There is no such thing as the freemarket (1 Viewer)

[byebyebye]

23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism: Item #1 -- There's No Such Thing as a Free Market


Author Ha-Joon Chang dismisses the idea that any capitalist market is free and questions whether it can ever really be fair.

Editor's Note: Many books have tackled the great recession of 2008, the second worst economic crisis in history, after the depression. But I doubt there is one book, written in response to the current economic crisis, that is as fun or easy to read as Ha-Joon Chang's 23 Things They Don't Tell you About Capitalism. I'd never heard of this Korean economist, probably because he lives in England and teaches at Cambridge, but he is well known in economic circles, and well respected.
It is no secret that the American society is dominated by the super rich, held for hostage by the banks, dominated in the Nation's Capital by the tens of thousands of lobbyists and their big bucks, as the Republican party and their corporate Tea Partyists provide cover for giant theft of many billions of wealth for the very rich, with of course the cooperation of the Democrats who supported the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy (Check out Rachel Maddow's op-ed, which explains why Dwight Eisenhower, who taxed the rich to balance the budget, which be a radical in today's political reality). In this very discouraging environment it is hard to imagine scenarios where normal folks, every day voters, the non-rich, who are not represented by lobbyists, can have much influence.
On top of that, making change even harder, is an enormously effective propaganda system that perpetuates inaccurate and often destructive myths about virtually every element of capitalism and the US and global economy. And top economic officials in the Obama administration and leading mainstream economists often perpetuate these myths, and the corporate media marches along side repeating them like the gospel.
So, as far as I am concerned there never can be too much truth-telling to attempt to pull away the curtain of propaganda and disinformation that shrouds our economic thinking and actions. I am not under the illusion that the facts will set us free. As research has shown, when people connect their opinions to a set of values or leaders, they will not be open to changing their mind, and presentation of contrary "facts," may make them dig in more clinging their their misinformation. But when it comes to the economy, the propaganda system has been so pervasive, and supported by conventional wisdom that people who need to know better, buy into it, and yes that includes liberals and progressives who have a kind of inertia of the mind of their own. It is hard to change one's sense of things.
AlterNet's Economics editor Joshua Holland made a nice contribution to this public education effort this Fall with his book: The Fifteen Biggest Lies about the Economy Now we have the funny, and sharp Chang. What follows is chapter one of his book: "There is No Such Thing as a Free Market." Other chapters are quite revealing such as: " The Washing Machine Has Changed the World More than the Internet;" "More Education, in Itself, Is Not Going to Make a Country Richer;" "The U.S. Does Not Have the Highest Living Standard in the World;" "Companies Should Not Be Run in the Interest of their Owners."
Chan's main point is the recent economic disaster wasn't by accident, that active government can promote economic dynamism, that tax cuts for the rich simply redistribute wealth upward, and that we will continue on the path to economic disaster,with no end in sight, unless the collective wisdom, goes in a different direction. -- AlterNet Executive Editor Don Hazen

http://www.alternet.org/books/14968...s_no_such_thing_as_a_free_market/?page=entire

 

[zombie omie jay]

nice copy paste, homo

 

[Cianyx]

lolcialism

 

[SylviaB]

ugh

that's right, there really isn't anywhere in the world that is truly free market

and this is precisely why blaming anything on the free market is so stupid

"there is no free market. Oh btw everything that is wrong with the world is caused by the free market. "

 

[byebyebye]

ugh

that's right, there really isn't anywhere in the world that is truly free market

and this is precisely why blaming anything on the free market is so stupid

"there is no free market. Oh btw everything that is wrong with the world is caused by the free market. "

The article is correct - there is no true "free market". The article then describes and defines the economic construct that is falsely labeled as a "free market". It also gives reasons how, why, and by whom the mislabeling is done.

It is only after the economic concept is accurately defined, which entails delineating it's true parameters, can one begin to grapple with the complexities of this multifaceted entity whose evil and short-term benefits, should not be disguised, (and thereby shielded), by the simplistic and deceptively benign label of the "free market".

 

[zombie omie jay]

ugh

 

[Chemical Ali]

This forum in one image?

This forum in one image.

 

[mitchy_boy]

de


rp

 

[SylviaB]

can one begin to grapple with the complexities of this multifaceted entity whose evil and short-term benefits, .

Short term benefits like drastically higher living standards for the bottom 1% and up?

 

[TacoTerrorist]

Short term benefits like drastically higher living standards for the bottom 1% and up?

The living standards of chattel slaves in the 19th century went up too. Is that an argument for slavery?

 

[Lolsmith]

Look what the cat dragged in

Bringing millions out of poverty seems to be a pretty fair argument

 

[cosmo kramer]

how to make libertarians REALLY ANGRY 101

this is obviously a troll account

 

[TacoTerrorist]

And entrapping them into a lifetime of wage slavery for the benefit of the few?

 

[byebyebye]

Short term benefits like drastically higher living standards for the bottom 1% and up?

I think it's more important that it be an equitable market for all including the bottom 1% because being fair and equal amongst citizens is the backbone of a democracy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFxYyXGMfZM&feature=player_embedded

In summary, Professor Chomsky says that the short-term benefits of "higher living standards" should not be used to justify doing something that is morally wrong. He gives three examples:

1.] The slaves in America realized a "higher standard of living" during the 100 year span between 1750 and 1850, yet this increase in the "standard of living" should not be used to justify the continued existence of slavery.

2.] Stalin's brand of capitalist-socialism created such a drastic rise in the standard of living for Russians, that the U.S.S.R. was used as a shining example of the benefits of communism in other parts of the world. However, this does not excuse the atrocities perpetrated by Stalin to service this "higher standard of living".

3.] One of the reasons the people in WWII Germany loved Hitler because he delivered a dramatic recovery from the effects of post WWI hyper-inflation. The Fascists brought about a desperately needed rapid, and tremendous reversal to the flagging standard of living of most Germans. Never-the-less, this should not be used as an argument to condone Fascism.

Short term benefits like "higher living standards" can't not be used to justify capitalism on moral grounds, (see example 1., above), nor on inherently inequitable economic terms,. The future of humanity demands that we evolve past the selfish greed that lies at the root of the capitalist system.

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

And entrapping them into a lifetime of wage slavery for the benefit of the few?

Let us go to a developing country where Nike or whatver has set up some factories. Let us now declare that Nike's labour policies are inherently "immoral", unfair, blah blah blah and impose laws against child labour, implement safety regulations and standards etc as well as throwing in the minumum wage. Would you be surprised if Nike now decided to close the factories, upon seeing all these measures and leave god knows how many workers unemployed and actually *worse off* than they were previously? I mean, why should they have to pay for the additional transportation cost to america when they could instead abide by the child labour and wage laws over in the states - without having to pay unneccessary costs elsewhere? Could you also tell us what would happened when outsourced companies are discouraged from staying?
What are the jobless to do now? Resort to stealing? Begging? Subsistance farming? Prostitution?
Are these altnernatives really uncommon?

To quote Paul Krugman "Bad jobs at bad wages are better than no jobs at all."

 

[Chemical Ali]

cubans have a dramatically better standard of healthcare than united states of americans

does this justify socialism or dictatorship? I think we all know it does.

 

[davidbarnes]

'The free Market' is the excuse wankers claim for making the rich wealthier.

 

[byebyebye]

Let us go to a developing country where Nike or whatver has set up some factories. Let us now declare that Nike's labour policies are inherently "immoral", unfair, blah blah blah and impose laws against child labour, implement safety regulations and standards etc as well as throwing in the minumum wage. Would you be surprised if Nike now decided to close the factories, upon seeing all these measures and leave god knows how many workers unemployed and actually *worse off* than they were previously? I mean, why should they have to pay for the additional transportation cost to america when they could instead abide by the child labour and wage laws over in the states - without having to pay unneccessary costs elsewhere? Could you also tell us what would happened when outsourced companies are discouraged from staying?
What are the jobless to do now? Resort to stealing? Begging? Subsistance farming? Prostitution?
Are these altnernatives really uncommon?

To quote Paul Krugman "Bad jobs at bad wages are better than no jobs at all."

aces! now i get to leave YOU with a one word response: Bopal

 

[byebyebye]

secksiiminh (or is it peter dang - your facebook?)

read what you wrote and think about how that applies to what happened Bhopal!!! You obviously haven't seen any of the pictures of the horribly deformed babies, or of the short-lived survivors with their skin sloughing off of their bodies like curdled cottage cheese.

Children are still being born, twenty-five years later, suffering from the trans-generational mutagenesis inflected on their parents via Union Carbide's immoral pursuit of ever greater profits. The crushing poverty that is still being endured in that region today is a direct result of Union Carbide, and now Dow Chemical's willful negligence, pernicious arrogance and inhumane greed.

Theirs' is but one example of the many predictable results of how the short-term benefits of capitalist principles disastrously impact the poor. Below is a very sanitized film clip of the Bhopal diaster, which I've included for your edification, because as a fellow human being, if you were aware of it, you obviously wouldn't say silly things like your statement above.

http://wn.com/the_bhopal_chemical_disaster_twenty_years_without_justice

 

[SylviaB]

I think it's more important that it be an equitable market for all including the bottom 1% because being fair and equal amongst citizens is the backbone of a democracy.

Democracy is not an unqualified good. I'm not interested in this pre-suppositional nonsense.
Democracy is shit.

1.] The slaves in America realized a "higher standard of living" during the 100 year span between 1750 and 1850, yet this increase in the "standard of living" should not be used to justify the continued existence of slavery.

You mean the thing that government actively supported and took part in?

2.] Stalin's brand of capitalist-socialism created such a drastic rise in the standard of living for Russians, that the U.S.S.R. was used as a shining example of the benefits of communism in other parts of the world.

BAHAHAHAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAAAHAHAAHAA


Until now I thought it was possible you were legit, but alas, the troll is revealed.

3.] One of the reasons the people in WWII Germany loved Hitler because he delivered a dramatic recovery from the effects of post WWI hyper-inflation.

Even though Nazi Germany experienced massive inflation, caused by Hitler's disastrous economic policies. Pssh. Stop this oblique statist masturbation session.

"Stalin and Hitler helped the oppressed masses by rejecting evil free market capitalism! Oh btw I'm not saying that they weren't bad or anything..."

Short term benefits like "higher living standards" can't not be used to justify capitalism on moral grounds, (see example 1., above), nor on inherently inequitable economic terms,. The future of humanity demands that we evolve past the selfish greed that lies at the root of the capitalist system.

Basically, you're perfectly happy with the poor being poorer, and long as the "rich" are poorer too?

Pointing out that there is some ALLEGED fault with "capitalism" is not enough to reject it.

Market based economies lead to people being happier and healthier than state run economies, and that's all that matters. The massive hardon you have for the pre-conceived greatness of "equality" does not justify the use of violence, which your beloved democracy is founded upon.