Remember, the value of something is directly related to its scarcity. Sand is cheap. iPhones are dear.
Gold is especially valuable as money because it's scarce, divisible, and, MOST important, it can't be printed, much to the ancient alchemists' and today's rulers' chagrin.:-)
No I didn't say _that_. There were times when there were both. The currency was backed by commodities AND there were central banks issuing paper money. Panics usually followed. The 1837 panic for example occurred just after the 2nd Bank of the US went out of business, and the bubble burst without fiat currency to feed it.
And bank runs will happen whenever you have fractional reserve banking, these certainly make headlines, and bankrupt the bank, but don't take the entire economy down with it. Depositors might get most of their cents out of the dollar after the liquidation, they might not. Milton Friedman, in the 3rd episode of his Free to Choose TV series, tells the story of when the Bank of America failed during the 30's in a bank run, it actually paid its depositors 92,5 cents on the dollar when it was liquidated.
Yes, that is absolutely sucky and I wouldn't shed a tear for those fellas could they be persecuted and jailed by whatever fraud or embezzlement article they can tag on them.
But millionaire settlements are small change compared to the damage a 850 billion dollar bailout will do the the US dollar and the economy. And that is really a conservative figure, because the Fed doesn't need Congressional approval to flood the market with cash further, as they are doing.
It's natural to be twice as angry with the fellas that made their money on this bubble when the average joe is screwed up, but that's the least of the problem.
By _my_ definition of justice, the government does not really have a say on how much my money is worth. Or have a right to steal my money to aid whomever, least of all huge failing companies.
He's not inept, he's actually a pretty bright fella. The thing is: nobody can see _all_ the consequences of, say, arbitrarily changing the interest rates.
The reason the Fed fails is the same reason the U.R.S.S. failed; Central planning _does not work_, socialism _does not work_, price fixing ( including the price of money, i.e. interest rates ) _does not work_.
To paraphrase Mises, if a God would descend from the heavens and take the economy's leash to guide us, then socialism would work under such an omniscient leadership, but since that's not likely to happen anytime soon, the free market is the only rational mechanism we have to direct economic activity.
Heh, Milton Friedman said something like "Greenspan has the ability to speak for hours and say absolutely nothing". If anyone has the exact quote that'd be great.:-)
One of the downsides of free markets is the inevitability of boom and bust cycles
That is NOT a downside of free markets. That is a downside of having a central bank issuing fiat currency at essentially arbitrary interest rates that do not necessarily reflect current savings and consumer preferences.
F.A. Hayek won an Economics 'Nobel' on that work, by the way.
People fail and succeed all the time in a free market, that's good and healthy for the economy, but when everyone fails at once, you can be sure there's a central bank and an Alan Greenspan fucking everything from up on his planner's high tower.
What's wrong with your argument is that you're focusing on the symptoms and ignoring the cause. Companies DO have accountability, Lehman Brothers went bankrupt, AIG is broke on Federal life support, everybody who indulged in that binge is now dead or dying. Except the government isn't allowing the failures to fail, and in doing so they're rewarding idiocy and punishing competence. I say it is government that needs accountability.
Well, that's why he's getting Tesla to focus on selling the Roadster and their powertrain and putting the next model on standby.
I think it's a sound business decision and might keep them going long enough to weather this rough time and get to work on their next model in the future, we'll just have to wait and see.
I hear where your coming from. The thing is, the banking, financial and housing sectors were already regulated and the bubble still grew and burst. Regulate more? Deregulate and re-regulate differently? I don't believe that's the answer.
I think the current crisis shines a very positive light on F.A. Hayek's Nobel awarded theory of the business cycle being caused by central bank artificial manipulation of interest rates. I don't think anyone today can deny that.
On the other argument you make of the 'problems' arising from the failure of a competitor, yea, I think you make a pretty good point. But I'd say it's a good problem to have. Like you said, Company C benefitted from A and B's failed arrangement. It's just as wrong to bail GM out for just GM's sake as it is to bail out GM for, say, both Honda and GM sake. These kinds of things happen in a free market, and it's a good thing they do. Company A will be more careful in the future of tying it's own production to the fate of another company. That's the way I see it anyway.:-)
Yea man, even with that. Those three failed launches cost 30 million dollars, rounded up. Musk alone put 100 million of his money into the company. That's besides the COTS competition money which they managed to get quite a lot of, and whatever other investors they might have which I have not a clue of.
That ex-GM employees lose their pensions and individual GM brands struggling is obvious, of course everything GM related will suffer, but then again they've _failed_.
I'm talking about the remaining majority of the economy that comprises the non-GM world. Obviously I want failed companies to fail, so that the successful ones are getting fair treatment. These bailouts are a disgrace and totally immoral in my opinion.
And to tell me that a GM competitor will shed a tear to see it go is inviting my bold laughter a bit too strongly. They're probably very happy to be able to buy them up for near nothing when liquidation occurs, although you never know, since in Soviet US the government pays YOU!:-)
This just goes to prove that all those bailouts are simply socialism for the rich. The companies that are 'too big to fail' and have too many friends in Washington get their billions, which makes the credit contraction all that worse - since there is a limited pool of savings, as small or nonexistant as it is - and the regular Elons competing in the free market get the shaft.
So, if you are big, irresponsible, reckless and have a strong lobby, you're safe.
b) engaging in a huge war got us out by spurring heavy industry to create jobs and produce war machines, bombs, and bullets.
That's more than a little bit absurd. Something like getting everyone to shovel dirt with a spoon to solve unemployment.
What government did was get into a war to divert attention from the fact that it was a decade prolonging the Depression, propping up failing companies, fixing prices, establishing monopolies and arresting people and entrepreneurs who worked and produced, while claiming to be fixing everything.
Saying the military industry was sustained by government policy might be more accurate.
Tesla will do just fine. They're gonna have to downsize and maybe Musk will have to pump some of his own money on it. SpaceX IS making money after all.
I'll bet that 95% of the orders for roadsters will follow through. Somehow I don't think people ho have 110k to spend on a sports car will be the most hurt by the upcoming Depression.
Like the regulations that prevented the current bubble? Or the dot-com bubble before that? Sure, sure, give us more of those enlightened commandments.;-)
It's naive of you not to consider government regulations as part of corporations' 'malfeasance' plans. The tax exemption for companies manufacturing child toy arrows on the latest bailout bill, is a small example. While I do not agree with his views on monetary policy, Milton Friedman was right on the money when he said: "When you have big government, big business takes it over.".
The 'hedge' you speak of is currently being stuck up the taxpayer's behind. It's something that came out of a head not unlike this Nobel 'mixed economy' laureate. All for the general public's welfare, of course.
In a free market if you fail you bear the consequences, in Communist US there is the Fed.:-)
When you have your guys at a vote counting to check the honesty of the procedure, everyone can understand what's going on by simply paying attention.
On the other hand, people generally don't understand hello world programs, let alone vote counting software source code. That is, if it's open, if proprietary, like in the US they are basically waiving the Democratic form of government.
Slashdot Mirror
50-80% ?
What is it? Is it fifty or eighty percent? Cause it does matter. :-)
Remember, the value of something is directly related to its scarcity. Sand is cheap. iPhones are dear.
Gold is especially valuable as money because it's scarce, divisible, and, MOST important, it can't be printed, much to the ancient alchemists' and today's rulers' chagrin. :-)
Are you crazy? Nobody speaks for all Libertarians. We're Libertarians for chrissake!
If you want a king, go to Russia or the USA. Who speaks for all Libertarians... the nerve... *rumbles* :-)
No I didn't say _that_. There were times when there were both. The currency was backed by commodities AND there were central banks issuing paper money. Panics usually followed. The 1837 panic for example occurred just after the 2nd Bank of the US went out of business, and the bubble burst without fiat currency to feed it.
And bank runs will happen whenever you have fractional reserve banking, these certainly make headlines, and bankrupt the bank, but don't take the entire economy down with it. Depositors might get most of their cents out of the dollar after the liquidation, they might not. Milton Friedman, in the 3rd episode of his Free to Choose TV series, tells the story of when the Bank of America failed during the 30's in a bank run, it actually paid its depositors 92,5 cents on the dollar when it was liquidated.
Yes, that is absolutely sucky and I wouldn't shed a tear for those fellas could they be persecuted and jailed by whatever fraud or embezzlement article they can tag on them.
But millionaire settlements are small change compared to the damage a 850 billion dollar bailout will do the the US dollar and the economy. And that is really a conservative figure, because the Fed doesn't need Congressional approval to flood the market with cash further, as they are doing.
It's natural to be twice as angry with the fellas that made their money on this bubble when the average joe is screwed up, but that's the least of the problem.
By _my_ definition of justice, the government does not really have a say on how much my money is worth. Or have a right to steal my money to aid whomever, least of all huge failing companies.
He's not inept, he's actually a pretty bright fella. The thing is: nobody can see _all_ the consequences of, say, arbitrarily changing the interest rates.
The reason the Fed fails is the same reason the U.R.S.S. failed; Central planning _does not work_, socialism _does not work_, price fixing ( including the price of money, i.e. interest rates ) _does not work_.
To paraphrase Mises, if a God would descend from the heavens and take the economy's leash to guide us, then socialism would work under such an omniscient leadership, but since that's not likely to happen anytime soon, the free market is the only rational mechanism we have to direct economic activity.
Heh, Milton Friedman said something like "Greenspan has the ability to speak for hours and say absolutely nothing". If anyone has the exact quote that'd be great. :-)
One of the downsides of free markets is the inevitability of boom and bust cycles
That is NOT a downside of free markets. That is a downside of having a central bank issuing fiat currency at essentially arbitrary interest rates that do not necessarily reflect current savings and consumer preferences.
F.A. Hayek won an Economics 'Nobel' on that work, by the way.
People fail and succeed all the time in a free market, that's good and healthy for the economy, but when everyone fails at once, you can be sure there's a central bank and an Alan Greenspan fucking everything from up on his planner's high tower.
