Colin, give me an example of where free market liberalism has been successfully implemented. Your views are pretty ironic considering where you are based.
IPT and you Crybabies
- Thread starter LastTwo
- Start date
No, I'm talking about in a tried and tested world economic markets. No successful country operates in the context he mentioned, free of democracy, regulation and government intervention.
He mentioned Austrian economics, this is pretty much a bandied about idea that never left the economic backburner. It lacks substance.
He mentioned Austrian economics, this is pretty much a bandied about idea that never left the economic backburner. It lacks substance.
14.1player said:
You're right, no country allows much freedom to trade. So, is this your answer as to why you think free trade doesn't work?
Austrian economics may be on the backburner, but popular opinion is not what makes truth.
See mises.org for more info on this subject.
Jeff Livingston
Classic Jeff!chefjeff said:
Certainly true in this case for a supposed Big Time scammer. Plenty of little scammers around and within the Pool game.
One thing that, to my knowledge, has not been mentioned is the World Pool Association's take on this whole thing. I certainly didn't think of it! They are, after all, Pool's governing body over and above the BCA, EPBF, etc, and the ones that set the rules by which we play our 8-Ball, 9-Ball and Straight Pool WORLDWIDE.
Well, if you go to pro9.co.uk, you can see a letter to the whole pool community from Ian Anderson, the WPA's President. It does make for very interesting reading.
I'd like to see what IPT have to say in direct answer to what is said in the letter.
And I have to agree with Berry (who, Colin, is Dutch and was writing in his - at best - second language!) when he asks about the legitimacy of calling the challenge match the "World Championships". Sure, LJJ and Sigel are 2 true legends of out sport, but to call what is, essentially, an exhibition match to help pubicise the launch of a new organisation is, in my opinion, little more than a joke.
I hope the IPT works, I really do. It would be great to see our sport finally have decent prizefunds and the effects that the IPT would have on the rest of pool could be fantastic with higher prizefunds for all tournaments. BUT there are a few things such as their relationships (or lack of) with the sport's governing that are bugging me.
Well, if you go to pro9.co.uk, you can see a letter to the whole pool community from Ian Anderson, the WPA's President. It does make for very interesting reading.
I'd like to see what IPT have to say in direct answer to what is said in the letter.
And I have to agree with Berry (who, Colin, is Dutch and was writing in his - at best - second language!) when he asks about the legitimacy of calling the challenge match the "World Championships". Sure, LJJ and Sigel are 2 true legends of out sport, but to call what is, essentially, an exhibition match to help pubicise the launch of a new organisation is, in my opinion, little more than a joke.
I hope the IPT works, I really do. It would be great to see our sport finally have decent prizefunds and the effects that the IPT would have on the rest of pool could be fantastic with higher prizefunds for all tournaments. BUT there are a few things such as their relationships (or lack of) with the sport's governing that are bugging me.
14.1player said:
The closest to a classical liberal society would be the US from 1800 to around 1913 when the federal bank and federal income taxes came into play.
Read the review of "How Capitalism Saved Amercia" http://www.mises.org/story/1887
Audio of the author here: http://mises.org/MultiMedia/mp3/ASC2005/DiLorenzo-book.mp3
As far as Austian economics lacking substance, have you read and understood to foundational tomes Mises "Human Action" and Rothbard's "Man, Economy and State" ? Can you explain praxeology and the fundamental axiom of human action to me and their implications for the understanding of emperical methods of economic investigation?
It is the most clearly thought out system of economic thought. Too hard for most to comprehend. It has always struggled against the mainstream because it is clearly not in their interest to implement what Austrian economics implies as effecacious policy.
Jeff is spot on with his point above too!
China is experiencing rapid improvements in productivity, quality of life etc with increasing freedom in business enterprise. That is why I am in Shanghai, the fastest developing city in the world with over 20% of all the world's construction cranes in this single city
Leave people alone to manage themselves and history has always shown a healthy economy. Conversely, the more a governments regulate people's free and willing transactions, the worse is their economy.
