Does America need a bit of Socialism

[The Empire of Pretantia]

We haven't even eliminated starvation here.

Or anywhere. Starvation is omnipresent in all nations of all political ideologies. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the Nordic countries came closest to eliminating it.

Why the nordics?

[Cyyro]

We haven't even eliminated starvation here.

Or anywhere. Starvation is omnipresent in all nations of all political ideologies. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the Nordic countries came closest to eliminating it.

It's pretty easy to eliminate starvation in low population countries. Compared to high population countries at least.

[Galloism]

He ignores most arguments. Hasn't addressed anything about social contracts or commune vs nation yet.

I will research your assertions, nonetheless Hong Kong has a freer economy than the USA. Without govt. run institutions (except law and defense) they would do better.

Source.

EDIT: Divair, I'm about to put a virus on your computer that makes all internet transactions have a five second delay. Jesus.

[Riiser-Larsen]

Even better, it's a direct consequence of that free market.

There is no rational argument that says starvation is caused by allowing people the freedom to use their talents to address economic scarcity without coercion. Starvation occurs when govt thugs distort markets.

This is completely false. The United States of America actually produces 400% of its total food consumption through industry or commercial stores, but most of this is disposed of due to the fact that it is "Not good enough" to sell in stores. 400%. Just think about that. The United States has the resources to feed 1.2 billion people but does not because the free market has said that this food is "not good enough"

[European Socialist Republic]

We haven't even eliminated starvation here.

Or anywhere. Starvation is omnipresent in all nations of all political ideologies. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the Nordic countries came closest to eliminating it.

I think the Vatican might have done that.

[WRIF Army]

I'll will ask you for the second time, did WalMart force you to commit the heinous act of making you buy goods at below market prices ?

Did they cuff you or beat you over the head to get you in the store and later force your wallet open at gun point ?

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Without govt. run institutions (except law and defense) they would do better.

Without government institutions they would be able to abuse their workers like they did in the days of The Jungle.

[Divair]

I'll will ask you for the second time, did WalMart force you to commit the heinous act of making you buy goods at below market prices ?

Did they cuff you or beat you over the head to get you in the store and later force your wallet open at gun point ?

No, but then again I don't patronize Wal-Mart because of their slave-labor wages and poor treatment of employees - unless I have to.

However, enough people did that now I have no choice but to buy at extortion prices or go without clothes. Unless you want me to give up my job and stay home, then die of starvation (because you're against government assistance), I need clothes. There's only one place to buy them.

Is that not coercion?

This is inevitably where all the debates end in a cycle. Free market fanboys can't come to terms with monopolies existing. They don't understand the concept of people being forced to buy things out of necessity, not physical force. They cannot comprehend how monopolies actively prevent competition from entrepreneurs. When it comes to this point, is there really anything that can be done?

[Threlizdun]

By intentionally losing money until all other stores in the area had closed in expectation of future profits.

Fuck, the store manager flat out admitted that's exactly what they'd done. That's not illegal.

I'll will ask you for the second time, did WalMart force you to commit the heinous act of making you buy goods at below market prices ?

Did they cuff you or beat you over the head to get you in the store and later force your wallet open at gun point ?

They don't have to. You shop there or you starve to death. That is the choice the poor have.

[Riiser-Larsen]

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

We've gone over this before. Large chains like Walmart outcompete this small stores because they are able to lower their prices at will and drive out competition. For christ's sake, do you even remember what people were saying to you earlier in this thread?

[Threlizdun]

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

Of fucking course, the poor who can't even afford to shop anywhere but WalMart in the first place are going to magically get the funds to open their own store.

[European Socialist Republic]

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

Since when is that a requirement of socialism?

[Divair]

Or anywhere. Starvation is omnipresent in all nations of all political ideologies. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the Nordic countries came closest to eliminating it.

Why the nordics?

Strong welfare states + high wages.

Or anywhere. Starvation is omnipresent in all nations of all political ideologies. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the Nordic countries came closest to eliminating it.

It's pretty easy to eliminate starvation in low population countries. Compared to high population countries at least.

Not entirely.

I will research your assertions, nonetheless Hong Kong has a freer economy than the USA. Without govt. run institutions (except law and defense) they would do better.

Source.

EDIT: Divair, I'm about to put a virus on your computer that makes all internet transactions have a five second delay. Jesus.

Problem?

Or anywhere. Starvation is omnipresent in all nations of all political ideologies. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the Nordic countries came closest to eliminating it.

I think the Vatican might have done that.

Do they really count for anything?

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

And yet you cannot accept moving as an option for being displeased with the government?

[Cyyro]

There is no rational argument that says starvation is caused by allowing people the freedom to use their talents to address economic scarcity without coercion. Starvation occurs when govt thugs distort markets.

This is completely false. The United States of America actually produces 400% of its total food consumption through industry or commercial stores, but most of this is disposed of due to the fact that it is "Not good enough" to sell in stores. 400%. Just think about that. The United States has the resources to feed 1.2 billion people but does not because the free market has said that this food is "not good enough"

Or you know, the Food and Drug Administration. Because they actually say if it's good or not.

[America Libertaria]

By intentionally losing money until all other stores in the area had closed in expectation of future profits.

Fuck, the store manager flat out admitted that's exactly what they'd done. That's not illegal.

I'll will ask you for the second time, did WalMart force you to commit the heinous act of making you buy goods at below market prices ?

Did they cuff you or beat you over the head to get you in the store and later force your wallet open at gun point ?

