The cool thing about markets is that they can solve problems even for people who are deeply suspicious of markets' supposedly cold indifference to altruism.
I don't think you'd find nonbelievers too difficult to convince provided you offer them the same terms -- everyone gets equal amounts of free money (i.e. equal in the sense of proportional to the population they serve) with which to "bid" on the market, replenished every midnight. As long as they are (a) provided with free resources, and (b) not made to feel bad or in any way unequal because of it, you could get Bernie Sanders fans to sign on to it.
The material wealth of slaves went up even as slavery persisted under the free(r) market. More food, longer life. That means even when people have contempt or care nothing for you, or are even actively trying to exploit you and screw you over, the system itself will improve your material life. It seems to work even in its most debased and unfair forms.
I wonder if that holds, though, for those who were pastoral Highlanders forced off the land during the Clearances? They often ended up in early factories, where I'm not sure it's true that their material circumstances improved versus what they'd had living a traditional pastoral life.
It's certainly not true, as I think of it, for the slaves that went not to the American South but to South America. The Latin American markets made up the bulk of the market for African slaves from the Middle Passage, and they nearly all died.
(I)"... and (b) not made to feel bad or in any way unequal because of it, you could get Bernie Sanders fans to sign on to it."(\i) But they are unequal in this system. Three percent of them never win a shipment. That, however, is counterbalanced by the huge 35% increase in distribution through the increased efficiency of the decentralized system.
I don't think you'd find nonbelievers too difficult to convince provided you offer them the same terms -- everyone gets equal amounts of free money (i.e. equal in the sense of proportional to the population they serve) with which to "bid" on the market, replenished every midnight. As long as they are (a) provided with free resources, and (b) not made to feel bad or in any way unequal because of it, you could get Bernie Sanders fans to sign on to it.
ReplyDeleteThey don't want a solution. When will people figure that out.
ReplyDeleteThe material wealth of slaves went up even as slavery persisted under the free(r) market. More food, longer life. That means even when people have contempt or care nothing for you, or are even actively trying to exploit you and screw you over, the system itself will improve your material life. It seems to work even in its most debased and unfair forms.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if that holds, though, for those who were pastoral Highlanders forced off the land during the Clearances? They often ended up in early factories, where I'm not sure it's true that their material circumstances improved versus what they'd had living a traditional pastoral life.
ReplyDeleteIt's certainly not true, as I think of it, for the slaves that went not to the American South but to South America. The Latin American markets made up the bulk of the market for African slaves from the Middle Passage, and they nearly all died.
ReplyDelete(I)"... and (b) not made to feel bad or in any way unequal because of it, you could get Bernie Sanders fans to sign on to it."(\i)
ReplyDeleteBut they are unequal in this system. Three percent of them never win a shipment. That, however, is counterbalanced by the huge 35% increase in distribution through the increased efficiency of the decentralized system.
Unequal is better.
Some day I'll figure out this tablet's virtual keyboard. That our I'll learn to proofread before posting comments...
ReplyDelete