Why is Communism So Opposed?

Fair enough. Buy yourself an ocean-going ship, take it into international waters, and you can live in an anarchy for as long as you want. You have my blessing.

It's immoral and eventually enough people will see that as well.

Right, so you advocate forcing people out of their homes if they don't pay their taxes. It's immoral and eventually enough people will see that as well.

Right, so you advocate forcing people out of their homes if they don't pay their taxes.
It's immoral and eventually enough people will see that as well.

If we were living in the anarchy you propose,
why would I care what you consider immoral?

I am using this forum purely for intellectual enjoyment.

Kenneth Arrow, who won the 1972 Nobel Prize in economics for co-designing the best-known mathematical proof of a 'market-clearing equilibrium', now insists economics has misappropriated the insight and has been waylaid by 'an implicit omniscience. It was not that economists thought there was no uncertainty, but there was a belief that you could understand the consequences of uncertainty.'

Of the 2 of us only I actually have a degree in economics so who's the "pretend economist" guilty of "adolescent posturing" is easy to discern.

You can't even have read the textbooks you link. If you had you would know what I wrote was right, only the costs and path of adjustment of free market systems going through a crisis are at issue. Calling costs and adjustment mechanisms "failures" of the free market system is a political approach, not an economic one.

I don't know why you pretend to be an economist while not being one. But you can count on getting systematically ridiculed online as long as you persist in this pretension.

He's free to derive intellectual enjoyment from expounding half-understood proofs. And he can continue having fun that way until somebody comes along who can actually work his way through these proofs. He cites Ken Arrow but fails to see the subtlety of that great economist's reasoning, so best to refer to Arrow himself:

Quote:

Kenneth Arrow, who won the 1972 Nobel Prize in economics for co-designing the best-known mathematical proof of a 'market-clearing equilibrium', now insists economics has misappropriated the insight and has been waylaid by 'an implicit omniscience. It was not that economists thought there was no uncertainty, but there was a belief that you could understand the consequences of uncertainty.'

We don't know how to quantify uncertainty and attempting to model it without allowing for intangibles like trust meant all risk models were unreliable.

That isn't a failure of free markets it's a failure of economic analysis. Two different things.

To me as a Utilitarian, "moral" is whatever produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

Night Ripper wrote:

Right, so you advocate forcing people out of their homes if they don't pay their taxes. It's immoral and eventually enough people will see that as well.

If we were living in the anarchy you propose, why would I care what you consider immoral?

And don't let anyone tell you that socialism is communism. Americans have been so brainwashed by all of this they think that anyone to the left of Reagan is communist. It ain't so. The whole electorate has been shifted right by the financial industry, so that they can own their own private islands, and you will think they're doing you a favour.

Additionally, I often agree with Marx politically, and he doesn't have as nasty a history to tackle as the Gulag (though a lot of his analysis is dated, at this point)