Paul Volcker asked about the Austrian school of Economics.

[BroodjeEend]

this guy makes a lot of sense

[atrios28]

"Now you're telling everybody how old you are" (Laughter)

"Yes, but notice I'm not ever telling them how rich I are"

[USTreasuryBond]

Austrian and the Chicago school come to the same conclusion, they just reach it in different ways. The Chicago school has produced more award winning economists than any other school. What's funny is that these socialists try to take Keynes side of the argument, without realizing that it's not a marxist or a noam chumpsky position. Keynesian economics strictly relies on a free market in order to finance itself. Liberals are brain dead. Modern liberals that is, not real liberals.

[tadaa11]

@USTreasuryBond Yeah, not to mention the fact that socialism only gives the impression of working when capitalism builds the foundation for them to steal.

[USTreasuryBond]

@tadaa11 Yes, they rely on the very system of capitalism to create GDP lol. Without the price system, there would be no way to calculate real socialism.

[USTreasuryBond]

Hitler and the socialist party hated mises too

[Rrppooq]

The word 'libertarian' was chosen because leftists stole the word 'liberal'. Give our terms back and stop whining, then you will get 'libertarian' in change.

[perdondaris]

Anything but eager eh? Why not collude with dictators if you believe might makes right? I'm not cherry picking the word. Libertarian describes a form of socialism. Harry Browne and the capitalist worshipers stole it because they did not want to call themselves the Liberal Party or the Capitalist Party. It is pure opportunism that capitalists call themselves libertarians. That the capitalists dare lay claim to socialists like de Cleyre and Kafka is disgusting.

[perdondaris]

Mises the intellectual founder of the Austrian school worked for Dollfuss, a self avowed Austrofascist. Proponents of the Austrian school of economics are on the far right of the political spectrum. Before WW2 capitalists in the USA openly expressed admiration for fascists like Franco and Mussolini (think Henry Ford and Father Coughlin--the 1930s versions of Beck & Limbaugh). They began calling themselves libertarians after the end of WW2. Libertarianism is a segment of the socialist movement.

[sirellyn]

@perdondaris You are quite the cherry picker of terms and associations. You are using a very old version of libertarian, it's polar opposite to socialist in today's vernacular.  You can't even relate them to the "right" as both parties have muddied any sort of separated stance for right/left. The relationship with Mises to Dollfuss was anything but eager, and you omit the policies Mises pushed and won did hold steady their currency amidst surrounded otherwise by hyperinflation.

[trick29420]

"Gold is Money. Everything Else is Credit." - J.P. Morgan

[TruthInjector]

"No body 'wants' to lend"-- Volcker is great but he is under the misunderstanding that this is only a problem that was created by allowing frauds of all kinds in banking and investment. It is that but it is also directed to undo the power of the U.S.A.. We must not allow the U.S. dollar to be replaced as the global trading currency.

[strawspulled]

@Odysseus087 cool story bro

[Trimbler00]

@Odysseus087 ... he says "School of Austrian Economics" at 0:20 and says "Austrian School" several more times throughout the video and characterizes their views accurately.

[RadiantMirage]

@Odysseus087 He certainly was familiar with it. I suppose if you only watched 30 seconds of the video, then you might be under a false impression. Your name calling and indirect attempt at age fallacy are more laughable than any one of us could ever be.

[Odysseus087]

@RadiantMirage yeah your right. although the fact that he was merely familiar with it doesn't give it much credibility. he certainly wasn't as serious about it as the kid who asked the question. i don't know what the hell an indirect attempt at age fallacy is.

[RadiantMirage]

@Odysseus087 You mention the fact the person asking the question is a "kid" several times. This seems to me as an appeal to age, as if his age is a reason to not take his question seriously. However, you aren't directly making this claim; that is why I said it was indirect.

Certainly Volcker's familiarity with the Austrian school does not itself give it credibility. However, Keynesian economics is not valid simply because people(including Volcker) are familiar with it either.

[Odysseus087]

@RadiantMirage yeah except austrian economics isn't really taken seriously among serious economists. how many austrian economists have been hired at american universities? universities around the world? hardly any if any at all. it's pseudo economics. it's the same thing as supply-side trickle down economics. art laffer is the only actual economist who promotes it, and he is a charlatan. the problem in the economy is lack of demand. increasing supply won't help.

