Holy shit, you're right, a website dedicated to the works of an Austrian economist thinks that natural monopolies don't exist! What a huge fucking surprise.

Look up some unbiased literature and you'll realise that natural monopolies unequivocally exist. Just because many current monopolies are government created does not mean that every single one is.

There are plenty of instances around in the 1700s and 1800s where governments flirted with laissez faire and it didn't work. To defy its failure, the Austrian economists rejected all econometric data and their conclusions in favour of a twisted theory supported by no evidence.

Thatcher embodied the policies of Friedman with some level of short term success, but the Friedman inspired policy of deregulation of London in 1986 (colloquially the Big Bang) poised us for future disaster in the financial crisis. Even Hayek said that some form of regulation was needing in the banking sector.

"Defend every point of complete anarchy"? You're a filthy casual anarcho-capitalist that cannot grasp, despite overwhelming evidence, that the free market does not always ensure the most efficient outcome.

Friedman was objectively one of the greatest economists ever.

and you accuse me of ad hom..
You are dismissing it based on the very fact that they hold those views..

Pharma clearly isn't a natural monopoly. That should be obvious for everyone.
The numerous examples of competing companies in other "natural monopolies' before they were turned into actual government imposed monopolies also serve to disprove your other claims..
Like I said, you have to come up with a better example and then we can address that.




Claiming omg there is overwhelming evidence isnt actually overwhelming evidence.
Your implication that lassez faire 'didn't work' is also pretty absurd. On what grounds did it "not work"?
You have no real argument and are merely broadly claiming that the evidence is on your side.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Sep 28 2015 10:24am

There are tons of papers on the effectiveness of laissez faire and a few on natural monopolies. I looked at a few papers on the existence of natural monopolies last night just from searching google. As for actual data and econometrics you know you don't have a leg to stand on. That's the whole basis of Austrian economics - refuting evidence because it's impossible to draw scientific conclusions from somewhat irrational human beings.

The majority of your posts relate to refuting arguments rather than addressing them. You'd never address points like the deregulation of London and its contribution to the recession, because you don't have a clue about it or its relation to the policies you advocate. Things are only mentionable when they suit your agenda.

Oh you did some googling? Good for you. Then you must be right without having to use any logic! You can just keep claiming i'm wrong and hopefully no one will notice!
You are continuing to vaguely claim the evidence is on your side without actually pointing to anything and then toss in some insults.

The data is on my side!!! [blank space] is your way of avoiding the logic.
Then you make wild assumptions about what I know or don't know and try to haphazardly pin the crash on austrians..

You are implying that refuting something isn't addressing it... and that somehow that isnt a good thing for me in a debate. thats obviously a false dichotomy you have set up and doesn't preclude what I cited from being true.

Now, am i am expert on 1980s British history? no.
But I do know enough about the financial crisis over here to know your attempt to tie it to laissez faire and austrian economics is completely ludicrous.
It was largely caused as a result of an inflationary boom affected by loose monetary policy and government intervention in the housing market.
You have this distorted guilt by association complex, Where you try to tie thatcher to my beliefs and then blame thatcher for the crisis, and then pin that on austrians.. while ignoring all of the government interventions in the economy along the way.
(Of course if I refute that 'scary deregulation' was the cause you will think this is somehow illegitimate because its a 'refutation' rather than just accepting what you say as fact and addressing it.)

''The 'evidence' is on my side! Deregulation caused the recession! Therefore laissez faire doesnt work!' is intellectual laziness.


Austrian economics does not ever attempt to prove that all private decisions will work out or that there will never be a recession. Nor do they defacto support what the banksters are doing.
In case you missed it they are the loudest voices against it in many cases..

The massive correlation and causation between economic freedom and prosperity is pretty undeniable at this point.
Your characterization of the 1800s as a failure of laissez faire 'not working' is laughable.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Sep 28 2015 11:12am

I had a good laugh when I skim read this. Thanks cam

Oh shit need more google/10

^^

I have every right to tell my boss he's an asshole. I have every right to have a tattoo.

/thread