/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.19165969]

What's the point of right wing economists? I mean the application of economics studies is usually implementing economic policies, but if you're a economic freedom kind of guy, isn't the only policy you have is no policy?

[Anonymous No.19166025]

>>19165969
Most sane people will agree that the role of government in economics should be to ensure a free a fair marketplace with reasonable consumer protections, regulations, and legal systems.

The trouble is applying this to real life where politicians are easily corrupted, public perception is easily swayed, and government almost invariably begets more government.

[Anonymous No.19166044]

>>19166025
Yeah but Milton Friedman spent his whole life saying
>just don't mess with the market
over and over again; why should I pay for fours years of college to do the same?

[Anonymous No.19166061]

>>19166025
What about pushing the economy towards one direction?
Like sustainable energy or space technology?

[Anonymous No.19166096]

>>19165969
I studied economics in college, and continue to do keep up with it when I can, but even I know they don't call economics a pseudo science for nothing.

[Anonymous No.19166098]

>>19165969
the reality is this:
right-wing: honest about wanting to kill commies
left-wing: dishonest about wanting to kill commies

both sides actively isolate commies and kill them. left-wing is more clever tho and not in-your-face-stupid like republitards.
this is why i support left-wing policies.
btw, ubi and our student loan forgiveness is going to work out great for you anon...haha

[Anonymous No.19166117]

>>19165969
Being rich requires a degree of pragmatism anon. Very few (sane) people are true laissez faire or planned economy advocates because these represent abstractions. Altering the money supply is relatively noninterventionist alone when you consider other factors, like Friedman being against protectionism and regulations.

Functionally, even an ancap world would inevitably have some kind of economic policy, from the decisions of private banks to print money, to customary norms on exchange and compensation, or - more likely - warlords demanding McTribute from lesser armed communities. Just like the USSR had an informal service market where smugglers and tradesmen had power for favors.

[Anonymous No.19166135]

>>19165969
Stop using the term "right-wing" and just say laissez-faire.

[Anonymous No.19166181]

>>19166044
read >>19166096
college is generally scam in terms of education, it's only necessary for employment

>>19166061
This is certainly an interesting point. Society as a whole greatly benefits from advancements in technology, and it is in the governments best interests to stimulate R&D. The question then becomes how to go about this with minimal intervention. Tax cuts as opposed to subsidies are always preferable IMO, as well as having strong patent laws that cannot be easily abused.

[Anonymous No.19166315]

>>19165969
>if you're a economic freedom kind of guy, isn't the only policy you have is no policy?
Yes
Also pic unrelated I guess? Friedman was a commie and was for UBI, should have gone with rothbard.

[Anonymous No.19166413]

>>19166025
Government is like brain cancer. You can never completely get rid of it, excision is impossible, but if you don't keep it under control it can easily metastasize and kill the whole body.

[Anonymous No.19166497]

>>19165969
Imagine actually taking this shit at face value. Anon, these stupid debates exist only to provide cover to reasonable people who (rightfully) do not want the state to give money to trannies, niggers, and refugees, but who are afraid to put it that way.

[Anonymous No.19166534]

>muh friedman
>muh austrian
>muh frankfurt
Imagine thinking anybody actually cares about this gay nerd shit.

[Anonymous No.19166572]

>>19166117
>implying portions of western governments and corporations powerful enough to direct them through bribes and propaganda aren't warlords

[Anonymous No.19166595]

the point of right wing economics is to pretend to be laissez faire while massaging state infrastructure in the interests of your donors

[Anonymous No.19166921]

>>19166595
faggot

[Anonymous No.19166951]

>>19166595
That would be corporatism, which currently the left is engaging in more strongly. Modern democrats are basically the Bush-era Republicans from 2003. We need the overton window to shift such that people are able to recognize corporatism for what it is: the single biggest bleed to the US economy and general welfare since the late 1800's. Free markets would uplift everyone.

[Anonymous No.19167233]

>>19166951
>corporatism
>left engages in this more strongly
Do you have examples of this? And how did you quantify who is doing it more or less?

>free markets would uplift everyone
Why would it? Ultimate free market, just like communism can only really work on small scale and when you don't include the rest of the world into your equation. If you have no regulations, what's stopping everyone just fucking off to the most profitable place? If you don't want that to happen you'll have to introduce some kind of draconian protectionist policies. But then the market is not exactly free if youre putting such hefty restrictions in place.

>welfare is a bleed on the economy
Some people just can't work for whatever reason. Some exploit the system, just like everywhere else, but the vast majority probably don't. Dorothy from Kentucky who is ugly and has poor quality education in her area, is practically unhirable. She has no skills and nobody wants her. Do you create pointless jobs so everyone can be employed or do we just euthanise all the undesirables? Again, some kind of government intervention has to happen.

Free markets is a fantasy and not something that will ever happen in a modern society, just like communism. The current system seems to work for most people across the world, for now. You'll never convincing people of a complete economic restructure just so you don't have to pay taxes.

[Anonymous No.19167563]

>>19167233
Well said