Market Anarchy

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

tyrtle
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:54 am UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby tyrtle » Thu Jul 01, 2010 7:08 am UTC

WaterToFire wrote:Inflation is a natural process that will always occur to some degree. Because people who work at jobs long enough expect raises, more and more money will be given out in paychecks. Because there is more money in the system, prices will rise to compensate. As long as people expect raises there will be inflation, and government has nothing to do with it.


I'm sorry... what? Inflation occurs when currency is magically created out of thin air. An employer cannot just snap his fingers and create more money. An increase in an employee's wages is simply a transfer a wealth from the employer to the employee. This wealth was previously transferred to the employer from somebody else in exchange for a value the company provides. No money is spontaneously created in this situation.

Alx_xlA
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 11:22 pm UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby Alx_xlA » Thu Jul 01, 2010 2:00 pm UTC

tyrtle wrote:
WaterToFire wrote:Inflation is a natural process that will always occur to some degree. Because people who work at jobs long enough expect raises, more and more money will be given out in paychecks. Because there is more money in the system, prices will rise to compensate. As long as people expect raises there will be inflation, and government has nothing to do with it.


I'm sorry... what? Inflation occurs when currency is magically created out of thin air. An employer cannot just snap his fingers and create more money. An increase in an employee's wages is simply a transfer a wealth from the employer to the employee. This wealth was previously transferred to the employer from somebody else in exchange for a value the company provides. No money is spontaneously created in this situation.

If a government simply stops printing new money, won't that present supply problems? What if there just wasn't enough dollars for everyone? How would you feel if a water treatment plant stayed the same size for fifty years?

I see money as being much like infrastructure.
My signature contains forty-four characters.

WaterToFire
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:09 pm UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby WaterToFire » Thu Jul 01, 2010 2:08 pm UTC

Yes. The economy (hopefully) isn't stagnant. It grows, unless you're in a recession or depression. And if it grows, you need more money (as far as I can tell).

User avatar
Charlie!
Posts: 2035
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 8:20 pm UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby Charlie! » Thu Jul 01, 2010 4:53 pm UTC

tyrtle wrote:I'm sorry... what? Inflation occurs when currency is magically created out of thin air.

Or 'magically' mined out of the ground. Or when a famine increases the amount of money per person. Or when the barter system forms a side-economy that reduces the value of currency. Or when technology reduces the actual cost of key goods, increasing the amount of effective wealth in circulation.
Some people tell me I laugh too much. To them I say, "ha ha ha!"

tyrtle
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jul 01, 2010 6:54 am UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby tyrtle » Thu Jul 01, 2010 8:38 pm UTC

Alx_xlA wrote:If a government simply stops printing new money, won't that present supply problems? What if there just wasn't enough dollars for everyone?


Printing additional dollars only devalues the current dollars in circulation. For example, suppose $1.00 equals 1oz of gold. If we double the money supply, $1.00 is then worth only 1/2oz of gold, which is essentially what a government is doing when it prints more money. Price increases due to inflation don't reflect a change in the actual value of the item, but simply that the dollar is worth less.

charlie! wrote:Or 'magically' mined out of the ground. Or when a famine increases the amount of money per person. Or when the barter system forms a side-economy that reduces the value of currency. Or when technology reduces the actual cost of key goods, increasing the amount of effective wealth in circulation.


Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this lead to deflation? Using a similar example to the one above, suppose we start a mining operation that doubles the amount of gold. $1.00 then has the purchasing power of 2oz of gold. Similarly, if technology reduces the cost of producing goods, each dollar can purchase an amount of good equivalent to the decrease in price.

User avatar
Charlie!
Posts: 2035
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2008 8:20 pm UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby Charlie! » Fri Jul 02, 2010 11:24 pm UTC

tyrtle wrote:
charlie! wrote:Or 'magically' mined out of the ground. Or when a famine increases the amount of money per person. Or when the barter system forms a side-economy that reduces the value of currency. Or when technology reduces the actual cost of key goods, increasing the amount of effective wealth in circulation.


Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this lead to deflation? Using a similar example to the one above, suppose we start a mining operation that doubles the amount of gold. $1.00 then has the purchasing power of 2oz of gold. Similarly, if technology reduces the cost of producing goods, each dollar can purchase an amount of good equivalent to the decrease in price.

Mining more gold out of the ground under the gold standard (which is what I meant) is equivalent to printing more paper money under fiat currency - if you think about money as an object that has a variable price, obviously increasing the supply reduces the price.

Changing the cost in human labor of producing some goods is trickier, but I'm pretty sure you can set up situations in which making one good easier to produce decreases the value of money. For example, take a situation in which everyone spends a lot of money on blorfs. If blorfs are suddenly devalued, most people suddenly have a lot more money to spend, thus decreasing the total value of money for things OTHER than blorfs. Depending on what you care about (e.g. wage inflation) the drop in blorf price might be seen as causing inflation.
Some people tell me I laugh too much. To them I say, "ha ha ha!"

snapshot182
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 1:12 pm UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby snapshot182 » Fri Jul 23, 2010 4:21 pm UTC

Mucho apologies for neglecting this thread for so long. Moved to a new location and got a new job coming up in 2 weeks. w00t!

Patashu wrote:If there is no governing body that holds a monopoly on the use of force and thus the ability to stop others from using it, then those in an anarchic system with the most force will control those who lack it. You'll end up back in a monarchy soon enough.
Or democracy, or theocracy, or any other governmental system. I.E. You just described what happens when a state takes over: "...those [...] with the most force will control those who lack it."

