4 ms·
Then there's, you know, "capitalism in actual practice". Which is what the Dude above was referring to.
by kafkaesq 9y ago
Then there's, you know, "capitalism in actual practice".
Which is what the Dude above was referring to.
- humanrebar 9y agoAs long as we don't confuse what we have right now (corrupt cronyism, corporatism, blatant vertical monopolies, blatant government-backed monopsonies, etc.) with an actual free market.
- kafkaesq 9y agoYep, it's best not to confuse reality with pipe dreams, generally.
- humanrebar 9y agoI'm not sure what way that sarcasm is cutting. I'll say the "design the problem away" impulse is partly what causes corporatism and monopolies. For example, regulatory capture in which the regulated industries more or less control the regulators. So I'll say the regulate-the-problem-away impulse is a pipe dream in the long run.
- kafkaesq 9y agoSo I'll say the regulate-the-problem-away impulse is a pipe dream in the long run. I'll call it "the lesser of nightmares". Being as we've seen where "just let property owners do whatever they want" has lead us to in the past.
- Danihan 9y agoWhere's that?
- kafkaesq 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnstown_Flood https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnstown_Flood
- Danihan 9y agoAnd so now we have strict liability law. Considering that, I don't believe this case, really justifies your (apparent) paranoia against the free market.
- kafkaesq 9y agoIt isn't paranoia when the entire history of the "free market" demonstrates that... (not all, but a far to high proportion of) these entities pretty much will screw over everyone and everything they can, in exchange an extra buck or too -- unless very rigorously constrained from doing otherwise. Or that is to say, "regulated".
- jononor 9y agoHowever "look the other way" isn't a very viable strategy either, it can also easily end up with corporate abuse. So what to do?
- Bakary 9y agoAren't those the natural consequences and evolutions of a truly free market?