[RadiantMirage]

@Odysseus087 I don't have statistics, but there are Austrians in university positions.

Argumentum ad populum fallacy and ad hominem. Look them up. I suggest reading about other logical fallacies too, it will benefit you.

[Odysseus087]

@RadiantMirage i just graduated from the uconn with a minor in economics. the austrian school of economics is not taught in any economics class and is not in any economics textbook. hardly anyone who actually has a degree in economics supports the austrian school viewpoint. i only know of one prominent economist who does, art laffer. he created the trickle down theory on a paper napkin while sitting at a fancy restaurant on wall st. forgive me for not trusting him.

[Odysseus087]

@RadiantMirage if you think that everyone who doesn't agree with you is employing 'argumentum ad populum', then it sounds like you are simply an anti-intellectual. i suggest reading about anti-intellectualism. i'm guessing you're also probably someone who doesn't agree with the near 100% of scientitsts who believe in evolution and climate change.

[RadiantMirage]

@Odysseus087 I never said everyone who disagrees with me is using that fallacy, only you. Nice implied straw man. The rest of that comment is irrelevant because you are trying to label me with groups of people that are irrelevant to Austrian Economics.

By the way, Art Laffer is not an Austrian Economist. So mentioning him and whatever flaws he may have is a red herring.

Keep it up, and a whole book on logical fallacies could feature your comments as examples.

[Odysseus087]

@RadiantMirage Peter Schiff and Art Laffer both came out in strong support of Herman Cain's "9-9-9 Plan." The plan that Cain got from a branch employee at his local Wells Fargo and that was allegedly inspired by a computer game. Laffer and Schiff are two sides of the same coin. Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. Actually, even though I distrust Laffer, I consider him less of a threat than Schiff. Schiff wants to return to a gold standard, which is an unspeakably bad idea.

[Salvysahagun]

@Odysseus087 Peter Schiff was against the 999 plan you nimrod

[Odysseus087]

@Salvysahagun Peter Schiff loved the 9-9-9 plan in an of itself. The thing he didn't like was that Cain never mentioned removing the payroll tax, so really it was a 9-9-9-9 plan. So essentially, Cain's plan wasn't extreme enough for Peter Schiff. He wants taxes as low as possible, but he did indeed say that he liked Cain's plan, just that he wanted it tweaked to make it "better."

[Salvysahagun]

@Odysseus087

Your just like most of the uninformed American political spectrum.

Only take the things you like out of others dialogues.

He was very clear that it would desimate the poor.

[Odysseus087]

@Salvysahagun You have no idea what you are talking about claiming that Schiff is against regressive taxation. Here's a Schiff quote: "We should tax people when they spend their wealth, not when they create it". The fact is, the poor and middle class spend a much higher % of their income than the rich do. So if you endorse Schiff's idea to heavily tax spending, then the middle class and poor would pay much higher rates than the rich. Regressive!

[Salvysahagun]

@Odysseus087

Thats because consumption creates inflation.

Study "Says Law"

Schiff never supported HEAVILY taxing spending. His father was part of the Anti Income Tax movement in the 70s that was started by liberal Hippies. No law requires the American People to pay an income tax.

You need to forget about Keynes. he was bad man for the ENTIRE feild of economics and was disproven in the 1800's by Batistat and Ricardo.

If it was up to me I'd outlaw consumer loans.

[daobagua]

@Odysseus087 Only if the rich never spend their earned money is what you said true. But if they never spend their money, then the poor and middle class will benefit from the deflationary effect on the currency. (less money in the system, same amount of products = cheaper goods). Now the rich might also give their money away at the end and that would also benefit the poor. I guess the only thing that doesn't benefit the poor is if the rich spend the money on themselves, so tax them then.

[jeffiek]

@daobagua ". I guess the only thing that doesn't benefit the poor is if the rich spend the money on themselves, so tax them then."

Not so. When they spend it on themselves, the people that build that stuff they buy have jobs. More people with jobs = less poor people.

[daobagua]

@jeffiek And here I thought the point of production was to create surplus goods for society, not to simply create jobs. My bad. Probably best if we take the interest rates to 0 (for everyone not just the banks). This way people can borrow money and spend it without regard. This will create jobs won't it? (This was all sarcastic)

[jeffiek]

@daobagua It's a good thing your put in the sarcasm note. Still, I haven't a clue as to what you meant.

[daobagua]

@jeffiek Your comment was that rich people spending their money on consumer goods creates jobs and thus is beneficial for the poor. Jobs is not the goal of any economy, the goal is to create goods that people want and that are affordable. When rich people (or anyone) spend all their money on goods, they put more money into the economy which drives the prices of the goods up. This hurts other people. When they save the reverse is done. This is why you should tax consumption (which is not good).

[TheClosestcontinuer]

@Odysseus087

I guess that's why we are in such a shitty condition. You're laughable.

[USTreasuryBond]

@Odysseus087 "The only people who take that shit seriously" Anyone with half a brain you mean? Tell me again who doesn't take the free market seriously?

[Zakdayak]

@USTreasuryBond Ron Paul fans...thats it. No Scientific Method. Enough said.

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

I'm as big of a science freak as it gets, studying Physics, Chemistry, and Biology. I have a bachelor's in both Physics and Applied Mathematics and going on to get a doctorate in the natural sciences and I can tell you the Austrians understand Philosophy of Science much better than the imitators of the Scientific Method in the aggregative schools. Men are not atoms and you never will be able to treat them as such. Read Mises' "Theory and History."

[Zakdayak]

@selfrealizedexile Thank you for illustrating my point, so people know I'm not making this shit up. We know a lot about human behavior. For example, if allow liars loans you get fraud. Big surprise there. In fact, Austrians believe in this kind of thing as well - they might refer to it as "moral hazard." Austrians are full of shit.

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

What you wrote isn't much of an argument. Have you even read the relevant literature on this subject of disagreement? The Austrian school chooses to not apply the Scientific Method (you'd be surprised how many people don't even properly understand what the Scientific Method actually is -- hint: it never proves anything, only falsifies, but you'll here people time and again talk about how an experiment proved something) not because it has some kind of neanderthalic distaste for

[Zakdayak]

@selfrealizedexile Oh, I see because I used the word shit twice you didn't actually bother to consider thee argument. Like I care, YOU WILL NEVER consider the argument, Austrians don't care!!! A priori is independent of facts or experience. But we know from experience that people do follow predictable paths. This is why I included an example. Thenyou went off on 60 paragraphs of nonsense.Furthermore, Austrians themselves don't adhere to this standard.

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

Well, you argument in favor of the scientific method in the social sciences was along the lines of "liar loans." But, that's really just a single issue and not the foundation of a whole school of thought like New Keynesianism or the Neo-classical school. If you want to make an argument in favor of what one of those schools has done, you need to speak on the "60 paragraphs of nonsense"; you need to provide justification for why you can aggregate unique individuals. Even the

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

proponents of these aggregative schools will admit their predictive power of what's happened in the markets the past 10 years (we can go back even further if you like--one word: stagflation) is astronomically off compared to how well Physics and Chemistry predict their respective phenomena. It's no accident progress is constantly made in the natural sciences with new technology and medicine being created yearly while economics continues to rehash centuries old fallacies, no progress

[Zakdayak]

@selfrealizedexile The existence of stagflation in the 70's negates everything we've learned about econ? Don't make me laugh. We know what the problems are with the economy, aggregate demand combined with the Fed incentivizing banks not to lend $1.4 Tril. This is the liquidity trap mentioned in the video. There is a glut of supply. According to Classical Economics, such a glut is impossible. But yet, we have it. Instead, the Austrians will attempt to make the circumstances fit their assumptions.

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

There's no such thing as too much *aggregate* supply or too little *aggregate* demand. The economy is not some thing you can neatly plot data from into a nifty little graph that means anything. You need to dwell on Hayek's statement, "aggregates conceal the most fundamental mechanisms of change." In other words, the complex, inter-locking chains in the economy--the true causes and effects of human action---are glossed over through statistical aggregation. And before you claim

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

anyone who opposes the misapplication of mathematics in economics as being merely frightened of economics, Murray Rothbard got his Bachelor's in Mathematics--this is the same guy that said economics is misusing and misunderstanding what mathematics is and where it can be applied. I, myself, have done math that would make your head pop, try modeling advanced physics phenomena (fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, tensors, fields, etc. this stuff actually is the proverbial "rocket science"

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

) with differential equations. And, yet, here are two examples of men who understand math on a high level, understand what its about, where it can be used, has the capacity to do it, and they're both telling you economics is misusing it for the ends its employers seek. Sure, you can attempt to model physical and chemical phenomena with roughly good accuracy for practical benefits, but you CANNOT do this with humans. Why is this so hard to understand? The logical leap is the size

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

of the Grand Canyon and yet you're taking it like it's so obvious we can and should apply the Scientific Method to society. Men are constantly changing, thinking, devouring new information, plotting new courses of action, they change what they want, they change what they hate, etc. etc. Everyday people react to new information and, what's more, they you cannot effectively separate these market actors into some kind of experiment with controls without already distorting the result.

