[Sayf-Allah]

and our way of life more?

Terrorism™ or The Free Market™?

And which of these is more of a threat in the future?

While there's no denying that Terrorism™ has probably cost more lives (directly), which of these two forces cost us the most? And in your opinion which of these threatens our way of life more?

Is it possible that while we (the West) have been so focused on the WoT™ that we simply forgot to worry about what our traders were doing with our money? Could more of the money and effort spent on combating terrorism been spent on making sure our markets wouldn't crash?

These are a couple of questions I've been asking myself lately.

The answer to me is quite obvious to those that know me but to stay clear of a rule 8 violation:

The Free Market™ has cost us more in lives (indirectly) and money than terrorism ever could. The Free Market™ is also a much bigger threat to our way of life. And we should have spent a lot more time and energy trying to fix this Free Market™ than combating terrorism.

That's the short verion of my answer. I'll elaborate if someone bites.

ps. I'm not talking about a true and ideological free market when I say Free Market™. I'm talking about the market as it is today with money being created out of nothing (thanks Doofy for that film. ), people not producing anything but still making money (speculators on the market), and so on.

[smacintush]

This thread has great potential.

Seriously.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

people not producing anything but still making money (speculators on the market)

It's not really fair for you to blame this on the free market, since any alternative pretty much is defined by this (people who fail to produce anything still get free stuff courtesy of the rest).

[smacintush]

His whole post in unfair.

He is comparing apples to oranges, creating his own definition of "Free Market" while not attempting to give us his definition of "Terrorism", and backs his opinion up with no evidence for us to accept or refute.

That's not to mention that the whole premise is retarded. American "free market" capitalism has made it possible for America to do more good for the world than any other nation in history. "Terrorism" as most often referred to today is but a single issue in the much larger problem of the proliferation of Islamic fundamentalism that is destroying hundreds of millions of lives as we speak.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

American "free market" capitalism has made it possible for America to do more good for the world than any other nation in history.

And yet somehow you're writing in English.

[Kerrigan]

I would say that the free market has benefited us more, owing to its ability to place a downward pressure on the prices of technological products (both tangible and intangible). Elementary school students now have database access and processing power that only government officials and academics had 15 years ago. The large market for pharmaceuticals also has spurred an increase in profit-driven research which has lead to breakthrough treatments for all manner of diseases.

This access to technology -- the purchasing and distribution of which corresponds to its theoretical demand curve -- pushes us further and further into technological breakthroughs. Greater efficiency leads to greater productivity, allowing us to make better use of resources available in a free market.

Free trade raised the standard of living for more people than has any government aid program.

Before our efficient use of resources through free market economies, all societies were forced to exist at a level barely allowing for subsistence with per capita incomes well below what would be considered today's poverty.

The expansion of the freedom of goods and labor has seen a corresponding democratization of knowledge and understanding.

While I respect the OP's intellect, I do not think this topic presented in a way that is suitable for discussion as a serious issue. It has been mooted ad infinitum since the 19th century and everyone knows the ins and outs of arguments for and against free market economics. There is nothing new or shocking about the imagined threat of free market economics. Furthermore the argument is presented in a slanted way, and the reasoning is vulnerable on the grounds that it mistakenly tries to establish that, because one thing is a threat, the other is not. Also, the argument fails two relate two unrelated phenomenon.

Of course, there will always be those who hate progress. Perhaps Obama was right: these bitter people would rather cling to guns and religion and subsist on a diet of stale ideas.

[Doofy]

Also, I have to agree with Sayf (as long as we're using the definition of "free market" provided). I firmly believe that within our lifetimes we're going to see financial disruption which makes the Great Depression look like a boom time.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Also, I have to agree with Sayf (as long as we're using the definition of "free market" provided). I firmly believe that within our lifetimes we're going to see financial disruption which makes the Great Depression look like a boom time.

I think you need break out the velvet brush there Doof…

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

I think you need break out the velvet brush there Doof…

Not familiar with that expression, Smac.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

It's not really fair for you to blame this on the free market, since any alternative pretty much is defined by this (people who fail to produce anything still get free stuff courtesy of the rest).

Thank you! I've been trying to say this for years, but never quite got it out as succinctly as this.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Not familiar with that expression, Smac.

http://www.milty.co.uk/i307c166/Medi...htm?mennum=166

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

http://www.milty.co.uk/i307c166/Medi...htm?mennum=166

Ahhh. OK.
Just don't come running to me if you find yourself without a stack of gold.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

It's not really fair for you to blame this on the free market, since any alternative pretty much is defined by this (people who fail to produce anything still get free stuff courtesy of the rest).

That's not entirely accurate. There are shades between a full libertarian utopia free market and socialist policies. Teddy Roosevelt's presidency (e.g., antitrust laws) was a great example of that kind of thinking.

[Doofy]

I don't believe that Sayf is actually talking about the free market when he's saying "The Free Market™". It sounds like he's mostly talking about the fiat economy.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Not familiar with that expression, Smac.

I'm curious, what is it about the free market that will cause "financial disruption which makes the Great Depression look like a boom time."? I thought the problem was as much a central bank and in part, the creation of entities like Mae and Mac as anything else that caused a lot of the problems we face today.

*just read the above. I don't understand why the use of "free market" in Sayf's conclusion is acceptable? While I also believe Sayf intelligent, I agree with Kerrigan on the lack of firm foundation for discourse with the post.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I'm curious, what is it about the free market that will cause "financial disruption which makes the Great Depression look like a boom time."? I thought the problem was as much a central bank and in part, the creation of entities like Mae and Mac as anything else that caused a lot of the problems we face today.

