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.
Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmintHowever, it seems that the "invisible hand" is not so invisible and not so infinitely wise because unregulated free markets (i) can often lead to disastrously poor decisions driven by greed and (ii) are costly.
The first premise, that the invisible hand of the free market is not infinitely wise should be self evident. We have all seen how greed in an under regulated market can lead to disastrous results. Bernie Madoff-like people cheating investors out of billions, people ripping each other off by flipping houses and junk securities, and people profiting off of insider trading are all examples of this. This leads to the invisible hand dishing out slices of pie not in the most efficient manner, but in an inefficient manner.
Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
reply to post by rbnhd76
My economics professor was a Nobel Laurette and did a lot of consulting work for banks, so my guess is he earned a lot of pie.
By the way, I did not like the guy too much. He felt he was too good to teach an undergraduate economics class.
Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
In our current economy, bankers, sales people, and marketing people are playing the role of the invisible hand.
Their role in this economy is to distribute goods, services, and capital. The rest of us produce goods, services, and capital. If the hand were truly invisible, these people will make nothing or close to nothing. They would simply be guiding the allocation of resources rather than using up resources themselves. Of course these people need to receive some compensation for their work, and would need receive some of the resources this economy produces. However, is the invisible hand receiving to much?
There is only one reason any industry could ever remain at an extremely high profit margin for an extended period of time: excessive government regulation. Profiteering in the drug industry. Profiteering in the military-industrial complex. Profiteering in banking. Profiteering in the medical services sector. All this profiteering happens only... ONLY over the long term where excessive government mandates and excessive government regulations crush the competition. You can't start your own medical practice these days with all the regulations. You have not been able to start a bank for ages because of the regulations. You have not been able to start so much as a lemonade stand without a government license for Gods sake! And you call that capitalism? LOL, no. That is quite simply fascism.
Banking, marketing, and sales seem to make up an ever increasing portion of the economy while those that actually produce services get little. Take a pair of designer jeans as an example. It may only cost the manufacturer of the jeans a few dollars to buy the material and pay someone to sew it together or operate the machines that sew the jeans together. A pair of jeans may sell for $100 or more. The people that pocket the profit are not the actual manufacturers of jeans, but bankers, marketing people, sales people and others. If a pair of jeans costs $5 to make and sells for $100, $95 goes to the advertisers, sales people, and bankers. Only $5 goes to the jeans maker. So when it comes to distributing a resource like designer jeans, the invisible hand may pocket over 90% of the resources while "efficiently" distributing the jeans to market.
How can something that does not exist "work better" if this or that? Capitalism does not exist in the USA, so it can't be improved upon. The one and only place capitalism comes close to existing is Hong Kong. Shouldn't they be doing worse by your estimation since they are "under-regulated"? And what do you know, their economy is improving now for all classes of people there. Amazing how that works.
Perhaps capitalism would work better if regulations were in place that prevented the invisible hand from making dumb decisions. It may also work better if the invisible hand did not take such a big bite out of the pie as it distributed the pie.
Originally posted by seachange
How can something that does not exist "work better" if this or that? Capitalism does not exist in the USA, so it can't be improved upon. The one and only place capitalism comes close to existing is Hong Kong. And what do you know, their economy is doing very well right now. Amazing how that works.
Chung, 67, is now waiting for welfare to kick in and is on a long list for public housing. The government says it is doing its best to meet its citizens' needs, but Chung says he has lost all hope. Economic recovery or not, he feels forgotten.
Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by seachange
Really except for having to live in a cage it's great? Sounds like a cop out to me.
This sounds sad:
Chung, 67, is now waiting for welfare to kick in and is on a long list for public housing. The government says it is doing its best to meet its citizens' needs, but Chung says he has lost all hope. Economic recovery or not, he feels forgotten.
Living in a cage in Hong Kong
There is nothing that resembles the milk and honey promised by capitalism in that story.
Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by seachange
Actually I'm not a proponent of any particular government model. It seems to me that except for very extreme cases (dictatorships and anarchy) things are usually pretty similar. No matter what -ism is used to call them they are always oligarchies.
Actually the idea that Hong Kong is capitalist is what I was trying to point out as wrong. In that story they talk about public housing and welfare. It is said that their market is freer than the US but the same can be said of some European contries that are considered socialist.