4 ms·

So there's no room in this case where and individual would be unable to find work? Somehow, everyone will have a skill-set and the personal capability (even qua

by Weltan 13y ago

So there's no room in this case where and individual would be unable to find work? Somehow, everyone will have a skill-set and the personal capability (even quadriplegic people?) at any given time to find work on demand and to change their work on demand as well. What is your definition of voluntary, by the way? Is a person taking a job they don't want to do, but have to in order to feed themselves, a voluntary decision?

oleganza 13y ago
Say, I would like to be an astronaut. I'm thus unemployed because no one will voluntarily take me to an orbit just because I want that. Is it bad for society? Well, who knows? But I sure can find million other jobs to work at until we hit real resource limits and 100 trillion head count on this planet.
oleganza 13y ago
It's very good that you ask this question. There was always and always will be scarcity in the world. Everyone wants more than it's available right now. To avoid poverty we need ways to save, build capital and insure ourselves against rainy days. This won't eliminate poverty, but nor rape and murder will help removing it. The only way to know how to rationally use resources is to do so without acts of violence. Then we can talk about how to make sure that most people have something useful to do and have enough money to feed themselves.
snitko 13y ago
I think what oleganza is trying to say here is that while unemployment may indeed exist under any system, what we have to understand is that by creating laws and regulations to fight it, we really are doing it at someone else's expense. For instance, if an automobile factory produces cars and people don't really need so many cars, then this factory fires workers. If it's impossible or difficult to fire them, then this means the cost goes on to consumers and prices of cars go up. The reason unemployment exists is not because there's not enough jobs. There are plenty of job positions that can't be filled because there are no people willing and/or skillful enough to fill them. The reason unemployment exists in the wild (with no regulation) is because the market needs to readjust itself to produce something people want in the quantities people want. When government interferes into this process, it only delays this adjustment.
- Weltan 13y ago
  Right, and I guess what I'm saying is that it's fine to do so at someone else's expense. But that's the moral argument and it's a simple one, I don't see government force as illegitimate and therefore I'm fine with taxation, regardless of who is being taxed. If you believe it is illegitimate, that's ultimately your problem and you live in a reality where most people do not agree with you. That's fine, we can disagree and move on. But the problem comes in when unsubstantiated statements come into this. I don't see any evidence presented at all that what you go on to say in your last paragraph is true. "The reason unemployment exists is not because there's not enough jobs." I'm sorry, but my country's unemployment rate is 22%[1], and we have no welfare state worth mentioning. The minimum wage is under $1/h, and there are no restrictions on hiring nor on firing. We've had this same rate of unemployment for decades with constant economic liberalization. Now, I suppose under oleganza's view, we can still blame the very fact that government (anywhere) exists on this problem, but at a certain point you cannot blame the government anymore. [1]http://webrzs.stat.gov.rs/WebSite/Public/ReportResultView.aspx?rptKey=indId%3d240100IND01%2635%3d6%266%3d1%2c2%2c3%2c4%262%3d%23last%232%2640%3d15%2cL15-64%26sAreaId%3d240100%26dType%3dName%26lType%3dEnglish http://webrzs.stat.gov.rs/WebSite/Public/ReportResultView.as...
  - snitko 13y ago
    If people weren't afraid an IRS agent could come and take away their possessions and if they refused to cooperate a policeman could come and handcuff them, we would see whom most people would agree with. It's like saying "but my wife agrees with me that beating women is okay" all the while knowing you would beat her even more if she disagrees.
  - oleganza 13y ago
    "unsubstantiated statements" you say? How about "But that's the moral argument and it's a simple one, I don't see government force as illegitimate and therefore I'm fine with taxation, regardless of who is being taxed"? Basically, you are okay if people who disagree with your opinion can be beaten and their money confiscated. This does not say anything good of you as a fellow human being.

by Weltan 13y ago

oleganza 13y ago

Say, I would like to be an astronaut. I'm thus unemployed because no one will voluntarily take me to an orbit just because I want that. Is it bad for society? Well, who knows? But I sure can find million other jobs to work at until we hit real resource limits and 100 trillion head count on this planet.

oleganza 13y ago

It's very good that you ask this question. There was always and always will be scarcity in the world. Everyone wants more than it's available right now. To avoid poverty we need ways to save, build capital and insure ourselves against rainy days. This won't eliminate poverty, but nor rape and murder will help removing it. The only way to know how to rationally use resources is to do so without acts of violence. Then we can talk about how to make sure that most people have something useful to do and have enough money to feed themselves.

snitko 13y ago

I think what oleganza is trying to say here is that while unemployment may indeed exist under any system, what we have to understand is that by creating laws and regulations to fight it, we really are doing it at someone else's expense. For instance, if an automobile factory produces cars and people don't really need so many cars, then this factory fires workers. If it's impossible or difficult to fire them, then this means the cost goes on to consumers and prices of cars go up. The reason unemployment exists is not because there's not enough jobs. There are plenty of job positions that can't be filled because there are no people willing and/or skillful enough to fill them. The reason unemployment exists in the wild (with no regulation) is because the market needs to readjust itself to produce something people want in the quantities people want. When government interferes into this process, it only delays this adjustment.

Weltan 13y ago
Right, and I guess what I'm saying is that it's fine to do so at someone else's expense. But that's the moral argument and it's a simple one, I don't see government force as illegitimate and therefore I'm fine with taxation, regardless of who is being taxed. If you believe it is illegitimate, that's ultimately your problem and you live in a reality where most people do not agree with you. That's fine, we can disagree and move on. But the problem comes in when unsubstantiated statements come into this. I don't see any evidence presented at all that what you go on to say in your last paragraph is true. "The reason unemployment exists is not because there's not enough jobs." I'm sorry, but my country's unemployment rate is 22%[1], and we have no welfare state worth mentioning. The minimum wage is under $1/h, and there are no restrictions on hiring nor on firing. We've had this same rate of unemployment for decades with constant economic liberalization. Now, I suppose under oleganza's view, we can still blame the very fact that government (anywhere) exists on this problem, but at a certain point you cannot blame the government anymore. [1]http://webrzs.stat.gov.rs/WebSite/Public/ReportResultView.aspx?rptKey=indId%3d240100IND01%2635%3d6%266%3d1%2c2%2c3%2c4%262%3d%23last%232%2640%3d15%2cL15-64%26sAreaId%3d240100%26dType%3dName%26lType%3dEnglish http://webrzs.stat.gov.rs/WebSite/Public/ReportResultView.as...
- snitko 13y ago
  If people weren't afraid an IRS agent could come and take away their possessions and if they refused to cooperate a policeman could come and handcuff them, we would see whom most people would agree with. It's like saying "but my wife agrees with me that beating women is okay" all the while knowing you would beat her even more if she disagrees.
- oleganza 13y ago
  "unsubstantiated statements" you say? How about "But that's the moral argument and it's a simple one, I don't see government force as illegitimate and therefore I'm fine with taxation, regardless of who is being taxed"? Basically, you are okay if people who disagree with your opinion can be beaten and their money confiscated. This does not say anything good of you as a fellow human being.