Lib Dems prove once again they are not fit to govern

[sasguru]

It'll be here until the end of the universe.

Or until the oil runs out.

HTH.

Stranger things have happened.

[Mich the Tester]

Admin, seeing as this thread was just a test, could you please ...

[BrilloPad]

Admin, seeing as sasguru was just a test, could you please ...

FTFY

[Robinho]

FTFY. HTH.

There's nothing wrong with an ideology that works.

[Mich the Tester]

There's nothing wrong with an ideology that works.

Indeed, but we still haven't found one.

[Robinho]

Indeed, but we still haven't found one.

Are you still denying the trend between economic freedom and prosperity?

[DodgyAgent]

Indeed, but we still haven't found one.

We have found one that works better than anything else. its failure as I keep saying is to make it work for everyone. Unfortunately the people entrusted to do this (government) would rather use it to enrich themselves.
The bits that do not work are the left wing controlled institutions - the reform of which is steadfastly prevented by lefties.

[Mich the Tester]

Are you still denying the trend between economic freedom and prosperity?

It's not a case of denial whatsoever; it's a case of seeing that there are multiple determining factors for prosperity, and we don't really know which of those factors is most important; that's probably dependent on several other factors. One factor is obviously having some degree of economic freedom; perhaps just relative to surrounding countries, or perhaps relative to all. But other factors are of great importance too, like education levels, demographics, geography, geology, level of sexual equality, literacy rates, health, transport, etcetera etcetera. This isn't simple and it isn't easy for any government to get the balance right, assuming of course that a government has the interests of the people at heart, and that's probably only the case for the minority of governments.

Oh, and when you see a 'trend', be careful of attributing cause and effect. I think it was Sas who laughed at the idea of economics as a hard science; he's right. It isn't. It simply doesn't have the rigour or discipline of real sciences.

[Mich the Tester]

We have found one that works better than anything else. its failure as I keep saying is to make it work for everyone. Unfortunately the people entrusted to do this (government) would rather use it to enrich themselves.
The bits that do not work are the left wing controlled institutions - the reform of which is steadfastly prevented by lefties.

Well, it appears to have worked better that other systems that have been tried up to now; I think you're right there. But of course human history doesn't end today (at least not in my diary), so there's no reason to stop thinking about alternatives or adaptations that might work better, especially alternatives that might make it work for more people. Indeed, many 'left wing' institutions have failed IMO, and are perhaps as much part of the problem as the solution. I simply object to this worshipping of one big idea, whether that's the market, the workers' internationale or any other ideology; I like to think practically in terms of how to solve real problems; worship of one big idea is simply intellectual masturbation which is as much an insult to poor folks as any other insult.

[DodgyAgent]

It's not a case of denial whatsoever; it's a case of seeing that there are multiple determining factors for prosperity, and we don't really know which of those factors is most important; that's probably dependent on several other factors. One factor is obviously having some degree of economic freedom; perhaps just relative to surrounding countries, or perhaps relative to all. But other factors are of great importance too, like education levels, demographics, geography, geology, level of sexual equality, literacy rates, health, transport, etcetera etcetera. This isn't simple and it isn't easy for any government to get the balance right, assuming of course that a government has the interests of the people at heart, and that's probably only the case for the minority of governments.

Oh, and when you see a 'trend', be careful of attributing cause and effect. I think it was Sas who laughed at the idea of economics as a hard science; he's right. It isn't. It simply doesn't have the rigour or discipline of real sciences.

Free market capitalism is enables people to work for the benefit of others (services) in the interests of themselves. I build you a house and you mend my computer. Competition ensures that we work hard and do not become complacent or reliant on other people.
as you say this model does not or should not work for everything - policing for one and basic healthcare for another but where it can be used it should be.
it should also be our priority as a society to make suer everyone is equipped and prepared to survive in this society - that is what our government should be doing with the taxes it raises. Of course governments get nowhere near this - aided and abetted by lefties tax is viewed a punishment or to feed people with a sense of entitlement or to buy power and influence in order to enrich themselves (Tony Blair is a prime example).
The failure is not the system, it is how the system is managed that is failing.