PDA

View Full Version : Price controls are harmful only because industry is not an operation of the state




Boshembechle
06-26-2014, 03:39 PM
In a free market, a government mandated price control of $25 for flat screen TVs or Cars would cause the supply of both to go to 0. IF, however, goods were produced by the state, it wouldn't matter what the price is, as profit, loss, and costs are not an issue. As long as the state can accurately determine how much of a quantity to produce, price wouldn't even matter.

Petar
06-26-2014, 03:49 PM
In a free market, a government mandated price control of $25 for flat screen TVs or Cars would cause the supply of both to go to 0. IF, however, goods were produced by the state, it wouldn't matter what the price is, as profit, loss, and costs are not an issue. As long as the state can accurately determine how much of a quantity to produce, price wouldn't even matter.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWTGsUyv8IE

Boshembechle
06-26-2014, 04:06 PM
Not exactly sure why that is pertinent to the discussion

Petar
06-26-2014, 04:12 PM
Not exactly sure why that is pertinent to the discussion

Price controls fuck up the supply chain... it divorces economic activity from what people actually want, and are willing to pay for/take a gamble on...

jkr
06-26-2014, 04:26 PM
our trollish friend neglected to consider/ mention the variable of demand.
I DONT WANT WHAT THE STATE IS SELLING!

Boshembechle
06-26-2014, 05:02 PM
Well, too bad. When (if) the free market can show us that it can provide goods to the entire population, then I MIGHT change my views. Until then, I'll take the grocery store in the video over any american supermarket any day, for the goods in an American supermarket are not available for the vast numbers of americans

jkr
06-26-2014, 05:07 PM
in your limited view

angelatc
06-26-2014, 05:10 PM
In a free market, a government mandated price control of $25 for flat screen TVs or Cars would cause the supply of both to go to 0. IF, however, goods were produced by the state, it wouldn't matter what the price is, as profit, loss, and costs are not an issue. As long as the state can accurately determine how much of a quantity to produce, price wouldn't even matter.

You are absolutely and entirely retarded.

angelatc
06-26-2014, 05:11 PM
Well, too bad. When (if) the free market can show us that it can provide goods to the entire population, then I MIGHT change my views. Until then, I'll take the grocery store in the video over any american supermarket any day, for the goods in an American supermarket are not available for the vast numbers of americans

Everything in the entire world is available to every single American, you idiot.

presence
06-26-2014, 05:20 PM
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/hFsTCeUC8Dk/hqdefault.jpg

Victor Grey
06-26-2014, 06:08 PM
In a free market, a government mandated price control of $25 for flat screen TVs or Cars would cause the supply of both to go to 0. IF, however, goods were produced by the state, it wouldn't matter what the price is, as profit, loss, and costs are not an issue. As long as the state can accurately determine how much of a quantity to produce, price wouldn't even matter.

http://familydiscipleshipmin.com/images/headers/ifwisheswerehorses.gif
http://www.applebybooks.com/images/008059.jpg
http://libcom.org/files/images/library/das-kapital-bank.jpg

NorthCarolinaLiberty
06-26-2014, 08:23 PM
In a free market, a government mandated price control...

There is no such thing as government mandated price control in a free market, so I stopped reading your thread after these 9 words.

Well, at least your short threads are getting even shorter. Maybe they're designed for Americans with short attention spans?

Boshembechle
06-26-2014, 08:35 PM
I meant price controls imposed on a market with private firms.

presence
06-26-2014, 09:03 PM
WTF does this have to do with the pursuit of liberty?

Vanguard101
06-26-2014, 09:40 PM
OP doesn't understand that the state is not an operation of the free market.

Henry Rogue
06-26-2014, 10:18 PM
There is no such thing as government mandated price control in a free market, so I stopped reading your thread after these 9 words.

Well, at least your short threads are getting even shorter. Maybe they're designed for Americans with short attention spans?
My first thought in reading the op.

