Re: Public/Private

[Ian Murray <seamus2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "David S. Shemano" <dshemano@xxxxxxxxxxx>



> In reply to Ian Murray and Matthew Forstater:
>
> Let me be more specific.  I am not disputing that the private/public
distinction is often vague, and that markets are inseparable from the
state that creates the rules that define the market, etc.  I am not saying
that free trade is the natural state of affairs (btw, I am presently
suffering through The Great Transformation -- aren't you proud of me?).
>
> However, even if everything in the previous paragraph is true, there are
types of behavior that are analytically distinct.  If Boeing goes to the
legislature and says that it will move unless it receives the benefit of a
state expenditure, that is a different behavior than if it does NOT go to
the legislature, right?  So why would you call both behaviors the same
thing?

=====================

I didn't say that they were the same thing in the context you are citing
and you raise a good point. Why *is* Boeing going to the State? :-) Why
don't they leave the State [and my wallet] alone?

In the larger context, your 1st paragraph, alot of the rules the State has
created and the path dependency of the rules, are themselves the outcome
of rent-seeking. Some mainstream economists have even argued that the
modern State-Form is the result of rent-seeking; arguably the USA is the
result of rent-seeking behavior by GW, TJ and their --prior to success in
their venture-- criminal syndicate[s].



> To me, rent-seeking is the attempt to increase profitability through the
lobbying of the state.  I am prepared to say that lobbying for a tax
reduction or lower tariffs because it will provide an advantage compared
to competitors may be rent seeking.  However, increasing profitabilty
through making capital investments, for instance,  is simply a different
type of behavior that is analytically distinguishable.  I do not see any
reason why both behaviors should be called the same thing.
>
> David Shemano

===================

The larger issue, imo, is that the very ability to make those capital
investments couldn't even exist if some group hadn't previously engaged in
rent seeking to ensure that a certain set of financial institutions and
their accompanying fiduciary relationships were authorized by the State
that gave them a competitive advantage over a different set of financial
institutions and fiduciary relationships. Over time these become the
'sedimented' practices of our society and we take them for granted in the
manner in which fish take water for granted. I think we're at a point
where we need to think about how dirty the water in our fish tank is.


Ian