TED Conversations

Tom Britton

Director, Teacher, Language School

This conversation is closed.

Is America being destroyed by the Free Market system?

Could it be that unrestricted business and privatisation has created a profit drive and not competition to provide better quality goods and services? At what point would American people decide that the unrestricted Free Market doesn't serve the people?

Topics: behavior change
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Oct 3 2013: Tom, By reading your question and the explanation, I would guess that you are NOT well versed in economics. Political policies are the cause of the success and failures. In the USA we are undergoing a change from a free market system to a Socialist inspired system of big government, unfunded social programs, the socialist strategy of government control of industry and removal of private ownership in property and business, and Keynesian economics. All the enemies of Socialist / Communist manifestos are being addressed. Which means that Capitalism in all forms must die.

    Your question should be what is killing the free market system? Why is the national debit greater than the GDP? Why is the USA on the brink of depression and recession? Why is the fed flooding the system with 85 million dollars a month that never reach the general population?

    Have you looked at the economics of the PIGS and what has occurred and why? Read what occurred in Argentina in 1916 and overlay it with the current problems in the USA almost a perfect match.

    Study economics and history for the answers to what should be your real question.

    Be well. Bob.
    • Oct 3 2013: Robert if you truly understood economics you would know that this is quite far from the truth. The time in US history when we were socialst was right after WWII when the government controlled the major infrastructure and - at the time - even controlled wages and production output of major corporations. That is socialism, and our messed up health care is the end result of a response by the then free market to the socialism of the time. In the last 30 years (since Reagan) we have moved SO FAR into an economy based entirely on a Randian version of game theory driven free market that socialism is the farthest from where we are. The Argentinian situation in 1916 had everything to do with colonialism and nothing to do with what we have now. I know this is an ideologic issue for you but I truly beg of you to see this for what it is. The Obamacare system is very very fr from socialism the only thing about it that is even slightly (and I truly mean that) socialist is the insistence that you must participate. But there are so many options and it is so corporately driven and designed to benefit business that it bears no resemblance to a socialist system. Please rethink what socialism actually looks like and remember that Fox news won the right to lie in the courts.
      • thumb
        Oct 3 2013: Sharon, I admire your loyalty to the Party, however ... Obamacare was carefully designed to be a failure. If the twenty somethings do not "mandatorily donate" to the "tax" the system will fail, insurance companies will fail, and within two years we will have a national health entitlement program completely funded by the government.

        The policies being offered are a joke and the co-pays and costs to individuals are 50% or worse with limited coverage. This is not a help to the poor only a step to socialized medicine at the expense of those working and contributing.

        In Argentina HipĆ³lito Yrigoyen, of the Civic Union, to won the elections in 1916. He enacted social and economic reforms. This completely reversed the progress of Mitre, who sought to industrialize the country, and promoted a massive wave of European immigration that led to the strengthening of the state, the development of modern agriculture and to a near-reinvention of Argentine society and economy. The country emerged as one of the ten richest countries in the world, benefiting from an agricultural export-led economy as well as British and French investment. Driven by immigration and decreasing mortality the Argentine population grew fivefold and the economy 15-fold. That got sucked dry by the social reforms immediately. Argentina fell from the top ten to the bottom.

        There was no colonialism .. no interference from the outside .. Just a elected leader that tried to Socialize the country and broke it. Ergo the same as the USA today.

        I must have been at work supporting the entitlement programs the day Fox News won the right in court to lie legally to the country. Please provide a reference.

        Sharon I enjoy your posts but we respectfully disagree on this issue.

        I wish you well. Bob.
        • Oct 3 2013: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1310807.html

          is the ruling on the case. During arguments, the lawyer for Fox indicated that under the 1st amendment they were allowed to lie. That statement was picked up and erroneously stated as part of the ruling.

          That argument was ignored and not listed in the ruling

          The other argument is that Fox news is part of the entertainment division which occurred in 2012.
      • Oct 3 2013: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1310807.html

        is the ruling on the case. During arguments, the lawyer for Fox indicated that under the 1st amendment they were allowed to lie. That statement was picked up and erroneously stated as part of the ruling.

        That argument was ignored and not listed in the ruling

        The other argument is that Fox news is part of the entertainment division which occurred in 2012.
        • thumb
          Oct 3 2013: The case was Ayre VS Fox but the facts were about "whistle blower and FCC rules. So why the big boo hoo about Fox. She messed up the case by not playing by the numbers. The whole issue is about federal rules. Fox told her to provide proof ... she didn't. Instead she fought them and made threats. The story was dropped and she was released under her contract agreement.

          Do you agree that all media either distorts or slants the news in favor of the managements desires. Absolutely. So to some Fox lies while others just report favorable news as desired by the managements politics.

          Gotcha ... now I understand.

          I wish you well. Bob.
        • Oct 5 2013: Sticking specifically to the construct of the ruling: the ruling was that the FCC rule that insisted that news programs must be "true" had to do with the differentiation of Fox as news versus entertainment. Fox has been proven statistically to allow far more flat out falsehoods than other cable news networks did. I agree that the others are now starting to fall down the fox-hole. But, when you can show that people are more misinformed by watching fox than by refusing to watch any news at all, you have a problem. A misinformed electorate is bad for everyone. I am not loyal to any party, I think the left right paradigm is a distraction from the entirety getting shafted by the up/down dynamic. If more people recognized that the far left and the far right are actually mad at the exact same thing we could at least begin constructive dialogue over how to fix it rather than screaming across the abyss at one another.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.