trivas7
30th June 2009, 01:22
There is a difference bt profits through violence (theft) vs. profits through voluntarism (wage-labor). There is a difference bt profits by selling arms to the government and profits by selling desired products (iPods, e.g.) to consumers.
In any society there is a small subset of violence and fraud. The state is the largest agency of violence in history. If you don't understand the difference bt violence and voluntarism, you need to stop talking re society. As the state usurps more and more power volunterism bt individuals, companies, collectives goes down. If you think there is an equivalence bt punching a clock at Starbuck's and being an inmate at Abu Ghraib, you don't understand how society works.
People selling products really do want competition and everyone benefits from competition. A truly free market never sustains a monopoly. It just doesn't happen. Consumers determine business success, not businessmen. Wal-Mart's success is determined by consumers, not lobbyists or capitalists.
Of course capitalists serves the needs of people. If they didn't they'd go out of business. How do you think people's needs are met under capitalism?
Automation is how wealth grows. More automation creates wealth. Scarcity does not increase profit. Scarcity increases competition.
Violence is not free trade. Scarcity plus a gun equals increased profit. But here the problem is the gun, not scarcity. Violence is not voluntarism. The problem in not profits, the problem is violence.
If socialism/communism is so great, what's stopping people from implementing it? It's not the free market, or money. It's the state. The violence of the state would stop them.
Efficient allocation of resources is impossible w/out prices. That's why socialist economies never work. There's no prices which indicate aggregate demand so you can't ever efficiently allocate resources.
What would be motivation to produce in a profitless society? Why would people strain to produce? How would you know what to produce? Where would you apply finite resources to satisfy infinite desires w/out the mechanism of money and trade?
Yes, state monopolies/corporations are evil, b/c they are sustained by the initiation of violence. What is the moral argument for getting rid of money in a voluntary society? Who says money needs to be sustained by the state?
In any society there is a small subset of violence and fraud. The state is the largest agency of violence in history. If you don't understand the difference bt violence and voluntarism, you need to stop talking re society. As the state usurps more and more power volunterism bt individuals, companies, collectives goes down. If you think there is an equivalence bt punching a clock at Starbuck's and being an inmate at Abu Ghraib, you don't understand how society works.
People selling products really do want competition and everyone benefits from competition. A truly free market never sustains a monopoly. It just doesn't happen. Consumers determine business success, not businessmen. Wal-Mart's success is determined by consumers, not lobbyists or capitalists.
Of course capitalists serves the needs of people. If they didn't they'd go out of business. How do you think people's needs are met under capitalism?
Automation is how wealth grows. More automation creates wealth. Scarcity does not increase profit. Scarcity increases competition.
Violence is not free trade. Scarcity plus a gun equals increased profit. But here the problem is the gun, not scarcity. Violence is not voluntarism. The problem in not profits, the problem is violence.
If socialism/communism is so great, what's stopping people from implementing it? It's not the free market, or money. It's the state. The violence of the state would stop them.
Efficient allocation of resources is impossible w/out prices. That's why socialist economies never work. There's no prices which indicate aggregate demand so you can't ever efficiently allocate resources.
What would be motivation to produce in a profitless society? Why would people strain to produce? How would you know what to produce? Where would you apply finite resources to satisfy infinite desires w/out the mechanism of money and trade?
Yes, state monopolies/corporations are evil, b/c they are sustained by the initiation of violence. What is the moral argument for getting rid of money in a voluntary society? Who says money needs to be sustained by the state?