Message from @devpav
Discord ID: 522084633098190861
We don't have a free market in anything.
That is the most important one.
If that is granted, all else follows.
You can blame the ECB for the uprising in france more than macron.
If it doesn't have "nothing to do with free trade", why would you say it did, verbatim, in a discussion about cost of living?
The social problems usually claimed about Japan are not due to trade.
That's not what was being discussed, for starters. Second it could easily be argued that high cost of living contributes to social issues
And so-called free trade contributes to social issues.
The free trade you admitted doesn't exist contributes to social issues?
That was a statement about free trade in general.
Okay, so where's the social-issue-causing free trade?
The decline of domestic production is rather obviously social-issue-causing.
misallocations of resources causes the boom bust cycle, so it seems logical to regulate markets, but credit expansions are what causes misallocations of resources, so the correct solution is the opposite of what seems intuitive.
Reading Mises is a misallocation of resources.
lol. kill yourself
Only if people refuse to adapt to the market. Further the consolidation of power in the hands of corporations (a government defined entity, need I remind you) and high cost anti competitive practices is anything but free trade
If the market isn't free then there's no reason for us to adapt to it.
Anything other than perfect competition is socialism. Reeeeeeeeeeeeee
🤔
>there's no need to adapt to conditions if they aren't market driven
>but this one segment of this larger system is "free trade", so free trade is the cause of social ills
The 'free trade' regime we have is the cause of social ills. Whether the current regime truly represents the ideology is beside the point.
Wot
>discussing a concept
>it doesn't matter if X actually matches that concept
🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔 🤔
There may be a self-preserving rational argument for adapting to non-free market conditions, but there's no economic argument.
The real social ills are caused by the attempt to realize the free trade concept. It's like the socialists constantly chasing 'real socialism'.
?????
>government mandated and regulated pursuit of profit growth is pursuit of a free market
I guess socialism is now the free market too. Everything is free market
Free market achieved
Don't bother, there's no helping those who don't want to be helped.
I think I'm done bothering, too, since neither of you are trying to have a conversation here.
self awareness has peaked
```"There exist, indeed, certain general principles founded in the very nature of language, by which the use of symbols, which are but the elements of scientific language, is determined. To a certain extent these elements are arbitrary. Their interpretation is purely conventional: we are permitted to employ them in whatever sense we please. But this permission is limited by two indispensable conditions, first, that from the sense once conventionally established we never, in the same process of reasoning, depart; secondly, that the laws by which the process is conducted be founded exclusively upon the above fixed sense or meaning of the symbols employed."
-John Locke.```
But, A != A, so fuck it.
Or more accurately, !A apparently equals A. We just haven't regulated things enough. Bring in more rules so we can get rid of that pesky free trade we don't have
✊
I can't find any answer to I'll ask here. What makes legally banning something a good idea? What metrics should we use to decide?
For example banning the use of non see through back packs
Or certain fire arms.
Or banning certain foods? Kender egs
You mean Kinder Eggs. Kender are halflings from Dragonlance or some such nonsense and Kinder Eggs are no longer banned
And I think it should be on the basis of principle and that almost nothing should be necessarily banned across the board
Kinder Eggs were never specifically banned. Selling food with inedible parts completely inside them was banned since the 1930s. The Kinder Egg company always had the option to change their packaging to sell in the US. That is why the US eggs are half candy and half toy. Vs candy outside and toy inside like EU.
banning something is generally done when it is believed that the item/action would cause large scale harm to the public
```I can't find any answer to I'll ask here. What makes legally banning something a good idea? What metrics should we use to decide?```
If it leads to violence or death. And that is inevitable with this thing/belief, then we should ban it.