4 ms·

This was always my understanding. I am a free market proponent, but a Adam Smith style free market proponent. In that I believe in a market that is actually fre

This was always my understanding. I am a free market proponent, but a Adam Smith style free market proponent. In that I believe in a market that is actually free, not one with thickets of patents, generous subsidies for corporations, and bailouts while all at the same time a laissez-faire stance on workers rights. You don't get to scream free market while cutting wages and then cry for regulation because a union committed an "illegal strike", or an important worker failed to give you 2 weeks notice and is headed to your direct competitor with knowledge of "your clients". Nobody owns a worker or client in a true free market system. I've always thought the problem with the major economic systems isn't that either of them is inherently flawed, just that they haven't really even been implemented in a large enough scale for any decent period of time. In America we pay socialist taxes and get capitalist benefits, that's the problem. We have to pick one and commit to it.

edblarney 10y ago
Regulations and taxation are essential. There used to be a 'free market' it was called 'feudalism'. Not quite, but almost. If you believe in 'Adam Smith' then you understand under a totally free system, one person would end up with all the wealth. Adam Smith was not a libertarian, or a 'laissez faire' kind of dude. He was an Ethicist and heavy duty Christian and to him capitalism was a moral issue. Unlike the 'Chicago School' and Libertarian types who really state that corps exist for the shareholders, that's it, end of story. As noted above, Smith invented progressive taxation. Get this - do you know what Smith said the #1 quality of a CEO is? Get this: 'Benevolence' Not something you'd hear too often in America. Onerous regulation is obviously a problem, and wasted taxation inefficient government is also a problem. But there's no doubt they have to exist. There's a 99.9% chance you'd be a serf were there to be a truly free and open, 'laissez faire' market. You wouldn't even have a chance at going to a good Uni. You know Trump's son-in-law, Kushner? He only got into Harvard after his parents gave $2.5M to the school. Maybe 1/3 Harvard students buy they way in. In a totally capitalist system, 100% of top spots would be 'bought' - industrialists want to ensure their legacy, and that their kids get into the top schools, and that would guarantee the longevity of their Empire. Anyhow, that taxes can be too high and spent inefficiently does not mean they should not exit.

edblarney 10y ago

Regulations and taxation are essential. There used to be a 'free market' it was called 'feudalism'. Not quite, but almost. If you believe in 'Adam Smith' then you understand under a totally free system, one person would end up with all the wealth. Adam Smith was not a libertarian, or a 'laissez faire' kind of dude. He was an Ethicist and heavy duty Christian and to him capitalism was a moral issue. Unlike the 'Chicago School' and Libertarian types who really state that corps exist for the shareholders, that's it, end of story. As noted above, Smith invented progressive taxation. Get this - do you know what Smith said the #1 quality of a CEO is? Get this: 'Benevolence' Not something you'd hear too often in America. Onerous regulation is obviously a problem, and wasted taxation inefficient government is also a problem. But there's no doubt they have to exist. There's a 99.9% chance you'd be a serf were there to be a truly free and open, 'laissez faire' market. You wouldn't even have a chance at going to a good Uni. You know Trump's son-in-law, Kushner? He only got into Harvard after his parents gave $2.5M to the school. Maybe 1/3 Harvard students buy they way in. In a totally capitalist system, 100% of top spots would be 'bought' - industrialists want to ensure their legacy, and that their kids get into the top schools, and that would guarantee the longevity of their Empire. Anyhow, that taxes can be too high and spent inefficiently does not mean they should not exit.