![pope-francis-environment-encyclical[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/pope-francis-environment-encyclical1.jpg?quality=83)
Naomi Klein has been invited to attend a top level conference at the Vatican, to advise leaders how to fight climate change and dismantle capitalism.
According to The Guardian;
Naomi Klein and Cardinal Peter Turkson are to lead a high-level conference on the environment, bringing together churchmen, scientists and activists to debate climate change action. Klein, who campaigns for an overhaul of the global financial system to tackle climate change, told the Observer she was surprised but delighted to receive the invitation from Turkson’s office.
“The fact that they invited me indicates they’re not backing down from the fight. A lot of people have patted the pope on the head, but said he’s wrong on the economics. I think he’s right on the economics,” she said, referring to Pope Francis’s recent publication of an encyclical on the environment.
Release of the document earlier this month thrust the pontiff to the centre of the global debate on climate change, as he berated politicians for creating a system that serves wealthy countries at the expense of the poorest.
Activists and religious leaders will gather in Rome on Sunday, marching through the Eternal City before the Vatican welcomes campaigners to the conference, which will focus on the UN’s impending climate change summit.
Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/28/pope-climate-change-naomi-klein
The madness of this latest development, is Capitalism is the single most important factor which has made the wealth of rich countries possible. Dismantling Capitalism would not make poor countries rich, it would make rich countries poor.
As for non capitalist societies being better stewards of the environment, what a busted myth that is – if you want to see truly horrific levels environmental destruction, you need look no further than the old anti-capitalist Soviet Union, which is now practically a byword for pollution, inefficient use of resources, and environmental degradation.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Yes…. everyone knows poor countries have better environments. Just look at the mess Norway, Canada, the USA etc have made of theirs. And look at the lovely environments of India, China, Indonesia, Eastern Europe etc etc.
Its a no brainer. Capitalism has to go.
Their objectives are aligned – poorer countries see greater subscribership to the church. I am reminded of this classic line in Dogma:
Actually the Pope is pandering to the poor and the poor are going over to Pentecostalism in the Americas 8,000 per day according to a Vatican article. They are shifting gears in marketing.
http://ncronline.org/news/pentecostal-phenomenon-latin-america
You forgot Somalia, Haiti, Sudan, Bolivia, Venezula…
& You forgot the most successful low carbon, anti-capitalist economy of all….North Korea
Here she is predictably falling in the trap of complaining about the Three Gorges Dam.
They want a shift to renewables, but protest against the single largest generator of renewable energy on planet earth (100 TeraWattHours per year). Currently generating power for the people of China. Wikipedia claims that the dam will pay for itself in 10 years.
But Naomi Klein doesn’t like it. I suspect that she doesn’t even know why she doesn’t like it.
She has this to say, “Last week, Nelson Mandela presented a report assessing the global impact of mega-dams, projects traditionally seen by the World Bank as necessary pre-conditions to joining the global economy. The report, published by the World Commission on Dams, found that the projects were dramatically increasing migration flows—1.2-million people will be displaced by China’s Three Gorges Dam alone.”
Oh, Mandela, is he another engineering and economics expert like Ms Klein?
So, she is in favour of destroying big oil and big coal and big gas. But also big hydro.
Basically big anything. And anything that creates (evil) profit.
Which basically means that only boondoggle subisidy eating bullcrap is allowed.
They don’t even know why they hate the western industrial infrastructure.
Let’s run the world on incense sticks and hopi ear candles.
Well, it can’t have been Nelson Mandala. . He died on December 5, 2013.
Her problem is that she can’t even understand that if you make rich people poor, they can’t afford things like electricity, or taxes from which subsidies are sourced. No rich = no subsidies, or has she discovered magic pixie dust that creates money or of thin air, in which case the Greeks and EU could use her services.
The problem with environmental nuts on the left is that they will oppose any source of energy that actually works and is cheap. That’s the main reason they oppose hydroelectric and nuclear. If solar or wind became economical, they would oppose them too. That’s because cheap sources of energy allows the population to increase, which is the worst sin possible against Gaia.
err as much as I loathe Klien
there were some serious issues with landslides n quakes from the massive amount of water held in that dam I believe? they scaled it down.
and then the people displaced might also feel miffed?
where did they get shoved to? filthy cities n poverty?
Let’s see now, Pachauri, Al Gore, and Naomi Oreskes OUT!!! And IN!!! with the Pope and Naomi Klein (huh? Who’s she?) , whose instant, hive-heroine, super-star status has nothing–ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!! HEAR THAT YOU DENIER-SCUM “MERCHANTS OF DOUBT”?!!! (look Naomi! (I’m talkin’ to Oreskes-not you Naomi), you don’t own that phrase so buzz off, you’re just a has-been non-person now!–deal with it!)–with Naomi’s (talkin’ about Klein now) FOX-NEWS, hot-babe good-looks or her in-your-face, Pol-Pot weltanshauung, as the new, Papal side-kick, occupying the same ecological niche, in the landscape of the Holy See, as Huma Abedin occupies in Hillary-land.
And I’m sure this Pope-and-Naomi, “Communications Strategy”, Hi5-magnet brainstorm must have seemed a real agit-prop masterstroke, to the hive’s shot-callers, when their useful-tool Gruber-clones hyped it up in the inner-sanctum of the hive-bubble, and everything. And so one can only take a delicious, schadenfreude pleasure in our betters’ inevitable chagrin now that their haymaker, flim-flam “best-shot” is blowing up in their faces, as the whole world recoils in amused astonishment at the spectacle of the Pope’s Kardashian-grade zany-weirdness, in this matter.
