Today's comic was posted on the Lew Rockwell blog by Manuel Lora!
http://anarchyinyourhead.com/2008/08/06/prosecuting-the-free-market/
You can digg today's strip here.
http://digg.com/political_opinion/Prosecuting_the_Free_Market
And I never miss a chance to remind people that you can vote for the comic every day.
You also got posted to Freedom's Phoenix
Excellent. ;D 8)
that strip starts off w/ quite an assumption that there are actually ppl in prison for such 'violations' of free market capitalism...
would be interesting to see if there are folks doin time for gouging, predatory practices etc... yes, there may be some exceptions of merchants taking advantage of natural disasters by over pricing their stock to fit a 'survival of the fittest' scheme... and they've probably been dealt w/ by the 'courts'..
if its the free market capitalists complaining about such a scenario, then they may want to remember while they toss their hissy fits about coercion: free market capitalism, w/ its addiction and reliance on the states operating principal of organized violence to protect their interests, is the most coercive of all..
anyway... thats my .02 ... and my first post on the Underground... lovin' it so far....
Quotefree market capitalism, w/ its addiction and reliance on the states
You're describing what exists today, and what exists today is fascism, not free market capitalism. Please don't confuse those, it's not a free market if you're being forced to make or not make your own buying decisions. The rest of the sentiment, I'm with you on. :)
Dugg, commented (on digg), voted again. Loved the comic! :)
And agreed to Kevin on free market vs. fascism.
Cheers
Hehe. This is an interesting pingback.
http://jeffreyquick.wordpress.com/2008/08/07/comixes/
QuoteThanks to the LRC blog, I have discovered this.
OK, the art and level of humor isn't much above your typical college student paper, but he's a philosophical homeboy.
Conservative readers: unless you can handle doobies rolled from the Constitution, hammocks made of tapeworms, and soap bubbles having sex with porcupines, don't go there.
For that matter, anyone doing anti-Ron Paul cartoons really isn't taking any prisoners.
the free market is no longer 'free' it is a fascist market.
Good On. :D
Quote from: CSAnarchist on August 10, 2008, 03:40 PM NHFT
the free market is no longer 'free' it is a fascist market.
Good On. :D
I don't think we've ever had a truly free market in this country. It came close when the United States were first created, but by the mid-1800s the market had been bent to the advantage of the large industrialists using the power of the State, and by the 1930s the State realized they could increase their power further by implementing welfare statism (tricking the poor into believing it was socialism, and to their advantage) on top of that.
Huh?
It was bent by the poor socialist. I doubt my great grandfather would have invented child labor laws, social insurance, worker's comp, or any other non-individaul contract type program.
Even the 16th Amendment was passed because the poor deemed the wealthy evil.
The societal problem is described by the 'Grasshopper and Ant' fable.
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 15, 2008, 01:24 AM NHFT
Quote from: CSAnarchist on August 10, 2008, 03:40 PM NHFT
the free market is no longer 'free' it is a fascist market.
Good On. :D
I don't think we've ever had a truly free market in this country. It came close when the United States were first created, but by the mid-1800s the market had been bent to the advantage of the large industrialists using the power of the State, and by the 1930s the State realized they could increase their power further by implementing welfare statism (tricking the poor into believing it was socialism, and to their advantage) on top of that.
Why don't you think the 1930's was just a continuation of the mid-1880's? It is a common misconception on the left that the state and big business are antagonists.
I think most haven't seen the evolution of for-profit corporations.
The change in format from Industrialist to unattached shareholder capitalist.
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 15, 2008, 01:24 AM NHFT... by the mid-1800s the market had been bent to the advantage of the large industrialists using the power of the State ...
Just an observation...
In the mid-1800s a 14 year-old
woman could:
1> Not vote. (No woman could, but it didn't make much difference by the mid-1800s the "People's" votes no longer mattered as evidenced by most of the actions/reactions of Congress on a large number of issues.)
2> Freely move west to any of the new Territories/States
without government interference or permission or approval.
3> Freely marry whomever she chose
without government interference or permission or license.
4> Freely travel using the best, most modern modes of transportation at the time
without government interference or permission or license.
5> Have children and raise them how she and her (married to in the "eyes of their god", but not by the "state") husband chose...
including teaching them religious beliefs...
without government interference.
6> Go to the store and purchase or barter for: A> The latest, modern, most up-to-date medicines available and self-medicate as she choses (including such narcotics as laudinum), B> Various "spirits", "herbs", "spices" and food stores, C> The most modern, high-powered, "assault weapons" of the day, D> as much ammunition for those weapons as desired, and D> many other items that are highly regulated today... ALL
without government interference or permission or license or approval or "background checks".
7> Purchase or barter for the services of doctors and dentists to perform various procedures, both necessary and voluntary... ALL
without government interference or permission or mandated insurance or instituted "managed care".
8> Moving west, she (and her husband) could settle or "homestead" and farm the land and build their house as they wanted... ALL
without government interference or permission or license or approval or "building codes" or inspections or "property taxes".
9> If someone attacked, assaulted or invaded her farm or home, she could protect and defend herself and her loved ones by whatever means necessary up to and including deadly force... and, in almost every instance, the local folks would back her up by helping to bury the miscreants.
I know that there were lots of things that weren't very good in the mid-1800s, but I will never understand why a 14 year-old then was often considered a "woman" or "man" and now we don't allow them to drive until 16+ and drink until 21+... (forget voting at 18, if voting made any difference, it'd be illegal!)
A mixture of tradition, and voting law becoming common practice.
Quote from: BillKauffman on August 25, 2008, 11:11 AM NHFT
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 15, 2008, 01:24 AM NHFT
Quote from: CSAnarchist on August 10, 2008, 03:40 PM NHFT
the free market is no longer 'free' it is a fascist market.
Good On. :D
I don't think we've ever had a truly free market in this country. It came close when the United States were first created, but by the mid-1800s the market had been bent to the advantage of the large industrialists using the power of the State, and by the 1930s the State realized they could increase their power further by implementing welfare statism (tricking the poor into believing it was socialism, and to their advantage) on top of that.
Why don't you think the 1930's was just a continuation of the mid-1880's? It is a common misconception on the left that the state and big business are antagonists.
The State, using its central bank, screwed with the money supply and caused an economic collapse that put an awful lot of big business, well, out of business. They then implemented a bunch of psuedo-socialist programs regulating said businesses, which in turn greatly expanded the power of the State itself.
There may only be a slight difference between the two parties, but there
is a difference. The Republicans are in it for big business. The Democrats are in it for themselves.
Quote from: FreelanceFreedomFighter on August 25, 2008, 01:16 PM NHFT
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 15, 2008, 01:24 AM NHFT... by the mid-1800s the market had been bent to the advantage of the large industrialists using the power of the State ...
Just an observation...
In the mid-1800s a 14 year-old woman could:
1> Not vote. (No woman could, but it didn't make much difference by the mid-1800s the "People's" votes no longer mattered as evidenced by most of the actions/reactions of Congress on a large number of issues.)
2> Freely move west to any of the new Territories/States without government interference or permission or approval.
3> Freely marry whomever she chose without government interference or permission or license.
4> Freely travel using the best, most modern modes of transportation at the time without government interference or permission or license.
5> Have children and raise them how she and her (married to in the "eyes of their god", but not by the "state") husband chose... including teaching them religious beliefs... without government interference.
6> Go to the store and purchase or barter for: A> The latest, modern, most up-to-date medicines available and self-medicate as she choses (including such narcotics as laudinum), B> Various "spirits", "herbs", "spices" and food stores, C> The most modern, high-powered, "assault weapons" of the day, D> as much ammunition for those weapons as desired, and D> many other items that are highly regulated today... ALL without government interference or permission or license or approval or "background checks".
7> Purchase or barter for the services of doctors and dentists to perform various procedures, both necessary and voluntary... ALL without government interference or permission or mandated insurance or instituted "managed care".
8> Moving west, she (and her husband) could settle or "homestead" and farm the land and build their house as they wanted... ALL without government interference or permission or license or approval or "building codes" or inspections or "property taxes".
9> If someone attacked, assaulted or invaded her farm or home, she could protect and defend herself and her loved ones by whatever means necessary up to and including deadly force... and, in almost every instance, the local folks would back her up by helping to bury the miscreants.
I know that there were lots of things that weren't very good in the mid-1800s, but I will never understand why a 14 year-old then was often considered a "woman" or "man" and now we don't allow them to drive until 16+ and drink until 21+... (forget voting at 18, if voting made any difference, it'd be illegal!)
I'm not sure what this had to do with the original topic, but anyway...Indeed, and the one I always like reminding people about, since it's such a taboo subject nowadays:—
- The age of consent was first invented in the mid-1800s, at which time it was ten years old. Prior to that, there was a traditional, common-law "age of marriageability" (about 10–12, depending on which historical source is cited), but that applied to marriage and had nothing explicitly to do with sexual consent.
Read John Taylor Gatto's book,
The Underground History of American Education (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.htm). He goes into great detail about the infantilization of adults that occurred throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which is still going on today. Long story short: Treating adults as children during the first few years of adulthood makes them a
lot more easily controllable by the State.
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 25, 2008, 06:02 PM NHFT
Quote from: BillKauffman on August 25, 2008, 11:11 AM NHFT
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 15, 2008, 01:24 AM NHFT
Quote from: CSAnarchist on August 10, 2008, 03:40 PM NHFT
the free market is no longer 'free' it is a fascist market.
Good On. :D
I don't think we've ever had a truly free market in this country. It came close when the United States were first created, but by the mid-1800s the market had been bent to the advantage of the large industrialists using the power of the State, and by the 1930s the State realized they could increase their power further by implementing welfare statism (tricking the poor into believing it was socialism, and to their advantage) on top of that.
Why don't you think the 1930's was just a continuation of the mid-1880's? It is a common misconception on the left that the state and big business are antagonists.
The State, using its central bank, screwed with the money supply and caused an economic collapse that put an awful lot of big business, well, out of business. They then implemented a bunch of psuedo-socialist programs regulating said businesses, which in turn greatly expanded the power of the State itself.
There may only be a slight difference between the two parties, but there is a difference. The Republicans are in it for big business. The Democrats are in it for themselves.
Well, I wish the Republicans would stop trying to help me...
QuoteThey then implemented a bunch of psuedo-socialist programs regulating said businesses, which in turn greatly expanded the power of the State itself.
Big business wants regulation because it raises the barriers to entry and protects profits.
Of course. How silly of them to move capital and manufacturing overseas to where regulation is lower. >:D
Quote from: BillKauffman on August 25, 2008, 07:44 PM NHFT
QuoteThey then implemented a bunch of psuedo-socialist programs regulating said businesses, which in turn greatly expanded the power of the State itself.
Big business wants regulation because it raises the barriers to entry and protects profits.
Indeed, some regulation does help them. But how do programs like Social Security or the corporate income tax?
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 25, 2008, 06:11 PM NHFT
I'm not sure what this had to do with the original topic, but anyway...
Nothing really... sorry for my wandering off topic. The comment about the "mid-1800s" caused my mental tangent. :o
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 25, 2008, 06:11 PM NHFTIndeed, and the one I always like reminding people about, since it's such a taboo subject nowadays:—
- The age of consent was first invented in the mid-1800s, at which time it was ten years old. Prior to that, there was a traditional, common-law "age of marriageability" (about 10–12, depending on which historical source is cited), but that applied to marriage and had nothing explicitly to do with sexual consent.
Read John Taylor Gatto's book, The Underground History of American Education (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/toc1.htm). He goes into great detail about the infantilization of adults that occurred throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, which is still going on today. Long story short: Treating adults as children during the first few years of adulthood makes them a lot more easily controllable by the State.
Absolutely. I just wish the "masses" would realize it! ;)
Much more complex society.
Prior to the State's interference most contractual disagreements could be handle with a couple pistols and a few paces.
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on August 26, 2008, 11:42 PM NHFT
Much more complex society.
Prior to the State's interference most contractual disagreements could be handle with a couple pistols and a few paces.
Oh, don't get AnarchoJesse started on all the myths surrounding duels. :D
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on August 26, 2008, 11:42 PM NHFT
Much more complex society.
Prior to the State's interference most contractual disagreements could be handle with a couple pistols and a few paces.
::)
Since dalebert doesn't want to get AnarchoJesse on a :soapbox: about duels, then I won't climb up either...
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on August 25, 2008, 08:02 PM NHFT
Of course. How silly of them to move capital and manufacturing overseas to where regulation is lower. >:D
Labor. China, or Mexico, or India, is no less regulated than the US, but they are so impoverished that the labor market is desparate for jobs, and that is evident in the wages they will accept.
Many laws are written by business people, particularly license laws. They love the status they get by being 'officially' licensed, and actively keep out the unlicensed. But that is prolly true in all countries.
Try Ireland.
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 25, 2008, 06:02 PM NHFT
Quote from: BillKauffman on August 25, 2008, 11:11 AM NHFT
Quote from: J'raxis 270145 on August 15, 2008, 01:24 AM NHFT
Quote from: CSAnarchist on August 10, 2008, 03:40 PM NHFT
the free market is no longer 'free' it is a fascist market.
Good On. :D
I don't think we've ever had a truly free market in this country. It came close when the United States were first created, but by the mid-1800s the market had been bent to the advantage of the large industrialists using the power of the State, and by the 1930s the State realized they could increase their power further by implementing welfare statism (tricking the poor into believing it was socialism, and to their advantage) on top of that.
Why don't you think the 1930's was just a continuation of the mid-1880's? It is a common misconception on the left that the state and big business are antagonists.
The State, using its central bank, screwed with the money supply and caused an economic collapse that put an awful lot of big business, well, out of business. They then implemented a bunch of psuedo-socialist programs regulating said businesses, which in turn greatly expanded the power of the State itself.
There may only be a slight difference between the two parties, but there is a difference. The Republicans are in it for big business. The Democrats are in it for themselves.
The central bank didnt screw anything up dude, Without the central bank nobody would beable to buy houses or own property, they would be slaves to the people who had money. The central bank is a crowning acheivment for the people, it eliminated serfdom, you could get a loan and start a business!
As far as this whole free-market theory goes it Sounds so great from the prospective of an american, well an american who owns a large company. How it works is, no regulations a business can find the worst desperation in the world, the starving children and put them in a factory(esp massive overpopulated areas, ignore overpopulation its actually good for the economy). But dont pay them too much! then they wont be hungrey and you need that.
IT would be great because they could start opening up sweat shops right here in america, just get rid of Workers comp, minimum wage, safe working conditions, child labor laws, get rid of all those meddling regulations so we can prosper!
Historically the central bank existed in 1791.
President Andrew Jackson was upset with the lack of control the federal government had over the bank.
It had no Governors and no federally appointed directors.
Its only been under federal government control since the 1913 enactment of the federal reserve system.
Fractional reserve lending is what has allowed the credit leveraging leading to the expansion of consumerism.
In a Free Market, workers would be company owners. In essence we would all be independent contractors.
You realize before the central bank inflated the money supply, people used to buy houses. I mean, they bought them, without loans. Sometimes they bought some land and built a house or they saved up and just bought a house. It used to be a very viable option for many middle-class people. Basically, the government broke our legs and now they brag about providing us wheel chairs.
PinoX7, I'm not an owner of a "big company". I am in fact one of those who might be severely screwed if the current crisis results in a dollar collapse and/or a global great depression. Yet I am absolutely confident that the reason we are at this point is not the market, but the regulation and that the bail outs they are doing may very well make things even worse.
If they weren't there I'd have a sound money to rely on instead of this crumbling dollar and I would not be spending hours these days researching what the hell is happening and how do I avert the crisis - I would be doing my business, actually being productive and actually creating value, knowing that due to human nature the market will always go on and the great depression is not on the radar.
I am beginning to think that recessions are merely a micro boom/bust cycle caused by government's involvement, but that there is a macro cycle (every century or so) of depressions. This might be proved if the 2009 great depression fears materialize.
And I will curse you and people like you and all government supporters for willfully allowing this to happen! I am already more pissed off than you can imagine. You socialists with your mental delusions are causing the fundamentals that are behind most every recession, every depression and every war out there, and then you dare speak about starving children. It is the sick socialist ideology that caused their starvation!
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on September 18, 2008, 07:18 AM NHFT
Fractional reserve lending is what has allowed the credit leveraging leading to the expansion of consumerism.
Yep, if the socialists would actually think about it a minute, they'd see that the monetary system is a major factor pushing for an unsustainable economy.
Quote from: John Edward Mercier on September 18, 2008, 07:18 AM NHFT
In a Free Market, workers would be company owners. In essence we would all be independent contractors.
Wouldn't that be nice!