3 ms·

Monopolies are legitimately debatable topic for government intervention. However what is the reason governments should be involved in imperfect information or

Monopolies are legitimately debatable topic for government intervention. However what is the reason governments should be involved in imperfect information or transaction costs? Please provide specific market failures. Additionally creationists is the perfect analogy for collectivists, socialist and marxists, their ideas require magic fairy dust to have any chance of working.

notahacker 3y ago
Government isn't involved in imperfect information or transaction costs: responsibility for those failures of the market delivering suboptimal results lie entirely with the market participants. Obvious examples include the highly profitable sale of products that avoid the R&D overhead and additional manufacturing expense to actually do what they claim to do, and the inability of various disparate individuals each receiving small negative side effects to their health to coordinate to stop a local polluter even if a tort system for restitution (a government intervention!) actually exists. Creationism is also the perfect analogy for people who either are ignorant of or deny basically anything past the first page of an economics textbook in favour of the dogma that if markets fail to deliver optimal results it must be the fault of state intervention. Much like Marxism, the economics of Mises needs a lot of fairy dust
- alchemist1e9 3y ago
  It’s always so confusing when anti-markets debaters bring up pollution and product safety, because it’s like the only thing libertarians actually agree with them on. We absolutely believe the primary role of the government is to protect shared rights like the environment and health of products sold. What libertarian capitalist don’t want is redistribution and confiscation.
  - notahacker 3y ago
    It's even more confusing when libertarians decide a few days after insisting that there was no such thing as a market failure that the canonical examples of market failures are actually something they strongly believe the government must step in to regulate because the market can't do it... (I imagine the libertarians campaigning to abolish government involvement in product and environmental regulation would also be confused by the insistence they absolutely believe that the role of the government is to protect the environment and regulate products. Next minute you'll be telling me poor people deserve medical treatment!)

notahacker 3y ago

Government isn't involved in imperfect information or transaction costs: responsibility for those failures of the market delivering suboptimal results lie entirely with the market participants. Obvious examples include the highly profitable sale of products that avoid the R&D overhead and additional manufacturing expense to actually do what they claim to do, and the inability of various disparate individuals each receiving small negative side effects to their health to coordinate to stop a local polluter even if a tort system for restitution (a government intervention!) actually exists. Creationism is also the perfect analogy for people who either are ignorant of or deny basically anything past the first page of an economics textbook in favour of the dogma that if markets fail to deliver optimal results it must be the fault of state intervention. Much like Marxism, the economics of Mises needs a lot of fairy dust

alchemist1e9 3y ago
It’s always so confusing when anti-markets debaters bring up pollution and product safety, because it’s like the only thing libertarians actually agree with them on. We absolutely believe the primary role of the government is to protect shared rights like the environment and health of products sold. What libertarian capitalist don’t want is redistribution and confiscation.
- notahacker 3y ago
  It's even more confusing when libertarians decide a few days after insisting that there was no such thing as a market failure that the canonical examples of market failures are actually something they strongly believe the government must step in to regulate because the market can't do it... (I imagine the libertarians campaigning to abolish government involvement in product and environmental regulation would also be confused by the insistence they absolutely believe that the role of the government is to protect the environment and regulate products. Next minute you'll be telling me poor people deserve medical treatment!)