Re: the future long term financial apocalypse of the USA

On Sun, 19 May 2024, Dimensional Traveler wrote:

On 5/19/2024 1:38 PM, D wrote:

  On Sun, 19 May 2024, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
 

On 5/19/2024 4:03 AM, D wrote:

  On Sat, 18 May 2024, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
 

On 5/18/2024 5:56 PM, Titus G wrote:

On 19/05/24 01:34, Michael F. Stemper wrote:

On 17/05/2024 15.31, D wrote:
 

I was unaware

 Ignorance is bliss.
   we have anything resembling capitalism. What we have

today is a plan economy with government calling the shots, which is
far from capitalism. Many billionaires are the ones who are the most
cosy with politicians.
 As for who the wealth belongs to and the benefits for the population
at large, note that we are living at a high peak of civilization
compared with 100 years ago on all scales, infant mortality, wealth,
quality of life etc.

 The implication of what you're saying is that living at the peak of
civilization is strongly correlated with having a planned economy
rather than capitalism.
 

 Be careful. You might smear his rose tinted spectacles.

 One suspects that D is of the opinion that any kind of regulation or legal restraint immediately makes a given economy "non-capitalist" and a "planned economy".

 Yep, or if not, at least reduces the efficiency and produces worse results. On the other hand, I live in europe, so I get the "benefit" of studying socialism up close every day. I imagine living in the US or a more free country, that it is easier to come to the belief that government "fixes" all the problems of the market when you have not seen the horrors of socialism up close as in europe.
 On that theme, I recommend this article in FT where Börje Ekholm, CEO of Ericsson says that overregulation is driving the EU to irrelevance (https://archive.is/XAISI).
 I agree completely with him.

 The problem with your "definition" of a capitalist economy is that it doesn't exist.  Never has.  There has ALWAYS been some kind of regulation and laws about how commerce is transacted.  When you start stripping away all the propaganda and unfounded beliefs you find that you can't _HAVE_ capitalism without rules and regulations.  Can't have a marketplace if there is nothing preventing someone from whacking someone else over the head and taking their things.

 The only regulation that is necessary for two people to transact is what they agree upon. If you read what I say carefully you will find me criticizing government and political regulation. Nothing could be further from my mind and my position than banning two people who voluntarily transact to come up with their contracts.
 

So people cannot ban together to negotiate and trade?  (What exactly do you think a government is?)

Sure they can, as long as they don't violate their contracts with their employers.

So the sale of any kind of drug or chemical should not be regulated by the government?

Exactly! Instead it would be "regulated" by the owner of the property where the sale takes place. Absent an owner, no regulation at all.

The sale of weaponry, explosives and the like should not be regulated by the government?

Exactly! Now you're getting it! Except, see above.

The kidnapping, purchase and sale of other humans to be used as slave labor should not be regulated by the government?

Kidnapping violates the right of the individual being kidnapped and will be protected against with personal weapons, nieghbourshood watches, security companies etc.
In theory, although I doubt anyone would agree, someone can sell himself as a slave, but probably the nr of persons doing that would be close to zero.
Also note that financially slave labour does not make sense. Companies employing people perform better than organizations employing slaves.

The destruction of the local environment and making the area around a manufacturing facility uninhabitable and lethal should not be regulated?

Depends on who owns the land. Some land will be destroyed (like today, both by governments and private individuals and companies) and some land will be protected. Eliminate the commons and you also eliminate the tragedy of the commons.
Did I manage to convince you? =)