3 ms·

> While most countries have strong protections against insider trading, historical evidence suggests that efficient economies do not need such regulations What

> While most countries have strong protections against insider trading, historical evidence suggests that efficient economies do not need such regulations What historical evidence are they looking at? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecora_Commission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecora_Commission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_H._Wiggin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_H._Wiggin On a tangent, I really loath Cato's hand-wavy libertarian claims pieced together with weak arguments in their writing pieces.

zpeti 2y ago
> I really loath Cato's hand-wavy libertarian claims pieced together with weak arguments in their writing pieces. There's very few actual libertarian voices anymore, so I think just for sparking conversation it's good. Whether you are left or right, or even western or eastern, conservative or liberal, in 2024 there is basically agreement that government needs to fix things and government should have more control. Bureaucracy is increasing everywhere. Everyone is doing deficit spending. There's almost no one mainstream that is actually advocating for less government. Dems in the US might accuse the republicans of wanting less, but I find it hard to find evidence republicans have done any reduction in government since Reagan, and even he did quite little.
- pknomad 2y ago
  For me it wasn't so much about libertarian claims but about Cato's style of writing. Their written discourse is so lazy and highly disingenuous to the point it becomes offensive. There are parts where I think libertarianism makes sense but financial control isn't one of them. > in 2024 there is basically agreement that government needs to fix things and government should have more control. Agreed. I think there needs to be a better control of who controls the government though.
- UncleMeat 2y ago
  Cato-style libertarianism (massive deregulation, fire the federal government, increases in corporate power) is a core principle of the GOP's Vice Presidential candidate. Trump has further discussed the possibility of mass firings of the federal bureaucracy. Is that not mainstream? We don't need further advocates for bad policy just for the sake of it.
  - zpeti 2y ago
    How is reducing the government “bad policy”? Clearly there are bad ways to do it, and it’s risky, and hard, but calling it outright bad policy is wrong. It could be great policy if done well.
    - UncleMeat 2y ago
      "If done well" is supporting a lot of weight here.
tivert 2y ago
> On a tangent, I really loath Cato's hand-wavy libertarian claims pieced together with weak arguments in their writing pieces. It's propaganda. They're compelled to push libertarianism with the strongest arguments they can muster. The problem is society has figured out many areas where libertarianism had serious problems, so the strongest arguments are necessarily weak and misleading.
specproc 2y ago
Cato are a rent-a-wonk shop. This feels like someone wants this floated with an eye to a Trump presidency.

zpeti 2y ago

> I really loath Cato's hand-wavy libertarian claims pieced together with weak arguments in their writing pieces. There's very few actual libertarian voices anymore, so I think just for sparking conversation it's good. Whether you are left or right, or even western or eastern, conservative or liberal, in 2024 there is basically agreement that government needs to fix things and government should have more control. Bureaucracy is increasing everywhere. Everyone is doing deficit spending. There's almost no one mainstream that is actually advocating for less government. Dems in the US might accuse the republicans of wanting less, but I find it hard to find evidence republicans have done any reduction in government since Reagan, and even he did quite little.

pknomad 2y ago
For me it wasn't so much about libertarian claims but about Cato's style of writing. Their written discourse is so lazy and highly disingenuous to the point it becomes offensive. There are parts where I think libertarianism makes sense but financial control isn't one of them. > in 2024 there is basically agreement that government needs to fix things and government should have more control. Agreed. I think there needs to be a better control of who controls the government though.
UncleMeat 2y ago
Cato-style libertarianism (massive deregulation, fire the federal government, increases in corporate power) is a core principle of the GOP's Vice Presidential candidate. Trump has further discussed the possibility of mass firings of the federal bureaucracy. Is that not mainstream? We don't need further advocates for bad policy just for the sake of it.
- zpeti 2y ago
  How is reducing the government “bad policy”? Clearly there are bad ways to do it, and it’s risky, and hard, but calling it outright bad policy is wrong. It could be great policy if done well.
  - UncleMeat 2y ago
    "If done well" is supporting a lot of weight here.

tivert 2y ago

> On a tangent, I really loath Cato's hand-wavy libertarian claims pieced together with weak arguments in their writing pieces. It's propaganda. They're compelled to push libertarianism with the strongest arguments they can muster. The problem is society has figured out many areas where libertarianism had serious problems, so the strongest arguments are necessarily weak and misleading.

specproc 2y ago

Cato are a rent-a-wonk shop. This feels like someone wants this floated with an eye to a Trump presidency.