trickle up poverty

So then there is no free market and never has been?

Confusing. How do you explain supply and demand altering prices compared regulated sectors.

I already know about cartels and the like manipulating markets but are you saying it goes deeper than the superficial market we can observe?

 

Market forces operate, but they operate within a world of regulation (with that regulation required for capitalism, given its tendency towards crisis, to survive)

The very origins of modern capitalism reflect force. That continues today with 'industrial policy' in developing economies typically about coercing a stable environment capable of allowing the firm to appear and grow.

 

So considering these things how can one believe that there is anything that they can do to reach a high level of success? The markets are controlled and outside forces capitalize on the entrepreneurial successes in the limited free market; many times pushing the businesses out of existence or, in the case of foreign powers, stealing patents and rights.

These foreign powers then cut quality and prices and drive the originator under. There seems to be an issue where not only are markets controlled and manipulated but also are above the laws. WTO wont touch China for trade violations and market manipulation and the US seems just as impotent.

Considering this would you agree that killing the free market in some respects is a good thing and could allow internal market forces to thrive?

 

There's still some outcome delivered by merit. We just have to realise that exchange and conflict are natural aspects of capitalism

The free market cannot exist. However, deliberately restricting market forces can be good. We see that with the infant industry hypothesis (irrelevant to mature economies though)

 

I am not the one who has been duped into thinking that managed markets or market socialism can't be thoroughly corrupted.

You just happen to enjoy some privilege thrown your way by the bureaucrats, and are part of the corrupting process.

 

and can become a corrupted process that works against good.

 

Sometimes you do make me laugh.

Crikey, probably the first time you made a correct reference to capitalism

That market socialism can be easily integrated into the Austrian school illustrates a little lack of insight on your part!

 

psychotics do tend to laugh a lot

corrupted politicians cannot be easily removed from managed markets.

Your argument that something cannot exist because the state will use authoritarian power to keep it from existing is stupid.

How will this same state create good from an un-free market if it can't stop itself from corrupting a free one ?

 

Influence costs go hand in hand with capitalism. One would have to be cretinous in the utopian stakes to suggest otherwise

My argument is based on economic history and also macroeconomic reality. Aspects that you won't be interested in.

Free markets have never existed and won't exist in capitalism. Its an obvious point, making your question nonsensical

 

Yet you keep blaming things on the "free market".
Thanks for repeating what I already told you. Free markets did not cause our problem.

You lose again.

 

Stop making stuff up, its a tiresome tactic. I refer to the folly of free market economics, an economic school of thought that delivered the coercion of neo-liberalism

 

Free market economics has nothing to do with the granting of government privilege. What individuals in power do has nothing to do with free market economics. Using the words "free" and "market" to describe our corporatist system is retarded.

 

Such naivety ensured neo-liberalism went unchallenged, given us global crisis and inefficiently high unemployment in developing and developed countries alike

Thinking free markets are possible in capitalisn couild, in your oh so eloquent words, be described as retarded. However, it didn't hinder the school from coercing an undeirable result that openly assaulted individualism

 

corrupt individuals in government ensured the problems. Like individuals exist everywhere and will corrupt any system for personal gain. Retarded individuals, hell bent on receiving free stuff from government, and who believe the government can and should manage economies, provide the grease that makes it happen.

Hey genius, a "school" is an abstraction. An individual is concrete, and only an individual in government can grant privilege. Thinking that the same levels of corruption will not dominate any managed system you believe you are able to create, is cute. Your system has been forged by the same bunch of international financiers that dominates ours. Thinking that you will create managed markets that work for the good of the people, while your politicians bow to the same bankers that the US and the rest of europe bow to, is more than retarded.

 

Neo-liberalism, through the hegemony of the financial class, inflames opportunistic behaviour. Influence costs go hand in hand with 'free market economics'. Its an aspect ignored by the utopians

Such innocence of political economy and the influence economics- for good or bad- has on individual behaviour.

 

Wait let me ask: Which came first the chicken or the egg?

I have recently come to believe that this is a directed course of action. Not necessarily a conspiracy but more of a drawn out process that benefited those in control.

I mean the investment funds (401k, IRA........) alone was full of blind investors who sold themselves out (yeah I did it as well) for promised gains. We would have been better off @ 3% compounded over 30 years.

So anyway did the people not jump on these things believing false promises?

I had a point and lost it (I have a bad cold so excuse me) and if it can be picked up by someone I would appreciate it.

 

ascribing human characteristics to an abstract school of thought is the stuff fairy tales are made of. The state of being human inflames opportunistic behavior.

Influence costs go hand in hand with organizations comprised of human beings, and aspect ignored by whores beholden to government distributions.

 

You do struggle! I referred to how it enabled the hegemony of the financial class.

Influence costs are the result of asymmetric information and further enabled through hierarchy. Neo-liberalism merely inflamed them further.

 

schools of thought cannot enable anything. Government privilege does.

odd that you would talk about influence costs.

Isn't it your firm that owes its existence to the transfer of public wealth into its coffers, either directly from government contract or by its ability to influence government to extend privilege to your clients' firms ? Your mere existence is an influence cost, flaming asymmetric information .

Even as you rail against the corruption of the corporatists you so wittingly refer to as neo-liberals, you are one of them.

 

There's no debate in it. Neoliberalism, following the free market economics folly, allowed the financial class to run amok. I know you want to pretend otherwise, given you've perhaps been told to what to think by the opportunistic. However, you can still try and understand economic relaity

My firm exists because of entrepreneurship.

You're not making sense. Perhaps you think that helps your 'argument'?

 

your firm makes its living obtaining privilege for it's clients, facilitating the running amok of the financial class.

You are nothing but one of them, cashing in while you can.

Your pretense of hating the basis of your existence is nice theatre however.

 

Your pretending is becoming tiresome. I facilitate entrepreneurship. SMEs aren't privilege machines

I can appreciate your need to play pretend. Being duped to allow this coercion can't be nice

 

I have to agree with the squid. You present things in such a way that the only way to described them is "Blatant lies and misinformation" and use them for your advantage. Your logic defies common sense and discounts many studies that contradict you views.

Do you even care about anything or are you simply after the quick buck?

 

you facilitate the transfer of government privilege and taxpayer wealth to your SME clients.
Your livelihood is completely dependent upon your ability to influence government

 

That is a lie. I facilitate entrepreneurship. That you're so prepared to play make believe only advertises how out of touch your argument really is

Its based on making profit through market forces. Deep down you hate the likes of us as we are what allows the market to achieve its wonders. Your utopianism is alien to capitalism's reality