Coercion as a Crime: Is it Realistic?

[Gadarene]

Tell me what predatory lending is and I’ll take a stab at it.

Predatory lending occurs, in part, when creditors target low-income, undereducated individuals with poor credit histories, extending them credit at disproportionately high interest rates in the expectation that the individuals will eventually default and owe a tremendous amount of money.

Assume for the purposes of scope-limiting that the individuals enter into the credit agreement of their own free will. Assume also that the consequences (default and massive debt) are reasonably foreseeable to the creditors and to the reasonably sophisticated observer, but not to the individuals themselves.

Coercion?

[Dunderman]

@Liberal

No. That only comes up when people posit these child labor and tyrannical parent scenarios and want to know what government does about it. Ordinarilly, children just grow up and leave home.

So children are not in the power of their parents? Then who makes their decisions, given that they cannot give meaningful consent?

[spazattak]

@Gadarene

Predatory lending occurs, in part, when creditors target low-income, undereducated individuals with poor credit histories, extending them credit at disproportionately high interest rates in the expectation that the individuals will eventually default and owe a tremendous amount of money.

Assume for the purposes of scope-limiting that the individuals enter into the credit agreement of their own free will. Assume also that the consequences (default and massive debt) are reasonably foreseeable to the creditors and to the reasonably sophisticated observer, but not to the individuals themselves.

Coercion?

Libertaria has excellent schools because of the abundant competition between localities. This results in better educated individuals who don’t fall prey to predatory lending

[Gadarene]

Libertaria has excellent schools because of the abundant competition between localities. This results in better educated individuals who don’t fall prey to predatory lending

Nice try.

[Liberal]

@Priceguy

So children are not in the power of their parents? Then who makes their decisions, given that they cannot give meaningful consent?

That’s not what I said. Children are in the power of their parents until such time as the parents say they are adults. There is arbitration only if there is conflict. Now that I’ve answered your question (twice), would you explain how a specific cut-off age is any better? Don’t people mature at different rates, or do you maintain that everyone is equally mature on his 18th birthday?

[Liberal]

@Gadarene

Predatory lending occurs, in part, when creditors target low-income, undereducated individuals with poor credit histories, extending them credit at disproportionately high interest rates in the expectation that the individuals will eventually default and owe a tremendous amount of money.

Assume for the purposes of scope-limiting that the individuals enter into the credit agreement of their own free will. Assume also that the consequences (default and massive debt) are reasonably foreseeable to the creditors and to the reasonably sophisticated observer, but not to the individuals themselves.

Coercion?

Can’t say for sure yet. Could you explain why everyone in the world is in on this but the people borrowing the money? How is it that they, and they alone, are incapable of foreseeing the consequences? Has the lender hidden something from them? If so, it is coercion. Are they mentally retarded? If so, it is coercion. Are they just plain stupid? If so, it is not coercion.

[Gadarene]

Could you explain why everyone in the world is in on this but the people borrowing the money?

I didn’t say that.

How is it that they, and they alone, are incapable of foreseeing the consequences?

I didn’t say that.

Has the lender hidden something from them? If so, it is coercion.

Assume that the lender presents the individual with a contract laying out all relevant terms and consequences. Assume that those terms and consequences are phrased in legalistic language and buried in fine print. Is that “hiding” something? If yes, then yes.

Are they mentally retarded? If so, it is coercion.

Just unsophisticated and undereducated.

Are they just plain stupid? If so, it is not coercion.

Just unsophisticated and undereducated.

Bottom line: is it coercion to use a disparity in resources/capacity/bargaining power to take systematic advantage of vulnerable individuals for your own economic gain? I argue that at some point, yes, it is.

[Tevildo]

@spazattak

Unsafe working conditions can be addressed by the market (company A has safer conditions than company B - employees at company A will take less in wages for the safety - company A makes stuff cheaper because of this and blah blah blah) unions, and/or coercion.

Why will the pay at Company A be less than at Company B? Company B is already paying its employees the absolute minimum they need to survive. “But nobody would be prepared to work in those sort of conditions!” Lots of people were, less than 100 years ago, when the labour market was far less competitive than it is now. And, in those days, an worker could be - and often was - fired for talking to a union representative in her own time. Is that coercion? It was in her contract of employment, she signed it of her own free will. And what if she manages to join a union, and it calls a strike? Is the union coercing the company? It’s certainly persuading the workers to violate their contracts - so, what steps is the company permitted to take to counteract this coercion? Does the name River Rouge ring any bells?