Colin Colenso said:
Colin,
Just curious. Why do you say this? On what are you basing these accusations? Why, exactly, would curing illnesses put "them" out of business and who is "them"? The FDA and the AMA? They are in business? Bear in mind that being in business means that they are operating for profit. The FDA is a U.S. Government agency...it's not for profit. Their mission is to make certain that foods and drugs being marketed here in the U.S. are safe for human consumption and that medicines actually do what the makers claim they do. They aren't necessarily going to always operate on your schedule and they aren't always going to approve the things you want approved, but that's not their job. The AMA is a governing agency for medical practitioners...their purpose in life is to make sure that practicing medical professionals are qualified and are operating within the law and the guidelines of good medical practice. I fail to see how either of these agencies could "monopolize" medical practice in the U.S.
I can tell you one thing for damned sure. I don't want to take ANY medicine that has not been FDA approved. This is serious shit. Medicines can KILL people, both directly (toxic substances) and indirectly if someone is taking something that DOESN'T do what it's supposed to and meanwhile there is something effective available...they die from the disease because they are taking something that just doesn't work. Unfortunately, there are a LOT of people out there like Mr. Trudeau that have no problem preying on people in this manner...capitalizing on providing sick people with a false sense of security for profit. To me, this is just about as low as a human can sink. Believe me, we need watchdog agencies like the FDA to keep these scumbags from victimizing people this way. Think about it like this...say one of your loved ones has cancer that has not metastasised (spread) past the original tumor. The doctor recommends Chemotherapy and Radiation in addition to removing the tumor surgically and gives a good prognosis since it was detected early. We all know how difficult going through Chemo and Radiation is. Now your loved one happens to see Mr. Trudeau on one of his infomercials claiming that his bogus product can "cure" the cancer....so he or she decides to try that first. While they are taking Mr. Trudeau's "treatment", the cancer metastasises and is now terminal. Had your loved one taken the recommended course of treatment, they would have had a fair chance of defeating the cancer. This is the danger of this sort of thing and it's a real danger.
Anyway....can you provide any supporting documentation for your claims? Can you provide links to websites with valid investigative reports that will support your accusations? You have directly accused a U.S Governement agency and the governing body of the U.S. Medical Profession of criminal activity..I wouldn't think you would want to do that without facts to back those accusations up.
thecardman said:
Hi Cardman,
The letter you are talking about was discussed and dissected in detail here: http://www.azbilliards.com/vbulletin/upload/showthread.php?t=16804
I know Berry is from the Netherlands and I've enjoyed his participation on the WPC forums for the last couple of years if I remember rightly.
I believe we are having a gentlemanly debate about differing opinions. No harm in that
Hi Colin
You're right, there is NO harm in friendly debate. I wasn't sure if you and Berry had met before.
Also, thanks for letting me know that the letter was already on AZ. Thought I'd post just in case, though!
You're right, there is NO harm in friendly debate. I wasn't sure if you and Berry had met before.
Also, thanks for letting me know that the letter was already on AZ. Thought I'd post just in case, though!
Colin Colenso said:.. If KT starts making a killing out of this, we may see other media savvy entrepreneurs (big boys) move in for the action. Then KT might see some real rivals and there would be a war for the big name players...
This in itself would be spectacular for KT, he just might get a buyout as a great return on his investment. In which case he will be hailed. This is good business. And we know if this happens, pool has gotten its success as well.
It is normal for investors to throw in millions of dollars into a venture. Their expectations are 5 to 10 times return on their investment in less than 5 years. If it fails, that is acceptable. I think KT made a great find with an undervalued opportunity.
pete lafond said:
I agree with you Pete, I only wish I had the money to do it myself
But this is not going to be easy, I was hoping ESPN would make mention on the news after the event, but I was amazed to see them on the ESPN2 morning show Cold Pizza, at least it's a start.I think he knows this is going to be very difficult, but he has a wonderful PR firm and a great producer, the reward could be amazing. If bass fishing has money from ESPN, Citgo and Toyota, then pool could easily get the same once it gets notice, large companies don't want to do the leg work or take the chance, once someone does, they will be watching very closely.
SlimShafty said:
You've got that right. It is always the smaller investor that takes on the challenge. Years ago one of the software companies I started I had developed a product for Nuclear Power Plants. One by one the plant started buying. I needed money to grow the company but could not find the investment as no company was interested. Later as more power plants started buying my product and got the recognition, Westinghouse pursued me for a buyout and Wall Street wanted to bring it public. Bottom line is that I had to prove that it not only worked but the market was ready for it. This is here billiards is now even though it has been around for a long time.
GeraldG said:
Obviously you haven't been watching the news for a while, since there have been congressional hearings on the FDA for months where one of their own scientists has brought all of their corruption out into the open. Your doctor will recommend surgery, radiation, and or chemotherapy because it is illegal for him to do anything else in this free country. Most of the people (working at the FDA) making these drug rules are actually on the payroll of drug companies at the same time. They say it is legal. Cancer cure rates overall have not gone up significantly for 40 years, that's why people need other options.
unknownpro
Well if you're mechanic and none of the cars are breaking down, your business will not be so good. With the medical industry, a healthy populace is bad business. A drug that temporarliy relieves a sympton, and that has contraindications that lead to additional medications or treatment is good for the bottom line. This has always been a corrupting tendency in the medical business. It is holding a near monopoly over the industry and making it unaccountable that guarantees movement in this direction.GeraldG said:
It is well known that the same tightly knit group is enmeshed in these two organizations as well as the pharma companies and that FDA and AMA top often retire with high paid positions on the boards of pharma companies.
This is their claim, but whenever standardization/review type operations (and these are important for consumer awareness and saftey) gain monopoly powers from the central government, they will serve the public less and the special interests more, without the threat of losing the public as customers. A restaurant rating system would go out of business if it provided high reviews for a restaurant that served up salmonella surprises, but the FDA just calls for more regulations and more government money. They grow bigger by incompetence, as is the incentive system in all government agencies. eg. Schools, NASA, FBI etc etc.
Actually the AMA was set up to limit the number of doctors so that existing members could increase their salaries.
Read this: http://www.rense.com/general19/enemy.htm
I say to you buyers should beware, do not trust your health to the FDA nor to KT. Read up on the medicines / treatments until you find something or an advisor you trust. Personally I avoid all medicines as much as I can.
Here is a good article for an introduction to some of these ideas with several relevant links.
http://www.mises.org/story/1805
I advise all of you to read up on these things and take responsibility for your's and loved one's health. Do not trust your doctor. Be wary of medical advice. It is corrupted beyond your beliefs.
I have worked with several marketing people from pharma companies and can tell you that this business is all about perks and bribes to doctors and governments. They market what they are told to market, and the medicines produced are those which make the most profit by encouraging long term use rather than looking for cures.
Anyway...I could write a novel here...so just go ahead and follow those links. I hope you find some useful information
pete lafond said:
Good point Pete,
Though he may want to be another Bernie Eckleston
Colin Colenso said:Well if you're mechanic and none of the cars are breaking down, your business will not be so good. With the medical industry, a healthy populace is bad business. A drug that temporarliy relieves a sympton, and that has contraindications that lead to additional medications or treatment is good for the bottom line. This has always been a corrupting tendency in the medical business. It is holding a near monopoly over the industry and making it unaccountable that guarantees movement in this direction.
It is well known that the same tightly knit group is enmeshed in these two organizations as well as the pharma companies and that FDA and AMA top often retire with high paid positions on the boards of pharma companies.
