by The Liberated Territories » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:07 pm
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:08 pm
by The Liberated Territories » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:16 pm
The Scientific States wrote:No, it's not.
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:18 pm
by The Liberated Territories » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:19 pm
by Stovokor » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:22 pm
by The Union of the West » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:22 pm
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:22 pm
by Avenio » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:25 pm
by The Liberated Territories » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:26 pm
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:27 pm
The Liberated Territories wrote:Kelinfort wrote:I meant the devil's advocate you portray; such coercion would only occur in a truly Laissez Faire capitalist economy.
How do you know? Certainly, in a neo-liberal capitalist economy with the bare minimum of welfare and such, people could not rack up enough debt to only afford to pay their taxes and get by, but not to purchase food?
by Siaos » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:28 pm
Avenio wrote:Scarcity is the source of coercion, not capitalism. All systems that operate under scarcity parameters have to be coercive. Which isn't to say that capitalism doesn't exacerbate coersion - it most certainly does, since it's a non-optimal distributor of resources - but asking such is missing the point as to why coercion exists.
Zottistan wrote:Like voltage, the only practical way to measure freedom is relatively speaking.
Absolute freedom would be a terrible, terrible thing.
by The Liberated Territories » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:28 pm
The Scientific States wrote:The Liberated Territories wrote:
How do you know? Certainly, in a neo-liberal capitalist economy with the bare minimum of welfare and such, people could not rack up enough debt to only afford to pay their taxes and get by, but not to purchase food?
A capitalist society doesn't have to be neo liberal or Laissez Faire.
by Stovokor » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:29 pm
The Liberated Territories wrote:Perhaps the most often debated topic between the left and the right (economically speaking) is the idea that capitalism is naturally coercive, and that under a capitalist system people cannot fully truly be free, or have no choices in the terms of their conditions made in the system.
I personally do not believe this. Voluntarily exchanging some of your labor for money with ascribed value (an agreement often made in capitalism) is not coercive as the party who sacrifices their labor voluntarily accepts the demands of their employer, and they have the freedom to change their employer and thus, the agreement, become self reliant, or become the employer themselves. Even if capitalism is seen as coercive because it is hierarchal, one must realize that even if the richest elites still must rely on both the discriminating whims of their workforce, while at the same time having to keep up with market forces (the very demands of the workers who work for them!)
So what say ye, denizens of Nationstates. Is capitalism naturally coercive?
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:30 pm
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:30 pm
Stovokor wrote:The Liberated Territories wrote:Perhaps the most often debated topic between the left and the right (economically speaking) is the idea that capitalism is naturally coercive, and that under a capitalist system people cannot fully truly be free, or have no choices in the terms of their conditions made in the system.
I personally do not believe this. Voluntarily exchanging some of your labor for money with ascribed value (an agreement often made in capitalism) is not coercive as the party who sacrifices their labor voluntarily accepts the demands of their employer, and they have the freedom to change their employer and thus, the agreement, become self reliant, or become the employer themselves. Even if capitalism is seen as coercive because it is hierarchal, one must realize that even if the richest elites still must rely on both the discriminating whims of their workforce, while at the same time having to keep up with market forces (the very demands of the workers who work for them!)
So what say ye, denizens of Nationstates. Is capitalism naturally coercive?
To respond to you OP, ultimately yes. capitalism as an economic system is ultimately harmful to the human condition, a major issue with capitalism is that it tends to dehumanize it's working class, and ultimately cases inequality, in any cases not because someone worked harder but simply because of status and connections to wealth. If unregulated, capitalism has the habit of ultimately destroying competition and results in the creation of a mega-corporations and economic blocs, as well as a trans-national class that can be considered the modern power elite.
However, with that said, I cannot in good faith suggest anything better, simply a highly regulated capitalistic economy with socially funded programs.
by Margno » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:32 pm
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:33 pm
Margno wrote:At its simplest, trade says, "I will help you in this way if and only if you do what I want." So ya, it's coercive as fuck.
by Margno » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:35 pm
by United Marxist Nations » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:35 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
by The Liberated Territories » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:35 pm
Stovokor wrote:The Liberated Territories wrote:Perhaps the most often debated topic between the left and the right (economically speaking) is the idea that capitalism is naturally coercive, and that under a capitalist system people cannot fully truly be free, or have no choices in the terms of their conditions made in the system.
I personally do not believe this. Voluntarily exchanging some of your labor for money with ascribed value (an agreement often made in capitalism) is not coercive as the party who sacrifices their labor voluntarily accepts the demands of their employer, and they have the freedom to change their employer and thus, the agreement, become self reliant, or become the employer themselves. Even if capitalism is seen as coercive because it is hierarchal, one must realize that even if the richest elites still must rely on both the discriminating whims of their workforce, while at the same time having to keep up with market forces (the very demands of the workers who work for them!)
So what say ye, denizens of Nationstates. Is capitalism naturally coercive?
To respond to you OP, ultimately yes. capitalism as an economic system is ultimately harmful to the human condition, a major issue with capitalism is that it tends to dehumanize it's working class, and ultimately cases inequality, in any cases not because someone worked harder but simply because of status and connections to wealth. If unregulated, capitalism has the habit of ultimately destroying competition and results in the creation of a mega-corporations and economic blocs, as well as a trans-national class that can be considered the modern power elite.
However, with that said, I cannot in good faith suggest anything better, simply a highly regulated capitalistic economy with socially funded programs.
by The Scientific States » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:35 pm
by United Marxist Nations » Mon Mar 03, 2014 8:36 pm
The Kievan People wrote: United Marxist Nations: A prayer for every soul, a plan for every economy and a waifu for every man. Solid.
St. John Chrysostom wrote:A comprehended God is no God.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhirisian Puppet Nation, Alnas, Burnt Calculators, Cerespasia, Corporate Collective Salvation, Edush, Habsburg Mexico, Hidrandia, Kainin, Nu Elysium, Oceasia, Pridelantic people, Ravemath, Risottia, Roman Khilafa Al Cordoba, Shidei, Sublime Ottoman State 1800 RP, The City gigapolis, The Jamesian Republic, Too Basedland, Tungstan, X3-U
Advertisement