“The only ‘fair’ is laissez-faire, always and forever.” ― Dmitri Brooksfield

  • 0 Posts
  • 8 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • If the person renting a home stops paying, the landlord will use force to evict the person.

    In this case, the force applied by the landlord is legimitate because the tenant is not performing their contractual obligations over the property of the landlord.

    You didn’t pay taxes? Here, lemme force you to stay in prison for a while, also here’s a fine on top of that.

    There is no contract between the government and citizen that legitimize the violence of the state. Any theory of a “social contract” will be unilateral by nature. Actually, the state itself is a threat to the Non-Agression Principle.

    Not all contracts are voluntary and, more importantly, the workers are almost always the weaker party when it comes to negotiation.

    The asymmetries of power between both parties does not mean the contract is not voluntary. In fact, any government intervention in the labor market will make this situation worse, as these encourage poverty and harm those workers who are the less productive in the market.

    If you leave it to the market to “self-regulate”, you’ll just get feudalism 2.0, where companies become the new noble houses

    As long as private property is not violated by institutional coercion; as long as the system of prices is not manipulated by any government policy; as long as human action and his natural rights are respected: social cooperation through the division of labor will flourish, as voluntary exchange is the source of economic progress.

    Indeed, civilization itself is inconceivable in the absence of private property. Any encroachment on property results in loss of freedom and prosperity, as property is the only way to resolve conflicts by the existence of scarce resources.

    The market is a process, not an “equilibrium model”. It is not designed, but emerged from human action.

    Really, any sufficiently big company will act just like a govt, full of unnecessary bureaucracy

    The difference is that having market concentration does not mean being a monopoly. In fact, a monopoly is a government-grant privilege, for gaining legal rights to be a preferred producer is the only way to maintain a monopoly in a market setting.

    The state can not have direct consumer feedback; it can not act economically. Instead, it collects taxes and spends them arbitrarily following interest groups.

    “In a market economy, the range of quality, quantity, and type of goods and services correspond to social needs. These goods are services that are valued by consumers, and hence, they will be provided if it is economically feasible to do so relative to other social priorities.”


  • lunatics that cry at taxation but orgasm at rent and profiting off others’ work.

    The former is only possible through institutional compulsion and coercion. The latter is through a voluntary contract that expresses the cooperation of both parties to work for each other, as they have a property interest in specific performance of the other.

    Denying this process of voluntary exchange is, implicitly, denying the free will of the tenant and worker.




  • Because we voted for them.

    The fraud of representative democracy. What about those who didn’t vote them (the tyranny of the majority)? We, the common citizens, have really any power if our vote is secret?

    The rights and obligations of a contractual act are generated by explicit consent of both members. This does not happen when we our vote is completely secret, without our names and surnames. Politicians are free to impose their monopolical powers, even if we don’t choose them.

    “Representative democracy is the illusion of universal participation in the use of institutional coercion."

    We didn’t vote for the board of directors of private companies.

    Because we shouldn’t. Except for the lobbyists, they are using their private property and their factors of production achieved by social-cooperation.

    There’s plenty of waste and corruption in private enterprise. It’s not voluntary if they lie cheat and steal just like bad politicians.

    The only difference is that, in a free-market setting, they wouldn’t have any monopolical privileges to mantain their economical power and reputation in the market, as their permanence is dependent of supply and demand.


  • Taxes exist because public goods are actually good, and benefit everyone.

    Taxes raise money for transfers to special interests and public employees. Why would you trust an oligarchy of politicians (the State) to decide which goods are useful “for a community” and which don’t?

    In contrast to private businesses that supply the goods that consumers voluntarily want to buy, public officials lack of the capacity to pick data as to what people truly demand, much less how to go about meeting those demands economically. They don’t have direct feedback of what every individual in the community want; they don’t pass the test of economic rationality.

    If the Monopoly of Violence can’t act economically, they have no other choice but respond to interest groups, so tax money will necessarily end up with narrow interest groups rather than the provision of “public goods”

    The sum of the parts is greater than the individual parts.

    The end does not justify the means. The mere existence of taxation is detrimental (and antithetical) to the very source of economic growth, that is, voluntary exchange.

    Goods like education and roads, for example, are goods like any other: they can be supplied by markets and markets alone.

    The only privilege we need is a better community.

    A better community will be formed if it’s achieved by voluntary means. Moral obligation is not the same as legal obligation. How can individuals be virtuous? By letting them act freely.