Now since we’ve had our Communist brethren rattling on about the evils of capitalism I like to ask this question, to what type of trade system would you be inclined. Now I’ve based these on the actual (rather than the theory) reactions in markets in the world and tried as best I can to give understandable examples.

Trans-National Model
This form of capitalism involves minimal levels of government regulation and a minimal taxation environment. One of the results of this is that ultimate source of authority in the market is the trans-national bodies involved.
Such as the WTO, IMF, large scale multinational corporations (such as McDonalds, Wal-Mart, etc.). This been due to the market generally been highly concentrated in the hands of a small number of competitors due to mergers and benefits of concentration. This is a market where capital and people are highly mobile, though ideas are highly regulated among competitors. In many ways this the model the US is heading towards, under such deals as NAFTA and FTAA.

National Model
This is very similar to the trans-national model in that there is a concentration towards large businesses, but there is bias in the regulatory and tax system that favours national producers over foreign registered. This system by and large isn’t very regulated (beyond the border entry point that is) and has easy movement of capital and people within the nation. This would be where the US currently would be in my view. Mexico, Italy would also be examples I think.

Local Business Model
This type of capitalism would be dominated by a large number of small regional businesses. Its what would be described as the nation of small shopkeepers.
Now this tends to have a large government regulatory environment and taxation system that favours small business against the economies of scale it would be competing against. The US economy from the 50’s-80’s would an example of this. Today France would be an example in trying to maintain local businesses against market forces.

Semi-State Model
This type of model has a relatively high level of government activity in the market, even going so far as to the government having a large shareholding in companies. This market is highly regulated, but highly privatised with national businesses predominating and capital movement been hard to move outside the national market.
Germany would be an example of this type of capitalism.

Welfare Statist Model
This market is highly regulated and heavily taxed with a lot of power residing in the government. Sweden, Finland would be examples of this type of capitalism. Capital movement is highly restricted and tax spending invested heavily in social programs.

Centrally Planned
This market while privatised is directed by a combination of public and private planning. Japan is a prime example of this type of capitalism, in that while the market is highly privatised the regulations and tax system are designed to have cooperation on a national level against foreign competitors.

__________________
"Better to die on you feet than live on your knees" - Emilio Zapata

Personally I favour the nation of small businesses.

I decided to ask this question because of something I was thinking about today while walking through town today.
About a year or two a series of large stores opened up in the area, and I remember at the time opposing them, though not actively I'll admit.
Now I walked down main street and local shops are closing down, or closed down already. And I remeber the arguements that had been used to support the stores been given planning permission being that they'd bring in employeement to the area, lower prices etc. Plus they threw alot of money behind there arguement, far more than local residents could.
Now while the town is growing somewhat all these local businesses are been driven out of business. Local suppliers are also unable then to compete as the new businesses are foriegn in nature and tend not to use Irish suppliers.
And I find dreadful to see all the things that gives a community strenght, and grows democracy is been undermined.

__________________
"Better to die on you feet than live on your knees" - Emilio Zapata

Is "laissez-faire" a choice?

that would be my choice...

I was going to but its really a theorithical model. And to be far i was basing these on the practical results of capital policies rather than just detacted philosphical viewpoints.
And to be fair the transnational model by-and-large is laissez-faire save that the resulting concentration of power in large capital groupings is the practical result.
The market is left to its own devises. That makes the dominant market players the ultimate source of authority, this is what happens in the majority of markets.

Thats why I used these six models rather than the more theorithical economic ones. Im sorry if their not entirely to your liking, but I had to generalise using real practical markets rather than more idealised ones.
Possibly I should have phrased the question better.

__________________
"Better to die on you feet than live on your knees" - Emilio Zapata

How do you come to this conclusion? Laissez-faire capitalism means not only private property and the rule of objective law but the complete separation of the state from economic activity—conditions that currently do not exist in any country in the world.

It's like saying the "communism" version of "communism"... they are one in the same. Laissez-faire IS capitalism.

When capital is trans national the state really has no power or activity in the market. Capital not Citizens sets the market rules and regulation.
There is no pure capitalist system in the world.But there are differing degrees of capitialism, thats what I trying to reflect in the model.
Im trying to shy away from the theory because markets, politics, religion, people, national pride, hatred, etc, are all factors that affect the national economy.
Simply trying to hermatically seal of the economics from its social effects really isn't a good long term investment plan.

__________________
"Better to die on you feet than live on your knees" - Emilio Zapata

realised I didn't put in centrally planned on the poll.
Sorry about that.

__________________
"Better to die on you feet than live on your knees" - Emilio Zapata

No capitalism

__________________
“Capitalism cannot reform itself; it is doomed to self-destruction. No universal selfishness can bring social good to all.” —Dr. W.E.B. Du Bois