What are laissez faire capitalism and national socialism the only economic systems that consistently fix economies...

What are laissez faire capitalism and national socialism the only economic systems that consistently fix economies, despite being two totally opposite sides of the coin?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wages_of_Destruction
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Horseshoe theory.

>Socialism and capitalism
>Opposites sides of the same coin
You must learn about debt and usury before thinking about socialism and capitalism.
There is no economy working in our world without debt-based principles

>debt and usury
Fractional reserve banking is undeniably a good thing.

Because?

Friedrich List was right.

This is far from horseshoe theory, the two systems in question aren't similar.

Come on user, this is fucking RationalWiki tier. Do you really think people would be better off if banks couldn't give out loans?

Except that is only true for the former.

Go on?

>National Socialism
>fixing the economy
Huh?

>National Socialism
Are you referring to Keynesian economics?
Because that is what Nazi Germany did.
But yes, digging holes and filling them back up fixes the economy everytime.

Source?

>national socialism
>fixing the economy

You realise the only reason the economy in Germany improved under the Nazis was because it was already so bad after the great depression that it could only get better, and also because the Nazis had begun a massive rearmament programme which in the long run would have been unsustainable. It is just lucky for Hitler the war started before the next recession, or things would have gone very badly for him.

Shit, that seems legit.

Name ONE example of when laissez faire policies actually improved an economy overall, actually creating decent jobs for workers and not just serving the ultra-rich.

Pro tip: you literally can't.

trying to fix capitalism is like trying to put tape on a leaking dam that's about to crack

You are one of the examples

Capitalism is the dam
Socialism is the cracks

Military spending doesn't stimulate consumer demand, stop this meme.

>laissez faire capitalism

national "socialism"

>(((national socialism)))
FTFY. You should live a little, user.

Singapore for starters.

Loans are good

Tax cuts in the US has always been followed by increase in private sector employment

The nazis sure knew how to run a country.

In what way did national socialism "fix" the economy besides raising GDP and lowering unemployment (which both do not necessarily correlate with the security of an economy or the quality of life for its inhabitants) through massive rearmament fueled by debt and deficit spending?

>Because that is what Nazi Germany did.
We can't be sure because they never had an expanding economy in which to cut spending.

Everyone knows that the real cause of economic malaise are the existence of Jewish dirt farmers in Poland.

I don't know if it's good, but the only alternative to fractional reserve banking would just be having everyone use one government bank; why else would for-profit banks hold your money in a checking account?

They are systems that reject criticism. It's that simple. If you fail in either system it's not the systems fault, but failure in other systems is always the fault of the other systems.

>we aren't responsible for you starving
>you could have gone and farmed somewhere else
>we are using your farm now
>you want a job?

It's an excuse for the uneducated and immoral. Literally the only laissez faire capitalists I know are closet kiddy diddlers who work at guitar center. If you want a more intellectual argument against it, go somewhere else. The philosophy just lends itself to the worst of society.

Can't tell if communism or just plain totalitarianism.

Kill yourself, Singapore was (and still is) a dirgist state. In Singapore, the government intervenes in the economy much more than in any Western country, they never pursued laissez-faire policies.

I have absolutely no idea how economy works, but this seems sensible

more like basic capitalism

Free trade policies help the poor more than the rich

Don’t forget about the billionaires feeding them propaganda who really want the tax cut and rigged economy

The massive reduction in world-wide poverty due to an increase in unrestricted trade.

>Do you really think people would be better off if banks couldn't give out loans?
Yes? For all the "growth" brought about by debt, there is always the following collapse.

>laissez faire capitalism
>fixed economy

Wrong.

And no, "muh growth" is not an argument. Debt is fraud.

>Name ONE example of when laissez faire policies
Modern day men who quote laissez faire policy as laissez faire are only paying it lip service in much the same way Capitalists quote Adam Smith despite never having read him or his reservations on many of the central facets of the modern economy such as large multinationals. Furthermore, the fact that nearly every nation on Earth is forced to live with the burden of a Central Bank automatically precludes the fact of true laissez faire policy from ever being enacted because what the government does in one hand to loosen markets, the bank does in another to close them up. Yet despite all this, it is undeniable that nations which adopted some form of market process and forms fared far better than those under strict controls.

> Nat Soc
> Consistently repairing economies
???

