Jose Perez Posted April 26, 2013 Posted April 26, 2013 Stefan, at min 42:50 on this video you mistake voluntarism for generosity. If the claim is that the free market – and private property – is good then surely ads are less hypocritical than donation requests. Ads – or price – will always demonstrate the free market works, as well as the value of what is offered, which is not the case with donations. [View:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkZqtgpH2EQ]
ribuck Posted April 26, 2013 Posted April 26, 2013 In a free market, ads demonstrate the value of the video to the advertiser. Donations demonstrate the value of the video to the listener.
Jose Perez Posted April 26, 2013 Author Posted April 26, 2013 Both Stefan and me are talking about objectively (universally) demonstrating something, or proving; otherwise why would we speak about hypocrisy. Donations demonstrate nothing about the listener's motivation – in fact, in this world a large portion is likely to be motivated by guilt.
SuperAdventurer Posted April 26, 2013 Posted April 26, 2013 Ads are part of the free market (as Stef acknowledges), and donations are also part of the free market. As long as force isn't being used to compel payment, there's no hypocrisy here either way. Around the 43 minute mark Stef says: "If I talk about voluntarism as a way to help the poor... then I have to put my money where my mouth is and rely on donations." I fail to see how this follows.
Jose Perez Posted April 26, 2013 Author Posted April 26, 2013 Around the 43 minute mark Stef says: "If I talk about voluntarism as a way to help the poor... then I have to put my money where my mouth is and rely on donations." I fail to see how this follows. Exactly. It would only follow if donating to FDR was the equivalent of helping the poor, or if Stef saw a certain moral duty in donating to FDR (*sigh*) which is at least not an appeal to generosity...
Recommended Posts