|
Next time, shall we NOT offer help to the US? | by klaranth | 2007-04-30 02:30:56 |
|
This is why I dont trust the government. | by esbita | 2007-04-30 06:06:21 |
|
Why do you think that might be? | by Peace_man | 2007-04-30 08:57:07 |
|
See lab rat's reply for a dose of reality. | by esbita | 2007-04-30 09:58:03 |
|
I certainly don't disagree with what you're saying | by Peace_man | 2007-04-30 12:47:26 |
|
Agreed on the last- somewhat. | by esbita | 2007-04-30 14:00:19 |
|
You're right - the outcome is far from what | by Peace_man | 2007-04-30 14:19:00 |
|
There are already the "welfare programs" in place. | by esbita | 2007-04-30 15:14:47 |
|
I'm getting confused, here. | by Peace_man | 2007-04-30 15:54:34 |
|
Yes that is the case! | by esbita | 2007-04-30 16:49:38 |
| Thanks for those links. Very informative. |
by Peace_man |
2007-04-30 17:19:42 |
I can appreciate the reasons for allowing a free market to create an influx of materials and manpower. But in any situation where demand far outstrips supply, the possibility of abuse exists. And therefore a completely free market does not provide protection for those who need it the most. Nor does it allow for those with less savings to acquire the resources they need. So I don't see a free market as desirable during such unbalanced conditions.
On one hand, overly draconian anti-gouging laws don't make for a bad situation to get relieved. On the other, a free market allows for serious gouging, and unfairly penalizes those who just happen not to have a lot of savings.
I guess it comes down to this: A completely free market basically allows those who happen to be rich to have a very unfair advantage. Worst case, it allows someone rich enough to corner the market and become much richer at the cost of everyone else. For certain values of 'corner the market'. IMO simply having the ability to acquire huge piles of money should not give anybody preferential treatment - and this goes for priority service after a natural disaster. Of course, I also don't think that just having the good luck to know a government official should qualify anyone for preferential treatment - although it seems that it does, in far too many cases.
I'm happy to see an article that shows some improvement by people being retrained, and having better circumstances for it. I'm unhappy to see too much bungling and mismanagement. However, I still think that a completely free market would cause more damage than it would fix problems. But that's probably just me. I happen not to worship the Almight Mammon. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
One man's "premium" is another man's "gouging." | by esbita | 2007-04-30 17:54:00 |
