Capitalism vs. Socialism

Discussion in 'Politics' started by rollinjoints, Dec 16, 2011.


  1. And I can see you accepted Milton Friedman's lies. How does the central bank cause recessions? You seem to be throwing around phrases without proving their validity.
     
  2. What about having the treasury department be in charge of the dollar? And why not have the dollar be tied to something so that the rich can not manipulate our currency like they do with our current fiat currency? Like Gold? Or Silver?
     

  3. I didn't say you have to have free market capitalism to get to corporatism. Obviously you don't.

    And the best example I can think of, of free market capitalism, is Chile under Augusto Pinochet. That worked out really well, right?
     

  4. No. Milton Friedman didn't have it totally correct. The Austrian account is more accurate. The Misean explanation of the business cycle is the correct one. Friedman places the blame for the "bust" on the central bank, but not the preceding "boom" period, which is the actual cause of the future recession. The cause of recessions is usually loose money policies from the central bank. The recession is actually the necessary correction that fixes the malinvestments created by artificially low interest rates and easy credit. The recessions are actually the cures, not the problems. But when government intervenes to prevent the recession from happening they prolong the suffering by delaying the cure, and often make it even worse. This was the case during the Great Depression. Hoover and Roosevelt prolonged the depression for 17 years with all of the government intervention they enacted.
     
  5. #25 gedio, Dec 16, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2011
    :/
    And socialism, historically leads to milk and cookies?

    I'd prefer free market capitalism, but I've always thought socialism would be something that would need an overwhelming majority or the population (of the planet) to be involved in to actually work.

    I'll be honest in my view:

    Capitalism > Communism > Socialism

    Communism seems superior to socialism in every imaginable way. Actual Communism that is, but I still think it's a bit far fetched.
     
  6. Not sure if serious?
    Regulations are one of the tools that are used by a heavily centralized system to allow corporatism to flower.
     
  7. Both by themselves are a poison to which a properly mixed economy is a remedy. And Americas mixed economy is not what I would call proper
     

  8. How you you reconcile the Libertarian philosophy that people should be free
    as individuals, but the government should have control over the economy? You realize that intruding on a mans economic freedom steps on the toes of his individual freedom yes?
     

  9. what most people don't to realize is that almost any system works but in only one condition and that is if the people care about each other. without people caring about each other, no system will work for long and is doomed to fail.

    if you were to ask me if our society will break down soon i ask you, if a 100 dollar bill dropped out of someones pocket on the street and 10 people saw it, how many of them would give it back to the one who lost it.... then i say, yes it will be breaking down soon.
     
  10. The draw back to free market capitalism is not that there is no regulations to keep corporations honest, it's that you have nobody to blame but yourself when they fuck you.

    Most people are scared of this, they want protection, but don't want to provide it themselves. They would rather settle for inefficient, ineffectual government protection, then actually do the work themselves. This way when there is a failure, they can remain in denial over their idiocy, and project it onto officials and corporations.
     
  11. Capitalism is better, morally, historically and theoretically speaking.

    Morally: The rights of the individual are protected from the wants of the majority

    History: Freer markets grow faster and elevate more people from poverty and despair

    Theory: Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Dispersing the power to millions of individuals instead of a single collective reduces the likelihood for corruption drastically


    OP, central banks cause depressions because they are politicized. For example, instead of doing what's right and raising interest rates to a realistic level, they currently hold them at 0%. Can you say, "malinvestment"?



    "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - TJ
     
  12. #33 SouthrnSmoke, Dec 16, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 16, 2011

    In all fairness, boom and bust cycles are not unique to economies with a central bank, regardless of our central banks roles in our depressions, the business cycle is going to keep rolling.

    The good news is human beings adapt, and as our overall wealth and technology evolve, these bust phases of the cycle will gradually do less damage. Ie future bust cycles would likely mean people would have to go without expensive medical procedures during a bust, but they would not likely be unable to feed themselves.

    Of course, that assuming we were to succeed in fighting for a free economy, and we allow the free market to improve technology and industry in ways that are practical and useful, instead of idealistic.
     

  13. That's true, but with central banks they are both more common and more severe, much more severe. Ultimately they are caused by unsound money. You can have unsound money without a central bank, but it's usually localized and affects only a small group of people. When a central bank does it, it effects the entire nation. In any case a central bank will never help prevent them, they only do harm.
     
  14. The most ridiculous concept I've ever heard is that the boom and bust of the economy is brought about by the "animal spirits" within us, like seriously?

    Cheap credit, forms a bubble of malinvestment, bubble pops.

    FRB Speech, Bernanke -- On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday -- November 8, 2002

     
  15. Ask yourself who stands to benefit from the collapse of the dollar, and how.
     
  16. I believe Bernanke shares the same flawed analysis as Friedman and Shwartz though, they all only see the "bust" part of the cycle while ignoring the "boom". That's missing the main problem though, the boom is the problem, not the bust. The bust is the solution.
     
  17. I'm not sticking up for Friedman by any means.
     
  18. How about you just say NEVER EVER! (cause it's a pipe dream)

    Why are you so hesitant to just admit that "free capitalism" has NEVER been
    done.
    I think someone said Liberia and Somalia are the 2 closest.
    Nice examples!
    Got any more, MJ?
     

  19. Not in anyway free market.

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page