Comments on: Evolutionary Economics

By: Hasan

Hasan — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:57:28 +0000

I would be interested to know if there is any phenomenon that would falsify economic libertarianism. Too often, it seems to be portrayed as an ideology in a similar vein in which proponents of marxism still continue to defend marxism and attribute its failures to misunderstanding of the theory. Free markets work best in situations of open competition. But when the market is such that it is inherently monopolistic/oligopolistic, like power distribution for example, or where significant barriers to entry exist, then there is a chance that market players will resort to the basic human motive of minting money by taking undue advantage of the market.

Although reegulation should be limited and aimed at ensuring transparency, the fact remains that there will be market failures in future as well. And given that many of us like to go for short term gains, this attribute of human nature would in itself fuel the market in a not-so-optimal direction.

By: Cult Of Reason

Cult Of Reason — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 08:24:11 +0000

“You are not superior just because you see the world in an odious light.” – Vicomte de Chateaubriand”

No, I’m superior to you because I acknowledge the limits of the human mind. But hey, bickering about it clearly gives you something to do, and, at times, it probably makes you feel superior to certain people.

You wouldn’t be the first self-described skeptic to get something wrong.

By: Jody

Jody — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 01:35:57 +0000

As a bit of a counter to this post by Dr. Shermer, Dr. Massiomo Pigliucci, also a noted skeptic, interviewed with Atheist Talk Radio last week on economic systems, evolution and human nature.

He presented a far more nuanced take on economics and liberty, pointing out that generally speaking, capitalism is better at providing happiness, wealth and liberty — except when it it doesn’t.

It was a brief interview, but his summation was that a mix of free economics and social welfare measures are necessary to achieve the old greatest good for the greatest number.

Discussion over points Dr. Pigliucci, or people like him, raise- strengths/ weaknesses of economic systems in light of research, not either/or but how much of each — would be a far more interesting and far more in keeping with the spirit of skepticism and a search for truth.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 14:21:28 +0000

Well, actually… your rather depressed nihilism comes far closer to the ramblings of the homeless, but thanks for sharing.

“You are not superior just because you see the world in an odious light.” – Vicomte de Chateaubriand

By: Cult of Reason

Cult of Reason — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:47:46 +0000

The Skeptical/Fundie Atheist Community, much like the Libertarian community is such a clusterfuck of nonsense, that it often resembles a group of homeless people muttering random thoughts to themselves on a street corner.

The only thing that these debates usually end up proving is that very little can be proven. At the very least, calm down. If this post somehow makes it to the future, please excuse the nonsense. We overvalued our knowledge, just as you will overvalue yours.

Yes, this silly little huddle of animals, whose size, in relation to the Universe, is comparable to that of pond scum, believed that they had at last figured it out…for real this time!

The Internet is depressing.

By: Roy Edmunds

Roy Edmunds — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:18:01 +0000

A lot of good stuff here. I have noted Shermers limits of understanding which is common to us all. An American raconteur said a long time ago that we are all ignorant, just on different things.
What I like about Shermer is that he jumps in fearlessly where angels fear to tread and stirs up one hell of a hornets nest. And it is stimulating to read the hornets incredible variety of responses with stings as individual as their finger prints.
As someone who delights in thinking and exploring others thinking, and engaging in debate, discussion, postulating and thinking about what one is thinking about, the whole process is very envigorating.
But ultimately it is the doers who change the world when all the dust of debate has settled. Something is going to happen. Lets hope the doers get it right. History suggests that when a nation has run its course, nothing can save them from subsiding into mediocrity or oblivion.
Somehow I believe the United States of America is not ready to slip away. After all I think you are in the process of re inventing America with a black American at the helm. A guy who is eloquent and incisive.
I hope he cuts ties with communist china, re regulates, introduces tarriffs to protect American industry from imports produced in slave labour states, like China, India, and any other country which does not celebrate the moral standards of free association, rule of law, human rights, work safety, and every other standard that we in our democratic cultures take for granted but which were fought for with people laying down their lives to protect. Lets not forget those who gave their lives for causes we have turned our backs on in recent times which have resulted in the mess we have to wade through for decades to come.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:00:53 +0000

By: Roy Edmunds

Roy Edmunds — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:18:50 +0000

Did anyone listen to Obamas Green Bay address. Got it here in Australia. I think his administration is simply pre occupied with cleaning up the mess. To do nothing would be morally reprehensible. The human suffering in America because you have no universal health scheme is significant. You could turn your back on it, but is that an ethical thing to do? Obama does not want Govt. to take over everything, but he wants it to pick up what private enterprise does not in the health care society. I think that is a moral stand. If not now when, if not his administration, whose?
Then there is the role of regulating. No one can rightly allow private enterprise to do anything they like. Human beings are an unstable animal, does anyone disagree with that? Just look at the mess the world is in. No other animal in history has succeeded in destroying completely as many other forms of flora and fauna and threatening his own existence on the planet as the human animal.
People are just no damn good.
So Obama has to re regulate. We tried, we failed, people are still people it seems. I mean, what incredible narcisistic types aspire to be CEO’s and rip out incredible sums of money from public companies while presiding over the collapse of the company. I know greedy people. Make a million and they want two, then four, then anything they can lay hands on. They die being worth millions, unspent on a million possible socially needed things and it is a sickness of the spirit. It has been around for a long time this sickness of acquisitiveness. Jesus railed against it.
But we tend to think in broad terms instead of looking at specific people and understanding their psychological disorder. Clever, brilliant crooks. Narcisicism is alive and well and has to be regulated for otherwise we return to the ugly period of early industrial revolution times or like present day communist China in other words. And you should stop trading with the bloody communists for Gods sake. What the hell do you imagine you are gaining by trading with a totalitarian ruthless govt. which has scant regard for human rights and even less for the environment. It is the greedy narcisists in the business world who merely regard china as a billion dollar signs or a great source of cheap slave labour. Shame on all who trade with this evil govt. on equal terms. Slap on a tarriff on all their products and to hell with them. Doing deals with the devil is going to bring you all down. Not that I believe in the devil or God which is probably the reason with America today. You are neither one thing or another. You don’t fear God even though you profess belief in it/him/her and you don’t have relative ethics in your social relationships otherwise you would not go back to dealing in slavery which is what you are doing by trading with communist china. Australia is just as guilty.

By: epicurus

epicurus — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 01:37:03 +0000

What happens when you “take government out of the equation?” Look at Singapore in the first half of the 19th century. It had no government. The country was colonized by East India Co. It was a free market economy with absolutely no government intervention. It was ‘regulated’ by criminal organizations engaged in opium trade, prostitution and slavery. They had the monopoly of guns and violence, until the British government took over and the rest is history.

By: Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:00:59 +0000

I’d point out also that Mr. Shermer’s libertarianism posts are typically accompanied by a pic of his book, including a link for purchasing said book from his website. In that he will not deign to respond to commenters, we might assume his interest in presenting here is financial – making book sales.