KVR Audio

Fidelity · Post by **Fidelity** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:38 pm

This whole issue seems to stem from the fact that companies are allowed to set "minimum advertised prices". Doesn't that go directly against the principles of a "free market", except that it's enforced on a corporate level and not by the government?

Jazzyspoon · Post by **Jazzyspoon** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:38 pm

afreshcupofjoe wrote: Just like regular cops go around handing out traffic violations and busting small time drug users instead of going after the real criminals. Yet, I don't think our tax money is wasted on the police. The institution needs a drastic overhaul, but I wouldn't want to see it disappear. I agree with your sentiment though.

Agreed, I was being overly passionate and overly caffeinated and I apologize. I would edit out my response, but it's been quoted so there's no point. I don't wish them to go away as I fully understand what they are good for, they just aren't doing it.

xoxos · Post by **xoxos** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 4:59 pm

Jazzyspoon wrote: Agreed, I was being overly passionate and overly caffeinated and I apologize. I would edit out my response, but it's been quoted so there's no point. I don't wish them to go away as I fully understand what they are good for, they just aren't doing it.

no, you've said it now and you're eternally condemned

we know what you meant, we're sure of it!

why "aren't they doing it" - could be something endemic to the form hmm.

you haven't lived on an arcology or a reservation so i shan't attempt a thorough explanation of how things can actually be different, you go ahead and keep your assumptions about vital social form. please try not to enforce any global policy on them until you understand how life can be different and still actually be alive

after a decade i came to love the supple finesse of his touch on the thumbscrews, his exact sense for the efficacy of the rack et c. the way he sold me music software was the sweetest.

afreshcupofjoe · Post by **afreshcupofjoe** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:01 pm

herodotus wrote:I will ask this once, because I can no longer resist the temptation:

There is such a huge cynicism about free markets or "So called 'free' markets" around here that I wonder if anyone thinks that kvr (you know, this place where we do all of this talking about how much free markets suck and whatnot) would be better if it were run by some sort of state or international monopoly.

Since 1999, a completely free global market, using sites maintained exclusively by private, commercial businesses, has resulted in over 700 free vst instruments, over 800 free vst effects, and 70 free host applications.

Does anyone really think that any number of government mandated programs could have done better?

Our issue with the "free market" is not with market forces and principles, it's that the term "free market" is entirely inadequate for describing the complex corporate-political, and geo-political relationships of our time. The economic ideas behind free markets are useful tools for describing the ways complex economic systems behave on a macro scale, but they are utterly useless as a political philosophy. The failure of of blind market fundamentalists is their belief in some sort of pure, unadulterated, ideal free market which does not exist in reality. Much like communism or socialism are always doomed to failure because their philosophies don't take into account man's animal nature to compete with, and dominate others. Running a society based on market principles is also doomed to failure because they don't take into account the fact that government will always have a role to play in the markets of any society, and corporations will always be fighting with the masses for control over the governing body.

I'm so sick of people arguing for free markets as some sort of guiding political philosophy, like it's some sort of black and white issue where you have to choose either capitalism or socialism as if there is no grey area. I think we would be better off abandoning the terms "free market" and "capitalism" altogether because at this point they are nothing but tools of political propoganda that have been so ingrained upon the psyche of every American that all they do is limit real thought and discourse on the issues at hand. Any time anyone utters the term "free market" I hear a sucking sound as the conversation is vacuumed into a little box and brought down to the level of back and forth bantering where everybody falls into their predefined roles and belief systems. That is the whole point of an ideology, to simplify an express a structured belief system in order for people to have something to organize around. But because it is such a gross oversimplification, it has absolutely no place a political argument. It's drivel. Just like the idea of "change" is drivel, and "peace" is drivel, and "freedom" is drivel in any real political discussion. Those words are nothing but empty containers for political propaganda because they are such powerful triggers for human emotion.

RawTheory · Post by **RawTheory** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:09 pm

afreshcupofjoe wrote:Our issue with the "free market" is not with market forces and principles, it's that the term "free market" is entirely inadequate for describing the complex corporate-political, and geo-political relationships of our time. The economic ideas behind free markets are useful tools for describing the ways complex economic systems behave on a macro scale, but they are utterly useless as a political philosophy. The failure of of blind market fundamentalists is their belief in some sort of pure, unadulterated, ideal free market which does not exist in reality. Much like communism or socialism are always doomed to failure because their philosophies don't take into account man's animal nature to compete with, and dominate others. Running a society based on market principles is also doomed to failure because they don't take into account the fact that government will always have a role to play in the markets of any society, and corporations will always be fighting with the masses for control over the governing body.

I'm so sick of people arguing for free markets as some sort of guiding political philosophy, like it's some sort of black and white issue where you have to choose either capitalism or socialism as if there is no grey area. I think we would be better off abandoning the terms "free market" and "capitalism" altogether because at this point they are nothing but tools of political propoganda that have been so ingrained upon the psyche of every American that all they do is limit real thought and discourse on the issues at hand. Any time anyone utters the term "free market" I hear a sucking sound as the conversation is vacuumed into a little box and brought down to the level of back and forth bantering where everybody falls into their predefined roles and belief systems. That is the whole point of an ideology, to simplify an express a structured belief system in order for people to have something to organize around. But because it is such a gross oversimplification, it has absolutely no place a political argument. It's drivel. Just like the idea of "change" is drivel, and "peace" is drivel, and "freedom" is drivel in any real political discussion. Those words are nothing but empty containers for political propaganda because they are such powerful triggers for human emotion.

