User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: Economics is Fun, Part 11: Competition

  1. #11
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,042, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496573
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,693
    Points
    859,042
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,218
    Thanked 147,583x in 94,415 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    Traditionally natural resources like rivers, air, fisheries, etc are held to be shared as the commons. Tragedy of the commons problems like you two are discussing are sometimes worked out by people, in the free market simply by recognizing the need to cooperate as much as compete, and sometimes not worked out, and government can be a cause of such problems.
    My favorite example is the levy system for a town in a flood plain. A free market likely wouldn't protect the entire town. Just the really important parts of that. Which is OK, if you are part of that important part.

  2. #12
    Points: 11,578, Level: 25
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 172
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Stoney's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    152
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Traveling
    Posts
    565
    Points
    11,578
    Level
    25
    Thanks Given
    55
    Thanked 135x in 104 Posts
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Levies and flood dams have not prevented flooding or flood damage. They just provide the perception to some that they are protected and maybe a reason to pay for the losses. The free market wouldn't have people building homes where tax payers are sure to have to pick up the tab for the losses.
    "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner."

    "The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable."

    H. L. Mencken

  3. #13
    Points: 12,573, Level: 26
    Level completed: 92%, Points required for next Level: 77
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran10000 Experience Points
    RollingWave's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    3456
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Taiwan
    Posts
    981
    Points
    12,573
    Level
    26
    Thanks Given
    105
    Thanked 367x in 292 Posts
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stoney View Post
    Levies and flood dams have not prevented flooding or flood damage. They just provide the perception to some that they are protected and maybe a reason to pay for the losses. The free market wouldn't have people building homes where tax payers are sure to have to pick up the tab for the losses.
    Ok, that is just not true, go back and read some history, it use to be everyyear that hundreds if not thousands of folks die to flooding a year in almost ANY country , and if we're talking about China, then it's usually in the upper thousands. and back then population concentration was much lower, if we use a more recent example, when the Nationalist army blew up the Yellow River dams in WW2 to try to stop the Japanese advances, it reported killed something in the range of 800 thousand people (a number folks often argue to be too low!). aka more than the two nukes dropped on Japan combined..... by about 4 times!!

    Flood prevention is the oldest form of public project in man kind history, you think everyone over the last 6000+ years have been wasting their time on something they don't really need?
    Last edited by RollingWave; 03-07-2012 at 09:06 AM.

  4. #14
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter1469 View Post
    My favorite example is the levy system for a town in a flood plain. A free market likely wouldn't protect the entire town. Just the really important parts of that. Which is OK, if you are part of that important part.
    We've argued this before. The initial efforts at building levees were private, free market undertakings.

    Have to agree with Stoney here.

    If people want to risk living along a river known to flood, have at it, but don't expect others to bail you out.

  5. #15
    Original Ranter
    Points: 112,719, Level: 81
    Level completed: 69%, Points required for next Level: 931
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsYour first GroupVeteran
    Conley's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    7413
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    22,473
    Points
    112,719
    Level
    81
    Thanks Given
    4,582
    Thanked 2,511x in 2,019 Posts
    Mentioned
    238 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    We've argued this before. The initial efforts at building levees were private, free market undertakings.

    Have to agree with Stoney here.

    If people want to risk living along a river known to flood, have at it, but don't expect others to bail you out.
    The thing is there are risks everywhere. Can't build in the Midwest - tornados. Southeast? Hurricanes. California? Wildfires and earthquakes. These regions all contribute to the tax base so when occasional disasters happen how are they being bailed out by others?

  6. #16
    Original Ranter
    Points: 297,707, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 41.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mister D's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    416529
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    117,870
    Points
    297,707
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    25,300
    Thanked 53,474x in 36,449 Posts
    Mentioned
    1102 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RollingWave View Post
    Ok, that is just not true, go back and read some history, it use to be everyyear that hundreds if not thousands of folks die to flooding a year in almost ANY country , and if we're talking about China, then it's usually in the upper thousands. and back then population concentration was much lower, if we use a more recent example, when the Nationalist army blew up the Yellow River dams in WW2 to try to stop the Japanese advances, it reported killed something in the range of 800 thousand people (a number folks often argue to be too low!). aka more than the two nukes dropped on Japan combined..... by about 4 times!!

    Flood prevention is the oldest form of public project in man kind history, you think everyone over the last 6000+ years have been wasting their time on something they don't really need?
    Humans have settled along rivers from time immemorial. I agree with what you've said.
    Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.


    ~Alain de Benoist


  7. #17
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Along rivers, yes, in flood zones? Flood zones make good farming land.

  8. #18
    Points: 665,270, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 88.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433316
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,552
    Points
    665,270
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,984
    Thanked 80,905x in 54,720 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Conley View Post
    The thing is there are risks everywhere. Can't build in the Midwest - tornados. Southeast? Hurricanes. California? Wildfires and earthquakes. These regions all contribute to the tax base so when occasional disasters happen how are they being bailed out by others?
    By the feds or states declaring disasters and legislating relief.

  9. #19
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,042, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496573
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,693
    Points
    859,042
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,218
    Thanked 147,583x in 94,415 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris View Post
    We've argued this before. The initial efforts at building levees were private, free market undertakings.

    Have to agree with Stoney here.

    If people want to risk living along a river known to flood, have at it, but don't expect others to bail you out.
    The free market did not erect a levy system along the entire length of the Mississippi River. Without that system much of the most profitable farmland in the nation would be piratically unusable at least part of the year and a bad snow melt could cripple farmland for years; unless you wanted to grow rice....

  10. #20
    Points: 11,578, Level: 25
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 172
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Stoney's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    152
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Traveling
    Posts
    565
    Points
    11,578
    Level
    25
    Thanks Given
    55
    Thanked 135x in 104 Posts
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This is what I posted above.

    "Levies and flood dams have not prevented flooding or flood damage. They just provide the perception to some that they are protected and maybe a reason to pay for the losses. The free market wouldn't have people building homes where tax payers are sure to have to pick up the tab for the losses."

    Two posters have suggested those words aren't true. But they absolutely are. Do I have to show evidence of the floods that happened last year, or the year before, or the year before that. I've been going to Grenada Lake, a flood control lake off the Mississippi River near Grenada, Mississippi for 40 years and have watched some flooding in that town almost every one of those years.

    Government providing levees that prevented flooding might be a good thing. But when they don't prevent floods they provides us with an obligation to pay for the damage caused. If levees are what's needed for entrepreneurs to profit from the "delta" of the Mississippi then they'd figure it out, or a better solution.
    "If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner."

    "The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable."

    H. L. Mencken

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts