Crunch

[dubman]

there is a point where people just talk complete nonsense though.
not saying it's in this thread, because it isn't
but there's an awful lot of opinion where a receptive audience is more than it deserves.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by dubman

there is a point where people just talk complete nonsense though.
not saying it's in this thread, because it isn't
but there's an awful lot of opinion where a receptive audience is more than it deserves.

seriously. that's why i'm not responding. my level of information is tapped after two pages on this thread. just have to see what happens to the market after the bailout. this next few months should prove interesting.

[Rog]

Originally Posted by King of Snake

btw about the free market and why are there still so many people living in poverty: well for one thing if european governments wouldn't be working against the free market by subsidising their own agricultural industries, there would be a lot more opportunity to make money in the third world by exporting food to europe.
.

a large proportion of the third world cannot grow enough food to feed its own people let alone export it to europe! i find it incredible that you can buy fish farmed in zimbabwe at the local supermarkets today when most of their people can't get enough to eat. do you think that flogging their food while their people are starving to earn a bit of foreign currency is a good idea? same for kenya.........

[Rog]

once governments intervene (with bailouts) does it cease to be a free market?

[Rog]

Originally Posted by King of Snake

Just because people are taking advantage of the system doesn't mean the system itself is to blame.

i disagree, it's because people can take advantage of the system ( to such a disasterous effect) as it stands then the system most definitely is to blame.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Rog

a large proportion of the third world cannot grow enough food to feed its own people let alone export it to europe! i find it incredible that you can buy fish farmed in zimbabwe at the local supermarkets today when most of their people can't get enough to eat. do you think that flogging their food while their people are starving to earn a bit of foreign currency is a good idea? same for kenya.........

This is only because of the predatory trade laws created by the G8 and other international bodies that hide fascism/mercantilism behind a soft smile of free market trade. If you need to find examples of the evils wrought from free market economics you need to cite one that actually involves principles of free market economics, not corrupt oligarchic collusion between governments and multinational CEO's.

True free market principles would have us grow and raise locally, because its cheaper, not import beef from brazilian rain forest lands to Utah because somebody had an inside connection to powerful governments.

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Rog

i disagree, it's because people can take advantage of the system ( to such a disasterous effect) as it stands then the system most definitely is to blame.

for what system of government/economics is this not the case?

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by Rog

once governments intervene (with bailouts) does it cease to be a free market?

exactly. as I'm sure i've mentioned earlier, i'll argue that the result is closer to fascism than socialism.

Its important to put this in perspective. We bailed out the airlines right after 9/11 because we need airlines. We bailed out the big three american auto makers because the jackasses thought SUV's were the way to make them richer than God, because we need an automotive industry. We've been bailing out since Bush came into office. Seems like you can derive from this a few theories.

1. bail outs do not in themselves produce better economic conditions from which further bailouts are obsolete.

2. we assert the argument that anything government can do corporations can do better but then basically graft the corporations onto the governing body so that the result is a government-corporate complex of a many headed hydra against which no small businesses or middle class enterprise can hope to compete against. Which is why the whole fucking country is working for walmart.

So here's what free market theory says as far as I can see it. Bail-out fuck all and take this on the chops. Remove priveledges that allowed such detachments from reality, and place regulations that bring all the acid tripping harvard business school grads down to earth.

If that means we don't have banks for a bit. Fine. Serves us right for being uneducated about the practices of the banks we were patronizing. If that means we don't have cheap air travel for a few months? Great. Serves us right for allowing these douche bags such a choke hold on things. Have to buy german and japanese cars? awesome. Detroit has been responsible for stopping innovation and massive fuel guzzling for decades. Fuck em. Let the smarter, more ethical people come in their place. That's the free market. And I'm wondering how you would argue that such a process is inherently oppressive or evil.

[King of Snake]

Originally Posted by Rog

a large proportion of the third world cannot grow enough food to feed its own people let alone export it to europe! i find it incredible that you can buy fish farmed in zimbabwe at the local supermarkets today when most of their people can't get enough to eat. do you think that flogging their food while their people are starving to earn a bit of foreign currency is a good idea? same for kenya.........

Obviously I'm not suggesting that countries experiencing food shortages export whatever food they have left. But developing and third world countries have an enormous potential for agricultural production. The problem is that because EU and US protectionism the third world farmers are simply unable to compete with subsidised (not to mention mechanised) farmers from the EU and US. In fact we are dumping our own subsidized overstocks of food for cheap into foreign markets, depriving farmers there from making a decent living.

I'm sure you can find a lot of info online about the problems that our market protectionism is causing for the third world.
like here http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3226

According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, EU protectionism deprives developing countries of nearly $700 billion in export income a year. That's almost 14 times more than poor countries receive in foreign aid. EU protectionism is a continuing tragedy, causing unnecessary hunger and disease. The Cold War "iron curtain" between East and West has been replaced with a customs curtain between North and South.
EU protectionism takes a toll on Europeans, too. The rich countries' protectionism costs their citizens almost $1 billion every day. At that rate, you could fly all the cows in the OECD, 60 million of them, around the world every year in business class. In addition, the cows could be given almost $3,000 each in pocket money to spend in tax-free shops during their stopovers.

hey, $700 billion, that number just keeps popping up doesn't it?

this is also why i think that the whole foreign aid system is a big sham designed to keep our conscience clear so we won't have to deal with the real problems.

[Rog]

Originally Posted by King of Snake

Obviously I'm not suggesting that countries experiencing food shortages export whatever food they have left. But developing and third world countries have an enormous potential for agricultural production. The problem is that because EU and US protectionism the third world farmers are simply unable to compete with subsidised (not to mention mechanised) farmers from the EU and US. In fact we are dumping our own subsidized overstocks of food for cheap into foreign markets, depriving farmers there from making a decent living.

I'm sure you can find a lot of info online about the problems that our market protectionism is causing for the third world.
like here http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3226

hey, $700 billion, that number just keeps popping up doesn't it?

this is also why i think that the whole foreign aid system is a big sham designed to keep our conscience clear so we won't have to deal with the real problems.

i know you weren't suggesting that, it's just that the whole system is geared against the third world and it makes me unhappy. I'll check out the link later as i'm at work now.
It also bothers me when you rightly talk about the agricultural potential of the third world as i read an article the other day about using prime agricultural land in south asia for growing palm oil to produce petrol
Sorry to go on about this but i think the whole system is broken and needs replacing with something fairer - not bailing out. With that i'll say no more as i don't want to alienate anyone more than i have done already