The Free Market is stupid

If one can't rely on the FDA, why is the mission necessary?

 

I can only speak for myself, but I'm not arguing for a free market. I argue for a consumer regulated market. I, for one, will never put my trust in a federal regulation. The rampant corruption has disolved any trust in my opinion, so I put my trust in myself.

 

"consumer regulated market"

meaning people will buy other products when one product kills somebody?

 

Meaning:

If one can't trust the product, one should not buy it.

 

how are we to know we can't trust it?

who will monitor which products are safe?

who will monitor which products kill/sicken people?

 

The mission is necessary because the conditions described in the jungle evolved in an environment that lacked adequate oversight. We need to produce adequate oversite or that is the condition we will get. We need some access to a mechanism that can produce oversite.

That is why the FDA's mission is necessary.

Now as to why we need the FDA specifically...

Because theoretically we should have influence over them fda; therefore are responsible for the situiation. That is the way our system is set up by the constitution.

If it's not that way, and we can't change it, then the system and the constitution has failed.

 

I'm not calling for the dissolvement of the FDA, because I don't really care. If it makes you feel better, keep buying your FDA regulated food and drugs, like the cows and pigs who walk themselves to their own death in the slaughtering house in the Jungle.

I personally don't have any more confidence in food with or with out the FDA. My spending habits wouldn't change.

 

You mean besides the past two thousand years?

 

Even with the FDA oversight you clam is 'necessary', we don't have a situation much different than Sinclair described in his famous work. On the surface, it may seem much better, but that's only superficial. Our food is still dangerous. Your argument depends on the fact that our food is more safe, when this is only true at first glance.

 

My point is that even if it's as bad as you say, it is our responsibility to make it better.

We know what the market produces when left to its own devices thanks to Sinclair. The FDA may norms do a Great job, but we need a way to produce oversite or something else that will prevent the situiation described in the jungle.

Right now the FDA is our solution.

 

Only because we are not allowed to freely burn down the factories polluting the rivers. If these entities could not shield themselves behind criminal laws prohibiting consumers to do unto them as they do unto others, we would not need as much government

 

And this is what we call common sense. Recognizing that it's not a black and white matter of either/or but a matter of degrees. If only more people could recognize this.

 

I'm all for the FDA. I'm glad we have it. But when every pill on tv has a list of side effects ranging from blindness to death, I have to ask - what standard for safety are they using there?

 

Besides a nonspecific irrelevancy. What specific events in the last two thousand years support your as yet baseless assertion?

 

Listen, I'm about to post roughly three hundred documented instances of companies knowing they have a defective product, and selling it anyways. You still have time to concede the point, otherwise prepare to be evidence-bombed.

 

No. Or are you unaware of the 40 year long Cold War we waged against them?

 

I don't agree with this statement. Sinclair described the situation in Chicago, the capital of the Robber Baron meat packers, during the time of early 1900's. I agree whole heartedly that the situation was (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up. But I can't get beind your contention that this is what always happens when a market is left to its own devices. Though, I do think some intervention may be required on a case by case basis.

The Robber Barons in the early industrial period successfully manipulated supply and demand, both of the supply of their products whether coal, credit, meat packagin ect, and also the demand for labor. Will corporations or companies always be able to do this? Sometimes yes, especially with an uninformed extremely poor consuming body and un-skilled and un-educated workforce. I believe we see this kind of stuff going on in many third world countries today. But currently in America, a lot of the issues you bring up from the Jungle don't really apply. Consumers don't have to shop at Wal-Mart to avoid starvation these days, so there's no reason they can't go to the local butcher to get reliable meat. In the situation described in the Jungle, consumers, out of sheer poverty, were forced to buy the cheap meat produced by those Giants. Since we no longer experience such poverty here, I think some of your concerns are over-blown, at least from the consumption stand point.

As far as the addressing the externalities of polution, intervention is definitely needed. In places where natural gas exists under ground, individuals of such land have no recourse to the pillage of the fracking companies. I agree something needs to be done about this (*)(*)(*)(*). These gas companies make money destroying the environment, skip town and don't even have to deal with the repercussions. But if they're causing harm to other people - 1) should not be allowed to do it, 2) if they do cause harm, they should at least have to pay for it.

