A free market must let the nature take it course
I think that is bullshit.
Take it's fucking course until system collapse?
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:I think that is bullshit.
Take it's fucking course until system collapse?
how about this:
A free market must be heavily regulated by the government
A free market must be heavily regulated by the government
How to be regulated depends on situation and conditions.
Too slack, become corrupt.
Too heavy, stifle development.
There is nothing wrong with the current free market system.
So don't dump your economics textbook yet, by knee jerk reaction.
The free market allows capital, which would have been kept in banks or homes, to flow to viable business entities to expand, create jobs, fund research and better our lives.
It's not like there is no regulation in it. Stock exchanges exist as watchdogs to ensure at least minimum rules are kept so as not to hamper business activities.
Let's get the market condition now in perspective now.
What happened to the market was caused by a bunch of crooks known as investment banks and hedge fund operators, who by virtue of their immense wealth capital and legal non-transparency operations to protect its competitiveness, had sought to manipulate the market to bring max profit to themselves and their clients, at the expense of business entities and stock players, and even humanity itself.
Thus, the culprits must be brought to justice, made public the crime they had done as a reminder to future conmen, and the free market will rule, with a bit more oversight duties by regulators. Just like punishing criminals in a free society, so too the same for the free market system.
The alternative would be heavy regulations that would hamper business capital funding and using taxpayers social spending monies as guarantees - socialism as per Karl Marx.
can only guess how much regulations there should be.
but one thing is for sure.
PAP is either regulating too much or not regulating enough.
and LKY is to be blamed.
Originally posted by xtreyier:There is nothing wrong with the current free market system.
So don't dump your economics textbook yet, by knee jerk reaction.
The free market allows capital, which would have been kept in banks or homes, to flow to viable business entities to expand, create jobs, fund research and better our lives.
It's not like there is no regulation in it. Stock exchanges exist as watchdogs to ensure at least minimum rules are kept so as not to hamper business activities.
Let's get the market condition now in perspective now.
What happened to the market was caused by a bunch of crooks known as investment banks and hedge fund operators, who by virtue of their immense wealth capital and legal non-transparency operations to protect its competitiveness, had sought to manipulate the market to bring max profit to themselves and their clients, at the expense of business entities and stock players, and even humanity itself.
Thus, the culprits must be brought to justice, made public the crime they had done as a reminder to future conmen, and the free market will rule, with a bit more oversight duties by regulators. Just like punishing criminals in a free society, so too the same for the free market system.
The alternative would be heavy regulations that would hamper business capital funding and using taxpayers social spending monies as guarantees - socialism as per Karl Marx.
every system has a loophole.
and when people exploit the system, you will need regulation.
quite funny hor....
people make money nobody praise garmen....
people lose money garmen fault.
garmen neber force old folks to buy stocks.
The alternative would be heavy regulations that would hamper business capital funding and using taxpayers social spending monies as guarantees - socialism as per Karl Marx.
No, that is actually not true.
Karl Marx's view is for communist state, where all economic activities are under state control.
What happened to the market was caused by a bunch of crooks known as investment banks and hedge fund operators, who by virtue of their immense wealth capital and legal non-transparency operations to protect its competitiveness, had sought to manipulate the market to bring max profit to themselves and their clients, at the expense of business entities and stock players, and even humanity itself.
That is why we cannot have "free market".
It would be abused.
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:I think that is bullshit.
Take it's fucking course until system collapse?
hahahaha...good for uncle blood pressure...hahahaha...free market will collapse some day, then it will renew and start again,...same same like our wet markets, some closed some renewed.
Originally posted by Chin Eng:quite funny hor....
people make money nobody praise garmen....
people lose money garmen fault.
garmen neber force old folks to buy stocks.
yalor, they told them to put into CPF to enjoy 4% interest they dun wan. Aiya..
hahahaha...free market will collapse some day, then it will renew and start again
Then why USA bailout wall street, don't let it collapse?
According to free market theory, the bankrupt banks should be allowed to collapse.
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:.
That is why we cannot have "free market".
It would be abused.
Agreed, but that is what the world embraced, a capitalist free market policy, sure got abused somewhere and somehow, so as the flaws of capitalism shown up one by one, laws and policies are implemented to curb the flaws and abuse, unfortunately, there is no end to it, the virus keep attacking the flaws of the system.
Today communism is also turning into capitalism, if Marx is around, he will be crying.
Originally posted by angel7030:
yalor, they told them to put into CPF to enjoy 4% interest they dun wan. Aiya..
...at the end of the day, it's greed. regardless of how little the old investors understand the fund managers, they understood one thing.... they get more money.... which is GREED!
...it's a free market.... you make your own decision as what you want to buy.... kena suckered? own fault!
Agreed, but that is what the world embraced, a capitalist free market policy
There is a lot of bullshit pushed by USA free market or neo-liberalism economists.
Go and read:
Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Samaritans-Secret-History-Capitalism/dp
Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective
http://www.amazon.com/Kicking-Away-Ladder-Development-Perspective/d
How Rich Countries Got Rich ... and Why Poor Countries Stay Poor
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:Then why USA bailout wall street, don't let it collapse?
According to free market theory, the bankrupt banks should be allowed to collapse.
in the 30's the great depression had cost it to renew once, then now another time, just that now USA are more rich to support its bank, yes, bankrupt banks are allow to collapse, they are infact collapsed, just that the Fed buyout them to stay sustainable and most importantly, the ability to withhold it obligation to depositors.
USA has one of the highest tax, nearly 1/3 of your salary goes into taxation, corporate businesses pays the high tax in USA, for about a century, the govt had make great fortune from these taxation to make fireweapons to sell and make more profit from it. The Fed Reserve is very rich. Now, it is the time to plough some of these reserve back into the society.
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
There is a lot of bullshit pushed by USA free market or neo-liberalism economists.
Go and read:
Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Samaritans-Secret-History-Capitalism/dp
Kicking Away the Ladder: Development Strategy in Historical Perspective
http://www.amazon.com/Kicking-Away-Ladder-Development-Perspective/d
How Rich Countries Got Rich ... and Why Poor Countries Stay Poor
Aiya, Uncle no need to read so much lah, some of these authors are just trying to sell their journals or books and get famous so as to earn more money mah. They can also sell your soul.
If you think it is a close door market so be it lor, different school of teaching mah, like me Harvard teaches that business profit is make to answer to shareholders, whereas oxford teaches business profits is make to answer to stakeholders and shareholders, so which is which??? Damn, very hard to understand political economy Science