Libertarian rule

RothyBuyak@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone – 384 points –
50

You are viewing a single comment

I disagree that the free market is democratic because hedge funds and the richest people in our society control all of the "votes" in a free market, even after taxes. This can probably be blamed on capitalism, stock markets, and money-driven lobbying.

First of all lobbying and any other intrusion into fair competition is incompatible with free market.

As for the "rich" — without government enforced monopolies, their wealth is a representation of how much value they provide to society. Which roughly translates into their support by society. A bit like representative democracy, but more decentralized.

By that logic, thieves are virtuous and valued by society. In reality, the wealthy are creating value for themselves and their peers, and we operate on a system more like $1 = 1 vote, rather than 1 person = 1 vote. This system is usually called a plutocracy.

By that logic, thieves are virtuous and valued by society.

Thieves are forced to return what they stole, they don't (usually) accumulate capital

In reality, the wealthy are creating value for themselves and their peers

Could you please provide an example? Even something like Apple products (luxuries) are used by people that can't be called rich. So it's hard for me to understand how wealthy could create their separate economy

thieves are force to repay…

Depends on your definition of theft. I define theft to include the net profits that are not shared with the workers.

how would you describe their separate economy…

Most of us don’t get to participate in IPOs and hedge funds. The capital needed for that has been stolen from us by people who refuse to share with us the fruits of our labor.

“But you work for a wage that you agreed to take”

Because the other option is to starve to death.

Exactly it's not democratic. So what is wrong here would be the way we force our elected leaders to campaign, by having to accept donations you imediatly bring money into the table.

If all candidates had the same air time/publicity and couldn't do more outside of that budget the gov gave them. I believe it could improve, you could denounced oponets who are moved by money, and wouldn't be forced to accept non