3 ms·
> owners and especially managers nowadays controlling priorities and work rules So? I do think some people have bad practices. Non-competes, for instance, ar
by mises 8y ago
> owners and especially managers nowadays controlling priorities and work rules
So? I do think some people have bad practices. Non-competes, for instance, are often abused. But you can still leave...
> existing corporate management structures... rely on state violence to maintain themselves... If a bunch of workers enacted control over their workplace
Yes, if there was a workers uprising, I would darn well hope the police would come in and crack heads. You don't get to "enact control" over other people's stuff (including their company). But I do think that crony capitalism is cancer, see Amazon's recent $15/hr push to force competitors out of business.
> You're simply defining your narrow conception of property rights and economic organization to be the Right and Natural Way for Things to Be, and you choose to not see the club of government used to enforce it.
You're absolutely right that property rights are the Right and Natural Way for things to Be. If you don't agree, read about the tragedy of the commons. And look at the 100s of millions communism has killed.
We live in a nation founded on the basis of property rights. One of the most basic functions of our government is to enforce property rights. It's impossible to run a civilization on our scale without it. If you really don't like America and the way she's run, you could leave.
And the idea that you can have my stuff just because you want it is plain wrong.
- scarmig 8y ago> We live in a nation founded on the basis of property rights. Assuming you live in the United States, do you mean the right to enslave people and take their labor? Or the right to kill people and take their land?
- mises 8y agoCare to clarify? I was never alive at either of those times, nor were my predecessors (all immigrated legally after that). I and my family have fairly earned what we have. I agree there were past issues, but socialism/communism is worse in that it keeps taking every year after. And none of what you mentioned is a free market.
- ranie93 8y ago>I agree there were past issues, Are there current issues as well? [1][2] A main point is this (and I think its been mentioned elsewhere in this thread as well): An attack on the status-quo is not a promotion of socialism Our current implementations are a far cry from a free market. The entrenched powers and corporations don't want free markets-- its socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor [3] [4] We'd have to start from scratch to attain a free market. And even then, the oft-quoted invisible hand of competitive markets falls flat in an increasingly opaque, complex world [5] It seems to me that you have a strong sense of what is fair. I urge you to look out into all the wealth of information we have and take a hard look to see if our current way of being is fair [6][7] [1] https://poverty.umich.edu/research-projects/policy-briefs/rising-wealth-inequality-causes-consequences-and-potential-responses/ https://poverty.umich.edu/research-projects/policy-briefs/ri... [2]https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1513.pdf https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1513.pdf [3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilizati... [4]https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/social-mobility-america/491240/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/07/social-... [5]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis [6]https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ [7]https://vimeo.com/129550053 https://vimeo.com/129550053