Another non-response. Insults only make this clear. Another non-response. Insults only make this clear. More insults in lieu of answers.
Nothing. You are making an irrelevant comment. I gave you an example of price controls that successfully did what was intended. On the contrary, the public approved of wartime price controls and supported it. You keep arguing theoretical principles when I just indicated that crises can change the situation by showing an real example where price controls achieved a desired purpose, therefore they ARE NOT always bad. 1941-1946 in the United States of America. I just stated this in detail. I repeat . . . While I can agree that under ideal circumstances price controls are not needed, it is rash and imprudent to imagine that price controls can never and have never worked . . . because they have.
you didnt show that they worked, you showed that people didnt mind. basically you are arguing that patriotic people will subject themselves to things that suck and are terrible when they think it helps bring their sons back from war alive. people also approved of the draft back then. doesnt really prove the point that the draft is great and we should do it now. it proves that war creates unique situations where people willingly give away their freedom because of mass murder. this is nota strong position from which to argue economic policy.
if i said it was always a bad idea to force people to kill for you, would you say "our country does this during war when it drafts guys and forcees them to fight wars" would you then think you had made an argument in favor of forcing people to be slaves that must either kill people or be thrown in jail? i mean do you really think you are making a point?
Ideal being what? When poverty is wiped from the earth? It is not rash to imagine that price controls can never work because they NEVER DO WORK. Point to the War, the government CREATED that atmosphere. This isn't hard. There was no choice..... 15+ million AMERICANS served in the military with MILLIONS more serving back home. Food, resources, land, lives, family's, homes, etc were all impacted by the War.... "Despite the frequent use of price controls, however, and despite their appeal, economists are generally opposed to them, except perhaps for very brief periods during emergencies. In a survey published in 1992, 76.3 percent of the economists surveyed agreed with the statement: “A ceiling on rents reduces the quality and quantity of housing available.” A further 16.6 percent agreed with qualifications, and only 6.5 percent disagreed. The results were similar when the economists were asked about general controls: only 8.4 percent agreed with the statement: “Wage-price controls are a useful policy option in the control of inflation.” An additional 17.7 percent agreed with qualifications, but a sizable majority, 73.9 percent, disagreed (Alston et al. 1992, p. 204)." http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PriceControls.html "The reason most economists are skeptical about price controls is that they distort the allocation of resources. To paraphrase a remark by Milton Friedman, economists may not know much, but they do know how to produce a shortage or surplus."
my point about red's ignorance of basic economics wasnt meant to be an insult, i geniunely think he is ignorant. why else would he ask me to explain basic things like how price controls work?
Of course they worked. We won the war and people didn't go without food or shelter, war profiteering was not a problem, inflation was curbed, wartime manufacturing was sucessfully converted to war production and people were able to staff the factories despite loss of $15 million men to the military.
Ideal being the conditions we enjoy in Louisiana and most of the rest of the country where there is no shortage of affordable housing. I have just cited an instance where price controls were valuable, popular, and effective.
