Socialism can arise from a free market, but socialism is not a free market institution. Socialism is based around the notion of solidarity, not competition. So yes, in a free society, you could go off and be a socialist, but that would not be a free market system you would be employing. The free market aspect only occurs during the conception of the socialist system. After that, it is abandoned.
Let’s let the market decide.
I define advertising as paid access to a mind. If it is not paid it is just communication.
I consider advertising as a tax because I see it as analogous to rent-searching, where an entity pays to influence allocation of resources in a way which wouldn’t naturally occur. I think the market is filled with asymetries and as a result is incedibly inefficient. Working 40 hours a week doesn’t seem natural, at least not in this technologically advanced world.
you are amusingly full of crazy.
So much blather.
theantirobot,
Don’t forget this. Unless you don’t know what the free market is?
your right, we should be working 60 hours…
Yeah free market individuals own stuff and decide what to do with it.
Imagine an organization who’s best interest is to let other people control what it owns.
Websites give a way their services for free. How do you compete with free?
Yes, but that’s only part of what the free market is. The free market is where liberty is. The free market involves no coercion. So it’s not only about economic exchanges, but also about discourse and reason happening without coercion. Governments (States) are coercive and anti-liberty.
This is vague. Needs context/examples.
It costs money for the provider to offer these services. So maybe you get a job to pay and start your own free website? You figure it out. Not being a smartass, but I’m not trying to start a website. You need to do some research if you’re asking these questions.
{Edit made}
But paying to allocate resources is exactly what happens in nature. Opportunity cost.
And for the umpteenth time, it is rent SEEKING not searching.
Do you have a job?
You’re right. People should be working 60 hours a week.
lol, I would have posted it first but I got a phone call.
“Free market system” does not necessarily imply individualism; individualism is merely the invariable and realistic result of a free market system. If I establish a collectivist community within the context of a free society, the market would still be free because I could decide to convert to individualism at any time.
Your definition of “free market system” is circular. You define “free market system” as the market system that is a result of freedom (i.e., individualism and therefore competition). If, hypothetically, humans were inherently collectivist, socialism would be your definition of “free market system”.
To avoid the circularity, simply define “free market system” as the result of freedom. The result of freedom, realistically, is individualism.
Summary:
If voluntary socialism appeared within the context of a free society, I would still consider their market to be “free” (i.e., “a free market system”).
to the extent that there was a truly socialist community surrounded by a freemarket, the socialists within it would not have an economy, would not have an internal market.
But the services are not free. They have a cost. Nothing is free.
Value.
I need a lot of drugs for that.
What is your definition of “economy” and “market”? I define “economy” and “market” as the system of exchange. If the system of exchange is competitive, then the system is individualistic; if the system of exchange is solidary, then the system is collectivistic. Within the context of a socialistic society within the context of a free society, exchange still exists.
[edit]
Mises defined all human action as exchange. Mises stated that (paraphrased) human action is a quest to exchange one less satisfactory circumstance with one more satisfactory circumstance. When these circumstances are material, we call the exchanged concept a “good”. When these circumstances are immaterial and interpersonal and motivated by self-interest, we call the exchanged concept a “service”. When these circumstances are immaterial and interpersonal and motivated by altruism, we call the exchanged concept a “favor”. The last category, immaterial and intropersonal, defines all other circumstances (such as running to increase your fitness).
You say this, but advocate socialism so by your very definition you aren’t letting the market decide. You want a technocratic-government, meaning, coercion. You are not for liberty and are a statist. If your idea was that great, then you wouldn’t need to force it upon people. They would gladly accept it by their own free-will. But since you find the need to force this upon people, then you are inadvertently or do know that people will not even bother with it. In other words, what you advocate is a terrible idea.
I think relatively soon we’ll be forced to change our ideas of what governments and states can be.
There’s this from google:
http://www.project10tothe100.com/
Bandwidth, storage space, and processing power are becoming exponentially cheaper. Free open source software is becoming more powerful. Google apps provides free hosting on their own infrastructure. The price of running a website is dropping.
I don’t have the skills to create the website I want. That is why I am so excited to be going to school. Even if I wasn’t working toward what I’m working toward, free market competition will inevidably bring about the system I am advocating. If a website can earn money and help people collaborate, and it takes no skills or money to start a website, eventually communities will take control and develop mechanisms for spending the money.
I have no idea where you get the notion that I am trying to force this on people.
If I can create a website that hundreds of millions of people want to use, and it brings in billions of dollars, and I turn to the community for ideas on how to invest that money, where is force? If I give the community a mechanism for deciding how to spend the money, and it functions similar to a republic, where is force?
theantirobot,
Your posts are so nonsensical and ambiguous that, although I have read all of your posts, I barely remember what I read.
I guess 23rd century ecnomics aren’t for everyone… yet