This is their claim, but whenever standardization/review type operations (and these are important for consumer awareness and saftey) gain monopoly powers from the central government, they will serve the public less and the special interests more, without the threat of losing the public as customers. A restaurant rating system would go out of business if it provided high reviews for a restaurant that served up salmonella surprises, but the FDA just calls for more regulations and more government money. They grow bigger by incompetence, as is the incentive system in all government agencies. eg. Schools, NASA, FBI etc etc.
Actually the AMA was set up to limit the number of doctors so that existing members could increase their salaries.
Read this: http://www.rense.com/general19/enemy.htm
I say to you buyers should beware, do not trust your health to the FDA nor to KT. Read up on the medicines / treatments until you find something or an advisor you trust. Personally I avoid all medicines as much as I can.
Here is a good article for an introduction to some of these ideas with several relevant links.
http://www.mises.org/story/1805
I advise all of you to read up on these things and take responsibility for your's and loved one's health. Do not trust your doctor. Be wary of medical advice. It is corrupted beyond your beliefs.
I have worked with several marketing people from pharma companies and can tell you that this business is all about perks and bribes to doctors and governments. They market what they are told to market, and the medicines produced are those which make the most profit by encouraging long term use rather than looking for cures.
Anyway...I could write a novel here...so just go ahead and follow those links. I hope you find some useful information
Well, that was an intelligent response...I'll have to give you that. However, the two websites you pointed me to are (to say the least) biased to a point of view. That's like pointing me to an Income Tax Protestor's website to prove a point about the problems with the IRS. Show me some credible, unbiased evidence. These folks have an axe to grind...I want to see reports by an independent investigative body as appointed by Congress or something like that...something with some substance and unbiased findings. Other than that, it's mere speculation and baseless accusation....
GeraldG said:
There are just tons of sources. I've read hundreds of articles and several books on the issue. Some are emotional and poorly founded, others well documented and very specific.
Just google FDA conspiracy / corruption and start following the links.
Here's some recent news on the FDA corruption in the Vioxx scandal that led to as many as 10,000 deaths recently:
10 on FDA Vioxx panel had ties to companies
Report: Panelists given consulting fees, funding from drug makers
WASHINGTON - Ten members of the Food and Drug Administration advisory panel who voted that a group of powerful pain killers, including the controversial drug Vioxx, should continue to be sold had ties to the drug makers, a new analysis shows.
A study by the Center for Science in the Public Interest indicates that 10 of the 32 panel members had ties to either Pfizer Inc., or Merck & Co., ranging from consulting fees and speaking honoraria to receiving research support from the companies.
The FDA issued a statement saying it screened members of the panel for conflicts of interest. “This transparent process requires the agency to carefully weigh any potential financial interest with the need for essential scientific expertise in order to protect and advance the public health,” the agency said.
After three days of hearings on the drugs, known as Cox-2 inhibitors, the panel voted 31-1 to keep Pfizer’s Celebrex on the market, 17-13 with 2 abstentions in favor of Pfizer’s Bextra and 17-15 that Merck’s Vioxx should be allowed back on sale.
Merck pulled Vioxx from the market Sept. 30 after heart problems were reported in some users. Similar questions were later raised about the other two drugs, prompting the FDA to call the advisory panel to look into the matter.
Since drug companies fund many studies it is not unusual for researchers to have ties to manufacturers, though some have questioned the practice.
The transcript, including the votes by the individual members of the panel, has not yet been posted by the FDA. However, a copy obtained by The Associated Press indicated that the 10 panel members in question voted 10-0 in favor of keeping Celebrex and Bextra available and 9-1 in favor of allowing Vioxx to be brought back onto the market.
Without those ballots the vote would have been 13-7 in favor of withdrawing Bextra and 14-8 to keep Vioxx off sale.
The industry ties of the panel members were first reported Friday by The New York Times.
Source: Associated Press via http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7031927
Last edited: