4 ms·

In case you haven't noticed, this has been how virtually all first-world states have operated for decades. This social democratic ideal has not worked out, but

In case you haven't noticed, this has been how virtually all first-world states have operated for decades. This social democratic ideal has not worked out, but has led to a dysfunctional corporate statism where mere "deregulation" (which is a misnomer, as most cases of deregulation have really been regulatory adjustments in an overall baroque framework that unsurprisingly lead to new pathological regulatory states - just because you cut some edges off the graph doesn't mean the nodes are going to stand still) can lead to catastrophe. This is an example of the state being entrusted to ensure smooth regulation, and failing miserably at their task. In fact, many banking panics and examples of financial fragility have originated from pathological financial regulations guided by desires of the state to subvert various public finance constraints. Authors like George Selgin, Kevin Dowd and Lawrence H. White have written on this subject.

roymurdock 11y ago
I'm not sure what you're advocating for - pure capitalism with no government oversight and regulation?
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  I'm advocating for actually getting acquainted with economic literature and not repeating moronic talking points about "redistributive and regulatory role of governments" that are filled with theoretical and empirical problems, and in any event are not a radical new idea but how it has always been to begin with. Whether it was anti-vagrancy and poor laws or the modern welfare state. Whether it was mercantilism or the state-guided capitalism of today.
  - roymurdock 11y ago
    I understand your frustration, but you are not going to win any support or convince anyone to read somewhat obscure economic literature by being caustic and attacking old ideas simply for being old. How would you structure society and how would this work in a more efficient manner than the government that we have now? If you a) define the problems and b) give me some tangible examples of how you/these authors think we should fix these problems I'm more than happy to read and think about them.
    - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
      Firstly, most common standards for gauging market failure and inefficiency are based on static, institution-less Paretian general equilibrium and/or social choice models that require interpersonal utility comparisons, among other things. The public choice and Virginia school of political economy have critiqued those. More broadly, the subject of dynamic market process has been explored by Roy Cordato, Gerald P O'Driscoll and Mario Rizzo (The Economics of Time and Ignorance), Israel Kirzner and other later Austrian School authors. I already listed you three authors about banking and finance. More broadly, we already live in the system that you advocate, and it does not work.
      - roymurdock 11y ago
        > More broadly, we already live in the system that you advocate, and it does not work. You still haven't made any specific argument as to why the system of balancing capitalism and socialism does not work, and could not continue to work without some rebalancing of the scales. Briefly, what is the alternative?

roymurdock 11y ago

I'm not sure what you're advocating for - pure capitalism with no government oversight and regulation?

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
I'm advocating for actually getting acquainted with economic literature and not repeating moronic talking points about "redistributive and regulatory role of governments" that are filled with theoretical and empirical problems, and in any event are not a radical new idea but how it has always been to begin with. Whether it was anti-vagrancy and poor laws or the modern welfare state. Whether it was mercantilism or the state-guided capitalism of today.
- roymurdock 11y ago
  I understand your frustration, but you are not going to win any support or convince anyone to read somewhat obscure economic literature by being caustic and attacking old ideas simply for being old. How would you structure society and how would this work in a more efficient manner than the government that we have now? If you a) define the problems and b) give me some tangible examples of how you/these authors think we should fix these problems I'm more than happy to read and think about them.
  - vezzy-fnord 11y ago
    Firstly, most common standards for gauging market failure and inefficiency are based on static, institution-less Paretian general equilibrium and/or social choice models that require interpersonal utility comparisons, among other things. The public choice and Virginia school of political economy have critiqued those. More broadly, the subject of dynamic market process has been explored by Roy Cordato, Gerald P O'Driscoll and Mario Rizzo (The Economics of Time and Ignorance), Israel Kirzner and other later Austrian School authors. I already listed you three authors about banking and finance. More broadly, we already live in the system that you advocate, and it does not work.
    - roymurdock 11y ago
      > More broadly, we already live in the system that you advocate, and it does not work. You still haven't made any specific argument as to why the system of balancing capitalism and socialism does not work, and could not continue to work without some rebalancing of the scales. Briefly, what is the alternative?