Obviously I hear quite a bit about some of the problems that people see in implementing a Resource-Based Economy as the Venus Project advocates. And during these debates some good questions are asked. And some bad ones. In many cases I notice that people are asking the same questions that they themselves cannot answer.
Lets assume for a moment, that we wanted to implement what Anarcho-Capitalists suggest. Complete Free Market, absent of any government.
And of course, we also have to get rid of that pesky federal reserve, and switch to sound money. In fact most Free Market Capitalists that I talk to seem to think that it's the unsound money that is the root of all of our woes. And that despite the fact that even when money was based literally on gold and other precious metals (because it was made out of them) we still had huge pockets of poor in our society.
So, then what? Do we just throw a lever and get rid of all of the regulations at once? What about all the people who own property purchased using the fraudulent banking system? Obviously we cannot have a Free market where everyone is equal and able to compete if these mega-corporations are allowed to retain all the property they purchased with federal reserve notes right?
So then what? Do we seize the assets of everyone on the planet, and reset everything and create no regulations whatsoever?
If the answer is no, then how do we propose to solve the issue that will happen when we suddenly switch to sound money that there is only a finite supply of? In this supposedly "equal" race we will have people staring off in the 1,000 meter dash at the 900 meter mark. What kind of "Free" market do you think will exist at that point?
Something I always found funny about many Libertarians during the course of my time working with Senator Mike Gravel in his bid for the Libertarian nomination, was that they did not believe in the ability of the citizens to be competent enough to make decisions to participate in ballot initiatives to make their own federal laws. They called democracy "mob rule" (leaving out the fact that Gravel's NI4D proposal is still limited by the Constitution so as to protect the minority) yet most of them place so much faith in those very same people to adequately participate in the final fail safe in the Free Market system. The consumer. All of our woes that will come from such a system supposedly are going to be made fine, as the consumer (the "mob") will make sure that all evil business practices are not profitable.
Apparently we don't need laws to prevent sweat shop factories because the same "mob" that they don't trust to vote for their own federal laws, will be responsible citizens as consumers, and always do what is best for the economy.
Seeing as how we can already see this is an utter failure I don't see how this is going to in any way work. Particular in the monetary profit motivated system. The average consumer knows about sweat shop factories. They know about bad environmental practices. The vast majority of them simply don't care. They still put on a smile and shop at Wal-Mart so they can buy more junk that is planned to be obsolete as soon as the maker of the product can feasibly get away with. Why? Because it is a profit motivated system from top to bottom. And as long as you have that profit motivated system, all parts of it will be corrupted by it.
There is also the issue of the fact that even if you wanted to make choices, in many cases there are none. And the more the economy tanks the less choices people will be able to make. As the greedy profit motive causes the consumer to buy products regardless of who it puts out of work locally, and the employer continues to put more people out of work through machine automation or finding a country of people desperate enough to accept ten cents an hour to do their work, despite the fact that this will eventually destroy their consumer base.
Free Market Capitalism relies on a lot of fallacies. Including that supposedly no monopolies can exist in a free market. When you ask them why they can't exist, they just say they can't because they can't. Or because Ayn Rand said so.
I remember talking to one guy who said in response to me pointing out that wages are decreasing as fast as companies can get away with it that history "proves" that as production rises wages will rise. He acted like it was some sort of law of physics that this would occur. I warrant that in history this used to take place. But that trend has been over for a long time. There was a time when the consumer cared about such things as honorable business practices. Now they care about $50 DVD players. The greed inherent in the system trickles down from the top to the bottom like water pouring from the top of the mountain. But also like water, it erodes everything. And I think eventually we are going to see an avalanche when the mountain that proves to be a house of cards crashes.
So again, how do you implement this Anarcho-Capitalist system?
Personally, I think it is rather "utopian".