Dan Crawford | May 18, 2012 9:29 pm
Hillary in 2012?
A couple of years ago, when doubts about 0bama’s eligibility and competence were first appearing, reader sammy predicted that 0 would be removed from the 2012 ticket due to his incompetence…….. using the birth cerificate issue……. by the Dems.O posts forged birth certificate online. O says he is Kenya born in autobiography. It’s all coming into place. If Dems want to pull the pin, it’s all there.
don’t know what you are reading, but i’m not seeing it.
i think you should love Obamney. he’s the most successful Republican president since Bill Clinton.
Sammy is obviouslya republican– he is off in his own fantasty that has little basis in reality.
If I had to believe such stupidy to justify my faith I would really question my beliefs.
Don’t you ever think about that?
Sammy initiated the discussion on Mikes thread regarding malware and other slow down issues. He did so by making an interesting observation concernint “perfect markets” and defining same as markets with perfect information. His exact words, “One of the requirements of perfect markets is perfect information. The further you get away from this ideal, the less well the market functions. There are many markets where asymetrical information interferes – everywhere from healthcare to auto repair to landscaping.”
While he offers no operational definition of either markets or information in some state of perfection lets assume for the moment that the concept is legitimate. Inorder to have a perfect market it is necessary to have perfect information. It is not clear if the necessity for one is sufficient for the other.
The point then comes up regarding the relationship between a perfect market and the free market. Given that Sammy and others of a similar ideological bent of mind have made it clear that free markets are essential to a healthy and growth oriented economy it should follow that a free market is little different from what may be referred to as a perfect market. If a free market is preferable to a regulated market it should be necessary to show that free markets are more perfect than would be a regulated market.
So now we come to a natural conclusion. It was noted that a perfect market requires perfect information. Therefore, inorder for a free market to be in any way superior to a regulated market it must have a more perfect distribution of information. How can that be the case unless the distribution of information is in some wat regulated. Now we have a conundrum. If a free market is to be regarded as more perfect than a regulated market it needs to be demonstrated that a free market has more perfect information than does the regulated market. How can that be the case in the absence of any requirement regarding the distribution of information about a market.
I suggest that this is most clearly the case in regards to financial markets. The regulation of financial markets has a great deal to do with disclosure of information. All parties to a transaction should have equal access to information pertinent ot that transaction. How can that be the case without some form of regulation regarding the disclosure of market information. If a free market cannot be shown to be more perfect than is a regulated market then what is the basis for the preference for a free market?
Then there is the question concerning in what way does a perfect market being based on perfect information effect the behavior of market participants? If a free market is not more perfect than is a regulated market is the result then that a regulated market would be more perfect if the behavior of participants within a market were regulated? Certainly if the regulation of market information is necessary to insure perfection of such information then regulation of behavior within such markets should yield a more perfect market. Given that a free market cannot be demonstrated to be more perfect to a regulated market based upon the perfection of information in each type of market function then it should be accepted that a regulated market is more perfect than can be a free market.
Thank you Sammy for clearing up that issue for us. I am surprised to see that your initial contention regarding perfect markets and their relationship to perfect inofrmation leads to the recognition that regulated markets must, therefore, be […]
Well, I have to say it’s all funny as hell.
The makers of Genetically Modified foods have argued successfully that labeling products as “GM free” is an unfair trade practice, and gotten the law to agree.
The sad fact is that none of these bastards believe what they are saying. They only say what they think will work to get what they want, which is usually “more money” at the expense of an ill informed public.
Sammy, of course, is not ill informed. He watches fair and balanced Fox News.
Unfortunately legislation is for sale to any high bidder in our free market economy. Note that in Coberly’s example there has been a restraint of information. By sammy’s definition then there is no longer a perfect market in food production and distribution because the information has been distorted by agents of one sector of the market. The government has in this case been coopted to favor one market participant over another. Would the right wing ideologist complain of such interference and would they recognize that in such a case it is not the government that is initiating the distortion of information, but, instead, agents of a market participant have coerced legislative action contrary to the needs of the general public.
