User Tag List

First 816171819 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 186

  1. #171
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Neo-liberalism is the economic orthodoxy, I believe because the banks and wealthy are more powerful than any single state or other constituency, therefore all economies must, ultimately, do their bidding, protect and serve their interests.

    No state can exercise control, not even moderate regulation and not even when they have majority shares in the same financial institutions, the fall out of the bankers crisis and recession are evidence enough of that.

    In the UK the state privatised the central bank, the principal economic manager, and even it has said that the banks are behaving in ways which are contrary to their own interests and survival, the response from the banks was a protest that they had undertaken radical change since the recession but honestly they have not changed in any way other than supposed organisational or business culture and that is incredibly difficult to gauge or measure or judge.

    There are no non-governmental or supranational regulators either, no sans frontiers unions or international fiscal controllers, such as the IMF, WTO or World Bank, which isnt operating to the same neo-liberal orthodoxy.

    Now the differences between democracy and dictatorship I would suggest are largely cultural, as there are political patterns and processes shared by each which resemble one another. The countries in which political upheavels and modernisation reproduced similar regimes with different window dressing only prove the indelible mark of tradition. So Stalinism resembled Czarism in all but rehetoric.

    Another example of convergence is most of the political democracies around the world have come to resemble dynastic rule in their own ways and some nations positively encourage or support it, such was and is the reception of successive family presidencies in the US for instance, like the Bush family or Clintons.

    However the cultural differences are still important, the popluations of democracies can be authoritarian and support as serious authoritarianism as those in dictatorships but they also enjoy greater freedoms in fundamental and real ways provided they dont threaten the economic orthodoxy. So you can access as much pornography and argue most vehemently in favour of this or that sexual behaviour being accepted as the norm without repercussions which you may experience elsewhere. Although in either case concerted action which threatened to provoke the desertion of investment or bankers would be treated the same way ultimatley, although tactics may differ.

    I see all these trends as leading to greater outbursts of market libertarianism, people are cynical and disillusioned with government, particularly the vindication of the peter principle and managerialism which it obviously represents, and they most cherish the freedom to buy which the market place offers them.

    Ultimately it wont alter things, the neo-liberal politicians will protect and serve the bankers or wealthy for their share, act in ways coherent with their ideology and resort to power politics when it fails in practice. I just have no idea what will happen when capitalism and market libertarianism finally have their 1989, truly I dont and whether that advent will be too late because the resources will be spent. War drums, bad religion, some sort of slumquake, it could all be on the cards.
    You're right, I talked about this with another member, banks are killing countries right now, and we don't need them.

  2. #172
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    I globally agree on your post, Lark. But you seem to consider neo-liberalism and libertarianism as the same thing while it's not the same. Neo-liberals rely very much on interventionist and keynesian principles and want to protect banks from failure and responsabilities, while libertarians reject interventionism and just say "let them fail" about banks.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  3. #173
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    I globally agree on your post, Lark. But you seem to consider neo-liberalism and libertarianism as the same thing while it's not the same. Neo-liberals rely very much on interventionist and keynesian principles and want to protect banks from failure and responsabilities, while libertarians reject interventionism and just say "let them fail" about banks.
    Neo-liberals have no balls, they cried like babies when their casino-like banks blowed up, and ask money to governements.

    But in the same time, if we didnt, we would have to make a whole new money system, which is kinda crazy. We saved a corrupted system, but what if we didn't ? I think I've read that 40% of banks money were gone in sept 2008, insane !

    (Your avatar is better like this )

  4. #174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    I globally agree on your post, Lark. But you seem to consider neo-liberalism and libertarianism as the same thing while it's not the same. Neo-liberals rely very much on interventionist and keynesian principles and want to protect banks from failure and responsabilities, while libertarians reject interventionism and just say "let them fail" about banks.
    I dont regard them as the same, did you read my post, neo-liberalism is the economic orthodoxy and libertarianism an ideology, different things, I ultimately think that the economic orthodoxy will prevail whatever the ideology, real or proclaimed.

    I dont believe that libertarians would let natural or logical consequences play out for anyone without fear or favour, its great in opposition, its like talking about everyone having a perfect day on the morrow of the workers paradise, which was the old dream.

    The reason why I believe that is because not only would the living standards of the wealthy and bankers, which are their core constituency take a massive hit, they would too, personally, because guess what they bank, they invest, they are part of that income group. That is before you consider all those who will take the greatest hit and probably the first hit from allowing such a correction to play out.

