You\’ve shown those bastard market lovers what for there eh?
Let’s try that on the following for which there is undoubtedly market demand:
· Child labour
I could go on.
Do I need to do so?
Well, yes actually. Markets are about \”voluntary\” exchange. If it ain\’t voluntary it ain\’t a market exchange. That gets rid of the slavery one.
Child labour? I don\’t see any evidence of demand for it in our rich and wealthy society. I don\’t think anyone else does either (absent the occasional crazed nutter keeping a child slave in whch case see above).
Yes, of course there is demand (and voluntary supply) of child labour in poor countries. For the alternative is not the nice and comfy school, the teddy bear and the Winnie the Pooh story being read. It\’s death through starvation.
Have these people never heard of externalities?
Indeed we have and they are one of the major reasons why we argue that drugs and prostitution should be legal. For the externalities of their being illegal are so great in the costs of crime, violence, disease and the rest. Plus we also believe that consenting adults are just that (and if they\’re not consenting then see slavery above).
Market enthusiasts are really making complete fools of themselves at the moment.
They need to face reality: just because there is a market for something does not make it right.
I\’m not sure that anyone has ever said that simply because there is a demand for something that it is right. There is a demand from some that they be able to murder people as they show by going out and doing so, 800-1,000 times a year in the UK alone. No one is saying that this is right or moral.
However, we do tend to say that when there is both demand and willing and consenting supply that the exchange should be allowed.
Just because a price can be set does not mean there is value.
True….but that two of said consenting adults can agree upon a price at which to exchange means that, by definition, value has been created for each is giving up something that they desire less than that which they are getting. This is an increase in utility, the very definition of the creation of value.
Now it is indeed true that swapping a blow job for some smack doesn\’t create value for me and I\’m similarly certain that it doesn\’t for Ritchie (and please don\’t even go down the route of thinking of that being a mutual exchange ). But who are either of us to determine what provides value for the 60 odd million people with whom we share a country?
Willing participants does not even mean benefit results.
Depends what you mean by \”benefit\”. By your, my or their standards? That consenting adults have entered into a voluntary transaction means that, as above, for the participants, benefit has resulted.
Yes, we are indeed allowed to insist that some such transaction not take place because of the externalities, either actual or even possible. The key to Sellafield being bought, in an entirely voluntary transaction, by Abu Ben Nutter might be an example. But those externalities do have to be identifiable, over and above the conviction of one or many that they are repugnant transactions.
Or ethics? Or society? Or democracy?
Whose ethics? Which society? And by democracy I assume here is meant the tyranny of the majority?
Don\’t forget it was only a few short decades ago that men could be and were locked up for having consensual, non-commercial sex with other men. All entirely according to the ethics of the time, the society of the day and the democratically expressed will of the people.
Nicely liberal attitude you\’ve got there Ritchie. People not only should not do what you disapprove of, they should not be allowed to do what you disapprove of.
Try reading Mill again, eh?