There are other means than physical force to force people to buy your product. For example walmart offers prices below what it costs to make which causes people to buy from walmart because it's so cheap (not because of the quality of the products) which in turn force all the small businesses to go bankrupt. Now that Walmart is the only supplier of those supplies left you have to buy from them. You honestly know nothing about economics and you have provided no evidence to back you up.

[WRIF Army]

I will research your assertions, nonetheless Hong Kong has a freer economy than the USA. Without govt. run institutions (except law and defense) they would do better.

Source.

EDIT: Divair, I'm about to put a virus on your computer that makes all internet transactions have a five second delay. Jesus.

I will post empirical evidence to show that the freer an economy, the more productive provided that private property protections are in place.

[Galloism]

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store,

I don't have the $3-5 million it takes to open a store to compete with wal-mart.

boycott,

I'm sure the bus driver having no clothes would be an interesting anatomy lesson.

find substitution goods,

For clothes? Like what?

buy online,

Which costs substantially more due to shipping, along with the lack of guarantee they will fit.

move......

Your free market solution is kill a town? That's a valid solution?

Besides, a lot of us don't have the $2,000-$5,000 it takes to move.

there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

Define short.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

But they are all more expensive than just going to Wal-Mart, eve with their price-raising bull.

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

I didn't say it was happening around here, but it probably could if Wal-Mart builds a store around in the area. It already happened a few towns over.

[Riiser-Larsen]

No, but then again I don't patronize Wal-Mart because of their slave-labor wages and poor treatment of employees - unless I have to.

However, enough people did that now I have no choice but to buy at extortion prices or go without clothes. Unless you want me to give up my job and stay home, then die of starvation (because you're against government assistance), I need clothes. There's only one place to buy them.

Is that not coercion?

This is inevitably where all the debates end in a cycle. Free market fanboys can't come to terms with monopolies existing. They don't understand the concept of people being forced to buy things out of necessity, not physical force. They cannot comprehend how monopolies actively prevent competition from entrepreneurs. When it comes to this point, is there really anything that can be done?

This is something that I've never really understood, because it is such a basic concept in economics that there are goods people are required to buy. Seriously, how can you fanboy the free market, an institution based on economics, and not understand economics?

[European Socialist Republic]

[I think the Vatican might have done that.

Do they really count for anything?[/quote]
Their leader has a nice hat. Has got to count for something.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Is direct violence the sole means of coercion? Or is having to buy from them because all other businesses are on the other side of the county just as good?

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

You obviously missed this:

Congratulations in showing you lack the most basic knowledge of entrepreneurship or business.

Any service business takes at least several months into coming to be; manufacturing can take years. You also need capital, real estate, equipment, all of which is not possible to have at the drop of a hat.

You can't be serious in stating that anyone can open their own business as they wish. Even in Texas it takes several months/years of planning and building proper capital before trying to open up any sort of company legally (which includes having a DBA).

[Divair]

Source.

EDIT: Divair, I'm about to put a virus on your computer that makes all internet transactions have a five second delay. Jesus.

I will post empirical evidence to show that the freer an economy, the more productive provided that private property protections are in place.

You seem to be confused. This doesn't prove that dismantling the government causes a nation to "do better".

[Threlizdun]

Open your own store, boycott, find substitution goods, buy online, move...... there are myriad options that are far better than surrendering most of your freedoms to a behemoth federal govt monopoly to counter a non-coercive WalMart monopoly (if it really exists).

Btw, tell me where you live and I will give you dozens of competitors within a short drive.

We've gone over this before. Large chains like Walmart outcompete this small stores because they are able to lower their prices at will and drive out competition. For christ's sake, do you even remember what people were saying to you earlier in this thread?

For believers in the "free market" like them the poor do not exist and the only monopoly that can ever exist is the government. Capitalism is incapable of ever doing anything wrong.

[WRIF Army]

I'll will ask you for the second time, did WalMart force you to commit the heinous act of making you buy goods at below market prices ?

Did they cuff you or beat you over the head to get you in the store and later force your wallet open at gun point ?

There are other means than physical force to force people to buy your product. For example walmart offers prices below what it costs to make which causes people to buy from walmart because it's so cheap (not because of the quality of the products) which in turn force all the small businesses to go bankrupt. Now that Walmart is the only supplier of those supplies left you have to buy from them. You honestly know nothing about economics and you have provided no evidence to back you up.

Your honestly bitching about lower prices ?!

Can you name a single private sector monopoly that lowered prices then raised them and got away with it ?

Do you understand that a company loses money lowering prices below costs ?

Do you realize that the moment they raise prices they incentive immediate competition, substitution goods, boycotts... that will further erode profits?

It won't happen, it hasn't happened, it shouldn't be used to justify a far greater monopoly that is govt.

[Divair]

This is inevitably where all the debates end in a cycle. Free market fanboys can't come to terms with monopolies existing. They don't understand the concept of people being forced to buy things out of necessity, not physical force. They cannot comprehend how monopolies actively prevent competition from entrepreneurs. When it comes to this point, is there really anything that can be done?

This is something that I've never really understood, because it is such a basic concept in economics that there are goods people are required to buy. Seriously, how can you fanboy the free market, an institution based on economics, and not understand economics?

It's simple. Don't take economics. Free market fanboys ignore necessity. Free market fanboys ignore elasticity. Free market fanboys ignore natural monopolies. Free market fanboys ignore externalities. Why? Because they either know and willingly don't care about others, or they don't know because they haven't actually studied economics.

Their leader has a nice hat. Has got to count for something.

I don't like it.