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

So, in actuality, it is the Austrians who have the greater respect for Science and the aggregative schools whom insult Science the greatest by misunderstanding it and, like apes, attempting to imitate it. Again, if you could successfully apply the Scientific Method to society, why has there been such a stark contrast in progress of the Natural Sciences and the Social "Sciences"? It's because humans are infinitely more complicated and harder to control than atoms. If you can't

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

understand that, then, please God, don't start a career in the sciences--you'll be one of the most unsuccessful scientists or engineers ever, not understanding how to properly set-up experiments let alone able to understand and interpret the results you do get.  Go back and study Philosophy, particularly Philosophy of Science.

[Zakdayak]

@selfrealizedexile This is like a Nazi telling me to study Freud.

[daobagua]

@Zakdayak how so?

[jeffiek]

@Zakdayak "The existence of stagflation in the 70's negates everything we've learned about econ?"

Nice deception. selfrealizedexile wrote "is astronomically off", NOT "negates everything".

Try some honesty. It won't hurt much.

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

Science and progress, quite the contrary. Many prominent writers of the school have too much respect and sophisticated understanding of it to apply it in the social "sciences" because it understands that that method requires an immense amount of control over the experiment, something we'll never be able to achieve with humans. Science and its experiments are predicated on many assumptions, one of which being categorical uniformity--an atom of Na here is the same as an atom of Na

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

over there. The two atoms can have different properties in kinetic energy and position, but insofar as we call it a "Na" atom, it is uniform. No if's and's or but's about it. Science CANNOT tolerate uniqueness for its theories to explain phenomena. So, what the aggregative (we call them aggregative because they precisely try to aggregate unique humans and pieces of data associated with these unique humans into uniform blocks with which they might grope their way towards cause and

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

effect, but as Hayek told Keynes "aggregates conceal the most fundamental mechanisms of change.") schools assume is that humans are uniform. I don't know many--if any--people whom are willing to accept that assumption. But, they understand that if they do not accept this premise, they CANNOT go on to apply broad mathematical and statistical techniques to the data in a scientific fashion (scientific as they see it, but really it's "scientistic" because it is incorrectly applying

[Zakdayak]

@selfrealizedexile We're not assuming anything. We live in the real world and we can predict what will happen when : You de-regulate, allow liars loans, bail-out the banks. It's not rocket science....ironically.

[jeffiek]

@Zakdayak "We live in the real world and we can predict what will happen when "

Who is WE? Who predicted that BEFORE it happened. Certainly not Greenspan or Bernanke. Who is WE?

YOU began with the insult - No Scientific method. Then you complain Austrians won't listen to an argument. Well - MAKE ONE.

[Zakdayak]

@jeffiek It wasn't an insult, at least when I insult I make the case first. Sorry if you missed it. It's there. As for who we is supposed to be, I meant human beings, or if you'd like, educated persons. There are many studies that cover all sorts of things in society.

[jeffiek]

@Zakdayak Well then, you contradict yourself. WE (as you use it) did NOT predict the results of the liar loans ...... WE ( as you use it ) predicted that life would be happy all day long.

The Austrian economists were shouting warnings at the top of their lungs. No one listened.

FYI - No one has ever used "No scientific method" as anything other than an insult.

Go yank someone else's crank.

