[CarolinaGuitarman]

"Depends on (1) the product, (2) the level of control you exercise over that product, (3) the manner in which you acquired control over the product, and (4) the machinations you employ to extort a given price and/or prevent others from offering the same or alternative products."

It makes no difference as to 1 and 2. As to 3, as long as no force was initiated, there is no problem. Number 4 is only possible with government force behind you. My selling my product at whatever price I wish in no way prevents another from selling the same or an alternative product at whatever price they wish. If a buyer prefers my product/price, why should I be punished because another company isn't efficient enough to compete? The other company has no entitlement to success.

"If the foregoing were put into the form of questions, we have, as a deliberative civilization, decided that each question has an acceptable answer that will encourage economic growth and prosperity. We have also decided that each question has an unacceptable answer that will discourage economic growth and prosperity."

The collective doesn't get to vote away property rights.

[atlaw]

I have to say, your vision of an ideal economic anarchy is both quaint in its miniturazation, and selective in its application.

In your vision, should individuals be insulated against liability for the debts they incur in doing business and the torts committed by the business entites they operate?

[balrog666]

The collective doesn't get to vote away property rights.

I like the way you think.