To RE-quote the beginning of my above quote: There are basically only two ways in which economic life can be organized. The first is by the voluntary choice of families and individuals and by voluntary cooperation. This arrangement has come to be known as the free market. The other is by the orders of a dictator. This is a command economy. In its more extreme form, when an organized state expropriates the means of production, it is called socialism or communism. Economic life must be primarily organized by one system or the other.
It can, of course, be a mixture, as it unfortunately is in most nations today. But the mixture tends to be unstable. If it is a mixture of a free and a coerced economy the coerced section tends constantly to increase.
Capitalism and Socialism are polar opposites. One is based on the Non Aggression Principal and the other based on pure violation of it. Pure socialism self destructs and when mixed with capitalism you get most of the things (If not all) that's wrong with current state of global economy.
There is a thing as coma (or zombie if you like that) between life and death; it's not a positive thing.
You should read Ludwig Von Misess. It'll save me lots of explaining. You'll learn lots of valuable things. Most importantly you'll know the works greatest economist ever. Anyone who significantly deviates from Misess is simply an idiot. There is no putting it gently.
I am already familiar with the Austrian School of economics and already debated the basics of this to some extent with one of the leading Professors of Economics in Germany. He, like you, assumed I didn't have anything to possibly add to the situation - when in truth, I do.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Please tell me what you can add to the situation. From what you have currently talked about, I'm inclined to stick with what the professor said. May I also know the name of the professor. Does he write in English?
If the professor holds Misess to the same degree that I do as the #1 Economist, you have probably heard most of the things I could have told you in a debate.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The discussion I had was only a brief one - it was with Professor Richard Werner after he published the world's first empirical evidence that banks make money 'from nothing' and are ultimately thus then all criminal bodies trading on fraud and deception.
I showed him a post I made on ureka.org that was a relatively quick one from me to answer the question of what system I preferred for economics:
https://www.ureka.org/thoughts/view/86956/a-system-engineer%E2%80%99s-perspective-what-system-is-better-than-capitalist-democracy
His response was a bit like yours - to be so sure of his own ideas being correct that he basically just told me his idea was the best one to replace standard capitalist democracy and as far I am aware he didn't even read my post.
This is the problem we face with 'economists' in general, in that they often appear to be more dogmatic even than some religious characters.
When you wrote:
You are making clear you have a closed mind on this subject and are resorting to generalised judgements and ad hominem attacks - none of which denotes the needed balance and integrity (there is no putting it gently).
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I have to presume @vimukthi is incapable of recognizing or unwilling to admit that instances of the direct opposition to any principle of non-aggression by the profit motive abound.
All paid military forces, and any other organization that uses violence tactically or strategically- there'll ALWAYS be money to be made there...ISIS certanly turned their US-backed franchise to great financial success for quite a few years.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
in the very purest sense, it is true that money/profit does not inherently oppose violence, because we 'could' just be totally non attached to the 'profit' and release them at will - this would result in continued balance and abundance for all. there may in many cases also be enough to go around so that no conflicts arise anyway. the military conflicts may occur with or without money - so in that sense the issue could be said to be 'attachment' as buddha points us to.
however, on earth it is useful to have a 'home' and other 'things' that we are attached to to some extent and i don't have a problem with that. the key issue is being able to be open hearted enough to share, instead of getting caught up in the dominator principle of 'own or be owned'.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit