What happens to jobless individuals in a free market during economic downturns?

  • Thread starter kasse
  • Start date
In summary: Though a free market incorporates both positive and negative feedback mechanisms, the positive feedback ones seem to dominate. From Wikipedia: “A free market is a term that economists use to describe a market which is free from economic intervention and regulation by government, other than protection of property rights (i.e. no regulation, no subsidization, no single monetary system and no governmental monopolies).” Though a free market incorporates both positive and negative feedback mechanisms, the positive feedback ones seem to dominate. In other words more successful companies tend to become more powerful, eventually dominating the market and becoming monopolies. Powerful companies are able to maintain subsistence level wages which severely limit the options of the workers. Without government regulation companies are free to discriminate as they
  • #71
mheslep said:
Yes quite right. Which has nothing to do with your assertions above. You are spouting nonsense there.

Why?

Do elaborate..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #72
The isolated and likely temporary premise described here:
#68 said:
If you were PHYSICALLY starving (and that is an OBJECTIVE, trans-historical condition!), ...
You wouldn't care about "rights", but about food
is not the same as the widespread and nearly pandemic conditions implied for the actions described here
#42 said:
...you willing to agree to any sort of degradation.

We have pathetic letters from 6th century Gaul, where a man sells himself into slavery to the local land-owner in order to gain some sort of security in his life.

People sold their own children (if you were a carpenter, scraping by, and then had an accident making you unable to work for a long time; what would you choose: let all your children starve to death, or sell one to a guy who says he will be treated well, giving you the money to care for the others while you are ill?)...
People still do occasionally reach dire conditions in modern societies, but they visibly do not sell their children off. Or, in the rare tabloid story of some human monster who does so, it is not because of starvation conditions.
 
  • #73
mhsleep:

Your "conditions" are mere, historical circumstances. They change profoundly over time, and can, of course, be reversed.

Not so with the condition of starvation.

Whenever it occurs, it leads to the same type of cravings within the individual, irrespective of the historical times he lives in.

Only insofar as the historical times happens to be amenable for him, in his condition, will he not sink into self-degradation.

And THAT is the argument for why we should have a system of minimum social aid.

Even a libertarian like Herbert Spencer understood that.
 
  • #74
arildno:
"Yawn.

If you were PHYSICALLY starving (and that is an OBJECTIVE, trans-historical condition!), you would rid yourself with such notions in the manner of..seconds.

You wouldn't care about "rights", but about food. "

Alright, class, what logical fallacy is this?
 
  • #75
Please use the "quote" function when replying.
 
  • #76
AUMathTutor said:
arildno:
"Yawn.

If you were PHYSICALLY starving (and that is an OBJECTIVE, trans-historical condition!), you would rid yourself with such notions in the manner of..seconds.

You wouldn't care about "rights", but about food. "

Alright, class, what logical fallacy is this?
There is no fallacy.

It merely bumps into your indoctrinated head.
 
  • #78
Evo said:
Please use the "quote" function when replying.

Sure.
 
  • #79
What are the drawbacks with having welfare like hospitals, school and a pension system in a free market society? Isn't it a pity if people regard taxing theft, and not a way to continue a safe society?
 
  • #80
I hear a lot of people comare taxing to theft. In a sense, I suppose it's similar. However, I'm not sure if I know of a better way of providing, for instance, national security, than by taxing everybody and using it to fund a national military. Privatization comes to mind, but I'm not sure how that would work.

Social programs could more realistically be privatized. I think there's a possibility... I don't know if it would be better or worse, but I can imagine that anything other than the way things are now would be bad for a while, at least until things settled down. It wouldn't be an easy transition, in my relatively uninformed opinion.
 
  • #81
I cannot really see any drawbacks of having hospitals, schools or pensions.

Cost... and that's it, but I would like to think that in this day and age money means less to people than the increased standard of living and health of all. Sadly people give more of a **** about their bank balances than helping others.
 
  • #82
kasse said:
What are the drawbacks with having welfare like hospitals, school and a pension system in a free market society? Isn't it a pity if people regard taxing theft, and not a way to continue a safe society?
Do you have a point? Please make it if you do.

If you want to equate taxation with theft, you have a whole lot more history than the US to reference.
 
  • #83
The thread is going nowhere. Closed.
 
<h2>What is a free market?</h2><p>A free market is an economic system in which prices for goods and services are determined by the open market and consumers and producers are free to make their own economic decisions without interference from the government or other external forces.</p><h2>What are the advantages of a free market?</h2><p>Some advantages of a free market include increased efficiency, innovation, and competition, as well as the ability for individuals to make their own economic choices and potentially achieve economic success.</p><h2>What are the limitations of a free market?</h2><p>One limitation of a free market is the potential for market failure, in which the market does not produce an optimal outcome for society as a whole. This can occur due to externalities, information asymmetry, or the presence of monopolies. Additionally, a free market may not adequately address issues such as income inequality or environmental concerns.</p><h2>How does a free market differ from a command economy?</h2><p>A free market allows for individual decision-making and is driven by supply and demand, while a command economy is controlled by the government and decisions are made based on central planning. In a free market, prices are determined by the market, whereas in a command economy, prices are set by the government.</p><h2>What role does the government play in a free market?</h2><p>In a free market, the government's role is typically limited to protecting property rights, enforcing contracts, and regulating certain industries to ensure fair competition. However, the extent of government intervention in a free market can vary depending on the country and its economic policies.</p>

What is a free market?

A free market is an economic system in which prices for goods and services are determined by the open market and consumers and producers are free to make their own economic decisions without interference from the government or other external forces.

What are the advantages of a free market?

Some advantages of a free market include increased efficiency, innovation, and competition, as well as the ability for individuals to make their own economic choices and potentially achieve economic success.

What are the limitations of a free market?

One limitation of a free market is the potential for market failure, in which the market does not produce an optimal outcome for society as a whole. This can occur due to externalities, information asymmetry, or the presence of monopolies. Additionally, a free market may not adequately address issues such as income inequality or environmental concerns.

How does a free market differ from a command economy?

A free market allows for individual decision-making and is driven by supply and demand, while a command economy is controlled by the government and decisions are made based on central planning. In a free market, prices are determined by the market, whereas in a command economy, prices are set by the government.

What role does the government play in a free market?

In a free market, the government's role is typically limited to protecting property rights, enforcing contracts, and regulating certain industries to ensure fair competition. However, the extent of government intervention in a free market can vary depending on the country and its economic policies.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
851
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
626
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
633
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
804
  • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
6K
Replies
19
Views
1K
Back
Top