It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NAZI GREENS - An Inconvenient History • Martin Durkin

page: 6
17
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Of course the free market provides perfect results assuming of course that all participants have perfect knowledge
the price disseminates knowledge, perfect anything is a straw man.


and are rational,
As rational as democracy, or at least as rational as people just plain are.


that there are no externalities,
externalities are reflected by the cost

that there is no monopoly power,
there are no monopolies in a free market

that income inequality and power imbalance does not force people to act in ways that are against their own interest,
Income will always buy more in a free market as compared to any other system. Power is minimized in a free market as compared to any other system. Income inequality and power imbalances are smallest in a free market.

and of course that companies/corporations are really honest players in a truly free market.
If they are a problem then competition will take them out.


Does that sound like reality?


Ever heard of cause and effect?




posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

And still not a single real world example.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

I think most progressives are capable of a less boolean view of environmentalism and can see a role for both state and individual. The one dimensional (government = bad) view seems to come from the right.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Semicollegiate

And still not a single real world example.


There is a first time for everything.

Even if there were an example of a completely free market, it would have unique attributes, and task would be to determine the essentials and the transpositionals and the irrelevancies.

Climate would be an irrelevancy.

Culture would be a transpositional.

Everyone contributing their minds to valuations in the market is the essential.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

The funny part here is although there is nothing really funny about any of this is.

The Nazi's didn't think they were doing anything bad either.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

You would think so but I can tell from some of the previous posters that is not the case. The government = bad would actually be the farthest extreme left according to the scale (Anarchism) which goes to show how people can have their perceptions altered simply by confining things to something like a scale or ideology. This is why many leftist are unable to see the similarities with fascism and leftist authoritarianism because they hold them to be ideologically in opposition but the outcome is the same.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Perfect knowledge and rational man are cornerstones of the assumptions of how markets work in economics. I assumed you knew that.

Externalities are by definition not included in the cost.

By what mechanism are there no monopolies in a free market?

Can you provide any evidence that free markets reduce inequality or is this you projecting your political ideology onto how you want economics to work?

Without regulation/oversight what mechanism prevents companies lying to distort markets?



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Semicollegiate



If that were true I wouldn't pay income taxes or have a Social Security number. Lefties are always imposing their beliefs upon others.


Can we then say that the constitution, which allows for the laying of taxes, is a Leftist document?



Lefties are theocratic because they believe in their God, the State. The State has mystical powers of omnipotence to make the environment just right and divine omnipotent insight into the needs ands wants of all Lefty believers.


Nonsense. The state does not have mystical powers and cannot all the needs and wants of the people. That's just ignorant hyperbole.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Actually it was a centrist document that gave the state the power of taxation to be able to fund itself.

To function properly. Under LEFTIST delusions that power has been bastardized in to paying the peoples bills.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96



Actually it was a centrist document


Yes, it is. I posed my question to highlight the fallacy in their line of argument.



Under LEFTIST delusions that power has been bastardized in to paying the peoples bills.


It has been de-regulated capitalism that has caused the need for the government to step-up and help pay people's bills.

There is always two sides to every coin.
edit on 27-9-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-9-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

I actually agree however I think people on both sides of the political scale are are often blind to the essential uselessness of looking at politics as either left or right (irony intended). I by the very nature of this site think most people here agree that that overly authoritarian states are the problem. The disagreement is over what social/economics model best preserves peoples freedoms, strong or weak state institutions.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Yet the government has intervened on the subject of illegal drugs and created a perfectly functioning and empowered black market. Freaky lol.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




It has been de-regulated capitalism that has caused the need for the government to step-up and help pay people's bills.


De regulated capitalism eh.

I been paying attention to the War on poverty with REGULATION out the wahzoo, and today there are now more people broke, more dependent upon government for their existence than in this entire nations history.

Once the world starts getting 'regulated' out the wahzoo, and taxes out the wahzoo.

The people are going to be exponentially WORSE off.
edit on 27-9-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: introvert

Yet the government has intervened on the subject of illegal drugs and created a perfectly functioning and empowered black market. Freaky lol.



I disagree with the "war on drugs". What an utter failure.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: NihilistSanta

I actually agree however I think people on both sides of the political scale are are often blind to the essential uselessness of looking at politics as either left or right (irony intended). I by the very nature of this site think most people here agree that that overly authoritarian states are the problem. The disagreement is over what social/economics model best preserves peoples freedoms, strong or weak state institutions.


I agree. I can be extreme at times but in the same vein I don't want to consume unsafe products

A balance has to be found for sure.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The "war on poverty" is a joke as well.

What put the final nail in our coffin was the repeal of Glass-Steagall which allowed the banks to screw us over. Then we bailed them out without learning our lesson.

Our economic health is directly tied to regulation, or lack thereof.

Also, did you know that taxes are, at this point and time, very low when compared to the tax rates paid in previous years?

Taxed out the wahzoo is simply wrong.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I just found it comical that the only example of a free market is created from heavy state regulation. I wasn't saying you are for that position. It is just strange that the left fears big government on issues like drugs but finds it OK when it comes to the environment or any other issue.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: neo96

The "war on poverty" is a joke as well.

What put the final nail in our coffin was the repeal of Glass-Steagall which allowed the banks to screw us over. Then we bailed them out without learning our lesson.

Our economic health is directly tied to regulation, or lack thereof.

Also, did you know that taxes are, at this point and time, very low when compared to the tax rates paid in previous years?

Taxed out the wahzoo is simply wrong.


That's not what I have been seeing! Feel free to prove me wrong, because I am not seeing how taxed out the wahzoo is simply wrong.


Three trillion dollars is a lot of money. Just imagine what you could do with $3 trillion. The possibilities are practically limitless. Of course no one is worth $3 trillion, individually. However, the United States Federal Government recently reported that for the 2014 fiscal year it collected more than $3 trillion in tax revenue, for the first time ever.


Federal Government Takes in Record Tax Haul in 2014



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Surely a nihilist Santa would not only be in favour of unsafe products but deliver them annually to small children?????

Some things are best done at an individual level, some things by people working together for profit and some are best done by people working together for a common good. For the later the best model yet devised is democratic government.

Only extremists of whatever persuasion believe in a one size fits all approach.



posted on Sep, 27 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Semicollegiate

Perfect knowledge and rational man are cornerstones of the assumptions of how markets work in economics. I assumed you knew that.


Keynesian economics is the one with (wave hands) "animal spirits", perfect knowledge, perfect competition, too big to fail, fiat money, inflation confiscation, and fractional reserve banking.





Externalities are by definition not included in the cost.


By convention of the legal profession mostly. Externalities are trespasses and should be paid for accordingly.




By what mechanism are there no monopolies in a free market?


A company could be the sole provider of a good. As long as that company charges a fair price and produces enough items, there is no gain to be had by competing with it. Although this single company fits one definition of a monopoly, the situation is not really a monopoly because nothing would be gained by having another company.

If a sole company, or cartel, restricts output and/or charges a high price, then new competitors will get fore sure profits by entering the market, offering a lower price and taking the offenders customers and income away.


So the bad monopoly, lower availability with high prices, can not exist in a free market. Only a coercive force can maintain a monopoly situation.




Can you provide any evidence that free markets reduce inequality or is this you projecting your political ideology onto how you want economics to work?


The poorest class today has more then the richest class did before the industrial revolution. The industrial revolution was a free market phenomenon.

Since socialism/collectivism took over, about 1920, the rate of technological change has slowed and money debasement is reducing the poor into the next feudalism.



Without regulation/oversight what mechanism prevents companies lying to distort markets?


The competition. Sound money makes insights and planning viv a vis the economy exponentially easier. That includes discernment of unusual expenses.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join