*just read the above. I don't understand why the use of "free market" in Sayf's conclusion is acceptable? While I also believe Sayf intelligent, I agree with Kerrigan on the lack of firm foundation for discourse with the post.

I'm taking the whole thread as "terrorism" vs "fiat economy". Which makes it a central bank thing.

And the reason why I reckon it's all going to be very problematic very soon is that we've basically hit the growth buffers (hence the current crisis). There's nowhere left to go. And since the entire system requires growth to work, interesting things are going to happen now we're running out of headroom.

Now, I hate terrorists more than you guys put together. But this upcoming financial problem is larger, IMO. The terrorists are just gnats (annoy you a tad) to the fiscal crocodile (will bite your leg off).

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I'm taking the whole thread as "terrorism" vs "fiat economy". Which makes it a central bank thing.

And the reason why I reckon it's all going to be very problematic very soon is that we've basically hit the growth buffers (hence the current crisis). There's nowhere left to go. And since the entire system requires growth to work, interesting things are going to happen now we're running out of headroom.

Now, I hate terrorists more than you guys put together. But this upcoming financial problem is larger, IMO. The terrorists are just gnats (annoy you a tad) to the fiscal crocodile (will bite your leg off).

Don't get me wrong Doofy, I agree with you 100% on the fiat economy thing. I just don't agree with the "free market" premise of the argument. No doubt about it though, you're not really hearing too much about terrorists right now.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I just don't agree with the "free market" premise of the argument.

I think Sayf was using "Free Market™" sarcastically, to illustrate that the actual free market is non-existent. Everyone's picked up on the words "free market" but I'm pretty sure that that's not the thrust of this thread.
I could be wrong, of course. We'll have to wait until Sayf gets up and explains himself.

[Sayf-Allah]

As so often (for some very weird reason), me and Doofy are in agreement.

And yes, like my post said. I'm not talking about the liberal (European sense of the word) free market. I'm talking about the system we have today that pretends to be a free market.

Like I said in the original post.

And to do the MacNN thing.....

If you believe our markets are free today you're a bloody socialist!



(enough of an explanation?)

[- - e r i k - -]

…paging Chongo. Chongo to this thread please.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

So in a nutshell... socialists are a greater threat than terrorists, and end up killing more people and costing us more money with misguided policies than terrorists ever could deliberately.

If you say so. Sounds about right.

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

So in a nutshell... socialists are a greater threat than terrorists, and end up killing more people and costing us more money with misguided policies than terrorists ever could deliberately.

That's a fantastic statement.

I think though, that we're dealing with two very separate things and trying to compare them is awkward. Socialism is a problem which comes from within. It's our internal policies, culture, and attitude which brings about socialism. Terrorism on the other hand is (largely) external. We can make change internally to eliminate socialism. We cannot change the way they other people think about us. It's up to them to change their opinions.

Markets function at the very basic level with human relationships. "I'll give you this for that","This is worth so much to me",etc. Terrorism almost always denies those relationships, It has to. A terrorist cannot function (in that role) when there is a working communicative relationship. I think because of this, you can't really compare Terrorism and The current market situation.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

I was, of course, being facetious. (Although, heck, maybe that is true.)

Just waiting around to see if this thread actually does veer off into the territory of making any sort of relevant comparison.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - 

…paging Chongo. Chongo to this thread please.

No need for me to comment, these posts some it up quite well.

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

As so often (for some very weird reason), me and Doofy are in agreement.

And yes, like my post said. I'm not talking about the liberal (European sense of the word) free market. I'm talking about the system we have today that pretends to be a free market.

Like I said in the original post.

And to do the MacNN thing.....

If you believe our markets are free today you're a bloody socialist!



(enough of an explanation?)

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

So in a nutshell... socialists are a greater threat than terrorists, and end up killing more people and costing us more money with misguided policies than terrorists ever could deliberately.

If you say so. Sounds about right.

Originally Posted by SirCastor 

That's a fantastic statement.

I think though, that we're dealing with two very separate things and trying to compare them is awkward. Socialism is a problem which comes from within. It's our internal policies, culture, and attitude which brings about socialism. Terrorism on the other hand is (largely) external. We can make change internally to eliminate socialism. We cannot change the way they other people think about us. It's up to them to change their opinions.

Markets function at the very basic level with human relationships. "I'll give you this for that","This is worth so much to me",etc. Terrorism almost always denies those relationships, It has to. A terrorist cannot function (in that role) when there is a working communicative relationship. I think because of this, you can't really compare Terrorism and The current market situation.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by SirCastor 

Terrorism on the other hand is (largely) external... We cannot change the way they other people think about us. It's up to them to change their opinions.

Huh? Since when is domestic terrorism not the bigger problem in America?

[SirCastor]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Huh? Since when is domestic terrorism not the bigger problem in America?

I think the conversation is addressing "The War on Terror" Terrorists, rather than anything homegrown. I also think however, that a terrorist (generally) is a person who has stopped communicating, and essentially becomes a external problem. When I said 'external', I didn't mean outside of the physical borders of the country, but essentially someone who abandons working with the people to find a solution. They seek disruption through fear and terror. They become an external problem by separating themselves from us.

Now, if you want to say that socialists are trying to scare the country further into their mindset... I'd agree, and that can probably be constituted as a form of terrorism. And yes, I'm using these terms horribly loosely.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

So in a nutshell... socialists are a greater threat than terrorists, and end up killing more people and costing us more money with misguided policies than terrorists ever could deliberately.

If you say so. Sounds about right.

You're wasting your breath man.