Slavery would have gone away with time, just as it did under governmental systems in Europe. The existence of slavery had nothing to do with governments. Had the US won independence from Britain and created a free market system with no central government at all, slaves would still have existed for quite a while. Johnny's argument that slavery would have gone away with no government and a free market system is naïve. What human activity isn't founded in praxeology? That was quite a blanket statement. Humans predate economic principles, unless you define survival as a "economic principle."
Yeah hierarchy of values as it relates to choices in action is economic activity, Read any treatise on economics and you will read this.
Lol yes, because humans realized how immoral it was. If a free market actually existed, then all contracts would have to be voluntary, and slavery was certainly not a voluntary contract. And I gave examples as to how a government was propping up slavery.
Some did realize how immoral it was, others still haven't realized it. In a truly free market system all contracts would be voluntary, however you forget that at that time period the majority of slave owners did not see their slaves as human. It would be like them freeing their cattle and hoping they would volunteer to provide their bodies and milk for food under contract. And yes, government did help prop up slavery as they helped abolish it, but that has little to do with the point I'm making that it would still have existed had the government gone under and we lived under a truly free market system.
In what way? Early humans choosing one berry over another in the woods is economic activity? \teco·nom·icsnoun plural but singular or plural in construction \\<span>ˌe-kə-ˈnä-miks, ˌē-kə-\\</span> : a science concerned with the process or system by which goods and services are produced, sold, and bought : the part of something that relates to money \nHuman beings, prior to forming communities, creating their own tools, and trading goods with others lived without economics.
It cannot exist in a free market, as a free market simply means voluntary and without coercion, where all parties involved mutually benefit. Slavery is none of those things. Some critics of the free market argue that property rights are in conflict with “human†rights. But the critics fail to realize that in a free-market system, every person has a property right over his own person and his own labor and can make free contracts for those services. Slavery violates the basic property right of the slave over his own body and person, a right that is the groundwork for any person's property rights over nonhuman material objects. What is more, all rights are human rights, whether it is everyone's right to free speech or one individual's property rights in his own home. http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/FreeMarket.html
I'm not arguing that in modern times. But when you are talking about a time period where slaves were not considered human and had no rights over their body and person, no rights to self determination, etc.. it is a different story. And we were talking about that time period.
This is true only if the slave is seen as a human being. You are still seeing it through a modern opinion that slaves were human and not another livestock animal. Secondly, when did we stop talking about a free market economy and turn it over to free market philosophy?
I already defined a free market, as being voluntary, free from coercion, and where all parties mutually benefit. If a free market was instigated like you said, then not only philosophically would it not happen since those people involved would see how slavery violated the ideas of the free market, but also the absence of a coercive power of a government would not let slavery stay, since that government is what was legislating and enforcing slavery (economy).
Yeah, I don't think its safe to call that a free market just because certain idiots had perverse thoughts for their personal gain.
Can you be so sure of that? If they didn't see slavery as anything more than owning working apes I doubt they would see the idea of owning one violating free market philosophy. Slave owners saw them as property, not humans with rights. Government did not force these slave owners to obtain and work their slaves. If anything these men did not want government involved at all. The government wasn't paramount to the slavery issues here in the US. The Constitution protected the rights of the slave trade until the early nineteenth century, but other than that government wasn't terribly involved until the outbreak of the Civil War, and it exists prior to the founding of the US with basically no oversight from Great Britain. Government isn't necessary for slavery to exist. And the free market, by definition, is a market system that only requires lack of control by any authority. Slaves, whether seen as humans or not, can exist in a free market economy. Free Market economies can exist with many different philosophies.
Yes, because they are assigning value to each berry and making judgements about how much they are worth relative to each other and the labor necessary to obtain them. This is all economic activity. Again, read any treatise on economics. Actually it's funny you used the berry example. -Mises Institute
If I'm not allowed to be sure of something, then your whole argument is flawed, as it is based on a hypothetical, that you are sure of. The government legislated and enforced slavery, already gave examples. Also rewarded slave catchers, further enforcing slavery. If there is no authority in a free market, then there is nothing to enforce slavery. Slaves wont be slaves if they arent forced to do it. I feel like we have both said a lot and had a good conversation along the way, but we both seem pretty adamant about our views, so probably wont be able to change them. If you want the last word thats fine, i'm interested in your reply, but probably wont say anything back. Have a good one Monk!
3rd world countries are actually happy to make our goods. American capitalism has made lives and opportunities for many people in 3rd world countries. In fact, thanks to regulation and socialistic practices, 3rd wprld.countries like china are becomming richer while americans are getting poorer. You dont want google phones to be made by foreigners? Me either. Thanks mininum wage laws ans outsourced labor! Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
This means nearly every basic animal engages in economic activity. Yes, I agree with you on government's involvement, as I'm sure you agree that slavery existed without government involvement. Yes a slave owner would be authority, but that is still looking at slaves as humans. If a slave isn't human, then the authority is no different than the relationship between chicken farmer and chicken and thus does not affect the free market. I posted this for your interest as you mentioned. I too, was planning for this to be my last one, I realized we weren't going to necessarily get anywhere. It was a good discussion, I too enjoyed it. Thanks goober
This is true. They've traced it down to amoebas. I'll have to ask the person I heard it from for the study information.
It is interesting that the "tide of inequality" is GROWING, and at the same time america is moving farther and farther away from capitalism Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app