My inclination is to think that the state is slavery.
Arent we all slaves through taxation already?
Not necessarily. The relationship between the state and its subjects is at least equivalent to robbery. There are some that are definitely slaves, such as soldiers, but I don’t think that each and every citizen is necessarily a slave to the state.
No one going to say it? I know you were thinking this when you were making the thread Wheylous. So, just to satisfy my completionistic fetishism:
You went full slavery, Belarus. Never go full slavery.
they could just make it a fine for leaving so severe people think they are better of staying the duration of the contract, then if people don’t pay they can be put into the labor to pay it back or have wages taken,
i’m not sure how well it works if the only punishment someone could face for a fine is a larger fine but no restrictions on freedom.
Such a fine could only be voluntarily paid.
In a free-market contract, such as we’re discussing, the remedy for exiting a continuing contract is generally cessation of current payment. Not a fine.
They could enforce a fine only if the worker wanted to continue working there.
What if you had a slave and he worked for you and didnt get paid.
What if then you let your slave earn wages but you kept 100% of those wages.
Then you let your slave keep 50% of his wages and you kept 50%.
Did we stop talking about slaves?
You’d still be paying his living expenses, ostensibly.
Nope, still slavery.
i don’t think people will voluntarlily pay much at all.
if a person stops a contract, thats putting all the risk on company and non of the risk on someone that can stop at whim.
a worker is not allowed to leave with company property, and i don’t think it makes much sense for the company to only get the property returned under voluntary conditions.
Such a fine could only be voluntarily paid.
If the fine was agreed to when entering the contract, then the fine is a debt, and not paying debts is theft. Rothbard concurs 
Certainly, I just mean to say that you can’t simply decide to suddenly fine someone for breaking a contract with you. If they no longer want to associate with you, you have no power over them. And neither should the government. If they do want to associate with you, maybe then you can convince them to pay a fine in order to continue that privilege.
Whatever was worked out in the contract is of course enforceable. I assumed his talk of being fined for quitting was extra-contractual.
Ah, I agree, the wording was ambigious.
my suggesion was thinking contractual and not extra-contractual. the employer and employee would agree to terms or arbitration in the contract.
In that case, again, it wouldn’t be possible to force him to keep working even if he breaks the contract and decides to pay whatever penalty for that worked out in the contract.
I guess his point was that the fine may be so high as to be impossible to pay.
That’s actually my usual response to Rothbard’s “impossibility of voluntary slavery”. Let’s say, S has a contract with M to pay the GDP of the US if S stops working for M. How is this effectively different from voluntary slavery? Sure, S may stop working, but he will incur a huge debt. Won’t he be forced to work in order to return at least part of the debt?
he would be forced to keep working if he refused to pay what he had agreed to pay. he can work any job he wants as long as he returns the property as agreed upon