Cowardly Refugee Running Away From Problems

[glenn303]

In fact if the views I support had been heard more then, the Nazis would not have got into power. Fact. Challenge me on this if you want.

[TomViolenz]

In fact if the views I support had been heard more then, the Nazis would not have got into power. Fact. Challenge me on this if you want.

Oh oh, you shouldn't have!
Now we will get treated to lengthy posts with walls of copy pasta, "proving" that Trotzky new it all back then and no-one listened and he could have saved us all if we would have just accepted him as our Saviour!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks

Edit: Told you so!

[re:dream]

Empiricism is great... for certain things, like physics, that require testing. Other things, like maths are a priori. We cannot make sense our reality purely through observation.

As for economics, unless we consider people as economic actors, with subjective values, ends, etc., we fail to understand what drives them, and thus cannot predict their future economic behaviour.

Consider this: Whenever an exchange is not voluntary but coerced, one party profits at the expense of the other.

Clearly, no empirical testing is required to prove this statement, hence economics cannot an empirical science.

QEDizzle

Well I would say that adjudicating between rival approaches to social organization raises empirical questions - not only mathematical ones.

You are right that no empirical testing is required to prove or disprove a conceptual statement e.g. about the relationship between coercion and exploitation.

But establishing whether coercion or consent is actually happening in reality is an empirical question. In my part of South Africa, every year farm workers accept work at starvation wages. Is that contract voluntary or coerced? You need information about the actual situation of the people involved. (E.g. are their other potential sources of work, etc etc.). As Mises points out, you need to know whether your assumptions about " the conditions of the environment in which an action takes place" hold true or not. Those are questions of fact.

[Galt]

And how did you get to: "shy away from a discussion"?! I didn't "shy" away, I was already beyond bored when I finished reading the thread title (slight exageration )... This is not what I understand as "shy away from..."
Why do you care so much what I think of healthcare anyways?

Only now, at the end, do you understand... the importance of wording.

[Galt]

Well I would say that adjudicating between rival approaches to social organization raises empirical questions - not only mathematical ones.

You are right that no empirical testing is required to prove or disprove a conceptual statement e.g. about the relationship between coercion and exploitation.

But establishing whether coercion or consent is actually happening in reality is an empirical question. In my part of South Africa, every year farm workers accept work at starvation wages. Is that contract voluntary or coerced? You need information about the actual situation of the people involved. (E.g. are their other potential sources of work, etc etc.). As Mises points out, you need to know whether your assumptions about " the conditions of the environment in which an action takes place" hold true or not. Those are questions of fact.

This is correct. The question of whether or not someone is being coerced clearly requires empirical investigation. This requires first of all a working definition of the word "coerce" (to persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats – OED), and then an exploration of the facts.

In the case of the starving farmworker, if he is being persuaded by force, threats, by any third party, be it the farm owner, the state, the local mafia, or anyone else, then he was coerced.

Otherwise...

[re:dream]

Now we will get treated to lengthy posts with walls of copy pasta, "proving" that Trotzky new it all back then and no-one listened and he could have saved us all if we would have just accepted him as our Saviour!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks

]

You think so?

[Galt]

@ Funken

I have reported you for spamming.

[re:dream]

. This requires first of all a working definition of the word "coerce" (to persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats – OED), and then an exploration of the facts.

In the case of the starving farmworker, if he is being persuaded by force, threats, by any third party, be it the farm owner, the state, the local mafia, or anyone else, then he was coerced.

Otherwise...

That's *physical* coercion. Other kinds of coercion also exist. And (back to conceptual points) a free choice is not only a choice that is free of coercion by force or threat of force.

So if workers face a choice of either having no money at all, or accepting wages that are insufficient to feed their families, it's hardly a free choice.

Interestingly enough, not even white South African farmers would make that argument. None of them say, 'it's a free choice, they can walk away if they want to, and therefore there's nothing wrong with our wage contracts'.

[Galt]

That's *physical* coercion. Other kinds of coercion also exist. And (back to conceptual points) a free choice is not only a choice that is free of coercion by force or threat of force.

So if workers face a choice of either having no money at all, or accepting wages that are insufficient to feed their families, it's hardly a free choice.

Interestingly enough, not even white South African farmers would make that argument. None of them say, 'it's a free choice, they can walk away if they want to, and therefore there's nothing wrong with our wage contracts'.

Yes, people have to work to survive. We are "coerced" by nature, who forces us to seek food and shelter. Unfortunately for your workers, their labour just isn't all useful to anyone, which is why their survival is now uncertain. This is a basic question of supply and demand. Captain hindsight would spank them for having families in the first place. How very irresponsible of them.

In any case, they are certainly NOT being coerced by the farm owners, who best I can see are the only ones even willing to give them jobs. A shit job is still better than no job.

[re:dream]

[Galt]

[re:dream]

[Galt]

[TomViolenz]

Unfortunately for your workers, their labour just isn't all useful to anyone, which is why their survival is now uncertain. This is a basic question of supply and demand. Captain hindsight would spank them for having families in the first place. How very irresponsible of them.

lol
What a strange world it must be living inside your head... (Not meant to offend, I'm just astonished )

[Galt]

Unfortunately for your workers, their labour just isn't all useful to anyone, which is why their survival is now uncertain. This is a basic question of supply and demand. Captain hindsight would spank them for having families in the first place. How very irresponsible of them.

lol
What a strange world it must be living inside your head... (Not meant to offend, I'm just astonished )

I'll admit that intellectual rigor can often take you wonderful, unexpected places.