4 ms·

>All laws are coercive Locke would disagree with your premise. You're an individual with the freedom to move to any society that you agree with the most. Unl

>All laws are coercive Locke would disagree with your premise. You're an individual with the freedom to move to any society that you agree with the most. Unless your freedom has been alienated, you are tacitly consenting to a government's laws by remaining where you are.

soVeryTired 9y ago
So why does the typical American live within 18 miles of home? [0] Do they just happen to agree with the society they're born into, or is it possible there are stronger forces than political preference that constrain their movement? [0] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/24/upshot/24up-family.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/24/upshot/24up-f...
- simonh 9y ago
  It depends what you mean by constrain. What constraints are they under that are not voluntary?
  - soVeryTired 9y ago
    Family ties? Caring obligations? These are extremely powerful forces, despite the fact that they don't fit into the economics-101 thinking that libertarians are so fond of.
    - arcbyte 9y ago
      Those forces fit exactly into economics 101. The first day is always "What is economics" and the answer is always that is the study of human behavior and choice. The supply/demand curve that makes up most of the class beings with the introduction that choice is variable, but assuming for the sake of argument that we consider them equal, what interesting effects do we observe? Have you ever taken that class?
- bduerst 9y ago
  Choosing to live close to family isn't alienation of freedom. Those are economic choices, not coercive constraints.
  - soVeryTired 9y ago
    Sure, but I don't think that amounts to a tacit agreement with a government's laws. Sometimes people are just stuck where they are.
    - bduerst 9y ago
      That's definitively what tacit agreement is, especially when someone claims that all laws are coercive.
simonh 9y ago
That's entirely fair enough, but that's not the point we're arguing on. Objecting to a specific law on the basis that you are being coerced into following it is not a basis for picking and choosing which laws you're prepared to accept, because that is a general feature of laws.
raesene6 9y ago
I'd suggest that the reality for most people is that they're not "free to move to any society that you agree with most". Many countries have strict immigration and citizenship requirements, many of which revolved around wealth. So whilst it may be true that very rich people have complete freedom to choose their favourite society, that's not the reality for the majority of people.

soVeryTired 9y ago

So why does the typical American live within 18 miles of home? [0] Do they just happen to agree with the society they're born into, or is it possible there are stronger forces than political preference that constrain their movement? [0] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/24/upshot/24up-family.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/24/upshot/24up-f...

simonh 9y ago
It depends what you mean by constrain. What constraints are they under that are not voluntary?
- soVeryTired 9y ago
  Family ties? Caring obligations? These are extremely powerful forces, despite the fact that they don't fit into the economics-101 thinking that libertarians are so fond of.
  - arcbyte 9y ago
    Those forces fit exactly into economics 101. The first day is always "What is economics" and the answer is always that is the study of human behavior and choice. The supply/demand curve that makes up most of the class beings with the introduction that choice is variable, but assuming for the sake of argument that we consider them equal, what interesting effects do we observe? Have you ever taken that class?
bduerst 9y ago
Choosing to live close to family isn't alienation of freedom. Those are economic choices, not coercive constraints.
- soVeryTired 9y ago
  Sure, but I don't think that amounts to a tacit agreement with a government's laws. Sometimes people are just stuck where they are.
  - bduerst 9y ago
    That's definitively what tacit agreement is, especially when someone claims that all laws are coercive.

simonh 9y ago

That's entirely fair enough, but that's not the point we're arguing on. Objecting to a specific law on the basis that you are being coerced into following it is not a basis for picking and choosing which laws you're prepared to accept, because that is a general feature of laws.

raesene6 9y ago

I'd suggest that the reality for most people is that they're not "free to move to any society that you agree with most". Many countries have strict immigration and citizenship requirements, many of which revolved around wealth. So whilst it may be true that very rich people have complete freedom to choose their favourite society, that's not the reality for the majority of people.