Debate: Free-Market Police: Better or Worse?
Side: Much, much better...

Doesn't usually work that way, because jobs require specialisation which means that unless they gain a new field they're stuck in a low-paying or poor career (because it's not often the case that there are all sorts of employers with better working conditions than the job they're in).If a manager suddenly makes the working conditions for his employees much worse, then the working conditions will be worse than which is offered by other like-companies, therefore making it less likely that workers will come and work for him instead of his competition.at least is what defeats your argument, at least means minimally fair pay and benefits.And what defines what is minimally acceptable? Oh, right, it's defined by what the demand finds acceptable. =/I never said lesser product or service, I said lesser employee pay and benefits.Supply and demand affects both a companies services to its customers and it's employees. Most people are apathetic, that is why kids in china are sewing shoes together.Wait, China, with it's massive government has poor working conditions? How is this possible? I was under the impression that governments are put in place to stop thing like this. o.Operhaps person in North America are apathetic to the working conditions of China, so? Do you think they'd be so apathetic when it's their own working conditions being challenged?Obviously not.Try selling U234 on E-bay or child pornography. You'll see what I mean.Alright, you don't need a government to stop such sales from happening. Actually, those things still get sold regardless of the governments existence, so what you've said once again is in no way an argument for the state. If E-bay doesn't want these things being sold on their website, they're free to ban such trade themselves.Problem solved.Going back to the above, you'd have lots of unpenalised fraud, arms dealing, nuclear isotopes, and child pornography being traded.These things still happen under the governments watch so... you know where I'm going with this at this point, I'm sure.fraud would be penalized either from a free market court agreed upon ahead of time via a contract. even if no agreement was made ahead of time, the fraudster would pay for it with his reputation.You never heard of espionage, or stock manipulation (insider trading and rigging).Bribery works on every kind of system.Again, if these things are so feared by the population, then watch-dog companies will come into place to meet that demand.Who will be bribed with no fear of repercussions. Because there is no law, remember? No state means no common law, just small circles or jurisdiction to evade.You can have law without a government. Don't assume you cannot. http://mises.org/daily/2701Poor, naive fellow. Never heard of implausible deniability and coverups.I mean, I literally just debunked this claim in the post you are responding to. Multiple watch-dogs make this sort of thing almost impossible. A company would go bankrupt trying to make deals with every watch-dog and trying to cover it up. It's easy to make deals and cover up when there's only one watch-dog... like the government... =/