So can’t someone just spritz a little holy-water on these slithering, pit-spawn Beelzebubs, who have gotten their hooks into the Pope, and rid us, once and for all, of this whole grinning, death’s-head “HORROR!!!”, already?
Oh how I love your posts. Dang you’re good. 👍
Yeah, mike,
Plus some.
But – in future – don’t hold back.
[snip…a bit over the top -mod]
Auto
I had such high hopes for this Pope, only to be so disappointed.
Same for our current President.
The squandered opportunities are heartbreaking.
What a waste.
“Same for our current President.”
Really, he’s lived up to every one of mine.
It’s a sad day when the Pope needs to enlist advertising to get his message across. It is also telling.
When the Pope sells Christianity, he has no need of anyone’s help to get his message out.
When the Pope dumps Christianity in order to sell warmed over socialism/communism then no amount of help will get people to pay attention.
I wonder if this pope would have supported Lech Walesa’s Solidarity Movement in Poland like Pope John Paul II did?
“I wonder if this pope would have supported Lech Walesa’s Solidarity Movement in Poland like Pope John Paul II did?”
I don’t think so. With this step, Pope Francis has shown his true colors finally. He is really a stronger supporter of marxism and the new green eco-religion than of the Catholic Faith.
reminds me of indulgences that used to be (as far as I know its gone, not catholic myself) practiced.
sorry hit post too soon, meant to add I am talking about the “scandal” in the 1500s over them.
This is getting beyond embarrassing for Catholics. Who is advising Francis because it sure ain’t the Holy Spirit.
Check out John Schellnhuber here: http://notrickszone.com/2015/06/27/schellnhuber-boasts-of-having-skeptics-excluded-from-participating-in-drafting-laudato-si-encyclical/#sthash.diCdpFm9.dpbs
Also in the mix is Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, George Soros has funded him for years and is on the advisory board, http://www.earth.columbia.edu/articles/view/1006.
Lash has just received $400,000 from the 2015 Blue Planet Award. http://www.af-info.or.jp/en/blueplanet/introduction.html. He is also director of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network and was working with Ban Ki Moon on manipulating the Pope a few weeks before the encyclical.
http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2015/04/explainer-what-we-know-about-the-popes-encyclical/
“On the 28 April a meeting, entitled “Protect the earth, dignify humanity: the moral dimensions of climate change and sustainable development”, took place at the Vatican.
An agenda listed appearances from UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon and US economist Jeffrey Sachs.
According to the website, the summit had three goals:
to raise awareness and build a consensus that the values of sustainable development cohere with the values of the leading religious traditions, with a special focus on the most vulnerable;
to elevate the debate on the moral dimensions of protecting the environment in advance of the papal encyclical.
and to help build a global movement across all religions for sustainable development and climate change throughout 2015 and beyond.”
Sorry Jonathan Lash’s name crept in there, rather than Sachs. He is World Resources Institute and is heavily involved in the run up to Paris. All in the same game but he didn’t get the Blue Planet award… yet.
..you’re, right, Antonia…I always thought climate change had to do with weather conditions…NOT capitalism..or ANY OTHER -ISM…I ponder, where IS THE HOLY SPIRIT OF DISCERNMENT, in all of this falderol ?
maybe it is?;-) some grappa in the wine? too p*ssed to figure hes duped?
@ur momisugly gentle tramp ( love the moniker), He has no true “colors”. Look at Klein’s statement: about the “pat on the head”. If I would have said that about a Pope 35 years ago I would have been ex communicated! He is , sadly, a puppet just like Obama. Just read who truly wrote this horrible Popal statement. The fact that cheap energy would elevate the poor to higher standards of living, health and education etc and his denial (oops) of that simple fact is the saddest thing I have ever seen. I am glad I left the RC behind many years ago.
In a addition to being a puppet, the pope may also aspire to be a puppeteer among the powerful who lust for more power in their push for globalism. Isn’t the lust for power one of the seven deadly sins?
I look forward to their friendly debate about abortion. Naomi is a hard core feminist as well as communist. But I suppose that is redundant.
Naomi Klein has a solution to climate change and it goes like this: punitive taxation; massive wealth re-distribution; the abolition of free trade and free markets; a state-enforced end to to the “cult of shopping”; the whole to be supervised by a New World Order of selfless illuminati (who presumably resemble Naomi Klein).
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100117165/only-a-totalitarian-new-world-order-can-save-us-now-says-naomi-klein/
Why not Al Gore? He already travels the lands with a “christian version” of his talks – whatever that means… do christians need some special language, like a retarded kid or something?!
He speaks in tongues.
Forked tongues.
And we know who is going to get forked.
Global Warming aka Climate Change has always been a political cult to depopulate the planet and take money from the wealthy to spin it out to the poor. It is an act of doing ostensible good, but in fact it is doing deep and disturbing evil to the poor. What an incomprehensible and toxic mix this is… What an evil, awful mess. I feel like I am suffering the Cassandra paradox.
It is so evil, unscientific and overwhelming I just do not know what to say. I just don’t.
This is one of the similarities between socialism and global warming.
Those behind both only care about feeling good about themselves. The fact that they are causing misery for billions and death for millions just isn’t important.
“The fact that they are causing misery for billions and death for millions just isn’t important.” I disagree; these are essential.
Right there with you.
Maybe I am judging from appearances, but I think the Vatican needs an exorcist.
You are not alone Paul. My very Catholic friends are dismayed at what is happening.
What?
The Pope couldn’t find a catholic idiot?
Skeptics, the new witches?
Well, the will need to burn something for lights…
Whale oil was the preferred lighting fuel pre industrialisation.
Only if they can do it without releasing any CO2.
From Club of Rome, and Ehrlich, and Earth Day to the IPCC, Gore, and all the rest of the AGWBS, this has been Watermelon Politics. The Marxists never quit, they just change tactics and disguises.
You forgot to trace back to an earlier doomsdayer – Rev. Thomas Malthus, the original dismal economist.
Unfortunately you are very right. This really has nothing to do with the saving the earth or clean environments. This has to do with power, and wealth re-distribution. It always has been. So there is no point trying to win the academic argument. Just to keep exposing this ideology for what it is.
“This really has nothing to do with the saving the earth or clean environments. This has to do with power, and wealth re-distribution. It always has been. ” CoR and UNFCCC published these facts several decades ago – they’re referred to as conspiracy theories by the majority, whose vocabulary is restricted to disinformation memes. They have no meaning in the delusional paradigm of a benevolent government that exists for the welfare of its citizens.
The problem is that they are also succeeding. A global socialist tyranny is rapidly approaching, in my view.
One doesn’t have to look further than the economic travesty in the Pontiff’s homeland, that leftist paradise where I understand they’re critically short of toilet paper, in spite of price freezes. It is astonishing that the real substantive threats to religious freedom, economic prosperity and health do not appear to be a leading Vatican focus in contrast to the modeled threat from the UN IPCC, Figueres et al. There is sea of black to attend to, and it isn’t fossil fuels.
“I understand they’re critically short of toilet paper, in spite of price freezes.”
They are critically short of toilet paper because of, not in spite of, price freezes.
No surer way to reduce supply, than fix the price of something below the market.
Absolutely Menicholas. I was really considering the excessive demand imposed by the ideological propagation of bow locks.
The toilet paper shortage is a feature in Venezuela. The Pope is from Argentina. Let’s hope he’ll travel to Venezuela and check out how marvelous Marxist equality of outcome works in a formerly developed nation. All the capitalists in Venezuela will soon be living in Miami. The oil industry is crashing there, because there is no motivation to maintain equipment and corporate infrastructure, leaving the Venezuelan government unable to subsidize it’s own people or to support that other Communist paradise, Cuba. Crime is becoming rampant, refugees are leaving. Another great example of a “people’s paradise.”
Have you ever tried to exchange an Argentine Peso for anything outside of Argentina?
Is this a joke? The Church, Catholic or Protestant needs to stay away from the “climate debate” as it is a pack of lies. The Church deals in “truth”, correct? Shame on the Pope.
Well, he is prophesized to be the last Pope, isn’t he? He seems to be doing his best to bring that about, by pushing all sane people away from the Vatican.
Yes, madness is upon us. The Pope cannot apparently see that this is the most antihuman push since Eugenics. The result of this policy is not universal wealth it’s universal poverty, and universal welfare dependence – the end result is a communist state. Pope Francis, have a look back, see how well that’s worked in the past! Catholics are good at the past.
I would like to remind Pope Francis of an old saying.
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime.
Stop then preaching welfarism, when what is really needed is work, and work is created by ….you guessed it, wealth. Have a look next door to Greece and see where the take from the rich, give to the poor welfare society gets you.
Maybe the church should start at home and divest itself of all of its monies and property.
Amen to that!
another Amen
Hypocrites, Is the catholic church still one of the riches organizations in the world?
A Case of Conscience is a science fiction novel by James Blish, first published in 1958.
Blish respected Popes and Jesuits.
Franciskus is a decent man. But off of save ground.
Hans
I’m a little off topic, but Johann reminded me of a scifi book dealing with religion and science:
“A Canticle for Leibowitz” by Walter M. Miller, Jr
Great read, intelligent and inventive.
Wholeheartedly agree. One of my favorites. I re-read it every two or three years.
Fiat Lux!
IMO the best apocalyptic novel ever written.
I third the enthusiastic endorsement of Canticle. It was a great book many decades ago in the cold war; perhaps soon to be re-recognized.
Catholics are supposed to integrate reason, not sacrifice it to the ideological Zeitgeist. For some catholics this papal hotch-potch of platitudes will be another heavy burden, another treason of their church.
That book is one that has stuck with me for 40 years. It is what got me interested in epistemology. I had been thinking about it recently with all of this nonsense from the Holy See. One would think that the heresies embedded within Marxist thought, would be apparent to any theologian. And then there is that “error in equation 16” …
@ur momisugly DesertYote, “Holy See”?. More like the Wholly Blind”.
It’s all in line with Technocracy. Use science to control the world. Of course, guess who decides what science is or what science is denial. Hmmmm … It began decades ago. While you all argue amongst yourselves over minutia, the technocrats are winning the game.
We need to be a little careful in the reflex defence of capitalism.
It is wonderful how far capitalism has brought us.
But it is worrying to see where capitalism is taking us. Fewer and larger multinational corporations are aggregating and accumulating businesses and economic sectors at an alarming rate.
Combined with ‘Free Trade Agreements’ and their dispute resolution tribunals we are fast approaching a point where a few corporations will control the world.
If you were worried about your ‘one world order’, there it is.
Your screen nic’s a little obvious. Your ignorance of what capitalism is (and isn’t) is just as obvious.
According to many communists I have debated, there is pure communism, and everything else is a form of capitalism.
Crony Capitalism exists within Socialism and Communism.
markx commented: “…We need to be a little careful in the reflex defence of capitalism…. is worrying to see where capitalism is taking us. Fewer and larger multinational corporations are aggregating and accumulating businesses and economic sectors at an alarming rate….”
That’s where anti monopoly laws come in. Unfortunately it seems even the courts are controlled so that may not be a saving grace. The fact remains that Capitalism (in various forms) in economy and standard of living is the most successful “ism” today. Free market rules and the only reason anyone would want to do away with it is to gain control of people.
Since it’s impossible for a monopoly to form without the help of govt, anti-monopoly laws are unnecessary. What’s needed instead is to get govt out of the business of helping selected companies and industries.
Yes, anti-trust ant-monopoly laws are a must. In fact, the whole edifice only works because of a myriad of laws an regulations, starting with the most basic rights of property and regulations of currency, and going through to the more complex laws of debt, banking, transactions and employment.
”Monopoly cannot form without government help’
Good in theory, fails in fact and logic.
Someone is always better managed, smarter, better connected than the next guy. His business grows (and gets more efficient!) and out competes all. New ideas are copied and bettered, new competitors undersold. Suppliers are locked in … etc..
Eventually this one entity controls most of its own niche, then expands into other areas.
Everyone is happy, because prices of good are cheap…. except for the fact there is only one place to look for work (in any particular field), and worse, most of the profits move offshore, not into the community where they were generated.
Re ‘markx’, nope, not a statement of politics, just a differentiator: there seem to be a surfeit of Marks around here. 🙂
Good in theory, perfect in practice.
Even if a company is better managed, the bigger it gets, the more managers it needs and hench the average quality of those managers goes down. Beyond that there are the inefficiencies of scale which prevent large companies from competing with smaller companies on either quality or service.
As to connections, they are meaningless unless they are with the govt, in which case it is govt that is the problem, not capitalism.
As to niches, you ignore the ability of customers to substitute one product for another if one company starts charging too much for it’s product.
If the company gains market share by keeping customers happy, there is no problem for govt to solve.
Once the company starts raising prices, competitors show up to take away market share.
Agree – CONgress works to enrich the Int’l Corps (especially to limit/stop competition with regulations) and the Int’l Corps, who own most of the media, support the gov’t via propaganda to the willing ignorant.
TPP is a perfect example that will screw citizens and reward Int’l Corps.
Capitalism is organic. It comes into being on its own. It was not invented by anyone and is not imposed on anyone. Try to suppress it and it just continues underground. It can’t be abolished any more than human nature can be abolished.
All other economic systems are artificial and authoritarian.
Tyranny is organic too in social animals, the human societies that are relatively free of it are fortunate, but few and always under threat.
Tyranny isn’t an economic system. But economic systems other than free market capitalism are inherently tyrannical.
Give people freedom, and free markets happen.
markx
I hate to tell you this (well, not really) but corporations come and go. The innovative process inherent in capitalism ensures that corporation survive only as long as they provide “best” service.to the public.
It is when government begins to “support” certain corporations that they become a drain and a bane on the people. It is not corporations that are leading us into the dismal future you foresee but big government that must control everything — ruining everything.
I always find it amusing to remember that what was once one of the biggest corporations in America made — buggy whips.
Go back just a few years and review what happened to some high tech corporations that looked like they were on their way to ruling the world.
Eugene WR Gallun
US Steel, Alcoa, IBM, RCA, Zenith, Bethlehem Steel, Reynolds Aluminum, NCR, GM, …..
It’s not capitalism that is creating fewer and bigger corporations. That is 100% the work of govt.
Under a capitalistic economy, most of those big companies would quickly die a well deserved death.
How come Microsoft survived Windows 8?
Some corporations are too big to be accountable to the market.
The costs of switching away from them means they have a built in resistance to competition.
“How come Microsoft survived Windows 8?
Some corporations are too big to be accountable to the market.”
Microsoft does not exist in a laissez faire free market, but rather in a corporatist environment. (Mussolini’s favorite term for “fascism”) Even though Microsoft reached a dominate position in operating systems, they still are losing market share now. Apple, Linux Flavors, Chrome, and of course Android on devices are all eating into Microsoft’s market. Why even version 10 is going to be free they say. Imagine a free Microsoft OS version 10 years ago.
Next you will see Open Office or other office software knock out the cash cow of Microsoft. That will take some time also as we humans hate change.
You’re free to walk away from any corporation. You don’t have to work for ’em, you don’t have to buy their products.
The same can’t be said about government.
You have to wonder what value there is in buying an OS (even the $60 I paid for a full license of Win 7 Pro) when you can get Linux (and others) for free?
MS survived Win 8, because Win 7 existed, and they’ve done a lot to make Win 10 better, including giving it away.
But what few realize is how much Windows helped Intel pay to develop the advanced process and very powerful processors, Intel needed volume to do that, and a common hardware and software platform provided that volume. And how many software business made million and billionaires because that same volume existed.
BTW, if you want other, Oracle will give you their version of RedHat for free, supports extra
https://edelivery.oracle.com/EPD/LinuxWelcome/get_form
you need to sign in, but those accounts are free as well. You can even download their Virtual Machine platform for free (Xen), same deal, then you can run lots of machines all at the same time.
