Who could've guessed that Trump would make Obama look like an amateur socialist?!
@FunnyAnimatorJimTV
#10
The only way to achieve a free market would be to eliminate ALL economic rules and regulations (one of the US government's main functions), including currency.
#10
The only way to achieve a free market would be to eliminate ALL economic rules and regulations (one of the US government's main functions), including currency.
12:
"The only way to achieve a free market would be to eliminate ALL economic rules and regulations (one of the US government's main functions), including currency."
That is straight up wrong.
"The only way to achieve a free market would be to eliminate ALL economic rules and regulations (one of the US government's main functions), including currency."
That is straight up wrong.
@Doodbro Makes sense, as you need an authority to make the money and decide its value, and not everybody has the things people want to trade with each other. So how about just a typical capitalist economy, with currency and authority but it does't intervene unless the people request
@FunnyAnimatorJimTV :
I'm always a proponent of free market.
During periods of crisis (although not this one), the US economy has adopted a widespread command-oriented approach. The benefit is that it focuses the economic activities of the nation on a specific goal (example: WWII production focused on supplying the military). The downside is that it decreases incentivization. I think that incentivization is generally more important than most goals that can be addressed by a command economy, unless there is a very specific goal that needs to be accomplished-- the free market will eventually recognize profit opportunities, but it may take time, while socialism can act more quickly, albeit less efficiently.
I would argue that free market incentivisation would be more beneficial right now in order for firms to be able to weather similar types of shock in the future, but one could argue that the command based approach in the medical sector better focuses development of a vaccine.
Hope that answered your question
I'm always a proponent of free market.
During periods of crisis (although not this one), the US economy has adopted a widespread command-oriented approach. The benefit is that it focuses the economic activities of the nation on a specific goal (example: WWII production focused on supplying the military). The downside is that it decreases incentivization. I think that incentivization is generally more important than most goals that can be addressed by a command economy, unless there is a very specific goal that needs to be accomplished-- the free market will eventually recognize profit opportunities, but it may take time, while socialism can act more quickly, albeit less efficiently.
I would argue that free market incentivisation would be more beneficial right now in order for firms to be able to weather similar types of shock in the future, but one could argue that the command based approach in the medical sector better focuses development of a vaccine.
Hope that answered your question
free market =/= laissez faire
Every living beings' first priority is survival. That survival is instinctual and does not need the false incentive of a "free market." The free market isn't FREE: it takes a lot of government and socialism to sustain the free market.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.