Freedom, Inc

A freedom oriented blog, designed to give you a break from the oppressive political ramblings from those whom wish to see liberty taken away.

If women were paid 77 cents on the dollar [relative to men for the same work], a profit-oriented firm could dramatically cut labor costs by replacing male employees with females. Progressives assume that businesses nickel-and-dime suppliers, customers, consultants, anyone with whom they come into contact—yet ignore a great opportunity to reduce wages costs by 23%.

They don’t ignore the opportunity because it doesn’t exist.

On the term “Crony Capitalism”

laliberty:

association-of-free-people replied to your post: It is crony capitalism, as opposed to…

Stop allowing them to call it crony capitalism. It is fascism and thus it is socialism.

I actually think it’s strategically helpful to use the term “crony capitalism” - merely a synonym for corporatism or state capitalism - precisely because it makes it easier to differentiate from free market capitalism

Someone with a bias against “capitalism” will not be dissuaded by any argument that says “no, no that is not capitalism” - especially when that bias is borne from many years of societal acceptance of that definition of the word. And, truthfully, the term was first popularized by detractors of private property and exchange. But if we simply explain that what they should rail against is crony capitalism but not the other type that is simply free people making consensual, mutually beneficial exchange - then we have a shot. After all, it’s not easy to argue against the concept of consent (though some do try).

And yes, corporatism is fascism. As I wrote years ago:

It is intellectually dishonest, at best, to point at the shortcomings of crony capitalism as evidence of failure of free market capitalism. Crony capitalism (aka ‘state capitalism’ or ‘corporatism’), after all, is the economic framework for fascism. Free market capitalism, on the other hand, is the economic framework for liberty.

(Source: laliberty)

In a police state, referencing one’s rights is seen as an act of aggression.

—Philip Schuyler (via thinksquad)

(via ch00sel0ve)