James Rogers wrote:
> True free markets offer maximum *average* utility and growth to agents.
> Perfectly controlled markets offer a guaranteed utility(?) floor to
> agents.
> In the real world, both systems have problems because they are run by
> people, not machines. It becomes a values argument ...
> This is very analogous to network protocol design, which
> are essentially markets for communication bandwidth. Free-for-all
> protocols offer the maximum possible throughput but no guarantees
> regarding the performance of individual packets. Controlled, negotiated
> protocols offer guarantees of performance for individual packets, but it
> is
> mathematically impossible to meet the average performance of free-for-all
> protocols on the same hardware. Both types of protocols are in use
> today,
> with the selection criteria being dependent on the application.
I can't speak to network protocols, but this is very misleading regarding
markets.You can redistribute wealth by just taking cash from one person and
giving it
to another person, without in any other way interfering with the market.
This
can provide as much of a utility floor as you like. All other regulation
and
control cannot be justified in terms of providing a utility floor.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:37:34 MDT