Slashdot Mirror

No, that would be classical liberal or even libertarian stance. Go to mises.org for more information.

The guy had it right. Conservatives by definition - no matter what country or society are about protecting the status quo, and the worship of authority. Anything else is labeled as criminal and hammered back into place.

Republicanism is not the same as conservatism. No matter what the media tells you.
Just tracking the budget deficit would have revealed that fallacy.

http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?record=152&mo nth=5

There's a great article that speaks about mercantilism in an easy to read way. The entire time you'll be thinking "THIS is what the RIAA is about."

Payola is one of the factors that made record companies the giants that they are today.

This is old news anyway. Read this article written in 1956.

STF

I wasn't particularly wild about this article, but it's interesting anyway. "The Private Production of Defense" by Hans-Herman Hoppe of UNLV. Private Production of Defense it's a pdf.

In the Austrian school of economics you find out that a company can never get big enough to fully crush all competition. Ludwig von Mises proved, for example, in the 1930's that Socialism couldn't work because in a planned economy, you just don't know how much stuff is supposed to cost. Socialism

Small companies form, take those monopoly rents away, and the big company loses market share. Open source software is doing this now. Yes, Microsoft has a big market share, but linux is severly impinging on the server market, and threatens the desktop market.

Cell phones are doing this now, both in the US and overseas. It's a great way to solve the old last mile problem. Who knows, maybe without the huge, inefficient power monopolies we'd have a lot of nuclear power plants, or smaller, more numerous plants without the cost of the extremely long transmission lines with the booster stations, or wind power, or even more solar! But it's the government restrictions on who could enter the market that causes market irregularities.

Read more about the exiciting world of Austrian Economics at the Mises institute and LewRockwell.com

Forget that socialism crap ... go for anarcho-capitalism

Best explanation of Electoral College.

For posting on /. is it a prerequisite to be well-versed in conspiracy theory? Big Oil this and Detroit Auto Thugs that ... whatever happened to semi-anarchic free market theory? If you build it (and build it well, and price it enticingly) they will buy ...

-1 Flamebait, -1 Troll ... [sigh] ... see you in mod hell

Some may scream that the law should enforce morality, but then you must wonder "Who's Morality?".

I read a very interesting book recently, called Human Action, by a lovely looking grey haired man called Ludwig von Mises. It was left by my old boyfriend in the bathroom, and I picked it up and smelled it unhappily one evening, but before long found myself readin Mises' interesting take on the fundamental sovereignty of man.

Mises would warn us all against enforcing a common morality, for that is a sure way to tyranny, in the end. This company should not be legislated against. We should instead encourage people to read EULAs and to take responsibility over themselves, over their own bodies, over their computers. Anything else is slavery to government.

I thought I had left slavery to the state behind in my native Scotland. As a Catholic girl, I understand only too well the attractions of worshipping an idol like the state. But we are better to resist laws that seem fair and moral, and instead trust in common deceny and responsibility.

Thanks,
Margot. XXX

Read this:
Why the Housing Scandals

I was going to post the same link but you beat me to it. Actually they wrote a better one on the whole enron/CA issue check it out here. The Greast Power Shortage Myth http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?control=1053& month=48&title=The+Great+Power%2DShortage+Myth&id= 49

Your view of the California debacle is not uncontroversial

Land Reform: an Audit of Death, Rape, Destruction.

There are a few folks out there who would throw out the whole patent system in favor of copyright law. Check out http://www.kinsellalaw.com/archive/2002_07_01_arch ive.php has some links. Or you can just read Stephan Kinsella's article on "Against Intellectual Property" from the Journal of Libertarian Studies http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf (pdf) if you like.

Imperialism isn't a capitalist tool, its an authoritative tool. True free-market capitalists get HURT with authoritative regimes such as ours. No capitalist wants regulations, tariffs, or subsidies. Only the authoritative business leaders desire those.

Don't confuse media's definition of capitalism with the true definition of capitalism...

I find it amusing that so many people think our economy depends on tricks of the mind to keep going. That is, it all depends on "consumer confidence" and stuff like that. If that were really true, then all we'd need are a bunch of Pollyanna PR types cheering us on.

Economic reality can be found discussed in more depth at the Ludwig von Mises Institute.

Hoppeism and the Bailout

Unfortunately, I know of no way as an American to profit from these bail-outs.

Also, the protectionist tariffs on behalf of the American steel and soft wood industries have the same basis as a bail out. Oh! Don't forget the Airline Industry, well see what happens the next time they whine for a bail out...

