What we need is FAIR markets, not free markets.

[myrkul]

It is good thing that bitcoin is on a free market based on offer and demand, a market that can be manipulated is not good since history has shown it usually helps those who are in control of the money supply.

The only reason the bitcoin market can be manipulated to some degree is because it is a very young and small market, once the bitcoin acceptance grows, the market for bitcoins grows, and bitcoin will be a very stable currency by then.

I would imagine the early adopters of Bitcoin can also manipulate the market as they have a disproportionate portion of the money supply.  Even in the Bitcoin world, there are the elite that can pull strings.

Yes, welcome to a small economy. I purchased 20 shares of a stock on GLBSE today and raised the price 33%.

[1714973781]

1714973781

[1714973781]

1714973781

[1714973781]

1714973781

[1714973781]

1714973781

[1714973781]

1714973781

[Findeton]

Also, you can refer to Karl Marx all day but that's just going to make you look like a literal communist.

Well, I couldn't care less about what other people might think. Also, I don't see why people are scared of communists, I think most of them are good people. Well, I do know why, because of USA USA USA USA USA propaganda.

I don't buy into the "let's plan all the economy altogether" thing. But the analysis Karl Marx does of Capitalism is VERY interesting and just because I don't like the solution he gives I won't stop reading Das Kapital.

It looks to me like KARL MARX and COMMUNISM are taboos for many americans. Well, they are no taboo for me and I cannot cease to be amused every time I mention them in front of an american. ("Hey, he said SEX, he must be a pervert!", "Hey, he said MARX, he must be a communist!").

As we saw in the 20th century, socialism doesn't work. It destroys entire economies and leads to the worst kinds of human suffering imaginable. I just can't believe how after over a hundred million people died due to this flawed idea, so many people still support it. It's like these people don't want to understand basic facts. They are "flat-worlders".

- The surplus value is a theory that analyzes Capitalism, not a theory that analyzes communism.
- He didn't invent the surplus value theory, he just made it famous.
- USSR actually worked somehow between 1917 and 1991. of course it was a monstrous thing, but it worked somehow and it actually turned a peasant rural country into a technological superpower.
- Millions of people die because of famines every year under capitalism's rule. It's a valid comparison: most of the people that died under communism died because of famines.

ok, let's try quoting a different author then.

"Servants, labourers and workmen of different kinds make up far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part is of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged. "

"The liberal reward of labour, therefore, as it is the necessary effect, so it is the natural symptom of increasing national wealth. The scanty maintenance of the labouring poor, on the other hand, is the natural symptom that things are at a stand, and their starving condition, that they are going fast backwards."

Adam Smith.

[MoonShadow]

Also, you can refer to Karl Marx all day but that's just going to make you look like a literal communist.

Well, I couldn't care less about what other people might think. Also, I don't see why people are scared of communists, I think most of them are good people.

Most are fine people.  They are just ignorant.  And terminally so.

- Millions of people die because of famines every year under capitalism's rule.

Name a capitalist country that had a famine with a million deaths in the past year.  Name one in 2000, 1990 or 1980.  Show me a million deaths in any year, since WWII, within a predominately capitalist society that wasn't at war at the time.  You can't because it hasn't happened since 1933, and even then it's questionable.

I really wish you kids would study History.

[billyjoeallen]

Sovereign chance your name to socialist please

Social-democrat is a better definition. I am social-democrat and enjoy one of the best socialized/universal healthcares of the world (inexpensive and high quality). Yes, I'm from Spain.

Holy crap, you were being serious?  I thought that your OP was sarcasm. Dude, you gotta take the red pill. You're still in The Matrix.

Free markets ARE fair markets to me. Doesn't my opinion count as much as yours?

[billyjoeallen]

- USSR actually worked somehow between 1917 and 1991. of course it was a monstrous thing, but it worked somehow and it actually turned a peasant rural country into a technological superpower.

1. It worked because the politburo had access the the Sears Catalog.  Without it, they would have no idea where to set prices.  see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

2. It worked because Stalin backed off his land reforms in time to keep the famines from killing everybody.

3. It worked because the black market was tolerated.

4. it became a technological superpoer because the technology/military complex was the only industry group that faced competition (with the West). Competition is good. It makes you stronger.

5. it worked because of Western aid- to fight Hitler, expatriates in Western countries sending remittances home to family members, humanitarian and technological exchanges, etc.

6. Ultimately, it didn't work.

[Findeton]

Name a capitalist country that had a famine with a million deaths in the past year.  Name one in 2000, 1990 or 1980.  Show me a million deaths in any year, since WWII, within a predominately capitalist society that wasn't at war at the time.  You can't because it hasn't happened since 1933, and even then it's questionable.

There are 35 million deaths caused by famine every year under capitalism. 17 million people every year die because of obesity. There are 850 million people suffering severy hunger, there are more than 1000 million obeses.

[myrkul]

Name a capitalist country that had a famine with a million deaths in the past year.  Name one in 2000, 1990 or 1980.  Show me a million deaths in any year, since WWII, within a predominately capitalist society that wasn't at war at the time.  You can't because it hasn't happened since 1933, and even then it's questionable.

There are 35 million deaths caused by famine every year under capitalism. 17 million people every year die because of obesity. There are 850 million people suffering severy hunger, there are more than 1000 million obeses.

There are 35 trillion dollars spent on twinkies every week.

See? I can make up statistics, too. Links, please, to those statistics.

[MoonShadow]

Name a capitalist country that had a famine with a million deaths in the past year.  Name one in 2000, 1990 or 1980.  Show me a million deaths in any year, since WWII, within a predominately capitalist society that wasn't at war at the time.  You can't because it hasn't happened since 1933, and even then it's questionable.

There are 35 million deaths caused by famine every year under capitalism. 17 million people every year die because of obesity. There are 850 million people suffering severy hunger, there are more than 1000 million obeses.

Links or it didn't happen.

[westkybitcoins]

It seems as if Findeton simply will never answer the request to illustrate how a minimum wage actuallly increases prosperity (or wealth, or whatever he wants to call it.) I wonder if it's because, really, he knows he can't.

Hey it's OBVIOUS:

Imagine that you are paid the minimum wage. Suddenly, there's a minimum wage increase. Therefore, if you don't get fired, you are now paid more therefore your income has increased. As wealth hasn't increased, someone has to pay for your income rise, therefore there's been a wealth redistribution under that scenario.

(Man, kids these days don't see the obvious)

You can argue that you don't like this particular scenario. It's basically what we've been discussing all the way down this thread: whether and under what circunstances this scenario will happen.

Finally. Thank you. Now we have a nail to hammer at:

In any reasonably-sized society (100,000+ people), what percent of employees do you think will fall into the above scenario, versus the percent who get fired, have their hours cut, etc.? (It would help too if you explain how you came to estimate that percent.)

Do you not have an estimate? Don't even want to hazard a guess?

[nazgulnarsil]

Also, you can refer to Karl Marx all day but that's just going to make you look like a literal communist.

Well, I couldn't care less about what other people might think. Also, I don't see why people are scared of communists, I think most of them are good people. Well, I do know why, because of USA USA USA USA USA propaganda.

I don't buy into the "let's plan all the economy altogether" thing. But the analysis Karl Marx does of Capitalism is VERY interesting and just because I don't like the solution he gives I won't stop reading Das Kapital.

It looks to me like KARL MARX and COMMUNISM are taboos for many americans. Well, they are no taboo for me and I cannot cease to be amused every time I mention them in front of an american. ("Hey, he said SEX, he must be a pervert!", "Hey, he said MARX, he must be a communist!").

As we saw in the 20th century, socialism doesn't work. It destroys entire economies and leads to the worst kinds of human suffering imaginable. I just can't believe how after over a hundred million people died due to this flawed idea, so many people still support it. It's like these people don't want to understand basic facts. They are "flat-worlders".

- The surplus value is a theory that analyzes Capitalism, not a theory that analyzes communism.
- He didn't invent the surplus value theory, he just made it famous.
- USSR actually worked somehow between 1917 and 1991. of course it was a monstrous thing, but it worked somehow and it actually turned a peasant rural country into a technological superpower.
- Millions of people die because of famines every year under capitalism's rule. It's a valid comparison: most of the people that died under communism died because of famines.

ok, let's try quoting a different author then.

"Servants, labourers and workmen of different kinds make up far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part is of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged. "

"The liberal reward of labour, therefore, as it is the necessary effect, so it is the natural symptom of increasing national wealth. The scanty maintenance of the labouring poor, on the other hand, is the natural symptom that things are at a stand, and their starving condition, that they are going fast backwards."

Adam Smith.

If you're actually interested in level headed analysis you should check out the unabomber manifesto.  of course it mostly isn't anything *new*, but it is put together in an fairly efficient way.

[myrkul]

If you're actually interested in level headed analysis you should check out the unabomber manifesto.  of course it mostly isn't anything *new*, but it is put together in an fairly efficient way.

I wouldn't call anything that led to the conclusion: "Therefore I will mail you explosives" 'level-headed'

[nazgulnarsil]

If you're actually interested in level headed analysis you should check out the unabomber manifesto.  of course it mostly isn't anything *new*, but it is put together in an fairly efficient way.

I wouldn't call anything that led to the conclusion: "Therefore I will mail you explosives" 'level-headed'

prepare to be surprised.

http://cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt

[myrkul]

If you're actually interested in level headed analysis you should check out the unabomber manifesto.  of course it mostly isn't anything *new*, but it is put together in an fairly efficient way.

I wouldn't call anything that led to the conclusion: "Therefore I will mail you explosives" 'level-headed'

prepare to be surprised.

http://cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt

Well, After a quick skim, I saw nothing that leapt out and screamed 'WACKADOO', and he does seem to have outlined the insanity of what he calls 'Leftism'. So, color me surprised. How he thought explosives could fix things, though...

[MoonShadow]

If you're actually interested in level headed analysis you should check out the unabomber manifesto.  of course it mostly isn't anything *new*, but it is put together in an fairly efficient way.

I wouldn't call anything that led to the conclusion: "Therefore I will mail you explosives" 'level-headed'

prepare to be surprised.

http://cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt

Well, After a quick skim, I saw nothing that leapt out and screamed 'WACKADOO', and he does seem to have outlined the insanity of what he calls 'Leftism'. So, color me surprised. How he thought explosives could fix things, though...

The Unabomber wasn't trying to fix anything, in reality.  He was enacting vengence towards people he belived had done him wrong.  The manifesto was a distraction and cover.

[hugolp]

Not all actions of any given government are against/towards  equality.

This is not an answer. I did not say that all actions of a government go in that direction. I said that the net result of a social-democratic government is to benefit the elites at the expense of the middle classes and the poor.

For example minimum wages rise equality and are enforced by the government.

Nice way of switching the topic of the conversation.

Youve been dodging issues all the time, instead of answering them. Why wont you admit that social-democracy is corporatocracy when you have it in front of you?

[Trader Steve]

Regarding the folly of central planners see:

A Way To Be Free - by Robert LeFevre

http://centerforselfrule.org/a-way-to-be-free/

[Trader Steve]

There are 35 million deaths caused by famine every year under capitalism. 17 million people every year die because of obesity. There are 850 million people suffering severy hunger, there are more than 1000 million obeses.

There are no true capitalist countries. Every country is screwed up to some degree by central planners who think they know what is best for the rest of us. Who are these angels that are "all wise" and "all knowing"? They don't exist. They are simply humans like the rest of us except they are protected from accountability by armies and ignorant people who believe in the myth of external authority.