RoR: Forum

Good find, Jason!

My favorite part:

Protectionism in all its guises, both domestic and international, does not contribute to the welfare of American workers. At best, it is a short-term fix at a cost of lower standards of living for the nation as a whole. We need increased education and training for those displaced by creative destruction, not a stifling of competition.

Post 1

Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 8:54pm

There's no news like old news - perhaps if it gets recycled enough times, someone begins to hear it...

Post 2

Wednesday, September 28, 2005 - 2:46am

There's no news like old news - perhaps if it gets recycled enough times, someone begins to hear it...

Recycling. How's that working out so far?

Here in Melbourne we have weekly Capitalism/Objectivism meetings. 3 back we looked at what a C19th Australian had to say about it. 2 back it was about what another dead Australian thought about the same. Last night the topic for discussion was what Winston Churchill had to say about free markets. If someone so much as mentions free markets next week I'm going to move back to Sydney!

Is it possible that we need some new news? The 'deaf ears' of the anti-freemarketeirs are probably as desensitised to these old gospels as I was after hearing them for the fifty millionth time- which happened a while ago now.

Post 3

Wednesday, September 28, 2005 - 3:31am

Well, it is not reallly recycling, but rather reusing old phrases. I admit that mostly Objectivism and Capitalism focus on PR-ing free markets, but this is only because there are so many mistaken views about it.

However, especially in Objectivism/Capitalism meetings, there should be space for other topics related to the philosophy: Individualism and it's effects and problems in real life, f.e.
What problems encounters an Objectivist in this really not Objectivist world and how can he handle them without sacrificing his principles?

I believe not every individualist is an economist and therefore not interested in markets and pro-market speeches all the time. It's nice to know, but probably unncecessary for several participants.

Post 4

Wednesday, September 28, 2005 - 12:11pm

Am I missing the logic here?
What seems to be being said is,the truth is falling on deaf ears so lets not mention the truth.

Post 5

Wednesday, September 28, 2005 - 4:53pm

At least in my case, it is wrong. I don't say that you shouldn't mention it, I say that among Objectivists, the power of free-markets is well known. So, instead of reiterating the old economic free market speeches, just go to other topics, which are as important as discussing free-markets. A musician, for example, can gasp the principles of free market and their advantages, but still be more interested in the art focus of Objectivism, rather than hour long discussions on Churchill's view of free markets..

It's just a thought...

Post 6

Wednesday, September 28, 2005 - 8:00pm

For me, this article was interesting because of who was saying it. Greenspan is one of the most influential figures in the American economy, and is notorious for making a lot of technical economic statements with little or no moral or political content. It's nice to hear him actually express a viewpoint for once, and to know that he hasn't fully abandoned many of the ideas he presumably embraced during his association with Ayn Rand.

Post 7

Wednesday, September 28, 2005 - 8:49pm

Yes, the reason I found this interesting and noteworthy is that Greenspan made a public, direct speech about the topic and it was covered on several national news programs to some degree. People here on SOLO and in various free market ideological groups will find nothing new in Greenspan's speech but this is not true of the general public in the U.S. Even the most conservative media talking heads are generally in favor of some degree of government regulation and wealth redistribution. In economics classes every college student in the United States is taught that regulation is necessary because free competition is "monopolistic competition" (as opposed to the Platonic non concept "pure and perfect competition"). FDR is hailed in history classes as a hero and champion of the poor. Marxist bromides are alive and well among most Americans in relation to how they view capitalists and big business.

Greenspan is retiring as chairman of the Federal Reserve at the end of this year. I am hoping that once he is outside of that role he can use his fame to spread the virtues of capitalism more agressively. Maybe he will even speak out directly against the Federal Reserve System and its paper money. I'm sure that would draw a lot of attention.

- Jason

(Edited by Jason Quintana on 9/28, 8:51pm)

Post 8

Thursday, September 29, 2005 - 4:55am