[aflurry]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NeoLotus', 'I') agree. On another note tho, this presupposes that the underwriter of the contract has any intention of honoring it. Our country is a signatory on many treaties but we have yet to fully honor any of them even when it is in our best interest to do so. Geneva Conventions anyone?

[mattduke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mkwin', 'T')he business cycle is not soley caused by the government inflation of the money supply. There were booms and busts way back into the 18th century. --snip-- Credit and real estate are two very important variables but neither soley cause business cycles. The mistake is confusing causality with correlation.

[mkwin]

The free market has proved to be the most effcient way of organising goods and services into their most productive use. It is not a fanatical belief it is evident in a century of economic history.

The alternative is government control of companies and many countries have tried and do try that. They tend to be less effcient, less productive and reduce the overall wealth of the county.

The limits are the free market are really humanitarian, social and environmental. We have to limit it and tax it to support unproductive or seemingly wasted activity for these purposes. The degree to which the economy is limited depends on the politics of the country.

[mkwin]

[quote="mattduke"]This is why it is always a mistake to try to briefly explain the Austrian theory of the business cycle within the context of a peakoil.com post. Private banks's expansion of unbacked banknotes also causes booms and busts, --snip-- quote]No disrespect Matt. but I have a Masters degree in Real Estate Economics and Investment from one of the best business schools in Europe. I have read many 'large books on economics' I just don't buy the Austrian theory as a suitably complete explanation.

The expantion of credit is driven by demand for credit. If there was no economic activity there would be no demand for credit and the banking system would not be able to expand credit. Just look at Japan. Just as the demand for land and property drives the price, which in turns drives the value of land and the real estate cycle, not the other way round.

[seldom_seen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('aflurry', 'i')'ve tried to understand the fed paranoia people and i never get more than "rabbit hole" babble...

[aflurry]

but aren't they going to the fed to borrow so they can turn around and re-lend to you? i thought the general point or relaxing or restricting money supply was to try to produce a countercyclical effect and reduce volitility in the business cycle.

not that i have much of a leg to stand on in the current market, but i thought that this was the point in theory. ... damn i know i'm going to get slapped for this post.

[aflurry]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mkwin', 'T')he free market has proved to be the most effcient way of organising goods and services into their most productive use. It is not a fanatical belief it is evident in a century of economic history.

The alternative is government control of companies and many countries have tried and do try that. They tend to be less effcient, less productive and reduce the overall wealth of the county.

The limits are the free market are really humanitarian, social and environmental. We have to limit it and tax it to support unproductive or seemingly wasted activity for these purposes. The degree to which the economy is limited depends on the politics of the country.

[threadbear]

Free markets are like "free love" as espoused by a purveyor of porn. Appeals to the libertarian who ignores that, in reality, if often just means someone's getting screwed.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'F')ree markets are like "free love" as espoused by a purveyor of porn. Appeals to the libertarian who ignores that, in reality, if often just means someone's getting screwed.

[MrBill]

Thanks, but I will take the market economy anytime over some bureaucrat deciding what's best for me, my family and my future. Cheers.

[mkwin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('aflurry', '
')what do you say about the market's organization of energy usage? --snip-- .
regarding the wealth effect of privatization,it's temporary. once the windfalls stop, the wealth will dry up.

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mkwin', '
')The real danger is left wing politicians will place price controls or nationalise oil companies when oil hits $200 a barrel rather than letting the price reduce consumption and spur alternatives. Energy production and especially fossil fuel usage should have the price of the externalities or damage it causes to the environment priced in. That is why carbon taxes are important in spurring renewables further.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', 'D')o you have another economic system you'd like to propose threadbear where there's less people getting screwed?

[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cube', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', 'F')ree markets are like "free love" as espoused by a purveyor of porn. Appeals to the libertarian who ignores that, in reality, if often just means someone's getting screwed.

[REDEYE]

Gee, it was only my second post that started this whole wonderful debate. I'm pretty thrilled to see so many bright, engaged people sounding off here. And to be a part of it all.

I would like to add one more thought of my own:

It seems clear that on one level the free market debate is over--it won. It works better than all the other systems. However, any system that simultaneously taps into our reptilian, predatory instincts and our higher creative nature is bound to be explosive and sometimes very destructive. Something like Don Quixote's windmill, it can toss you up into the stars, or down into the dirt. All I'm saying is, it has to be very carefully watched and continually re-evaluated. And that takes open debate, like this one. The free market is not gospel, not religious revelation. It's a system that's still evolving. Why is that so hard for some free-marketers to accept? Why are they so defensive?

[Concerned]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBill', 'T')hanks, but I will take the market economy anytime over some bureaucrat deciding what's best for me, my family and my future. Cheers.

[mattduke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mkwin', 'T')he expantion of credit is driven by demand for credit.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Concerned', 'F')ree markets just need to be adjusted so that the rich are not ensconced as the de facto royalty of centuries past.

[Lanthanide]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('aflurry', 'i')t seems to me like the market does a piss-poor job at pricing things that are both hyper-abundant and non-renewable. oil and gasoline should (IMO) have been much more expensive all along.

[LoneSnark]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he free market is not gospel, not religious revelation. It's a system that's still evolving. Why is that so hard for some free-marketers to accept? Why are they so defensive?