Ron Paul Ideas: Utopia vs Reality.

[Teenforpaul08]

Do you really think that?

When a runner has a lead, and has more energy than the guy in second place, would he win? Of course. Microsoft has the lead and has more resource, so without regulation they would only extend the lead until oracle goes out of business. Just think man.

That's free market for you.

 

[nate895]

Ok then, if the governments don't interfere, Microsoft would be the only software company. GE would be our only energy company. And exxon would be our only oil company.

When a company gets that edge, they will do what's neccesary to keep it. Standard oil did it by controlling prices. Just think about it. Monetary based systems of any kind (socialism, capitalism, communism) doesn't work anymore.

No they wouldn't. Standard Oil was only able to maintain a monopoly in most markets by lowering the price to below FMV, and they had to absorb those costs in other markets, where there wasn't a monopoly. A monopoly is only natural in utilities and first-class postage.

 

[me3]

Ok then, if the governments don't interfere, Microsoft would be the only software company. GE would be our only energy company. And exxon would be our only oil company.

Are you unaware of Linux? Do you think the government made Apple or Linux? Do you think that Sony only made the PS3 because government told them to compete with Xbox 360?

Gimme a break. You're not even being logically coherent.

When a company gets that edge, they will do what's neccesary to keep it. Standard oil did it by controlling prices. Just think about it. Monetary based systems of any kind (socialism, capitalism, communism) doesn't work anymore.

And pray tell, what is the solution to the money based system?

 

[me3]

When a runner has a lead, and has more energy than the guy in second place, would he win? Of course. Microsoft has the lead and has more resource, so without regulation they would only extend the lead until oracle goes out of business. Just think man.

That's free market for you.

There is no free market. You're trolling.

Also, based upon your horrible logic, Google should have never overtaken Ask, or Yahoo, or MSN, or Alta Vista, or Excite.

But they did. They overtook the big dogs who had years on them, and loads more money. And they did it on the internet, which is the closest thing to a free market that humanity has ever seen.

 

[nbhadja]

...however, if the federal government is not permitted to interfere in markets whatsoever, lobbyists will not be able to use government force to kill off competition.

BINGO!

You guys who think the free market has screwed up are clueless! We do NOT have a free market!

If we have a free market and a constitutionally restricted government it is a guarentee we will have a great economy.

And to the person who said liberals are correct when criticizing the free market, you really need to do some research. They are not because we do NOT have a free market. We have a government controlled market.


Many of you guys were brainwashed to think if it is not 100% government controlled, it is free market. That could not be farther from the truth. Our health care industry is like 80% government controlled, sure as hell is not free market.

 

[ClockwiseSpark]

And pray tell, what is the solution to the money based system?

Oh oh I know this one! A Resource based system?



This has been going on since he finished Zeitgeist: Addendum. He now has all the answers to the worlds problems.

"Money is evil and if you disagree you're stupid!"

 

[powerofreason]

There is no free market. You're trolling.

Also, based upon your horrible logic, Google should have never overtaken Ask, or Yahoo, or MSN, or Alta Vista, or Excite.

But they did. They overtook the big dogs who had years on them, and loads more money. And they did it on the internet, which is the closest thing to a free market that humanity has ever seen.

qft.

Sorry OP, you're wrong on all counts. You have fundamental misunderstndings on how prices function, who regulation really helps, and why there are not monopolies in a free market economy. Like I said, GO READ.

 

[Teenforpaul08]

Are you unaware of Linux? Do you think the government made Apple or Linux? Do you think that Sony only made the PS3 because government told them to compete with Xbox 360?

Gimme a break. You're not even being logically coherent.

And pray tell, what is the solution to the money based system?

Dude, WOW. If there weren't any anti trust laws, microsoft would make sure everyone loves their windows and sell it at $10 a piece.

Standard oil would have up every gas station in america if the GOVERNMENT didn't force them to break up.

A good solution would be a resourced-based econ:
here:

http://www.thevenusproject.com/resource_eco.htm

 

[nbhadja]

When a runner has a lead, and has more energy than the guy in second place, would he win? Of course. Microsoft has the lead and has more resource, so without regulation they would only extend the lead until oracle goes out of business. Just think man.

That's free market for you.

Umm you are clueless.

The only reason companies get such a huge lead is because they go to the BIG GOVERNMENT, throw millions of dollars at them and the politicians make laws killing the competition in that industry to the benefits of the giant corporations.
That is the complete opposite of a free market.

That is called a government controlled economy and it has a 100% failure rate.

 

[Teenforpaul08]

There is no free market. You're trolling.

Also, based upon your horrible logic, Google should have never overtaken Ask, or Yahoo, or MSN, or Alta Vista, or Excite.

But they did. They overtook the big dogs who had years on them, and loads more money. And they did it on the internet, which is the closest thing to a free market that humanity has ever seen.

Omg, are you stupid? Google did this in a regulated market. If it's a free-market. Other companies would not let google rise as they did.

 

[nate895]

Omg, are you stupid? Google did this in a regulated market. If it's a free-market. Other companies would not let google rise as they did.

What would they do to stop them? Send out mercs to Google's servers?

 

[powerofreason]

A resource based economy LOLOLOL theres utopian socialist nonsense if I've ever seen it.

 

[Teenforpaul08]

Umm you are clueless.

The only reason companies get such a huge lead is because they go to the BIG GOVERNMENT, throw millions of dollars at them and the politicians make laws killing the competition in that industry to the benefits of the giant corporations.
That is the complete opposite of a free market.

