A problem with the free-market?

i have a life.  i am thankful that it is not yours too.

have positive market outcomes taken place with increasing socialism???

life expectancies???  have they increased within increasing socialst govts/insitutions???

 

i am not a spammer.  and i dont want your humor.  just truth and genuine opinions...not games or disingenuous opinions.  i guess that is difficult to come by in the interenet.

 

but if bad socialism is increasing what should be showing up in the human condition???  more povrety???  death??  starvation and disease??? 

 

wouldnt a decresing free market level begin to show more detrimental effects in human living???

"If we wish to preserve a free society, it is essential that we recognize that the desirability of a particular object is not sufficient justification for the use of coercion."

 

if i can determine that you have a communicalble plague i will coerce you into qurantine.

Mon. 10/04/26 10:56 EDT
.post #77

JakobM:

JakobM:

Ultimately you reject socialism because of arbitrary value judgments.

MMMark:

Ultimately, I reject putting sugar in the gas tank because of arbitrary value judgements.

Thanks. You are pretending that you have it all figured out as if you were dealing with a small, well defined, physical problem. That clearly shows that

1) you are a positivist and your 'economics' is just positivism.
2) you are completly mischaracterizing the problem at hand.

Jakob, slapping labels on me is not the way to understand what I am saying.

I wasn't making any statement about socialism or economics. I was making a statement about language, specifically, your use of it.

Stating that people accept or reject things "because of arbitrary value judgements" might be true, but it's so unspecific as to be practically meaningless.

I reject putting sugar in the gas tank because I desire to avoid the deleterious consequences.

I reject socialism for the same reason.

Daniel Muffinburg:

Gratefully, there are plenty of mods in this thread to split the off-topic threads. :P

I will admit to attempting this a few minutes ago, but I will require another look-over the thread, because the point where the thread deviates from the OP is fairly seamless & probably would involve gutting the original thread down to less than a page :\ 

Alright, after a little bit of proofreading, I think I've determined when & where the thread went completly off-topic from the OP.  I will be (attempting to) split the thread, so those who are anxiously writing follow-ups to the discussion should sit tight for a moment.  

Stating that people accept or reject things "because of arbitrary value judgements" might be true, but it's so unspecific as to be practically meaningless.

Take it up with von Mises. I'm simply using his technique. But yes, I agree. Mises' analyses and 'philosophy' are meaningless.

I reject putting sugar in the gas tank because I desire to avoid the deleterious consequences. I reject socialism for the same reason.

Socialism puts sugar in your gas tank!? I didn't know that. I admit that Socialism is bad then.