MCourtney;
In your limited view, does a single bad product always doom a company? If so, how did Ford survive the Edsel?
Eugene WR Gallun,
I do agree that in the long term imbalances work themselves out and unsustainable businesses, corporations, and even systems of government will fall. Hell, even something as big as Soviet Communism (whatever it really was) fell, and that only took 50 years.
My problem is that most of us have not got 50 years to wait while the imbalances magically right themselves. By the time they do, a few generations have borne the brunt and suffered.
It is just possible there may be a middle way, the right balance of regulation, antitrust control, and freedom, and the devout don’t realize that is currently going on and is the magic mix which really makes their ‘wonderful free market system’ work.
MarkW June 29, 2015 at 8:52 am said: In your limited view, does a single bad product always doom a company? If so, how did Ford survive the Edsel?
Because they were big enough, had enough cash reserves, could get more favorable financial terms, were too big for their financiers to let fail, could afford more and better lawyers, could pressure their creditors to wait…..etc
Exactly the point being made. Get big enough, and the natural laws of ‘free competition’ no longer apply.
Sure, big corporations do make wrong moves, don’t make right moves, don’t always see paradigm changes coming …… but the bigger they are, the more chance they have to survive and recover.
And the big ones ARE surviving.
The world’s top 200 corporations account for over a quarter of economic activity on the globe while employing less than one percent of its workforce.
http://www.ips-dc.org/top_200_the_rise_of_corporate_global_power/
You may think this is a good thing, and perhaps occasionally wonder why all these ‘corporation favouring’ Free Trade Agreements are deemed so important.
I’m not too sure it is a good thing, and I know who those FTAs are really for.
It is some kind of strange mania that causes people to blame the private sector when governments create protection rackets, exchange favors for money, create regulatory boondoggles that drive investment into larger blocs of more influential lobbying power, and create international rules that favor partners.
Which is wearing the leash and which is holding it are not so obscure. Start by counting the numbers of soldiers, police, judges and jails on each side.
You are confusing Corporatism with Free Market Capitalism. The former relies on the Power of State to manipulate the market. The oft decried Monopoly can not exist in a free market, but is the expected result of a manipulated market. Marxists always use the results of market intervention as justification for market intervention.
@DesertYote:
I’m sorry, but that is just not correct. In an absolutely “free” market, monopoly is nearly inevitable. This isn’t speculation, it is the observed fact of economic history.
There is a huge body of economics devoted to exactly that point, BTW, from as early as Adam Smith in The Wealth Of Nations.
The basic error of your position is using “expected result of a manipulated market” as any kind of evidence for why it would not happen. Monopolists work very hard to assure THEY manipulate the market. Most all of the anti-trust laws are aimed particularly at preventing them from doing just that manipulation of markets that lead to such monopolies as Standard Oil and, more recently, Microsoft (they were found to have behaved as a monopoly in court…).
You are quite correct that Corporatism comes about when Free Markets are dead. It is the end game of a type of Socialism where attempts to manage the markets leads to the Corporations “buying the laws they want” in exchange for doing some things the Governments want. (There is also the Fascist example where The Government directly tells the corporations what to do, in exchange for monopoly or oligopoly positions in the “managed markets” – and yes, Fascism and National State Socialism are both kinds of Socialism – Lange Type Third Way Socialism in modern terms).
So yes, worse than a free market is the Socialism or Socialism Lite of Managed Markets as they always force a few megacorps to run things under government ‘guidance’. What works best is what the USA had from about 1950 to 1980: The Mixed Economy with minimal regulation. That is what folks usually call a ‘free market’, but it isn’t. It is a lightly regulated market with anti-trust laws.
In short: There is a long list of ‘horribles’ in forms of economies that starts with Communism and runs through Fascism and other Socialisms. A little better is the Laissez Faire Market Economy (what is really ‘free markets’ but it is subject to the failure of competition via trusts, monopolies, and cartels / collusion). When lightly regulated to prevent the “ruin of the commons” and forbid monopoly practices, cartels, trusts, and collusion, you get an optimum. Unfortunately, that optimum is prone to breakdown into a “3rd Way Socialism” (or Progressive Third Way) with too much regulation and with government picking winners and allowing oligopolies to dominate. (Where we are now, both in the USA and EU; and with the “corporatism” you rightly pointed out is a worse situation…)
FWIW, I spent a few years getting a degree in all this stuff… I can dig out my text books (still have them!) and cite chapter and verse if needed.
E.M.Smith
I bet when you dig out your old textbooks there will be none in there by von Mises, Rothbard, Hoppe, or Block.
The Austrian School of Economics has shown that in a laissez faire free market totally devoid of governmental interference that monopolies are nearly impossible. The case most often made by Keynesians is that there are certain “natural monopolies”. Even those are government grants.
The Myth of Natural Monopoly
https://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly
E.M.Smith June 29, 2015 at 12:48 am
Like the U.S.-EU Free Trade Agreement (TTIP) perhaps which favors only the big Corporations who have successfully lobbied (bought) the Administration and Congress and the European Commission?
Sorry E.M, but the myth that free markets always lead to monopolies has been disproven in so many ways that only those who prefer myth to reality still believe it.
All companies try to manipulate the market, as do all workers. Manipulating their environment to their own advantage is what humans do.
