What do you think of this argument?

[Kade]

I really just wanted to ask you to elaborate on your view of good regulation and bad regulation. I can certainly see how regulation is bad, according to our own history. I have also read Atlas Shrugged. I can possibly see how no regulation could be harmful, but I have a hard time buying that. It is difficult for me to imagine, I've grown up entirely in an economy that is very controlled, and I also don't know if I can find an example of a truly unrestricted economy in history. Have there been times in history where an entirely free market was tried and failed? I'm sure there have been, especially on smaller scales, but who/where/when exactly?

From a completely moral standpoint, how can you decide when it is right to break up a company? Especially if that company is also owned by an individual who did work to create what he has. Who decides when it is too big?

Great questions.
I think the decision of when a company is too large should be technocratic in nature. I would like to see no regulation on how big a company could get under one individual. Corporations are not individuals, yet they are treated as such. This is the flaw.

A free market has existed in purity before, something that few outside of academia, (aka liberal stronghold) are willing to admit.

Special cool points to the people who know the answer.

 

[Kraig]

I agree corporations are a huge problem. Fundamentally they retain all individual rights, while avoiding the natural individual responsibility that should go along with them. I have often wondered it would be a good idea for property and ownership laws to only acknowledge one owner. This would leave one person to be ultimately responsible for a companies actions, and I think it would seriously deter mergers as well. Hard to say though.

 

[Kade]

I agree corporations are a huge problem. Fundamentally they retain all individual rights, while avoiding the natural individual responsibility that should go along with them. I have often wondered it would be a good idea for property and ownership laws to only acknowledge one owner. This would leave one person to be ultimately responsible for a companies actions, and I think it would seriously deter mergers as well. Hard to say though.

I like where your mind is. I really am on your side of the issue. We want the same thing, trust me. The ability of people to gain and profit, on their individual merit, outside of government regulation. We also want individual freedom. I am trying to achieve these goals with reason and persuasion.

I strongly believe this isn't possible without some regulations. I also strongly worry about the collective power of the people to willfully do what is best for them, by avoiding trash products...etc.

This is a economic theory problem, one I am not entirely versed in to debate with any real authority. I can say that I feel we should consider a balance not entirely in opposition to our original goals. We don't allow people to go too far with some freedoms, and that should be taken into consideration with the economy as well... I fear that many here believe in a sort of anarchistic pure free market that will somehow regulate itself.

This existed before, Marx's "capitalist mode of production", a riding influence in his theory. In fact, Das Capital was a critique of what he saw, not what he imagined.

 

[Kraig]

Well thanks, I don't doubt your love for individual freedom, this is indeed an economic theory issue as you said. If regulations are needed, I would greatly wish for them to be defined upfront, that is really my main concern. I certainly am not one of the anarchist types, I know they frequent these boards. Some regulation is always needed, traffic laws are a good yet simplistic example of that. One could say that a speed limit is a violation of their personal freedom, I would say that their freedom does not override the safety of those around them.

I also worry about people's collective power to do what is in their own interests, and to just be intelligent and free minded in general. After all, isn't that the reason we have the government we have today? Everyone here loves to hate and blame the government, but it was really decades of fools that got us in this mess. Also in Atlas Shrugged, John Galt's society would never work in the real world because it was created by the geniuses of their respective areas of work. People just aren't that smart in the real world, or as trustworthy. I have always believed education to be the key to this problem, but there is no way to make someone be educated. No amount of schooling will be worth anything if they personally choose not to think.

Definitely going to do some reading on Marx's capitalism.