Free-markets exist whether or not governments do. The fact that we are no longer living in caves is probably a good initial example. This forum may be another. Yet another example might be your own private life. Do you wait for the government to take action in order to know what to do or do you follow your own guidance? I know of NOBODY who references a government handbook, lawbook, or pamphlet in order to know how to conduct themselves in their private lives.

One other thing; please don't confuse the political gamesmanship, otherwise known as "Political Science", with the discussion we are having here about socio-political philosophies. Party politics have NOTHING to do with the philosophies We The People choose to live by.

 

I'm not sure cavemen were driven by the “free-market” although GIECO is doing well with cavemen.


Fear and safety drove us out of the caves.


Anyone have a clear example of when free markets cause a real change.

 

just do some research on ron paul everything he said will happen happened and they just treat him like hes an idiot and dismiss him. he said the market will fail he said the government will bail out the industries and guess what they did. he told them to let them fail and let the companies collapse even the housing market because those things are selling for more than they are worth if we would of let them fail we would know what they are really worth and we would know what the value of our dollar really is but no lets just scoff at him and dont believe him or any study that the university of austria economics has come up with

 

you do know what GEICO stands for right?

 

Who provided the alternate housing?

The fact that cavemen were free to address their concerns and to choose a solution MADE it a free-market by definition.

I also gave you a prime example of a free-market in action; this website. If you don't want to accept that example then I cannot help you.

How would you define "real change"? Sounds like an Obama campaign phrase.

 

True.....

I don't know what GEICO stands for BTW.

 

The Government Employees Insurance Company

 

Yes, and their abysmal failure was why they needed to be rescued by the rest of the available market. The one they chose to ignore up until they needed their own "bailout".

I find it ludicrous that governments will decry the free-market and the productive companies therein until they actually need a tangible solution. Then they approach us and if they cannot simply mandate into existence what they seek, they nationalize and plunder everything.

Due to Constitutional construct, our governing bodies will ALWAYS be in a reactive state of existence. That is, as long as we actually follow the Constitution and the Supreme Court's views on "prior restraint". A government cannot exist "of the People, by the People and for the People" and in a pro-active state at the same time.

 

If you agree with Ron Paul's views on politics and the proper role for government in America, you may be surprised to find that he, too, can give you more examples of free-market success than you are probably willing to recognize.

Maybe look up "Ludwig von Mises" and "Ayn Rand" while you are at it.

 

Real change like cavemen moving outside of the caves.
Or us going into space for research that lead to may of the things the free market capitalize on.
Or people standing up against big governments for more freedom [which the governments took away].
Or people suing drug companies that rush drugs to market causing injury or death.
This website is not what I would call real change so you cannot help me.


Don't confuse free-will with free-market.

 

we say we are a free market society but we like to hind under an umbrella of socialism. America; we like to say one thing and do another.

 

Maybe Porsche. CAFE rules don't apply to those that sell less then 10,000 units in any given market.

 

That is only the name of the company. It is a publicly traded company who's stock is controlled by mainly one individual. This company that contributes heavily to political parties (well, one anyway). It used to provide insurance to a select group, hence the name. It has since open it's scope to a wider possible group of clients.

 

Man moved out of the caves but I guess that memo was missed by some.
Who developed the technology to get from abstract to reality?
I agree and that is where my political views are derived. However, Che Guevera is not my definition of a Revolutionary. Neither is Zach de la Rocha. They were/are Statist-Socialists.
I agree on drugs being brought to market too soon but where was the FDA this whole time?
This website has provided the conduit through which we in the free-market, both as professionals and hobbyists, can solve problems inherent in the Mazda RX-8 and we are doing it without government intervention nor guidance.
I make no confusion between free-will and free-market but one cannot exist without the other.

 

Politics FTW!

 

Cool.

I see where you're coming from....

For the record [as if anyone cares] I dont' place my trust in governments or in corporations but in free people.
Or as free as we can be.

 

What, perhaps, annoys me the most in the discussion between Statism versus Freedom is that those who propose a more intrusive government, whatever the social issue they seek to "cure", never have the nerve to say to their neighbors' faces that which they imply through their calls for more regulation of all our lives.

 

Thanks for taking the time to understand.
I agree, whole-heartedly, with you in placing my trust in the free people but I also am not quite so critical of the corporate scheme as a whole. If I have my stats correct, 80% of employment comes from what is defined as "small entity/small business" and those companies are run by common fools like me. Yet, we provide the vast nexus through which people survive and prosper in America.
BTW, I do care.

 

.... and another thought since you guys got me all fired up.....

One cool thing about a free-market is that it provides the quickest way for problems, no matter whether small-scale or large scale, to be solved. What happens is that a few people have a problem and they approach a small entity like BHR. Since we have lower overhead in our operations we can quickly address the issue-at-hand and devlop a solution. With necessary governmetal beauracracy, they cannot move as quickly as we can. As regards the viability of the solutions brought forth by the small entities, that is something that is decided over time by using our freedoms of speech and choice.

 

That's all

 

RX8 plug-in hybrid

-1.3L

 

Personally, I think it is in the interest of the common good for leadership to encourage/mandate better fuel economy. The mob is not always intelligent. There's a lot of efficency and productivity in allowing, promoting, and defending free markets, but anyone who thinks we can make much societal progress without any regulation or political leadership and give and take doesn't know much about history. Our current system of politics is mostly nonsense, that I will not argue, but nor will I be persuaded by black and white simplistic 'reasoning.'

 

Common good aimed at which goal?
Good thing I don't defer to The Mob when I need to make decisions in my life.
What kind of regulation do you think is necessary?
"Give and take" between what and what?

 

In this case the goal is to develop a more rational and realistic long-term energy economy.
Not really sure, but it's time to make a start and let the normal give and take of our political nonsense system refine as practicable. If we had fully learned the lessons of the first 'oil embargo' in the 70s, we'd be better off now and further along in providing for our future energy needs. Instead we made half-steps forward and major steps backward. More nuclear power, with greater standardization, and an effective grid. France has done a good job in developing safe nuclear power with a more socialist approach. I've lived in Europe for many years and seen some positive things about a socialist approach. Why isn't good medical care a right for every child? Why isn't a good education a right of everyone who's smart enough to benefit from it? Is medical school only for the children of the rich? That makes me sound like a socialist, but really I'm just pointing out some positive aspects of a socialist approach where a more individualist, capitalist system like ours has not done as well. Of course there's also advantages of our more capitalist system, but surely if we had stuck with a more pure capitalism we'd still have slavery and company towns with police goons to kill union organizers and no child labor laws, etc.

 

We have plenty of energy supply to address your concerns. The problem is political hurdles placed in the way by powers who do not recognize self-autonomy, individual rights, and property rights.

"..... smart enough to benefit from it?" This statement makes you sound like..... a good Socialist.

The fact is that "rights" which come at the expense of the masses are not "rights" but "entitlements". Rights are at your OWN expense. Entitlements are at the expense of everyone else.

Slavery, Company towns, police goons (Fascists), and child labor laws are all contrary to the rights of the individual.

BTW, my common-law wife being my chattel property was a great argument when I refused to pay child support to the government. They never collected a dime from me.