Liberty News Forum
Political News Forum - Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. Not for wimps!
Political Opinion Page - Recent Posts - LNF Forums LNF in the Age of Empowerment!
Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Entertainment - Sports Forum
Military - A1 News Page - Computers Tech - Financial News - Bunker - Presidential Tracking Poll
The House - Off the Wall News - Page 2 - Rasmussen Reports Polls - Chat Room
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HerePolitical Opinion Page - The Hot Seat › Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market? (Read 871 times)
wyattstorch2004
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

GO CUBS

Posts: 12,452
Joined: May 11th, 2004
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #60 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:30pm
Print Post  
Limey wrote on Dec 6th, 2017 at 4:03pm:
Can I put down a marker?

"Regulation" means a lot of things.


My own area of expertise is in worker/public safety regulations, and I have experience at board level in numerous companies, of different nationality.


On this subject, its absolutely the case that business does not want regulation and the only driver towards allowing decent precautions to be taken is the fear of enforcement action by the authorities.



The only driver?  Fear of losing customers isn't a driver?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
wyattstorch2004
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

GO CUBS

Posts: 12,452
Joined: May 11th, 2004
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #61 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:38pm
Print Post  
MJ wrote on Dec 5th, 2017 at 11:47pm:
What's a "free" market? I don't ask that to be cheeky, but your definition will differ from mine, and I imagine both of us support less "free" markets than TL, our resident Austrian libertarian.

I don't hate the market, and I don't love government, especially when people whom I feel are unqualified, uninformed and wrong are running it. But there's problems that exist that pose collective action problems and require a more centralized response to alleviate the problem. And if run correctly, government action CAN help solve problems. I fully expect many to disagree, but that's my personal answer.


Like small-town pharmacies, for example? If bigoted pharmacist runs the only pharmacy in town and doesn't feel like filling prescriptions to a (insert adjective here) person, is that person supposed to just go without needed medication?

Sure, other towns have pharmacies, but that's undue burden on the one needing their medication. Or eventually another pharmacist may open shop, sure, but if people die without the medication in the meantime, that's not worth it to me.


What if the only person in that hypothetical small town that has the skills to be a pharmacist does not wish to be a pharmacist at all?  Closes up shop?  Would you support forcing that person to perform those tasks for the same reason?


Quote:
Because workers die from horrible and unsafe working conditions and crippling poverty. That may be worth it to some, depending on their ideology. It's not to me.


What about the economic effects that tend toward poverty that come about as a result of regulation and government meddling in the market?

Quote:
I don't disagree. This is why I have no problem believing the market will adapt to laws concerning air & water quality, for example. The market will be fine, and in the meantime, we can have some basic niceties like roads, sanitation services, etc.


There are always businesses and jobs on the margins of profitability.  To the extent that you impose these various things on the market, you will lose those businesses and jobs.  And you will have the resultant poverty, hardship, etc.

Government meddling cannot very well create grand benefits out of nothing.  It might be able to help some at the expense of others, but that's about it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Running Deer
LNF Party Leader
LNF Bunker
***
Offline

Disloyal Opposition

Posts: 4,889
Joined: Dec 10th, 2005
Gender: Male
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #62 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:40pm
Print Post  
The free market does not exist and never has.  It's a buzzword invented by political consultants a few decades ago to sell deregulation of corporations and lowered taxes on the rich.

You will not find a modern market that is not tied to power and does not have significant coercion shot through.  The European conquest of the Americas forcibly stole an enormous amount of land and gave it to European settlers.  Can you have a free market in clearly stolen property?  If so, what does "free" really mean?

The corporate idea of free markets - which is the one pushed by conservatives and libertarians - takes the current property arrangement as good, or at least, good enough to be kept.  Leaving this property arrangement as is, people contract for most or all of their services from private organizations or get them supplied from charity.  This is nuts, because the distribution of property as it is right now is due, in large part, to a massive amount of theft, corruption, violence, repression, and murder.  Put another way, treating the current property arrangement as libertarian violates the principles libertarians claim to accept.

As a leftist, I recognize the immense amount of violence and repression that created (and sustains) the current property arrangement. This arrangement cannot be treated as Locke's free acquisition without causing enormous injustice.  Leftists disagree about the best way to combat the outcome of this repression, but we all agree that a "free" market in unjustly distributed property is nonsense.
  

"If cousins, I would much prefer to marry one my Neanderthal relatives than a screeching chimpanzee which might bite my face off as has happened recently. Of course, chimps are not even a human species so procreation between humans and chimps is out of the question." - joe_christian, on sex
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Limey
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 16,567
Location: the County Palatine
Joined: Dec 14th, 2012
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #63 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:47pm
Print Post  
wyattstorch2004 wrote on Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:30pm:
The only driver?  Fear of losing customers isn't a driver?


A supermarket that has a salmonella outbreak loses customers.


A supermarket that has a refrigoration engineer die in a roof fall doesn't.


What do you think the supermarket does about the lack of safe access to the rooftop refrigoration plant?

Spend the £250k or fingers crossed about the £150k fine?
« Last Edit: Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:53pm by Limey »  

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.

