Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

Because they would gone bust and being ostracised ? :-p

Funny enough the demand would be there I suspect- so from a purely market perspective there is no reason not to sell babies.

The problem for the free market fundamentalists is that they need a basic moral framework in which their free choice can be exercised- but this requires non negotiable moral absolutes like 'it's not acceptable to use force to make other people do what you want.'

But that which is non negotiable cannot therefore be derived by trade- since trade is all about negotiation.

So they are left with the conundrum that their universe of free trade requires a God- some pre existing moral framework that cannot be called into being via free trade itself- but must somehow exist 'pre trade'.

The strange thing is that they deny the existence of any such framework while at the same time invoking it.

Edited by wonderpup
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 327
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Funny enough the demand would be there I suspect- so from a purely market perspective there is no reason not to sell babies.

The problem for the free market fundamentalists is that they need a basic moral framework in which their free choice can be exercised- but this requires non negotiable moral absolutes like 'it's not acceptable to use force to make other people do what you want.'

But that which is non negotiable cannot therefore be derived by trade- since trade is all about negotiation.

So they are left with the conundrum that their universe of free trade requires a God- some pre existing moral framework that cannot be called into being via free trade itself- but must somehow exist 'pre trade'.

The strange thing is that they deny the existence of any such framework while at the same time invoking it.

Indeed. That is why despite the flaws, we need a advance democratic parliament.

BUT..you got to understand that the reason they gone bust is because in a free market the ambulance no win no fee lawyers will take up the case for the babies and seek compensation from the breeders :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You Lucky Barsteward.

I was made redundant in 2009. Was lucky to walk straight into another job with a10% pay cut (Elec Engineer in construction) . Nearly three years on been promoted, working 5 - 10hrs/ week more and I'm the same money my previous employer paid. We are very busy privately owned consultancy and the "management constantly try to instil fear of imminent lack of work and redundancy. Personally I think they're money grabbing shysters using the economic environment to enslave their staff. I know I make substantial profit for the business as I monitor my project fee and costs. So I am getting pretty peeved that I as well as others arr not being paid a fair salary for the work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was made redundant in 2009. Was lucky to walk straight into another job with a10% pay cut (Elec Engineer in construction) . Nearly three years on been promoted, working 5 - 10hrs/ week more and I'm the same money my previous employer paid. We are very busy privately owned consultancy and the "management constantly try to instil fear of imminent lack of work and redundancy. Personally I think they're money grabbing shysters using the economic environment to enslave their staff. I know I make substantial profit for the business as I monitor my project fee and costs. So I am getting pretty peeved that I as well as others arr not being paid a fair salary for the work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But even you would place a limit on trade I think.

For example if I wish to breed puppies and sell them I suspect you would agree with this trade- but if I were to breed babies and sell them I think you would disagree with this trade- but why?

To explain why you are forced to introduce a different type of 'value' -one that cannot be expressed in terms of trade but must be expressed in terms of ideas like 'fairness' or 'justice' or 'liberty'.

So I'm not saying that trade is bad- I'm saying that trade is not everything and that all values cannot be reduced to price tags of one sort or another.

Anyone who argues that we-as a species-should hand over the responsibility for all the choices we make to the free market is insisting that we abandon free will and say 'we are not capable of governing ourselves- so the market must govern for us'.

Because this is the implicit idea that lies behind the free market fundamentalist's position- they have no faith in themselves or anyone else to do the right thing and so want to hand the whole show over to market- and that really is an example of people who want to submit to an outside authority- they want the market to run their lives so they don't have to.

Why do you suggest that without without forced trades, there can be no 'fairness' or 'justice' or 'liberty'?

You really don't seem to understand the position of the free market anarchist. The market doesn't govern anyone, as it is just the observation of people freely trading. How people in communities interact is something different, which can also form without institutionalised force being involved.

BTW, people do trade babies already too - that's what surrogate mothers do. Whether money is involved or not, doesn't mean that it isn't a free trade.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. That is why despite the flaws, we need a advance democratic parliament.

BUT..you got to understand that the reason they gone bust is because in a free market the ambulance no win no fee lawyers will take up the case for the babies and seek compensation from the breeders :lol:

A democratic parliament is just an way of managing the organisation called the state.

You can also have other democratic processes for managing other organisations, such as the board of directors. Indeed, you can also have cooperatives.

If you can't see that the state is just an organisation which gets to use violence with impunity, then I'm afraid our minds will be unable to meet to discuss the implications of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A democratic parliament is just an way of managing the organisation called the state.

You can also have other democratic processes for managing other organisations, such as the board of directors. Indeed, you can also have cooperatives.

If you can't see that the state is just an organisation which gets to use violence with impunity, then I'm afraid our minds will be unable to meet to discuss the implications of this.

I would support your attempt to build an organisation that has the same features as a modern democratic state (or improved it). But unfortunately, one that works is one that needs a uber security force which is controlled through check and balance and in that organisation, you will still be forced to do things you don't want to for the 'common' good.

One that people do as they please and will never be compelled by force at limited and necessary occasions for public good just would not work.

