Ars Regendi Simulation Forum

Full Version: The U.S. is a real free-market state
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Deregulated corporations take hold of the government to make it bail them out. Deregulation of corporations means corporate regulation of government. That is the real meaning of free-market.

You cannot get rid of government by deregulating the market, you can only hand it over to corporations to serve their own interests, which includes a less free market with guarantees against the failure of their personal companies with bailouts.

DRLHyper

Wrong, that is not a free market. That is a corporate state.

In a Free Market, the government's focus on Justice & Police would easily rot out corruption; hence these corporations could only influence from lobbying. But bailouts would not occur.

DRLHyper Wrote:
In a Free Market, the government's focus on Justice & Police would easily rot out corruption; hence these corporations could only influence from lobbying. But bailouts would not occur.

Example?

DRLHyper

Triniteras23 Wrote:

DRLHyper Wrote:
In a Free Market, the government's focus on Justice & Police would easily rot out corruption; hence these corporations could only influence from lobbying. But bailouts would not occur.

Example?

http://freemarketmojo.wordpress.com/2009...orruption/

Quote:
Is corruption influenced by economic growth? Are legal institutions such as the ‘Right to Information Act (RTI) 2005’ in India effective in curbing corruption? Using a novel panel dataset covering 20 Indian states and the periods 2005 and 2008 we estimate the causal effects of economic growth and law on corruption. To tackle endogeneity concerns we use forest share to total land area as an instrument for economic growth. We notice that forest share is a positive predictor of growth. This is in line with the view that forestry contributes positively to economic growth. To capture the effect of law on corruption we use the ‘difference-in-difference’ estimation method. Our results indicate that economic growth reduces overall corruption as well as corruption in banking, land administration, education, electricity, and hospitals. Growth however has little impact on corruption perception. In contrast the RTI Act reduces both corruption experience and corruption perception. Our basic result holds after controlling for state fixed effects and various additional covariates. It is also robust to alternative instruments and outlier sensitivity tests.

DRLHyper Wrote:
Our results indicate that economic growth reduces overall corruption as well as corruption in banking, land administration, education, electricity, and hospitals.

For a developing country, sure. But you're welcome to send me more papers on India, as I enjoy the subject.

DRLHyper Wrote:

Triniteras23 Wrote:

DRLHyper Wrote:
In a Free Market, the government's focus on Justice & Police would easily rot out corruption; hence these corporations could only influence from lobbying. But bailouts would not occur.

Example?

http://freemarketmojo.wordpress.com/2009...orruption/

Quote:
Is corruption influenced by economic growth? Are legal institutions such as the ‘Right to Information Act (RTI) 2005’ in India effective in curbing corruption? Using a novel panel dataset covering 20 Indian states and the periods 2005 and 2008 we estimate the causal effects of economic growth and law on corruption. To tackle endogeneity concerns we use forest share to total land area as an instrument for economic growth. We notice that forest share is a positive predictor of growth. This is in line with the view that forestry contributes positively to economic growth. To capture the effect of law on corruption we use the ‘difference-in-difference’ estimation method. Our results indicate that economic growth reduces overall corruption as well as corruption in banking, land administration, education, electricity, and hospitals. Growth however has little impact on corruption perception. In contrast the RTI Act reduces both corruption experience and corruption perception. Our basic result holds after controlling for state fixed effects and various additional covariates. It is also robust to alternative instruments and outlier sensitivity tests.

That means China's corruption should be very very very low. Tongue

DRLHyper

Helsworth Wrote:
That means China's corruption should be very very very low. Tongue

Not necesarily. It however means that pre-Liberalization China was more corrupt than post-Liberalization China.

DRLHyper Wrote:

Helsworth Wrote:
That means China's corruption should be very very very low. Tongue

Not necesarily. It however means that pre-Liberalization China was more corrupt than post-Liberalization China.

During the cold war there was a lot of high level corruption everywhere. To say that GDP growth lowers corruption is not scientific at all. First GDP is a broad measurement that tell you very little and second corruption has existed all the time. It changed forms as time passed and things changed. Also corruption like other things such as shadow economy cannot be measured, only presumtions can be made in their regard.

DRLHyper

Helsworth Wrote:
During the cold war there was a lot of high level corruption everywhere. To say that GDP growth lowers corruption is not scientific at all. First GDP is a broad measurement that tell you very little and second corruption has existed all the time. It changed forms as time passed and things changed. Also corruption like other things such as shadow economy cannot be measured, only presumtions can be made in their regard.

I did not say GDP Growth, I said economic growth. Economy is compromised of many factors, moreso than GDP imply.

DRLHyper Wrote:

Helsworth Wrote:
During the cold war there was a lot of high level corruption everywhere. To say that GDP growth lowers corruption is not scientific at all. First GDP is a broad measurement that tell you very little and second corruption has existed all the time. It changed forms as time passed and things changed. Also corruption like other things such as shadow economy cannot be measured, only presumtions can be made in their regard.

I did not say GDP Growth, I said economic growth. Economy is compromised of many factors, moreso than GDP imply.

Again scalar liniar calculations don't show the real productivity and level of development of an economic platform or its people. My country compared to the 1989, has had economic growth, yet corruption is still there. Again the austrian conclusion that economic growth lessens corruption is an a priorist pathetic conclusion, which has no basis in reality.

Pages: 1 2
Reference URL's