Is there an issue that Ron Paul does not claim a Free Market can correct?
Ron Paul on healthcare - Elminate the government control, have an absolute Free Market, eliminate medicare/medicaid, FDA, etc.
Ron Paul on Economy - Elimnate government control, US withdrawl from NAFTA and WTO, eliminate income tax and inflation tax. Stop printing new money.
Ron Paul on Energy and Environment - Eliminate government control, allow drilling in ANWR and other public parks, eliminate Energy Department, focus on nuclear energy.
I give Ron Paul credit for swaying from the Republican platform which some other candidates follow to the T, (ie Giuliani). However is eliminating Government control the solution to every problem?
2007-12-05 05:11:25 · 10 answers · asked by labken1817 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
There are inefficiencies in any market. The extent to which the government needs to address these inefficiencies is a politlical decision. The fact that we understand that and have a dialogue about it is a good idea. Pollution is an example of a market inefficiency which I believe that government needs to address. If I can dump my toxic waste into Lake Michigan, I can produce my product with less cost than my competitor who disposes of his or her waste properly. The true cost of my dumping will be borne by the citizens who live along the watersheds of the great lakes, not the consumers of my products. There are many more but that is one example.
Having said that, a little more capitalism in our society would be a good thing.
2007-12-05 05:20:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
No. An absolute free market would still include child labor. When that was abolished it also angered the capitalists and those wanting to end it were called communists even Priest like the Belgian Adolf Daens.
First of all the free market is a myth because various forms of cooperate welfare are included. Capitalism should be called corporatism instead. A total free market will lead to Multinationals surviving and poverty for everyone else. You get monopolies that can charge whatever they want for their goods or services and you end up with about as much choice as in the former soviet states.
If that's the goal absolute free market is the solution. I believe the goal should be a better world for everyone of us reaching that might not have an easy snappy answer but a total free market, fundamentalist capitalism isn't part of it
2007-12-05 05:45:15 · answer #2 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In my opinion, the government should have very little to do with a capitalist society.
I've seen government housing, have you? They're called "projects". Don't want to live there.
I'd much rather have my social security so that I may invest it on my own rather than worry that the retirement age is going to be increased AGAIN and that I may not actually get the money that I have been give to the government for over 30 years!
I work hard and I have a choice of good health plans. If the government health care system was anything like, medicare, government schools, government housing, or social security, I would really worry.
What has the government EVER done right?
2007-12-05 05:22:20 · answer #3 · answered by MrOrph 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
labken-There is no such thing as an absolutely Free Market. I just wonder how Mr. Paul intends to get Congress to go along with his ideas should he be elected. As I do seriously take some of Mr. Paul's ideas and definately think he is serious and very courageous to put them out there. Just can't figure out why he's running on the Republican ticket. But I don't believe you can totally eliminate the Government from all things. And it's not the solution to every problem.
2007-12-05 06:09:10 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
no, there is such a thing as morality.
An absolute free market is not the end all be all.
.
Sure capitalism is a good thing and the best system there is. But just like everything else in life, too much of even a good thing becomes bad. Excessive free marketers have no conscience, no loyalty to country or fellow citizens, and do not care that blood is spilled to make them their riches. They are a danger to our country, and to the world and it can all be summarized by greed and selfishness. Some of these people for example, would rather make money now, rather than acknowledge that we are possibly doing things industrially to endanger our planet. They keep wars going and tensions of wars going so they can fatten their pocket books. They bring in slave laborers into their own country to depress the wages of their fellow citizens and shut down factories in their own country to send jobs to a country like china which is a communist nation enemy of the USA.
They replace american high tech workers with HB1 visa holders from India to save on salary, they would rather see americans struggling and not have health insurance, just so they can keep making a killling on the current system. They have no conscience.
The best system is yes, capitalism, yes free enterprise, but we must also have a conscience and we must also have vision beyond making pennies today and selling out our future and that of our children.
2007-12-05 05:22:59 · answer #5 · answered by bush l 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. I used to work in the for-profit vocational education industry. These outfits do the same job as public community colleges, most often do not do it as well, and actually cost the taxpayers more.
The price of an associates degree at ITT Tech. is about twice the total cost of an associates degree at a public community college in California (this includes fees, tuition and state subsidy).
Schools like ITT are heavily dependent on government aid to students to populate their often mediocre schools.
2007-12-05 05:17:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Certainly not. Free market, while generally good, must be regulated. Classic example is price fixing. Suppose, for example, all the suppliers of a particular item (e.g., milk) decided to get together and agreed that they would all charge the same inflated price. That would be "free market" but would be terrible for the poublic and is illegal.
2007-12-05 05:15:53 · answer #7 · answered by mikegreenwich 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
With a free market, with a pre-existing condition insurance companies have determined that I am to big a risk for them to sell health insurance to at any price even though I am willing and able to pay for it, so the answer is no.
2007-12-05 05:16:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Only from those that the Constitution restricts them from,that they have assumed.
2007-12-05 05:18:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2007-12-05 05:53:38 · answer #10 · answered by David_the_Great 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