Another repost that I don't think went through. ---------- >From: "Thomas Lunde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [Futurework] Free Trade kills :: Why not :economy games" like "war games" instead of economy like war? >Date: Fri, Oct 10, 2003, 2:37 AM >
> >> The market is simply a description of people exchanging things. Nothing >> strange about people exchanging things. They have been doing it since the >> beginning of time. If, as you seem to think, it's a place where everybody >> get screwed, then people wouldn't trade anymore. Overwhelmingly, the >> market is a place where people trade to become better off than they were >> before they traded. >> >> Heck! You trade all the time and are better off because of it. People by >> the tens of millions trade at computer shows and at flea markets and out of >> their car boots. >> >> I don't know how many of your rules and regulations there are at these >> places, but I doubt there are many. People don't want to be protected from >> the market. They want protection from people who want to take their >> markets away. > > Thomas: > > Well, you got me thinking Harry. I went to a car auction and at this > particular auction where quite a number of cars that should have sold for 2 > - 4 thousand dollars but the buyers would not bid these cars up - consumers > with no money perhaps. Anyway it dawned on me that I was watching a pure > market at work. Price being established immediately with no other criteria > other than what that immediate market would pay. > > Now the auctioneer made a comment that he wasn't looking forward to telling > the people selling the cars how low a price they went for. Now those people > thought they had a market price in mind - a value, based on what they paid, > what other cars of similar or identical year and model were being sold for > in the market in which business sets the price - not the market. But here > was a case where the consumer made the price decision. > > An excellent market - the market that existed in a market place of more > primitive times and places. But a supermarket - for instance is not a pure > market. The price is set by the supplier - not the buyer - therefore, not a > pure market but a manipulated market - manipulated so the seller can make a > profit - the distributor can make a profit - the producer can make a profit. > But a pure market doesn't have profit as a given. If the consumer has the > final choice on price - then price is the determinant of a free market. > Therefore - none of the so called market activities - from the labor market > - to the stock market - to the reality market - to the financial market - > all prices are set by the supplier not by the purchaser - all the purchaser > has is the right not to buy and that is a different than is expressed at an > auction where the consumers determines for himself what he will pay. >> >> You're right about political interference. Politicians have no faith in >> the intellectual prowess of their constituents (as they voted for the >> politicians its obvious their pilot lights must be out) so a lot of their >> political time is spent protecting people from things they don't want to be >> protected from. > > Thomas: > > To big a generalization for me. >> >> I just love your "direct the market into hopefully beneficial activities >> for all". The market is naturally beneficial to the people involved in it >> or they wouldn't be involved in it. The content that left-wing politicians >> feel for most people is evident in their desire to try to protect >> them. "I'm all right Jack, but you need help. > > Thomas: > > Obviously, an auction may not be beneficial to the seller. He enters the > marketplace with faith, but reality is - he has no control once the decision > to sell is taken. In terms of your negative view of politicians interfering > in the market - if the politicians did not create the structure of business > rules, taxation, regulation then hardly any business would ever survive the > vagaries of the market place and the determinant of their success based on a > market established price at the time of purchase >> >> If the market were allowed to be free from these political meddlers, people >> would handle their affairs themselves. >> >> It amuses me, Tom old lad, that apparently, when you get rid of the free >> market and put it under the control of political appointees, none of them >> will be guilty of "greed, exploitation, manipulation and philosophical >> distortion". >> >> Perhaps the reason why socialism inevitably fails is that we don't have any >> "honesty pills". We do know socialist politicians have " let's share >> pills" because an important part of their philosophy is coercively sharing >> other people's things. >> >> In fact, the free market is the way to stop "greed, exploitation, >> manipulation and philosophical distortion". The way to start with these >> excessive profits you love to talk about is to get rid of the political >> obstacles to the free market. > > Thomas: > > This led me to some other thinking about the market and the assumption that > all the "if only everyone got out of the way, the market would provide the > best solutions is the holy grail. > > Now an automobile - is in essence a tool, a tool we have created to haul our > sorry asses around. But business found that a tool like a tractor - well, > you don't sell very many because there use is utilized and only replaced > when it is no longer economical to repair. Such is not the case with the > automobile. The "market" offers and woos and entices us to believe that we > need style and that is the main criteria for this tool. And because style > can be changed yearly - then it becomes necessary to continually upgrade > your car for style - not for utility. In fact, style often destroys utility > because a new material, a new motor, a new tire may or may not perform as > well as a previous model. An immense parts industry has to operate to > compensate for style - the insurance industry is incredibly expense because > not only do we return a car to utility, we return it to style - so hundreds > of dollars are paid to repair a scratch - a scratch that does not affect