[Zakdayak]

@jeffiek There were plenty people who saw what was coming and were certainly not Austrians. And Austrians are shouting warnings every year (the Ron Paul newsletters are filled with that crap, I've been reading other articles forever about the "upcoming" collapse, the Austrians are a broken clock). Also, the Austrians have nothing to say about liars loans (like Fletchforfreedom here on YT who flat out doesn't believe in them). I'm not sure why you would take a fact as an insult. It IS a criticism

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

the scientific method where confusion and misunderstanding of true cause and effect can be the only result.).  I can go into more detail explaining this, clarifying any link in the reasoning, but I think I've said enough for now. I'm going to link you a short video on this topic that would do you a lot of good to be exposed to: watch?v=ry8a_SbA25M

The most important point from the video is this:

It is just as well that economic theory does not need "testing," for it is impossible

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

to test it in any way by checking its propositions against homogeneous bits of uniform events. For there are no such events. The use of statistics and quantitative data may try to mask this fact, but their seeming precision is only grounded on historical events that are not homogeneous in any sense. Each historical event is a complex, unique resultant of many causal factors. Since it is unique, it cannot be used for a positivistic test, and since it is unique it cannot be combined

[selfrealizedexile]

@Zakdayak

with other events in the form of statistical correlations and achieve any meaningful result." -- Murray Rothbard

These issues are much more complicated than laymen of Science are initially led to believe. It is not enough to dismiss any who philosophically disagree with you as shamanistic mystics whom are anti-Science or anti-progress. Even if you ultimately still disagree, you'd do yourself a favor by *actually* understanding where they're coming from.

[USTreasuryBond]

@Odysseus087 Philips Curve fail - Labor theory of value fail - stimulus spending fail - war increasing economic growth and prosperity fail - shovel ready projects and gov't spending fail - keeping full employment, controlling inflation, and balancing the budget fail - borrowing and spending instead of saving and producing fail - pump priming policies fail - historical track record of predictions and efforts by the fed and keynesians fail- no wonder losers like you cheer on krugman! FAILURES!

[USTreasuryBond]

boosting aggregate demand fail -keynesian multiplier is zero fail -preventing malinvestment fail -controlling interest rates and federal funds rates - fail - keeping entitlement trust funds safe - fail - tax revenue collapse fail - bankrupt post office - fail. 15 trillion in debt, 116 trillion in unfunded liabilities..shall i continue?

[tadaa11]

@Odysseus087 Did you hear what he said? Easy credit has built up the financial firms liabilities on the balance sheet. Creating so much credit in the market, without incomes or savings to back it up. "This has Come home to roost" Volcker. Do you seriously not see how messed up the world is! You're being run over by a bus and you dont even know it.

[Skeptic121]

Much better than Bernanke's answer to the same question. He compared Austrian Economics to "the phlogiston theory of fire". Mr. Volker has some serious intellectual integrity, unlike Bernanke.

[vince33x]

@Skeptic121 Bernanke is a Left-Wing Jew who is complicit in the economic destruction of the USA.

[NYCSteveS]

@vince33x You're a pro-Nazi moron who is complicit in stupidity.

[Salvysahagun]

@Skeptic121

Krugman said that

[politicalbeast1959]

@Ujamesl978

True!

[ReaganGoldwaterBuckl]

@mubaraq

You were right until you got to the Food part. Food can be traded and inflated and hoarded and manipulated just like commodities and fiat currencies. The only insurance against financial meltdown is a change of man's heart... And that's not gonna happen.

[mubaraqtopeakere]

An intrinsic, limited and scare non-necessity commodity such as gold, silver nor fiat money, as the unit of account, and non-globalization of macroeconomics is to blame for financial crisis. Food and Agriculture, as the unit of account, is the long-term solution for financial crisis, with complement to rules under the Rome Declaration on World Food Security.

[politicalbeast1959]

Volker is a disingenuous prick. As the former Fed Chairman, it is his former employer that has stymied the economy and robbed the people.

[Madfoot713]

@politicalbeast1959 Seems like he means the best and believed in what he did. If he's wrong, he's an ideologue, not corrupt.

[politicalbeast1959]

@Madfoot713

I don't think that any of these central banking higher ups (or former higher ups) mean well. I ti is well documented how the Federal Reserve was foisted onto the American people via Jekyll Island nearly 100 years ago. How could Volker not know what the gig was really about? America should rid itself of the financial cancer called the Federal Reserve and its collection arm, the IRS; however, this probably will never happen. If it did, we would be on our was to freedom.

[dellwon]

Keynesian economics is for idiots!

[beretboy22]

@dellwon No it's for people who live in reality.

[johammbass]

Well, we are fucked with Keynesianism so maybe we should look back at something that is more real like Austrian economics i.e. free market economics

[silvermaniamania1]

austrian economics is crack pot bullshit! XD XD

[luomio]

@silvermaniamania1 I love the eloquence with which you support your point. Great job.

[silvermaniamania1]

@luomio thanks. there really insnt any oyher words to describe austruan cock shit... XD

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

Actually it used to be mainstream and some of the most important concepts in economics originated from that school of thought.

+In my opinion mainstream economics is nonsense. What normal person could possible conceive society as being static?

[silvermaniamania1]

@j4ck2234 asutrain and keysian both are cock shit! it;s like right and left polical paradime... total shit!

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

There is a left and right paradigm in economics. It's between the monetarists and the keynesians.

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

Oh yeah, and information as being given. That's just crazy.

[silvermaniamania1]

@j4ck2234 austrian ecnomics is for the rich! are you billionaire?

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

It's not for the rich. 'The rich' need a state. You will find that keynesianism and monetarism have all the institutional support while real economic theory which promotes free markets is constantly attacked by all sides.

You know the state creates 50000 jobs for statist economistst and then says that the austrians are out of the mainstream...what a joke.

In a free market economy the poor get rich and the rich get richer, nothing wrong with that.

[silvermaniamania1]

@j4ck2234 state will always there. you want anarchy? Rothbard before die, he confessed he is anarcho-capitalist. so fuck him! you keep talk bullshit about market. but what's important is jobs. it dont matter if it is govt or corp. job jopb jpob~!

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

lol Rothbard was an anarchocapitalist long before he died.

You don't understand what a job is, getting a billion dollars a day from the government for digging a hole and then filling it back up is not a job.

A job is a market response to a service demanded (and valued). Jobs are discovered (and created) by entrepreneurs.

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

Creating a 'job' that is not in demand, is not a job at all. It's just pretend work wellfare.

[silvermaniamania1]

@j4ck2234 WOW!! job demand? we got like 10% umemploment! XD XD XD typcial austrian shit!!! XD XD XD XD job demand!!! XD XD have you been out of work?

and when we really have depression, go to the food stamp and talk to umemployed people about MARKET and VON MISES and interest rate and job demand! XD XD XD

you gonna get lynched! XD XD XD we need job we need infrastuture rebuilding and we need productiin. everything else is bullsjhit!

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

...we do not have a free market. Unemployment is a government program, it's called minimum wage. (not the only cause but the most important one)

Try to understand, if we 'need' infrastructure then this is what the market (that's you and me) will create. Value is transmitted through the price system and increases profit in the infrastructure sector which will attract entrepreneurs and workers. Notice that there is no other way than the price system to see what is needed.

[silvermaniamania1]

@j4ck2234 are you gonna build the road? you gonna make electric grid? you gonna make hydro? you gonna make brigde? you gonna make irrigation system?

I never said we do have free market. But in human civ, we never ever never ever had a free market? EVER! that free market you Austruan shcool had is dream. the moment we have free market, somebody will snatch it away! XD XD XD XD XD XD

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

Yes all that -has- been build by the market. It's not that there ever was a free market. But in all these sectors we had at a time modestly free markets and the results were spectacular.

Free markets are highly resilient, once unleashed they may never be put in the box again. The problem is we need a few years without anybody being able to establish monopoly power. Then the explosion of wealth will take care of the remaining statist ideologies.

Don't worry this will happen.

[stealthswimmer]

@j4ck2234

"once unleashed they may never be put in the box again"

that's just simply not true. There are periods of time when countries are more economically free and less so. It hasn't been a linear trend of getting more free or getting less free.

[j4ck2234]

@stealthswimmer

I'm talking about an actual free market without any government restrictions.A separation between market and government if you will (or better no government at all). We never had that in human history and my point is that it might not be reversible.

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

It almost did happen in the US. Remember what we can understand as capitalism is just 300 years old and a proper understanding of the process ist no even a hundred years old. It'll take some time to wash out 4000 years of statism.

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

sry I meant before UNemployment is closer to 20%

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

btw don't use the government statistics, employment is closer to 20% if you count for example the people who work 1 hour a week.

[yoyuepz]

@j4ck2234 lol 1 hour a week? wow..

[j4ck2234]

@silvermaniamania1

Most importantly it is a system in which you have to please the consumer to succeed. The purpose of the state is to sever that connection between service and reward. Putting 'the rich' on a plateau far away from the threat of market competition. A little research will show you that corporations are the greatest supporters and promoters of regulations and state intervention into the market - see for example Gabriel Kolko's work. (he's a socialist btw.)