I do not want "limited government"
It is up to We the People to decide on the details
It's the governments job if We the People say it is
They don't want government except in the areas they want it
I mean that for free trade to happen, there must also be some form of organization -- however heavy or light be the organization's influence -- that facilitates the trade's taking place freely.
- Property Rights: If you invent something, should I be able to "reverse engineer" it and compete with you, selling the exact same thing, or perhaps an enhanced version of it but nonetheless relying on your work as the foundation for my product? Should I instead be required to innovate 100% on my own to produce a competing product? Where does one draw the line between what constitutes one's own innovation vs. what's just common knowledge? Some organization must be the arbiter of such matters.
- Safety: Say you and I are members of the "Hodo" and "Gogo" groups/tribes. We want to engage in trade, but the "Nono" group doesn't want us to do so so they interdict our shippers, sellers and/or production operations. Either there comes to exist some organization that protects us from the "Nonos" as we go about producing/trading or trade doesn't happen.
- Barriers to entry: Assume a innovation/product comes about that consumers demand; however, the costs of producing the product and delivering it are so high that while one provider can produce and deliver the good profitably, were there competition in doing so, neither producer could do so profitably, thus neither produces it. The only way that product gets produced and provided is if some organization ensures monopoly status to a single producer or if consumers directly spend their own money to somehow subsidize the cost of producing or delivering (or both) the product.
Think about receiving potable water, for example, when one's home/office doesn't have immediate access to an aquifer and/or one lacks the means to tap into it even if one does.
- In an environment where everyone needs to possess some quantity of the medium of exchange -- paper and minted money, gems, gold, dirt, woodchips, hair, blades of grass, whatever be the medium -- the downsides of capitalism eventually manifest themselves. Some organization must step in to counteract those excesses.
Those are just a few simple examples of the role an organization must play in facilitating free trade. The following documents provide additional ones along with more comprehensive discussions of them.
Having and exercising free trade, no matter how free one wants it to be, requires there be some organization to manage the process at a high level. Some organization has to maintain the "playing field" as it were. That organization, as we understand it now, is government. The absence of government is anarchy. Under anarchy, even if free trade commences, it won't endure. So the point I was making about your comments and anarchy is that the level of governmental non-intervention, non-participation, non-facilitation for which you seem to advocate strikes me as being commensurate with a state of anarchy.
- Roles for State Government in International Trade
- GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
- THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- The Role of International Trade and Investment in Business Growth and Development
- What is Free Trade? -- This paper answers the question in a specific context; however, the overriding concepts are applicable to others. (Note this paper seems long, but it's not. Most of the length comes from the references not the prose.)
- The Political Economy of Capitalism
- Domestic Regulation and International Trade
"Not all regulation is inimical to public interests, and some that will be under pressure as a result of trade could be regulation that is relatively helpful to public welfare. These instances in the main will involve spillover effects captured to different degrees in various nations. In such settings, there is a clear role for international agreement to regulate harms that are not sustainably regulable by individual nations with open trade."
As for the other "ill" you've been "on about," crony capitalism...To the extent there is an organization that serves to manage the downsides and challenges of capitalism, no matter whether that organization is government or some other organization having the authority and power to enforce its "fixes," capitalists will seek to influence the decisions that organization makes. It seems to me that in the model you've been describing, pretty much any successful effort to influence the decision making will be deemed "crony capitalism" if it doesn't align with your own interests, or what you think "should be," and will not be deemed thus if it does align with the way you think the decision should go. The thing is that no matter which way the decision goes, it goes "that" way because of interested/affected parties acting to exert influence in pursuit of protecting their own interest. Accordingly, it seems that merely attempting to exert influence over a decision that differs with the decision you'd make is what qualifies for you as one's behaving in a "crony capitalist" manner. Well, there's a solution for that. It's called "make you the absolute monarch."
They don't want government except in the areas they want it
I mean that for free trade to happen, there must also be some form of organization -- however heavy or light be the organization's influence -- that facilitates the trade's taking place freely.
- Property Rights: If you invent something, should I be able to "reverse engineer" it and compete with you, selling the exact same thing, or perhaps an enhanced version of it but nonetheless relying on your work as the foundation for my product? Should I instead be required to innovate 100% on my own to produce a competing product? Where does one draw the line between what constitutes one's own innovation vs. what's just common knowledge? Some organization must be the arbiter of such matters.
- Safety: Say you and I are members of the "Hodo" and "Gogo" groups/tribes. We want to engage in trade, but the "Nono" group doesn't want us to do so so they interdict our shippers, sellers and/or production operations. Either there comes to exist some organization that protects us from the "Nonos" as we go about producing/trading or trade doesn't happen.
- Barriers to entry: Assume a innovation/product comes about that consumers demand; however, the costs of producing the product and delivering it are so high that while one provider can produce and deliver the good profitably, were there competition in doing so, neither producer could do so profitably, thus neither produces it. The only way that product gets produced and provided is if some organization ensures monopoly status to a single producer or if consumers directly spend their own money to somehow subsidize the cost of producing or delivering (or both) the product.
Think about receiving potable water, for example, when one's home/office doesn't have immediate access to an aquifer and/or one lacks the means to tap into it even if one does.
- In an environment where everyone needs to possess some quantity of the medium of exchange -- paper and minted money, gems, gold, dirt, woodchips, hair, blades of grass, whatever be the medium -- the downsides of capitalism eventually manifest themselves. Some organization must step in to counteract those excesses.
Those are just a few simple examples of the role an organization must play in facilitating free trade. The following documents provide additional ones along with more comprehensive discussions of them.
Having and exercising free trade, no matter how free one wants it to be, requires there be some organization to manage the process at a high level. Some organization has to maintain the "playing field" as it were. That organization, as we understand it now, is government. The absence of government is anarchy. Under anarchy, even if free trade commences, it won't endure. So the point I was making about your comments and anarchy is that the level of governmental non-intervention, non-participation, non-facilitation for which you seem to advocate strikes me as being commensurate with a state of anarchy.
- Roles for State Government in International Trade
- GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE
- THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT IN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- The Role of International Trade and Investment in Business Growth and Development
- What is Free Trade? -- This paper answers the question in a specific context; however, the overriding concepts are applicable to others. (Note this paper seems long, but it's not. Most of the length comes from the references not the prose.)
- The Political Economy of Capitalism
- Domestic Regulation and International Trade
"Not all regulation is inimical to public interests, and some that will be under pressure as a result of trade could be regulation that is relatively helpful to public welfare. These instances in the main will involve spillover effects captured to different degrees in various nations. In such settings, there is a clear role for international agreement to regulate harms that are not sustainably regulable by individual nations with open trade."
As for the other "ill" you've been "on about," crony capitalism...To the extent there is an organization that serves to manage the downsides and challenges of capitalism, no matter whether that organization is government or some other organization having the authority and power to enforce its "fixes," capitalists will seek to influence the decisions that organization makes. It seems to me that in the model you've been describing, pretty much any successful effort to influence the decision making will be deemed "crony capitalism" if it doesn't align with your own interests, or what you think "should be," and will not be deemed thus if it does align with the way you think the decision should go. The thing is that no matter which way the decision goes, it goes "that" way because of interested/affected parties acting to exert influence in pursuit of protecting their own interest. Accordingly, it seems that merely attempting to exert influence over a decision that differs with the decision you'd make is what qualifies for you as one's behaving in a "crony capitalist" manner. Well, there's a solution for that. It's called "make you the absolute monarch."
Then they scream enumerated powers
Yes, they are laid out in the Constitution and if our legislative branch exceeds its authority our judicial branch will let them know
