Like I said, enjoy your little pretend win, Rob. You have lots of practice at celebrating those lol.
__________________ Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth bound feathered dinosaur. But it is not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.-- Alan Feduccia-a world authority on birds, quoted in "Archaeopteryx:Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms," Science 1994, p.764-765
Last edited by eThneoLgrRnae on Nov 20th, 2020 at 11:40 PM
I don’t think that’s true, even though I agree that too many businesses are subsidized or bailed out by the government. But private entities have an immense amount of power over ordinary people, and use that to exploit them constantly. Of course historically it was much worse, but we are on a bad trajectory in a lot of ways over the last few decades.
I don’t think it is voluntary. Sometimes the employees and customers have slightly more options, but sometimes the only choice they have is work for or buy from this company or starve, and that’s not real choice, imo. Generally companies are in a more powerful position, imo, and sometimes they use the government to even further strengthen that position.
Yeah, they can exist for long times without providing much or any value, certainly if we don’t just look at customers, but also the costs they impact on society.
The relationship between the state and individual is not voluntary either, in the best case scenario there is a strong democracy that ultimately rests the power with the people, of course that’s generally not so clear cut.
Similar to companies really, it’s a question of power and who has it and how to wield it. The cost-benefit analysis of both states and private companies is complex however, as states do a lot of harm, but also provide a lot of value usually.
So someone who exchanges 10 dollars for a shirt doesnt value the shirt more than their 10 dollars and the seller doesnt value the 10 dollars more than their shirt?
Im operating off of the subjective theory of value, as it is the only conception that can explain prices, among many other things.
A simple example goes something like: a man dying of thirst would spend anything for a bottle of water, a man who owns a lake and a water purification system wont pay so much for bottle of water.
No one can be blamed for the man's condition of dehydration other than that man or those who would use force to expropriate his water.
In any other case they have failed their responsibility to care for themselves.
Damaging the environment would be part of the value paradigm.
No matter how cool the color palettes of nike's next shoe are, most people wouldnt buy them if they were highly radioactive or deatroyed some vital environmental resource.
If a company damaged an area sufficiently, people wont live there and the business would lose patronage, and thus lose revenue.
Im not sure why you think comapnies that dont provide value, nor do they take gov money, could exist long when co vid caused a bunch of companies patronage to lessen, and alot of companies almost or did fail, showing an incredulously low amount of resilience to changes in the variables of life.
Companies like people have to be adaptable, so in the same way people, who didnt have a savings, lost their house because the pandemic are the only ones responsible for that, so is it the case for comapnies, which are simply collections of individuals.
The state creates the circumstance of democracy to exist as a cudgel against dissent, the very tool that allegedly keeps democracies sane and the mechanism for scientific progress.
Democracy is the vader to the state's palpatine.
The pits the losing 49 % against the winning 51 % when we're supposed to all be americans, a title that transcends ethnicity as long as you follow the tenets of non violence and by extension the respect of private property.
Individuals can peacefully exist through voluntary trade, even if the two parties share different ideals.
States exist through the vampirism of the condition of free market capitalism.
The best example of this is how china catapulted out of poverty into prosperity, but not relative prosperity because that requires private property, through free market principles, while under the watch of an fascistic authoritarian regime.
North Korea's grey markets exists as a corollary to this example, being legal for the gov to steal
The becoming illegal when too profitable/creating toouch individual wealth.
What value do states provide that the market couldnt, without the incredibly unethical monopolization of force, and with higher efficiency than private enterprise?
This question is similar to the moral question posed regarding the relationship between piety and moralilty.
What value can churches provide that cant be achieved through secular means ?
And in the case of churches, even that is a voluntary relationship as no one forces anyone go to church, and in fact freedom of religion was/is critical when describing the quality and character of american life.
KMC Community Forums
Nov 20th, 2020 11:38 PM
