How does Austrian Economics deal with “free” exchanges? Take for example sex. You can either pay for it directly (depending on legal restrictions), or you can get it for “free”.
Or another example, a company is giving away a t-shirt, but gets nothing back in return.
Or even another example of helping a friend move a furniture into a new apartment, as opposed to hiring a moving company?
Why is voluntary sex a “free” exchange? Because there isn’t always money involved? There is psychic profit involved in every voluntary exchange.
value is subjective, not intrinsic. just because it’s free as in 0 dollars doesn’t mean that nobody profits.
If nothing is exchanged for the good or service, is it really a question for economics/catallaxy?
at first in your opening post they are free exchanges then here in your most recent they arent exchanges at all. which is it [;)]
Nice catch.
Is something actually exchanged in a free exchange? Or is nothing exchanged in a free exchange?
the term ‘free’ exchange is most commonly taken to mean an exchange not hampered by a 3rd party. i.e. the two parties are both free to make it.
but thats not how you used the term either time. in the first. you were asking about exchanges that were money-free.
in the latter you ask about exchanges where one party gives no good in exchange for the good he received. ofcourse, title over some good has been exchanged. the good has been exchanged from one party to another. praxeology explains such one-sided exchanges as being motivated by the giving parties expectation of receipt of psychic profits of some kind.