If force over others is what is bad or wrong, then you can't have government. This is contradiction that statists have to put up with. You can't put forth an argument that you need a government to stop the use of force of the strong against the weak. You're describing the role of government. The reason government has control is because it uses force.

Inevitably some body needs to control the use of force, or someone who has no inclinations against using it for their personal gain/the gain of their particular group will do it for you, and it won't be pretty.
We can control the use of force by not controlling other people or promoting systems or institutions, such as governments, which use force to control people. If you want to minimize force in your personal life, for example, you don't go to a biker bar and try to put everyone in a headlock--that's a plainly obvious example. But it's as plainly obvious to an anarchist that you don't reduce the amount of force and violence in society by granting an institution a monopoly on the use of force. If you want to reduce the use of force in a society, the solution is not to come up with solutions the require the use of force. The solution is to come up with non-violent solutions. Government is not and will never be a non-violent solution.

Also, wouldn't your ability to join a DRO be limited by spatial constraints? Say that you're in a certain part of the Earth where almost everybody has decided to join a certain DRO for hundreds of miles around but you want to join a different DRO instead. Are they really going to want to support you, given the extensive costs of providing infrastructure and services to just one person hundreds of miles away? It'll either be prohibitively costly or outright refused, so you don't escape the problem states have, where it costs money to change states.
It's a cost benefit analysis to decide whether to start your own DRO, someone else's or stay where you are. You're also neglecting the efficiency and creativity that a market environment produces (for lack of a better word). If everyone in my town is using wooden axes, how easy would it be for me to sell an iron ax to the people? Incredibly easy. The same would be true for a great new business proposition from a DRO entrepreneur. I don't know what it would be, but I don't have to know. The reason I don't have to know is because the point of having a free market isn't for the efficiency or the creativity. It's for the ability to be efficient and creative; something for which you are punished in a government system. All laws are a veritable threat upon your life should you choose to break them and ignore all government threats. This essentially ceases the thought processes which allow for growth in the first place. Without the restriction of creativity, who knows what people would come up with? But again, it's not so much that they would come up with something (though they undoubtedly would, as history has shown), it's that than can--that they are not threatened by an institution for breaking regulations or codes or laws.

JonScholar
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:07 am UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby JonScholar » Mon Jul 26, 2010 2:36 am UTC

If force over others is what is bad or wrong, then you can't have government. This is contradiction that statists have to put up with. You can't put forth an argument that you need a government to stop the use of force of the strong against the weak. You're describing the role of government. The reason government has control is because it uses force.


The use of force exists within any society, may it be anarchy or totalitarianism. Nobody is against the use of force, that would be ridiculous. The most anyone can say is that they oppose the unjust use of force. That's why most liberals such as myself are proponents of democracy. It is through democracy, that we collectively agree upon what constitutes just force, and what constitutes unjust force.

snapshot182
Posts: 104
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 1:12 pm UTC

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby snapshot182 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 6:22 pm UTC

JonScholar wrote:
If force over others is what is bad or wrong, then you can't have government. This is contradiction that statists have to put up with. You can't put forth an argument that you need a government to stop the use of force of the strong against the weak. You're describing the role of government. The reason government has control is because it uses force.


The use of force exists within any society, may it be anarchy or totalitarianism. Nobody is against the use of force, that would be ridiculous. The most anyone can say is that they oppose the unjust use of force. That's why most liberals such as myself are proponents of democracy. It is through democracy, that we collectively agree upon what constitutes just force, and what constitutes unjust force.

Democracy is not a concept that can be used to define what is just/moral/right.

Democracy helps alleviate our anxieties of our political ideologies because it allows us to be one with herd mentality. If the products of democracy actually create injustice, yet the vast majority of people believe it does not, it's much harder to see the truth--or much easier to forget it.

Nobody preaches the value of democracy in a gang-rape scenario, or when millions of people around the world protest the actions of United States in wars of aggression. Democracy is an arbitrary concept, which relies on arbitrary borders and an arbitrary number of people, and it cannot be used to justify anything that involves the use of force.

diamonds
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 9:10 pm UTC
Location: Cave

Re: Market Anarchy

Postby diamonds » Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:52 am UTC

skeptical scientist wrote:I don't think there are any market anarchists here.
I would respond, look around.

At the very worst the ideology between liberalism and anarchism is only almost identical, what is the difference between a state that doesn't initiate coercion for taxes or favors, and simply no coercive institutions (no state)? (Arguably you could say by the definition of state, the former example isn't a state at all).

Vaniver wrote:Note, for example, the extremely permissive American bankruptcy laws, designed to let entrepreneurs fail gracefully and try again. In a market anarchy situation, the standard for lending would be loansharking- where there's very little incentive to let defaulters fail gracefully.
Well, in a system of market anarchy, like any variant of free system, we can't say exactly what would happen (contrast to communists who know exactly what their ideal system would be). However, my guess would be entrepreneurs simply fail and lenders would take the loss, the entrepreneur would have to make up their credit rating or whatever system would exist, and there would be additional incentive to make sure the debtor is creditable before lending. If there is loan sharking, it would still be illegitimate, and you would likely have insurance for this, and/or some form of police protection against it. Again, it's impossible to say for sure what the outcome would be, nor does it matter.

(That said, if seemingly contradictory, I'm not an anarchist; I just don't see any conflicts of ideology between constitutional government, liberalism, and anarcho-capitalism/market anarchy.)
##politico, the troll-free politics channel on Freenode (channel link)


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests