Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Che Guevara in 10 (Not So) Great Quotes
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Thu Nov 28, 2013 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Koala Kid wrote:
I find it amusing that some Che fanboy from a former Nazi collaborator state that isn't exactly relevant in today's world, comes here and presents some "facts on the ground" he borrowed from pro-paleostinian sites.


Dominique_71 is famous!
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dominique_71
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 1508
Location: Switzerland (Romandie)

PostPosted: Fri Nov 29, 2013 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
Koala Kid wrote:
I find it amusing that some Che fanboy from a former Nazi collaborator state that isn't exactly relevant in today's world, comes here and presents some "facts on the ground" he borrowed from pro-paleostinian sites.


Dominique_71 is famous!


I was not even born at that time. To be complete, you can also mention that Walker-Bush, the grand-father of G.W., was Hitler's banker into the US, and that he continued to fund Hitler until 1943, which is one year after the US got in war against Germany, and that he stopped to fund Hitler in 1943 only because the US state forced him to do so.

And you can continue to joke, that will change nothing to the fact that the Zionists are the fascists of today.

That will not change another fact of today: You can not blame the Communists for the complete failure of Capitalism to bring peace and prosperity for every one on earth, as well than for its complete failure to address the ecological issues, because just about every one is Capitalist today.
_________________
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading that text: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Fri Nov 29, 2013 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dominique_71 wrote:
Muso wrote:
Dominique_71 is famous!


And you can continue to joke, that will change nothing to the fact that the Zionists are the fascists of today.


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Brilliant self-goal!
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dominique_71
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 1508
Location: Switzerland (Romandie)

PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The American Dream? You have to be asleep to believe it.

http://vimeo.com/34456498
_________________
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading that text: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The cult of Ernesto Che Guevara is an episode in the moral callousness of our time. Che was a totalitarian. He achieved nothing but disaster. Many of the early leaders of the Cuban Revolution favored a democratic or democratic-socialist direction for the new Cuba. But Che was a mainstay of the hardline pro-Soviet faction, and his faction won. Che presided over the Cuban Revolution's first firing squads. He founded Cuba's "labor camp" system—the system that was eventually employed to incarcerate gays, dissidents, and AIDS victims. To get himself killed, and to get a lot of other people killed, was central to Che's imagination. In the famous essay in which he issued his ringing call for "two, three, many Vietnams," he also spoke about martyrdom and managed to compose a number of chilling phrases: "Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become …"— and so on. He was killed in Bolivia in 1967, leading a guerrilla movement that had failed to enlist a single Bolivian peasant. And yet he succeeded in inspiring tens of thousands of middle class Latin-Americans to exit the universities and organize guerrilla insurgencies of their own. And these insurgencies likewise accomplished nothing, except to bring about the death of hundreds of thousands, and to set back the cause of Latin-American democracy—a tragedy on the hugest scale.

The present-day cult of Che—the T-shirts, the bars, the posters—has succeeded in obscuring this dreadful reality. ....

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2004/09/the_cult_of_che.html
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 759
Location: EU

PostPosted: Sun Dec 01, 2013 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
Quote:
The cult of Ernesto Che Guevara is an episode in the moral callousness of our time. Che was a totalitarian. He achieved nothing but disaster. Many of the early leaders of the Cuban Revolution favored a democratic or democratic-socialist direction for the new Cuba. But Che was a mainstay of the hardline pro-Soviet faction, and his faction won. Che presided over the Cuban Revolution's first firing squads. He founded Cuba's "labor camp" system—the system that was eventually employed to incarcerate gays, dissidents, and AIDS victims. To get himself killed, and to get a lot of other people killed, was central to Che's imagination. In the famous essay in which he issued his ringing call for "two, three, many Vietnams," he also spoke about martyrdom and managed to compose a number of chilling phrases: "Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become …"— and so on. He was killed in Bolivia in 1967, leading a guerrilla movement that had failed to enlist a single Bolivian peasant. And yet he succeeded in inspiring tens of thousands of middle class Latin-Americans to exit the universities and organize guerrilla insurgencies of their own. And these insurgencies likewise accomplished nothing, except to bring about the death of hundreds of thousands, and to set back the cause of Latin-American democracy—a tragedy on the hugest scale.

The present-day cult of Che—the T-shirts, the bars, the posters—has succeeded in obscuring this dreadful reality. ....

