Bitcoin Forum
December 04, 2016, 08:17:39 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Anarcho-capitalism, Monopolies, Private dictatorships  (Read 13196 times)
Anonymous
Guest

May 26, 2011, 12:44:42 AM
 #161

There's no such thing as anti-competitive behavior in a free market.
Then why do you see it every now and then in the news? Oligopolys were formed by market leaders to push up prices . This happens both in very diverse markets, both free and not so free. One example that comes to mind was a paving oligopoly that was broken up not so long ago. Would you say that paving is something that is protected by the state and that no free market exist there?

I'm sure you would. As long as there's a state somewhere in the world it can be blamed for everything by anarchists. It seems.
Instead of Oligopolys being broken up they can be taken out by a smaller guy that would eventually have more incentive to undersell the people in power. Really, it's not utilitarian for me. It's just a matter of principle. People should be able to cooperate and manage their property as they choose.
1480839459
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480839459

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480839459
Reply with quote  #2

1480839459
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480839459
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480839459

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480839459
Reply with quote  #2

1480839459
Report to moderator
1480839459
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480839459

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480839459
Reply with quote  #2

1480839459
Report to moderator
The Script
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
May 26, 2011, 01:49:08 AM
 #162

We don't need the state to insure it. Private companies can do it much better.
Please find me a private insurance company with the resources and right to enter and search other companies that engage in anti-competative behaviour. Those who do such things will not cooperate with anyone investigating them.
Feel free to expand on how you think this should work.

No one can tell you exactly how an anarchic society will work.  If they could, it would not be an anarchic society.  What we can do is postulate based upon market principles, logic, best guesses and speculation.  The case for anarchy derives from principles of morality (if you adhere to the NAP) and maximizing individual freedom and market efficiency.  Logically following those principles leads you to an anarchy.  If you want to know some of the ways the specifics might work out, check out the book at the following link.   

http://freekeene.com/2008/02/07/the-market-for-liberty-pdf/

There's an audio book at freekeene.com and the pdf at mises.org (which is linked).  Both are free.  I really think it will be worth your time and might answer a lot of the questions I've seen you post here regarding an anarchic society.  It's likely you will not agree with all the authors' solutions and premises, but at least that will give a focal point for further discussion on this topic. 
The Script
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 336



View Profile
May 26, 2011, 01:50:53 AM
 #163

Also, Atlas, that cartoon is rather silly and hasn't appeared to convince any of the proponents of democracy on this forum so far.  Perhaps it's time to put it to rest?   Tongue
Anonymous
Guest

May 26, 2011, 02:05:33 AM
 #164

Alright. Heh.
DrSammyD
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 49


View Profile
May 26, 2011, 04:09:41 AM
 #165

Here is one of my favorite lectures on anarchy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5PbLLBfiM8&feature=channel_video_title

It's by Peter Leeson who's done a lot of work with pirate law and merchant law. The state is only one way of creating social order. There are others as well.

JA37
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378


View Profile
May 26, 2011, 07:23:05 AM
 #166

Instead of Oligopolys being broken up they can be taken out by a smaller guy that would eventually have more incentive to undersell the people in power. Really, it's not utilitarian for me. It's just a matter of principle. People should be able to cooperate and manage their property as they choose.

Except that wasn't what happened. Three larger companies who had the lions share of the market worked together to push up prices for everyone. No small guy appeared for a number of years, and it seems that the minor players either didn't want to, or couldn't break the oligolypoly.
Eventually the state stepped in, fined the companies, fined a few managers who were guilty and the prices dropped about 20% across the board.

Ponzi me: http://fxnet.bitlex.org/?ref=588
Thanks to the anonymous person who doubled my BTC wealth by sending 0.02 BTC to: 1BSGbFq4G8r3uckpdeQMhP55ScCJwbvNnG
JA37
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378


View Profile
May 26, 2011, 07:56:45 AM
 #167

Perhaps because almost all markets are regulated by the state?

I feel like a broken record here, but there is no such thing as a corporation without the the implicit and explicit grant of privilege by states.

How do you mean "regulated"? Safety standards and such laws? Or something more sinister?

If a few companies in a geographical area decides to cooperate to push up prices, how is this the fault of the state?
Anyone could start a company yet no one did. No barriers of entry from the states perspective.
The prices were artificially high. Just the thing you abhor when it's done by the state, or a state enforced monopoly. But when it's done by market leaders it's fine?

I believe that anyone who abuses monopoly, or monopoly like, power should be punished for it. Wouldn't you agree?

Ponzi me: http://fxnet.bitlex.org/?ref=588
Thanks to the anonymous person who doubled my BTC wealth by sending 0.02 BTC to: 1BSGbFq4G8r3uckpdeQMhP55ScCJwbvNnG
MacFall
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


Agorist


View Profile WWW
May 26, 2011, 03:20:09 PM
 #168

The Nozickian argument that concentrations of "market power" (which is a contradiction in terms) will be diverted into political power (which is the only actual kind of power) tends to ignore the fact that attempts to establish power where none previously existed lack the appearance of legitimacy that permits political power to exist. That doesn't mean that the establishment of political power ex nihilo is impossible, but it is unlikely given a society that has rejected the legitimacy of political power.

No king but Christ; no law but Liberty!

Fledge Press: Pro-Liberty Fiction and Art
1JBmYmG2U5ETj8BXZUBCXDKWCQcFoERBNP
DrSammyD
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 49


View Profile
May 26, 2011, 07:15:27 PM
 #169

Perhaps because almost all markets are regulated by the state?

I feel like a broken record here, but there is no such thing as a corporation without the the implicit and explicit grant of privilege by states.

How do you mean "regulated"? Safety standards and such laws? Or something more sinister?

If a few companies in a geographical area decides to cooperate to push up prices, how is this the fault of the state?
Anyone could start a company yet no one did. No barriers of entry from the states perspective.
The prices were artificially high. Just the thing you abhor when it's done by the state, or a state enforced monopoly. But when it's done by market leaders it's fine?

I believe that anyone who abuses monopoly, or monopoly like, power should be punished for it. Wouldn't you agree?


It's called regulatory capture. The biggest firms in an industry are usually able to gain political power over the those that regulate them, and then they put up barriers to entry by making regulations that large firms are easily able to deal with, but smaller firms can't.

You can see this in the fact that Wal-mart supports mandating employer provided health care. They think that they could deal with it better than their competitors could, such as target.

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!