+2000 couldn't have said it better...

xoxos · Post by **xoxos** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:14 pm

afreshcupofjoe wrote: I'm so sick of people arguing for free markets as some sort of guiding political philosophy, like it's some sort of black and white issue where you have to choose either capitalism or socialism as if there is no grey area. I think we would be better off abandoning the terms "free market" and "capitalism" altogether because at this point they are nothing but tools of political propoganda that have been so ingrained upon the psyche of every American that all they do is limit real thought and discourse on the issues at hand.

it sounds like you've actually lived here...

..and someplace else, too, tbh.

Fidelity · Post by **Fidelity** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:20 pm

afreshcupofjoe wrote: It's drivel. Just like the idea of "change" is drivel, and "peace" is drivel, and "freedom" is drivel in any real political discussion. Those words are nothing but empty containers for political propaganda because they are such powerful triggers for human emotion.

"War is peace"

"Freedom is slavery"

Sound familiar?

pough · Post by **pough** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:32 pm

herodotus wrote:There is such a huge cynicism about free markets or "So called 'free' markets" around here that I wonder if anyone thinks that kvr (you know, this place where we do all of this talking about how much free markets suck and whatnot) would be better if it were run by some sort of state or international monopoly.

No. I think of myself as a cynical capitalist, with a dash of socialism that comes from an understanding that our lives are social, as well as a strong personal desire for what I like to think of as civilization. I think that markets should be mostly free, but with an eye towards the abuses of power that inevitably result from accumulation of power. Government should protect the people (and therefore itself), which includes the freedom of markets and freedom from abuse.

I certainly don't expect perfection from businesses, governments or people. I also don't want any one of those to have too much power. Any one of those, left unchecked, will eventually become tyrannical. (Unless heaven decides to intercede, I suppose.)

That's where my comment came from. I don't want either extreme. I'm not sure why you think I'd swing the pendulum back all the way to the other side. Why did you think that? Are there only two shades in your world?

kbaccki · Post by **kbaccki** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:36 pm

afreshcupofjoe wrote: Our issue with the "free market" is not with market forces and principles, it's that the term "free market" is entirely inadequate for describing the complex corporate-political, and geo-political relationships of our time.

As I write this I'm watching a liv stream on cnn.com of the US Senate Banking Committee hearing on the unmitigated disaster that is American International Group.

We have no idea of AIGs current risk exposures, we have no disclosure of to whom the taxpayer-funded CDS payouts are going, we have no idea of AIGs current assets and liability, and on and on...

What we do know is that AIG "needs" another $30 billion US on top of the $150 billion US they were already given. What we do know is that AIG, and many companies like it, created an utter financial house of cards in the last 10-15 years. What we do know is that the "watchdogs" were apparently asleep in the their doghouses. And now US taxpayers are paying for it. And US taxpayers for generations to come will be paying for it. And indeed, people all over the world are paying for this house of cards that a select few have profited heftily from.

The current bailout bill in the US is over $10 trillion. That doesn't include the $10 trillion national debt. US taxpayers are on the hook for $20 trillion, give or take a trillion dollars.

There's nothing "free" about it. It's all very "costly", and it's all very "fraudulent".

"Free market" is a great concept. Unfortunately, we have painful proof that the Titans of Industry, and our wonderful Elected Officials can't seem to implement free markets without screwing me, you, our children, our childrens' children, our childrens' childrens' children, etc.

"Free markets" depend on humans with a conscious, a bit of a moral grounding, consideration for fellow human beings, and an ability to make reasonable/rational decisions.

pough · Post by **pough** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:45 pm

kbaccki wrote:"Free markets" depend on humans with a conscious, a bit of a moral grounding, consideration for fellow human beings, and an ability to make reasonable/rational decisions.

All systems do. Capitalism and Socialism are both excellent systems that will never succeed. They both require people to be perfect. We're not.

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:25 pm

well, you'll forgive me, but "we're not perfect" is no longer acceptable to me as being an excuse for "not doing the right thing"

I have a bad feeling about this thread.......

pough · Post by **pough** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:48 pm

hibidy wrote:well, you'll forgive me, but "we're not perfect" is no longer acceptable to me as being an excuse for "not doing the right thing"

I wasn't aware that I used it in that way. Care to explain? Or are you just trying to make the part of your post I didn't bother to quote come true?

hibidy · Post by **hibidy** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:53 pm

pough wrote:
hibidy wrote:well, you'll forgive me, but "we're not perfect" is no longer acceptable to me as being an excuse for "not doing the right thing"
I wasn't aware that I used it in that way. Care to explain? Or are you just trying to make the part of your post I didn't bother to quote come true?

I actually don't understand this question.

As is usual in threads on forums, it wasn't necessarily directed at "you". It was more of a point that I keep hearing people use the "we're not perfect" as an excuse to "not do the right thing"........which comes back to the original topic and so and so on and so on.......

zerocrossing · Post by **zerocrossing** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:57 pm

Say what you like, but music retail has notoriously small margins for the most part. All this really serves to do is balance the playing field for smaller mom and pop stores so they can compete with the big boys.

pough · Post by **pough** » Thu Mar 05, 2009 11:06 pm

hibidy wrote:As is usual in threads on forums, it wasn't necessarily directed at "you". It was more of a point that I keep hearing people use the "we're not perfect" as an excuse to "not do the right thing"........

Okay. I'm going to let it slide, in large part because I can't make heads or tails of your thought processes.

I know what you're thinking, and I met a Hungarian gentleman.

so maybe NAMM isn't so benevolent after all...