DaedalusHKX's Journal: If we truly had a "free market" THIS wouldn't occur.

http://courierpress.com/news/2007/nov/15/liberty-dollar-office-raided/

So to those who say "the free market doesn't work"... I must ask... how is this "free"? I have known more than few individuals who dealt with this company and none seem to have been "cheated" or dealt with in a way that warrants a Jack Booted Thug squad kicking in this particular door.

Questions, answers? I'm as curious as you are how someone will sell me the "free markets are evil" concept, when none of us have yet seen a "free market" outside of black markets fulfilling needs or wants (especially those that harm nobody but the user of the thing in question) that the government has prohibited (and the list of prohibitions is quite long.)

Free markets aren't evil

[spun]

But they become unfree without protection. The more money one accumulates, the more power one can bring to bear on the market. For instance, if one has enough money, one can afford to lose money undercutting a competitor until they are out of money and you have a monopoly. This is only one dirty trick that people play every day in the free market. Markets also fail to achieve Pareto optimality in the case of natural monopoly, externalities, and imbalance of information.

In case you link to, what the governme

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

I don't understand, if the government hadn't been there to protect the various forms of exploitation, and people hadn't been taxed into subservience, would the corporations have gotten as big as they are? Every large corporation has gotten as such because the government suppressed or destroyed their competition.

As for price controls against these monopolies, if the people are so stupid, ignorant and lacking in foresight, no amount of government planning will deny them the fruits of their stupidity. I've n

Dostoyevsky

[benhocking]

Read Notes from Underground. Despite what the disciples of Ayn Rand might have you believe, Dostoyevsky explains how we don't always act in our own best interest. Of course, he also explains why there will never be a perfect system (be it Marxist communism or Randist capitalism).

From what you've written, I think you'll easily understand his point.

Of course, I understand... however.

[DaedalusHKX]

Would you prefer to be free to screw up and learn from it yourself, or have someone hammer you into submission because you might "endanger" or "hurt" yourself? I'm sure we've all got screw ups in our lives that taught us more than all the good times we've coasted through.

Otherwise I would fully agree with you. However, I'm not a fan of being forced into things. Couldn't stand it as a child, couldn't stand it as a teen, can't stand it now :) My preference, really. No "randian" has ever lead me to believ

I prefer to be free

[benhocking]

Of course, allowing the "market" (i.e., those with money) to do whatever it "wants" is a sure way to keep most people from experiencing freedom. It is impossible for a truly "free market" to exist. Your choices are to allow the government to regulate it (bad choice), for the rich to regulate it (worse choice), or both (worst choice). Obviously, I'm not advocating stifling regulations, but merely acknowledging that some form of regulation is necessary.

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

I am saying the regulations should not exist.

If it hadn't been for government involvement, you would be able to rehabilitate your garden (grow hemp for a few growth cycles, without going to prison, that is) or farmland... you could grow, buy, sell, eat, drink, smoke, whatever you damn please. We have NEVER had a system where there wasn't heavy handed control. And thus those with money merely made the system friendlier to themselves, so the rest of the sheep got pissed. Until the mass man (who is hopeless

It doesn't work like that

[benhocking]

By "market" I meant that neither government nor thugs with guns and badges should tell anyone what they should do with their lives. I mean, and have always thought was meant, the individual's ability to produce and exchange whatever the individual desires... whether good or bad for him or her.

It's a nice concept you have there, just like "from everyone according to their abilities and to everyone according to their needs". Problem is, it can't happen. You remove government regulation and you get (rich) th

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

By the way "You remove government regulation and you get (rich) thug regulation in its place. Nature abhors a vacuum and all that."... what do you think "government" is? Thugs working for the rich. The only reason they pretend to care for the masses is to prevent the masses waking up and getting some good ole' fashioned justice being done. Despite all the willing enforcers available among the general populace, if the governments of the world ever dropped the facade of kindness or fairness or if the media

What government is

[benhocking]

What do you think "government" is? Thugs working for the rich.

Yes, but elected thugs working for the rich. Without these thugs regulating things, we actually get even worse thugs "regulating" things. Also, we have a voice in the process and can get rid of these thugs. I've seen this done in several communities, which is exactly where it needs to start.

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

Ahhh, but here's the little mentioned dirty secret.

If you elect them, you cannot fight them. You've already given them PERMISSION to abuse you.

