Comments on: Liberal Democracy

By: JerryOgar

JerryOgar — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 08:44:53 +0000

Democracy cannot do justice to the issues of good governance, that is why I so much appreciates the effort and and idea of Francis Fukuyama, who opines that it is true that some countries are practicing democracy, but what they are practicing is not absolute democracy. A Democracy should be liberal where by all the citizens can exercise their franchise. Not like some people’s franchise will be envelop and those at the herms of the affairs covers themselves with immunities as in the case of some countries in Africa.

By: JerryOgar

JerryOgar — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 08:37:16 +0000

Democraacy cannot do justice to the issues of good governance, that is why i so much appreciate the effort and and idea of Francis Fukuyama, that it is true that some countries are practicing democracy, but what they are practicing is not absolute democracy. A Democracy shouldbe liberal where by all the citizens can exercise their franchise. Not like some people’s franchise will be envelop and those at the herms of the affairs covers thrmselves with immunities as in the case of some countries in Africa.

By: John Hasenkam

John Hasenkam — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 00:47:21 +0000

There is no conflict between the freedom of the individual, subject to a condition of not hurting others, and the interests of society.
—–
There is, there always has been, there always will be. You can even see the same principle at work in mammalian behavior. The individual is in part formed by this conflict.

Your argument is devoid of insight into human behavior.

By: The Rant: how Gub’ment scams us on the income tax. « The Sagamore Journal

Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:48:27 +0000

[...] problem with this government-provided-services theory in practice is that such governments grow up around us and inevitably encroach on taxpayer freedoms while offering ever fewer services. [...]

By: Mark Hill

Mark Hill — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 05:58:05 +0000

You are seriously not going to try to pull out the “income inequality” “reason” for the great depression are you?

The causes can be identified rather glibly but more or less correctly. Ongoing monetary disequilibria and a massive shock to world trade.

Stop dissimulating. More regulation caused the depression.

By: Trinifar

Trinifar — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 02:52:23 +0000

“Coase’s accepted ideas about firm structures and externalities were rejected out of hand when he first theorised them.”

Milton Friedman rejected Coase’s thinking about the FCC at first too.

As for causes of the great depression that’s a open question with a host people from varingy viewpoints weighing in. Let’s hope Ben Bernake learned something useful from his study of how to avoid another one. (Just read something about this subject being a central one of Bernake’s career.)

By: Mark Hill

Mark Hill — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 22:26:47 +0000

The increasing financial regulations you talk about Trinifar occured largely after the 1st World War, and not after the depression. Increasing fiscal and industrial regulation and subsidy is a trigger point for the great depression.

The savings and loans debacle cannot be insulated against despite the number of well intentioned laws the US has as long as Cuomo inspired “anti discrimination” lending provisions and the moral hazard of the US banking and NMA/GSE system continues via loan guarnatees.

The simple answer is they thought they’d be better off. Unfortunately, economics is anti intutitive. Coase’s accepted ideas about firm structures and externalities were rejected out of hand when he first theorised them.

By: pommygranate

pommygranate — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 22:15:38 +0000

Mark

It probably is. Have you joined the new UK Libertarian Party?

By: TerjeP (say tay-a)

TerjeP (say tay-a) — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:58:18 +0000

Given that trade regulation caused the great depression, subsequent calls for financial regulation were misplaced (and harmful). The stock market crash of 1929 was a prediction of impending economic problems, not a cause of them.

By: Trinifar

Trinifar — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:39:11 +0000

P.M.Lawrence, thanks for the pointer to Carson. I like this article of his Libertarian Self-Marginalization. Justin,

The fact of increasing complexity of society is an argument against, not in favour of greater governmental intervention. The reason is that no government authority is capable of obtaining the knowledge of individual circumstances and values that is spread throughout the millions of people. The market is the expression of their peaceable collaborations with each other in seeking what they need by mutually providing for the needs of others.

If only that were true. Why is that if you look at increasingly complex societies you find increasingly complex governments? Why did people clamor for increasing financial regulations in the wake of the Great Depression, the US savings and loan crisis of the 80's and now with the Wall Street meltdown? Why did people ask for pollution regulations in the 1960's (again in the US)? Why were slaves captured and traded (in free markets mind you) well into the 1800's?