Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- From: Nospam <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2006 20:02:23 -0500
Steve Campbell wrote:
Where to begin?
By using logic instead of reciting propaganda.
First: human poverty. The free market system is the only system tried
so far where the amount of wealth generated by the participants exceeds
consumption.
You forget to mention that the single non free market system attempted
was the communism which also totally suppressed the democracy.
The failure of the communism it may be rather connected to the democracy
supression that destroyed the personal motivation.
If you are so big believer into free market, why don't you propose to
abolish any planned leadership into companies and have every single
employee doing what he want, abolish any form of leadership in the company
to take advantage of the "free market" that will "naturally appear" inside
the system to make that company the best in the world.
All other economic systems consume more than they create.
If and only if the population is demotivated enough to be unproductive.
Disparity betwen poor and rich can actually be exactly this kind of
de-motivator. As mater of fact, communism was the most inequalitarian
society ever created on Earth, where a very small oligarchy practically
owned everything and the rest of the population had no ownership at all.
While in the near term such over-consumption might create the illusion
of reduced poverty, in the long term it only guarantees that all
humanity will be impoverished. The fall of the Soviet Union
demonstrated the insidious deceit behind the promise of a workers
paradise.
The fall of Soviet Union proved that it is idiotic and criminal to suppress
the democracy and it is idiotic to demotivate people. The same privileges
that the communist leaders enjoyed in the USSR while the people suffered
are very similar with the privileges enjoyed by today's American CEOs and
rich shareholders while the population suffer without health insurance,
declining wages, and no job security.
If the trend is not reverse, the outcome will be the same on the long run.
Second: destruction of the natural environment. I guess Chernobyl
happen after the fall of the worker's paradise?
Nope. It happen into a country where a gang of criminal liar idiots
suppressed the democracy. Into a country that employed propaganda to claim
that the people enslaved live into a "workers paradise", propaganda that
was so successfull that even today there are still some weak minded
individuals all over the world that still believe the lie.
Third: social apartheid, racism, and ethnic strife. How long was
Yugoslavia governed by a socialist government (almost 50 years)? Yet
the ethnic hatred did not disappear.
First of all it was communism because the democracy and others political
parties were suppressed.
Second, ethnic hathread is (unfortunate) not related with a particular
political system to go away with it. Just think about the racism in US,
about the black guy chained after a pickup truck less than 10 years ago.
Just imagine that due to some developments, the law enforcement is
suppressed in US, like it was into the collapsing Yugoslavia. Do you
believe the outcome in South will be that different ?
It is a functional democratic government that prevent that to happen in US.
And BTW, the only way to get rid of racism, ethnic strife and so on is
education. And that takes time...
Fourth: forced displacements, landless farmers, shuttered factories,
and jobless workers. These tragedies are the end result of socialism,
not free markets.
This are a result of autocracy.
Sure, one can point to examples where all of these
undesirable situations exist in a free market economy, but they are
just temporary blemishes associated with the flux of change as
inefficiencies are removed from the system.
Nope. The single difference is who to blame. If all the jobs are lost into a
region under free market, nobody is to blame.
"It is market economy, there is no demand for your skills etc... We let you
go".
If it happen at the government command, it is the government to blame.
As a result, people tent to talk EXCLUSIVELY by the harm done by the
government because there is something to blame for all the problems.
A tragedy 10 times higher that happen into a market economy is just ignored
because there are 10000 companies to blame, not only one government.
It is exactly the problem with health care. If people are unhappy with the
coverage they get in France, they go on streets, protest and in the end the
government have to fix the issue somehow. Nobody dies because of
unaffordable care, nobody is uninsured to be denied care when needed.
Nobody goes in bankruptcy in France die to health care costs.
In US we have 46 M uninsured and over 18000 preventable deaths each year due
to unaffordable health coverage and over 50% of all the middle class
bankruptcies are due to health care problems. But because it is a private
business, a sick guy have the "freedom" to apply and be rejected by 500
companies.
In meantime his family gets bankrupt and the guy die. Nobody is to blame
because the guy had "freedom of choice" on the free market. At best he can
hire a lawyer sue a company for denial, the company have 100 better lawyers
and the one having the most lawyer power wins.
In the end the family of the victim gets a curt order to pay the fees and
get to the homeless shelters to mourn his death head of household.
Yet, people like you will come into this newsgroup and claim:
"""
Look at French, they have people in streets because of their ineffective
"socialist" health care system. Nobody protest in US, so our "free market"
system is much much better.
"""
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- From: jmh
- Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- From: Bob Kolker
- Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- Next by Date: Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- Previous by thread: Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- Next by thread: Re: The Road to Serfdom, Neoliberalism have mastered the British colonial-era double-speak of "liberty", "democracy", "markets", etc. "Market liberalization" is nothing more than armed robbery. And "investment" is really nothing more than "asset stripping"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
