Most people use the term "free market" to describe something that has already existed. I don't.
Most people maybe, but not us.
when you create a claim - you have created something that is not natural
Birds create nests and protect them. Is this not property?
an access-based system would be built around sustainability
That's called socialism, runs into the Tragedy of the Commons and the calculation problem.
I am certain that I could design an economic system that outperforms your free market capitalism.
Why have you not let the government know of this yet?
@Jargon
I just wanted to make sure that some people see the merit in vouchers when compared to our modern tax system. And I still guess that some people don't fathom the potential for vouchers to substantially remove corruption. Try to see how advocacy of vouchers is pragmatic when faced with an overwhelming number of people who think taxes are necessary.
Now on to the point of taxation. I think there could be a future without taxation - and I think that is a great goal. But I would add my opinion of that future... which would require a great sense of charity and knowledge within the culture.
I argue that the implementation of the tax mechanism is a symptom of ignorance... and perhaps you can agree with me since you don't like taxation. I happen to think that this symptom has a purpose - in that it attempts to fill a niche that was not addressed by the current social system.
So the absense of taxation would in fact indicate an absense of the cause of the need for taxation... in that sense - I can agree with "no taxation" goodness. But our reality is one where taxes are acceptable among many people. And I think we should design that tax system with the intent of DEVELOPING a social system where taxes are no longer needed.
I don't know if you people agree with social engineering or not - seeing as how many of you are against coercion. Every great engineer is a master at coercing nature into useful organizations. And whether you like it or not - our current tax system is coercing our culture in a terrible direction.
I generally agree with that post, but
Every great engineer is a master at coercing nature into useful organizations.
sort of like Stalin and Hitler were great engineers...
We don't need engineers, we need leaders who will educate the public. We don't need force, we need a change in culture and mindset.
Wheylous: That's called socialism, runs into the Tragedy of the Commons and the calculation problem.
A socialist design does not need to be centrally planned - it can be technocratic: allowing for the dynamic self-organization of people who use technological toolsets and chooses algorithms that process machine readable information pertaining to economic activity. This is how a design would avoid the calculation problem. People would have to forgo individual-private economic activity to avoid "Tragedy of the Commons". And people would ideally choose such a system out of self-interest... after the system has been researched, developed, and tested.
I am certain that I could design an economic system that outperforms your free market capitalism. Why have you not let the government know of this yet?
Too funny Wheylous. I have actually tried. I must basically resort to supporting Ron Paul and liberty... and developing my own corporate empire in this capitalist world... playing "their" game. It will probably take a winner within this game - to actually change it... for selfless reasons.
Wheylous: sort of like Stalin and Hitler were great engineers... We don't need engineers, we need leaders who will educate the public. We don't need force, we need a change in culture and mindset.
Those guys weren't pragmatic. And they really weren't innovaters... unless you can point me to some technology they happened to innovate?
I think we really need leaders who will seek out enough capable minds to cooperate and create a working model of something better. Then the less-capable minds can look at that model - and their minds can change as well. And then the culture changes.
GavinPalmer1984:I am certain that I could design an economic system that outperforms your free market capitalism.
Hayek wrote a book about that very topic.
We need more liberty to experiment with alternatives. This is a bigger issue than who's THEORETICAL economic design is better than the others'. And when I make suggestions about changes to our current system - I most certainly have liberty in mind.
So let me get this straight: You need liberty to experiment with your notions of central planning. And when you make suggestions about dictating how the world will function, you have liberty in mind. I think Hasnas was right. Orwell was not exaggerating.
experiment with your own economic design. I will learn from your inevitable failures. We can learn from each others' inevitable failures.
Evidently not all of us do. As you're still advocating the same thing.
[Stalin and Hitler] weren't pragmatic. And they really weren't innovaters
So, like I said a page and a half ago, "Communism would have worked if it hadn't been for Stalin".
You rarely directly address anything I say, you simply change the subject and ramble on about something else. Your comments are of the utmost delusion and contradiction, and yet this doesn't even faze you in the slightest. I'm really beginning to wonder if you're nothing more than a troll.
The economic calculation problem associated with central planning is valid. But socialism doesn't require central planning. Socialism can and must use price signals.
Don't stereotype all socialists.
GavinPalmer1984: The economic calculation problem associated with central planning is valid. But socialism doesn't require central planning. Socialism can and must use price signals. Don't stereotype all socialists.
How, pray tell? I thought socialism was based necessarily off of the LTV
The Anarch is to the Anarchist what the Monarch is to the Monarchist. -Ernst Jünger
You can begin to get an idea on these posts. But in summary - I like technocracy as a way of implementing a distributed system connecting people with calculated information.
http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/26254.aspx
http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/26449.aspx
Jargon I think the driving force behind your thread here has already gone from...
to...
So I wouldn't worry too much about it.