Topic: This is the thread where you discuss free market, americans and libertarianism - page 10. (Read 33903 times)

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:24:08 PM

Bottom line: If you don't give the little guy, the new innovator, a chance to monopolize the market for a while, all you will wind up with is old money monopolizing the market.

So, your answer, to prevent natural monopolies is... enforced monopolies?

Sadly, yes.

Then it's a bad answer, wouldn't you say?

What's so bad about natural monopolies that they warrant violent monopolies to prevent them?

The so-called violent monopolies I advocate are short-term, the natural monopolies are borderline eternal, and thus present a greater threat to individual freedom.

How so?

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: myrkul on May 11, 2013, 08:45:30 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:36:22 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:24:08 PM

Bottom line: If you don't give the little guy, the new innovator, a chance to monopolize the market for a while, all you will wind up with is old money monopolizing the market.

So, your answer, to prevent natural monopolies is... enforced monopolies?

Sadly, yes.

Then it's a bad answer, wouldn't you say?

What's so bad about natural monopolies that they warrant violent monopolies to prevent them?

The so-called violent monopolies I advocate are short-term, the natural monopolies are borderline eternal, and thus present a greater threat to individual freedom.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:36:22 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:24:08 PM

Bottom line: If you don't give the little guy, the new innovator, a chance to monopolize the market for a while, all you will wind up with is old money monopolizing the market.

So, your answer, to prevent natural monopolies is... enforced monopolies?

Sadly, yes.

Then it's a bad answer, wouldn't you say?

What's so bad about natural monopolies that they warrant violent monopolies to prevent them?

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:20:30 PM

And the market has a marked preference to remove monopolies.

≠

Zero IP rights will promote monopolies.

In some industries, market monopolies (also known as natural monopolies) will develop, but in most, competition and innovation will be the norm.

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:24:08 PM

Bottom line: If you don't give the little guy, the new innovator, a chance to monopolize the market for a while, all you will wind up with is old money monopolizing the market.

So, your answer, to prevent natural monopolies is... enforced monopolies?

Non-state capitalists can own several industries/economic sectors, and without IP rights, may eventually own all of them.

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:20:30 PM

And the market has a marked preference to remove monopolies.

≠

Zero IP rights will promote monopolies.

In some industries, market monopolies (also known as natural monopolies) will develop, but in most, competition and innovation will be the norm.

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:24:08 PM

Bottom line: If you don't give the little guy, the new innovator, a chance to monopolize the market for a while, all you will wind up with is old money monopolizing the market.

So, your answer, to prevent natural monopolies is... enforced monopolies?

Sadly, yes.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:20:30 PM

And the market has a marked preference to remove monopolies.

≠

Zero IP rights will promote monopolies.

In some industries, market monopolies (also known as natural monopolies) will develop, but in most, competition and innovation will be the norm.

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 08:24:08 PM

Bottom line: If you don't give the little guy, the new innovator, a chance to monopolize the market for a while, all you will wind up with is old money monopolizing the market.

So, your answer, to prevent natural monopolies is... enforced monopolies?

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Bottom line: If you don't give the little guy, the new innovator, a chance to monopolize the market for a while, all you will wind up with is old money monopolizing the market.

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:26:19 PM

Either that, or the other way around. It's win-win.

The market decides. And the market has a marked preference to remove monopolies.

Agreed. Zero IP rights will promote monopolies.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:26:19 PM

Either that, or the other way around. It's win-win.

The market decides. And the market has a marked preference to remove monopolies.

Mike Christ

legendary

Activity: 1078

Merit: 1003

I don't think removing freedoms for the sake of the few is what we should be striving for. Patents are terrible things that lay the groundwork for sanctioned monopolies. How long does a business need to grow and recoup their losses? A year? Ten years? Twenty? We don't know. Nor should we expect private businesses to make their debts and gains public, so we can see, exactly, how long they have to go before their patent expires (if we're going by the "just enough to recoup my losses" idea.) All of this requires a lot of writ law, which goes completely against libertarian ideals. We're striving for more agency, not less. If that means the few inventors and innovators of this world must invent new businesses practices to succeed, so be it. I don't want to live in a world where one guy can invent something, and must be paid every time that something is used, else those who violate the IP get sued. Lets not pave the way for sanctioned monopolies; that's what we're trying to get away from.

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: myrkul on May 11, 2013, 06:25:21 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:22:50 PM

Quote from: myrkul on May 11, 2013, 06:13:51 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:09:17 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:45:19 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:32:44 PM

Some would consider it a criminal offence to violate IP rights, others would consider it a criminal offence to enforce IP rights. Can both of these schools of thought be reconciled in the same society? I say "Yes".

And those who wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did so, and those who do not wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did not, the practical result of which will be the same as if IP rights were not recognized.

Except we innovators would get a bit of cash from the moochers.

How do you figure that?

Once I find someone who is violating my IP rights, my arbitration company will sue, and give me some cash.

Unless that person is using an arbitration company that does not recognize IP rights.

If I get no cash, I fire my arbitration company.

And soon, all the companies that support IP go out of business for lack of customers.

Either that, or the other way around. It's win-win.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:22:50 PM

Quote from: myrkul on May 11, 2013, 06:13:51 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:09:17 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:45:19 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:32:44 PM

Some would consider it a criminal offence to violate IP rights, others would consider it a criminal offence to enforce IP rights. Can both of these schools of thought be reconciled in the same society? I say "Yes".

And those who wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did so, and those who do not wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did not, the practical result of which will be the same as if IP rights were not recognized.

Except we innovators would get a bit of cash from the moochers.

How do you figure that?

Once I find someone who is violating my IP rights, my arbitration company will sue, and give me some cash.

Unless that person is using an arbitration company that does not recognize IP rights.

If I get no cash, I fire my arbitration company.

And soon, all the companies that support IP go out of business for lack of customers.

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: myrkul on May 11, 2013, 06:13:51 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:09:17 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:45:19 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:32:44 PM

Some would consider it a criminal offence to violate IP rights, others would consider it a criminal offence to enforce IP rights. Can both of these schools of thought be reconciled in the same society? I say "Yes".

And those who wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did so, and those who do not wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did not, the practical result of which will be the same as if IP rights were not recognized.

Except we innovators would get a bit of cash from the moochers.

How do you figure that?

Once I find someone who is violating my IP rights, my arbitration company will sue, and give me some cash.

Unless that person is using an arbitration company that does not recognize IP rights.

If I get no cash, I fire my arbitration company.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 06:09:17 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:45:19 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:32:44 PM

Some would consider it a criminal offence to violate IP rights, others would consider it a criminal offence to enforce IP rights. Can both of these schools of thought be reconciled in the same society? I say "Yes".

And those who wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did so, and those who do not wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did not, the practical result of which will be the same as if IP rights were not recognized.

Except we innovators would get a bit of cash from the moochers.

How do you figure that?

Once I find someone who is violating my IP rights, my arbitration company will sue, and give me some cash.

Unless that person is using an arbitration company that does not recognize IP rights.

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:45:19 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:32:44 PM

Some would consider it a criminal offence to violate IP rights, others would consider it a criminal offence to enforce IP rights. Can both of these schools of thought be reconciled in the same society? I say "Yes".

And those who wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did so, and those who do not wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did not, the practical result of which will be the same as if IP rights were not recognized.

Except we innovators would get a bit of cash from the moochers.

How do you figure that?

Once I find someone who is violating my IP rights, my arbitration company will sue, and give me some cash.

myrkul

hero member

Activity: 532

Merit: 500

FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:45:19 PM

Quote from: FreedomEqualsRiches on May 11, 2013, 05:32:44 PM

Some would consider it a criminal offence to violate IP rights, others would consider it a criminal offence to enforce IP rights. Can both of these schools of thought be reconciled in the same society? I say "Yes".

And those who wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did so, and those who do not wish to recognize IP rights as valid would subscribe to arbitration and rights defense agencies which did not, the practical result of which will be the same as if IP rights were not recognized.

Except we innovators would get a bit of cash from the moochers.

How do you figure that?

FreedomEqualsRiches

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10