Under Communism, it's the exact opposite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
wyattstorch2004
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

GO CUBS

Posts: 12,452
Joined: May 11th, 2004
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #64 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:48pm
Print Post  
Running Deer wrote on Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:40pm:
The free market does not exist and never has.  It's a buzzword invented by political consultants a few decades ago to sell deregulation of corporations and lowered taxes on the rich.

You will not find a modern market that is not tied to power and does not have significant coercion shot through.  The European conquest of the Americas forcibly stole an enormous amount of land and gave it to European settlers.  Can you have a free market in clearly stolen property?  If so, what does "free" really mean?

The corporate idea of free markets - which is the one pushed by conservatives and libertarians - takes the current property arrangement as good, or at least, good enough to be kept.  Leaving this property arrangement as is, people contract for most or all of their services from private organizations or get them supplied from charity.  This is nuts, because the distribution of property as it is right now is due, in large part, to a massive amount of theft, corruption, violence, repression, and murder.  Put another way, treating the current property arrangement as libertarian violates the principles libertarians claim to accept.

As a leftist, I recognize the immense amount of violence and repression that created (and sustains) the current property arrangement. This arrangement cannot be treated as Locke's free acquisition without causing enormous injustice.  Leftists disagree about the best way to combat the outcome of this repression, but we all agree that a "free" market in unjustly distributed property is nonsense.


I wouldn't say that the libertarian argument is that the property situation is just and that's it.

More like, just or not in its starting point, the proper way forward is not further theft and coercion, but a diminishing of the existence of theft and coercion.

I (and I consider my self to be a libertarian) could get behind undoing thefts if proof of the theft can be found and parties made whole.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Limey
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 16,567
Location: the County Palatine
Joined: Dec 14th, 2012
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #65 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 8:01pm
Print Post  
Refrigeration



My phone was set on some weird, or possibly wierd, setting and spelled it wrong.

I blame Putin.
  

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.

Under Communism, it's the exact opposite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Limey
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 16,567
Location: the County Palatine
Joined: Dec 14th, 2012
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #66 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 8:09pm
Print Post  
Running Deer wrote on Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:40pm:
The free market does not exist and never has.  It's a buzzword invented by political consultants a few decades ago to sell deregulation of corporations and lowered taxes on the rich.

You will not find a modern market that is not tied to power and does not have significant coercion shot through.  The European conquest of the Americas forcibly stole an enormous amount of land and gave it to European settlers.  Can you have a free market in clearly stolen property?  If so, what does "free" really mean?

The corporate idea of free markets - which is the one pushed by conservatives and libertarians - takes the current property arrangement as good, or at least, good enough to be kept.  Leaving this property arrangement as is, people contract for most or all of their services from private organizations or get them supplied from charity.  This is nuts, because the distribution of property as it is right now is due, in large part, to a massive amount of theft, corruption, violence, repression, and murder.  Put another way, treating the current property arrangement as libertarian violates the principles libertarians claim to accept.

As a leftist, I recognize the immense amount of violence and repression that created (and sustains) the current property arrangement. This arrangement cannot be treated as Locke's free acquisition without causing enormous injustice.  Leftists disagree about the best way to combat the outcome of this repression, but we all agree that a "free" market in unjustly distributed property is nonsense.



I recently attended a thought gig, at which the main speaker riffed on the ideas underpinning property.

Ultimately, all land holding comes from violence.

The speaker (I wish I could remember his name) said he had a plan to go and stand in a field whilst the farmer was working it.

As the ensuing argument developed, he wanted to steer the owner to say”it’s my land!!”

At this point, the challenge is, “why is it yours?”


Obviously the answer is that, in past time, someone won it by violence.


At which point the speaker said, he’d say to the farmer, “ok, you accept the principle of conquest. Put ‘em up, we fight for the land” (the speaker was a big guy, I would’ve been wary and I’m quite handy).


Naturally if he really did it, as the libertarians point out, the regulatory weasels arrive.


But morally, can anyone find an argument against him?
  

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.

Under Communism, it's the exact opposite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
wyattstorch2004
LNF Speaker
*****
Offline

GO CUBS

Posts: 12,452
Joined: May 11th, 2004
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #67 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 8:41pm
Print Post  
Limey wrote on Dec 6th, 2017 at 7:47pm:
A supermarket that has a salmonella outbreak loses customers.


A supermarket that has a refrigoration engineer die in a roof fall doesn't.


They might if dutiful journalists or other individuals get the word out.

They also owe quite a bit to the family of the engineer.

And most people don't want someone working in unsafe conditions, most notably the worker.

So loss of customers, restitution to the family, the will of the engineer, and the good heart of the fellow workers.  None of those are drivers?  You said government penalty is the only driver.  You claim it to be an important one, but to claim it is the only one is ridiculous.

Quote:
What do you think the supermarket does about the lack of safe access to the rooftop refrigoration plant?

Spend the £250k or fingers crossed about the £150k fine?


If your only concern is the fine, then you hope for the best with the fine.  But your own example is harming your argument here.  The fine is doing nothing for the greedy jerk who only cares about money. 

