Obama and the economy

[2 Humped Camel]

You just spew material and talking points you read from Paul Krugman or MSNBC. I've mentioned this before. The mixed market you desire is the same one we live in. It's by no means 'free'. The government and people who think like you try to fix a problem through government. It then backfires and you blame it on free market economics.

 

Engage in the debate once in a while instead of sitting on the sidelines taking pot shots. Yes I read Paul Krugman who I happen to think is spot on most of the time,among many others that you obviously do not. I don't want a complete free market and I'd venture to say upwards of 90% of people don't either. I think the candidate that you support would do far more damage than any mixed market could. Ron Paul's ideas were tried once a long time ago in this country and they failed. I will continue to "spew" all the opinions that I want so feel free to do the same.

I do have one question though, every post you've made has been to spew a Ron Paul talking point, do you ever read an opposing opinion?

[2 Humped Camel]

You just spew material and talking points you read from Paul Krugman or MSNBC. I've mentioned this before. The mixed market you desire is the same one we live in. It's by no means 'free'. The government and people who think like you try to fix a problem through government. It then backfires and you blame it on free market economics.

 

My bad, I have a 2nd question. What do you think the United States would look like with the market system that you advocate? Wages, working conditions, hours, vacation time, health care, income/wealth distribution? Very curious to know.

[Know It All]

@2humped

 

Why would the free market be a horrible place to live in?

[acemona]

I don't consider that to be the same .

 

Because it is not.

[acemona]

@2humped

 

Why would the free market be a horrible place to live in?

 

slavery - RENT - iron law of wages

 

Think of Medieval Europe, or what we affectionately call "The Dark Ages". You know, when we completely ignored science and only the privileged few had property. Education was frowned upon. Serfdom was the norm. The free market at its best.

[75center]

Now THAT'S some faulty logic.

[Know It All]

slavery - RENT - iron law of wages

 

Think of Medieval Europe, or what we affectionately call "The Dark Ages". You know, when we completely ignored science and only the privileged few had property. Education was frowned upon. Serfdom was the norm. The free market at its best.

 

You're suggesting there are no incentives for science in the free market? Inventing new methods of production and exploring new industries are rejected? And education is unwanted?

 

How did you arrive at these conclusions?

[Bluegrasscard]

I don't consider that to be the same .

 

Because it is not.

 

Reasons?

[Bluegrasscard]

I don't consider that to be the same .

 

Because it is not.

 

Yes because the United States would be a horrible place to live and work in a true free market environment. It's unwanted and unrealistic and so completely out of the realm of possibility that it's not worth discussing.

 

As Milton Friedman once asked of Phil Donahue - name one type of economical system where the masses have lifted themselves up as they have under (mostly) free market capitalism systems.

 

One.

[Know It All]

You're suggesting there are no incentives for science in the free market? Inventing new methods of production and exploring new industries are rejected? And education is unwanted?

 

How did you arrive at these conclusions?

 

Read the Road to Serfdom. You're confusing mercantilism with the free market. Your statement is inaccurate.

[Bluegrasscard]

When considering unemployment, you have to consider that many jobs are being lost to technological innovation and not a reduction of economic activity. Furthermore, both parties support programs like H1-b that import cheap technology labor that depress the wages available of all. This phenomena would be of less impact if more students would choose science, technology or math majors. This is where the jobs are and will be in the future.

 

IMO. both Democrats and Republicans are responsible for the fiscal irresponsibility we have experienced. Yet, we continue to elect them as if we did not have a choice. My hope is that a certain Texas Congressman will run on the Libertarian ticket! Neither Romney nor Obama is getting my vote.

 

H1-B and pure off-shoring of jobs.

 

There was always a certain amount of inertia in moving manufacturing. Factories, expecitally ones making complex items take a while to build. Navigating foreign laws and employment policies slowed things down. A lot of that inertia is not there with white collar offshoring. Set up call center with some phones and an internet connection and the next day you can take over a fortune 500 billing department and put lots of Americans out of work.

 

American business use to chase 10-15 percent improvements in labor cost chasing 'cheap labor' or even with technology advances as you indicate. Though I think technology advances have slowed a lot in recent years. Kentucky benefited from that chasing of cheap labor in the 1950s and 1960s when GM set up in Bowling Green and IBM set up in Lexington and there a other stories where our rural state with cheap wages attracted companies. But even a 'cheap', 'right to work state' can not compete with offshoring. The factor in savings is 50% or more. $40 an hour people replaced with $10 an hour people. And neither candidate will stop that. You are correct there!

 

The competition is no longer 'right-to-work' vs. 'Union only' states. That battle is yesterdays. The battle is the US vs. the emerging countries and the internationalization of labor. It is being done without regard to long term impacts to American society. It is being done by fear. There are consultants who specialize in putting fear into companies to all but force them to go down this road. Even companies who do not what to do this. The wave has not stopped yet. This is a political job-killing trend that no politician and most major business people will not talk about!

 

I am not sure any candidate will address this and business people have been conditioned to disregard society impacts, especially when the spreadsheet says your costs goes down 75%.

 

I better stop there...as I am starting sound like 2hump and Ace....

Edited September 6, 2012 by Bluegrasscard
extra quotes

[Know It All]

^I'd like to addon to BGC post. The "cheaper labor" abroad allows for a much cheaper product domestically. A loss of manufacturing jobs in given industries opens up employment opportunities in other industries. The work force is not an infinite number.

 

My main point: cheaper labor > high price or vice-versa?

 

Americans can't have it both ways.

[Michael Corleone]

Again, your failure to keep up is noted. No one said ANYTHING about the President not sharing in the blame game.

 

How much of the problem was to do with the housing collapse and how much of the blame for the housing collapse to you lay at the feet of Bill Clinton?

[Clyde]

How much of the problem was to do with the housing collapse and how much of the blame for the housing collapse to you lay at the feet of Bill Clinton?

 

I place the overwhelming majority of the blame on the financial institutions and the pols who supported them in getting laws changed that allowed them to make not only bad investments that were filled with risk but also ones they lied to their own customers about.

 

I'm not sure where President Clinton fits into that. You?

[2 Humped Camel]

@2humped

 

Why would the free market be a horrible place to live in?

 

Low wages for the vast majority of people, higher prices and less choice of products and services (monopolies), higher concentrations of wealth and income that we have now. Home ownership rates in the single digits, long working hours in poor conditions with little or no vacation time. That's just a few concerns off the top of my head.