Comments on: The social market economy Wed, 07 Oct 2015 17:23:32 +0000 hourly 1 By: sukumo Sun, 05 Feb 2012 10:28:41 +0000 Why are no thinkers taking (excess of) capitalism head on? There are no alternative suggestions. No convincing objections. Everybody knows inequalities beyond a certain limit stunt growth. Yet nobody wants to say or explain that.

By: Gillyp Sun, 29 Jan 2012 06:12:01 +0000 Capitalism is like any engine, with out a a regulator the engine consumes to much fuel and destroys its self…

By: paintcan Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:41:14 +0000 OOTs still claims his wants to advance truth but he really is an old codger like me who likes to see his words in print.

What’s in a name? That could just as easily serve as Mr. Hadas’s cogent article’s title.

The “truth” of the matter of economic systems is that most people don’t really care what economic system they are trapped in is as so long as it provides them a means to satisfy their vital needs at the very least, and if it can make them happy – that is all the better.

The constitution makes no claim to being any kind of economic system and that was largely because it was written before the study of economics even had a name for what is called “capitalism”.

The Constitution was written to regulate what one could call protean powers and the distribution of them within a society and a government.

By: steve778936 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:49:50 +0000 An excellent take on the current situation, and one I agree with. The focus on ‘capitalism’ is far too narrow. In my opinion, the problem we face is 1) ultimately self correcting, and 2) quite dangerous in the short term. Throughout human history there have been endless numbers of terrible governments, environmental disasters, and crises of every kind, but we as a species survive. We’ll survive this too. The problem is that as we work our way out of our current crisis, millions of people have their lives ruined, some irreparably. In my view, one of the functions of any responsible government is reduce the time it takes to overcome a crisis, while minimizing the number of people affected. Most governments do a very bad job of this. One the one hand, many people in politics refuse to observe and think, and instead rely on ideology to solve the problem. The others believe that government is the repository of all knowledge and should exert total control. Neither of these have ever worked, or ever will. The solution lies, in my view, in being intelligent enough and agile enough to make changes, try new solutions, and modify as we go along based on what works and what does not work. Unfortunately, as the current US presidential campaigns demonstrate, the electorate insists on trying the same solution over and over, and expecting different results – the definition of insanity.

By: OneOfTheSheep Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:10:25 +0000 I am a married, American citizen that is retired and primarily living on Social Security. No. No. No.

We each see “life” and “reality” through a unique prism of personal experience and perspective. Unfortunately, pressures to conform in American society are pervasive.

My goal in posting is primarily to stimulate others to think for themselves, and preferably “outside the box”. The role of “devil’s advocate” is not infrequently an effective means to such end. My comments are always intended to “advance the truth” since the “story” and the “truth” are not always well acquainted.

By: Gillyp Sat, 28 Jan 2012 07:48:45 +0000 who is poster OneOfTheSheep, I have to ask are you paid to post?do you have a web site or a blog? are you affiliated to any political organization?

By: OneOfTheSheep Sat, 28 Jan 2012 03:46:50 +0000 As governments over the years have insinuated themselves into the economies of modern society, their inept diddling is increasingly and adversely affecting the work ethics and other moral values of their citizens. An excellent example is that farmers paid to not farm quickly learn that there is more money to be made “farming” the “system” than farming the land…clearly contrary to what they did under an earlier and more pure “capitalist” system. Last night on the news (now that air fares must include ticket, fees AND taxes as a “total”) one airline’s “ticket” appeared to be only one third of the total! Always the “shell game” and NEVER simple.

Back in the ’60s, those “observers” of the 1960s that “thought the capitalist system couldn’t deal simultaneously with environmental goals and the search for profits” were 100% right. Changes in the law, technology, corporate priorities and cultural values did have considerable success in reducing noxious emissions, but look at how much manufacturing has left the United States for countries willing to “look the other way” over those years.

Americans today can buy inexpensive goods made elsewhere without the associated environmental economic penalties, but an ever-increasing Americans are today without productive work. Ya think these things are related? If so, prosperity HAS been harmed!

Today it is true that people ARE less wondering WHETHER the “system” can survive, but HOW. I don’t see the current “financial disorder” a problem of “politicians and regulators’ complacency”, but rather of politicians and regulators’ ever increasing incompetency. That is WHY “politicians tried to give citizens more wealth than they have earned, bankers forgot the common good, governments refused to live within their means and investors’ greed was celebrated rather than restrained.” There is simply no rational justification for the U.S. government to represent 40% of America’s Gross domestic Product (GDP).

I totally agree that “the way out” must be by way of “changed political and moral attitudes”, but such change must be in those “in charge” and not we, the victims. I fear your “social market economy” concept will prove all but indistinguishable from a “Socialist Market Economy” which might describe what we see today in China. Is that really the destination “we, the people would choose for these United States of America?