Thread: The Market vs. The State

This coming from the guy that called me silly because I told him there were no arguments for me to argue against, after telling me he was too busy to do what he said he would.

Wrong. I said this to you:

Maybe. It was like a week ago when I submitted this thread. I've sort of lost interest. This is a hobby. I have many. It's really easy to spout an opinion, but it's work (not to mention tedious hunting-down and finding of links for referencing) to write opinion backed with data. To be honest, I'm currently much more interested in space elevators, orbital rings, and other such brain-porn. I'm fickle. Sue me.

I then said this:

Yeah, silly. Because communism looks about as appealing as salted dogshit on paper.

...in response to your comment on 'the popular phrase'. I did not call YOU silly, but the 'popular phrase', because I find the first part.....silly.

My saying you're full of shit isn't based on that.

Don't really care why. If your next post isn't an on-topic argument pertaining to the subject of this thread, you're ignored.

Originally Posted by Sigg

i never said it works fine, i just don't have the extreme, cynical view of the world that makes me think that everything is so damn horrible.

Enjoy your optimism, then. I guess. Or not.

trying to understand yourself, the world around you and your place in the world are at their core, practical. so i'm sorry if those discussions seem meaningless to you, but maybe you just miss the point.

The funny thing is you were the one demanding practical value. If you can't find it in the discussion yourself, I can't help you. I find all those topics I mentioned to be wastes of time. You don't? Once again...yay for you.

and? does it effect the message? are you unable to understand what i'm saying? has my ability to communicate been hindered in any way? get off your high horse.

Grow a skin.

at the risk of much targeting, I'll add my bit.

Market: The buying and selling of goods/services is driven by a single force - Profit.

All things aside, this desire for profit, by either an "entity" like a corporation, or a single individual, is the same. They each want the maximum amount they can with the least amount of effort to obtain it.

Now, given that what generates profit, or "more" profit has no bearing on what is humanely proper, or decent, backed by greed (or simply competition) and you open a very large Pandora's box of how far will anyone (or everyone) go in the quest of power and wealth.

I fail to see how any good can come of such a thing existing.

Originally Posted by Leyline

...in response to your comment on 'the popular phrase'. I did not call YOU silly, but the 'popular phrase', because I find the first part.....silly.

Are you off your meds?

Does anyone have anything to add that actually counts as reasoned debate and that's actually about The Market and/or The State?

Insulting each other is not what this forum's supposed to be for.

Originally Posted by Dr. Malone

I haven't read all the long posts because I didn't think a position had been explained yet, but I did see that Leyline isn't planning on writing it out, so I'll just ask the questions that seem the most immediate to me based on what I've gathered on Leyline's position. If they've been answered, just say so and don't worry about explaining them again.

How would you go about switching from our (USA) current system to your system? You want no regulation or laws to interfere with the market, and I believe you've said you want local bartering systems. So how would you get rid of the huge companies in existence that no small provider or upstart or bartering would be able to overtake? Government intervention and/or laws about it would seem contradictory to anarchism.

How would you keep anyone growing to large in the market place? Is there some kind of reasoning that predicts why that wouldn't happen? Again, I'm assuming laws and regulations are out.

How would you deal with the assholes (the "few bad apples") who fuck everything up while amassing huge amounts of money for themselves. It doesn't seem like getting fired or any kind of natural market punishment would get them if they just take the money and run, leaving the infrastructure damaged/destroyed and costing other people.

Basically, what I could get from this, is that you believe that for a market to function in a "free" environment, there needs to be an established infrastructure to ensure honest and humane business practices.

Which I think is the lynch pin of the issue as far as this discussion goes.

Originally Posted by Ungood

Basically, what I could get from this, is that you believe that for a market to function in a "free" environment, there needs to be an established infrastructure to ensure honest and humane business practices.

Which I think is the lynch pin of the issue as far as this discussion goes.

There is an established infrastructure; one per every developed country. And, while they are not perfect and can in no way ensure honesty - or even be honest - without them there would be [by now] one super corporation owning all the rest and controlling the global economy. Entrepreneurs would be a dead breed, lest they compete for mowing lawns.

So, who else besides Leyline just completed reading "The Wealth of Nations" by Jack Daniels?

Originally Posted by Blood

There is an established infrastructure; one per every developed country. And, while they are not perfect and can in no way ensure honesty - or even be honest - without them there would be [by now] one super corporation owning all the rest and controlling the global economy. Entrepreneurs would be a dead breed, lest they compete for mowing lawns.

What I got from this was for enterprise and market to thrive they need to be reigned in to some extent to ensure they remain healthy in their growth.

So, who else besides Leyline just completed reading "The Wealth of Nations" by Jack Daniels?

Nope, have not read it.

Originally Posted by Ungood

What I got from this was for enterprise and market to thrive they need to be reigned in to some extent to ensure they remain healthy in their growth.

...and to ensure new growth and opportunity for those who would otherwise be shut out.

I can only imagine a free-er market would tilt the pendulum even further in one of those directions. Since we can still, you know, think shit without being electroshocked while caged, starving rats are set in front of our eye sockets, that means one is more likely in this scenario than the other...I wonder which one?

I can only imagine a free-er market would tilt the pendulum even further in one of those directions. Since we can still, you know, think shit without being electroshocked while caged, starving rats are set in front of our eye sockets, that means one is more likely in this scenario than the other...I wonder which one?

Come on, dude. Not only does this post rely on the GIGANTIC ASS PICTURE that I had to wait 15 minutes to load, it sabotages itself with the two emphasized bits. The first posits a failure in individual imagination, the second a form of begging the question. You then follow with a a statement that doesn't so much slip down the slope as leap off, shrieking hysterically.