    It could be the correction which wipes out the system altogether so would that really be such a good thing? Not for someone who actually believes in the same system. So I see that as hot air, you can not "let them fail" no matter how much you'd like to.

    Also, so far as interventionism goes, libertarians are very much in favour of that, people used to say that the USSR was one party in power and everyone else in prison, I'd say that libertarianism would quickly play out the same way, the kind of authoritarian policing required to make the free market work, especially if making it work involved letting it fail would be incredible.

  5. #175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redScorpion View Post
    Neo-liberals have no balls, they cried like babies when their casino-like banks blowed up, and ask money to governements.

    But in the same time, if we didnt, we would have to make a whole new money system, which is kinda crazy. We saved a corrupted system, but what if we didn't ? I think I've read that 40% of banks money were gone in sept 2008, insane !

    (Your avatar is better like this )
    That's the crux of the matter, new money system, perhaps beginning a restructuring and reinvention of the economy from scratch.

    There isnt the imagination or will needed for that sort of thing anymore, people just want the latest iPod instead. That said perhaps there never was the imagination or will, most of the banks, businesses and economy came about as an accident or series of attempts and tries. Marx was really critical of socialists wanting an alternative but offering nothing but dreamy pictures of how things once were in the distant past.

  6. #176
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    That's the crux of the matter, new money system, perhaps beginning a restructuring and reinvention of the economy from scratch.

    There isnt the imagination or will needed for that sort of thing anymore, people just want the latest iPod instead. That said perhaps there never was the imagination or will, most of the banks, businesses and economy came about as an accident or series of attempts and tries. Marx was really critical of socialists wanting an alternative but offering nothing but dreamy pictures of how things once were in the distant past.
    True. Western countries need "real" new leaders that understand this need of new system. If we don't change, we're done.

  7. #177

    Default

    We could be done anyway, I increasingly think that rather than making more changes we ought to have a realistic appraisal of the change to date and perhaps abandon some of it.

    The recession and banking crisis did not materialise out of thin air, it was the natural consequence of a belief in the ability of the market to self-regulate and self-police, consumer sovereignty, ultimately of individualism and a sort of alchemy which turns selfish behaviour to public benefice. Dreams. All of it.

  8. #178
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redScorpion View Post
    Neo-liberals have no balls, they cried like babies when their casino-like banks blowed up, and ask money to governements.
    Eh, government initially permit them to play with money since they almost give them money by constant extending of credit.

    But in the same time, if we didnt, we would have to make a whole new money system, which is kinda crazy. We saved a corrupted system, but what if we didn't ? I think I've read that 40% of banks money were gone in sept 2008, insane !
    The crisis began in 2007 when investors lost confidence in the subprime market and the first bankruptcy happened. At this time it represented just 2 or 3 % of the securities market, nothing dramatic or catastrophic. But as usual, government came to rescue, and the water continued to boil hidden until the crash came back even bigger in 2008. If government had not reached in 2007, the crisis would'nt had been that hard. Other than that, what explain Lark is true, people hardly saw the branch on wich they are sat, but I don't think it's imposible to solve that with faithfull and virtuous leaders. I was really enthusistic about the Ron Paul campaign in 2008, his son seem fiable too.

    (Your avatar is better like this )
    I know!
    True. Western countries need "real" new leaders that understand this need of new system. If we don't change, we're done.
    Dont worry, your president care over you.

    (By the way, have your pseudonym something to do with your astrological sign? I mean, are you Scorpio on the Zodiac?)
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  9. #179
    null Jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    FREE
    Posts
    2,486

    Default

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  10. #180
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arclight View Post
    Well, according to Alex Jones in his movie Endgame.
    Alex Jones has fetal alcohol syndrome.

Similar Threads

  1. Because someone is Liberal does not mean they can ignore democracy
    By ilikeitlikethat in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-06-2017, 04:25 PM
  2. Do you think western styled-democracies are a good or bad idea?
    By EcK in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-03-2016, 05:50 PM
  3. Liberals vs Conservatives, Authoritarianism, SDO and Haidt's Moral Scales
    By Seymour in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 01-07-2016, 11:29 PM
  4. Liberal Democracy and God
    By Mole in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 05-24-2011, 09:11 PM
  5. [SJ] Liberal SJs
    By sassafrassquatch in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 06-29-2009, 03:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO