Tyson guts free market fundamentalism

Tyson didn't gut anything. He was talking specifically about Gingrinch's statements about the Moon and Mars, two places private industry had no incentive to visit at the time.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
oh please! He used that as an analogy.
Click to expand...

Never said he didn't, just pointed out that he didn't eviscerate the free marketeers. His space exploration example is flawed and Magellan and Columbus were also poor examples because there was no analogue then for what we recognize as the free market today.
 
Guille said:
Never said he didn't, just pointed out that he didn't eviscerate the free marketeers. His space exploration example is flawed and Magellan and Columbus were also poor examples because there was no analogue then for what we recognize as the free market today.
Click to expand...
youre wrong and you're rationalizing. What do you think the Dutch East Indies company was?

The truth is free markets have their limits and Tyson succinctly illustrated why.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
youre wrong and you're rationalizing. What do you think the Dutch East Indies company was?

The truth is free markets have their limits and Tyson succinctly illustrated why.
Click to expand...

Today? We would call DEI fascism.

The only thing Tyson illustrated is that he's very good at confusing the issue. Btw, the government doesn't build a lot, they ask private companies to bid on contracts.
 
Twerk Master Miley said:
Tyson is dumber than a box a moon rocks whenever he isn't talking about astro physics.
Click to expand...
Un Huh...except he's right. He could have used the example of the Panama Canal or the Transcontinental railway or the Interstate Highway system or the Internet. Whether you like it or not he's spot on right. In every one of those infrastructure projects the free market was unwilling to take the risk.

If we left it to short sighted Libertarians and free market fundamentalist who lack imagination and an understanding of how the real world works we would have none of these important infrastructures and our markets would be a dismal fraction of what they currently are.
 
Guille said:
Today? We would call DEI fascism.

The only thing Tyson illustrated is that he's very good at confusing the issue. Btw, the government doesn't build a lot, they ask private companies to bid on contracts.
Click to expand...
No...they just provide the capital and take the risk. Tyson is flat out right. None of the major infrastructure projects in our nations history would have ever happened without private/public partnerships where government allocated resources and diffused risk. That is simply a historical fact whether you like it or not.
 
Guille said:
Today? We would call DEI fascism.

The only thing Tyson illustrated is that he's very good at confusing the issue. Btw, the government doesn't build a lot, they ask private companies to bid on contracts.
Click to expand...
No...they just provide the capital and take the risk. Tyson is flat out right. None of the major infrastructure projects in our nations history would have ever happened without private/public partnerships where government allocated resources and diffused risk. That is simply a historical fact whether you like it or not.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No...they just provide the capital and take the risk. Tyson is flat out right. None of the major infrastructure projects in our nations history would have ever happened without private/public partnerships where government allocated resources and diffused risk. That is simply a historical fact whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...

You have created a straw man argument. Nobody says that government should do nothing. That is a perversion of what people like me say about the free market.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No...they just provide the capital and take the risk. Tyson is flat out right. None of the major infrastructure projects in our nations history would have ever happened without private/public partnerships where government allocated resources and diffused risk. That is simply a historical fact whether you like it or not.
Click to expand...

Define what you mean by public/private partnership, I think we have different ideas on what that means. Tyson got one thing right, the private sector will do something when there's a profit motive or they need something and the risk is acceptable to them. To take the examples of Magellan, Columbus, and the Moon shot and then make a blanket statement about the superiority of the public sector is misleading, at best, for reasons I've already given...especially Magellan and Columbus, that was just straight up dishonest on his part.
 
Teflon Don said:
You have created a straw man argument. Nobody says that government should do nothing. That is a perversion of what people like me say about the free market.
Click to expand...
Have I? Our government has largely been controlled by conservatives for the last 30 years. Name one major national level infrastructure or R&D project they have supported in that time?
 
Guille said:
Define what you mean by public/private partnership, I think we have different ideas on what that means. Tyson got one thing right, the private sector will do something when there's a profit motive or they need something and the risk is acceptable to them. To take the examples of Magellan, Columbus, and the Moon shot and then make a blanket statement about the superiority of the public sector is misleading, at best, for reasons I've already given...especially Magellan and Columbus, that was just straight up dishonest on his part.
Click to expand...
I was not saying or even implying that the public sector is superior or discrediting market capitalism. We need both to cooperate and coordinate in a robust and healthy manner to promote the common good. Extreme views like free market fundamentalism or command economics either simply don't work or are counterproductive and let's not even discuss unintelligible gibberish like Libertarianism that has never accomplished anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top