4 ms·
Nothing free about any market, since the bounds of said market is inevitably dictated by whatever social coordination mechanisms are available (the most wide-sp
by kaonashi 13y ago
Nothing free about any market, since the bounds of said market is inevitably dictated by whatever social coordination mechanisms are available (the most wide-spread being some form of government).
- zanny 13y agoIf you can make something of your own volition without any violent coercion, and I can voluntarily exchange with you for it, then that is a pretty free transaction. I guess that means there aren't any free markets, since you are at least being violently taxed, and are probably violently forced to comply with regulation unless your implicit production process doesn't violate any such laws, which is unlikely.
- kaonashi 13y agoTaxes aren't violence, they're dues for engaging in the external economy.
- cobrausn 13y agoNo anarchist here, but try not paying your taxes for long enough and the violence will come.
- kaonashi 13y agoIf you try to walk into a baseball game or a movie without paying, it's called theft. If you try to participate in the economy without paying your dues, likewise it's theft and you will suffer the punishment.
- tsotha 13y agoTaxes have very little to do with the economy.
- kaonashi 13y agoThey're the gradient in the system that drives economic activity. If you must acquire a particular currency to pay taxes to avoid jail, then you will offer your output in that currency.
- cobrausn 13y agoSo, we are in agreement then? Taxes are enforced with violence.
- kaonashi 13y agoBeing enforced with violence and being violence aren't quite the same thing.
- burntsushi 13y agoThere is a clear owner of a ballpark or a movie theater. Nobody owns the economy in a similar way (not even the government), so your analogy doesn't hold up.
- kaonashi 13y agoThe economy is owned by its participants.
- burntsushi 13y agoAn economy is not a scarce resource, which means it cannot be owned in any meaningful way. An economy is an abstract concept referring (roughly) to a collection of actors that exchange goods in some geographic location.
- kaonashi 13y agoThis points to weaknesses in the concept of ownership.
- burntsushi 13y agoNot at all. Ownership as a concept is useful specifically for non-violent resolution of conflict over scarce resources. If something is neither scarce nor a resource, then some other construct needs to be used. (For example, in intellectual property law, the term "copyright infringement" is used instead of theft.)
- kaonashi 13y ago> Ownership as a concept is useful specifically for non-violent resolution of conflict over scarce resources. But you outlined precisely when it breaks down: when 'ownership' cannot be determined because the thing in question is a communal resource.
- 13y ago
- rayiner 13y agoViolent coercion is one of the most basic sorts of free action common to all animals. Why arbitrarily take it off the table?