Jim Crow, Racism, and the Free Market

[Chris]

The economic means of the free market doesn't create racism, the political means of government does.

Jim Crow, Racism, and the Free Market (http://capitalismmagazine.com/2012/05/jim-crow-racism-and-the-free-market/)
Prior to Jim Crow, plantation owners competed against one another for labor. Though there were informal agreements to refrain from such bidding wars, individual plantation owners ultimately acted in their own self-interest and competed for labor. This of course, increased wages to the benefit of laborers and the detriment of the plantation owners. The plantation owners responded by using government force in the form of Jim Crow to impose restrictions on everyone–neither plantation owners nor laborers could act as they judged best.

When the market was free plantation owners had a motivation–their desire to plant and harvest crops–to put aside their racism and negotiate with black laborers as equals. Those who valued their racist views more than their profit were free to act accordingly and they suffered the consequences. But they couldn’t force blacks to accept their terms. It was only through Jim Crow and government’s legal monopoly on force that they were able to form a “successful” cartel and impose their racism on others.

[Trinnity]

Govt almost always mucks things up.
And we have way too much govt now...so............

[Cigar]

Nearly all the High-tech innovations we enjoy while complaining about Big Government, was Funded by Big Government.

No need to say Thank You, just keep typing to show your appreciation. :)

[Chris]

Nearly all the High-tech innovations we enjoy while complaining about Big Government, was Funded by Big Government.

No need to say Thank You, just keep typing to show your appreciation. :)

Where'd givernment get those funds?

[Smartmouthwoman]

Where'd givernment get those funds?

I was gonna ask for some proof of his statement, but your question is better. Let's see if he answers that first... don't wanna confuse him. ;)

[Cigar]

Where'd givernment get those funds?

I'm not sure what "givernment" is but if your referring to "Government", the easy answer is; Government receives revenue from where it has always received "revenue" ... from Taxes-Revenue. Exactly who were you expecting to pay for it?

I suppose you're expecting "private" money to pay for it ... correct?

Let's just take the tools and technology you're using right now ...

Computers; although many would digress, mush of the computer technology was researched and funded by Government Agencies, with the help of Universities Private Businesses.

Telecom ... come-on really ... I stared my career in telecom.

Internet ... Hello ... Government ... with the help of various private firms.


BTW ... do you take any Aspirin or any other Medicine that Government hasn't researched and ok'ed?


Also ... Smartmouth... Ladiy ... I've studied and worked in Physical Science, Electronics and Software Development since the late 70s ... so I'm not at all confused ... how about you?

[Chris]

I'm not sure what "givernment" is but if your referring to "Government", the easy answer is; Government receives revenue from where it has always received "revenue" ... from Taxes-Revenue. Exactly who were you expecting to pay for it?

I suppose you're expecting "private" money to pay for it ... correct?

Let's just take the tools and technology you're using right now ...

Computers; although many would digress, mush of the computer technology was researched and funded by Government Agencies, with the help of Universities Private Businesses.

Telecom ... come-on really ... I stared my career in telecom.

Internet ... Hello ... Government ... with the help of various private firms.


BTW ... do you take any Aspirin or any other Medicine that Government hasn't researched and ok'ed?


Also ... Smartmouth... Ladiy ... I've studied and worked in Physical Science, Electronics and Software Development since the late 70s ... so I'm not at all confused ... how about you?

OK, so the source of funding isn't government but taxpayers. Thank you.

And you've shown what is, iow, government was involved in developing technology. Now what about what ought to be--politics is not about what is but what ought to be. Just because government is involved does not imply it ought to be. Was it involved because that's what the people wanted? No. People didn't vote on such issues. If people want technology they vote with their dollars as consumers. How many other new technology did government blow our money on that failed like Solyndra? And therein lies a problem, government R&D has some successes and many failures, but there's no natural free-market accountability.

[Cigar]

Ok ... there's lot here to digest ... and I'm not sure where to start because I don't have time to give you my entire resume to prove to you that I'm sure about what I'm saying.

So let's be practical ... do you think the US trip to the Moon was about Science or Politics? My answer is both. Our #1 goal was to beat Russia and we needed unlimited resources to do it. The residual was advance science and technology through trial and error. I don't remember hearing about anyone Voting for these resources for the good of the consumer.

Now fast forward ... to NOW. We (The United States of America) have an "urgent" and "practical NEED for Infrastructure Repairs and Politicians are playing Politics with .. A) the obvious need to fix "our" roads and Bridges and ... B) and Abundance of Highly Skilled Labors are a reduced cost to the only source that can fund it ... The American Tax Payers.

My question is basic ... "Who on this Forum thinks it's "wrong" for the President of The United States to fund the maintenance of America"?


... BTW ... Are all Conservative Republicans unaware of where and when the funding of Solyndra took place. I think if they actually did some research, they would be embarrassed to only associate the incoming President who had to follow through exactly 60 days into office in the Department of Energies recommendation. This is not to say it was a bad gamble, but we all know now one game lost doesn't cancel out General Motors. :)

[Chris]

Ok ... there's lot here to digest ... and I'm not sure where to start because I don't have time to give you my entire resume to prove to you that I'm sure about what I'm saying.

Irrelevant. Present instead an argument.


I don't remember hearing about anyone Voting for these resources for the good of the consumer.

Ah, but isn't the government supposed the represent the general good of the people?


embarrassed to only associate the incoming President

I didn't mention Obama. I did mention government.


As with the OP topic, you're now avoiding discussing this side issue with all but your own answers to your rhetorical questions.


BTW, I'm not a Republican, nor do I really consider myself conservative.

[Cigar]

Irrelevant. Present instead an argument.



Ah, but isn't the government supposed the represent the general good of the people?



I didn't mention Obama. I did mention government.


As with the OP topic, you're now avoiding discussing this side issue with all but your own answers to your rhetorical questions.


BTW, I'm not a Republican, nor do I really consider myself conservative.

I answered with my opinions on the Governments Role in Economics.

As for Racism in Government ... I'll just let the Politicians Own Words and Actions or Silence and Inaction's speak for themselves.

It's not important that you agree with my opinions.

[Chris]

So, cigar, if as you emit, government isn't representing the good of the people, don't you think it should be held accountable? The free market provides a natural means whereby people are always voting with their voices as consumers. The political system, where den and rep do the same, there is no real choice.

[Chris]

Had to rush that last post, so, continuing, back to original topic, you say...
As for Racism in Government ... I'll just let the Politicians Own Words and Actions or Silence and Inaction's speak for themselves.
Those actions were reported in the OP article: Jim Crow laws.

[Cigar]

So, cigar, if as you emit, government isn't representing the good of the people, don't you think it should be held accountable? The free market provides a natural means whereby people are always voting with their voices as consumers. The political system, where den and rep do the same, there is no real choice.

That's a common mistake, you can't really run the Government like a business, because not all important decisions are business decisions. Many are moral decisions, others are gut decisions and yes some are totally non Fiscal decisions.

We have been making business decisions based on Free Market solution expectation and we all can now see that it isn't the cure-all and the reason is simple; it's a Gut decision based on exceptions of people the Government can't control.

FACT: Businesses ARE doing more with less ... and that immediately blows away the misguided theory of businesses being Job Creators. They are in the business to create a profit to sustain the business; as Bain Capital and other Venture Capital Corporation clearly proved and Republicans are backing. So you can't have it both ways, in mandating that the Corporation are Job Creators and Profit Centers at the same time.

It's long winded way of saying that a Consumers guided economy and Government Roles are anything near alike. Yea the consumers vote with their wallet .. but it's Governments Role to help protect the wallet of America.

[Chris]

That's a common mistake, you can't really run the Government like a business

Trying to find where I suggested doing that, perhaps you could quote it?

I believe I talked about how do we make government accountable. This is a Constitutional proble, as Madison put it in Federalist #51: If men were angels, no government would be necessary., he wrote, and added, If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.



We have been making business decisions based on Free Market solution expectation and we all can now see that it isn't the cure-all and the reason is simple; it's a Gut decision based on exceptions of people the Government can't control.

Trying to find where I said the free-market is a cure-all. It's not, it's messy, sometimes wrong, but more often than not, right. It is simply better than any system man thinks he can design.

Not sure what you're saying re Gut. People make subjective valuations in every exchange of goods and services. It's out of that the free market emerges.




FACT: Businesses ARE doing more with less ... and that immediately blows away the misguided theory of businesses being Job Creators.

Nice fact, noce conclusion, just needs some logic to bridge the gap.



it's Governments Role to help protect the wallet of America

Agreed, it's government's job to protect our wallets from harm by force or fraud.

It's not necessarily government's job to decide how we spend the money in those wallets. Where in the enumerated powers granted government do you see it's given permission to fund R&D or Jim Crow laws?