Replies

Mobile, cheap, atomized labor force would be perfect for free market! People without roots, connections, community will be docile and obedient. They would not be able to meddle in politics or organize.

One difficulty is that they will not be able to raise many children but it can be remedied by the import of new labor from the Third World.

People are not interchangeable economic "units" that you can unpack one day, use, and put back in cold storage until they're needed later. One reason we have so many problems with young people is because so many kids are moved all over the country. They lose contact with their grandparents, neighbors, friends, anyone who made a difference in their lives. The social costs are *huge.*

It hadn't occurred to me that keeping people always on the move was an excellent way to politically "castrate" them, as well. The saying is true that "all politics are local." Finally, what's the difference between being moved around for the greater glory of the Communist state (as they did in the USSR), and being moved around at the dictat of corporations who see people only as profit-producing cogs in the machine?

Finally, what's the difference between being moved around for the greater glory of the Communist state (as they did in the USSR), and being moved around at the dictat of corporations who see people only as profit-producing cogs in the machine?

Ask Luis. He has ALL the answers.

Finally, what's the difference between being moved around for the greater glory of the Communist state (as they did in the USSR), and being moved around at the dictat of corporations who see people only as profit-producing cogs in the machine?

There is no difference in favor of free marketers. I think that free marketeers are worse - Communists at least had aspiration to help other people while free marketeers want to change society into isolated powerless robots. They read Dickens books as a description of the Golden Age.