The secret is that everybody is manipulating, which prevents any one manipulator from taking over.
Sure, some companies can gain an advantage by becoming more efficient than their competitors, but this advantage is always temporary. The competitors are also seeking ways to become more efficient, additionally, as a company grows, inefficiencies of scale begin to dominate. As a company grows it increases it’s workforce, thus by the law of large numbers, the average skill of it’s employees will approach average. Additionally there are more layers of management between the decision makers and the workers.
E.M.Smith– You’d be much better educated in economics if you: dug out your old Keynesian Econ books, put them in your BBQ grill, poured 1/4 cup of gasoline on them, set them on fire and then roasted marshmallows to make S’mores. At least that way, you’d get some utility from those worthless Econ books you apparently read.
After eating your S’mores, go to your computer and download Ludwig Von Mises “Human Action”:
http://www.cmi-gold-silver.com/pdf/humanaction.pdf
Cheers!
markstoval June 29, 2015 at 3:44 am
The Myth of Natural Monopoly
https://mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly
That is an surprisingly poor article to use as a reference in this argument.
It is simply an article about the failure of the misguided idea that governments/authorities granting monopolistic franchise rights to utility companies for up to 25 years, while the said government extracted a hefty fee for that right. Donald Duck could tell you that ain’t gonna create efficiency or cheaper utilities for anyone.
And the first example of a ‘large monopolizing corporation” is the Gas Light Company of Baltimore in the era when electric lights were coming on the scene?
That ain’t big, and it was not a matter of out-competing others, it out-politicked them. In the manner of going in with a gun and robbing people actually.
So, I guess we are in some agreement that the government granting of monopolies to utility companies is not such a bright idea. I would argue that no-one ever thought it was, and the ‘theorizing’ was just a simple matter of excusing a robbery and the disguising future planned ones.
No-one will dispute that new technologies and competition have often resulted in the demise of a technology or a business. It has probably happened hundreds of thousands of times. That does not mean large corporations can never dominate a market or a business segment.
And, you don’t necessarily need a monopoly to dominate a market, and stifle the chances of competition arising. Two or three big companies dominating the market is likely just as bad. Unspoken agreements to maintain the status quo, great pressure on suppliers to accept poor payment terms, and the constant squeezing out of any little competitor and the soaking up of other market segments. Goods are not necessarily cheaper to consumers, and even if they are, the ‘great gains in efficiency of scale ‘ must mean someone is out of a job somewhere in that community that was previously had a bigger mix of suppliers amongst it (for they too are consumers).
By the way, there are some lovely bits of ‘hand-waving’ in there too:
.
Big is always better, eh? And best utilization of capital is the yardstick? Perhaps depends how much benefit flows back to the community, and how much profit goes offshore.
And this following tells us not only that big is inevitable (hey, that’s MY argument, right?) but it is also better for us! (BTW, I’m a bit doubtful about that last bit)… and everyone gets a job in the new system?!! That’s odd, where went the economy of scale?
And this sums up the article:
.
Well, there ya go. It is all OK after all. It just may take a few lifetimes to level out.
Those 200 firms now dominating the world economy must have just been lucky (and, I theorize, many of them will continue to be ‘lucky’).
EM Smith and his textbooks are, (IMHO) undoubtedly correct in this matter. It is a simple matter of logic.
In an absolutely “free” market, monopoly is nearly inevitable.
You probably need to ask yourself who is pushing so hard on the idea that ‘free market capitalism’ is the answer to all problems. (Well, it is if you are already big enough).
Your grocery store every week (well our local stores do) have sale papers where they sell some items near zero profit, and other items in the store have a profit margin, so the store can make a profit on your total order, yet the competing stores sell those same “loss leaders” with a profit, is that unfair?
Now, I live in NE Ohio, use to be full of steel mills, most are gone now, except specialty steels, The ones that went out of business were put out because foreign steels were sold below cost, and were subsidized by the government (I think), with the intention of running US mills out of business, that’s dumping, and I believe the government did get involved, and added a tariff as penalty.
Microsoft included a free browser (once browsers became a required app) in their OS (which wasn’t free), this was viewed as anti-competitive by Monzilla because they charged for a browser. If you want to be picky, MS did the same thing with the GUI, FTP stack, any number of things, some they got by buying a company that specialized in that area, some by developing it inhouse. Being in the software business, that’s normal, you add functionality to your product, sometimes you charge more for it, sometimes you don’t, and sometimes you do at first and then later on include it for free. IMO there’s nothing wrong with this, MS sells more OS’s when they provide the latest functionality, even if a different company sold it as an add on to previous versions of the OS that did not include it. Plus in the case of OS’s you didn’t have to use Internet Explorer.
Most of the minicomputer manufacturers are gone, as a side note I interviewed with DEC and got a ride back to the airport in one of their helicopters, which was pretty cool. I didn’t get the job, I made too much without a degree compared to their degreed engineers, they decided it would cause internal strife. But anyways, most of the workstation manufactures are out of business, they were out competed by PC makers, who are being pressured by gaming systems, and smartphones, the lesson IMO is compete or die, this is capitalism.
Now it has it’s warts, again IMO this is where the government, to keep the game fair, keep the cheats out. Fair is somewhat subjective, cheating not so much. An none of the other options has done so much for so many, including a guy with working class parents who didn’t go to college who didn’t have any connections to power.
“We need to be a little careful in the reflex defence of capitalism.”
No we don’t. it’s the most underappreciated cause of prosperity in our modern world. It is constantly critiqued and under attack. it’s also mis-represented, such as what you are doing. “capitalism” has nothing to do with statist attempts to invoke some supra-national world order. Try again, but first read up on economics.
And now we have a Pope who believes in the economic ignorance that turned Argentina from a first-rate country to a second-rate one. We need to be a little careful in the reflex defence of anti-capitalism.
About Argentina ( and Brazil, Chile etc +1000
The UN.
Public Choice theory (the economics of politics) handles that quite nicely. Wherever there is consolidation in an industry you will find the heavy hand of regulation. Just look at Obamacare and the consolidation of both the health insurers and hospital groups. Businesses will enlist the help of government to crush their competition. Look at taxi cartels around the globe trying to crush Uber using government thugs to make criminals of ordinary citizens. And if that is not enough government itself will criminalize the most benign of behaviors, like smoking a weed or carrying a bit too much cash.
Capitalism is about cooperation not competition. How else does the panoply of items in your home get there but if people did not cooperate with each other on a massive scale every minute of every day. If they were locked exclusively in fierce competition as in a battle nothing would be created. So, the meme of ruthless competition is a myth and should be replaced with “competing to cooperate” which is the process of entrepreneurship and management skill.
Think also for a moment about the Church and other institutions, are they also competing to cooperate? Well of course they are. They are not exempt from the laws of economics but at the same time they can be woefully ignorant of them as well. Uninformed people of goodwill are usually called fools.
Huge, monopolistic corporations = bad.
Huge, monopolistic government = good
Irony meter = pegged
I’ve always been fascinated by those who claim that in order to fight monopolies, we have to turn control of everything over to the biggest monopoly of all, government.
Worse still is they do it with Laws, that while hard to get put on the books, they’ve next to impossible to get removed!
I’ve lost track of the number of people I’ve talked to who actually believe that govt is more responsive than big business.
In reality, since businesses are greedy, they want as many customers as they can get. This means they will do what they can to cater to as many as possible.
Govt on the other hand only cares about 50%+1. Any votes above that level are superfluous.
And then there is govt bureaucracy, that can’t be fired and has an unlimited supply of other people’s money to spend, so it can’t ever go bankrupt.
When you have a run-in with a monopolistic corporation, you can complain to government. Governments have acted against abusive monopolies in the past. But when you are mistreated by a monopolistic government, who can you go to for help?
You left out Huge, monopolistic labor unions.
Louis, why would a govt do anything against a monopolistic company?
It was govt that created that monopolistic company in the first place.
Eustace Cranch June 29, 2015 at 4:04 am:
EC (Eustace Cranch) Practicality/logic Module = non functioning.
A bit more like this, perhaps:
Huge, monopolistic corporations = very bad.
Huge, monopolistic government = also bad, probably worse, but very much depending on the government., and how it deals with providing a functioning economy to all levels of society.
Louis Hunt June 29, 2015 at 10:05 am
When you have a run-in with a monopolistic corporation, you can complain to government. Governments have acted against abusive monopolies in the past. But when you are mistreated by a monopolistic government, who can you go to for help?
Exactly, Louis.
We need someone to control those corporations, and so government does do that now. But more and more they are moving beyond national laws.
On your latter point, try to maintain or improve upon the semblance of (corporate funded) democracy we now have. 😉
That is not the result of capitalism. Capitalism means free, competitive markets. Government interference in, and over-regulation of, markets has produced the situation that you speak of. Large multi-nationals are always the primary benificiaries of government action.
Capitalism is great when played by established rules. It’s problem is that the refs are bought off. When was the last time a monopoly was broken up in the USA. Bribes to govt are the way businesses operate in many countries.
Max
“When was the last time a monopoly was broken up in the USA”
The FTC shouldn’t allow them to be created through the purchase of another business. But if you are successful and become the standard, I don’t think they should be broken up, accept for the most agregious violations.
For instance the Microsoft browser wars, they deserved fined and some sanctions, but was petty jealousy for the most part.
What did Microsoft do that was bad?
Do you believe that automakers should be forced to sell cars without radios?
She’s not that hot. And neither are her views/statements/whatever…
Hotter than the other Naomi…
The only Pope Mao can do to improve the human condition is promote contraception and leave science to scientists.
my favourite excerpt from Rosie Scammell’s Guardian piece is “The ***imminent arrival of Klein within the Vatican walls has raised some eyebrows”. “imminent” makes Naomi sound so important, doesn’t it?
anyway, as for the “Activists and religious leaders will gather in Rome on Sunday, marching through the Eternal City”, the organisers involved all the usual suspects under a “One Earth, One Family” umbrella – WWF, Greenpeace, 350.org which i read somewhere sent two islander “climate warriors”, etc. & they claim to have assembled 5,000 in St. Peter’s Square, says Rosie Scammel in a follow-up Guardian article.
google has no pics of any numbers remotely in the thousands, and the only pic in the One Earth, One Family second photo gallery on their website with any sizeable numbers is clearly the regular Sunday crowd in St. Peter’s Square waiting to be blessed by the Pope. in fact, it has the tag ““I finally saw the Pope”. the first photo gallery on the page has no crowds, just small numbers with the WWF, Greenpeace, Solar, Migrants Lives Matter banners & the like:
OneEarthOneFamily.org – Photo Galleries
http://oneearthonefamily.org/
29 June: Guardian: Pope Francis’s environmental message brings thousands on to streets in Rome
Vatican officials to discuss climate change and environment with scientists and activists including Naomi Klein
by Rosie Scammell in Rome
Alongside Klein and Turkson, the conservation group WWF has been invited to this week’s Vatican conference and had a strong presence at the rally on Sunday, described as a “historic event” by Samantha Smith, leader of the organisation’s global climate and energy initiative…
Activists at the One Earth, One Family event broke through the silence enveloping early-morning Rome with singing and chanting, waving paper birds high over the central Piazza Farnese before marching to the Vatican…
While a few hundred people began the multifaith march, holding banners and sheltering from the sun under giant paper leaves, organisers said about 5,000 were present at the end of the march in St Peter’s Square…
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/28/pope-francis-environment-rome-naomi-klein-climate-change
Ah the Guardian…
Did you catch the recent article that claimed extraterrestrials might come to earth and eliminate the human race to protect the planet from AGW? “Scientists say…”
To paraphrase the immortal Twain, there are lies, damn lies and the Guardian
Didn’t Hollywood just make a movie with that as it’s premise?
who do you think controls obama???
CIDSE has the July 2-3, 2015 Vatican program as of June 26, 2015
Conference People and Planet First: The Imperative to Change Course
http://cidse.org/articles/rethinking-development/conference-people-and-planet-first-the-imperative-to-change-course.html
Scroll down to the Program PDF
Day One, Session One 11-12:30
Naomi Klein, Author (Canada)
Amazing. They just keep returning to Karl Marx like moths to a flame. With the same results every time.
They are absolutely convinced that this time they will get it right, because this time they will be the ones in charge.
Very succinctly put. Every generation believes your statement.
“We are the ones we’ve been waiting for”….Pres Obama
The Pope is suppose to be saving souls not the earth.
No, now his job is to save the Earth FROM the souls. Understand?
The driver in every company is to generate a monopoly, it is only possible for a monopoly to flourish under the shelter of regulation.
Big monolithic corporation that use lobby are no better than the Communist equivalents.
This is the tension in any capitalistic system and the drive from the left is to add regulation which concentrates economic activity, code for monopoly and the right should have the desire to disassemble regulation to allow the blowtorch of competition to disassemble the inefficient forming monopolies.
The Pope and Naomi Klein?
A marriage made in heaven….
Look lower.
Look lower…….lol!
My new hobby is asking progressives why they consider the pope to be an authority on the subject of climate change, but not on the subjects of gay marriage, contraception, or abortion.
That’s a pretty valid point, I wonder how the Holy See will view eco-evangelism after the EPA requires them to upgrade their churches and cathedrals to Energy-Star standards.
I’m watching a slow death of the country (U.S.) I once cherished.
Bernie Sanders is apparently giving Hillary a run for her money on the Democrat side.
Despite the proven failures of socialism, the leeches want more of it.
Beats working for a living.
I hope Bernie Sanders wins the primaries. At least he is honest about his socialism…
I would love to see a debate between him and Ted Cruz for example…
Ted Cruz is a Masterdebater….
I would feel sorry for Bernie if he had to debate Ted Cruz. It would be reminiscent of a cuisinart in action.
JPP; “Ted Cruz is a Masterdebater….”
I think the Pope will disapprove. You know that causes blindness…
Climate Change and anti-free-market economic philosophies share the same metaphysical premise that polical elites have both the right and the ability to effectively control economies and climate through the initiation of force.
Morally, ethically and empirically this premise is fallacious.
The CAGW hypothesis has, for all intents and purposes, already been disconfirmed, as the physics and empirical evidence show CO2 forcing will likely only generate around 0.75C (+-0.25C) of warming by 2100, plus or minus whatever the sun and other natural variables decide to do between now and then.
Such a minuscule amount of CO2 induced warming is far from catastrophic and almost an order of magnitude less than CAGW hypothetical projections.
Moreover, it’s morally reprehensible to restrict fossil fuel use in developing countries as it will perpetuate and exacerbate poverty, and greatly inhibit infrastructure and economic development.
Economically, empirical evidence is irrefutable that societies with the freest markets and the highest level of individual freedom do the best.
For the Catholic Church to embrace centrally controlled economies and Climate Change is morally and ethically reprehensible and will ultimately have a very negative impact on the Church and society.
“Moreover, it’s morally reprehensible to restrict fossil fuel use in developing countries as it will perpetuate and exacerbate poverty, and greatly inhibit infrastructure and economic development. ”
I agree. There are 50 million Americans living at or near subsistence. 75% of Us are living pay check to pay check.
So I ask Francis: how will cutting consumption help most of us, especially those on the absolute margin?
Sarastro– There are roughly 1.2 BILLION people in the world that still don’t have access to electricity…
What economic effect do Statist CAGW acolytes think their fossil fuel restrictions will have on these 1.2 billion people?
Because of: US’ movement away from a free-market economy, $18.3 trillion national debt, monetary inflation, $2 trillion/yr in compliance costs, fiat US$, a gigantic bureaucracy, and roughly 43% of GDP being spent by the federal/state/local governments, US living standards are tanking.
At the start of the 20th century, total federal/state/local government spending only accounted for 7% of GDP….
Had $100+(?) trillion (who knows what the actual number is) not been squandered by the US government and left in the private sector over the past 100+ years, imagine what the US standard of living would look like; it boggles the mind…
And so it goes… until it doesn’t.