Deregulation

[Emsworth]

Amazing anyone still believes this 'Keynesian' stuff. Guess they forgot about stagflation.

The primary problem with Keynesian economics is its reliance on observation, rather than logic. In the natural sciences, one can expect observations to be consistent in several experiments; one can test the effects of various variables. It is impractical to similarly isolate and test a variable in society. Economic observations tend to be rather haphazard. Instead, economics should be based, as the classicists argued, on logic and principles.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Prices are an estimated 22% lower than they would have been. Fatalities are down. Competition is way up.

This is incorrect on all counts.

[John Dibble]

Prices are an estimated 22% lower than they would have been. Fatalities are down. Competition is way up.

This is incorrect on all counts.

Prove him wrong. Of course, Philip should link his sources to back up his own points as well.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Prove him wrong.

Weren't there several years in the 1970s where there were hardly any (possibly zero) fatal crashes involving American commercial airliners?

[Gabu]

Prove him wrong.

Weren't there several years in the 1970s where there were hardly any (possibly zero) fatal crashes involving American commercial airliners?

Finding out and posting proof of that would be a good way to prove him wrong.

[John Dibble]

Prove him wrong.

Weren't there several years in the 1970s where there were hardly any (possibly zero) fatal crashes involving American commercial airliners?

Finding out and posting proof of that would be a good way to prove him wrong.

^^^^

Conjecture isn't proof. As to your question, I wouldn't know - I wasn't born yet and I haven't researched the question.

[A18]

I already gave my source on that:

http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/politics_conservative/7326

The number of fatal accidents per million aircraft miles were significantly smaller in the 1980s and 1990s after deregulation, than in the 1970s.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

The number of fatal accidents per million aircraft miles were significantly smaller in the 1980s and 1990s after deregulation, than in the 1970s.

This is incorrect.

Besides, anytime you see an article called "Free Market Success", you can't exactly trust what they say.

[Gabu]

The number of fatal accidents per million aircraft miles were significantly smaller in the 1980s and 1990s after deregulation, than in the 1970s.

This is incorrect.

Besides, anytime you see an article called "Free Market Success", you can't exactly trust what they say.

Try again, as that's an ad hominem fallacy - the nature of the article has no bearing whatsoever on its truth content.

If it's incorrect, show why it's incorrect with sources.

[A18]

It's easy to lie with statistics, but it's easier to lie without them.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Try again, as that's an ad hominem fallacy - the nature of the article has no bearing whatsoever on its truth content.

When it's called "Free Market Success", it does, as the title "Free Market Success" is itself as untruism.

[Gabu]

Try again, as that's an ad hominem fallacy - the nature of the article has no bearing whatsoever on its truth content.

When it's called "Free Market Success", it does, as the title "Free Market Success" is itself as untruism.

If it was called "Free Market Success" and the article contained the statement of "2 + 2 = 4", would its title render that statement false?

[Bandit3 the Worker]

If it was called "Free Market Success" and the article contained the statement of "2 + 2 = 4", would its title render that statement false?

It sure doesn't help the credibility of the statement that 2 + 2 = 4.

[Gabu]

If it was called "Free Market Success" and the article contained the statement of "2 + 2 = 4", would its title render that statement false?

It sure doesn't help the credibility of the statement that 2 + 2 = 4.

Does it render the statement false?  Yes or no?

[John Dibble]

If it was called "Free Market Success" and the article contained the statement of "2 + 2 = 4", would its title render that statement false?

It sure doesn't help the credibility of the statement that 2 + 2 = 4.

The truth is the truth, it doesn't matter if you don't like the messenger. You have yet to back up your own statements with ANYTHING, at least Philip HAS an article.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

The truth is the truth, it doesn't matter if you don't like the messenger. You have yet to back up your own statements with ANYTHING, at least Philip HAS an article.

Why do you expect an economic populist, who has suffered serious economic ruin at the hands of capitalism, to believe an article called "Free Market Success"?

[Gabu]

The truth is the truth, it doesn't matter if you don't like the messenger. You have yet to back up your own statements with ANYTHING, at least Philip HAS an article.

Why do you expect an economic populist, who has suffered serious economic ruin at the hands of capitalism, to believe an article called "Free Market Success"?

Stiiiiill waiting for you to answer my question.  It's just a few letters you need to type.  It's not difficult.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Stiiiiill waiting for you to answer my question.  It's just a few letters you need to type.  It's not difficult.

Do you actually think you're gonna get me to say 2 plus 2 isn't 4? It's the conservatives who are always denying science.

[John Dibble]

The truth is the truth, it doesn't matter if you don't like the messenger. You have yet to back up your own statements with ANYTHING, at least Philip HAS an article.

Why do you expect an economic populist, who has suffered serious economic ruin at the hands of capitalism, to believe an article called "Free Market Success"?

First off, failure on your part doesn't render capitalism a failure. Second, you state that 2+2=4 would not be credible if it were mentioned as fact in this article, even though you clearly know it to be truth. It is either the truth or it isn't - there is no in between.

"A contradiction can not exist in reality. Not in part, nor in whole. To believe in a contradiction is to abdicate your belief in the existence of the world around you and the nature of the things in it, to instead embrace any random impulse that strikes your fancy – to imagine something is real simply because you wish it were." - Terry Goodkind

[Gabu]

Stiiiiill waiting for you to answer my question.  It's just a few letters you need to type.  It's not difficult.

Do you actually think you're gonna get me to say 2 plus 2 isn't 4? It's the conservatives who are always denying science.

Does the appearance of "2 + 2 = 4" in an article titled "Free Market Success" render the statement false?  Yes or no?

[Emsworth]

When it's called "Free Market Success", it does, as the title "Free Market Success" is itself as untruism.

On the contrary, it is a market which is not free that tends not to succeed. If the government controls the factors of production, and/or sets prices, it tends to make irrational decisions relating to production and pricing, failing to take into account actual demand. Ultimately, the free market tends to be far more efficient than one controlled by the government.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

On the contrary, it is a market which is not free that tends not to succeed. If the government controls the factors of production, and/or sets prices, it tends to make irrational decisions relating to production and pricing, failing to take into account actual demand. Ultimately, the free market tends to be far more efficient than one controlled by the government.

Then why is capitalism such a failure?

[Gabu]

Stiiiiill waiting for you to answer my question.  It's just a few letters you need to type.  It's not difficult.

Do you actually think you're gonna get me to say 2 plus 2 isn't 4? It's the conservatives who are always denying science.

Does the appearance of "2 + 2 = 4" in an article titled "Free Market Success" render the statement false?  Yes or no?

Are you incapable of typing a two- or three-letter word?  It's not a complex question.

[Emsworth]

Then why is capitalism such a failure?

I would contest your assertion that capitalism is a failure.

Just for clarification, might I ask if you if whether support a socialist or a Marxist philosophy?

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Are you incapable of typing a two- or three-letter word?  It's not a complex question.

But it's a stupid question, so there's no point in answering it.