(April 27, 2011 at 10:10 am)TheDarkestOfAngels Wrote: One of the failings of the libertarian school of thought on economics that I've been trying to communicate for some time to theVoid (and yes, I still understand that you're not a laissez-faire capitalist) and others involved the laissez-faire capitalist movement is the fact that it does nothing to prevent capitalists and plutocrats from gaming the system and winning.Agreed, and I thankyou for helping to clarify some positions. I think another problem that I have been personally having with void is that when he says "austrian school" the first thing I think of is "laissez-faire capitalist" or "Market anarchy". Sometimes I can avoid that line of thought, but I cant help having a hard time distinguishing the three because the differences in my point of view between them is slim to none. I am sure void can point out the differences so I can spot them better.
American history is rife with this very thing (the railroad companies of the 19th and early 20th century) and Standard Oil and their price fixing once they had market dominance.
Pharma and health insurance companies are the modern examples.
There is just no one around to protect the population against big business from ruling the population authoritatively given the libertarian position of minimal influence of the economy. All it does is allow companies to make 'devil deals' where the enforced contracts are vague and always favor the company's bottom line, assuming there are any contracts at all.
In the end I feel the differences would probably not make much of a change for me. Call me biased. I feel that in the real world, if we were to switch to any of those systems, it would do nothing more than hand ALL of the power to those who already have the money. It would actually HURT people who are trying to climb up the ladder legitimately and would establish a full scale plutocracy. We have a plutocracy of sorts in America right now, and it is difficult to aviod such a thing unless we went full scale communist (whihc I also oppose). The difference in my opinion being that we have laws and regulations that allow people such as I to move up the ladder and not be hindered as much as would if the corporations were unleashed completely.
I know it sounds funny, but I think you cant have a true free market without good regulations. Remove the regulations and you insure that those in power will do everything they can to knock down the competition in favor of unchanging protectionism for the corporation.
