Laissez faire economics and the moral imperative

I actually have a qualification in this subject! Lol! I did a GCSE is something called ‘Welfare and Society’ – yes really. Well laissez faire economics is the ideal, isn’t it? Laissez faire basically means ‘leave us  alone!’ – telling government to get out of our lives and not regulate trade so that traders can do as they please. The ideal part of this is that those who work best, most efficiently and produce the most desirable products are successful, and those who are less efficient will lose. Regulation is expensive, and cumbersome, and works AGAINST innovation by putting obstacles between people and their business ideas.

This subject follows on nicely from my earlier post (Link) and I want to share this debate between Paul Craig Roberts and Stefan Molyneax – it’s very interesting.

The thing I want to add is that the greatest factor in production at one time was the Protestant work ethic! Of course that came with a built in morality which ensured that greed was stemmed at the potential source. The change came when hidden hands decided to sew up markets behind closed doors. Diamond mines? Oil and steel? No-one dares rock the boat – OPEC is a cartel. A free market, when there are no morals except ‘profit for our shareholders’, produces a farm-society where we are merely worker bees producing products and profits for the handful of poeple who own the most ‘chips’ on the gaming table. The 0.1%.

Free markets without morals don’t work. Regulated markets without morals are usually either communistic or fascistic (whether they start out that way or not).

I think that Stefan Molyneaux is an idealist – the real truth is that the love of money is the root of all evil, and once that becomes the driving force in business, morals will go out the window. When designing products is based only on providing money for a business, catching some ‘wave’ of popularity, there is no moral imperative to stop society sliding down into total depravity. Tindr and Grindr apps are a good example of this – they weren’t ‘good ideas’ they are base and appeal to base instincts.

I hope you enjoy the video – I learned some things I didn’t know about how the system is being worked by corporations.

You might also enjoy this video, which I’ve posted before:

Lassiez faire economics also affects the welfare state – there is no welfare state under laissez faire. This increases the charitable sector, which in some ways is good, because they should be aiming to give folks a hand UP not a hand OUT. The Victorian era was the time when charities came to the fore to help the poor. The problem comes again when charities are self-invested – in other words a charity which helps the poor should be aiming to make itself redundant, but today charities are regulated by the charity commission which requires them to seek donations whether needed or not – it creates a dependency from the charities on the very problem that they were created to help. Charities also pay their CEOs a huge amount of money – of course they are not seeking to put themselves out of work!

So in conclusion, lassiez faire is great when it applies to the Christian guy running a mom-and-pop shop with his wife and family. When it applies to freemasons and satanists who worship and seek power and financial rewards and influence to skew the whole system to their own requirements, that’s another matter, and it requires regulation. We have never really had true lassiez faire economics, and we aren’t going to anytime soon. Just look at TTP!

God Bless you