Opinions on the free market ideology

[IronCladMoon]

Obviously, everyone here, including me is most likely against it, but i have recently come across somebody who believes it is the best idea, some points he has brought up is that a corporations drive comes from the idea of profit, which is directly related to consumers buying products, so he believes if say a corporation were to say use child labor, people would not buy it, and the corporation would fail, and he keeps on saying when the govt does get involved, like when telegraphs were made, they failed, and that regulations only hurt. I believe this to be false, but i need some help getting some evidence, i have not much time since i get a crap ton of homework, so i would love some help, thanks!

[Antiochus]

You want some evidence for the history of child labor? Try Wikipedia...

Capitalism does not operate on any such principles anyway. Coca-Cola financed MAS in Colombia, a mass murdering, cartel-linked, paramilitary death squad. Guess what, people still drink Coke.

[ComradeAllende]

Obviously, everyone here, including me is most likely against it, but i have recently come across somebody who believes it is the best idea, some points he has brought up is that a corporations drive comes from the idea of profit, which is directly related to consumers buying products, so he believes if say a corporation were to say use child labor, people would not buy it, and the corporation would fail, and he keeps on saying when the govt does get involved, like when telegraphs were made, they failed, and that regulations only hurt. I believe this to be false, but i need some help getting some evidence, i have not much time since i get a crap ton of homework, so i would love some help, thanks!

You're friend is right in theory, but a number of examples prove otherwise. For instance, the whole anti-globalization movement in the early 90s tried to start large boycotts of clothing companies that used child labor or did business with local producers who used child labor. Guess how that ended. If that doesn't persuade your friend, tell him about how Nike used to profit off of child workers in Southeast Asia as late as 2010. If that doesn't do it, ask him to explain this bullshit: https://mises.org/library/defense-cheap-labor

Only a libertarian or a gutless neoliberal hack could glue together a defense of child labor.

P.S. Don't worry about old-timers like Antiochus. Once you get used to the forum style you'll be one of us.

[willowtooth]

Obviously, everyone here, including me is most likely against it, but i have recently come across somebody who believes it is the best idea, some points he has brought up is that a corporations drive comes from the idea of profit, which is directly related to consumers buying products, so he believes if say a corporation were to say use child labor, people would not buy it, and the corporation would fail, and he keeps on saying when the govt does get involved, like when telegraphs were made, they failed, and that regulations only hurt. I believe this to be false, but i need some help getting some evidence, i have not much time since i get a crap ton of homework, so i would love some help, thanks!

there's still about 100 million child laborers including in the US many working in extremely hazardous conditions. So that argument is complete bullshit. when people talk about how great "the free market" or capitalism is theyre usually just parroting right wing talking points. Some of the biggest opponents of the most basic principles of laisseze faire economics are the same people who prattle on about the benefits of the free market. They really just want fascism, slavery, and all the other horrors that the big evil gubmint has worked to abolish. They aren't in favor of capitalism as much as they are against socialism, and the reasons they are against it can be vast, stretching from religious issues, to racism, to psychological nostalgic regression.

there is no such thing as capitalism that is "free of government interference" this is just a collection of propagandist buzzwords. The government is heavily involved in any capitalist system, not to protect the poor and disenfranchised but actually the exact opposite in order to defend the wealthy capitalist from the poor. What would happen to the wealthy if the millionaires of Beverley Hills were all of a sudden raided by the millions of people in the surrounding slums? They would want "the government" to protect them pretty quick wouldn't they?

The government prints the money. So if anyone tells you they want "the government out of the economy", or something along those lines, it should be fairly obvious they are completely full of shit.

[GiantMonkeyMan]

It's not as if you go into your local computer store and there's a big sign saying 'the minerals used in the production of the microchips were mined by child labourers in the Congo (https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/congo-child-labour-mobile-minerals) and then processed in factories in China with conditions so bad that they have to employ netting outside windows to prevent suicides (https://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/apple-says-chinese-supplier-made-changes-after-suicides/?_r=0) - only £250!".

