Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ahhaha who wrote (7996)	4/13/2006 3:11:44 PM
From: deeno	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

"Capitalism does not need property rights. It does not need rule of law." so the black market would epotmize your view on capitalism

To: ahhaha who wrote (7996)	4/13/2006 3:20:29 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

Capitalism does not need property rights. It does not need rule of law. It works in spite of these structures which are put in place for other reasons. Also, rule of law and property rights do not coincide. Indeed, property rights are usurped by rule of law every day via, say, eminent domain. So do you think it is coincidental that the industrial revolution occurred in England, which had both the rule of law and property rights? Think it was just a few lucky technological inventions?

To: ahhaha who wrote (7996)	4/13/2006 3:52:16 PM
From: gpowell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

Capitalism does not need property rights. It does not need rule of law. It works in spite of these structures which are put in place for other reasons. I agree. However, property rights allow individuals to store and divide labor, which, in turn, enables individuals to determine where it is to be applied. Property rights, which are simply a construct created by the market, has seemed to increase the rate at which pure resources are turned into valued output (at least in this era). I do agree with the assertion that if another form of market organization is developed (where property rights are abolished, for instance) proves to be more efficient, the market will adopt it.

To: ahhaha who wrote (7996)	4/14/2006 8:51:00 AM
From: Wildstar	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24758

Capitalism does not need property rights. I disagree. Capitalism can work without property rights on a small scale in which information about market participants is readily available. This is one way in which the tragedy of the commons can be overcome without private property. Robert Ellickson describes social norms among ranchers evolving to facilitate trade, negotiation, adjudication, etc in spite of the law. amazon.com But in a sufficiently complex economy of millions (and in the future, billions) of participants, information is hard to come by. Thus, legally recognized property rights and enforceable contracts become important to keep widening the sphere of market influence. In the words of F. A. Hayek, From the first establishment of trade which served reciprocal but not common purposes, a process has been going on for millennia which, by making rules of conduct independent of the particular purposes of those concerned, made it possible to extend these rules to ever wider circles of undetermined persons and eventually might make possible a universal peaceful order of the world. Social norms provide these "rules" on a small scale among neighbors; laws are necessary to provide them on a large scale among strangers.