Thread: Quiz about money.

Ah yes. It is not only the fault of composition that the vast majority have accepted without inspection. The real distinction between earned and unearned, what constitutes earned and unearned, this has been blurred by special interests. And what is a free-market - generally miscomprehended as meaning something like free of regulation, free of government interference. Here are some points about 'free markets': http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/02/...ge-of-looting/

"Economic writers from the 16th through 20th centuries recognized that free markets required government oversight to prevent monopoly pricing and other charges levied by special privilege. By contrast, today’s neoliberal ideologues are public relations advocates for vested interests to depict a “free market” is one free of government regulation, “free” of anti-trust protection, and even of protection against fraud, as evidenced by the SEC’s refusal to move against Madoff, Enron, Citibank et al.). The neoliberal ideal of free markets is thus basically that of a bank robber or embezzler, wishing for a world without police so as to be sufficiently free to siphon off other peoples’ money without constraint."

The best thing would be to read some of the blogs of the various economists in the videos. They accept questions.

Originally Posted by Seraph

Ah yes. It is not only the fault of composition that the vast majority have accepted without inspection. The real distinction between earned and unearned, what constitutes earned and unearned, this has been blurred by special interests. And what is a free-market - generally miscomprehended as meaning something like free of regulation, free of government interference. Here are some points about 'free markets': The Language of Looting

"Economic writers from the 16th through 20th centuries recognized that free markets required government oversight to prevent monopoly pricing and other charges levied by special privilege. By contrast, today’s neoliberal ideologues are public relations advocates for vested interests to depict a “free market” is one free of government regulation, “free” of anti-trust protection, and even of protection against fraud, as evidenced by the SEC’s refusal to move against Madoff, Enron, Citibank et al.). The neoliberal ideal of free markets is thus basically that of a bank robber or embezzler, wishing for a world without police so as to be sufficiently free to siphon off other peoples’ money without constraint."

The best thing would be to read some of the blogs of the various economists in the videos. They accept questions.

EDIT: The Government colludes with these bankers and Elites that allow them to accumulate this wealth. For e.g., regarding the U.S., I posted a video that explains it.

I am just giving my humble opinion here, FWIW. I was just curious what you think about it and I hope you might consider this perspective.

"It is not only the fault of composition that the vast majority have accepted without inspection."
I am not sure what you mean.

In every country (in particular, Western but also these 'pro-Soviet' FSU Republics), the Governments DOESN'T allow free markets. These 'faux' free market democracies are frauds and they enable these banking and money industries to do the embezzling and basically act as 'accepted' mafias, all of them. They artificially manage (make that mis-manage) these economies that both push inflation and devalue currency. Only through more borrowing and spending, do they temporarily sustain their economies. It's an illusion, though.

Edit: Asking Economists to explain is a bit laughable. The majority are academics who receive funding via Governments and most are Keynesian. There are those who are not but they won't be giving speeches and be on your cable TV programs every day.

I hope you might offer your thoughts about this. I edited the post because I want to offer something different to think about. I honestly don't trust the academics and your official 'economic' explanations that these so-called experts publish. Even if they don't have an agenda, they are too connected to Government agencies and they profit either way regardless of which official economic policies are pursued. Understand? :-/

Yes, I agree with 14Russian too.

You hardly can find an economist, who is free from the system.

US elite and Government has common interests... so often they share the state pie to help each other. Claw me and I will claw thee.

"In...'pro-Soviet' FSU Republics), the Governments DOESN'T allow free markets."
Yes, to some degree it is true. But we still have schemes for money laundering, and withdrawal, and etc. And these money then enjoy free markets benefits. And not allowing "free markets" just creates other beneficiary - bureaucracy. Besides, our Elite and Government are related in the same manner...

In my view there should be more balance between free markets and regulation, but it is impossible until the corruption exists. I believe they have less degree of corruption in Northern Europe and Germany, so that is the beacon to follow.