why unfettered markets will not work

and who's arguing for unfettered markets? To believe that we are overburdened by certain regulations does not automatically mean one wants no regulations at all.
 
they want deregulation for deregulations sake.

"WE have too many laws"

when someone used this stupid argument you know they don't care about the RIGHT level of regulation they just want it all gone
 
evince said:
they want deregulation for deregulations sake.

"WE have too many laws"

when someone used this stupid argument you know they don't care about the RIGHT level of regulation they just want it all gone
Click to expand...

Really? That's what I meant?
 
cawacko said:
and who's arguing for unfettered markets? To believe that we are overburdened by certain regulations does not automatically mean one wants no regulations at all.
Click to expand...

Well, everyone sure thinks repubs are arguing for that -

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/29/1079058/-The-unfettered-Free-Market-is-really-like
I had and interesting conversation the other day with a conservative, who was trying to convince me that:

A) Government is TOO Big, and it's what's holding back economic growth.


B) That Government Regulation is the source of all our economic ills.


and that ...



C) That the unfettered Free Market, without all those bureaucratic regulations and taxes, would cure all economic ills, if only given a chance, because the Free Market is by its very nature "self-correcting" ...
Click to expand...


http://www.mindanddestiny.org/2011/11/unfettered-markets.html
epublicans are also trying to block the funds necessary to implement the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. House Republicans have demanded that the bureau be run by a five-person commission; Senate Republicans have vowed that they will not confirm Elizabeth Warren or anyone else to run it.

Congressional Republicans want to cripple our government’s ability to police too-big-to-fail institutions. In the final analysis, their goal is to repeal Wall Street reform completely. They’re determined to re-deregulate Wall St, because the Republican attack on the Democrats’ financial reforms have paid off handsomely for them in the form of millions of dollars in campaign contributions.
Click to expand...


http://www.beezernotes.com/wordpress/?p=1385
But of the two parties, the GOP drunk most deeply of this flawed ideology that unregulated free markets will provide for all.
Click to expand...

http://democrats.budget.house.gov/committee-report/report-gop-budget-protects-special-interests-expense-jobs-key-investments-and
There is no reason to believe that the Republican budget’s plan for unfettered market competition will result in affordable, acceptable coverage for seniors.
Click to expand...


http://www.politicususa.com/2012/01/13/fox-news-gop-capitalism.html
And now we understand why some people on Wall Street do not support the Republican unfettered market approach; it leads to wild, erratic growth and inevitable complete destruction. It invites the prosperity of the dishonest and the greedy rather than the hard-working and the excellent. A healthy economy requires some regulation.

But even the wild west fantasy that Republicans are laissez-faire Libertarians toward the free market is off base. Republicans have messed with the market for years, playing favorites, offering tax breaks and subsidies to certain industries while not to others and even to certain companies while not others. It is, in fact, Republicans’ abuse of what they call capitalism that has most threatened its viability. It’s ironic that they are unable to even take responsibility for this, and are still operating in a tunnel of denial about their part in the Bush Stock Market Crash of 2008.
Click to expand...


But it's true, some have thought different:
http://www.examiner.com/article/today-s-republican-party-more-regulation-no-more-free-market-less-freedom
While the Republican Party talks free market, the reality is quite different. The Party calls for high regulation of American farmers, even paying farmers not to farm. Much like the Obama Administration and every Presidential Administration for the last few decades, Republican or Democrat, they proudly pick winners and losers. They decide what farmers should farm, subsidize some farming operations while not others and actively manipulate agriculture in America. The Republican Party is no different than the Democratic Party when it comes to farming operations and actively distorts the free market with federal government mandates and incentives. Republicans have proven themselves, they are not interested in seeing a free market in the agriculture industry.

Another example of elected Republicans picking winners and losers like Democrats can be seen in the many 'free trade agreements' our federal government signs with other countries. These agreements should all be renamed 'managed trade agreements' as they do not offer free trade between the countries and nearly every agreement decides which products will be 'protected' and which will not. This is anti-free trade and anti-free market.

Like Democrats, Republicans continue to advocate for forcing money out of one's paycheck. Regardless of the rhetoric, Americans will not receive a full paycheck so long as Republicans or Democrats are in charge. While Libertarian Party presidential nominee Gary Johnson has a plan for each American to receive their full paycheck, without mandatory deductions going to federal, state and local governments, Obama and Romney are fine with the status quo.

Republicans use the term "constructive regulation" in their platform to define their approach to regulation. As per Romney's elective record, this seems contrary to the notion Republicans want an America free from regulation. In fact, when you look at most elected Republican's voting records, they vote for more regulation of business and individuals, not less.

While their platform calls for "protecting Internet freedom", the Republican Party platform advocates the opposite.
Click to expand...



I think it's that they don't want to regulate their friends, but LOVE regulating the rest of us
 
tekkychick said:
Well, everyone sure thinks repubs are arguing for that -

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/29/1079058/-The-unfettered-Free-Market-is-really-like



http://www.mindanddestiny.org/2011/11/unfettered-markets.html



http://www.beezernotes.com/wordpress/?p=1385


http://democrats.budget.house.gov/committee-report/report-gop-budget-protects-special-interests-expense-jobs-key-investments-and



http://www.politicususa.com/2012/01/13/fox-news-gop-capitalism.html



But it's true, some have thought different:
http://www.examiner.com/article/today-s-republican-party-more-regulation-no-more-free-market-less-freedom




I think it's that they don't want to regulate their friends, but LOVE regulating the rest of us
Click to expand...

tc, I don't mean to attack the source here but you'll have to excuse me if I don't find a Daily Kos writer claiming some unnamed conservative wants no regulations at all that convincing nor anything put out by a Democratic website claiming what a Republican really thinks. (And I would say the same way about a Republican party site speaking about a Democrat. If it has anything to do with the RNC or DNC it has very little credibility to me)

And you have a liberal site claiming Republicans want unfettered capitalism. I can find conservative sites that claim Democrats are all socialists. Does that make it so?

If Republicans are for unfettered markets why would a Republican led Congress and a Republican President pass the Sarbenes-Oxley act?

Republicans are for the free market when it serves their interest. They are against the free market when it serves their interest.
 
Professor Baxter said:
When have any of them advocated removing laws against fraud and theft, which this case involves?
Click to expand...

I wasn't commenting on a case. I was answering a question. And I don't view laws against fraud and theft as economic regulations but as laws preserving property rights.


Professor Baxter said:
Rockwell is an editor and has a background in publishing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I suppose he isn't trained as an economist but instead is a Austrian school cheerleaders. My main point was to distinguish folks like Mises and Rothbards and others associated with the Austrian school that support some government intervention in the economy (Hayek, for example).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top