Lazefaire Capitalism is ideal!

Lazefaire Calitalism is defined as "Laissez Faire Capitalism. "Laissez Faire" is French for "leave alone" which means that the government leaves the people alone regarding all economic activities. It is the separation of economy and state."

All a government should be concerned with is protecting citizen's rights, running a rational judicial system, and protecting its citizens from external and internal aggressors. It has no business meddling in religion or economics. Do you agree?

The government should also be available to act an objective and unbiased arbiter in disputes arising from business, be they business against business or business against individual.

a reply to: Tman2135
I agree. I think that falls under the category of "judicial," I think.

a reply to: Aristotelian1

I wish the Government would take that policy and use it in all dealings with the public. What happens between two consenting parties (financial or otherwise) should be no concern of the Federal Government.

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
Lazefaire Calitalism is defined as "Laissez Faire Capitalism. "Laissez Faire" is French for "leave alone" which means that the government leaves the people alone regarding all economic activities. It is the separation of economy and state."

All a government should be concerned with is protecting citizen's rights, running a rational judicial system, and protecting its citizens from external and internal aggressors. It has no business meddling in religion or economics. Do you agree?

The problem is that there is a segment of the society that isn't too bright and they will be taken advantage of by unscrupulous actors. This is what drives most of the market regulations. The free market tends to fix things over the long term, but in the short term, a fool and his money is easily separated.

For example, a lot of banking regulations are designed to protect the stupid. I work in mortgage finance and most of the regulations and paperwork are designed to inconvenience 99% of people because 1% of people are too stupid to own a house.

The issue with regulations to protect consumers is that bad actors are always a step ahead of the regulations. In addition, the free market often corrects the issue before the regulations can do the job.

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
a reply to: Tman2135
I agree. I think that falls under the category of "judicial," I think.

Not necessarily. Judicial implies crime, I'm talking more in a situation where there is a dispute but no law has been broken, such as a contract dispute.

a reply to: Aristotelian1

Have you ever read "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair?

a reply to: Aristotelian1

Who cares? What matters is how the lobbyists feel. If your theory is true, the swamp needs to be drained of lobbyists and a bought Congress. 17% approval and voters sent back same swamp creatures.

a reply to: Aristotelian1

I absolutely agree.

Somewhere, somehow, this idea (which was a big part of forming our original [not the current iteration] government) got jettisoned for big, overbearing government that sticks its nose in everywhere and micromanages its citizenry.

a reply to: Tman2135

It seems as though maybe you're talking about mediation?

That's a thing.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Fun Fact: This form of government NEVER existed in this country. There has always been a time where the government was messing around with the business world to some degree. Here's Mises writing an article about it happening in the 1860's with the transcontinental railroad:
Crony Capitalism and the Transcontinental Railroads

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Fun Fact: This form of government NEVER existed in this country. There has always been a time where the government was messing around with the business world to some degree. Here's Mises writing an article about it happening in the 1860's with the transcontinental railroad:
Crony Capitalism and the Transcontinental Railroads

Government is always getting involved because many businessmen seek to use the power of government to protect their fortunes from competition. When government stays out of the way, innovation takes off. Greed drives competitors to look for ways to improve service delivery to steal customers from company's that aren't operating well.

You see this everyday if you look close enough. Government rarely spurs true innovation.

a reply to: Edumakated

This is why there needs to be consumer protections for the public. Business people have much better access to the government to lobby for their wishes. All promoting laissez faire economics does is just promote business intervention with government while eliminating public intervention. Because we all know that businesses won't abide by the ideas of laissez faire. But they certainly will sing its praises, all while demanding federal kick backs from the government.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Edumakated

This is why there needs to be consumer protections for the public. Business people have much better access to the government to lobby for their wishes. All promoting laissez faire economics does is just promote business intervention with government while eliminating public intervention. Because we all know that businesses won't abide by the ideas of laissez faire. But they certainly will sing its praises, all while demanding federal kick backs from the government.

Of course, what is ironic is that "consumer protection" is usually the excuse politicians give when doing the bidding of businesses when passing regulations.

There has to be a balance. I don't mind regulations, but usually the problem is that those regulating often times don't understand the industry or business being regulated. In addition, they have their own biases. In addition, regulations need to be evaluated and culled from time to time especially when it can be shown that they aren't effective.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I never said that it was part of the government, ever, just that the idea that was part of the discussion got lost in favor of what we have now. I sill think that the intention was there, for the most part, but enough loopholes existed that it didn't/couldn't have lasted very long.

The IDEA of laissez-faire governing was a big part of forming our country, even if it wasn't the end result.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I never said that it was part of the government, ever, just that the idea that was part of the discussion got lost in favor of what we have now. I sill think that the intention was there, for the most part, but enough loopholes existed that it didn't/couldn't have lasted very long.

The IDEA of laissez-faire governing was a big part of forming our country, even if it wasn't the end result.

That really depends on which founding father you ask. I'm sure Hamilton would have had a different idea on the matter than Jefferson did.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes...I'm speaking in general. I never mentioned ALL of anything, just that it was a part of the discussion at the forming of our nation, implying that SOME considered the philosophy in their discussions and intentions.

Again, and quite obviously, that's not what we ended up with.

Sheesh...can we quit beating this dead horse already?

Lazefaire Capitalism is ideal!

Also know as the FREE MARKET.

Problems with that is it doesn't/can't exist.

Not when you have the state providing corporate products to the masses aka healthcare( social security,medicare,medicaid), free homes,education, and the list goes on.

And that thing the state created back in 1913 called the federal reserve that created fiat currency, and controls every financial instrument there is via rate control.

Everyone paying attention knows the state can't keep it's hands off anything.

It's ideal only in a biosphere without physical limits. Otherwise, it because the source of its own demise.

originally posted by: Aristotelian1
Lazefaire Calitalism is defined as "Laissez Faire Capitalism. "Laissez Faire" is French for "leave alone" which means that the government leaves the people alone regarding all economic activities. It is the separation of economy and state."

All a government should be concerned with is protecting citizen's rights, running a rational judicial system, and protecting its citizens from external and internal aggressors. It has no business meddling in religion or economics. Do you agree?

How does one have a radio channel in Laissez Faire Capitalism?

e: also Google "Lazefaire Capitalism" finds only a few results... It seems like you're trying to corrupt the French term into something new. Using "Calitalism" instead of "Capitalism" is even worse...