies. Here's an experiment. Define "right".
>I believe that personal choice is most important
And you're objectively wrong. And it's okay to be. Making mistakes is how you learn. But you have to be open to refining your stance before you can, and slavery to doctrine prevents that.
>I never said that everybody should only do things in the name of profit.
You don't have to. It's part of the religious creed.
>You still didn't answer that if consumers shouldn't have the right to pick a product, than what determines what that product should be
What is best for individuals and society and on a more extended view what is best for all life. For example, fast food should be outlawed and all its CEOs should be gutted in public. In capitalism, however, what we do is overtax the medical system with lifestyle illnesses, then privatize the entire thing so nobody can ever pay for their medical treatment. America has the highest cost of healthcare of any nation on Earth because of capitalist policies. By the same token it doesn't even rank in the top 10 for medical care quality and people literally leave the country to get medical treatment and the entire trip, boarding and procedure cost less than just the procedure in America and the quality is equal or superior. That's capitalism. It's shit.
>of course its my opinion, you're talking to me, this is a meaningless statement that people bad at arguing use
The statement serves as a reminder that it is only your bullshit opinion and it has nothing to do with facts or reality.
>>75271234
>>75271353
i'm slovenian reeeeeeeeeeee
>>75271521
in a truly free market, i assume nobody would tell medical institutions what or who to "cure".
you'd have competing medical systems, maybe one would only help obese people and one only for serious diseases
>>75270438
>I'll admit this is a drawback
That's mighty unusual of a capitalist. But what you fail to realize is that this is the norm for capitalism, not the exception. This is LITERALLY all fucking capitalism does: serve wants instead of needs, give shiny toys instead of survival strategies, kill people and nature with vulgar stupid shit instead of serving life. The abuses of the system are not exceptions, they are intrinsic to it.
>After you point out a flaw, you have to make sure that government intervention will actually make those things better
And it OVERWHELMINGLY has. If you don't believe me, do some cursory study of what capitalism was like in the 1800s. It never ceases to amuse me how little libertarians speak of the age in which nearly everything they want was already in place, and how society fought long and hard to GET RID OF IT.
>What would be the ramifications of a society where we can ban artists because we consider them to be frivolous.
Literally Nazi Germany: the greatest civilization in recent history. You can go ahead and thank them any time for space travel, socialized medicine and environmentalism. Oh wait, you're American, so you can't for the last two.
>Or, forcibly creating a society where we only think completely practically and never have any fun?
But that wouldn't serve society. And even retarded leaders understand that.
>>75271521
>This. It's literally just this and nothing more than that.
I know, right? The only way to stomach this foolishness is to conclude that such a gullible bunch doesn't deserve any better.
>>75272073
We have totally free market societies. They're called slums.
>>75272414
whoa bro why would you say something if it isn't an argument?
>>75272645
How isn't it? Literally the only free market societies which have ever existed are slums within another society. Period. Anything more sophisticated always develops governments to control the chaos.
>our only choices are stalinism, Keynesianism, and neoliberalism
Market Socialism is the only logical midterm solution.
>>75270186
Austrian economics isn't based on empirical evidence. Anyone who tries it is a dumbass.
>>75272759
even those societies are regulated at least on a psychological level by the laws of the state, keeping them reserved to low intelligence people and misfits.
>>75272402
When you look at most of the proponents of free markets what you find is that most of them are parasites who don't live by the market. They either live on public benefits like Ayn Rand or with their parents paying for nothing in an upper middle class suburb. You can't interact with the world in a serious way and still support free market capitalism. And if you have any intelligence, eventually you realize capitalism is THE problem. It never fails to amaze me how often libertarians and their ilk shit-talk government as something sinister that doesn't have people's best interests at heart, then praise a system that impoverishes countries and turns them third world so that less than 1% of the population can have the net worth of small countries - somehow this is benevolence we should all embrace.
>>75273132
No they're not. Slums are mostly lawless hellholes that don't get policed. What DOES happen, however, are exactly the kinds of things libertarians would want: paying people for protection, gangs controlling supply and demand, etc. It's all privatized. And shit.
>>75273052
austrian business cycle theory is totally debunked by all available evidence. austrian theory is also trash. no one takes it seriously at all.
muh free market = mass immigration for low wages, globalized trade, no jobs, feminism. all our problems now are the result of reagan-thatcher style market worship.
>>75271521
>rights
I'm not talking about a philosophical definition, the basic fact is that we live In a country that allows us or doesn't allow us to do things.
>personal choice is wrong
What "objectively" makes personal choice wrong. Are you talking about the time Romania outlawed contraception and abortion resulting in an orphan crises, or the time communist China collectivized all farmers, causing a famine.
>what is best for society determines things
How do you know what is best for society. You also seem to know my opinions by defining for me what I believe even though I don't actually believe profit is the most important thing. You must be some perfect supernatural being that knows the right answer to questions that have no completely correct answer. You seem to think that you're something straight out of doestevskys crime and punishments, that you're so above everybody here that it's barely worth arguing with us. I hope you have the same revelation radkolnikov had
>>75273419
literally this
>>75273419
>>75273256
do you really think a free market society of educated, high iq people would turn to a hellhole just like a slum?
>>75273712
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2011/08/12/apocalyptic_crisis_budgeting.html
"During the Reagan era, a friend and former colleague, a professor of American history, was invited to the deliberations of a Washington think-tank that provided policy direction for the Republican Party. As they discussed growing the debt and increasing the deficit, he was flabbergasted: “Are you not the party of balanced budgets and debt elimination?” The reply was unequivocal, “Our goal is to grow the deficit as much as possible in order to create political space to eliminate government-funded programming. Until then, we want high deficits while lobbying for a balanced budget — and promoting social program cuts as the only solution."
>>75273788
Prove that those high IQ people exist in a condensed population and we'll talk. Because right now the majority of every nation is full retard.
Most of these arguments against capitalism and libertarianism don't actually attack those systems but attack what the poster sees the system as. Can no one here create or debunk a premise? You all seem like you masturbate a lot
>>75274921
Literally a christian apologetics-tier argument. Your fantasy of the magic capitalism represents is not an objective view of the system in the first place, so you reject realistic criticisms of it. You're a faggot. Kill yourself. Q.E.D.
>>75274921
If your system does not protect the nation and the landscape (plants and animals included) from harm, your system is worthless and shit.
>>75274209
Cities are usually regions with higher iq, suburbs and the city centre in particular.
At least in my country, i don't know what it is in your nigger infested towns
>>75275537
You fucking dumb monkey. The high point of the bell curve is always tiny without eugenics. Letting the masses control anything is national suicide.
>>75275398
in a libertarian system, what is stopping you from profiting of providing green and enviromental services?
and i imagine boycotting is much more effective if you have a problem with some business that exploits animals and nature
>>75275760
you think the people that are incompetent now would suddenly turn to head CEOs even in a free market/libertarianism?
lmao the plebs would stay plebs, so i doubt much would change. Just provide them with work and everyone will profit
>>75262511
I saw this exact post yesterday.
>>75276137
Your English is fucking awful so I can barely understand what you're saying.
>>75276460
They'd be free to try, but
why do you think these "uneducated masses" would end up controlling anything?