Care to rephrase it?



Quote:
I recently attended a thought gig, at which the main speaker riffed on the ideas underpinning property.

Ultimately, all land holding comes from violence.

The speaker (I wish I could remember his name) said he had a plan to go and stand in a field whilst the farmer was working it.

As the ensuing argument developed, he wanted to steer the owner to say”it’s my land!!”

At this point, the challenge is, “why is it yours?”


Obviously the answer is that, in past time, someone won it by violence.


At which point the speaker said, he’d say to the farmer, “ok, you accept the principle of conquest. Put ‘em up, we fight for the land” (the speaker was a big guy, I would’ve been wary and I’m quite handy).


Naturally if he really did it, as the libertarians point out, the regulatory weasels arrive.


But morally, can anyone find an argument against him?


Given that I tend to be argumentative and enjoy disrupting premises, I would say, "no, I do not accept the principal of conquest or the assumption that it was won by violence, but if you can find the proof that this land was stolen I won't stand in the way of an investigation to determine the rightful owner and the unwinding of the transactions that got it to me, which would, at least, make me whole for the money I paid for it".

Of course, most likely, the large man would then find that the theft happened so long ago that the rightful owner has died, and given that he leans politically in a way that would probably have him supporting 100% inheritance tax, I would explain to him that once the rightful owner died it was up for grabs to whomever claimed authority over it.

If it is like many discussions that happen here, the large man would likely walk away, bored, long before I finished arguing.

There is also the conundrum, for the large man, that the farmer would have the government in his corner, making it very difficult for the large man to succeed in his conquest.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Limey
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 16,567
Location: the County Palatine
Joined: Dec 14th, 2012
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #68 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 8:58pm
Print Post  
wyattstorch2004 wrote on Dec 6th, 2017 at 8:41pm:
They might if dutiful journalists or other individuals get the word out.

They also owe quite a bit to the family of the engineer.

And most people don't want someone working in unsafe conditions, most notably the worker.

So loss of customers, restitution to the family, the will of the engineer, and the good heart of the fellow workers.  None of those are drivers?  You said government penalty is the only driver.  You claim it to be an important one, but to claim it is the only one is ridiculous.
[\quote]

This is my professional area. I can tell you for a fact that food poisoning is the big fear, loss of sales due broken cooling systems is a close second, and injured maintenance staff isn’t on the list.


That’s because of the financial mechanisms.


I’m talking about conversations at the top decision making level for the UK and Europe arms of international grocers you shop in.


The priorities are as I state.


I’m sorry if this is a discordant note against your ideology. 
[quote]
If your only concern is the fine, then you hope for the best with the fine.  But your own example is harming your argument here.  The fine is doing nothing for the greedy jerk who only cares about money. 

Care to rephrase it?

[\quote]


Simple maths.


[quote]


Given that I tend to be argumentative and enjoy disrupting premises, I would say, "no, I do not accept the principal of conquest or the assumption that it was won by violence, but if you can find the proof that this land was stolen I won't stand in the way of an investigation to determine the rightful owner and the unwinding of the transactions that got it to me, which would, at least, make me whole for the money I paid for it".

Of course, most likely, the large man would then find that the theft happened so long ago that the rightful owner has died, and given that he leans politically in a way that would probably have him supporting 100% inheritance tax, I would explain to him that once the rightful owner died it was up for grabs to whomever claimed authority over it.

If it is like many discussions that happen here, the large man would likely walk away, bored, long before I finished arguing.

There is also the conundrum, for the large man, that the farmer would have the government in his corner, making it very difficult for the large man to succeed in his conquest.



The rightful owner had died.... want to talk to the pro Israeli people about their claim, or the dispossessed (2nd gen) Palestinians?


Lol. So once the last relative of the victim of theft is gone, it’s ok to claim rightful ownership.


Shaky moral ground there.
  

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.

Under Communism, it's the exact opposite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Limey
LNF Speaker
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 16,567
Location: the County Palatine
Joined: Dec 14th, 2012
Re: Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?
Reply #69 - Dec 6th, 2017 at 8:59pm
Print Post  
I messed up the [quote/] Thing, sorry, assume it’s clear, bed time here, goodnight Mr. W
  

Under Capitalism, Man exploits Man.

Under Communism, it's the exact opposite.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 
Send TopicPrint
 
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HerePolitical Opinion Page - The Hot Seat › Why do leftist-libbies hate the free market?

LNF Home - Political Opinion Page
LNF Forums

Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Sports Forum - Entertainment - House
Military, History - Cooking and Crafts - Creative Writing
Off the Wall News - Science Forum - Tech Gadgets - Financial News - Humor
Bunker - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Chat Room





Drudge Report - News Max - Rush Limbaugh - FrontpageMag
Advertise on the LNF - Twitter LNF - LNF Archive - LNF News
LNF Blog
News and Political Links
Political Blogs
Add your website or blog
Political Columnists
Political Humor
A1 News Page
David Limbaugh
Political Frog
Conservatives Directory
President Trump Approval Poll
Presidential Party Election Poll News forum posting, privacy policy and member rules