That is called a government controlled economy and it has a 100% failure rate.

Dude, wow man. THINK!

say there's a track race. Will all the runners get first place? NO

Some companies will get the edge, in a free market, sooner or later. Then, with the more resources they have, they will make sure they stay ahead, eventually buying out everyone else.

If that runner in first place had more energy (resources) than the guy in second place, his margin of lead would widen.

 

[RonpaulSupporter7777]

"ME3" I am enjoying your critique of my seamingly "baseless arguements."
I admit that I have not offered up credible examples to back up my assertions. So here are a few examples to play with:

*We are currently suffering through an economic crisis that was not only predicted by the likes of Ralph Nader and Ron Paul, but encouraged by the policies of the Federal Government.

When policies of deregulation, touted by the likes of Phil Gramm, are enacted within a thoroughly corrupted climate as is Washington these days, we can only hope for the worst. This is reality. This has been a reality for a very very long time in this country.

Utopian beliefs that somehow an economic platform based on the noble principles of Austrian economic theory will thrive amongst an uncorrupted group of politicians is just that, Utopian.
When has a democratic republic ever been truely represented by the people? Never. Democratic Republics are flawed to the extent that they always rest on ideological doctrine rather than progressive balance and restraint.

We are living in an age of non-progress. Ron Paul advocates some ideas that will stifle practical progressive environmental ideas that would allow us to become reliant on renewable resources. How does he expect to pull a 360 in some areas of policy when he does not advocate compromised ideas that would allow a bridge to be started between the left and the right?

 

[brandon]

Omg, are you stupid? Google did this in a regulated market. If it's a free-market. Other companies would not let google rise as they did.

Oh yea, how would the other companies stop google? Please be specific.

What specific regulations allowed google to gain market share?

 

[Teenforpaul08]

What would they do to stop them? Send out mercs to Google's servers?

OMG. Think man.

Google could not afford servers. Bigger companies would make sure they don't see the light of day.

 

[Teenforpaul08]

Oh yea, how would the other comapnies stop google? Please be specific.

What specific regulations allowed google to gain market share?

No monopoly. Google would not exist if they let microsoft own everything. Sergey brin would be working for microsoft now.

 

[Mini-Me]

Ok, if the government doesn't interfere then RIGHT NOW, standard oil would be the world's only supplier of oil. THINK ABOUT IT. they, as a company will do what it takes to control market share (and they can because they would have the resources to do so). They would just lower prices until everyone is out of business and jack them up when they are all alone.

First of all, read nate's post here. Second, these kind of monopolies can indeed come about occasionally in the free market, and they are actually the ONLY type that I know of that do, but they do not last forever unless they're propped up by the government. People are not truly so stupid that they would repeatedly fall for the price-lowering trick. Furthermore, from what I remember, Rockefeller used tactics that would be illegal under common "don't kill your neighbor law." I could've sworn I read something about sabotaging competitors, as well as bomb threats or something of that nature...

In terms of Microsoft: Microsoft built their near-monopoly on copyright laws, which are in fact government constructs, not elements of a free market. If you're the government, do you want to know the easiest way to take Microsoft down? Just stop forbidding everyone else to copy Microsoft software. Also, operating systems and similar "framework" products that other products are built on top of are in a unique position in the market, and the dominant company tends to be much harder to displace than in other market sectors. That said, I use Linux anyway (usually), and it's a perfectly viable alternative.

As a matter of fact, corporate personhood in and of itself is a government construct...and one which should not exist.

I know a lot of us here use a very exasperated tone when we discuss this stuff...and it's mostly because we've written essay after essay on it already, and we're just tired of repeating ourselves when new posters could easily read hundreds of pages of past discussions before bringing the same tired arguments to the table. For instance, here are two of my longer essays on economic topics:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1630316&postcount=23
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1633111&postcount=47

 

[brandon]

Dude, wow man. THINK!

say there's a track race. Will all the runners get first place? NO

Some companies will get the edge, in a free market, sooner or later. Then, with the more resources they have, they will make sure they stay ahead, eventually buying out everyone else.

First of all, your logic is wrong. But assuming it is right, what would be the problem with one company buying out every other company?

 

[Teenforpaul08]

"ME3" I am enjoying your critique of my seamingly "baseless arguements."
I admit that I have not offered up credible examples to back up my assertions. So here are a few examples to play with:

*We are currently suffering through an economic crisis that was not only predicted by the likes of Ralph Nader and Ron Paul, but encouraged by the policies of the Federal Government.

When policies of deregulation, touted by the likes of Phil Gramm, are enacted within a thoroughly corrupted climate as is Washington these days, we can only hope for the worst. This is reality. This has been a reality for a very very long time in this country.

Utopian beliefs that somehow an economic platform based on the noble principles of Austrian economic theory will thrive amongst an uncorrupted group of politicians is just that, Utopian.
When has a democratic republic ever been truely represented by the people? Never. Democratic Republics are flawed to the extent that they always rest on ideological doctrine rather than progressive balance and restraint.

We are living in an age of non-progress. Ron Paul advocates some ideas that will stifle practical progressive environmental ideas that would allow us to become reliant on renewable resources. How does he expect to pull a 360 in some areas of policy when he does not advocate compromised ideas that would allow a bridge to be started between the left and the right?

Hey do you know about the venus project? There are more, efficient and better alternatives to the free-market. Free-market doesn't work anymore.