GhostWriter16
Deity
How would you define it? I'd define it as no government in business, at all.
Absolute Capitalism
- Thread starter GhostWriter16
- Start date
civver_764
Deity
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
Ownership of the means of production by a private minority, who exploit their workforce for their ability to produce products of value.
Even no courts available to enforce contracts?
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
No government control in the economy at all. The most power they'd have would be to tax, so as to help provide things such as roads and defense, though these could be handed off to private institutions eventually, and taxes could be abolished, period.
After that, the government's only function would be to preserve the moral wholesomeness of society. And if we can make it so social groups maintain this, then the government is no longer necessary.
This is all talking about idealism, however, and unlike the Left, I do not ascribe to ideal circumstances.
After that, the government's only function would be to preserve the moral wholesomeness of society. And if we can make it so social groups maintain this, then the government is no longer necessary.
This is all talking about idealism, however, and unlike the Left, I do not ascribe to ideal circumstances.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
You realize the technologically regressive effect this would have on society, I assume?
Not even to protect the property rights of the rich?
Should the government step in if businesses become morally unwholesome?
Tani Coyote
Son of Huehuecoyotl
- Joined
- May 28, 2007
- Messages
- 15,195
In this ideal world, the people would already respect property rights; there'd be no need for the government to protect them. Just as in the Communist ideal world, there'd be no need for the government to enforce the system; the people themselves would do it.
Yes, why would anyone ever buy anything from a morally unwholesome business?
There you go. You all answered this one nicely.
civver_764
Deity
There's a gigantic difference in the idealism of communism and the idealism of capitalism. The former can actually work and isn't exploitative.
Yes, the ideals of communism are more attainable.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
The point with communism is that everyone has what they need to survive, so there's no reason for them to want someone else's stuff. But capitalism systematically denies large parts of the population of these things, so there's every reason for them to want the rich's stuff.
http://people.howstuffworks.com/sarcasm1.htm
Integral
Can't you hear it?
Absolut Capitalism would make for a good vodka.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
Only for capitalist pigs. Stolichnaya is the Peoples' Poison of Choice!
TheAlamo
Prince
Too bad all vodka is awful.
Shadylookin
master debater
It's an impossibility because the government is necessary to enforce contracts. It's also necessary to balance out externalities.
History_Buff
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2001
- Messages
- 6,529
Does the government maintain a monopoly on the use of force?
But without any government intervention in the economy you'll see rapid development of enormous monopolies that will use predatory tactics to bring down any new comers to the market. In time, such a concentration of profits will likely lead to the concentration of land ownership as well. If that were to happen, you'll see business entities buying up whole tracts of residential land, and then either taxing the inhabitants to use it, or simply leasing the land to them so long as it's use serves the business.
Then if you assume the government has also ceded it's monopoly on the use of force, these same entities will start maintaining private security forces to enforce their laws, and then a steady slide into feudalism and mercantilism, until such time as one party becomes strong enough to enforce it's will on the others, at which point it becomes the new government, and will be very interested in intervening in the economy.
It's basically the story of Europe since the Dark Ages. All this has happen before, and is just waiting to happen again.
But without any government intervention in the economy you'll see rapid development of enormous monopolies that will use predatory tactics to bring down any new comers to the market. In time, such a concentration of profits will likely lead to the concentration of land ownership as well. If that were to happen, you'll see business entities buying up whole tracts of residential land, and then either taxing the inhabitants to use it, or simply leasing the land to them so long as it's use serves the business.
Then if you assume the government has also ceded it's monopoly on the use of force, these same entities will start maintaining private security forces to enforce their laws, and then a steady slide into feudalism and mercantilism, until such time as one party becomes strong enough to enforce it's will on the others, at which point it becomes the new government, and will be very interested in intervening in the economy.
It's basically the story of Europe since the Dark Ages. All this has happen before, and is just waiting to happen again.
holy king
Deity
the people's poison of choice tastes way worse.
Similar threads
