economic freedom or personal freedom?

by **Gracious Sigona** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:49 pm

If you had to chose a society that had maximum economic freedom or maximum personal freedom which would you chose? (They're mutually exclusive - you don't get to cheat by saying that one begets the other.)

by **Tiami** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:50 pm

Gracious Sigona wrote:If you had to chose a society that had maximum economic freedom or maximum personal freedom which would you chose? (They're mutually exclusive - you don't get to cheat by saying that one begets the other.)

I don't know, what would you choose?
You need to provide your own opinion on the situation or the Mods will lock this thread.

by **Gracious Sigona** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:01 pm

I don't have an "absolute" opinion. I just think it's an interesting discussion, because I do believe that one "takes a bit" from the other. They don't complement.

by **Tubbsalot** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:03 pm

They both sound absolutely awful, so I'd choose economic freedom and buy something to suicide with.

by **New Heathera** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:03 pm

I choose personal freedom. Max economic freedom is a breeding ground for corruption and greed.

by **Walrusfolk Eurarcta** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:05 pm

Gracious Sigona wrote:If you had to chose a society that had maximum economic freedom or maximum personal freedom which would you chose? (They're mutually exclusive - you don't get to cheat by saying that one begets the other.)

Nah... their mutually inclusive. Strip one away entirely and you strip away the other as well.

For example, if we strip away personal freedoms like drug use, you are also regulating that they are not used in the market, thus you have also taken away the economic freedom of drug exchange.

by **Lackadaisical2** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:06 pm

Tubbsalot wrote:They both sound absolutely awful, so I'd choose economic freedom and buy something to suicide with.

Thats illegal.

by **Gracious Sigona** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:06 pm

In other words, I think it's disingenuous to promote economic libertarianism (Negative liberty) as a path to social libertarianism (Positive liberty).

by **Joneslind** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:08 pm

personal

money does not matter in caos

by **Jello Biafra** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:08 pm

They're only mutually exclusive if you erroneously define economic freedom.

by **Trotskylvania** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:09 pm

These terms do not have self-evident meaning. Especially the former.

"Economic freedom" is usually just an ideological catchphrase for unrestricted license for property owners over those they have subjugated

by **Korintar** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:09 pm

Gracious Sigona wrote:If you had to chose a society that had maximum economic freedom or maximum personal freedom which would you chose? (They're mutually exclusive - you don't get to cheat by saying that one begets the other.)

I would choose maximum personal freedom over maximum economic freedom hands down. The reason is that pursuing one's freedom in the market place, depending upon one's access to and control of the means of production, can have a far greater destabilizing effect on society at large than one's exercise of personal freedom could ever do. Furthermore, in some ways, I would prefer being told, "this is what you are good at, so this is how we require you to make your living," as it relieves so much stress not having to worry about what you are going to do for a living.

by **Victorious Decepticons** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:34 pm

MONEY, economic freedom.

With enough money I can buy as much personal freedom as I want, either directly, or by moving to a different country.

Korintar wrote: I would prefer being told, "this is what you are good at, so this is how we require you to make your living," as it relieves so much stress not having to worry about what you are going to do for a living.

No thanks! I am good at many things that I would not want to keep doing for a lifetime, and some that I wouldn't want to do for more than a few minutes a day. Washing dishes comes to mind. I do good enough at it, but wouldn't want to do it for even 4 hours a day (a part time job) let alone make a career out of it.

If they said "this is what you enjoy so do this" and handed me a stack of my favorite video games, then it'd be far different. But governments don't work that way. They'd hand me a dishrag...

And I'd hand them an insurgency.

by **Genivaria** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:42 pm

Define economic freedom.
Does that mean the freedom to buy and sell ANYTHING. Including people?
Or does it mean that people have the right to form labor unions?

by **Laissez-Faire** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:46 pm

I'd like to hearthe rationale behind the idea they are wholly mutually exclusive.

by **The Congregationists** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:05 pm

"Economic freedom" tends to be a loaded term. I'm all for the freedom of individuals to buy and sell according to their own wishes and needs. I'm NOT for the freedom of economic institutions to be owned and controlled, and the capital generated by them, by a narrow elite of individuals.

As to the o.p, I'd go with personal freedom if I really had to chose, but don't think they're mutually exclusive provided "economic freedom" isn't just a euphemism for corporations and their owners being allowed to do whatever they want at everybody else's expense.

by **Siorafrica** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:23 pm

Economic freedom, but only by a nose.

by **Hassett** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:36 pm

Can't have one without the other

"Skallvia" · by **Maurepas** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:31 pm

Personal Freedom, I can only go so far with money, I don't have much of it, heh.

by **North Calaveras** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:38 pm

Max personal freedom would mean private enterprise, thus economic freedom

by **Kvatchdom** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:40 pm

As a liberal democrat, I'll go with personal freedom. Human rights are extremely important to me.

by **Tahar Joblis** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:26 pm

New Heathera wrote:I choose personal freedom. Max economic freedom is a breeding ground for corruption and greed.

This. I'll take socialized medicine and IKEA furniture over a Manhattan luxury condo with secret police lurking around taking bribes from my competitors any day of the week.

by **JJ Place** » Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:47 pm

Gracious Sigona wrote:If you had to chose a society that had maximum economic freedom or maximum personal freedom which would you chose? (They're mutually exclusive - you don't get to cheat by saying that one begets the other.)

The two concepts are not mutally exclusive; you can't say that one does not beget the alternative. They're mutually convoluted subjects. Freedom needs completion to be exist in entirety, neither personal nor economic freedom exist to full extent without the full extent of the alternative freedom.

by **California Bay Area** » Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:00 am

Personal that's not even a question i don't know anyone who would give up the right to say and do whatever they want in return for the right to start a business.

"Skallvia" · by **Maurepas** » Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:06 am

California Bay Area wrote:Personal that's not even a question i don't know anyone who would give up the right to say and do whatever they want in return for the right to start a business.

Someone who could afford to keep anyone from stopping him would.

economic freedom or personal freedom?

economic freedom or personal freedom?

Who is online