I don’t deny that there will be some employers, the Joseph Rowntrees of their day, who treat their employees fairly and seek to better the general condition of the working poor. But I don’t think every employer will.

What do you mean by ‘protection from professional incompetance’?

There’s no redress against an incompetent doctor (or electrician, or accountant), provided they didn’t coerce you into acting on their advice and their advice was merely negligent rather than deceitful.

And the last one… I think you’re grasping at straws. The system wouldn’t be allowing that really.

From Liberal’s post # 42:

Prostitituion is not unethical so long as both parties are consenting adults.

From Liberal’s post # 47:

A minor appeals to arbitration that he is now capable of giving meaningful consent and that the obligation of his parents is completed.

I take this second post to be the legal definiton of “adult” in Libertaria.

Whatever in that child’s life that would lead to that kind of life could have been curtailed by enforcement of coercion.

A desire to make money, for himself and his family? Why is “Johnny, study hard, go to college, and you’ll be able to become a doctor - and doctors make lots of money!” legitimate parental persuasion, and “Johnny, study hard, pass The Test, and you’ll be able to sell your body - and such a cute body as yours is worth a lot these days!” illegitimate coercion? Because it’s immoral? But we all know how arbitary moral standards are - and there’s no legislature to come up with a codified set of standards that the nation as a whole are prepared to accept. Also, by invoking morals, we’ve moved away from coercion as the sole test of legality.

Incidentally, I apologise for bringing up such an extreme example - I was hoping to provoke outrage with Rosa Parks, but that seemed to fail.

(PS to Liberal. I hope you don’t mind me reigniting the debate with spazattack, despite my disengagement with you. Nothing personal. )

[Menocchio]

@Liberal

That’s exactly why I love libertarianism. Since it is not a society you care to live in, it does not force you to do so. If you like nothing else about it, you should like that.

This, and the entire Libertarian line about how the market and competeition will address all problems shows why the philosophy just wouldn’t work.

I could not live in the society. Great. Will the government give me the money to move to, say, Europe? Will it help me obtain the visas I need to live there? Will it help me stay in contact with the family I leave behind and help me adjust to different cultural values? Will it gurnatee me a job in my new country? No? Well then moving simply isn’t a realistic option, no matter what I’m “allowed” to do.

That’s an extreme example, I realize, but let’s look at spazattak’s (half tongue in cheek, I realize) point:

@spazattak

Libertaria has excellent schools because of the abundant competition between localities. This results in better educated individuals who don’t fall prey to predatory lending

Okay. Let’s assume that I’m looking at schooling options for my youngster. Of the local schools, the ones I can afford are crap, except for one, which won’t accept my kid due to religion or academic record. The market can very much fail to provide a decent option.

Now, under the present system, I have several options to improve local schools. I could run for school board (or higher office). I could petition local government to increase funding. None of these are a magic bullet, but they’re still more than sitting around hoping affordable alternative shows up, which may or may not ever happen.

[Liberal]

@Gadarene

I didn’t say that.

I didn’t say that.

I think you did. At least that’s how I understood you to mean the creditors plus reasonable people versus the borrowers.

Assume that the lender presents the individual with a contract laying out all relevant terms and consequences. Assume that those terms and consequences are phrased in legalistic language and buried in fine print. Is that “hiding” something? If yes, then yes.

Too vague to answer. What exactly does it say? Surely, you don’t expect me to comment on something that’s in your imagination that you haven’t fully described.

Just unsophisticated and undereducated.

Just unsophisticated and undereducated.

Then unless the lender is misrepresenting something, there is no coercion.

Bottom line: is it coercion to use a disparity in resources/capacity/bargaining power to take systematic advantage of vulnerable individuals for your own economic gain? I argue that at some point, yes, it is.

But you aren’t saying what makes them vulnerable. One could argue that any education short of a doctorate in jurisprudence makes one unqualified to read a contract. Perhaps you should define what level of sophistication and education are necessary to read loan agreements. And what does your system do about it?

[Dunderman]

@Liberal

Children are in the power of their parents until such time as the parents say they are adults. There is arbitration only if there is conflict.

Then I don’t understand why you answered “no” without clarification, but never mind; I’ve got my answer.

