Comments on: Peter Robert Garrett – in the exit lounge http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/ Australia's leading libertarian and centre-right blog Thu, 09 Sep 2010 00:52:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: ken n http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-17472 ken n Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:28:15 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-17472 rog those of us who want substantial deregulation of trades and professions do accept that some regulation is appropriate where there are significant safety issues. Especially when a government is shoveling billions into a field where there were obvious risks from unqualified people. rog those of us who want substantial deregulation of trades and professions do accept that some regulation is appropriate where there are significant safety issues.
Especially when a government is shoveling billions into a field where there were obvious risks from unqualified people.

]]> By: Garrett not being sacked? at Catallaxy Files http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-17468 Garrett not being sacked? at Catallaxy Files Tue, 23 Feb 2010 20:47:46 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-17468 [...] When I wrote that Peter Garrett’s position was untenable back on 11 February, I had assumed that he would have departed by now. [...] [...] When I wrote that Peter Garrett’s position was untenable back on 11 February, I had assumed that he would have departed by now. [...]

]]> By: rog http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13881 rog Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:13:18 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13881 JC hates government involvement in "free trade", excepting insulation JC hates government involvement in “free trade”, excepting insulation

]]> By: rog http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13880 rog Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:11:46 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13880 Cave canem, te necet lingendo Cave canem, te necet lingendo

]]> By: sdfc http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13879 sdfc Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:10:22 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13879 Then you're less concerned with market efficiency than with keeping the government out of the market at all costs. And you say you're not ideological. Then you’re less concerned with market efficiency than with keeping the government out of the market at all costs. And you say you’re not ideological.

]]> By: rog http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13878 rog Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:09:51 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13878 You just cant stop telling others what to think and do, can you JC? Some weird sort of "libertarian" You just cant stop telling others what to think and do, can you JC?

Some weird sort of “libertarian”

]]> By: JC http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13872 JC Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:48:37 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13872 I don't think the government should be involved in markets through ratty schemes like fuelwatch .. period. If there are enough people wanting that sort of info an information post would arise as it has in other markets. Suppliers under the Dudd scheme weren't free to set their prices as they wouldn't be allowed to change for 24 hours. Prices are extremely important and should be left the fuck alone by governments, especially one like Rudd's which knows fuck all about markets and it's leadership even questions the viability of markets. I'm not in favor of downward moving prices or upward moving prices. I only want free prices not influenced by government intervention in any way. I don’t think the government should be involved in markets through ratty schemes like fuelwatch .. period.

If there are enough people wanting that sort of info an information post would arise as it has in other markets.

Suppliers under the Dudd scheme weren’t free to set their prices as they wouldn’t be allowed to change for 24 hours.

Prices are extremely important and should be left the fuck alone by governments, especially one like Rudd’s which knows fuck all about markets and it’s leadership even questions the viability of markets.

I’m not in favor of downward moving prices or upward moving prices. I only want free prices not influenced by government intervention in any way.

]]> By: sdfc http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13870 sdfc Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:40:26 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13870 So you don't think increasing information flow is beneficial to a market. Suppliers are free to set their price, no one is forcing anyone to sell below cost. So you don’t think increasing information flow is beneficial to a market. Suppliers are free to set their price, no one is forcing anyone to sell below cost.

]]> By: JC http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13869 JC Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:35:09 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13869 I disagree. You don't want to be placing undue pressure on prices one way or another. The cheapest price is not necessarily always he best thing for numerous reasons if the government is fucking around with a market. Believe it or even something as basic as petrol is not a fungible commodity between stations and producers. You want station owners to be making a profit in the free market and not fucked over by governments dictating when they can move prices. Furthermore the effect on prices by imposing 24 restrictions would be to stifle downwards movement as stations would be loathe to go low knowing that they could be caught on bad price decision and not selling at optimal levels. Government imposed shit like that is bad. I disagree. You don’t want to be placing undue pressure on prices one way or another. The cheapest price is not necessarily always he best thing for numerous reasons if the government is fucking around with a market. Believe it or even something as basic as petrol is not a fungible commodity between stations and producers.

You want station owners to be making a profit in the free market and not fucked over by governments dictating when they can move prices.

Furthermore the effect on prices by imposing 24 restrictions would be to stifle downwards movement as stations would be loathe to go low knowing that they could be caught on bad price decision and not selling at optimal levels.

Government imposed shit like that is bad.

]]> By: sdfc http://catallaxyfiles.com/2010/02/11/peter-robert-garrett-in-the-exit-lounge/comment-page-4/#comment-13864 sdfc Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:11:34 +0000 http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=8035#comment-13864 It makes sense because the more users, the greater the downward pressure on prices. It makes sense because the more users, the greater the downward pressure on prices.

]]>