Wednesday, March 4, 2015

On How Some People Point to the Peculiar and/or Stupid Ways that Other Folks Spend Their Money and Parade this Around as Evidence that the Market Isn't "Perfect"

It's a total strawman in that nobody of a serious bent has ever said that the market was perfect, just that it was a better paradigm than the alternatives; fascism, socialism, and communism (the thought being that millions of individual and voluntary transactions/experiments are far more preferable and less catastrophic than some small cadre of massive ones that have been perpetrated by dullards such as Obama and Bush, their underlings, henchmen, etc.).......That, and who in the hell would want to live in a perfect world (defined by who?) anyway, for Christ?
at

5 comments:

  1. Jerry CritterMarch 4, 2015 at 9:04 PM

    I'd like to live in MY perfect world. After all, it would be perfect!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Will "take no prisoners" HartMarch 4, 2015 at 11:05 PM

    Jerry, I was watching some futurist on the Jimmy Kimmel Show once and he seemed to think that we will someday be able to swallow these little cameras and experience all sorts of virtual realities OF OUR CHOOSING. I personally cannot wait.

    ReplyDelete
  3. dmarksMarch 5, 2015 at 4:18 AM

    Will said: "...and experience all sorts of virtual realities OF OUR CHOOSING"

    Aren't there way too many doing this already, without the hardware?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Les CarpenterMarch 5, 2015 at 12:43 PM

    For sure the market isn't perfect, best system to date but it does need some rational tweaking. Best get started soon before it ultimately destroys itself.

    ReplyDelete
  5. BB-IdahoMarch 5, 2015 at 2:04 PM

    A large part of the market is institutional investments these days and only about 50% of Americans have stocks or even
    mutual funds. The idea that corporations rather bet on their
    stock performance than deal with
    banks for cash needs is attractive, but a bit confusing:
    for example, say Company A receives x$$ on it's IPO, and y
    % on its stock growth. Many of
    those stocks resell with no benefit to Company A: under certain conditions, would they
    have done better with a straight
    up loan? The concept of buying
    back stock to increase its value
    reminds of robbing Peter to pay
    Paul, IMO. I don't understand it
    very well, just well enough to have done quite well. :)

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.