[KomradeMakaVelli]

Most of the evidence i have brought towards this debate is circumstantial/moral rather than statistical, so i would say that regulations are the reasons we have a minimum wage in the US, which is still far too low. The Bourgeois' idea of the free market, at least on the labor side of the debate, is that if you deregulate the business, the CEOs themselves will just grow a bigger heart like the grinch and end up raising the wages for the workers out of the sheer appreciation that they produce their wealth, and that reason alone, which is what should happen, but thats an illusion. CEO's use that extra profit from deregulation to throw into offshore accounts and spoil their affluent children with fancy cars, drugs, and fancy powerful lawyers to get their family out of any crimes they happen to commit through that very affluence. They will never spend their profit on things they should. If they did, and it was a regular thing we could truly count on happening in the masses, then yes, i would say free market Capitalism would be a great thing. But, since thats not reality, and since Capitalism will always exploit and utilize the dark and greedy side of human nature, this is evidence that the Free Market System is flawed, and doomed for self destruction.

[ckaihatsu]

They will never spend their profit on things they should. If they did, and it was a regular thing we could truly count on happening in the masses, then yes, i would say free market Capitalism would be a great thing.


This is an unrealistic 'if', to the point of sheer moralism and wishful thinking, and it also assumes that the market mechanism itself is a sound instrument, which it isn't:





The financial crisis of 2007–2008, also known as the global financial crisis and the 2008 financial crisis, is considered by many economists to have been the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s.[1][2][3][4]




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007%E2%80%932008

[jdneel]

Under Capitalism, the corporations poison our air, water and soil with impunity. They resist any checks on the release of green house gasses which are a major factor in global climate change.For what? Profit, pure greed.
If for no other reason, Capitalism needs to be abolished because it is unsustainable. Even if you ignore the exploitation and mistreatment of the majority of the popultion, the workers, you must understand that Capitalism must be overthrown before it destroys the very planet we live on.

Sent from my SM-S920L using Tapatalk

[(A)]

There is nothing free about the "free" market.

Even without government protections (which must exists to maintain private property laws) The means of production would still be under the command of the ruling class.

Only by eliminating exclusive control over the means of production can a market be "Free". See Mutualism* (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_%28economic_theory%29)

But then again look at what happened in Russia; the market could have been replaced all together under the democracy of the workers unions if they had had the freedom to.


Why would we have need of money, all Petrograd is in the hands of the workers; all the apartments, all the clothes stores, all the factories and workshops, all the textile mills, the food shops, all are in the hands of the social organisations. The working class has no need of money.


—
Iosif Bleikhman, one of the leading Petrograd anarchist communists







(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory))

[GLF]

The "free-market". Freedom. The freedom to screw you over and the planet you live on. Freedom to exploit, overcharge, and misrepresent. That's what "freedom" means in "free-market".

Do you honestly think the market can regulate itself? Do you honestly think for one second the people care? Anti-aging creams and male-enhancement ... let's take advantage of human insecurity. No one will stop us. Let's sell porn to horny old men who can't get laid - they'll pay us because it's in their nature. Nobody will stop us. Let's sell addicting products that kill people and destroy their bodies, and they'll continue to give us their hard earned dollars because of the drugs/chemicals we put in it. Who can stop us?

Republicans/right-wingers will screw you in the ass. Democrats/centre-left are your best option because at least they want to lube up first.

Freemarket = freedom to shit all over goodness and decency. Human greed doesn't regulate itself. Evil doesn't regulate itself. If it did it wouldn't be evil, and if the free-market regulated itself it wouldn't be "free".

/rant

[Ale Brider]

People buy things out of necessity. Necessity to survive or to have (no matter what kind of) pleasure. Ethics is usually the last thing people care about when it comes to buying things. And this is not their fault, not like people's "mentality" could be changed unless the whole system breaks. So in short, people will buy things made by utilizing child labor. Not because they are evil, but because this is how capitalism works. Boycotts are a thing but usually they are (especially in the 21th century) laughable attempts, and have no impact on the greater course of things whatsoever.

[GLF]

People buy things out of necessity. Necessity to survive or to have (no matter what kind of) pleasure. Ethics is usually the last thing people care about when it comes to buying things. And this is not their fault, not like people's "mentality" could be changed unless the whole system breaks. So in short, people will buy things made by utilizing child labor. Not because they are evil, but because this is how capitalism works. Boycotts are a thing but usually they are (especially in the 21th century) laughable attempts, and have no impact on the greater course of things whatsoever.Exactly - that's the point. Anyone who says the free-market regulates itself is laughably naive.

OP, I wouldn't even waste time arguing with the person mentioned in your original post. If they're to the point of making those arguments then in all likely hood they are too far gone and your time is better spent reaching others.