I often see people on this site claim that they do not believe any of the conspiracy theories or whatever because the government is too "incompetent" to pull off such operations. Whenever I hear that, I think of a conversation like this:
Agent A: Here is equipment. Now remember what our plan is?
Agent B: But! But! But! I can't calculate!
Agent A: Who the hell cares? We already have the equipment!
The government is only incompetent if we assume that they are trying to be like a market. But if we assume that they are just trying to get power, scam people, or something, they seem pretty damn competent to me.
What am I missing here?
If I wrote it more than a few weeks ago, I probably hate it by now.
I don't see how economic calculation is relevant to conspiracy theories; or bureaucrats conspiring incognito.
I agree Ryan. Lack of market prices means they can't serve consumers in society. It doesn't mean they can't serve themselves.
Grayson Lilburne: I agree Ryan. Lack of market prices means they can't serve consumers in society. It doesn't mean they can't serve themselves.
But they do have market prices, which is precisely why they can serve [only] themselves very well. But they are still extremely inefficient due to them being a bureaucracy.
The government is extremely competent. It is extremely competent at stealing our money and lining the pockets of it's friends. It basically runs society like a giant farm.
Governments have pulled some awesome stunts in recent history. The Falklands would be one, the strategic bombing initiative another. In their very specific filed of specialization, stealing and killing, they sure can be ingenious. I never underestimate conspiracy claims. After all what but selling the Throne of England to whoever promised to charter a Central bank (Inglorious Revolution) has been the greatest conspiracy of all?
Conspiracy Theory is a loose term. I've been called "One of them conspiracy theorists," for discussing the Auditing the Fed bill along with allowing for competing currencies.
I believe when we use this term it's geared more towards the typical Alex Jones fan but people like to spread it a little wide. Which occasionally engulfs surrounding crowds. For me, he's putting on a show, and that's how he earns his living. The more intense and fearful the material, the more traffic and viewers he obtains.
Perhaps, certain branches of our government may ignore or misinterpret information for a monetary benefit with the hopes of their error wouldn't be too severe. But I'm not ready to believe that these events are planned and executed domestically...
DD5: But they do have market prices, which is precisely why they can serve [only] themselves very well.
But they do have market prices, which is precisely why they can serve [only] themselves very well.
Elaborate, please.
DD5: But they are still extremely inefficient due to them being a bureaucracy.
But they are still extremely inefficient due to them being a bureaucracy.
Only from our perspective. What is your definition of "inefficiency"?
I. Ryan: DD5: But they do have market prices, which is precisely why they can serve [only] themselves very well. Elaborate, please.
There is no calculation problem for all of the things the government wants to buy as long as the means of production are privately owned and there is still a market for consumers goods. The government is nothing but a big buyer that simply directs resources to satisfy itself. It is true, there is no way to ascertain the value of its services against costs from the point of view of its alleged consumers, the citizens. But from the government's point of view, there is no problem. It can have its fancy buildings and war machines.
I. Ryan: DD5: But they are still extremely inefficient due to them being a bureaucracy. Only from our perspective. What is your definition of "inefficiency"?
The bureaucracy has no inherent incentive to produce anything at minimal costs due to the lack of profit incentive. The bureaucratic organization itself can not be efficiently organized even if it wanted to due to the absent of profit and loss calculations and competition.
DD5: The bureaucracy has no inherent incentive to produce anything at minimal costs due to the lack of profit incentive. The bureaucratic organization itself can not be efficiently organized even if it wanted to due to the absent of profit and loss calculations and competition.
Why are you assuming that they care that much to "produce [things] at minimal [money] costs"?
I. Ryan: DD5: The bureaucracy has no inherent incentive to produce anything at minimal costs due to the lack of profit incentive. The bureaucratic organization itself can not be efficiently organized even if it wanted to due to the absent of profit and loss calculations and competition. Why are you assuming that they care that much to "produce [things] at minimal [money] costs"?
I said even if it wanted to - hypothetically.
Nielsio: The government is extremely competent. It is extremely competent at stealing our money and lining the pockets of it's friends. It basically runs society like a giant farm.
I think Nielsio is right. They are competent at achieving their goals. When it comes to us, we are just secondary. We are just the people they steal from. Although when I say government did "something", I don't mean everyone in govt. was in on the scheme, but just a few people at the top. There are good people in government also, but just a small number.
DD5: I said even if it wanted to - hypothetically.
Well, that is why I asked you to define "efficiency". My point is that, only if we impute to them our own desires, goals, intentions, or whatever, they are "inefficient", "incompetent", or whatever. Otherwise, as I said in my original post, "they seem pretty damn competent [or efficient] to me".
I just call it corporatism..............capitalism biggest enemy.
Corporatism is using state means to enhance market share and profitability of a few favored firms, at the expense of the citizen.
wolfman: Quote: "Corporatism is using state means to enhance market share and profitability of a few favored firms, at the expense of the citizen."
Quote: "Corporatism is using state means to enhance market share and profitability of a few favored firms, at the expense of the citizen."
So does Obamacare fit your definition for Corporatism?
What about the government who uses Corporations as a means to expand its controls over production and trade by means of command and control regulations? Or when it uses corporations to expand its welfare agenda?
Who are we trying to appease by resorting to such oversimplified rhetoric as in the quote above? As if it is really the corporations that come up with such original ideas as covering preexisting conditions, or coverage for all regardless of anything... Give me a break!
You begin your analysis with the government. I do mine with those behind the government. And I believe big corporations are behind every government economic policy....................Obamacare fits my definition.
DD5: wolfman: Quote: "Corporatism is using state means to enhance market share and profitability of a few favored firms, at the expense of the citizen." So does Obamacare fit your definition for Corporatism? What about the government who uses Corporations as a means to expand its controls over production and trade by means of command and control regulations? Or when it uses corporations to expand its welfare agenda? Who are we trying to appease by resorting to such oversimplified rhetoric as in the quote above? As if it is really the corporations that come up with such original ideas as covering preexisting conditions, or coverage for all regardless of anything... Give me a break!
wolfman:You begin your analysis with the government. I do mine with those behind the government. And I believe big corporations are behind every government economic policy....................Obamacare fits my definition.
So the public's incline towards socialism is nothing but the making of big corporations. . Socialism itself is a manifestation of big corporations. Right?
it's amazing how socialists and alleged die hard capitalists can find common ground on such nonsense.
I quoted corporatism and you talk about socialism. No idea where you brought that from. I lived trough communism.............i can smell it and see it coming...................."its not happening in America". But you are not so wrong after all. Corporatism is itself a form of corporate welfare...........a form of corporate socialism...............where profits are privatized and loses are socialized.
DD5: wolfman:You begin your analysis with the government. I do mine with those behind the government. And I believe big corporations are behind every government economic policy....................Obamacare fits my definition. So the public's incline towards socialism is nothing but the making of big corporations. . Socialism itself is a manifestation of big corporations. Right? it's amazing how socialists and alleged die hard capitalists can find common ground on such nonsense.
wolfman:I quoted corporatism and you talk about socialism. No idea where you brought that from
They are all variants of the same beast.
http://mises.org/humanaction/chap33sec4.asp
wolfman:I lived trough communism.............i can smell it and see it coming...................."its not happening in America".
So you lived through communism and this somehow makes you an authority on what socialism is? So Americans and Europeans have an economic and sociological understanding of the system they live under just because they live under it..? I don't think so.
Americans and Europeans know diddly -squat about their system and the former people of of the Eastern block had no better understanding of their system either.
The goverment can be efficient when it's something that is vital for the maintenance of power. For example, the Ministry of Love is quite fancy and functional in 1984, even if everything else is shitty. The Federal Revenue here in Brazil is extremely efficient and rigorous.
I do have a better definition than you on what socialism and capitalism are...............only because I have lived trough both of them I know what I say. Not an authority like you said.
You ( I assume) only know about your books...............that's why you can quote anything pretty fast.
Also I did say corporatism was a type of socialism...............I had no need to read anything to arrive to that conclusion.
DD5: wolfman:I quoted corporatism and you talk about socialism. No idea where you brought that from They are all variants of the same beast. http://mises.org/humanaction/chap33sec4.asp wolfman:I lived trough communism.............i can smell it and see it coming...................."its not happening in America". So you lived through communism and this somehow makes you an authority on what socialism is? So Americans and Europeans have an economic and sociological understanding of the system they live under just because they live under it..? I don't think so. Americans and Europeans know diddly -squat about their system and the former people of of the Eastern block had no better understanding of their system either.