[p2p-research] The difference between anarchism and libertarianism

[Patrick Anderson]

> Stefan Merten wrote:
>>  [scarcity] is not unneccessary for an exchange based system
>> because otherwise the exchange based system you mention
>> would not need to protect it.

Stefan,
By "exchange based system" are you talking about *any* form of
trade, or are you talking about the "for-profit" subset that attempts
to maximize "exchange value"?


Kevin Carson wrote:
> The exchange-based system isn't created to "protect" or "lock in"
> scarcity; it is also a way of dealing with scarcity when it exists by
> nature.

Kevin,
If by "exchange-based system" you are referring to "for profit" trade,
then you are incorrect in claiming it does not require scarcity, since
profit (price above cost) is the very measure of scarcity with regards
to the consumer who pays it.  Without scarcity, price hits cost and
profits hit zero, while wages are unaffected (wages are a cost).

Furthermore, a "for profit" business would never attempt to 'solve'
scarcity, for to do so will reduce and finally destroy profits.

"For profit" businesses are on a desperately problematic and
really even suicidally dangerous road requiring artificial scarcity
and purposeful destruction to keep their consumers dependent.

A http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_feedback loop that will 'solve'
scarcity is treating profit as a payer's investment - so that
ownership in the Means of Production is continuously balanced
across all those willing to spend more than cost for the products
they need.

When I say 'spend' I don't mean any sort of 'money' is necessarily
required.  I'm talking about protecting the worker, but from the
*consuming* side, for every worker is also a consumer.

Treating profit as a consumer's investment is the only
http://Wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_stabiliser needed to solve scarcity.


Sincerely,
Patrick