Helthcare a Privelij

A skeptical look at medical practices
Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:36 pm

LunaNik wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:
LunaNik wrote:You are aware that Rothbard excoriated Smith's ideas, claiming they would lead to Marxism? And that he opposed evidence-based economics in favor of his own baseless beliefs? Since you admit to admiring Rothbard, is it fair to say you're actually an anarcho-capitalist?


1. Which of Smith's ideas did Murray excoriate? Got any links?

2. I don't like the word capitalism and all that it has come to imply- the MIC, welfare for the rich, and so on.
Smith didn't use the word "capitalism." It wasn't invented by Marx until around 100 years later.

If I'm going to label myself, I'll call myself an individualist anarchist or simply an individualist, since collectivism is not compatible with individualism any more than absolute monarchy ( Saudi Arabia) is compatible with individual liberty.

1. Seriously? All of them. It's only Rothbard's seminal two-volume work, An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought.
For Smith not only contributed nothing of value to economic thought; his economics was a grave deterioration from his predecessors.

2. Actually, Marx did not invent the term as we now use it. French socialist Louis Blanc did, defining it as "the appropriation of capital by some to the exclusion of others." Anarchist and founder of mutualism, Pierre-Joseph Proudhom, further defined it as an ideology: "Economic and social regime in which capital, the source of income, does not generally belong to those who make it work through their labour."

And whether you like the term or not, Rothbard was an enthusiastic proponent of unregulated free market capitalism across the board...and a staunch opponent of egalitarianism*. His described his model wherein "a system of protection agencies compete in a free market and are voluntarily supported by consumers who choose to use their protective and judicial services." You should be able to see an obvious number of problems with Rothbard's system. If you can't afford protection and justice, you're SOL.

*Perhaps you haven't read enough of and about Rothbard. He was actively and publicly hostile toward women's and civil rights. He proposed that the police be allowed not merely to arrest and detain, but to administer punishment, and to torture suspects. He embraced historical revisionism and was an unapologetic Holocaust denier. He believed that individual rights extended to parents' rights to sell their children into slavery in what he dubbed "a flourishing free market in children," and believed that parents had no legal obligation to care for their children, because that would infringe upon the rights of the parents. He supported "an eye for an eye" criminal punishment...actually more than that, since he spoke about forcing the criminal into a state of temporary enslavement to his victim. All in all, he was a disgusting person, and I'm quite thankful he's dead.


I stand corrected, "capitalist" was in usage before Das Kapital, but Adam Smith didn't use the word.

Can I assume that you are a fan of Adam Smith, since he differed so radically from Rothbard?
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12220
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby JO 753 » Thu Jun 29, 2017 11:52 pm

Tom Palven wrote:Despite my belief that individualist anarchism is most ethical and efficacious ...


Are you a squirrel?

I prefer sivilization myself, being a human who coudnt survive in the wild. Its the tek and co-operation that makes my speciez possibl.

I really like The Sane Progressive, Debbie Lusignan,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJA7urXYocA


Interesting stuff.

Wuznt it Sanderz who nipped any tok uv singl payer in the bud bak in 09?
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:41 am

Tom Palven wrote:Can I assume that you are a fan of Adam Smith, since he differed so radically from Rothbard?
No. I don’t believe, in 2017, there exists such a thing as rational self-interest. And it’s patently clear that laissez-faire economics only leads to a rapidly widening income disparity. At the root of this in the post-modern era is the insistence of capitalists that “laissez-faire” means that the government must not interfere on behalf of the consumer, but must intervene to maximize the profits of the producer...even at the expense of the consumer.

Honestly, I think economic theories come and go, and become less valid over time. Smith’s ideas may have worked in his time, but the advent of industry, the financial sector, automation in manufacturing, and a hundred other things have made them outdated.

We’re rapidly approaching a turning point where we can no longer be a labor-based society. There simply are not sufficient unskilled labor jobs for the masses of unskilled people to fill. And there will be fewer and fewer as the years pass. Not everyone has the intellect, dedication, and skills get through the years of specialized schooling required for today’s jobs…never mind tomorrow’s. It's time to think in radically new economic terms.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26367
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:57 am

Tom Palven wrote: I stand corrected, "capitalist" was in usage before Das Kapital, but Adam Smith didn't use the word.
It's weird question this. Technically I would assume capitalism was a defined concept in the 15th century as Dutch accountants started to use "balance sheets" (capital wealth) in conjunction with P&L statements..