The trap has been sprung with the posting of the forged birth certificate. Whether or not they will let him out of it depends on whether or not the campaign continues to founder.
Recently a literary bio of Obama, provided by 0, has been reavealed and it states that he is Kenyan born. Rumor is that it was leaked by the Hillary (read “Democrat Establishment”) camp.
There is an offset to the perfect information requirement in our markets, and it is Judeo-Christian morality. Whether it is learned, or the innate spark of the Devine, the overwhelming majority of market participants tend to “do the right thing.” This is why markets function where there is asymetrical information. You can generally get your car fixed, go to the doctor, buy antivirus software, etc. without getting completely ripped off.
You are attempting to substitute Government for God here, which is typically liberal, and always fails.
sammy,You have just proved to us all in a very convincing manner that you are an idiot.
“the overwhelming majority of market participants tend to “do the right thing.” “….etc. without getting completely ripped off.” No, not completely, but maybe just substantially ripped off. All that trust amongst market participants must be the reason why contracts are required for nearly every aspect of economic life in our society. Before we all decide to rely upon that well known Judeo-Christian morality we may want to review the history of Christians and Jews throughout history, including modern day. Murder and mayhem is the rule of thumb.
I guess I am a bit offended by your claiming the mantle of Judeo Christian morality. Or, as Jesus said, “Beware of false prophets..”
The wonderful thing about the “morality” of Jesus is that it conforms with common sense. A merchant generally is better off if he is honest. Unfortunately this does not mean that all merchants are honest. Therefore we make laws to encourage honesty, and, indeed, to protect the foolish.
Jesus was crucified… the temporary victory, perhaps, of the Ruler of THIS world. but he seems to have promised this would not be the end of the story.
I don’t know what he has in mind for those who fool themselves in the service of Mammon.
Highly regulated markets do have some advantages. You would buy only government approved products at government established prices. However over time such a system also has disadvantages:
1) Prices set too high or low result in surpluses and shortages.
2) Products have to fit government templates, so innovation is stifled.
3) Companies no longer compete along products and prices but in the political arena, increasing corruption.
So, while a highly regulated market might be “safer” at first, over time it evolves into a stagnant, uninnovative, and corrupt system plagued by shortages and surpluses. The USSR was a perfect example of this.
sad to say, it was done by referendum. the general public is easy to fool.
Yes Sammy. Too much of a good thing can be abusive. Everything in moderation is the key. Ask the Tea Party members of the Congress if they know the definition of the term, moderation.
Extremism in the name of liberty is no virtue.
speaking of shortages and surpluses and corruption, what do you think of the current recession?
It has been difficult to imagine any democratic operative doing more to ensure Obama’s reelection than one Mitt Romney.
Then after I decide it’s impossible I get posts like this from our own sammy. Fess up you really are working for the DNC right? You can tell us. There’s no way this is still a credible political gambit. Is it?
The topic raised by Sammy, of the interplay of free markets and Judeo-Christian morality, reminded me of a situation at a nearby Catholic university. The school strives to inculcate Catholic Christian values and it isn’t the type of school that would invite Sebelius to speak. The university has “partnered” with a large bank (essentially the bank receives advertising and business in exchange for financial support). I was told by a student that, as a part of this partnership, Ayn Rand is required reading for business students. Professors are permitted to mention that Rand was an athiest. Of course, she was avowedly opposed philosophically to Christ’s teachings. Seems to me that the arrangement says less about the impact of Christian values on the operation of the free market than about the impact of the free market on the operation of Christian values.
but to be honest, as a devout Darwinian who believes Bethe’s book should be read by biology students, I don’t have any problem with Catholics reading Rand. At some point you really have to rely on people’s ability to use their own intelligence.
not that the results have been very encouraging so far.
Sammy, who has shown a decided preference for Mammon in his writings here, concluded, as a Christian I suppose, that the only reason I would be saying, repeatedly, that two plus two equals four is because I have a vested interested in receiving the Social Security I paid for.
Frankly, if there is a God, I can’t imagine what he would do about someone like Sammy. I mean, is stupidity a sin?