The Age of China

[imotion s14]

Originally Posted by gearhead55

Your sarcasm isn't funny or helpful.

Neither is your head-in-the-sand optimism that government can cure all economic ills if we just pass a law.

Regulation is absolutely necessary for a stable economy,

You can say the Soviet economy was stable in it's stagnation.

its just a matter of balance.

And who exactly gets to decide this arbitrary balance?

Obviously there will always be economic cycles, but big boom and busts should be avoided.

First you say we can achieve economic stability, now your admitting the boom and bust cycles is unavoidable.

How do you think the housing boom got started? Where did all that credit come from? it surely wasn't from American savings. Had nothing at all to do with the Fed lowering interest rates to 1% in response to the internet bubble. And the minute they start raising rates the bubble starts to burst. That has nothing to do with it at all.

And no, "the soviet economy" never had 100% regulation. No economy has or ever has had 100% regulation.

There was no private ownership of means of production, no capital markets, no entrepreneurs directing capital. The central planners of the Soviet Union had 100% control of the "output" of the Soviet economy.

Its easy to think in the black and white terms of "no regulation is good, regulation is bad", but thats not the way the world works.

You're the only one thinking in terms of black and white. In your black and white world the government has perfect information and thus can stop boom and bust cycle because they can predict the future and apply regulations with accurate foresight.

There will always be a give and take, and dogmatic views about the need for government involvement solve absolutely nothing. If people were more realistic the conversation would be much more productive.

I'm not the one who has a dogmatic view that government sticking it's nose into the market fixes everything. The economy is too dynamic for any 1 smart man or 100 really smart men. If we could do all that then we wouldn't need a market as we'd have a 100% efficient economy and can direct resource without making mistakes.

[gearhead55]

Originally Posted by imotion s14

Neither is your head-in-the-sand optimism that government can cure all economic ills if we just pass a law.

I don't have any unfounded optimism at all. I have never stated that 'government can cure all economic ills' and i don't think that that is true at all.

Originally Posted by imotion s14

You can say the Soviet economy was stable in it's stagnation.

sure you can, what does that have anything to do with the current conversation?

Originally Posted by imotion s14

And who exactly gets to decide this arbitrary balance?

The citizens of the united states, preferably after logical deliberation over the possible choices.

Originally Posted by imotion s14

First you say we can achieve economic stability, now your admitting the boom and bust cycles is unavoidable.

No i never said we can achieve economic stability, i said that regulation helps manage boom and bust cycles and increase stability.

Originally Posted by imotion s14

How do you think the housing boom got started? Where did all that credit come from? it surely wasn't from American savings. Had nothing at all to do with the Fed lowering interest rates to 1% in response to the internet bubble. And the minute they start raising rates the bubble starts to burst. That has nothing to do with it at all.

Again you are arguing against an extreme position that i am not presenting. I am not arguing that over-regulation is any less detrimental than under-regulation. I am arguing there is a continuum of positions on the subject and dogmatic views from either perspective are not beneficial to the conversation.

Originally Posted by imotion s14

There was no private ownership of means of production, no capital markets, no entrepreneurs directing capital. The central planners of the Soviet Union had 100% control of the "output" of the Soviet economy.

If you think that the post WWII soviet government had complete control over the production of crops and import/export from the country then you obviously haven't read enough about the history. The ideas that a country is founded on and the way that country actually operates are two different things.

Originally Posted by imotion s14

You're the only one thinking in terms of black and white. In your black and white world the government has perfect information and thus can stop boom and bust cycle because they can predict the future and apply regulations with accurate foresight.

I never said anything like that at all. Everything i have said was regarding the need for a balance between under-regulation and over-regulation.

Originally Posted by imotion s14

I'm not the one who has a dogmatic view that government sticking it's nose into the market fixes everything. The economy is too dynamic for any 1 smart man or 100 really smart men. If we could do all that then we wouldn't need a market as we'd have a 100% efficient economy and can direct resource without making mistakes.

AGAIN, i never said that the government fixes everything. I have only been saying exactly what your last statement sarcastically said; the world is a complicated place. I believe that in order to benefit the most as a society we must find a balance between over and under regulation of markets. Unless we abandon extreme views like the ones you appear to hold and the ones you mistakenly apply to me then we wont get over this bullshit...