On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:04:48 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 21/02/2010 6:52 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:46:14 -0700,
wrote:

which means the market doesnt eliminate inefficiency since a certain
number of companies will go bankrupt every year, right?

Nope, just the losers. The ones that drag the system down. Money and
growth go to those producting something people want.

and next year a bunch of companies will still go bankrupt


Unlike government that tosses billions at them hoping for someone to
wake up.

you think companies dont do this?

Not for long, they tend to disappear and die.

until someone else comes along and goes bankrupt


Companies live and die as they are needed. Highly efficient, no waste.
But when government gets involved they have to suck the wealth out of
people to prop us a loster like GM or various banks.

and when banks lend to bankrupt companies...as they did they did last
year...then they drain the economy as well

inefficiency is the same whether it's govt or private sector. it's
waste

the free market doesnt elminate it.


When government interferes it is bad because a loser lives to reduce the
wealth for no value to society. Creating a welfare company that
ultimately reduces jobs as people supporting the dead weight have less
to spend.

uh no. more of your fundamentalism

consider a well run black businesses...for example in rosewood, fl in,
say 1923.

and a bunch of white guys decide it's too well run. so they destroy
rosewood.

should the govt sit back and do nothing because govt interference is
always wrong?

what about toyota? should the govt do nothing?

and we have welfare...for the rich.


Say each working Amrican/Canadian is kicking in say $1000 to GM, which
is actually abou right. Then that $1000 does not go into their
community to employ people.

GM got 25B.

big deal.


Between taxation reduction of wealth and instability perception of the
markets, the US suffers a hidden but real job loss because of bailouts.

all of a sudden you're concerned about unemployment. what would
unemployment be if we HADNT bailed out the banks?

you, apparently, have never heard of 1929.

From a society view, government cannot create wealth, they can only
expropriate it (taxes) and inefficiently redistribute it. The losses
are then disproportial to the market and inefficiencies are born.

really? the govt cant create wealth?

ever hear of UC berkeley? the U of michigan? my own undergrad school,
the U of pittsburgh, where the salk polio vaccine was invented?

all examples of govt created wealth.

you're an economic cripple.