As for "voice", I saw voice. Every election we swap one group of assholes for another. Next year they tell you who you can have sex with. The year after that, a different group tells you what you can eat or drink or what kind of doctor you have "permission" to see (they're all butchers and drug dealers but they have license to kill you slowly, unlike the guys fro

The above comment is not meant to insult you... so

[DaedalusHKX]

Don't get insulted. The "you" and "your" usage there is general, not aimed at you or anyone in particular, it is meant for whichever reader actually feels himself/herself as fitting the sentence :)

But hopefully it gets some skulls warm with thought on the issue.

It's easy to be pessimistic

[benhocking]

Next year they tell you who you can have sex with.

Except, the trend seems to be the other way. Used to be, you couldn't marry outside your race in most states (if not all). Now you can't marry someone of the same sex in most states (used to be all). I'm betting that 100 years from now (if not less), all states will allow same sex marriage, although there will still be a few citizens who look on it with disgust (much like some do today with mixed races). I know that it moves with fits and starts, but I thi

Don't worry

[benhocking]

Although I didn't read this comment until after replying to the previous one, I never took it as an insult. I'll add that my previous point (in the GP post) was that although I understand the feeling of helplessness on a national level, on the local level it's actually no ways near as hard to make a difference. A lot of important stuff gets done on the local level, and national leaders usually are local leaders first. Unfortunately, the corrupt are naturally more likely to game the system to rise from local

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

Yeah, those same laws forced me to stay in high school and not graduate myself four years early or even sooner (i.e. not attend and waste my life listening to teachers I could one up every single day), and they also kept me from being involved in my father's business until I was of "legal age". Those crooks robbed me of a learning experience and delayed the onset of my progress by forcing me into the growth retarding public school system.

So I disagree. I wish my father could "exploit" me, as you think it.

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

I've been thinking of something like Galt's Gulch. I've seen a few places like that, and a few families like that. Sure, being interconnected is fun, and often useful, but being dependent on everyone who would force you to slave for them is foolhardy. Self reliance first, interconnection second, interdependence only if absolutely necessary for survival itself.

Pro-sweat shop?

[benhocking]

Well, how would you have ended the effective child slavery of the late 19th century, or do you think its existence would have been a small price to pay so that you could join the workforce early? Also, there are ways to start work early even within the current system—I got my first job at 14. I'm not saying there's no room for improvement, I'm only saying that ending the sweatshop practices of previous centuries was "a good thing"(tm).

But the "laws" didn't stop anything.

[DaedalusHKX]

Merely drove it underground. The government itself enforced our alliances as a people with peoples whose governments practice or enforce sweatshop and child slavery, etc. There are still sweatshops in America, but they're underground, this kind of stuff NEVER stops.

All "the law" did was stop honest people from exercising THEIR wills (me and mine for that example). Murder is a crime, yet murder occurs all over the world where it is illegal. Rape is a crime yet it still occurs. All crimes continue to occ

The laws stopped a lot

[benhocking]

What percentage of American children do you think were working in sweatshops at the end of the 19th century? What percentage of American children do you think work in sweatshops now? How can you say the laws stopped nothing?

Murder is a crime, yet murder occurs all over the world where it is illegal.

So, by your logic, we should make it legal because it might be helpful in some cases? Seriously, is that what you're proposing?

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

You DO understand why certain groups are "allowed to marry" now?

Everything that is licensed is subject to ownership or at least total control by the licensor. If you are "licensed to marry" that is why the state can come in and take your kids, or confiscate property or otherwise "regulate" your life. The reason gays and other groups are allowed to marry was because the control machine failed at outright prohibition (as it always does) but it made the now "lesser of the two" (direct control via licensing)

FFS

[Captain Splendid]

First of all, learn some basic HTML. Putting links in a url tag means we can click 'em not copy-paste 'em.

Second, I think Spun explained quite neatly how true, unrestricted capitalism would just quickly grow out of control, in the other thread you two were sparring in.

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

I am proficient with HTML, but I prefer not using slashdot as a referrer... thus the necessity of copy and paste. Some are starting to block slashdot url referrers. And frankly I can't blame them.

Re:

[Captain Splendid]

Have to disagree. It's been a while since Slashdot took a site down. Evolution of the web, plus /. losing some its might.

Re:

[DaedalusHKX]

Call it my good web linking manners.

Some of the sites I link to aren't all that big, some have banned slashdot as URL referer, and I personally don't care to test whether they do or don't.

Besides, whether its a hyperlink or a copy and paste link, 90% of the time, nobody RTFA anyways. :) Most of the people that read my journal tend to, but ever since that firehose thing started up, I've had "newcomers" (i.e. no blue dot) and I've noticed some just latch on.

Fun stuff to argue but kind of lame when they only