The ship is hired out and the ship comes back, so it is represented on the Balance sheet as an ongoing asset ( capital)

( Gosh, this forum has some very exciting topics..... I hope we can later move onto the fast action roller-coaster ride of "financial ratios" .)
:D

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:21 am

LunaNik wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:Can I assume that you are a fan of Adam Smith, since he differed so radically from Rothbard?
No. I don’t believe, in 2017, there exists such a thing as rational self-interest. And it’s patently clear that laissez-faire economics only leads to a rapidly widening income disparity.


If one doesn't believe in laissez-faire economics, doesn't one necessarily believe in government economics, controlled by politicians?

Here's a little anecdote that's true: After college one of my best high school friends took a job with investment banker Charles Schwab. He said to me "You might be on to something with your libertarian stuff. We get these guaranteed stock offerings now and then, like if you invest in some rare metal mining stock the Congress will guarantee that if the price goes down, you will be reimbursed, because this company is critical to US military readiness. But as soon as these stocks are issued, they are gone. These are no-lose investments and we don't get to handle any of them, and it maybe it's no wonder that after a Congressman who spent his last dime getting a elected is a millionaire after he's spent two terms in office."

I say that I didn't make that up, but you can believe it or not.

You can believe in the spontaneous order of free markets or prefer government-controlled markets in health, energy, education, whatever. I prefer the former. (Btw, Nancy Pelosi's net worth is somethin like 26 million bucks and Bernie Sanders' net worth is around 4 million bucks, so is having over $26 million or over $4 million having too much money, or is it some other figure?)
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 2:25 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Tom Palven wrote: I stand corrected, "capitalist" was in usage before Das Kapital, but Adam Smith didn't use the word.
It's weird question this. Technically I would assume capitalism was a defined concept in the 15th century as Dutch accountants started to use "balance sheets" (capital wealth) in conjunction with P&L statements..

The ship is hired out and the ship comes back, so it is represented on the Balance sheet as an ongoing asset ( capital)

( Gosh, this forum has some very exciting topics..... I hope we can later move onto the fast action roller-coaster ride of "financial ratios" .)
:D

You're probably right, as I assume you would be about financial topics. I'm referring to the use of the word as an economic ideology generally considered positively by the wealthy and negatively by the workers. (Except for today, of course, when unskilled workers stupidly support an unregulated free market based on deluded ideas of their own independence and skills, and an unfounded belief in upward mobility.)
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12220
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby JO 753 » Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:31 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:( Gosh, this forum has some very exciting topics..... I hope we can later move onto the fast action roller-coaster ride of "financial ratios" .)


We can alwayz go bak to arguing about UFOz.
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:44 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:... unskilled workers stupidly support an unregulated free market based on deluded ideas of their own independence and skills, and an unfounded belief in upward mobility.)


This is a repeat of an opinion I expressed as to where economic stagnation in the US, except in the MIC, and lack of upward mobility, has it roots:

Once Upon a Decade 1968-1978

In I968 Richard Nixon was elected US President and was sworn in on a Quaker family Bible turned to a verse about beating swords into plowshares.

In 1972 Nixon visited Moscow and negotiated an Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia, and was the first sitting President to visit China, establishing relations there.

During the next several years Nixon:

1. Took the US off what remained of the gold/silver standard and reportedly stated “We are all Keynesians now.” Silver coins were replaced with silver-colored copper coins, and without hard metal backing the door was opened to unlimited federal spending, "quantitative easing," and a now $20 trillion debt.

2. Declared a "war on drugs" and initiated the No-Knock Laws, co-sponsored in the Senate by Democrat Ted Kennedy, which led to the militarization of US police.

3. And in 1973 ended conscription and withdrew US troops from Vietnam.

In 1976 Jimmy Carter was elected President.

On his second day in office he pardoned Vietnam War draft-dodgers. (A good thing.)

In 1978 the Carter administration expanded federal regulatory supervision with the creation of the Departments of Energy and Education.

Elsewhere in1978 the Chinese Communist Party took the opposite path choosing free market advocate Deng Xiaoping to lead them out of their economic nightmare.

It worked for the Chinese, and while for the last four decades economists Paul Krugman and Robert Reich, among other central command advocates, have been chanting a mantra that the Chinese economy is overheated and about to crash, it continues to expand and loans money to the US at interest.
__________________
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 4:00 pm

Tom Palven wrote:Elsewhere in1978 the Chinese Communist Party took the opposite path choosing free market advocate Deng Xiaoping to lead them out of their economic nightmare.

It worked for the Chinese, and while for the last four decades economists Paul Krugman and Robert Reich, among other central command advocates, have been chanting a mantra that the Chinese economy is overheated and about to crash, it continues to expand and loans money to the US at interest.
You're taking an extremely one-dimensional view of the Chinese economy over the past 40 years.

1. The Chinese did not go full free market in 1978; they went mixed-market. Most of the industry remained State-owned.
2. Even after privatizing in the '90s, the State kept control of the energy and banking industries.
3. The State has in place long-term, large-scale programs to counter poverty.
4. The State's removal of price controls and regulations has, as I predicted, created income disparity. China's Gini coefficient is comparable to the US. (Russia's is better than both of ours, and European countries, Canada, and Australia are the best.)
5. Because of the lack of regulation, the Chinese economy is both energy-intensive and -inefficient.
6. The Chinese economy, today, is still not a free market economy; it is a State capitalism.

At the end of the day, a country is not a business. The purpose of a business is to show a profit; the purpose of a country is to benefit its citizens. China's economy is largely not doing that. Neither is the US' economy in its current state, and that would be made worse by enacting an unregulated market.

We read with regularity about corporations taken to task by consumer protection agencies for financial fraud, violations of consumer safety regulations, ignoring truth-in-advertising laws, deliberate pollution, and more. Do you really believe that removing consumer, environmental, and market protection regulations will improve this? When it's patently obvious that corporations are only interested in profit, regardless of the consequences?
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Fri Jun 30, 2017 5:09 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:... in 1978 the Chinese Communist Party took the opposite path choosing free market advocate Deng Xiaoping to lead them out of their economic nightmare.

It worked for the Chinese, and while for the last four decades economists Paul Krugman and Robert Reich, among other central command advocates, have been chanting a mantra that the Chinese economy is overheated and about to crash, it continues to expand and loans money to the US at interest.
You're taking an extremely one-dimensional view of the Chinese economy over the past 40 years.


When I first visited China 25 years ago the streets of Beijing were curb to curb bicycle traffic. On my most recent visit it was all Mercedes and Toyota traffic.

The Chinese have historically been great nature-lovers, and now that they are becoming wealthy they are encouraging their industries to clean up their acts. The can't do much about the fine dust that blows across from the Gobi Desert in the Spring, but they have been doing a lot to reduce pollution and protect their environment.

Why is it that in the days of the Robber Barons lower and middle class Americans were upwardly mobile and they set aside areas like Yosemite, Zion National Park, and so on?

On the other hand, take a look at the record of the major US industries today, the MIC, both here at home and abroad.

Just Google "pollution at US military bases."

Here is one example:
http://projectcensored.org/2-us-departm ... he-planet/
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 5:34 pm

Tom Palven wrote:Why is it that in the days of the Robber Barons lower and middle class Americans were upwardly mobile

Image

A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn
Chapter 11: Robber Barons and Rebels
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Fri Jun 30, 2017 7:40 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:Why is it that in the days of the Robber Barons lower and middle class Americans were upwardly mobile

Image

A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn
Chapter 11: Robber Barons and Rebels


Yes, yes. Howard Zinn was a socialist, and socialism, increasingly stifling bureaucracy, staggering loads of paperwork, and licensing requirements for one and all including barbers and dog-walkers, have been politically correct remedies for decades now, making activities like drug trafficking and robbing convenience stores look like attractive opportunities for fun and profit.

Sorry if I'm raining on your long, boring, parade.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9882
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:22 pm

Tom

Nations called socialist, like in Scandinavia, Iceland, and my own country, have been outperforming the USA on measures related to the welfare of their citizens, for many years now. The USA leads the world in military might, and in the degree to which that might is used to kill the citizens of foreign countries. But it does not do a lot to help its own people.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:34 pm

Tom Palven wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:Why is it that in the days of the Robber Barons lower and middle class Americans were upwardly mobile

Image

A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn
Chapter 11: Robber Barons and Rebels


Yes, yes. Howard Zinn was a socialist, and socialism, increasingly stifling bureaucracy, staggering loads of paperwork, and licensing requirements for one and all including barbers and dog-walkers, have been politically correct remedies for decades now, making activities like drug trafficking and robbing convenience stores look like attractive opportunities for fun and profit.

Sorry if I'm raining on your long, boring, parade.

Well then, which delusional, starry-eyed, capitalist "{!#%@} the poor people" version of history did you read? Murray Rothbard's? Ayn Rand's?

As is typical of most modern free market capitalists, your viewpoints are extreme; you allow for absolutely no grey areas at all. You seem to believe that all regulations are bad if they infringe in any way on the ability of anyone to profit. And you have this unfounded idea that the market will regulate itself, despite decades of evidence to the contrary. You folks have had your chance to prove that your way works...several times during US history, in fact. The result has always been economic disaster.

Howard Zinn was not a socialist. If you think he was, then you don't know what "socialist" means.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10227
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jun 30, 2017 8:46 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:Why is it that in the days of the Robber Barons lower and middle class Americans were upwardly mobile

Without reading the link, and assuming this is arguably true........my minimal take on History would be the phenomenal growth rate overall..... that high tide that lifts all boats. Even the Robber Barons could not capture it all. Not the same growth rate today, so they have captured all the growth. Imagine the rising tide limited to your own Country Club Swimming pool?

Hoomans: have a hard time thinking about any subject with more than 2 or 3 variables. Easily distracted by bright lights... or labels.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10407
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby OlegTheBatty » Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:51 pm

The difference is that from the '60's and earlier, the Robber Barons had to make their money by investing in things that produced jobs, either directly or indirectly. Nowadays, the vast majority of investments are in things that don't create jobs, such as derivatives, and tax evasion by moving money to offshore tax havens. etc.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10227
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:43 pm

Thats an excellent recognition.....that would be an easy issue to actually document. Worlds richest man: Bill Gates. Top runners today are Bezos and others. Not investors other than Buffet and Soros?

So......on your theme.... the Robber Barons of Today do so by disrupting the status quo rather than creating new categories?..... or their new categories take over old industries by being more efficient.... meaning fewer employees.

And the New Wave doing away with employees altogether.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:47 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:The difference is that from the '60's and earlier, the Robber Barons had to make their money by investing in things that produced jobs, either directly or indirectly. Nowadays, the vast majority of investments are in things that don't create jobs, such as derivatives, and tax evasion by moving money to offshore tax havens. etc.

This is why I won't name a historical economist with whose views I agree...none of their theories are valid for today's particular mixture of variables, especially given the increasingly rapid elimination of unskilled labor jobs. Radically new economic theories are needed.

Unregulated free market capitalism is neither new nor radical. Unless you are a member of the 1%, buying into its premise is delusional, since you won't profit from it. It doesn't level the playing field; it builds a special "members only" playing field for the already-wealthy to profit at the expense of both the worker and the consumer. Additionally, the already-wealthy need not worry about either labor or consumer regulations, since their money shields them.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9882
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:22 am

The real problem is political corruption, which prevents the appropriate correction being applied. The very wealthy use their money to bribe (campaign contribution). The rich should be taxed more heavily, but they get so many loopholes in the tax law, that Don the con (president) can boast of not paying tax for 18 years. With his $2 billion, the country could tax him a billion dollars, and he would still have more money than he could ever spend.

The new economy in which most people will not be able to get jobs, will require massive taxes of those with wealth, in order to provide a reasonable living for those with no source of income.
Last edited by Lance Kennedy on Sat Jul 01, 2017 1:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 01, 2017 1:26 am

Tom Palven wrote:If one doesn't believe in laissez-faire economics, doesn't one necessarily believe in government economics, controlled by politicians?
No. That's you being an extremist again, thinking that a nation's economy must be either unregulated free market or strictly controlled in every single aspect by the government. There's a lot of grey area in between those two extremes.

Clearly, you think the term "regulated" means "oppressed" from the viewpoint of the business owner. Have you considered what consequences an unregulated market would have on workers? On consumers? Perhaps you should read some history of what it was like to work in the US before the labor movement...for children as well as adults.

Stop and think of the number of ways that corporations have attempted to defraud consumers.

Enron took full advantage of deregulation of the fossil fuel industry to misrepresent its earnings reports to shareholders, resulting in devastating losses for them when the company failed. In addition, Enron executives embezzled company funds and manipulated the energy market. This prompted the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a regulation to increase corporate transparency and disclosure requirements, close accounting loopholes, strengthen compliance monitoring, establish penalties for malfeasance, and create the Public Company Accounting Oversight board. Still think an unregulated market is a great idea?

"Lehman Brothers had morphed into a real estate hedge fund disguised as an investment bank.[50] By 2008, Lehman had assets of $680 billion supported by only $22.5 billion of firm capital. From an equity position, its risky commercial real estate holdings were three times greater than capital. In such a highly leveraged structure, a 3 to 5 percent decline in real estate values would wipeout all capital." It should come as no surprise that that's exactly what happened. The executive officers declined to forego their multi-million dollar bonuses, and fought every court order requiring them to repay the investors they defrauded. Still think an unregulated market is a great idea?

Here are a bunch of recent convictions for fraud. You think instances of fraud would decrease in an unregulated market? These people committed their crimes with regulations in place! Without regulations, the people they defrauded would have been SOL.
• Owner of New York Produce Distributor Sentenced for Embezzling Over $750,000 from Company Profit Sharing Plan
• Former Samsung America Director Sentenced for Embezzling More Than $1 Million
• President and Chief Financial Officer of Payroll Services Company Sentenced
• Former Attorney Sentenced for Stealing Over $2.6 Million
• Kansas Man Sentenced In $6 Million Embezzlement
• CEO of “Green” Cleaning Product Company Sentenced for Defrauding Investors
• Former Bank Vice President Sentenced in Connection with Rothstein Case (Ponzi scheme)
• Former Maryland Businessman Sentenced for $7 Million Bond Scheme and Tax Fraud
• Former CEO of Marketing Agency Sentenced for $2 Million Fraud and Kickback Scheme
These were just a sample from IRS Fiscal Year 2016.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:02 am

OlegTheBatty wrote:The difference is that from the '60's and earlier, the Robber Barons had to make their money by investing in things that produced jobs, either directly or indirectly. Nowadays, the vast majority of investments are in things that don't create jobs, such as derivatives, and tax evasion by moving money to offshore tax havens. etc.


Yes, and also investments in the MIC that create jobs which are unfortunately making products to kill people and destroy things.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:10 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Howard Zinn was not a socialist. If you think he was, then you don't know what "socialist" means.


Do you suppose that Zinn didn't know what "socialist" means, either, when he called himself a socialist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Zinn
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10227
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 01, 2017 2:12 am

A supposed market without enforced regulations is just a free for all controlled by the most powerful thieves.

I know......... too subtle for our Right Wing capitalists.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:33 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:A supposed market without enforced regulations is just a free for all controlled by the most powerful thieves.


That's the Conventional Wisdom.

Other Conventional Wisdom includes "Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior" and "The MIC is protecting America."

The trouble with CW is that it's usually baseless.

The most powerful thieves in the US today are in the extremely well-regulated MIC which has revolving-door, musical-chair, corporate directors connected to the US Congress, a prime example being Dick Cheney.

Wall Street brokerages "too big to fail" are another example of well-regulated thievery.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7371
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:16 pm

What makes you think the MIC is well regulated - or maybe more regulated than any other industry? It seems to me that what isn`t regulated are the powerful thieves that simply use the MIC to their advantage.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:22 pm

TJrandom wrote:What makes you think the MIC is well regulated - or maybe more regulated than any other industry? It seems to me that what isn`t regulated are the powerful thieves that simply use the MIC to their advantage.


It's exceptionally well-regulated and monopolized.

You try to sell even a hand gun to someone in Saudi Arabia.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7371
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby TJrandom » Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:27 pm

How about box cutters?

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 12:48 pm

TJrandom wrote:How about box cutters?


Good luck.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 01, 2017 4:07 pm

Tom Palven wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:
Howard Zinn was not a socialist. If you think he was, then you don't know what "socialist" means.


Do you suppose that Zinn didn't know what "socialist" means, either, when he called himself a socialist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Zinn

Mostly, he called himself a Democratic Socialist, which is not remotely the same thing as a Marxist.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 01, 2017 4:10 pm

Tom Palven wrote:
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:A supposed market without enforced regulations is just a free for all controlled by the most powerful thieves.


That's the Conventional Wisdom.

Other Conventional Wisdom includes "Jesus Christ is our Lord and Savior" and "The MIC is protecting America."

The trouble with CW is that it's usually baseless.

The most powerful thieves in the US today are in the extremely well-regulated MIC which has revolving-door, musical-chair, corporate directors connected to the US Congress, a prime example being Dick Cheney.

Wall Street brokerages "too big to fail" are another example of well-regulated thievery.

Well, here's the problem. ^^^
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
JO 753
Has No Life
Posts: 12220
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:21 pm
Custom Title: rezident owtsidr
Location: BLaNDLaND
Contact:

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby JO 753 » Sat Jul 01, 2017 5:15 pm

Tom Palven wrote:The trouble with CW is that it's usually baseless.


Got any examplez? Kuz this iznt wun uv them.

Youre mistake iz thinking that if its not perfect, its completely useless.[/quote]
Gubmint for us
http://www.7532020.com
not the rich.

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 6:57 pm

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:
Nikki Nyx wrote:
Howard Zinn was not a socialist. If you think he was, then you don't know what "socialist" means.


Do you suppose that Zinn didn't know what "socialist" means, either, when he called himself a socialist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Zinn

Mostly, he called himself a Democratic Socialist, which is not remotely the same thing as a Marxist.


I never even mentioned Marxism, although Marxism and socialism seem more than remotely similar.
Last edited by Tom Palven on Sat Jul 01, 2017 7:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 7:03 pm

JO 753 wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:The trouble with CW is that it's usually baseless.


Got any examplez? Kuz this iznt wun uv them.


My examples above were that it's Conventional Wisdom that "Jesus is Lord and Savior" and that the gigantic MIC budget is needed to protect the lives of Americans.

Pleeze pay attenshun.
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9882
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:47 pm

On Marxism etc

As good skeptics, we should be oriented to evidence.
There is plenty of evidence as to the value of various political and economic systems, in the form of what we know happened to nations who tried them. Marxism and communism has to be seen as a failure, since nations who used those systems caused great harm to their citizens. Socialism on the other hand, when done according to the Scandinavian model, results in an excellent society. Unrestrained capitalism was seen in industrial revolution Britain, and resulted in terrible work conditions, and a short life and bad health to those who worked under those conditions.

It is all very well theorizing about the best way to do things, but it is much better to look long and hard at the very real empirical evidence that exists.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2042
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Nikki Nyx » Sat Jul 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Tom Palven wrote:I never even mentioned Marxism, although Marxism and socialism seem more than remotely similar.
There are distinct differences that are quite important, actually.

Marx’s socialism was merely a transitional period between capitalism and communism. In his view, no State was necessary, the people would collectively own the means of production, and distribution would be based on contribution, not need. Marx’s socialism was closer to communism.

Most people, when they discuss socialism, think of centralized socialism, in which the State dictatorially controls everything, both the production and the distribution for consumption.

Democratic socialism combines a socialist economy with a politically democratic form of government.

Social democracy keeps crucial industries (like energy, communications, transportation, etc.) nationalized and publicly-owned, but allows for private ownership of the means of production, albeit with strong regulations. Markets are free, but regulated against fraud, corruption, and other undesirable effects. Taxes are generally high, but every citizen receives robust public services, and income disparity is low.
—————
In any case, you’re dismissing Zinn’s writings on the Robber Barons because he’s a self-proclaimed socialist, is that correct? At the same time, you proffer self-proclaimed anarcho-capitalist Murray Rothbard as proof that socialism is bad and unregulated free markets are good. That’s rather hypocritical.

Let’s hear from some modern-day economists.

Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize for Economics, 2001
...one of the central tenets of the neoliberal ideology — the idea that markets function best when left alone and that an unregulated market is the best way to increase economic growth — has now been pretty much disproved. LINK


Jonathan Ostry, Prakash Loungani, Davide Furceri
International Monetary Fund

The increase in inequality engendered by financial openness and austerity might itself undercut growth, the very thing that the neoliberal agenda is intent on boosting. There is now strong evidence that inequality can significantly lower both the level and the durability of growth. LINK


Association of Environmental and Resource Economists
2012 opinion survey of 352 members

Q. Unregulated markets provide public goods in optimal quantities.
A. 96% disagree
This statement achieved the highest consensus ranking. LINK


Robert J. Shiller, Sterling Professor of Economics, Yale
Perhaps the most widely admired of all the economic theories taught in our universities is the notion that an unregulated competitive economy is optimal for everyone. In this optimal economy, each person is said to be a free actor who makes decisions purely in his or her own self-interest. Economists on both the right and left commonly say that these fundamental ideas tie our values of freedom and individuality to the success of our economies.

The problem is that these ideas are flawed. Along with George A. Akerlof, university professor at Georgetown and a fellow Nobel laureate in economic science, I have used behavioral economics to plumb the soundness of these notions.

While we confirm the importance of free markets, we have found that market regulation has been crucial, and believe that will continue to be true in the future.

Don’t get us wrong: George and I are certainly free-market advocates. In fact, I have argued for years that we need more such markets, like futures markets for single-family home prices or occupational incomes, or markets that would enable us to trade claims on gross domestic product. I’ve written about these things in this column. But, at the same time, we both believe that standard economic theory is typically overenthusiastic about unregulated free markets. It usually ignores the fact that, given normal human weaknesses, an unregulated competitive economy will inevitably spawn an immense amount of manipulation and deception.

In fact, the real success of economies that embody free markets has much to do with the heroic efforts of campaigners for better values, both among private organizations and advocates of government regulation. For example, before 1900 most of the patent medicines that were sold to the public were fraudulent. Most of these frauds have since been eliminated, not by market forces, but by the activities of private citizens who took action not selfishly but for the public good. LINK
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Tom Palven
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4728
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 12:29 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Tom Palven » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:25 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote: Unrestrained capitalism was seen in industrial revolution Britain, and resulted in terrible work conditions, and a short life and bad health to those who worked under those conditions.


As they say in Malawi, "Compared to what?"
http://www.skynewspoint.com/top-10-poor ... orld-2017/
If one can be taught to believe absurdities, one can commit atrocities. --Voltaire

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10227
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:47 pm

Every economic theory works........in principle. when hoomans apply such economic theories, they always get it wrong. The theory actually remains pure and untested. Hoomans constantly show they are unable to conform to economic theory.

What to do?

.............................................................................. DOG FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!

Just Look.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9882
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:50 pm

Tom

"Compared to what " is always a good rejoinder, since, as you clearly know, nothing has meaning except relative to something else.

My response is to take an example. A coal miner who is forced to work under terrible conditions may die of accident or black lung disease before he is 30 years of age. Relative to those of his generation who survived childhood, that is too young.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10227
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Sat Jul 01, 2017 10:54 pm

Compared to what.=========>compared to societies that have not been bent to the rule and benefit of a cloistered few.

Its what many mammal species do though. Ha, ha........something that controls more than we imagine or would voluntarily submit to, taken as normal, and its all genetics.

Thats gotta piss off a thinking person. Unless they are of the cloistered few???? And so goes the tale.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29108
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Helthcare a Privelij

Postby Gord » Sun Jul 02, 2017 12:40 am

Nikki Nyx wrote:
Tom Palven wrote:2. I don't like the word capitalism and all that it has come to imply- the MIC, welfare for the rich, and so on.
Smith didn't use the word "capitalism." It wasn't invented by Marx until around 100 years later.

2. Actually, Marx did not invent the term as we now use it. French socialist Louis Blanc did, defining it as "the appropriation of capital by some to the exclusion of others." Anarchist and founder of mutualism, Pierre-Joseph Proudhom, further defined it as an ideology: "Economic and social regime in which capital, the source of income, does not generally belong to those who make it work through their labour."

Lemme just sliiiiide this right in here: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=capitalist

capitalist (n.)

1791, "man of money," from French capitaliste, a coinage of the Revolution and a term of reproach; see capital (n.1) + -ist....
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE


Return to “Healthcare”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests