Crony capitalism only exists when there is a big government to buy. Even more, the bigger and stronger the government is the "cronier" capitalism becomes. The only real way to fight crony capitalism is by decreasing government size and scope.
Not any more than you are, my friend, but it is easier to see the bad side of others whilst ignoring your own. I am pretty sure you wouldn't be able to satisfy the standards you want to enforce to the people you envy.
Sure they can, in the same way he can have his huge profit and end in the top of all this shit. Even though the thought police out there would want to have his head in a stake for thinking forbidden thoughts.
Progressivism is the current mainstream religion and we are getting closer and closer to the Holy Inquisition way of doing things.
Sure. In your dystopic society where people can only think what you want them to think that is how things work. Fortunately in the real world things are not that bad, yet...
Completely false. Economy is not a zero sum game and never will be.
We are moving to a world where everybody is much richer and has much more than they had before. And we have been doing it for a couple centuries now, thanks to capitalism. There is no problem if some get richer in the process.
The debt that affects your grandchildren is government debt and it is direct result of a government doing what it shouldn't do at the cost of future generations. Personal debt does not pass to your children. Government debts do.
And what about all the other HFT companies and other day traders. Day trading exists since the stock market beginning and it is as much "parasitic" as HFT trading. Still no company decided that their stocks cannot be day traded. Therefore your judgment about what is parasitic and what is not may be a little off, my friend. You should rethink about it.
That is bullshit. They don't extract value continuously and actually they do not extract value necessarily at all. It is still gambling in the end, and they do increase liquidity in exchange.
But that is besides the point it is consensual, and the legitimate companies can at any time choose not to allow their shares to be operated by HFT. The fact that they don't should speak for itself.
Furthermore "beating you to it" is only relevant to other high frequency traders and day traders. Long term investors are totally unaffected by any operation of the sorts.
Sure it is. Nobody is forced to sell or buy shares. When you do it through the stock market you accept that you will do it to anybody that is interested in paying the correct price for it and that it works first-come, first-served.
High frequency trading is consensual trading and it shouldn't be abolished on the basis that "it is not useful". If people want to engage in this activity and other people are willing to sell and buy from them who are you to say what they can or cannot do?
Oh and the great depression was a monetary crisis, created by misguided monetary policy from the US government, who is the sole responsible for the currency availability by force of law. The crisis started in US and only became global (in a sense, because it was much worse in US than outside it), because the markets are intertwined and when one collapses others feel the pain.
Sure. It was a monetary crisis. Deflation. A money supply crisis. And there is only one institution that controls the availability of money by the power of force. You can link the dots.
Actually we have been trying it your way since the depression (which, by the way, was the government's fault and used as an excuse to increase government) and for the last 80 or so years and it is blatantly clear that the minimum wage does not work.
That is no problem. Even the small retailers can sell other things and stop selling bread temporarily, or close doors. For the economy and the consumers it is irrelevant and what matters is that everybody is buying cheaper breads. If and when the bread price starts to go up and become worth it again more people will start making it and balance the market again.
Small retailers that want to be immune to these tides should focus in quality and service and not in undercutting prices, even because they can`t ever compete with big retailers be it in profit margins or costs.
In this case it should be viewed as more a matter of hurting the corporations and making it unprofitable for them to try and do it again than about receiving money back.
That said class actions are usually lacing regarding compensations because of settlings. THAT is a much bigger greater problem with the judicial system. As soon as something went to court settling should not be allowed anymore. Settling should be an option BEFORE going to court,
Sure this is. It is a good deal for people in the 3rd wold in the long term, as you yourself admitted, and it is an excellent deal for people in the 1st world as it is a drain of resources. Thanks to that the first world quality of life improved incredibly in the last century. You are confusing the interests of a a few unionized groups of people with the interests of the country.
No, they never did. Not obeying safety regulations is not killing. You have the choice to not do anything that is harmful to you, even if the cost is your job. Nobody can force you to work for them. A job is a consensual agreement.
The government has the power to imprison and kill you, though. And the more power you give to the government to do this, regardless of the justifications, the more the corporations can buy this power.
Back on the topic of regulations, more people are dead or living lives in poverty because of safety regulations or any other kind of regulation than all people that have died because of the lack of such regulations.
Well, it shouldn't as in many many laws that are completely counter intuitive. It makes no sense at all to regulate this kind of business and this kind of artificial restriction of offer harms the population far more than it protects them.
True, some CEOs are sociopaths (Steve Jobs is the textbook example), but they do not have the power to arrest and kill you (at least not yet). This may change if people pushing for an even bigger government get their way, though...
Slashdot Mirror
Crony capitalism only exists when there is a big government to buy. Even more, the bigger and stronger the government is the "cronier" capitalism becomes. The only real way to fight crony capitalism is by decreasing government size and scope.
Not any more than you are, my friend, but it is easier to see the bad side of others whilst ignoring your own. I am pretty sure you wouldn't be able to satisfy the standards you want to enforce to the people you envy.
Sure they can, in the same way he can have his huge profit and end in the top of all this shit. Even though the thought police out there would want to have his head in a stake for thinking forbidden thoughts.
Progressivism is the current mainstream religion and we are getting closer and closer to the Holy Inquisition way of doing things.
Sure. In your dystopic society where people can only think what you want them to think that is how things work. Fortunately in the real world things are not that bad, yet...
Completely false. Economy is not a zero sum game and never will be.
We are moving to a world where everybody is much richer and has much more than they had before. And we have been doing it for a couple centuries now, thanks to capitalism. There is no problem if some get richer in the process.
The debt that affects your grandchildren is government debt and it is direct result of a government doing what it shouldn't do at the cost of future generations. Personal debt does not pass to your children. Government debts do.
And what about all the other HFT companies and other day traders. Day trading exists since the stock market beginning and it is as much "parasitic" as HFT trading. Still no company decided that their stocks cannot be day traded. Therefore your judgment about what is parasitic and what is not may be a little off, my friend. You should rethink about it.
That is bullshit. They don't extract value continuously and actually they do not extract value necessarily at all. It is still gambling in the end, and they do increase liquidity in exchange.
But that is besides the point it is consensual, and the legitimate companies can at any time choose not to allow their shares to be operated by HFT. The fact that they don't should speak for itself.
Furthermore "beating you to it" is only relevant to other high frequency traders and day traders. Long term investors are totally unaffected by any operation of the sorts.
It is part of the rules people who decide willingly to use the stock market accept. Therefore it is completely consensual.
Sure it is. Nobody is forced to sell or buy shares. When you do it through the stock market you accept that you will do it to anybody that is interested in paying the correct price for it and that it works first-come, first-served.
High frequency trading is consensual trading and it shouldn't be abolished on the basis that "it is not useful". If people want to engage in this activity and other people are willing to sell and buy from them who are you to say what they can or cannot do?
Oh and the great depression was a monetary crisis, created by misguided monetary policy from the US government, who is the sole responsible for the currency availability by force of law. The crisis started in US and only became global (in a sense, because it was much worse in US than outside it), because the markets are intertwined and when one collapses others feel the pain.
Every time a minimum wage is increased unemployment AND inflation increases. Your definition of working seems horribly mistaken...
Sure. It was a monetary crisis. Deflation. A money supply crisis. And there is only one institution that controls the availability of money by the power of force. You can link the dots.
Actually we have been trying it your way since the depression (which, by the way, was the government's fault and used as an excuse to increase government) and for the last 80 or so years and it is blatantly clear that the minimum wage does not work.
That is no problem. Even the small retailers can sell other things and stop selling bread temporarily, or close doors. For the economy and the consumers it is irrelevant and what matters is that everybody is buying cheaper breads. If and when the bread price starts to go up and become worth it again more people will start making it and balance the market again.
Small retailers that want to be immune to these tides should focus in quality and service and not in undercutting prices, even because they can`t ever compete with big retailers be it in profit margins or costs.
In this case it should be viewed as more a matter of hurting the corporations and making it unprofitable for them to try and do it again than about receiving money back.
That said class actions are usually lacing regarding compensations because of settlings. THAT is a much bigger greater problem with the judicial system. As soon as something went to court settling should not be allowed anymore. Settling should be an option BEFORE going to court,
Sure this is. It is a good deal for people in the 3rd wold in the long term, as you yourself admitted, and it is an excellent deal for people in the 1st world as it is a drain of resources. Thanks to that the first world quality of life improved incredibly in the last century. You are confusing the interests of a a few unionized groups of people with the interests of the country.
It is horrible, but it is undeniably much better than it was before.
No, they never did. Not obeying safety regulations is not killing. You have the choice to not do anything that is harmful to you, even if the cost is your job. Nobody can force you to work for them. A job is a consensual agreement.
The government has the power to imprison and kill you, though. And the more power you give to the government to do this, regardless of the justifications, the more the corporations can buy this power.
Back on the topic of regulations, more people are dead or living lives in poverty because of safety regulations or any other kind of regulation than all people that have died because of the lack of such regulations.
Nope, the smaller the government the less power corporations have. It has always been this way and it will always be like so.
In the exact same way people can drive anybody except when they are charging for it.
Well, it shouldn't as in many many laws that are completely counter intuitive. It makes no sense at all to regulate this kind of business and this kind of artificial restriction of offer harms the population far more than it protects them.
True, some CEOs are sociopaths (Steve Jobs is the textbook example), but they do not have the power to arrest and kill you (at least not yet). This may change if people pushing for an even bigger government get their way, though...
Considering the size and number of laws and regulations that exist in all countries these days, chances are you break a few of them quite often too.