Add: I recently read up about celtic culture, which was the only limited working example that you claimed to work (with the Boehn law was based upon). Unfortunately, it didn't work. More often than not, they settled their dispute through a duel or of that sort. I take note that about your claim that that was over 1000 years ago, but 5000 years have past and yet there isn't a single working example of free to join and leave sovereign non violence microstate - Somalia, Afghanistan, Waziristan included.

Edited by easy2012
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

Anymore Christmas Cracker jokes where that one came from ?

Actually... you may not believe this but our organisation hired consultants to perform and independent pay review and many grades were found to be underpaid (we aim for 80% of the average salary in the sector, flip-side being decent benefits and security). I'm expecting to be one such person underpaid for my grade so I *should* get a payrise this year. I'm told big pay increases have been budgeted in.

Edited by frozen_out
Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you suggest that without without forced trades, there can be no 'fairness' or 'justice' or 'liberty'?

You really don't seem to understand the position of the free market anarchist. The market doesn't govern anyone, as it is just the observation of people freely trading. How people in communities interact is something different, which can also form without institutionalised force being involved.

BTW, people do trade babies already too - that's what surrogate mothers do. Whether money is involved or not, doesn't mean that it isn't a free trade.

Apologies for taking a couple of years to address your point- I must have missed your post :D

I was not really claiming that it's impossible for people to organize themselves around the principle of free trade- I was just pointing out that the notion of 'free trade' itself is a moral absolute that by definition is non negotiable and thus must be derived from a frame of reference outside that of free trade itself- a context in which everything is negotiable.

So those who seem to argue that free trade can in effect replace moral absolutes with a system based on compromise and negotiation find that they require a moral absolute of their own in order to protect the very mechanism through which these negotiations take place.

If it's true that we can only have genuine free trade in a context in which no one is coerced then we have at least one non negotiable rule- the rule that states that no one is to be coerced- but note that this rule itself cannot be be arrived at through negotiation- one does not negotiate for one's liberty, because to do so is to call into question it's absolute nature.

So we have the ironic situation in which the universe of moral relativism generated via a free trade paradigm is only possible if all concerned agree to follow the commandment 'Thou shalt not coerce others or use force against them' and what is this if not precisely the kind of authoritarian proscription on individual behavior which the Libertarians insist their free market transcends?

A true libertarian would be compelled to accept the idea of coercion as a viable strategy in a free market scenario- if only because to outlaw it requires the creation of the very forms of coercion such a law would be designed to prevent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to say. This slowdown has some some massive structural changes - there has been a massive reduction of people working in the financial services. These jobs are not going to come back. I mention financial services as they have been one of the major job creators since the early 90s recession.

Local authorities and the public sector outside of schools + NHS have been much reduced and are due for even more gutting.,

Competition from the likes of India, outsourcing appears to have fallen on its face. AFAICT its been an expensive disaster.

Outside of volume electronic stuff, work is no longer going to China.

One thing that will happen is massive job switch over when people with skills in demand move to other companies.

This was very noticable in the mid 90s. As soon as the economy picked up, the company (and others) went from having an attrition rate of 1 in 50/year to something like 15 in 40/year. Between 93 and 97, all the people I had worked with (40) had left. I left in the first wave. ABout 6 months of me going, every week would see between 1 and 3 people hand their notice in.

This time I expect it to be worse. Last time, only people who'd accrue large pensions stayed. In these days of defined contribution I think you'll see a more dynamic workforce. What companies saved on DB they'll loose in on payroll.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Competition from the likes of India, outsourcing appears to have fallen on its face. AFAICT its been an expensive disaster.

Outside of volume electronic stuff, work is no longer going to China.

One thing that will happen is massive job switch over when people with skills in demand move to other companies.

This was very noticable in the mid 90s. As soon as the economy picked up, the company (and others) went from having an attrition rate of 1 in 50/year to something like 15 in 40/year. Between 93 and 97, all the people I had worked with (40) had left. I left in the first wave. ABout 6 months of me going, every week would see between 1 and 3 people hand their notice in.

This time I expect it to be worse. Last time, only people who'd accrue large pensions stayed. In these days of defined contribution I think you'll see a more dynamic workforce. What companies saved on DB they'll loose in on payroll.

In a way both very healthy and actually shoots down a lot of the doomsayers about a sustainable recovery IT services very buoyant

Link to post
Share on other sites

So we have the ironic situation in which the universe of moral relativism generated via a free trade paradigm is only possible if all concerned agree to follow the commandment 'Thou shalt not coerce others or use force against them' and what is this if not precisely the kind of authoritarian proscription on individual behavior which the Libertarians insist their free market transcends?

If there is coercion then it is no longer "free" trade but "forced" trade. Same applies to for example free speech. Its a well understood concept in society in general that freedom/liberty is a collective characteristic where the maximum overall level occurs when its distribution is equal and non-overlapping - where each individuals freedom/liberty is bounded so as not to impinge on that of others e.g. I dont have the freedom/liberty to stop you posting b*ll*cks.

Edited by goldbug9999
Link to post
Share on other sites

...

