17-02-2003 04:29									#1
	Capitalism Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I know it is a small point but why do people use 'capitalism' when they mean 'free markets'

Free markets- little or no government involvement in business ie no price controls etc

Capitalism- separation of ownership and management of business

Free trade- few controls over international trade

So you can have free markets without capitalism, but I can think of no examples where there has been capitalism without free markets

	17-02-2003 04:35									#2
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

The usage depends entirely on what discourse the speaker comes from. A Marxist (and they can make a pretty strong case for having invented the word) would define it as an economic system whereby control of capital is in the hands of a bourgeois upper class, for instance.

	17-02-2003 04:47									#3
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

it's spelled Captialism

	17-02-2003 09:53									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

No capitalism, no free market.

	17-02-2003 10:02									#5
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Actually, every example of free markets involved socialism (the worker ownership of the means of production).

	17-02-2003 10:15									#6
	Tired of ads?

If you'd consider that free markets and not merely a more advanced form of barter . Then again, free markets with capitalism aren't numerous either.

	17-02-2003 10:17									#7
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Ramo Actually, every example of free markets involved socialism (the worker ownership of the means of production).

Not the small craftsmanship sort of batering marketplace Ramo

	17-02-2003 10:27									#8
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Those economies, by and large, involved worker control of the means of production. Otherwise known as socialism.

	17-02-2003 10:31									#9
	Remove this text

Which economies .

There has been no true free market in human existance. It's a utopian goal... like communism.

	17-02-2003 10:35									#10
	Suffering from ads?

The various economies that I keep bringing up in all of those anarchism threads, which I don't really feel like turning this one into.

	17-02-2003 10:47									#11
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Well maybe you should.

How were they free market? Didn't they take the means from the people that owned them by force? That doesn't sound very free market to me.

	17-02-2003 10:53									#12
	Got spare money?

Hunter-gatherers didn't. But yes, most modern socialist societies took property by force (of course one could say that they had differing ideas on property claims, so collectivization could fit under a capitalists' idea of a "free market" ), but after collectivization, the economies were "free-market" by just about any standard.

	17-02-2003 11:15									#13
	Re: Capitalism Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Myrddin So you can have free markets without capitalism

Capitalism is the type of economy that Marx described as that which replaces feudalism. It is where the means of production are owned by one class of people and the work is done by another class of people. I guess what you are trying to say is that you can have free markets in either feudalism or communism. You should explain this because I don't think anyone here knows what you are getting at. I don't see how you could have free markets without capitalism, and If we go by Marx's definitions you don't.

	17-02-2003 11:22									#14
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Not the small craftsmanship sort of batering marketplace Ramo

True, but I don't think there was ever a classless society like this. This existed in both feudal and capitalist society. Therefore I think you would still have to consider it one or the other. There never was a free market society. However, if there ever was a society of all self-employed people I guess this would qualify as a new type of economy.

	17-02-2003 11:27									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Ramo Hunter-gatherers didn't. But yes, most modern socialist societies took property by force (of course one could say that they had differing ideas on property claims, so collectivization could fit under a capitalists' idea of a "free market" ), but after collectivization, the economies were "free-market" by just about any standard.

Who knows for sure, but anthropologists don't believe that in these societies you could save your labor and hire others to do your work for you. There weren't really markets either. Tribes traded with each other, but there was no market place where a price was negotiated like we have today.

	17-02-2003 11:34									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Yes, no one had the means to create any form of private authority in h-g societies. That's precisely the reason why there was no public authority, hence it was a "free market."

	17-02-2003 11:37									#17
	Got spare money?

quote: However, if there ever was a society of all self-employed people I guess this would qualify as a new type of economy

Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War, the Ukraine after the Russian Civil War, Southern Mexico during the Mexican Civil War, early rural Northern US, early Medieval Iceland, etc. Plus the various hunter-gatherer societies.

	17-02-2003 11:40									#18
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Okay Ramo, if that's the definition you use, I agree with you. However, that's not what "free market" is in economics.

	17-02-2003 11:40									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

There was public authority in h-g. It wasn't anarchy or free market.

	17-02-2003 11:42									#20
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, I should say that things were agreed to by the community. People weren't just making their own decisions on what work to do.

	17-02-2003 11:43									#21
	Got spare money?

I am not really sure if there was much trading going on between or within tribes back then. Most tribes seem to be self sufficient and they operated in a primitive form of communism.

	17-02-2003 11:46									#22
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Okay Ramo, if that's the definition you use, I agree with you. However, that's not what "free market" is in economics.

I was under the impression that "free market" in economics meant no government interference in the economy - i.e. what Myrddinn posted.

quote: Well, I should say that things were agreed to by the community. People weren't just making their own decisions on what work to do.

That doesn't mean that there's an authority. Authority is coercive. Communal organization isn't coercive.

	17-02-2003 11:53									#23
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Ramo,

To have a free market all people have to be able to act independently. If they act as a community for the communities interest instead of as individuals for their self-interest it's not a free market. That is communism.

	17-02-2003 11:59									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

There are no state-mandated constraints on people to not act independently in these societies. They certainly are able to act independently, but it isn't in their best interests so they act communally.

	17-02-2003 12:03									#25
	Get a bigger avatar today!

But there is no market to determine outcomes.

	17-02-2003 12:10									#26
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Sure there is. You only need to generalize the ideas of buying and selling to include giving.

	17-02-2003 12:57									#27
	Increase the size of your Attachments

I'm afraid that's not a market as it's defined in economics.

	17-02-2003 16:05									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Duncan, the above post, with that sig of yours, saying "defined in economics" looks very, hmmm, ironic Are you just a trolling capitalist?

	17-02-2003 20:13									#29
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: You only need to generalize the ideas of buying and selling to include giving.

How is that a market?

	17-02-2003 21:19									#30
	Increase Your PM Length

In a market you need real buyers and sellers. Not generalized ideas of buyers and sellers.