Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
how so, when you'd have individuals voting with their dollars Unless you meant a state of one?
Those votes don't matter if the means of production are all controlled by private industry. That means the relationship is not equal.
It's the same stuff Ayn Rand followers say, but these are horribly simplistic understandings of the market.
If I am dying of thirst in a desert and someone offers me a bottle of water for a million dollars, is that a mutually beneficial agreement done on equal standing?
Those votes don't matter if the means of production are all controlled by private industry. That means the relationship is not equal.
It's the same stuff Ayn Rand followers say, but these are horribly simplistic understandings of the market.
If I am dying of thirst in a desert and someone offers me a bottle of water for a million dollars, is that a mutually beneficial agreement done on equal standing?
It's the reality of the situation...no more, no less...provided that neither man violated the NAP to set that circumstance in motion.
If you demand water from that man by threat of force you are now violating the NAP. That makes you an armed robber and pro-slavery AKA a Marxist.
It's the reality of the situation...no more, no less...provided that neither man violated the NAP to set that circumstance in motion.
If you demand water from that man by threat of force you are now violating the NAP. That makes you an armed robber and pro-slavery AKA a Marxist.
haha, very funny.
Anyways you prove my point in that case, an exchange of goods for money is not done without exploitation as the context of the agreement matters.
Externalities are things capitalists ignore as agreements and sales are not done in a void. They are affected by the positions the people involved are in, and limit the freedoms of those not directly involved with that agreement.
Those votes don't matter if the means of production are all controlled by private industry. That means the relationship is not equal.
It's the same stuff Ayn Rand followers say, but these are horribly simplistic understandings of the market.
If I am dying of thirst in a desert and someone offers me a bottle of water for a million dollars, is that a mutually beneficial agreement done on equal standing?
Why would someone offer to sell you a bottle of water you cant pay for? Neither party benefits. Same with private industry offering products consumers dont want, dont need or cant pay for.
Anyways you prove my point in that case, an exchange of goods for money is not done without exploitation as the context of the agreement matters.
Externalities are things capitalists ignore as agreements and sales are not done in a void. They are affected by the positions the people involved are in, and limit the freedoms of those not directly involved with that agreement.
Yes, some people have more "stuff" because they work.
I know that receiving fruit from your labor is somehow evil to you but I can't change natural law and neither can you.
Why would someone offer to sell you a bottle of water you cant pay for? Neither party benefits. Same with private industry offering products consumers dont want, dont need or cant pay for.
You’d be indebted to him for a million dollars.
You needed water to live, great. Now you get to spend the rest of your life trying to pay him back.
Yes, some people have more "stuff" because they work.
I know that receiving fruit from your labor is somehow evil to you but I can't change natural law and neither can you.
What you make is not intrinsically tied to you. Your labor is, but the product of your labor is not.
If you make more than you can use or handle, then it is a public good like anything else in nature. Man and material have no bond that gives them ownership of something outside of usage or operation.
I don't like such and such and now I'll hire my goons to fix it.
I disagree with the bold. Voting to me is just letting my choice be known. For me it is very important especially to let our voices be known in local elections. I was much more interested in the "issues" we had to vote on in our local area for instance. I also am interested in a checks and balances form of government for the feds. If whoever I don't vote for doesn't win, I don't complain about them not winning - I'm not a complainer as noted - it is a huge pet peeve of mine. Also not a bully in most ways but I can be. I personally don't think bullying is 100% "bad" all the time and feel people complain too much about bullying today too lol.
It's the reality of the situation...no more, no less...provided that neither man violated the NAP to set that circumstance in motion.
If you demand water from that man by threat of force you are now violating the NAP. That makes you an armed robber and pro-slavery AKA a Marxist.
I am not the ideological purist that you are, or that Winterfall is, for that matter, but withholding water from someone who is literally dying of thirst seems fairly aggressive to me.
I am not the ideological purist that you are, or that Winterfall is, for that matter, but withholding water from someone who is literally dying of thirst seems fairly aggressive to me.
You see, the basic principles of mutual Aid are disregarded by capitalists in favor of the commoditization of everything.
They think if I make a deal with another person, it only affects us.
Furthermore just because two people make an agreement doesn’t mean that agreement happened on equal terms.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.