Tweet
I am not for complete unrestricted free markets. That will turn into a corruption arena. There has to be law enforcement. But free markets must be respected, and big businesses should not be restricted. That will kill the economy. Rather some of these businesses should be monitored for unlawful activity.
-
For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence) -
But even if businesses adhere to 'lawful' activity (which often they don't) they will eventually destroy the competition - we've seen it in many areas already. How many soft drinks are now owned by the coca-cola coproration for example?Comment
-
It may be common but it is not inevitable unless the market lends itself to natural monopolization by having barriers to entry for new competitors.Originally posted by red_jon
But free markets left unrestricted eventually become monopolies as businesses eventually destroy the opposition.
The only way to keep markets free is by restricting big business.
(I think that sentence sounds more intelligent than it actually is
)
One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
The free market is meant to be a fighting ground. A volatile ground. To restrict that is to destroy jobs and the economy. You must have businesses competing. Your statements about eventually destroying the competition is false because there will always be somebody else with something better.Originally posted by red_jon
But even if businesses adhere to 'lawful' activity (which often they don't) they will eventually destroy the competition - we've seen it in many areas already. How many soft drinks are now owned by the coca-cola coproration for example?
Coca-cola sure.. but there is also Pepsi, and other competiton on smaller base levels.
Same with McDonalds and Burger King.. in the US once kings of the fast food market are under pressure from other chains.
To restrict the free market, is to destroy capitalism.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
From my OE dictionary:Originally posted by yavoon
really big crunch? I always ascosiated liberal w/ government intervention, universal health care, high taxes, welfare, etc...leading to socialism on the far left.
kinda odd to see it be polar opposite.
Liberal. n. & adj.
6a) Favouring individual liberty, free trade, and open minded to socio-political reform. Regarding many traditional beliefs as dispensible, invalidated by modern thought, or liable to change.
6b) A person of liberal views.
That's pretty close to how I see the term liberal.
I'm politically and economically on the right, but I would consider myself liberal before I consider my self conservative.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
I am a neo-liberal classicist when it comes to the economy. In strictly 19th century terms. The word has been introverted. (is that the right word to use?)For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
a - it is my opinion that either coke or pepsi will destroy the other, just as they have done with the other companies around them.Originally posted by Fez
The free market is meant to be a fighting ground. A volatile ground. To restrict that is to destroy jobs and the economy. You must have businesses competing. Your statements about eventually destroying the competition is false because there will always be somebody else with something better.
Coca-cola sure.. but there is also Pepsi, and other competiton on smaller base levels.
Same with McDonalds and Burger King.. in the US once kings of the fast food market are under pressure from other chains.
To restrict the free market, is to destroy capitalism.
b - having only two major soft drink or burger companies does not qualify as 'competition'.
I don't see competiton posing a threat to these companies. If anything it's getting less. And what about Starbucks? I don't see much competiton to them, at least over here.Comment
-
That's the older, not in vogue meaning of liberal, the 19th century liberal. People who use liberal in a derogatry manner mean socialists today: in the US the term socialist was in vogue only for a few decades at the end of the 19th century: since then, it is as dirty as Communist, so I guess liberal became the word to use in the US. Since in Europe Socialists and Labor parties kept those names without problems, the old term "liberals" could live on.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard ShawComment
-
Redfern:
A) If they do, other people will have to start from scratch.
B) That is entirely your own opinion. I believe otherwise.
Starbucks... try to the Coffee Store... another famous chain...
Any restriction on capitalism, screws us all over in the end. Law enforcement is good. If a company does something criminal, I would love to see the exec in handcuffs being dragged off to jail... but forcing illegal taxes on a law abiding corporation is not good.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Caffé Nero, Coffee Republic, Costa...Originally posted by red_jon
And what about Starbucks? I don't see much competiton to them, at least over here.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
The problem is that a market totally free of government intervention will ultimately lead to monopoly. It is the only thing that makes sense: any company that gets even a temporary advantage will exploit is ruthlessly to crush competition in order to maximize profits. If the aim of the game is to make as much money as possible for yourself and company, crush the opposition and become the only game in town. To do anyting else is idiotic and cuts down on your possible profits.
People who make the Free market an ideology are as clueelss as communists, thinking that people have some deeper "economic" sense. They don't.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard ShawComment
-
I would of voted for Theodore Roosevelt early in the 20th century...Originally posted by GePap
That's the older, not in vogue meaning of liberal, the 19th century liberal. People who use liberal in a derogatry manner mean socialists today: in the US the term socialist was in vogue only for a few decades at the end of the 19th century: since then, it is as dirty as Communist, so I guess liberal became the word to use in the US. Since in Europe Socialists and Labor parties kept those names without problems, the old term "liberals" could live on.
I am a 19th century liberal to put it. Now right-winger.
Gepap: I support law enforcement. Not a totally free market.
Capitalism is not an ideology, it is the well-being of a country. To screw with it, is to cause severe damage.
That is why communists and socialists have no case.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence)Comment
-
Originally posted by Big Crunch
Caffé Nero, Coffee Republic, Costa...
Luckily we don't have Starbucks We're not infected yet!!
"An archaeologist is the best husband a women can have; the older she gets, the more interested he is in her." - Agatha Christie
"Non mortem timemus, sed cogitationem mortis." - SenecaComment
-
The problem with communism (not socialism) is that they make economics all encompasing, "totalitarian", and yet have no real ideas about how politics should run in this system.
Socialism has some very good ideas, and in general, if efficiency is key, a socialist system of ensuring free access to most basic services such as education and health care makes more sense than the free market, since in that sense, the customer has no clue about what the most efficient choice for them would be. Many people expect a level of rational choice that is simply not forthcoming form the people at all. And what kind of choice is it, if I have the ability to chose 50 models of cars in myriad colors, but the choice not to have a car is prohibitive? That is not choice at all.If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard ShawComment
-
BC - ya think those will be there in 10 years time?Comment
Comment