Jock's Place | ...ramblings of a Geo-Mutualist Liberal Democrat

View
links

The whole rationale of "economic liberalism"...

08.12.07
at 02:35

tagged with:

...is to produce a fair return to the working man or woman from all their economic activities and an equitable distribution of the earth's natural bounty. They are thus freed from dependency on both the state's, the landlord's and the employer's coercive tendencies.

And some people think it is "right wing".

There, I thought I'd just reiterate that, as I noticed some people complaining that the EU-Africa summit was concentrating too much on trade and too little on Human Rights. Human Rights will only follow where protectionism is abandoned and dictators lose the power to keep people they don't like in abject poverty.

Appreciated this post? Support my blogging with coffee!

Trackback URL for this post:

http://www.jockcoats.org.uk/trackback/728

comments RSS

Comments

Hear hear.

On 08.12.07 at 09:12 Joe Taylor (not verified) said:

Hear hear.

Not all of us are utilitarians...

On 08.12.07 at 10:52 Anonymous (not verified) said:

"The whole rationale of "economic liberalism" is to produce a fair return to the working man or woman from all their economic activities and an equitable distribution of the earth's natural bounty."

Not all people supporting economic liberalism are utilitarians. Some of us support it because they simply see the economic freedom as an extension of the personal freedom. Liberals supporting the natural rights aren't considered what economic liberalism produces, they see it as an end in itself.

What is a fair return?

On 08.12.07 at 15:29 Joe Otten (not verified) said:

Jock, what is a fair return? How do you define it?

Actually I feel a bit

On 08.12.07 at 18:53 Anonymous (not verified) said:

Actually I feel a bit uncomfortable of speaking about "freedoms". For me there is just the one freedom, and dividing it to "freedoms" enables people to support one and oppose the other, though they are actually different sides of the same entity.

OK, but that would suggest

On 08.12.07 at 22:15 Joe Otten (not verified) said:

OK, but that would suggest quite a range of possible 'fair' return.

So, let's suppose that fashion suddenly turns against hats, and all these hat makers (say sole traders and co-operatives) have to slash their prices or, in desperation take up another trade.

Is the low price a fair one? Even though it causes desperation? Or if not, what would you like to see done about it? Is it fair that the similarly-skilled wig maker is suddenly earning a lot more than the hat maker?

What I'm getting at is that I'm not convinced that 'fair' price or return is a useful concept.

I prefer to think of it as

On 08.12.07 at 13:14 Jock said:

I prefer to think of it as the root rather than the extension of personal freedoms.

Well, not as a number,

On 08.12.07 at 15:40 Jock said:

Well, not as a number, that's for sure! A "fair" return I would say is one in which the transaction is truly voluntary and where neither side's part in it is skewed by monpoly or unearned privilege on the one side or desperation on the other.

I sorta see what you mean.

On 08.12.07 at 19:37 Jock said:

I sorta see what you mean. I suppose what I mean is that you cannot have freedom if you do not have economic and financial freedom. And that very often that economic freedom necessarily precedes emancipation from, for example, a tyrannical regime.

The point is Free Trade (the

On 08.12.07 at 23:25 Jock said:

The point is Free Trade (the quiddity of "economic liberalism") drives down the returns to capital and drives up the returns to labour so they are more equitable. And that is "fairer". I don't believe that anyone should actually have to sell their labour just in order to survive - that's what the common wealth and its distribution in the form of a citizen's income is for. Freed from the need to take whatever one can get just to put the basics on the table so to speak labour has a choice and genuinely voluntary transactions are more likely.

It is no more vague as a statement of principle as any other. It's not intended to be quantitative, any moreso than to "safeguard a fair, free and open society".