 

Just remember that all of those drugs were tested on real people who suffered all of those harmful side effects that the drug notices warn about, including the big one of killing some people who may use the drug like it did the ones it was tested on.

 

First, if those hundreds of instances didn't kill hundreds you're not supporting your prior statement. Second, if those instances are of cases like the Ford Pinto, that wasn't a defect, it was a decision not to build a safer car at a higher price. Third, did these hundreds of instances occur with government oversight? If they did then it kind of damages your own argument in favor of government regulation. Fourth, why would you post a bunch of crap instances unless they're all crap?

Post away.

 

How fascinating. In your world, the market would adjust after people die from eating tainted spinach. The regulatory prophylactic hammer happens to work. Your way is insanity.

 

Quite right. The free market, left to its own design, results in monopolies. You know, where a several or one corporation(s) runs the market. Sort of like what we have today. Don't ask the simpletons defending 'free markets', they are slaves blind to their own chains.

The 'winners' destroy or take over the losers and that chain of events continues until we have monopoly governance of markets. Big government is baaaad. But big business is goooooooood. You may have a vote in big government, but you can vote with your dollar for Walmart. It really is that simple.

 

The existence of Underwriters Laboratories and similar organizations shows that to be a false statement.

 

When a company fails it is the free markets way of weeding out the bad companies. When gov. interfers in the investment end of businesses like is the case in the failed green energy and TARP bail outs the companies that have mismanaged are kept alive and the system doesn't work. Keep in mind that the banks who were bailed out on the peoples dime had a record setting 2009 CEO bonus's explosion. They all got stinking rich on our money and most never paid us back.
947
Recipients

$613B
Total disbursement

$388B
Total returned

$271B
Total revenues from dividends, interest, and other fees

$46.3B
Total net to date

http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list/simple

Here is a list of the green energy companies that Obama gave outr money to and allowed them to run off. When gov becomes an investor and not a regulator they use it to fund their campaigns.
1.Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
2.SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3.Solyndra ($535 million)*
4.Beacon Power ($43 million)*
5.Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
6.SunPower ($1.2 billion)
7.First Solar ($1.46 billion)
8.Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
9.EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
10.Amonix ($5.9 million)
11.Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
12.Abound Solar ($400 million)*
13.A123 Systems ($279 million)*
14.Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
15.Johnson Controls ($299 million)
16.Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
17.ECOtality ($126.2 million)
18.Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
19.Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
20.Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
21.Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
22.Range Fuels ($80 million)*
23.Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
24.Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
25.Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
26.GreenVolts ($500,000)
27.Vestas ($50 million)
28.LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
29.Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
30.Navistar ($39 million)
31.Satcon ($3 million)*
32.Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
33.Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.

 

It wont matter much longer since Washington seems dead set on destroying main street Americans. Stimulus (QE and corp bail out money injections)has achieved the following: banks get to pretend they’re healthy and stocks rise to heights that are only believable by the truly ignorant and don't line up with underlying real values. Citizens are being increasingly squeezed and ‘decide’ not to spend.
Therefore, the sole thing QE stimulus has achieved is a wealth transfer from poorer to rich. it’s the same as in Japan, France now Germany. And doing the same can only lead to the same results. A poorer population, a richer elitists group and an economy that continues to shrink, which will and must lead to the same deflationary trend. Our continued monetization to prop up failed corps will lead to a lack of confidence in the USD as many countries have warned and switched to other reserve currencies (27) De basing our debt with artificially low (near 0) interest rates while good for the gov's short trm debt flipping will lead to deflation it will lead to a spike in interest rates. If we go to a normal historical 6% rate that will make our bond obligations impossible to pay while the gov. continues to bail out and boost the military complex stock holders.

 

Collusion is illegal and has bee for more than a century. And the more competitors you have the less likely it is to work. And no one is trying to repeal the 14th, we would however like to see it limited to it's original intent which was by an large preventing the disenfranchisement and false imprisonment of African Americans, not to protect people's to engage in self destructive behavior and compel the rest of us to accept such behavior.