the > utility of an automobile but does affect it's false style value. > > If the market really provided us with the "best" and "cheapest" product we > would technically upgrade vehicles as discoveries came alone but we would > also standardize vehicles - say in 10 year retoolings. We would build for > safety, economy, durability, repairability and amortize the cost over a 10 > or more year period. Of course, by recasting a car from a tool to an > attribute of personality, costs, efficiencies, safety features get > sacrificed to the latest style. So, is the market more efficient - I can > think of other alternatives. >> >> The action of the market is to produce the best goods at the cheapest >> price. Any attempt to grab "excessive" profit is rapidly squelched by >> competitors bringing to the market better goods at cheaper prices. > > Thomas: > > Again, this seems to me to be one of the myths. If you all decide or go > along with the idea of style over utility, then the battlefield is style and > that now costs from 10 - 100,ooo, while cars build as utility tools with > durability and safety and economy might be priced at $5000. Sad to say, > even farm tractors have entered the style market so that we have $150,000 > tractors that are not all that different in essence, though quite different > in style than existed 25 years ago. So, I don't buy the argument that we > get cheaper prices - why, because there is more profit in selling style than > utility. >> >> The opposite of the free market is a controlled economy, in which disaster >> we are now all participating. However, in spite of the politicians playing >> with our lives, the flea markets and the car boot sales will go on. >> >> Real people love the free market, and so they should. > > People, really do love a free market. I love going to car auctions and > getting a great deal. However the seller often feels they didn't get a > great deal. The opposite occurs in a controlled economy. The seller is > happy because he made a profit - while the consumer often had no choice > except to take what the seller had to offer or do without - sometimes not a > productive option. > > But a free market does not guareentee the continuity of value. Banks would > not know how to value thingss because the value is in the hands of the > consumer. So, Harry, I guess you've made a convert. I think I should be > able to into the grocery store and pick so groceries and go to a counter and > make an offer. You know, this actually happens in my taxicab. A small > number of people get in and tell me they have $5 and would I take them > somewhere. It is my choice to sell the service - yes or no - but the > customer is trying to by-pass the relulated rate on the meter. Sometimes I > say yes, sometimes I say no, occasionally, I try and negotiate. > > Respectfully, > > Thomas Lunde >> >> Harry >> >> --------------------------------------------- >> >> >> Thomas wrote >> >> Morning Harry >> >> Enjoying California weather here in the Great Northern Plains of >> Saskatchewan - hope you are enjoying the same. >> >> The word "market" is a great big generalization. Underneath it is 10 >> million activiities. These activities are surrounded by laws and >> regulations to protect people from the market and direct the market into >> hopefully beneficial activities for all. Sad to say, these high ideals are >> often subverted by the actors in the market. It is even more compounded by >> the political actors who interact with the market for private gain over >> public good. >> >> Given that we were all given an "honesty pill" and a "let's share pill" and >> a "let's do no harm to our environment or the people in it pill" - the >> idealistic market might have some chance of living up to it's idealistic >> promise. Sad to say, such pills are unavailable. >> >> Underneath all the rhetoric is the sad truth of greed, exploitation, >> manipulation and philosophical distortion. >> >> I will make a little prophecy. The market as we know it will change from a >> profit driven activity that manipulates society to a sharing economy within >> the next twenty five years. For this current market will crumble. Millions >> will starve, die, be displaced and value will collapse. Out of these ruins >> will come the understanding of a cooperative market that redistributes the >> available goods and services in other ways. When the current crop of >> "experts" die off, new thought will come. >> >> What the shape of this new market will be will be answered by history. We >> will solve this problem and 200 years from now, people will study this last >> century with as much disbelief as we now think of nobility and kingship as a >> means of governance. >> >> Respectfully, >> >> >> Thomas Lunde >> >> ---------- >> >From Harry Pollard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >To "Thomas Lunde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Subject Re [Futurework] Free Trade kills Why not economy games" like "war >> games" instead of economy like war? >> >Date Sat, Oct 4, 2003, 323 PM >> > >> >> > Tom, >> > >> > The market is just a device for allowing people to exchange their goods and >> > services. It has no responsibility to anyone nor does anyone have a >> > responsibility to it. >> > >> > When a market is free, everybody benefits from its use. When everyone uses >> > the market and benefits from its use, then as they are the community, the >> > community benefits from the market "as if by an invisible hand". >> > >> > And that is all the "invisible hand" means. When every member of the >> > community is better off, then the community is better off. Does that make >> > sense? >> > >> > Harry >> >> >> >> **************************************************** >> Harry Pollard >> Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles >> Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 >> Tel: (818) 352-4141 -- Fax: (818) 353-2242 >> http://home.comcast.net/~haledward >> **************************************************** >> >> >> >> --- >> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >> Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 9/11/2003 >> _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