> All investment based on debt has led to a collapse
What

How is debt a fraud? Its a simple conversion of risk and liquidity.

Claiming to have something that you don't is fraudulent. It's a system based on people paying each other with glorified I.O.U.s and saying "well it usually works out so whatever."

Please open an economics textbook before writing so much stupid shit.

Hjalmar Schacht fixed the German economy. Not "National Socialism".

This is an important distinction, Schacht simply applied Keynesian demand-stimulation (ie - Building autobahns) which works great in the short-term when you've got an economic in depression with lots of idle industrial capacity and unemployment. Not unlike what Roosevelt did during the New Deal.

But it is a short term fix to get out of a temporary hole, once the crisis is over and you've reached full employment you need to ease into a market driven economy again to avoid stagnation and massive inflation.

Schacht understood this which is why by 1937 he was warning Hitler that his rearmament spending was unsustainable. This got him removed from his post and replaced with Walther Funk (In reality a puppet of Göering, all his powers were stripped) who led Germany down a path of socialist command economy (nationalizations, price controls, autarky, rationing, shortages) that would have caused an economic crash if it wasn't for the massive looting of Europe and relying on slave labour.

There was no "Nazi economic theory" to speak of. There were two distinct periods, a Keynesian period led by Schacht (an actual Economist) which did the same thing Roosevelt did in USA, and a later command economy period led by Göering (an economic illiterate) where Nazi Germany resembled more the Soviet Union.

t. Actual Economist

based roseposter, making a great post once again

>expecting communists to have picked up any economic textbook that isn't das kapital

So Nazis flirted with various forms of social democracy before attempting for nationalization of the whole economy. In a different way to the Soviet Union, but toward the same end result. German socialism wasn't as different as we were led to believe, but it was polluted by ethnic nationalism in the face of the Great War.

The price/wage controls are a very fascinating subject, esp. their impact on inflation during the wartime German economy and subsequent hyperinflation during the last phases of the war and just after the war ended as West Germany was forcibly reintegrated with the rest of the world. This continued until 1948 when the Deutschmark was issued to replace the reichsmark.

But Marxist economics isn't hostile to the idea of debt at all. Its a valid form of capital.

Thank you user

I wouldn't say it was a "complete nationalization" there were private industries left but yeah, by 1943 Nazi Germany was relying on many state-owned factories, money printing, restrictions on goods, price controls, asset confiscations from private citizens and slave labour so as to make their economic model closer to that of the Soviets than to their original 1930s policies.

I agree with you it's a fascinating and tragic spiral of desperation, the more they fucked up economically-speaking the more they needed to loot assets which meant they needed to boost arms expenditure even more to be able to continue expanding and so on.

This is all described very well by Adam Tooze in his book, a great read

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wages_of_Destruction

But seeing as how the world's poor live almost entirely outside the West I can't see how free trade is good for it.

>It's a system based on people paying each other with glorified I.O.U.s and saying "well it usually works out so whatever."
I really don't see anything wrong with this as long as there's a means of enforcing the iou's.

Every Asian country that adopted them post-WW2

I see. You must be one of those fools that takes The Hidden Secrets of Money and other gold standard shilling seriously. Pro tip: Learn how inflation fucking works. If at the very least, you can't explain why inflation can be a good thing, then you need to get educated.

He doesn't look like a communist to me, he strikes me as someone who's been mislead by gold standard shills.

>Gigantic Monopolies.
>Laissez-faire
LMAO!

Name a single country that has an unrestricted trade policy

The only Asian country that has adopted a relatively laissez-faire economic policy is Hong Kong

Atlantis.

Who is this semen demon?

my gf

>National Socialism
>consistently successfully
It was tried once and it was a failure.

>national socialism
>consistently
It's been tried exactly once.

I wasn't talking about the gif, you fool.

> So Nazis flirted with various forms of social democracy before attempting for nationalization of the whole economy. In a different way to the Soviet Union, but toward the same end result. German socialism wasn't as different as we were led to believe, but it was polluted by ethnic nationalism in the face of the Great War.

Considering the Nazis banned the Social Democratic Party, they did not flirt with social democracy at all.

The Nazis basically ran their government off of debt for 6 years, and prevented anyone from finding out how much money the government was borrowing by cooking the books with stunts like mefo bills. Imagine Venezuela but instead of using oil money to bribe the population, it was debt.

Italy? Germany?

>Italy
>National Socialist