Free to Choose - vol 02, 1980

[CosmicFork]

josefomanu said; "This economist had a very narrow view of life." You're right josefomanu. The psychology of the purely economic man is an extraordinarily simplified psychology. There's no subconscious, there are only two sentiments or drives that an economic man has. Number 1; he is desirous for accumulating "Stuff", Wealth, and Number 2; he looks for maximum satisfaction, i.e. utility. Those are the ONLY two emotions he has. There is no spiritual, no sense of giving, no gratitude for a gift...

[anthonypesce]

I think it is you that has a very narrow view of what "wealth" is. Do I not gain satisfaction by CHOOSING to help a brother in need? Do I not build wealth in my community when I produce benefits to my brothers and sisters? You and your ilk still exist in a reality of scarcity while free men build abundance.

[CosmicFork]

I am not advocating our present economy that is based on Greed and Artificial Scarcity. I imagine that in the future, we as a species, will live in sustainable abundance... (although I probably won't live to see it.) As strange as this sounds, in the future we will probably NOT work for money. We will work to improve ourselves, our abilites.

[chopin8826]

money is the consequence of harnessing our abilities and putting them to good use. There is nothing evil about it. And if you knew wealthy people you would know that they make the money work for them....

[SuaveSavant]

@CosmicFork

How the fuck is that any different than the results you see of capitalism, increased standard of living, and decreased cost of living? Did you fail econ 101?

Assuming it is different, how does this radical change in human nature occur? Gov't "resocializes" us? Do you actually believe sins can be socialized out of a gene pool?

What a farce.

[kyufa]

Hasty generalization = FAIL

[kyufa]

Hasty generalization = FAIL.

Go read a book.

[CosmicFork]

(Continued from above) No sense of working together to help the community. Nothing. Just accumulate wealth, and look for maximum utility or satisfaction. Now, these two emotions are the ones that drive the entire equation of our present economy. Nobody has revisited or questioned that humans are much more complex than this, and that's why we have "funny" phenomenon, things like "booms" and "crashes". Yet, this is the economic system that Friedman is praising?

[Rossg1981]

you meant phenomena not phenomenon idiot

[SuaveSavant]

@CosmicFork

Booms and crashes are symptomatic of gov't intervention. I believe it was John Stuart Mill who said, when a society directly attempts to help the public, it fails. It's only when freedom is preserved and each looks after himself that everyone benefits. That may be counter-intuitive, but I plead you to look at the results of the two courses throughout history.

Go run back to MSNBC culture where you can waste oxygen and not ever be challenged on anything liberal.

[josefomanu]

If there is any who needs encouragement, it is the unsuccessful... why? To get out of the hole. Its a coward's motif to step on the already ill. Even lions or other predators in nature won't eat an ill animal cause even if its a quick bite, it will turn out worse in the long scale for them. This economist had a very narrow view of life. His perspective is only a way of forcing reality to his conviction. I hope this man has the chance to experiment the other side of what he preaches.

[CosmicFork]

I reject the premise that there is a free market for ordinary working people. What we have is a Coercive Market. In a Coercive Market, the earning power of work and the standard of living of workers declines, while those with economic power gain an ever more unbalanced share of the nation's wealth. Those who preach the virtues of the free market should be the first to recognize that a Coercive Market is as certain to be destructive as a genuine free market is presumed to be healthy.

[kinglewisjtl24]

Those with economic power are in competition with one another over workers. If workers are being paid unfairly or being treated negatively they can easily quit, form unions work for another company... and by this method working environments are improved the playing field is leveled.

[CosmicFork]

I don't know what kind of "Free-Market Fantasy Land", you live in, kinglewisjtl24, but what you described "workers can easily quit, form unions, work for another company"... just is not true. For most employees, pay and working conditions are neither negotiable nor a matter of free choice. It is "take it or leave it". And few are in a position to leave it-- not when a job is a NECESSITY for survival !

[CosmicFork]

In a true free market, both the buyer and seller of work or services are free to bargain for the best possible terms. Today, more and more people work under terms of employment they are forced to accept, rather than under terms they would demand, if bargaining as equals. Employers have forced more and more employees to accept less job security, temporary rather than regular employment, lower pay and benefits than the prosperity of the country would seem to justify.

[CosmicFork]

Has a private company ever forced anything from me? coercive? Hell yes! I've been forced to work for much less than a living wage, because money is a NECESSITY FOR SURVIVAL! As F.D.R. said "necessitous men are not free". Oh, I forgot you're a Libertarian Right-Winger, who thinks that if we had absolutely no government what-so-ever, we would all be living in a perfect, wonderful, utopia, rather than in absolute chaos, and might-makes right horror. We have nothing in common, take a Hike!

[khallaghi]

Neoliberalism at the basis of the financial crisis.please watch my video

Milton Friedman ,New Horizons

[khallaghi]

- An analysis of the global financial crisis by Jacques Sapir, Research Director at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences, argues that the neoliberal economic model promoted by the United States is at the basis of the current crisis.

[sbuttgereit]

uhh... care to explain that? when government interferes with the operation of the markets, as it did with the government back mortgage institutions then you get a global collapse. for that part of the collapse wherein credit default swaps played a role, investors took risks and lost. it happens.

I didn't take loans I couldn't pay, I didn't make bad investments... no global crisis here. don't mess with my right to take risks or burden with the failures of others.

[khallaghi]

It is very sad he died before his idea, today we can see result of his theory . THE TOTAL COLLAPSE OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY

[wohs145]

thanks for showing your ignorance

go back to watching TV now