Re: Another question about free-markets... (fwd)
Forwarded message:
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:03:25 +0100 From: Steve Mynott <stevem@tightrope.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: Another question about free-markets...
On Sun, Oct 04, 1998 at 11:53:28PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
Now in a free-market, by definition, there is no law. What then is the
no in a free market there is no state
there are laws based on natural rights
Ok, who writes the laws? Who enforces the laws? Who decides what is natural? Remember, we have *NO* participants in a free market other than the producer and the consumer. Two, and *only* two, parties are involved. ____________________________________________________________________ The seeker is a finder. Ancient Persian Proverb The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, Oct 05, 1998 at 07:12:55AM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
From: Steve Mynott <stevem@tightrope.demon.co.uk>
On Sun, Oct 04, 1998 at 11:53:28PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
Now in a free-market, by definition, there is no law. What then is the
no in a free market there is no state
there are laws based on natural rights
Ok, who writes the laws? Who enforces the laws? Who decides what is natural?
whoever in a market by the division of labour finds it profitable will write and enforce the laws see David Friedman's http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Libertarian/Machinery_of_Freedom/MofF_Chapter_29.h... for an explanation of how private courts and police could work "Natural Law theory rests on the insight... that each entity has distinct and specific properties, a distinct "nature", which can be investigated by man's reason" -- Murray N. Rothbard
Remember, we have *NO* participants in a free market other than the producer and the consumer. Two, and *only* two, parties are involved.
thats how economic thinking starts, or rather should start, and then the economy is an array of these individual transactions.. police and courts provide a "middle man" function, so you would need three participants -- pgp 1024/D9C69DF9 1997/10/14 steve mynott <steve@tightrope.demon.co.uk> the first duty of a revolutionary is to get away with it. -- abbie hoffman
From: Steve Mynott <stevem@tightrope.demon.co.uk> there are laws based on natural rights
At 07:12 AM 10/5/98 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
Ok, who writes the laws?
No one.
Who enforces the laws? Who decides what is natural?
In the minarchist proposal, as explained by Bastiat, already quoted on this thread, http://www.jim.com/jamesd/bastiat.htm "the collective force", aka the minimal state. In the anarchist proposal, explained by Spooner in "Natural Law" http://www.jim.com/jamesd/spooner.htm, and myself in "Anarcho Capitalism, a short summary" http://www.jim.com/jamesd/anarcho-.htm, anyone and everyone decides. Attempts to enforce unnatural law are more likely to get one killed. Friedman in "A positive account of property rights" http://www.best.com/~ddfr/Academic/Property/Property.html explains why enforcing the law "Whats yours is yours, and what is mine is mine" is less likely to get you killed than attempting to enforce the law "Whats mine is mine, whats yours is up for grabs" --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG y5lZXNb9KdI6G/J/Mw0QVE3D0Xa+BCJ1nJ9JZrgy 4b6jnnkVkioQJ7SSLk7VTW3r694QFvcvfRB6H3dGp ----------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ James A. Donald
Jim Choate wrote:
Forwarded message:
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1998 10:03:25 +0100 From: Steve Mynott <stevem@tightrope.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: Another question about free-markets...
On Sun, Oct 04, 1998 at 11:53:28PM -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
Now in a free-market, by definition, there is no law. What then is the
no in a free market there is no state
there are laws based on natural rights
Ok, who writes the laws? Who enforces the laws? Who decides what is natural?
Everyone. Ever heard of common law?
Remember, we have *NO* participants in a free market other than the producer and the consumer. Two, and *only* two, parties are involved.
This is incorrect. Everyone is involved, in that there is generally more than one producer, and almost always more than one consumer. If the general body of consumers feel that producer X is doing something unethical, or otherwise badly, they will not do business with that producer --either for fear of being cheated, or simply because they feel that it would be morally incorrect to support him. If it happens that there is only one producer, then the general sentiment of the consumers will create a large demand for an alternative supply of whatever producer X produces. This generally leads to the diminishment of X's profits, which either drives him out of business entirely, or forces him to change his ways. This is how it works in a free market/society. Of course, if it were a governed society, producer X would buy up a bloc of politicians, and get them to either pass laws prohibiting or handicaping his potential competition, or get them to give him a big fat subsidy, which can be used to drive competitors out of business. The net result: everyone is forced to buy from producer X, even though everyone knows he's slime. Is the argument any more clear now? Michael Hohensee
participants (4)
-
James A. Donald -
Jim Choate -
Michael Hohensee -
Steve Mynott