Quote:
I asked if you were joking about Hoover believing in a free market. I'm not trying to be pessimistic, but if you read the stuff I read, I think you would understand. I would love it if I could say this was just a "slight economic downturn," but it isn't. This is the worst the economy has been since the Great Depression. It would be a lot easier to get through if the government would keep its filthy hands out of the economy and let the FREE market work.
See how much respect I have for Uncle Sam?
I don't want to argue. There is more economic theory and schools of thought then just the general concepts of classical economics. The New Economic Theory, Development Economics and Keyensian Economics are worthwhile to look into if you are interested in a comprehensive view of market systems. Economics is a broad discipline that still retains some of Adams Smith principles, however, they do not follow it to the letter. It is widely held that a free market with no obstructions could not benefit the majority of the people. This system cannot work in reality. Adams Smith's original concept of a free market system is essential flawed. It is assumed that everyone is equal, have perfect knowledge of the market and are rational. However, for their to be exchange (i.e. sell things to make profit) a certain level of inequality and unknown. As for rational, massive panics that accure after economic downturns prove that this does not exist.
We can see from the crashes and panics of the 19th century, the Great Depression and similiar problems in developing countries, unfetered markets are not stable nor benefitial to anyone. It is alright to have some controls and oversight of the market. It creates parameters in which we can have a stable, healthy market. The unfetered market causes the boom and bust scenerio that you describe.
The information that I am presenting is not orbitrary. It is from years of undergraduate and graduate education and independent field research.
Please, do your own research. Form you own thoughts. Do not just follow what one polititician says. It will only lead to trouble.
Free-market economics most certainly does not claim that everyone has perfect knowledge of the market. Such a thing is an impossibility, which is why gooberment attempts to manipulate the economy for the better have utterly, horribly, miserably, and a ton of other "ly" words, failed. I'm not just following "one politician." I'm actually lending an ear to people like Peter Schiff (who predicted the crisis we're stuck in now), Tom Woods, Tom DiLorenzo, Ludwig von Mises, Henry Hazlitt, and Ron Paul (okay, he's a politician, but he's truly free market and also predicted the crisis). I have yet to find an instance of a government economic program actually working. Hoover's attempts were an obvious failure, the New Deal failed horribly, and of course there's today. Compare these to the recession of 1920-21. Harding stopped it easily. He sat there and did nothing aside from cutting spending. An excellent book on economics is Henry Hazlitt's "Economics in One Lesson." Very easy to understand, too. Ron Paul's "End the Fed" and Tom Woods' "Meltdown" are also great at explaining economics from a free market perspective. I really like history, and one of the reasons Austrian (free market) economics convinces me is because, in light of cold, hard historical facts, it has a flawless reputation. I'll leave this thread, but please allow me to finish with a little humor.
Sure, it works in practice, but will it work in theory?