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2004/09/the_cult_of_che.html


yeah, pretty much.
_________________
wswartzendruber wrote:
Well, every group has its nutjobs, and the Second Amendment crowd is no exception.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dominique_71
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 1508
Location: Switzerland (Romandie)

PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Che is a dead man from a very long time ago. So, you cannot blame him for the failures of today. We are all capitalists, that's the problem!
_________________
[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading that text: please consider ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dominique_71 wrote:
Che is a dead man from a very long time ago. So, you cannot blame him for the failures of today. We are all capitalists, that's the problem!


:lol: :lol: :lol:

Sure, you're a capitalist.
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Old School
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 236
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon

PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 8:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dominique_71 wrote:
Che is a dead man from a very long time ago. So, you cannot blame him for the failures of today. We are all capitalists, that's the problem!

Just a question, and I think I know the answer, but are you confusing consumerism with capitalism?
_________________
Irony is asking government to fix the problems it caused
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1569
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For him, "capitalism" is a bucket into which all the world's evils go, so they can then come from there.
_________________
"The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands...may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
--James Madison, Federalist 46
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tylerwylie
Guru
Guru


Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 456
Location: /US/Illinois

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BoneKracker wrote:
For him, "capitalism" is a bucket into which all the world's evils go, so they can then come from there.
Pretty much, I think he's confusing fascism with capitalism. There hasn't been capitalism in the US since at least 1913. When the money supply and interest rates are set arbitrarily instead of by market forces, you get this sort of soft fascism. Capitalism in the US is like a vestigial organ in the State beast.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's his confusions in 5 points.

1. He thinks more government is the answer.

2. He assumes socialism is good.

3. He doesn't understand the definition of capitalism.

4. He assumes corporatism (which requires participation between the cronies and the government) is capitalism (hint hint, it's the opposite).

5. He used to use a Che avatar :lol:
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tylerwylie wrote:
There hasn't been capitalism in the US since at least 1913. When the money supply and interest rates are set arbitrarily instead of by market forces, you get this sort of soft fascism. Capitalism in the US is like a vestigial organ in the State beast.

I don't follow. Why does the fact that the Fed controls the money supply and interest rates mean that the economy is not capitalist? Isn't the definition of a capitalist society one in which the means of production are owned by private citizens? How does the existence of a central bank contradict that?

As an aside, I don't think that it is accurate to say that the central band sets the money supply and interest rates arbitrarily. While you may disagree with their goals, or with the value of their existence, the actions of the US central bank are not arbitrary.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 5:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
tylerwylie wrote:
There hasn't been capitalism in the US since at least 1913. When the money supply and interest rates are set arbitrarily instead of by market forces, you get this sort of soft fascism. Capitalism in the US is like a vestigial organ in the State beast.

I don't follow. Why does the fact that the Fed controls the money supply and interest rates mean that the economy is not capitalist?


Really?

I'm not kidding. You actually do not understand?

Here's a gigantic hint. The government is in control. It is not trader A dealing with trader B on a purely voluntary basis.
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 5:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
richk449 wrote:
tylerwylie wrote:
There hasn't been capitalism in the US since at least 1913. When the money supply and interest rates are set arbitrarily instead of by market forces, you get this sort of soft fascism. Capitalism in the US is like a vestigial organ in the State beast.

I don't follow. Why does the fact that the Fed controls the money supply and interest rates mean that the economy is not capitalist?


Really?

I'm not kidding. You actually do not understand?

Here's a gigantic hint. The government is in control. It is not trader A dealing with trader B on a purely voluntary basis.

I am not sure that "trader A deals with trader B on a purely voluntary basis" is a satisfactory definition of capitalism.

But even if it was, how does the existence of the Federal Reserve prevent trader A from dealing with trader B on a purely voluntary basis?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 5:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
I am not sure that "trader A deals with trader B on a purely voluntary basis" is a satisfactory definition of capitalism.

But even if it was, how does the existence of the Federal Reserve prevent trader A from dealing with trader B on a purely voluntary basis?


/me throws a dictionary @ rick449 & SMH

Have you ever actually read Adam Smith, Mises, Hayek or Rothbard?
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 6:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
richk449 wrote:
I am not sure that "trader A deals with trader B on a purely voluntary basis" is a satisfactory definition of capitalism.

But even if it was, how does the existence of the Federal Reserve prevent trader A from dealing with trader B on a purely voluntary basis?


/me throws a dictionary @ rick449 & SMH

Have you ever actually read Adam Smith, Mises, Hayek or Rothbard?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism
Quote:
CAPITALISM: a way of organizing an economy so that the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, factories, ships, etc.) are owned by individual people and companies rather than by the government

Full Definition of CAPITALISM: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

What part of that definition is violated by the existence of a central bank?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 657
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 6:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The section you quoted, as inaccurate as it was, answers your question.
_________________
I, for one, am glad to be living on a planet with 776x the mass of the super-massive black hole at the center of the milky way just to keep Neptune in its daily orbit around the Earth.
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
The section you quoted, as inaccurate as it was, answers your question.

I quoted a dictionary. Are you calling the dictionary inaccurate? After you threw it at me?

It should be obvious from my posting of the definition that I don't think it answers my question. If you think it does, could you please explain how?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tylerwylie
Guru
Guru


Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 456
Location: /US/Illinois

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
Muso wrote:
richk449 wrote:
I am not sure that "trader A deals with trader B on a purely voluntary basis" is a satisfactory definition of capitalism.

But even if it was, how does the existence of the Federal Reserve prevent trader A from dealing with trader B on a purely voluntary basis?


/me throws a dictionary @ rick449 & SMH

Have you ever actually read Adam Smith, Mises, Hayek or Rothbard?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/capitalism
Quote:
CAPITALISM: a way of organizing an economy so that the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, factories, ships, etc.) are owned by individual people and companies rather than by the government

Full Definition of CAPITALISM: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

What part of that definition is violated by the existence of a central bank?
The best metaphor I can think of this late is that having a coercive agency manipulating interest rates and the currency is a bit like temporarily altering the temperature of the ocean. When you try to push the temperature up or down, the ecosystem adapts but because the temperature cannot be permanently altered, you are setting up for a period where there will be starvation as the ecosystem attempts to reach equilibrium again. (Also: Why central banking causes the boom and bust cycle.)

The signals that people need to make decisions on are faulty and not representative how a free market economy would allocate resources. Given the last definition, and the premise I spelled out earlier, this bit could explain why many economists do not consider the US to be a capitalist economy: "...by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market."

But, then again by certain definitions you can call this current system capitalist though then I would not say capitalism equals a 'free market'. A soft fascism is still a better term I believe, given the amount of regulatory capture, the complexity of the tax code, and the size of the federal register in this country.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Prenj
n00b
n00b


Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like Eddie Izzard's shorthand version of evolution:
Monkey, monkey, monkey, monkey, YOU!
_________________
“If You Meet the Buddha on the Road, Kill Him”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tylerwylie
Guru
Guru


Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 456
Location: /US/Illinois

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 7:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Muso wrote:
The government is in control.
I'd say that's the other part of me that doesn't really like to see these modern economies called capitalist. Under democratic regimes we are still all the property of the State, even though in name the title may belong to private individuals.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
juniper
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 759
Location: EU

PostPosted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
tylerwylie wrote:
There hasn't been capitalism in the US since at least 1913. When the money supply and interest rates are set arbitrarily instead of by market forces, you get this sort of soft fascism. Capitalism in the US is like a vestigial organ in the State beast.

I don't follow. Why does the fact that the Fed controls the money supply and interest rates mean that the economy is not capitalist? Isn't the definition of a capitalist society one in which the means of production are owned by private citizens? How does the existence of a central bank contradict that?

As an aside, I don't think that it is accurate to say that the central band sets the money supply and interest rates arbitrarily. While you may disagree with their goals, or with the value of their existence, the actions of the US central bank are not arbitrary.


you are confused probably because they are using an extreme version of the definition of capitalism. They seem to be using anarchy (i.e. no govt involvement period). Capitalism of course has a broad definition and it depends on what extreme you take. Under your definition (which I accept, that the means of production is in private hands) means that France is a capitalist country. That's fine with me.

There seems to be a new brand of american where purity reigns. Capitalism isn't really capitalism until the white house is blown up.
_________________
wswartzendruber wrote:
Well, every group has its nutjobs, and the Second Amendment crowd is no exception.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
richk449
Guru
Guru


Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 345

PostPosted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 3:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tylerwylie wrote:
The best metaphor I can think of this late is that having a coercive agency manipulating interest rates and the currency is a bit like temporarily altering the temperature of the ocean. When you try to push the temperature up or down, the ecosystem adapts but because the temperature cannot be permanently altered, you are setting up for a period where there will be starvation as the ecosystem attempts to reach equilibrium again. (Also: Why central banking causes the boom and bust cycle.)

The signals that people need to make decisions on are faulty and not representative how a free market economy would allocate resources. Given the last definition, and the premise I spelled out earlier, this bit could explain why many economists do not consider the US to be a capitalist economy: "...by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market."

But, then again by certain definitions you can call this current system capitalist though then I would not say capitalism equals a 'free market'. A soft fascism is still a better term I believe, given the amount of regulatory capture, the complexity of the tax code, and the size of the federal register in this country.

Thank you for the response. A few questions/comments:
(1) Interestingly, the definition of capitalism that I found appears state that capitalism requires a free market. If this is true, I suppose it is possible to argue that any economic system with a central bank is not a free market economy, and thus is not capitalism. I think this is wrong, but it is a possible approach to supporting your position.

(1a) Why does the existence of the fed make price signals faulty? If the fed decides to lower interest rates to zero, and everyone gets cheap mortgages, so the price of houses goes up, and lots of people buy very expensive houses with very large mortgages, what price signal was wrong? Sure, without the actions of the fed, the price of the houses would have been lower, but the price was "correct" given the factors at play (which include the actions of the fed).

(1b) If you are left arguing the the market is not free because resource allocation does not match the resource allocation without a central bank, then you are at a tautology - the market is not free if there is a central bank, because a free market is one without a central bank.

(2) Why do you call the current system fascist? None of the items you cite: regulatory capture, complexity of the tax code, size of federal register, seem to have anything to do with fascism.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tylerwylie
Guru
Guru


Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 456
Location: /US/Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

richk449 wrote:
tylerwylie wrote:
The best metaphor I can think of this late is that having a coercive agency manipulating interest rates and the currency is a bit like temporarily altering the temperature of the ocean. When you try to push the temperature up or down, the ecosystem adapts but because the temperature cannot be permanently altered, you are setting up for a period where there will be starvation as the ecosystem attempts to reach equilibrium again. (Also: Why central banking causes the boom and bust cycle.)

The signals that people need to make decisions on are faulty and not representative how a free market economy would allocate resources. Given the last definition, and the premise I spelled out earlier, this bit could explain why many economists do not consider the US to be a capitalist economy: "...by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market."

But, then again by certain definitions you can call this current system capitalist though then I would not say capitalism equals a 'free market'. A soft fascism is still a better term I believe, given the amount of regulatory capture, the complexity of the tax code, and the size of the federal register in this country.

Thank you for the response. A few questions/comments:
(1) Interestingly, the definition of capitalism that I found appears state that capitalism requires a free market. If this is true, I suppose it is possible to argue that any economic system with a central bank is not a free market economy, and thus is not capitalism. I think this is wrong, but it is a possible approach to supporting your position.

(1a) Why does the existence of the fed make price signals faulty? If the fed decides to lower interest rates to zero, and everyone gets cheap mortgages, so the price of houses goes up, and lots of people buy very expensive houses with very large mortgages, what price signal was wrong? Sure, without the actions of the fed, the price of the houses would have been lower, but the price was "correct" given the factors at play (which include the actions of the fed).

(1b) If you are left arguing the the market is not free because resource allocation does not match the resource allocation without a central bank, then you are at a tautology - the market is not free if there is a central bank, because a free market is one without a central bank.

(2) Why do you call the current system fascist? None of the items you cite: regulatory capture, complexity of the tax code, size of federal register, seem to have anything to do with fascism.
Regarding (1a): Interest rates are the price for money and this is important to note. Prices contain a lot of valuable information that a market economy needs to function, regarding resource availability, demand, and so on.

If interest rates are being price-fixed you run into similar situations when other goods and services are price-fixed. With a central bank / printing press though, the deception is pushed a step further because the shortages or surpluses don't actually manifest. But the prices are misleading because instead of the prices for credit (interest rates) being a result supply vs demand for credit, they are set by a central bank. The prices for housing were phony because they were driven by

Hayek won his Nobel prize for showing how this manipulation manifests in the economy, and the relationship between interest rates, capital investment and investment in long term projects, and future consumption. I can expand upon this though not with the same level of clarity as some of the more well versed Austrian economists. Well... I'll try.

A simple way of putting it is that a large amount of savings signals future demand for consumption and higher supply of credit for capital investment in the present. A low amount of savings signals a higher demand for immediate consumption and a lower supply of credit for capital investment. Messing with these signals via centrally controlled interest rates misleads entrepreneurs and investors and directs them into ventures and investments that are not profitable or representative of the demands of consumers.

Regarding (1b): I would say the market is not free because people are forced, or coerced into using a fiat money standard. (A monetary system where one institution enjoys the legal right on counterfeiting and others are jailed for attempting to enjoy that same right!)

Regarding 2: Would you agree that private title, but government direction of resources would be a good definition of fascism? Under this definition I think the items I mentioned earlier are a sort of underhanded way for this to happen.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum