Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthetiq
That is not what I got out of reading your statements about the landlord/window and the non-profit, for that situation I'm at a loss to understand how it applies with the conflicts I understand and read in this last post.
|
My whole point is that capitalism needs to be regulated to work out in acceptable ways. I believe in the effectiveness of regulation, and also that system where the government took less regulatory initiative would be worse than the one we have now. It was a direct response to folks in this thread who seemed to pooh-pooh the idea that regulation is necessary.
Quote:
|
I'm not understanding the idea of a broken system is because the system exists. It's a bit too philosophical to me, but I'll take it to understand that because it cannot remedy all situations 100%, it is broken for someone.
|
When something isn't performing like it's supposed to it is broken. Capitalism as it exists in reality doesn't perform like capitalism as a theory, because the theory, like all economic theories, is just an approximation of reality.
It is important to acknowledge the shortcomings of any idealized model when using that model to describe reality. When viewed from the angle of idealized models of capitalism, the system doesn't work how it's supposed to (or maybe it does, and that's the problem).
Quote:
|
I would believe that the regulations in place are not necessarily for the well being of the tenant, but are also for the well being of the capital. The capital is taxed at some point on it's gains, so there is an interest in the state to increase it in some fashion, hence assessments based on criteria that changes each year.
|
I don't dispute this at all.
Quote:
|
In turn that capital care, does create some well being for me as a landlord. I'm given incentives to purchase property, rent out at reasonable rental rates, care for the property, etc. at some point my investment will become profitable and allow me to care for myself with my own dollars and pay some taxes instead of having some sort of state welfare or expediture for my well being.
|
This is irrelevant. Your thought experiments about the nature of landlordship are nothing more than thought experiments. Perhaps this is how things ought to work, but clearly things do not necessarily always work like this. This is a microcosm of why academic economic pontification is generally useless. Such pontification is however, if this thread is any evidence, a rather convenient means of dismissing things that interfere with one's rigidly held perspective (not necessarily talking about you here, cynthetiq).
"Clearly the laws of supply and-" No. It's not that simple.