Official: Free Market Economics (Repost)

[Drogue]

In response to Tass:

How the **** can people vote "Never"?!

Because Archaic did not give us a No option. Is that contitutional, to have an official SE poll without a No option?

[Lemmy]

Now that i think about it i'm not sure if this is constitutional.

If Archaic wants to change the SE tabnle, i think it would be best to create a poll with all the SE options avaiable, and a "No" option.
Archaic has had his chance to convince the citizens about FM, these results show he hasn't been completely succesfull, so in a next poll the citizens shouldn't be denied other options like planned or green.

[Earwicker]

Originally posted by Pandemoniak
It does have a factor for planet rating, i dont know which formula you've been looking at, but if it has no planet factor, thats a fake formula.

Thanks, my mistake - I was reading only TKG's excerpt dealing with terraforming damage, not the overall formula.

[Aaron Blackwell]

Indeed. There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Indeed Archaic ... too bad you are one them

[DeathByTheSword]

ok i havent interfered in this discussion and i havent paid attention but could you please tell me why a planned economy is more UNP then FM? RP ofcourse because freedom is the highest possible idea of the UNP and planned how ever you want to explane it is not....so please? i am really wondering

[Kirov]

Originally posted by GeneralTacticus

No need. I just did. And claiming to be RPing doesn't mean you can just ignore any argument presented in non-RP terms.

Oh? And why not? Because you say so?

Well, there are two reasons:

1. The discussion between '+2 ECON' and 'help the poor' is completely unsolvable and nothing can be said. What is better: the red colour or the bicycle? It doesn't make sense, does it?

2. I would like to RP as much as possible, and I'm just an ordinary citizen. I'm sure we are here for fun (altho watching Archaic and Pande quarelling makes me reconsider it), not to win this game, because it is already won. I know that sometimes it must be said 'move the 1-3t-1 to the (32,45) tile', but when discussing SE, we needn't do this. Methinks it's funnier then.

[DeathByTheSword]

Kirov i completely agree with you but could you then answer my question that i asked before yout post?!

[Aaron Blackwell]

ok i havent interfered in this discussion and i havent paid attention but could you please tell me why a planned economy is more UNP then FM? RP ofcourse because freedom is the highest possible idea of the UNP and planned how ever you want to explane it is not....so please? i am really wondering

Out-Of-Character : Right DBS, I will give you my RP point of view on the subject

RP :

Free Market is all about lifting the law restrictions on how market should be run.

The consequence of this is that a few selected individuals, those who have the money and the means to invest in the market, will be successfull.

It will also mean that these same individuals will weight more heavily in the overall results of our Faction and that the goverments will lose a lot of his powers.

Considering that the citizens as a whole only have power in electing the governments and make decisions through poll voting, they will lose a lot of their decision powers as this same power will be taken by a very small proportion of people.

In short :

Free Market => It is the market that is free, but the true decisions powers will be held by a few wealthy people who won't have to worry about the governments anymore ( which is by the way elected by the citizens as a whole) => Lot of power concentrated in a very few hand. Not every citizen will have the same 'weight' in decision making.

Planned Or Green => The government have final say on any subject concerning the faction as a whole. And the government is in turn controlled by the election and poll voting made by the citizens as a while.=> Every citizens
will have the same amount of decision making power as the others.

[Drogue]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
ok i havent interfered in this discussion and i havent paid attention but could you please tell me why a planned economy is more UNP then FM? RP ofcourse because freedom is the highest possible idea of the UNP and planned how ever you want to explane it is not....so please? i am really wondering

Well, IMHO, Democracy is the highest goal of the UNPK, and Planned means we have a stronger elected government, rather than having unelected large corporations (especially the media) dictating policy and opinion to us.

What is freedom? Either economic system does not detract from you freedom, bar the extra freedom choice in FM and the extra access to services (healthcare, education etc.) that means you are not bound by how much you earn. In either we can do what we like as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.

