>If I have a gun and say, "don't take my water or I shoot you" I have prevented you from acting thus not coercion. This is an alteration of the definition give

>If I have a gun and say, "don't take my water or I shoot you" I have prevented you from acting thus not coercion. This is an alteration of the definition given. Up above, you can see that this exact situation falls under "threat of physical force in as a mean to get someone to comply with your wishes" >Markets are not coercive because you are not threatened with force if you don't participate. Taxes are coercive because if you don't pay, the government comes and takes your stuff or puts you in prison. But you are! Markets rely on property and contract law. Let me lay out the example. You are selling water for $100. I choose not to participate in the market and instead steal a case of water and take it home. Later the government comes and takes my stuff and puts me in prison. So here we see that by the same token tax law is coercive, so are property and contract law. If property and contract law are coercive I don't see how you could ever say that markets aren't since they are the foundation of a market system.