What's wrong with your argument is that you're focusing on the symptoms and ignoring the cause. Companies DO have accountability, Lehman Brothers went bankrupt, AIG is broke on Federal life support, everybody who indulged in that binge is now dead or dying. Except the government isn't allowing the failures to fail, and in doing so they're rewarding idiocy and punishing competence. I say it is government that needs accountability.
Well, that's why he's getting Tesla to focus on selling the Roadster and their powertrain and putting the next model on standby.
I think it's a sound business decision and might keep them going long enough to weather this rough time and get to work on their next model in the future, we'll just have to wait and see.
I hear where your coming from. The thing is, the banking, financial and housing sectors were already regulated and the bubble still grew and burst. Regulate more? Deregulate and re-regulate differently? I don't believe that's the answer.
I think the current crisis shines a very positive light on F.A. Hayek's Nobel awarded theory of the business cycle being caused by central bank artificial manipulation of interest rates. I don't think anyone today can deny that.
On the other argument you make of the 'problems' arising from the failure of a competitor, yea, I think you make a pretty good point. But I'd say it's a good problem to have. Like you said, Company C benefitted from A and B's failed arrangement. It's just as wrong to bail GM out for just GM's sake as it is to bail out GM for, say, both Honda and GM sake. These kinds of things happen in a free market, and it's a good thing they do. Company A will be more careful in the future of tying it's own production to the fate of another company. That's the way I see it anyway. :-)
Yea man, even with that. Those three failed launches cost 30 million dollars, rounded up. Musk alone put 100 million of his money into the company. That's besides the COTS competition money which they managed to get quite a lot of, and whatever other investors they might have which I have not a clue of.
Check their launch manifest. It's booked till 2011.
That ex-GM employees lose their pensions and individual GM brands struggling is obvious, of course everything GM related will suffer, but then again they've _failed_.
I'm talking about the remaining majority of the economy that comprises the non-GM world. Obviously I want failed companies to fail, so that the successful ones are getting fair treatment. These bailouts are a disgrace and totally immoral in my opinion.
And to tell me that a GM competitor will shed a tear to see it go is inviting my bold laughter a bit too strongly. They're probably very happy to be able to buy them up for near nothing when liquidation occurs, although you never know, since in Soviet US the government pays YOU! :-)
but there is no way to build an all-electric family truckster with today's tech
Yea. There just isn't folks. We should stick to what we know; flint and steel.
Meanwhile a rocket developed by the same entrepreneur is orbiting over our heads. Yikes...
This just goes to prove that all those bailouts are simply socialism for the rich. The companies that are 'too big to fail' and have too many friends in Washington get their billions, which makes the credit contraction all that worse - since there is a limited pool of savings, as small or nonexistant as it is - and the regular Elons competing in the free market get the shaft.
So, if you are big, irresponsible, reckless and have a strong lobby, you're safe.
Corporatism at its finest.
I wouldn't care much if General Motors went bust, despite the far reaching consequences that would have
Name just one. :-)
Cool sig, btw. :D
b) engaging in a huge war got us out by spurring heavy industry to create jobs and produce war machines, bombs, and bullets.
That's more than a little bit absurd. Something like getting everyone to shovel dirt with a spoon to solve unemployment.
What government did was get into a war to divert attention from the fact that it was a decade prolonging the Depression, propping up failing companies, fixing prices, establishing monopolies and arresting people and entrepreneurs who worked and produced, while claiming to be fixing everything.
Saying the military industry was sustained by government policy might be more accurate.
Tesla will do just fine. They're gonna have to downsize and maybe Musk will have to pump some of his own money on it. SpaceX IS making money after all.
I'll bet that 95% of the orders for roadsters will follow through. Somehow I don't think people ho have 110k to spend on a sports car will be the most hurt by the upcoming Depression.
Sorry, but Battlestar Galactica kicked ass. :D
Like the regulations that prevented the current bubble? Or the dot-com bubble before that? Sure, sure, give us more of those enlightened commandments. ;-)
It's naive of you not to consider government regulations as part of corporations' 'malfeasance' plans. The tax exemption for companies manufacturing child toy arrows on the latest bailout bill, is a small example. While I do not agree with his views on monetary policy, Milton Friedman was right on the money when he said: "When you have big government, big business takes it over.".
The 'hedge' you speak of is currently being stuck up the taxpayer's behind. It's something that came out of a head not unlike this Nobel 'mixed economy' laureate. All for the general public's welfare, of course.
In a free market if you fail you bear the consequences, in Communist US there is the Fed. :-)
When you have your guys at a vote counting to check the honesty of the procedure, everyone can understand what's going on by simply paying attention.
On the other hand, people generally don't understand hello world programs, let alone vote counting software source code. That is, if it's open, if proprietary, like in the US they are basically waiving the Democratic form of government.
C'mon. All our parties are essentially left-wing. Liberal thought is all but nonexistant.
Ahhh, maybe I should translate some von Mises books to portuguese or something. Or just leave.
No Aero, though.
Man! Cut it out!
It's THREE steps, not four, and you CAN'T specify the intermediate one! Jeezuz...
Who did the robber-barons steal from exactly? I'm always at a loss when confronted with that term.
Seems like the 'software pirate' kind of propaganda smear.