Warning! Wall of text imminent!
Sure, partnerships are fine and dandy but they should be voluntary.
Exactly. And that's the advantage Market Anarchy has over the other types, imo: It can encompass, within its philosophy, acceptance of the practices of the others: An overall Market Anarchy would tolerate having enclaves of Mutualists, while an overall Mutualism would not tolerate, but would inevitably suffer, enclaves of Market Anarchy.
Which contributes to the present suckage of unemployment. You can't even go and grow your own food or build your own shelter without appeasing some capitalist for the right to use land that he owns but isn't using.
You could always... I donno... what's the word... oh yeah: Buy. You could always go and buy the land you want to use. Of course, that's a larger upfront cost, but you save on overhead.
Debunked? At least one capitalist, or devil's advocate, in this thread has agreed with my association of the two terms, just not that it's a bad thing.
Tell you what... When you can take care of everyone else who asks you, and still manage to feed yourself, I'll sign up for the Proudhoun Kool-aid. Until then, you are still a selfish being, and that's a good thing, because it means you can eat.
Except for the fact that I am not presently an employer, I can assure you that you are wrong. I don't know how it affects my argument though.
Thus re-enforcing my conception that anyone who says "Stop people from doing X!" is really saying: "Please stop me from doing X!" As an employer, did you stick to your convictions, or did you "exploit" your workers?
So, workers should sell that which they produce at market prices.
They are. Market price is what they can get for it. Since what they can get for their labor is (in the example provided) 10 BTC/hr, That's the market price.
Beyond the restrictions and regulations set forth by the state, capitalists will set their own the resources they control. The builder of the factory can gift it if he likes. I recommend that he sell it to a party that will actually use it.
He
is using it. He goes in every day, probably. He has an office there, from which he does his work. Some of that work is delegating other work.
Right, and you can put your efforts towards exploiting others and gaining at their expense or not. For example, you can work to obtain a lock-picking set. With it, you can either use it to take other people's hard work or you can use it to do honest work as a locksmith.
Apples and Oranges are both fruit. That doesn't make a tangerine the same as a Granny smith. In other words, Picking other peoples locks to steal their stuff is not the same as employing people.
Perhaps it isn't profitable for employers to be vindictive. However, it's profitable for employers to find obedient hires. A worker's reputation had better befit that requirement.
Indeed. It also behooves a company to pay its workers enough to keep them.
Profitable use != best use. See slavery.
Slavery was not the most profitable way of doing things, mechanization was. That's why slavery was slowly losing out to mechanization. Had the civil war not occurred, slavery would still have ended, with some estimates placing it within just a few years.
I find it rather sad that even union workers demand higher wages and greater benefits with no apparent regard for the fact that they deserve to own that which they produce.
I find it sad that Union workers demand higher wages and greater benefits with no apparent regard for the fact that they are sucking the company dry. So I guess that's one thing we have in common.
The drill press operator still deserves his fair share of the final product.
And he's getting it. If he does not like the wages offered, he can seek employment elsewhere, or seek a raise. If his skills are sufficiently valuable, he will get it.
tl;dr: Welcome to the 21st Century. It's not 1840 anymore.
People are still people. 171 years hasn't changed that.
No, But I'd like to think we've learned a few things since then.
The workers can delegate such duties to those most fit.
Which they are doing, by working for them, as opposed to attempting to go solo.
A supporters of slavery used a similar argument against abolitionists. "Who says the slaves want to be free?"
I'd say the running away is a pretty clear indication... Don't see a bunch of factory workers throwing down their tools and demanding ownership of the company.