Planned is also fairer, in that no matter what you earn, you have access to public services. If you are ill, you get treated, if your house is burning, the fire brigade will come and help. Free education also puts people in a meritocracy, in that those who are more intelligent do better, rather than those who can pay for a good education. It means we all start on a level playing field, so where we get to depends on us, not our parents wealth. This is freedom in the sense that we are all born equal, and able to do what we want.

I think the UNPK are more about democracy, fairness and meritocracy than freedom personally, although we are free, and what economic system we choose won't affect that IMHO.

[Voltaire]

The whole issue of whether we should adopt a free market economy also bring about the question of do we value equality (or at least equality of opportunity) as much as we value democracy. I agree fully with Drogue that we should strive for a meritocracy, and if we adopt a free market system meritocracy is shattered. No longer will you have equality of opportunity, those with more money rather than those with more merit will be the successful ones in society. Do we really want to return to the social structure of old Earth where actors and athletes are valued more than scientists and educators? In the end free market also contributes to the dissipation of democracy, for when the governing class isn’t chosen for quality it is chosen for material wealth: this means decadence, the lowers stage a society can reach.

[Kirov]

Actually, I think that both FM and Planned have nothing to do with freedom. It is democracy that makes the difference. In the Old Earth there were many countries without freedom that had been running either FM or Planned (compare Cuba and USSR with Chile and late China).

I understand what Drogue's point is, but I think we shouldn't mix the words 'freedom' and 'equality' or justice'. It is observed that in modern societies almost every party calls itself 'democratic' whilst claiming that their opponents are not. Such words are simply marked with emotional background, thereby they are so eagerly used. However, I do not consider GT and Archaic's views as non-democratic. Nevertheless, bear in mind our goal is not 'freedom' in terms you can do what you want. We have to provide our citizens much more than that, and basic social goods are IMHO included. Be careful tho, since we have not only to avoid the FM mistakes, but also those of communist, mainly soviet, countries. I'm far more skeptical than let's say Pande at this point.

[Drogue]

That's Kirov, that was the point I was trying to make (that neither have much effect on freedom), while also trying to answer DBTS' question. We do very much have to avoid the old Earth Communism.

I think a partly FM system, in that you have a meritocracy, but in which you can pass down wealth to your next of kin (a reward for hard work during life) with laws to help stability and guard against monopolies; with good public services, that can assure a basic quality of life for eveyone; and, most importantly, that has a strong Green ethos, both in laws and social attitudes; while remaining a libertarian democracy, so that the individual is free to do as he wishes, so long as it doesn't detract from others; is what I see would wish for, and think that the Peacekeepers would thrive under. I think society has advance to the stage that people are not just governed by their own interests, but also by the interests of society. Remember when we talk about human nature, that it is not just some abstract theory, we are the humans here, and so it is our nature we are talking about. Are we ready to help each other? To co-operate instead of compete?

[DeathByTheSword]

when i read all these answer i must say i am shocked....because it looks to me that even i live in a planned ecomony and not in a free-market.....but what i think most planned supports do is they overpower the free-market idea....i think i liv in a free-market land but no one is really wealthy and no one has real power...and on the other hand they underpower the planned idea...they think it is just that the government is in control of nationwide issues...well i dont believe that is what planned is about....planned is very simple the government plans the economy and that is wrong...just look at old russia i am not using it as an example because i believe communisme and planned is the same but communisme in Russia used planned economy and you see how that failed...so i believe that planned supporters are a little of with there ideas of what is what...

[Lemmy]

DBTS, while most european countries call themselves capitalistic and free market economies, this is not true. During the cold war, a lot of european governemnts adopted communist ideologies in fear of uprisings among the population. So in fact most these european countries are some sort of FM/Planned hybrids, or socialistic.

[DeathByTheSword]

so do you all see planned as social benifeicts and stuff because then i understand why you are so against FM but if not then i really do not understand what you mean with planned