Questions for Free-Market Moralists - Answered!
Questions for Free-Market Moralists by Amia Srinivasan answered by Stefan Molyneux. 1. Is any exchange between two people in the absence of direct physical compulsion by one party against the other (or the threat thereof) necessarily free? If you say yes, then you think that people can never be coerced into action by circumstances that do not involve the direct physical compulsion of another person. Suppose a woman and her children are starving, and the only way she can feed her family, apart from theft, is to prostitute herself or to sell her organs. Since she undertakes these acts of exchange not because of direct physical coercion by another, but only because she is compelled by hunger and a lack of alternatives, they are free. 2. Is any free (not physically compelled) exchange morally permissible? If you say yes, then you think that any free exchange can't be exploitative and thus immoral. Suppose that I inherited from my rich parents a large plot of vacant land, and that you are my poor, landless neighbor. I offer you the following deal. You can work the land, doing all the hard labor of tilling, sowing, irrigating and harvesting. I'll pay you $1 a day for a year. After that, I'll sell the crop for $50,000. You decide this is your best available option, and so take the deal. Since you consent to this exchange, there's nothing morally problematic about it. 3. Do people deserve all they are able, and only what they are able, to get through free exchange? If you say yes, you think that what people deserve is largely a matter of luck. Why? First, because only a tiny minority of the population is lucky enough to inherit wealth from their parents. (A fact lost on Mitt Romney, who famously advised America's youth to "take a shot, go for it, take a risk ... borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business.") Since giving money to your kids is just another example of free exchange, there's nothing wrong with the accumulation of wealth and privilege in the hands of the few. Second, people's capacities to produce goods and services in demand on the market is largely a function of the lottery of their birth: their genetic predispositions, their parents' education, the amount of race- and sex-based discrimination to which they're subjected, their access to health care and good education. It's also a function of what the market happens to value at a particular time. Van Gogh, William Blake, Edgar Allan Poe, Vermeer, Melville and Schubert all died broke. If you're a good Nozickian, you think that's what they deserved. 4. Are people under no obligation to do anything they don't freely want to do or freely commit themselves to doing? If you say yes, then you think the only moral requirements are the ones we freely bring on ourselves — say, by making promises or contracts. Suppose I'm walking to the library and see a man drowning in the river. I decide that the pleasure I would get from saving his life wouldn't exceed the cost of getting wet and the delay. So I walk on by. Since I made no contract with the man, I am under no obligation to save him. Original Article: opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/20/questions-for-free-market-moralists/ Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: www.fdrurl.com/donate Bitcoin Address: 1Fd8RuZqJNG4v56rPD1v6rgYptwnHeJRWs Litecoin Address: LL76SbNek3dT8bv2APZNhWgNv3nHEzAgKT Get more from Stefan Molyneux and Freedomain Radio including books, podcasts and other info at: www.freedomainradio.com Amazon US Affiliate Link: www.fdrurl.com/AmazonUS Amazon Canada Affiliate Link: www.fdrurl.com/AmazonCanada Amazon UK Affiliate Link: www.fdrurl.com/AmazonUK Freedomain Radio Facebook: www.fdrurl.com/fb Freedomain Radio Twitter: twitter.com/freedomainradio Freedomain Radio Google+: www.fdrurl.com/google Freedomain Radio LinkedIn: www.fdrurl.com/LinkedIn
