Is the US rapidly becoming a failed state due to its free market policies?

[OwlHoot]

FWIW the situation in Detroit is largely due to the decline of the US car industry rather than it's "ethnic makeup". This in turn is attributable to the oil crises in the 70s and the rise of far eastern manufacturing and globalization.

Exactly - So the decaying areas of Detroit Detroit aren't evidence of the free market failing but just the opposite, people choosing to buy smaller more efficient and reliable cars from overseas while complacent US manufacturers rested on their laurels.

[doodab]

Exactly - So the decaying areas of Detroit Detroit aren't evidence of the free market failing but just the opposite, people choosing to buy smaller more efficient and reliable cars from overseas while complacent US manufacturers rested on their laurels.

I guess it depends on how you define success and failure. If the point of free markets was that they would provide more for everyone as resources were more efficiently allocated, and now you have cities and states collapsing due to tidal forces as that occurs then you arguably have a failure of sorts.

It seems that the free market ideology that was once credible is somewhat undermined by this sort of thing so now we have it's more extreme proponents telling us we should just accept the consequences whatever they may be as that is progress while others take the middle ground and suggest we promote market freedom but try and temper the worst of the shocks. It seems that this middle way is now considered 'socialism' by the hardcore market libertarians.

[OwlHoot]

.. It seems that this middle way is now considered 'socialism' by the hardcore market libertarians.

Sounds good, like an agreeable compromise, but that "middle way" just entrenches failure and postpones the proper remedies. The latter are far more likely to be found and applied by private enterprise than dozy governments riddled with inefficiency and perverse incentives.

[DodgyAgent]

While I think the Euro was a bad idea, it's hardly the Germans who "foisted it" on others. As I remember they were happy with their strong mark - it was mainly the French who thought a currency union would be a good idea - its the French who have the driven the whole idea from the 50s.
And well done for working out that Germany is a free market society in the main: that should give you a clue about my politics, you cretinous imbecile.

Are you telling me that the Germans made no attempt to measure the "risk" of going into the Euro? With the experiences of German unification they knew full well that the competitive edge enjoyed by the rest of Europe would be wiped out. The fact that they used the stupid and vainglorious French to drive the Euro project through suited them entirely.

You also blame free market ideology for the failures of the US economy yet seem to approve of free markets in Germany. Like all lefties you only like free markets when they feed you your entitlements

[doodab]

Sounds good, like an agreeable compromise, but that "middle way" just entrenches failure and postpones the proper remedies. The latter are far more likely to be found and applied by private enterprise than dozy governments riddled with inefficiency and perverse incentives.

You're rather missing the point. It's not a 'middle way', it's simply managing the social changes that free markets induce in such a way as to make them palatable. The alternative isn't 'quicker adoption' and a better outcome, it's a catastrophic breakdown of society as you see in places like detroit or toxteth, which creates vast external costs for the rest of society to deal with.

[sasguru]

You also blame free market ideology for the failures of the US economy yet seem to approve of free markets in Germany.

Your pea-sized brain is not quite getting the point is it?
Does it feel like school all over again, the clever boys sniggering at your stupidity?

[OwlHoot]

.. Does it feel like school all over again, the clever boys sniggering at your stupidity?

Sas, I hesitate to mention it, but a lot of us (clever or not) reading this thread are sniggering at _your_ stupidity

[ZARDOZ]

I guess it depends on how you define success and failure. If the point of free markets was that they would provide more for everyone as resources were more efficiently allocated, and now you have cities and states collapsing due to tidal forces as that occurs then you arguably have a failure of sorts.

It seems that the free market ideology that was once credible is somewhat undermined by this sort of thing so now we have it's more extreme proponents telling us we should just accept the consequences whatever they may be as that is progress while others take the middle ground and suggest we promote market freedom but try and temper the worst of the shocks. It seems that this middle way is now considered 'socialism' by the hardcore market libertarians.

It's been proven that mixed economies (like the UK) work best in terms of having a civilised society. Take the best of Keynsian economics form left of centre and monetary policies from the right. While Kensian policies have never dramatically failed, Monetarism on it's own has spectacularly failed, and where the market fails the government has a duty to step in. Unfetered capitalism relies on logical unemotive agendas, as a theory that's fine for robots or autistic computer programmers but in general human beings are inherently illogical and emotive, think fear and greed, this has to be factored in to any economic policy.

[DodgyAgent]

Your pea-sized brain is not quite getting the point is it?
Does it feel like school all over again, the clever boys sniggering at your stupidity?

And your point (generously assuming you actually have one) is?

[sasguru]

You're rather missing the point. It's not a 'middle way', it's simply managing the social changes that free markets induce in such a way as to make them palatable. The alternative isn't 'quicker adoption' and a better outcome, it's a catastrophic breakdown of society as you see in places like detroit or toxteth, which creates vast external costs for the rest of society to deal with.

Apart from the social costs, I have a deeper problem with unfettered free-markets: they don't seem to lead to industrial strength in a country, quite the opposite in fact. Manufacturing industry has been hollowed out in the UK and US to such an extent that these countries can't pay their way and rely on borrowed money.
Whereas all current manufacturing powerhouses: China, Germany, South Korea have active industrial policies.