Hoppeism and the Bailout

Unfortunately, I know of no way as an American to profit from these bail-outs.

Also, the protectionist tariffs on behalf of the American steel and soft wood industries have the same basis as a bail out. Oh! Don't forget the Airline Industry, well see what happens the next time they whine for a bail out...

Interventionism by George Reisman (Pepperdine University).

It is instructive to never forget that the consumer always bears all costs, since consumers are the only source of wealth.

Bob-

We already have laws in place that are quite capable of both preventing and punishing corporate fraud. Moreover, the market is more competent at performing both functions than government could ever be. The government is (once again) blowing things out of proportion in an attempt to gain support for more expensive and more powerful government. And (once again) the vast majority of citizens are buying their propaganda without even questioning it. Read this and you will reconsider your opinion:

Link

Perhaps you would be interested to know that the biggest corporate accounting scandal of all is the US federal government. While Enron et all misappropriated revenue by the billions, our federal government does it by the trillions. Can you smell the smokescreen now?

Here is one argument that addresses the costs of sustaining the post office monopoly. Also see this one.

After all, when you are a second-class citizen, you have NO rights at all, never mind a curtailment of your freedom of speech!

What is currently being set up in the United States is a new class system, in which some people have more rights than others. DRM is part of it, but it isn't all of it. The main thing I see is an attempt to set up a society in which insiders will maintain control of the majority of the wealth and outsiders will not be able to topple them. The insiders consist of a class of people who move between the halls of Congress and the top levels of major American corporations, the outsiders are everyone else. This type of plutocracy has existed in the past in many parts of the world, and it always has disasterous results. As has been noted many times, it is a major feature of colonialism. Both the first wave which brought about the American revolution and the later wave for which brought about the Indian independance movement that Gandhi was a famous leader of.

These revolutionary movements were primarily aligned against economic concerns. That's what the British East India Tea Company was about. The preferential treatment of the British East India Tea Company by the British government was a major factor in sparking the American revolution. (I can just see Slashdot circa 177X, "I can't believe that you are getting upset about something as trivial as a tea monoply when there are som many more serious injustices in the world, have some sense of proportion!!") Of course, later the British East India Company was to turn to the opium trade to expand its interests in China. This opium trade was used as an excuse to sieze parts of China for the British Empire.

Mr. Wells, in his "Middle Kingdom" describes the origin of this first war with England: "This war was extraordinary in its origin as growing chiefly out of a commercial misunderstanding; remarkable in its course as being waged between strength and weakness, conscious superiority and ignorant pride; melancholy in its end as forcing the weaker to pay for opium within its borders against all its laws, thus paralyzing the little moral power its feeble government could exert to protect its subjects. . . . It was a turning point in the national life of the Chinese race, but the compulsory payment of six million dollars for the opium destroyed has left a stigma upon the English name."

He also says, "The conflict was now fairly begun; its issue between the parties so unequally matched --one having almost nothing but the right on its side, the other assisted by every material and physical advantage-could easily be foreseen" and again, after speaking of it as being unjust and immoral, he concludes "Great Britain, the first Christian power, really waged this war against the pagan monarch who had only endeavored to put down a vice harmful to his people. The war was looked upon in this light by the Chinese; it will always be so looked upon by the candid historian, and known as the Opium War."

Within fifteen years after this first war, there was another one, and again Great Britain came off victorious. China had to pay another indemnity, three million dollars, and five more treaty ports were opened up. By the terms of the Treaty of Tientsin, the sale of opium in China was legalized in 1858.

1. New powerful cartels being formed by the United States government with global interests and quasi judicial/law enforcement powers.

2. A new openness about the so-called rightness of imperialism by politically connected intellectuals.

3. Propaganda campaigns designed to link copyright infringement with terrorism. (And thus justify the use of force, both in the domestic and foreign spheres.)

Of course, my pure self-interest leads me to worry about the effects this will have here in the U.S. of A. not just the rest of the world. I don't want to go to jail for fixing my computer so it actually works correctly after a law is passed that requires it to be shipped broken (and stay broken!). I don't want the RIAA/MPAA to be given special law enforcement rights without any accountability under the Constitution. Basically, I don't want any of what's going on. Looks like we are all going to get it though, whether we like it or not!

Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty

It's an interesting perspective on libertarian philosophy.

Ha ha you just pointed out one of the two major flaws in socialism/communism. Who's going to take out the trash.
In a socialist/communist system there is always a big problem with incentive, basically how do you get people to do the jobs nobody wants to do. In capitalism its simple there is incentive for them to do that work, namely money.
In socialism/communism to get people to do the work they need to either pay them (im using that in broad terms, it could be money or anything of value), or they hold a gun to there head and make them slave labor. Or a combination of the two.

