Try to envision a stronger economic system.

W

Wilksey

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
The kind of regulations that prevent me from fucking up the environment whilst still making a nice profit.
Click to expand...
Which is a good thing, no?

What about fire regs? Aren't you required to abide by a fire code to acquire a license? I imagine you're using a lot of juice, so there's probably an electrical code you've got to abide by for safety purposes. Then there's the haz mat regs for any solvents you may use, and, of course, labor regs for your workers, and probably a bunch of other shit I have no clue about.

Regardless, business in a capitalist system are FAR from being "unregulated".
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
heckler73 said:
According to what you envision as an ideal market structure, I could negotiate prices with the cashier. What is preventing me from doing so? What is preventing them from doing so? It sounds like you have an external entity enforcing contracts of some type at some point.
You can't avoid it...
Click to expand...
Not quite how it work in a free market though... You would not have a sole exclusive external entity that is monopolistic AND coercive. Absent an exclusive external entity there would or could be multiple entities. Consumers acting in their self interest will make the best choices if they are allowed that choice.
 
heckler73

heckler73

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Not quite how it work in a free market though... You would not have a sole exclusive external entity that is monopolistic AND coercive. Absent an exclusive external entity there would or could be multiple entities. Consumers acting in their self interest will make the best choices if they are allowed that choice.
Click to expand...

You keep skirting the question; what is preventing me from negotiating a price with the cashier?
Either there are no cashiers, and everyone has a little "shop" (creating information inefficiencies and reducing the power of wholesale leverage) which they manage/operate on their own or in collectives,
or you have some external entity presiding over and enforcing contractual law.

You cannot avoid the influence of government in markets. Government is required for markets to exist securely. You will find if you take your ideas far enough and explore the prerequisite conditions involved, they will lead to that same conclusion.
Coase's Theorem sums up that point very succinctly, IMO. Even when private transactions can most efficiently resolve an externality issue, they still require no (or low) transaction cost, along with the clear assignment and enforcement of property rights. There will always be an external party of some type to ensure those conditions are met.

You seem to be now implying that contracts are going to be enforced by Coca-Cola and Google militias. Excuse me Mr. Mussolini, your black-shirted chauffeur has arrived. Yes, he is carrying his negotiator's manganello.


MalWart's "new" price guarantee program... :lol:
 
desert dude

desert dude

Well-Known Member
heckler73 said:
According to what you envision as an ideal market structure, I could negotiate prices with the cashier. What is preventing me from doing so? What is preventing them from doing so? It sounds like you have an external entity enforcing contracts of some type at some point.
You can't avoid it...
Click to expand...
Nothing prevents you from doing so. Go ahead and try. If they refuse to bargain, go elsewhere.

What prevents "them" from doing so (generally) is that they are employees, not owners, hence they have no authority to bargain on price or terms.
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Not quite how it work in a free market though... You would not have a sole exclusive external entity that is monopolistic AND coercive. Absent an exclusive external entity there would or could be multiple entities. Consumers acting in their self interest will make the best choices if they are allowed that choice.
Click to expand...
Absent the government, there would be no capitalism, government exists to serve the ruling class and protect private property.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Neofeudalists call themselves "Anarchocapitalists" because they think that capitalism can exist in the absence of government. Really, they simply advocate for the privatization of the government. From private armies to private police to private courts and roads. It is inverse totalitarianism.
Click to expand...
Not really. Also I'm more of a Panarchist, but keep trying to tell me what I think all the while avoiding answering any questions.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
reported as spam.









the very existence of these product refutes your argument.
Click to expand...

I apologize for my previous generalization. You are correct SOME consumers will make poor choices. However over time and presented with many available options, the free market will prevail and the astute consumer will not shoot himself in the foot when spending their own money.

I heard this one time a guy posing as a consumer actually took a shit on the floor of an eating establishment, but again, most consumers are not idiots.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
Odd you think a stop light controls your life. I bet toll booths have you going crazy.
Click to expand...
Odd that you think I think a stop light controls my life.

Come to think of it, odd that you think you think.

Can you say sycophant? I know you can.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
Absent the government, there would be no capitalism, government exists to serve the ruling class and protect private property.
Click to expand...
Oh silly you.

Absent a central coercive government, multiple non coercive governments become possible don't they?

Also, despite your claim, you never read The Market For Liberty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top