Now that I’ve answered your question (twice), would you explain how a specific cut-off age is any better? Don’t people mature at different rates, or do you maintain that everyone is equally mature on his 18th birthday?

I’ve never claimed that a specific cut-off age is better than children actively seeking legal adulthood. In fact I’ve had thoughts in this direction myself.

My question to you is what would stop me from manufacturing porn with my small children as the actors, or from simply raping or beating them. This is hardly one of the hypotheticals so detested by you; it happens all the time, in every country on Earth. When such a person is discovered in countries like yours and mine, he or she is prosecuted. What would happen in Libertaria?

[Gadarene]

sigh Ferget it, Lib.

[Liberal]

@Menocchio

This, and the entire Libertarian line about how the market and competeition will address all problems shows why the philosophy just wouldn’t work.

Just to correct the record, that’s not the libertarian line; that’s the capitalism line. A libertarian society can be communist, so long as all are volunteers.

[Liberal]

@Priceguy

Then I don’t understand why you answered “no” without clarification, but never mind; I’ve got my answer.

I did clarify. I said that it came up in the context of conflict resolution.

My question to you is what would stop me from manufacturing porn with my small children as the actors, or from simply raping or beating them. This is hardly one of the hypotheticals so detested by you; it happens all the time, in every country on Earth. When such a person is discovered in countries like yours and mine, he or she is prosecuted. What would happen in Libertaria?

I’ve answered that several times in the past. You can’t rape or beat or force into sex adults, let alone children. If you abuse them sexually, physically, mentally, or any other way, you risk charges of coercion.

[Liberal]

@Gadarene

sigh Ferget it, Lib.

Good idea. This entire discussion is pointless, contentious, and silly.

[Gadarene]

Good idea. This entire discussion is pointless, contentious, and silly.

I’ve done my best not to be contentious, actually, and I’m highlighting something that is a genuine problem, both in the system as it exists and (particularly, in my view) in the social context on behalf of which you so eloquently advocate. But you appear to prefer willful misapprehension to any genuine engagement on the issues. And if you believe that the uninformed and undereducated amongst us aren’t de facto “coerced” on a daily basis by entities possessing an unequal bargaining position over them, then you’re naive as well.

[Dunderman]

@Liberal

You can’t rape or beat or force into sex adults, let alone children. If you abuse them sexually, physically, mentally, or any other way, you risk charges of coercion.

OK. As I understand it, the only judicial process in Libertaria is that of mutually accepted arbitration. The kind of person to start child porn production is hardly likely to accept arbitration. So what specifically happens in the case of a child porn producer who uses his children? Who has the right and ability to prosecute him? Let’s assume the other parent is either dead or an accomplice.

[Liberal]

@Priceguy

OK. As I understand it, the only judicial process in Libertaria is that of mutually accepted arbitration. The kind of person to start child porn production is hardly likely to accept arbitration. So what specifically happens in the case of a child porn producer who uses his children? Who has the right and ability to prosecute him? Let’s assume the other parent is either dead or an accomplice.

The question makes no sense. What does the US do if children are being abused in communist China? You’re asking me what a libertarian government would do about things outside its jurisdiction. Assuming you’re not being deliberately dishonest, is there some reason you’re phrasing the question this way? Personally, if I knew of such abuse and had the means, I’d take matters into my own hands to rescue the children and suffer whatever consequences befell me. What would you do?

[Gadarene]

In other words, Priceguy, the only people who would have jurisdiction over a child pornographer who chose not to bind himself to arbitration would be those individuals willing to go after the child pornographer themselves with fists a’blazing.

You have to remember that Libertaria, as Lib envisions it, has no geographic borders. It’s drawn entirely by contractual obligations.

[Liberal]

@Gadarene

I’ve done my best not to be contentious, actually, and I’m highlighting something that is a genuine problem, both in the system as it exists and (particularly, in my view) in the social context on behalf of which you so eloquently advocate. But you appear to prefer willful misapprehension to any genuine engagement on the issues. And if you believe that the uninformed and undereducated amongst us aren’t de facto “coerced” on a daily basis by entities possessing an unequal bargaining position over them, then you’re naive as well.

But NO two position are EVER equal for bargaining. I have twenty dollars when I go to Wal-Mart, while they have millions of dollars in goods and staff. What about the bargaining power of government itself? Why don’t you see as coercive the fact that government can make financial demands of people using language so complex that a JD is required to understand it, and with the backing of guns and prisons?