Henry Rogue
06-26-2014, 10:30 PM
In a free market, a government mandated price control of $25 for flat screen TVs or Cars would cause the supply of both to go to 0. IF, however, goods were produced by the state, it wouldn't matter what the price is, as profit, loss, and costs are not an issue. As long as the state can accurately determine how much of a quantity to produce, price wouldn't even matter.
http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem
http://mises.org/econcalc.asp
Enlighten yourself.

Boshembechle
06-27-2014, 12:03 AM
I am well aware of the economic calculation problem put forth by Mises, and I find it to be an especially sinister excuse to justify the continued illegality of poor people owning goods. The state can keep inventory records of goods consumed, so that accurate production plans can be implemented in the future.

What good is an "efficient allocation of goods" if an entire section of the population is unable to own certain goods? Great, a $25 dollar price for a video game ensures that supply and demand are equal. You know what else that price does? It says "fuck you" to the poor people who have a willingness to pay of less than 25 dollars. "efficient allocation" my ass.

Czolgosz
06-27-2014, 12:13 AM
If your claim is that a central authority is "better" at the distribution of goods, then you are ignoring thousands of years of Human history.

Occam's Banana
06-27-2014, 12:24 AM
I am well aware of the economic calculation problem put forth by Mises, and I find it to be an especially sinister excuse to justify the continued illegality of poor people owning goods. The state can keep inventory records of goods consumed, so that accurate production plans can be implemented in the future.

In that case, you have obviously and utterly failed to understand the very "economic calculation problem" of which you claim to be "well aware."


What good is an "efficient allocation of goods" if an entire section of the population is unable to own certain goods? Great, a $25 dollar price for a video game ensures that supply and demand are equal. You know what else that price does? It says "fuck you" to the poor people who have a willingness to pay of less than 25 dollars. "efficient allocation" my ass.

Go tell it to Santa Claus. Maybe you'll get a pat on the head and a candy cane ...

P3ter_Griffin
06-27-2014, 02:22 AM
I am well aware of the economic calculation problem put forth by Mises, and I find it to be an especially sinister excuse to justify the continued illegality of poor people owning goods. The state can keep inventory records of goods consumed, so that accurate production plans can be implemented in the future.

What good is an "efficient allocation of goods" if an entire section of the population is unable to own certain goods? Great, a $25 dollar price for a video game ensures that supply and demand are equal. You know what else that price does? It says "fuck you" to the poor people who have a willingness to pay of less than 25 dollars. "efficient allocation" my ass.

If providing goods to poor people is something you feel is important, why do you not own a business providing goods to poor people? Free markets mean you can set your price where you deem it to be right without any respect to supply and demand. Good Will for instance, I'm not sure if they are local or national, sells NICE pairs of pants for 5 to 7 bucks, or even cheaper. I seen a telescope there the other day for $20. If you feel this is important to you you need to get off your ass and do something about it, because the greedy-cocksuckers running the multi-nationals today do not give a damn. Those greedy-cocksuckers though are at least beholden to our money and continued patronage, whereas with the state, if your idea of "efficient allocation of goods" differs, there isn't a damn thing you can do about it. You wish to give up your freedom to change the things you want to change. That is a recipe for no one to be happy.

Petar
06-27-2014, 05:28 AM
I am well aware of the economic calculation problem put forth by Mises, and I find it to be an especially sinister excuse to justify the continued illegality of poor people owning goods. The state can keep inventory records of goods consumed, so that accurate production plans can be implemented in the future.

What good is an "efficient allocation of goods" if an entire section of the population is unable to own certain goods? Great, a $25 dollar price for a video game ensures that supply and demand are equal. You know what else that price does? It says "fuck you" to the poor people who have a willingness to pay of less than 25 dollars. "efficient allocation" my ass.

Everything would be a lot more affordable if not for all of the government intervention which currently prevents us from living in a free-market.

pcosmar
06-27-2014, 06:13 AM
In a free market, a government mandated price control of $25 for flat screen TVs or Cars would cause the supply of both to go to 0. IF, however, goods were produced by the state, it wouldn't matter what the price is, as profit, loss, and costs are not an issue. As long as the state can accurately determine how much of a quantity to produce, price wouldn't even matter.

You do realize that Karl Marx was a total failure that had never worked for a living in his entire life.

His writings and Philosophy are those of total failure. They have failed in every place they have been tried.

Why do you support failure?

fisharmor
06-27-2014, 06:28 AM
Well, too bad. When (if) the free market can show us that it can provide goods to the entire population, then I MIGHT change my views. Until then, I'll take the grocery store in the video over any american supermarket any day, for the goods in an American supermarket are not available for the vast numbers of americans

Wow. Just.......... wow.

Sometimes, just sometimes, I think giving just one job to the state might be a good idea.
That one job would, of course, be making sure that people who make such monstrously idiotic statements with the intent of affecting public policy get shepherded away to a padded cell where they can enjoy the utopia they wish upon everyone.

Of course, I resist the temptation, because I know that even with that one tiny little job, the state would metastasize in under 200 years into exactly the kind of entity that runs that grocery store.

I mean, fer fuck's sake, didn't you see how there were only 20 slabs of unidentifiable meat, and yet they were still sniffing them?
Or the fact that every face on that video was the face of a beaten person: that they all knew that a camera pointed in their direction meant no good for anyone, and that they only spoke in hushed tones and only to the person next to them?

Have you ever known any Russians? They are NOT quiet people. Getting that whole society to the point of being that beaten was an even bigger trick than trying to feed them.

presence
06-27-2014, 08:29 AM
What good is an "efficient allocation of goods" if an entire section of the population is unable to own certain goods? Great, a $25 dollar price for a video game ensures that supply and demand are equal. You know what else that price does? It says "fuck you" to the poor people who have a willingness to pay of less than 25 dollars. "efficient allocation" my ass.

If I lived under a government that ensured everyone had equal access to video games I'd insist on some rope too so I can hang myself.

pcosmar
06-27-2014, 08:37 AM
If I lived under a government that ensured everyone had equal access to video games I'd insist on some rope too so I can hang myself.

They would be State Produced Video Games.. :eek:

Henry Rogue
06-27-2014, 08:54 AM
I am well aware of the economic calculation problem put forth by Mises, and I find it to be an especially sinister excuse to justify the continued illegality of poor people owning goods. The state can keep inventory records of goods consumed, so that accurate production plans can be implemented in the future.

What good is an "efficient allocation of goods" if an entire section of the population is unable to own certain goods? Great, a $25 dollar price for a video game ensures that supply and demand are equal. You know what else that price does? It says "fuck you" to the poor people who have a willingness to pay of less than 25 dollars. "efficient allocation" my ass.
Lol, well, reading isn't synonyms with comprehension.

If all government could do is say fuck you to poor people, governments would be inconsequential, unfortunately they can do much more than say fuck you. Governments are populated with people interested in maintaining their power. If that means keeping a segment of society poor to maintain that power, they will, if it means imprisoning people to maintain their power, they will. To maintain power, government will kill you. There is nothing more sinister than the power of the state.

CaptUSA
06-27-2014, 08:58 AM
How is it even possible to argue that restricted markets produce more prosperity than free markets? It's like evidence is of no consequence to this troll.

oyarde
06-27-2014, 09:07 AM
Lets see , govt wants to sell me crap for x , I am not buying crap .Govt wants me to sell them crops for x so they can dole them out for x . I am not conducting business with govt . They will get nothing from me, the land can remain fallow.

Boshembechle
06-27-2014, 01:16 PM
How is it even possible to argue that restricted markets produce more prosperity than free markets? It's like evidence is of no consequence to this troll.

Free markets are GREAT for those with means to pay for goods. The problem, though, is the sinister method by which market mechanisms balance supply and demand. Those at the top are able to get the goods precisely because though at the bottom are locked out of the market entirely.

Anti Federalist
06-27-2014, 03:15 PM
Free markets are GREAT for those with means to pay for goods. The problem, though, is the sinister method by which market mechanisms balance supply and demand. Those at the top are able to get the goods precisely because though at the bottom are locked out of the market entirely.

I have seen more 55 inch plasma TVs in "poor" homes in the US than in "rich" homes in other countries.

This is blah blah blah nonsense that was all tried in the USSR 70 years ago and resulted in abject failure and the deaths of millions of people.

I'll wager you were not even born when the Soviet Union fell. Le Sigh...never underestimate the ability of mankind to forget valuable lessons.

Let's see how strong my Rep Fu is today...

Anti Federalist
06-27-2014, 03:18 PM
Hah Hah...pretty strong...join 56ktroll with another red bar.

euphemia
06-27-2014, 04:38 PM
Free markets are GREAT for those with means to pay for goods. The problem, though, is the sinister method by which market mechanisms balance supply and demand. Those at the top are able to get the goods precisely because though at the bottom are locked out of the market entirely.

That's not why. It seems, though, that large televisions show a horribly misplaced priority.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
06-27-2014, 04:53 PM
Well, too bad.

Looks like it's too bad for you. Most people are not in that habit of providing video entertainment to lazy slobs.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
06-27-2014, 04:59 PM
OP sounds like he's from another country. I wonder if he's one of those people who watched a lot of American TV overseas, and then came over here expecting to pick money off of trees. I know people like that.

Sorry, it sucks over here too.

Boshembechle
06-27-2014, 06:09 PM
I was born in a soviet Satellite country.

pcosmar
06-27-2014, 06:27 PM
I was born in a soviet Satellite country.

So why are you trolling here? Is it deliberate? or do you actually support the failure of Socialism?

Henry Rogue
06-27-2014, 07:46 PM
OP sounds like he's from another country. I wonder if he's one of those people who watched a lot of American TV overseas, and then came over here expecting to pick money off of trees. I know people like that.

Sorry, it sucks over here too.
Good guess, I was guessing prepubescent.

If the soviet satellite country has a central bank, then it doesn't have anything remotely close to a Free Market. If half of every transaction is centrally planned, it ain't freedom.

fisharmor
06-27-2014, 08:24 PM
I was born in a soviet Satellite country.

Yeah, but which one? I'm guessing Romania, for the sheer irony of a Romanian continuing to hold this position.

Natural Citizen
06-27-2014, 08:26 PM
Yeah, but which one? I'm guessing Romania, for the sheer irony of a Romanian continuing to hold this position.

It baffles me when people who are products of a different way find their way here only to be bashed and called an idiot and whatnot. There are better ways.

Assuming, of course, that it isn't just some sock puppet account to solicit a prescribed debate. Wouldn't rule that out.

Boshembechle
06-27-2014, 10:06 PM
Yeah, but which one? I'm guessing Romania, for the sheer irony of a Romanian continuing to hold this position. Poland. And the life of an average Polish person was no doubt worse than the average life of an America, BUT there was no "denying" of goods based on price

oyarde
06-28-2014, 01:33 AM
Poland. And the life of an average Polish person was no doubt worse than the average life of an America, BUT there was no "denying" of goods based on price

Well , then , I guess everyone was rushing to Poland , yes ? Most of the Poles I ever knew really well were working in Germany, I never asked them .

Carlybee
06-28-2014, 01:50 AM
In a free market, a government mandated price control of $25 for flat screen TVs or Cars would cause the supply of both to go to 0. IF, however, goods were produced by the state, it wouldn't matter what the price is, as profit, loss, and costs are not an issue. As long as the state can accurately determine how much of a quantity to produce, price wouldn't even matter.


Yeah that worked out really well in Venezuela.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
06-28-2014, 02:46 AM
...BUT there was no "denying" of goods based on price

What about the quality of those goods?

Anti Federalist
06-28-2014, 01:39 PM
What about the quality of those goods?

Nothing but the very best, comrade.

Why, the whole world drives Trabants.

euphemia
06-28-2014, 01:45 PM
Here is something interesting: Of the goods I purchase, none of them are made or built in former Soviet bloc nations. It doesn't seem that former Soviet satellites have done much to improve their lots since communism/socialism was officially defeated. Holding on to what has failed means the system will continue to fail.

This is what I call the small-mindedness of collective economics. It thinks in terms of what will keep itself in power, not what will promote prosperity in its people or provide quality goods to the world.