There is a great article on www.mises.org in defence of laziness that you should read. Use the linnk below.
http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?record=928&mo nth=43

(make sure you get rid of that space in "month" at the end of the URL)

Also, in case anyone is wondering what the other flaw in communism/socialism is (which is actually a bigger problem than the incentive problem), is that it can't determine value. I'm not taking the time to explain that here though.

The Austrian school is a "really free market" school of economics.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/kinsella2.html has an overview of IP law, how it relates to Copyright, etc., by Stephan Kinsella. Mentions Napster.

http://www.kinsellalaw.com/ip/ has a huge list of online resources for IP related items. "Intellectual Property, Patent, and Law Resources".

http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?record=468&mo nth=22 is an article by Gene Callahan that questions if patent law was ever effective. Mentions One-click.

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=812 is an article by Ilana Mercer about Cipro (anthrax drug), and its scarcity because of patents.

mises.org is the website for the Ludwig von Mises institute, lewrockwell.com is "the anti-state, anti-war, pro-market news site."

The Austrian school is a "really free market" school of economics.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/kinsella2.html has an overview of IP law, how it relates to Copyright, etc., by Stephan Kinsella. Mentions Napster.

http://www.kinsellalaw.com/ip/ has a huge list of online resources for IP related items. "Intellectual Property, Patent, and Law Resources".

http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?record=468&mo nth=22 is an article by Gene Callahan that questions if patent law was ever effective. Mentions One-click.

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=812 is an article by Ilana Mercer about Cipro (anthrax drug), and its scarcity because of patents.

mises.org is the website for the Ludwig von Mises institute, lewrockwell.com is "the anti-state, anti-war, pro-market news site."

The Austrian school is a "really free market" school of economics.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/kinsella2.html has an overview of IP law, how it relates to Copyright, etc., by Stephan Kinsella. Mentions Napster.

http://www.kinsellalaw.com/ip/ has a huge list of online resources for IP related items. "Intellectual Property, Patent, and Law Resources".

http://www.mises.org/fullarticle.asp?record=468&mo nth=22 is an article by Gene Callahan that questions if patent law was ever effective. Mentions One-click.

http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=812 is an article by Ilana Mercer about Cipro (anthrax drug), and its scarcity because of patents.

mises.org is the website for the Ludwig von Mises institute, lewrockwell.com is "the anti-state, anti-war, pro-market news site."

The Softwood Tariff

The Apple Concentrate Tariff

The Steel Tariff

Enron

Rolling Blackouts

And on, and on...

Members of the American government protect their cronies in business, they do not, and haven't in over a century, practice "Free Trade." (Free Trade is a good thing, but it has nothing to do with the current debate.)

If people look for corruption in the current labor laws, they will find it.

The Softwood Tariff

The Apple Concentrate Tariff

The Steel Tariff

Enron

Rolling Blackouts

And on, and on...

Members of the American government protect their cronies in business, they do not, and haven't in over a century, practice "Free Trade." (Free Trade is a good thing, but it has nothing to do with the current debate.)

If people look for corruption in the current labor laws, they will find it.

The Softwood Tariff

The Apple Concentrate Tariff

The Steel Tariff

Enron

Rolling Blackouts

And on, and on...

Members of the American government protect their cronies in business, they do not, and haven't in over a century, practice "Free Trade." (Free Trade is a good thing, but it has nothing to do with the current debate.)

If people look for corruption in the current labor laws, they will find it.

The Softwood Tariff

The Apple Concentrate Tariff

The Steel Tariff

Enron

Rolling Blackouts

And on, and on...

Members of the American government protect their cronies in business, they do not, and haven't in over a century, practice "Free Trade." (Free Trade is a good thing, but it has nothing to do with the current debate.)

If people look for corruption in the current labor laws, they will find it.

The Softwood Tariff

The Apple Concentrate Tariff

The Steel Tariff

Enron

Rolling Blackouts

And on, and on...

Members of the American government protect their cronies in business, they do not, and haven't in over a century, practice "Free Trade." (Free Trade is a good thing, but it has nothing to do with the current debate.)

If people look for corruption in the current labor laws, they will find it.

Ok.. I've attemped to defend my position for over 40 minutes now and I've been bailing out the Titanic with a teaspoon..

I've made arguments against so many socialist in that last 40 minutes you've exhausted me...

If you disagree with me please read through my thread and read some of my responses...

If you still don't agree with me and wish to learn more on my position here is a list of reading materials if you are intrested.

Libertarian Party
The Mises Institute for Libertarian and Classical Economic Studies
Free-Market Network (Libertarianism & Economics)
A Little Bit Crazy Libertarian Lew Rockwell

My gosh... These things are just simply insane to me..

This is simple economics....

There is a market for DSL, wireless, and Cable. The government does not need to stick their foot into this market to make it work. As Adam Smith said, the 'invisible hand' will give these people their last mile connectivity.

By forcing them to move into market that is not profitable you are simply going to increase the price so that the people that you are trying to help aren't going to be able to afford it. (Not to mention the fact that everyone is at a net loss because of the added tax)

It IS NOT, repeat IS NOT governments job to force the economy into any position what so ever. If a company can figure out how to make these connections profitable they will, thanks to the 'invisible hand', and the company wins, the consumer wins, the economy wins, and it was all done without a negative effect. So how simple that works.

Welcome to the world of common sense and Austrian/Mises Economics

No, Denmark is a Potemkin Village.

A while ago I had posted a link to a pdf that challenges the legitimacy of intellectual property laws in general. Perhaps some of the arguments presented by the author would be helpful to you.

Unnatural Monopoly: Critical Moments in The Development of The Bell System Monopy

Later decided that they changed their minds and broke it up, and this is supposed to give me some faith that government can do good? What about all the damage government did to telecommunications in the mean time? (The Bell monopoly was enforced by the SSSCA's of its day. There was a time when you needed AT&T's permission to hook up a modem The Origins of Tymnet.)

I should point out that I am not an anarchist, protecting people from fraud is one of the police functions that a government should do. However, just because government occaisionally does it's proper job doesn't mean I want it to expand into other areas like controlling what I eat, drink, read, write, and spend money on.

For every good use of government, it seems, they throw up an SSSCA or DMCA. Be aware of the government's culpability in the whole Enron fiasco, Myths About Enron, which they have managed to successfully hide in most of the mainstream media.

http://www.rebuilding-manchester.co.uk

To be fair though, you hear very little in the maistream U.S. media when ALF or ELF burn something down in the actual U. S. Of course they aren't as bad as the IRA (give them time...) but they are destructive:

Another One for the List

Fascism is not incompatible with great disparities in material wealth. It is, however, incompatible with Freedom, including Free Markets.

I've posted this up before, but it explains the issues better than I can:

Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty

Even if you don't agree with it, it will likely get you thinking about market economies in a new way.

Left and Right: The Prospects for Liberty

You probably won't agree with all its points, but you may find some interesting.

If anyone is looking for a rigorous analysis of the legitimacy of IP from a libertarian point of view I recommend you give this working paper by Stephan Kinsella a read. Food for thinking.

Supply meets demand, always. Supply only depends on what you're willing to pay for.

If you want OC-192 to your home, you can get it. Anywhere. The "price" includes the time it will take to run the fiber to your home, and ship in the optical hardware.

Or did you really mean that the demand for *cheap* things always exceeds supply? Then you're comparing three variables, not two.

Price is the point at which demand and supply meet. That's all. You pay less for something because you do the work yourself? Your labor is part of the price you pay. For you, your labor is worth less than the money you saved.

That is why supply always meets demand, because there is always a crossing point. Everything has its price. That is why there is no shortage of drugs in the US, regardless of legality.

If you want to say that I cannot buy antimatter at any price, that is merely a technological issue where the "price" includes development costs.

If you want to talk politics, there is never enough supply of "free" services to meet demand. Thus the cost to supply welfare is always more than the costs of comparable private efforts.

I suggest Ludiwg von Mises' book "Human Action", available online, for a discussion of supply and demand.

The same site, http://www.mises.org/ also has seminal works by such luminaries as Fredric Hayak and Murry Rothbard, for anyone curious about the actual workings of "free markets" and the market forces which make Microsoft's efforts to promote their products no surprise at all.

Even, expected.

Bob-

The statement "they were forced to buy Windows in order to stay afloat" is no better than saying that Enron did no wrong, because they were "forced to cook the books in order to stay afloat."

Those businesses made the choice to "stay afloat" by OEMing Windows on Microsofts terms, just as I make the choice to pay taxes to stay out of jail and for no other reason.

Microsoft has no jail, no guns, no ability to use actual force, other than market leverage. If market leverage is so awful to you that you equate it with force, I would suggest some lessons in economics.

The "fact" is that by being so greedy, Microsoft signed their own death warrant. Microsoft has lost the "good will" factor, people use it only because of inertia. Now that better products are being produced, Microsoft is being abandoned. The turning point was the Microsoft Win95 rebate drive. Now that the sole source contracts are expiring, they're not being renewed. The market at work. Check out WalMart.

By the time the lawsuits came along, it was already too late. So go ahead and beat the dead horse, have your jolly anti-trust suit. Crow how you're fighting the good fight while such efforts do nothing but reenforce Microsofts own failing position and give it lots of free publicity, and the lawyers and politicians cash in.

Or better yet, just don't use their products. No one is forcing you.

Bob-

The difference between the two is compultion. That's the same as between any other "system" and Anarchy.

Everyone already cooperates and compromises every day. You deal with the people you wish to deal with, in the ways you wish to deal with them, or you ignor them and go on your way.

That is the essence of Anarchy!

Communist, Socialist, Democrat, Republican, all depend on FORCE to achieve their ends. Each and ever one of them differs only in the ways they rationalize the use of force to achieve the ends which the people in power want. They are mearly different ends which all use the same means.

To those who equate "Anarchy" and "Chaos", I would suggest a few of the articles and texts on the Ludwig von Mises institute web site until you can understand how they're fundimentally different. Human Action may be a little difficult, but do give it a try.

Bob-

Mises Institute

The Austrians lay the blame for our problems on too much easy credit.

On the other hand, Gamecube is not that expensive as long as you keep your spending within your budget.

Blymie,

Over and over again you say how your "community" depends on coersion to operate. Yet you also state you're happy about that. Since you're happy, there is no reason for coersion. The only reason for coersion is that someone is not happy with the situation and would not cooperate without being forced.

This is not a safe or stable community you live in. Anyone is able to be made a criminal by no action of their own, only the "vote" of their neighbors, or representitives they never wanted in the first place.

Since your community is based on initiating force against the people who live there, and you seem to believe this is a "good" thing, can you describe to me what argument it was that convinced you that initiating force against others was the right thing to do?

I'm also interested in why you want thieves to rob you. If you don't, then how do you reconsile defending your self while robbing others?

I can suggest some reading on the subject: Democracy, the God that Failed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, for one.

Bob-

I don't understand why anyone else didn't make a machine that could compete with theirs?

The realities are that they had between 75% and 85% of the market BECAUSE THEIR PRODUCT WAS BETTER. Mises Institute actually mentions them in a decent "Barriers to Entry" article that denounces most of the "monopolistic practices" that the government has put down in error, in this article.

Another article that briefly talks about how many "monopolies" fell apart on their own even before government lawsuits ran their course. It's obvious that the reason some of these companies exist is because they make a damn good product at a damn good price. Exclusionary practices are a farce -- people who are too lazy to compete are usually the complainers. It's easy to complain, especially if you don't have the brain cells needed to comprehend competing rather than complaing.

You might want to read a book before posting next time. I can suggest Ludwig von Mises "Human Action" as an excellent trist on the subject.

Here's why capitalism is like crabgrass: Any time property rights are protected to any degree, and freedom to associate is allowed to any degree, people begin to trade their skills and materials with others. If money is available, money is used.

Those with high skills or materials in demand trade their skills or materials at a higher "price" than lesser skills or materials.

Bingo. Capitalism. Supply and demand. A good barber in Kabul the day after the Taliban runs out has more business than a bad barber. No one plans it, the myriad decisions of each individual creates capitalism spontainiously.

So, Eryq, do you wish to say why you believe "capitalism" does not exist except by some plan or decision from On High? Care to give an example? Would you please support your assertion?

Bob-

I would start with The Antitrust Terrible 10: Why the Most Reviled "Anti-competitive" Business Practices Can Benefit Consumers in the New Economy and The Government's War on Mergers: The Fatal Conceit of Antitrust Policy, because it is a common misconception that antitrust is even needed. More analysis is found here, here, and these two links. In short, antitrust and monopoly-busting tactics do more damage than good.

The game was not a commercial success. Your alternative? Hmm???

Really, I'm interested Petree. You don't like to see something of quality go away just because the authors don't want to support it any more. Do you have an alternative to offer, or are you just complaining?

Have you offered to take over the operation of the game due to your support of it?

Have you communicated to EA urging them to open the source now that they're abandoning the game, and you take over as maintainer?

Do you have some alternative to "capitalism", or anything what so ever to offer in a positive direction to change the situation to something you would prefer?

And last, do you actually know what
"capitalism" is?

Bob-