What is AC?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Besides, the question wasn't what people believed was a good idea, but what was more profitable, cooperation or non-cooperation, and unfortunately for you, the answer is well known.

[/ QUOTE ] THat is the wrong question to ask; what matters when asking whether or not people will fight for a profit is what they believe to be profitable, not what really is profitable or not. Austrians out of all people should realize this.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are really bad at this. The question is what IS profitable. Because what IS profitable is rewarded by the market, and what is NOT profitable suffers LOSSES in the market. Can you even focus on what the argument at hand is, or are you incapable of thinking past the strawmen you must construct to get through each post? Why do you keep snipping and selectively responding?

[ QUOTE ]
Saying that people won't fight for profit because you judge that it isn't profitable is like saying that people won't go to church because you judge that God doesn't exist.

[/ QUOTE ]

Luckily, I didn't say that, Brainiac. The point is that people who cooperate do better in the market than people who don't cooperate, as you would understand had you actually watched the video in the link I provided or read any of the posts you snip and respond to strawman versions of that you construct in your head.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

, because the fact that something isn't profitable clearly doesn't show that people won't engage in it; much of the violence in the world isn't even done in the name of profit, plenty of it is based on revenge, religion, ideology, etc.

So even if it wasn't profitable to fight, it wouldn't follow that their wouldn't be fighting going on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Luckily no one, except you and your ridiculous strawmen, claims that with freedom there is an absence of fighting.

[/ QUOTE ]

Luckily everybody, except you and a few other extremists, realize that ideological and ethnic conflicts that are solved peacefully or simmer with a state will explode in anarchy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nonresponsive, ad hominem handwaving assertions.

And why, because you click your heels three times and hope, hope, hope it so?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you understand that I wasn't laughing at the part about us needing trees, but about the part where you claim that the market doesn't provide what people need?

Also, why did you not explain how to objectively identify a "market failure"?

[/ QUOTE ] If you look up market failure or read a little history, you will A) Realize the market doesn't always provide people with what they need and
B) Learn what a market failure is.

If you want, you can define market failures as good things; fortunately almost nobody else agrees with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you objectively identify a market failure?

[valenzuela]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you understand that I wasn't laughing at the part about us needing trees, but about the part where you claim that the market doesn't provide what people need?

Also, why did you not explain how to objectively identify a "market failure"?

[/ QUOTE ] If you look up market failure or read a little history, you will A) Realize the market doesn't always provide people with what they need and
B) Learn what a market failure is.

If you want, you can define market failures as good things; fortunately almost nobody else agrees with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you objectively identify a market failure?

[/ QUOTE ]

easy, if ppl dont spend their money where you want them to do you call it a market failure.

[dvsfun1]

[ QUOTE ]
No, it is simply more profitable to not use violence or steal.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I do not see why. See, I(and a whole ton of other people just like me) just came and took everything you thought was yours, along with everyone else's. I find that to be a pretty profitable day.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you understand that I wasn't laughing at the part about us needing trees, but about the part where you claim that the market doesn't provide what people need?

Also, why did you not explain how to objectively identify a "market failure"?

[/ QUOTE ] If you look up market failure or read a little history, you will A) Realize the market doesn't always provide people with what they need and
B) Learn what a market failure is.

If you want, you can define market failures as good things; fortunately almost nobody else agrees with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you objectively identify a market failure?

[/ QUOTE ]

easy, if ppl dont spend their money where you want them to do you call it a market failure.

[/ QUOTE ]

You win a gold star.

I'm waiting for Theftertarian's answer. It should be immensely funny.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, it is simply more profitable to not use violence or steal.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I do not see why. See, I(and a whole ton of other people just like me) just came and took everything you thought was yours, along with everyone else's. I find that to be a pretty profitable day.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because you're not very smart.

Luckily, the market selects against not very smart people like you.

[Propertarian]

It doesn't follow from the fact that people who cooperate do better on average than those who do not that people ACTUALLY WILL cooperate (unless you assume everybody always does what will be most profitable; literally trillions of actions contradict this). I'm answering the question of whether or not violence of the sort suggested by him would occur, and of course it does.

BTW-I watched the Dawkins video and it was good. But you have to realize that cooperation breaks down as well, and it is a lot easier for it to do so without a central authority for a variety of reasons, and that people often interact with another individual or company only one time in the real world, especially in modern times of high geographic mobility.

[valenzuela]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, it is simply more profitable to not use violence or steal.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I do not see why. See, I(and a whole ton of other people just like me) just came and took everything you thought was yours, along with everyone else's. I find that to be a pretty profitable day.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why dont Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay all get together and invade Bolivia??

[Propertarian]

[ QUOTE ]
How do you objectively identify a market failure?

[/ QUOTE ] I'm not going to answer a question for you that you could look up yourself in one second; it shows that I'm not making it up too btw. Wiki market failure, it has a list of about 20 different KINDS of market failure and definitions.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't follow from the fact that people who cooperate do better on average than those who do not that people ACTUALLY WILL cooperate (unless you assume everybody always does what will be most profitable; literally trillions of actions contradict this). I'm answering the question of whether or not violence of the sort suggested by him would occur, and of course it does.

BTW-I watched the Dawkins video and it was good. But you have to realize that cooperation breaks down as well, and it is a lot easier for it to do so without a central authority for a variety of reasons, and that people often interact with another individual or company only one time in the real world, especially in modern times of high geographic mobility.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do you objectively identify a market failure?

Isn't it true that in the market firms that do not satisfy consumers suffer losses and go out of business?

Isn't it also true that states, by definition, cannot suffer losses nor go out of business, since they can simply externalize all costs onto the public via taxation and inflation?

How do the human beings in the state determine when they have achieved "success"? What are their criteria?

Isn't it in the interest of those employed by the state to see "market failures" even where there are none, so that they can then continue to be employed "solving" them?

How do a few central planners with little access to a near infinite quantity of economic information distributed throughout the economy make better decisions than hundreds of millions of people distributed throughout the economy where they can directly apprehend the economic information that is relevant to their decisions?

How do you objectively identify a market failure?