So we have the ironic situation in which the universe of moral relativism generated via a free trade paradigm is only possible if all concerned agree to follow the commandment 'Thou shalt not coerce others or use force against them' and what is this if not precisely the kind of authoritarian proscription on individual behavior which the Libertarians insist their free market transcends?

A true libertarian would be compelled to accept the idea of coercion as a viable strategy in a free market scenario- if only because to outlaw it requires the creation of the very forms of coercion such a law would be designed to prevent.

The basic problem with libertarians is much simpler than that and much less fundamental.

Most self-declared libertarians are blind to the coercion that creates many of the 'free-markets' they advocate. The land market is the classic example.

If it was simply the case that libertarians were anti-authoritarian anarchists then they would have a compelling argument. A world built on freedom, negotiation and trade? Fantastic. Utopian, but something worth aiming for.

Unfortunately, they are mostly interested in special pleading for the ruling classes and, worse still, many are just Ayn Rand style fascists.

Of course this isn't always true, but its so dominant that I think anyone who really is anti-authoritarian would find it very hard to call themselves a libertarian.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Long dead economistics from the mists of time who didnt know any better.

Smith, Keynes, Marx, Galbraith etc - knew a lot more than the likes of Gidiot, Balls etc

Anyway - it doesn't matter what they knew - none of them could have predicted that by 2000 the entire world would be under the control of a few dozen cronies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pharmacist locum rates have declined over 11 years.

In 2003, average rate was £23 per hour during weekdays, and £28 per hour during weekends.

In 2014, average rate is £20 per hour during weekdays, and £23 per hour during weekends.

The government has recently announced that there will be NO cap on pharmacist student numbers - unlike doctors, dentists and vets, there has already been a huge increase in schools of pharmacy thus putting a downward pressure on pharmacy wages.

The Pharmacy degree is 4 years long - it will cost over £60,000 to complete - it is HIGHLY specialised.

Many kids will be ruined.

...

I am considering retraining as a nurse and working in the ME until I retire, I'm 40, I've already worked out there and speak and write (reasonably) fluent Arabic.

The thought of living in the UK now makes me feel appalled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason Communism, Monarchies and Fascism don't work is that there become individuals who are able to act without stay in their own self interest.

Probably the best political mechanism we have for enabling the group to control the interests of individual leaders is in fact democracy. And even here that is subject to the same forces of naked self interest as we see in Westminster, Washington and Beijing.

How this 'best practice' translates to markets is to allow the 'group' via the democratic process to set rules that balance the interests of all parties to a market so that it acts in an optimum fashion.

Clearly that is hard if not impossible to achieve, but it is the best system humankind has come up with so far.

It is susceptible to self interest of course, but it acknowledges it will always exist, and so uses it. All systems will be susceptible to it at the top also, so from that perspective none is superior to the other.

The hole pickers might want to suggest what would happen if it were all up to them. Mass starvation within 3 months is my guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pharmacist locum rates have declined over 11 years.

In 2003, average rate was £23 per hour during weekdays, and £28 per hour during weekends.

In 2014, average rate is £20 per hour during weekdays, and £23 per hour during weekends.

The government has recently announced that there will be NO cap on pharmacist student numbers - unlike doctors, dentists and vets, there has already been a huge increase in schools of pharmacy thus putting a downward pressure on pharmacy wages.

The Pharmacy degree is 4 years long - it will cost over £60,000 to complete - it is HIGHLY specialised.

Many kids will be ruined.

...

I am considering retraining as a nurse and working in the ME until I retire, I'm 40, I've already worked out there and speak and write (reasonably) fluent Arabic.

The thought of living in the UK now makes me feel appalled.

Looks like the idea is to use pharmacists, probably on minimum wage, to do thing GP's currently do in order to reduce the demand for GP services.

Link to post
Share on other sites
If there is coercion then it is no longer "free" trade but "forced" trade. Same applies to for example free speech. Its a well understood concept in society in general that freedom/liberty is a collective characteristic where the maximum overall level occurs when its distribution is equal and non-overlapping - where each individuals freedom/liberty is bounded so as not to impinge on that of others e.g. I dont have the freedom/liberty to stop you posting b*ll*cks.

What I am suggesting is that in a society that genuinely placed 'free trade' at the apex of it's value system coercion would be regarded simply as a rather extreme negotiating strategy- a strategy with it's own advantages and disadvantages, like other forms of negotiation.

And if you think about it this is inevitable since any attempt to suppress coercion would itself be coercion- by which I mean if you wish to prevent me using force you will have to use force to stop me.

So while it seems counterintuitive to say that a true libertarian society would accept coercion as a strategic option the truth is that only a society that allowed coercion could be described as authentically liberal.

The alternative is a society in which coercion is suppressed by a central power that we could choose to call 'The State'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I work in tech and I'm noticing quite a few job issues within my own circles - perhaps this process is kicking-in big time? Technology is already destroying jobs across all sectors... the process will no doubt increase as tech advances - the writing's on the wall guys: http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/515926/how-technology-is-destroying-jobs/

Edited by gruffydd
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.