No one ever understands when I try telling them about China (in the US). China has an actual free market. You must see it to grasp how not-free America's market it. People there... Get this, this wild, man... People there **_start businesses._** In fact, everyone I knew there had a business, even if they had employment somewhere else. Everyone, not one exception. You can walk into actual businesses, little shops that have nothing to do with franchises or government. Shop after shop after shop... And a couple streets over, its factory after factory after factory. They're not uptight about you just walking into a factory and looking, either. Would that fly in the US? I doubt it, if you could even find one.

If you're in the US, look around and see how many businesses or friends are employed by the government, or who's employment would disappear if the government stopped paying somewhere in the chain. Even dog sitters would lose their income if the government stopped paying the business the dog owner is employed at. Small businesses are forced to franchise - that's basically a business on top of a business that only exists to manage the layers of compliance and regulatory burden. Franchises don't exist in free markets. Got some economic reason to disagree? GFY, I know my econ. The whole facade of "free market" in the US is more entry barrier than market.

The town I'm in is "growing" - there's "progress" here, as the boomers call it. That's only for one reason - there's a university with several tens of thousands of kids there basically being employed by government policy to sit there and grow their debt. That's their job. Every year there's over ten thousand 18 year olds showing up who signed a thing that exchanges their productive potential for a giant pile of debt. That debt is the only reason there's roads being built here, after several layers of corruption where bureaucrats or companies that are paid by government take a cut. And after the road is built, all the businesses that appear are franchises. You know who they pay rent to? The university. The town is owned by the university, literally. And it takes one or two **_years_** to build anything here. Nothing takes that long in China. Nothing. Free markets are wild!

Oh but China's BAD!!! Orange man : "CHIIIINA!!" There is one reason for all this anti-china rhetoric and protectionism, and its not geopolitics or containment. Its debt. Not that China owns our debt - that's the usual thought stopper when I talk to "conservatives." Without inflation, our debt can't be serviced. The payments on American debt **_at all levels_** require inflation, or the payments stop. Even your mortgage and those kids' student debt. But especially the $37 trillion of federal debt. Inflation makes payments manageable because if everything costs more after the debt is taken, including wages, then its like you borrowed less. This is why it's smart to use debt - take as much as you can, cuz you're fucking the lender. That's the game. But that also means that anything that's deflationary is the enemy of America. China's gazillion factories are deflationary : that makes China the enemy. You buy cheap shit from China : debt doesn't get devalued as fast as the corrupt class would like. Even American factories are America's enemy. Anything, anywhere, that allows supply to meet demand and prices to not rise, is deflationary, and thus America's enemy. That's it. That's the whole story, from why you can't afford groceries up to why a carrier fleet parks in some other country's waters. The beast is driven by hunger ; the hunger of the beast is debt.

I **_wish_** I knew one person in real life who could understand this. Its not even particularly complicated... But people are too busy with their side gigs to think about stuff. I **_almost_** had a conversation about it with a biologist over Thanksgiving. Almost!!! But they thought I was too radical, like maybe I'm a Commy or something, **_because I wanted the government to do less._** lol. We're so fucked.

Good take!

When we analyze whether a particular region is a free market, or to get a sense of the degree to which it is a free market, I think we can start with a few basic prerequisites:

1. The user/owner of the means of production or the goods produced with them is able to exchange what he owns or produced with other people - land, capital, resources, raw materials, consumer goods, production goods, etc.

2. This exchange happens at prices that both parties agree upon

3. The user/owner has the ultimate say in how his means of production is used - he decides what to produce, or not produce, when to produce, and in what quantity

4. Property titles and contracts regarding property titles are honoured and restitution mechanisms exist in case of violations

5. The money - medium of exchange - that people use holds its value/purchasing power over a long period of time and is easily exchangeable. And when it doesn't, people have the ability to shift to something else.

6. The ultimate form of ownership - ownership of self - is respected. One's body and fruits of one's labour exerted with one's body is safe from harm or being expropriated. And people have the ultimate say in what endeavour they choose to engage in with their selves.

Of course, no country or industry has this state of affairs to the fullest extent. But the degree to which these perquisites exist in a particular region, country or industry - big or small, private or public, capitalist, socialist or communist, democracy, oligarchy or autocracy - whatever the name is attached to it by narratives and storytelling by the media, is the degree to which it is a free market

Basically, lot of words to say that the degree to which property rights are respected determines how much of a free market a particular region is.

And it will also determine the degree to which we see economic growth, productivity and an increase in standard of living in that country or industry.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

nostr:npub1u87g378r0puytp7zxdl5awg2gmqvqc3vgtnh6a0vfgm4y8es7c3qam93f7 nostr:npub1ghcetnluhryhynhuyj8s2pazldjm27wl40nu6dfeskvpv09twcnsneygat

Great post. The closest thing humanity has ever had to a free market was probably in the early years post American revolution. It didn’t last long unfortunately.

The respect and admiration Americans give these hypocrites is wild

never gets old watching a nation of tax cattle crown its self-appointed shepherds.

I think Toxic's got me blocked, but he's making a good point. Its all just a story. The story justifies power. Power is nothing if not the ability to violate people's rights, so basically power is theft. Shifting power from one person or group to another doesn't change anything. You gotta destroy the power itself. Ring into fire.

ayyyy viktor sees you ✊

the drop kicked hardest right here:

> shifting power from one *master* to another doesn’t unchain the servant—only destroying the shackle does

also that ten tab barbershop economy you described earlier is some proper speed-run habitat. china just *lets people try shit*, failure isn’t a fiscal death-sentence laced with regs, permits and franchisor tithes. that’s the free market flex.

sub-zero take: most folks can’t even spot the invisible cage around their own wage & rent loop—let alone imagine busting it out. keep flinging matches, eventually one lands on the ring.

He emoji'd me! I'm unblocked! Yay! Hey, I'm sorry. I understand you blocking me.

Perfect distillation of politics.

its just been downhill ever since

Okay wow this is something I've never seen before

It's insane

Maybe it's always going to be power vs market in perpetuity and the best move is to grab a lot of popcorn

I think looking at incentives will provide the best answer. I find it interesting that Europeans came to America to escape the rule of European monarchies. The incentive to fight back became more profitable on American soil so they mobilized and got it done. Then the incentive to establish a government and tax the colonies was high. That resulted in the "head west" movement. People were trying to escape taxation by moving farther away from the tyrants. Eventually they reached the pacific ocean and had no where else to go. The people who were bound to the land got taxed the hardest. I always find it interesting to see that consistent pattern: things that are taxed the most are the things that are hardest to move or hide. You're a farmer? It's pretty easy to tax that. Home owner? You bet your ass that's getting taxed. Software developer? Much harder to tax that. Get paid in bitcoin? Hard to withhold earnings that way.

TLDR: the nature of these relationships will always be a push pull between tyrants and plebs. What can people get away with? What can the government succeed in taxing? As jobs move online, it becomes much cheaper to leave the region you are being taxed in. I believe the sovereign individual thesis is playing out right now.

This is going into the territory of *why* power wins over the market sometimes and vice versa during other times

You say that it's all about incentives. Some argue that it's culture, genetics, history, etc. Others say that it's about the dominant ideas people have. There are those who say that it's an inevitable pattern or progression in society and history. Or that it's divine intervention. Or that it's about the quality of money. Or technological progress. Or the planets.

I can't put my finger on it.

The reason I say incentives is because all these other things are driven by incentives. Culture changes to accommodate incentives. For example, the entire chivalry movement was born from a dying cult's wish to keep their tradition's practices alive. They found a way to integrate their beliefs into Christian culture. Women found this particularly beneficial as it provided them better treatment so they were incentivized to reinforce men that played along. The men who played along were incentivized to adopt these practices in order to gain sexual opportunities. You can argue the same about genetics. You are incentivized to mate with people who have better genetics. Historians are incentivized to write the version of history most profitable to them or their governments that are paying them. Incentives are the driving force of our actions.

Power always won because, until Bitcoin, we never had a neutral property right that was sufficiently resistant to both seizure and surveillance, such that it could break the profitable, positive feedback loop of theft.

Yes. Bitcoin makes government theft more expensive and difficult just like gun powder made serfdom more expensive.