Talk:Laissez-faire

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Laissez-faire article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 1 year

Economics High‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: Libertarianism High‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Libertarianism portal This article is supported by WikiProject Libertarianism (assessed as High-importance).

Capitalism (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Capitalism, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CapitalismWikipedia:WikiProject CapitalismTemplate:WikiProject CapitalismCapitalism articles

Conservatism Top‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Adam smith and Laissez faire.[edit]

Smith did not advocate for Laissez-faire as has been noted by scholars for some time, Smith recognised the need for government intervention in 'commercial society'. For Smith a capitalist society could not function without Governmental intervention and state support. 78.144.120.127 (talk) 12:27, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted Edits[edit]

since my edits have been reverted I would like to discuss them here so we can reach consensus please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meistro1 (talk • contribs) 08:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Another basic principle of laissez-faire holds that markets should naturally be competitive, a rule that the early advocates of laissez-faire always emphasized."

what does this mean "should be"? it seems to me that principle of laissez-faire is that markets are naturally competitive, and the statement should be implies something else (is a pre-amble to advocate intervention). Why the phrasing "should be" instead of "are"?

"With the aims of maximizing freedom by allowing markets to self-regulate, early advocates of laissez-faire proposed a impôt unique, a tax on land rent (similar to Georgism) to replace all taxes that they saw as damaging welfare by penalizing production."

This section should be deleted. It is too irrelevant to the topic of laissez-faire. The top section should just be about laissez-faire. Meistro1 (talk) 07:59, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I take it that your reverted edits were deletions of these sentences?

I disagree that the second is irrelevant. A Georgist tax enables the state to collect revenue with a minimum of interference in productive activity; it thus advances laisser-faire goals. (Now putting my anarchist hat back on) —Tamfang (talk) 23:09, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

whatever your personal feelings on a georgian tax are, it is irrelevant to the section 2001:4451:1AA:7500:4771:5965:53D5:DC1B (talk) 05:02, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What if this ‘feeling’ were sourced to a more prominent advocate of l-f and Georgism? —Tamfang (talk) 01:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV + Undue weight[edit]

This article is absurd leftist propaganda. The section on laissez-faire capitalism is 7 (sic!) times smaller than the section on socialism. Despite the fact that the text itself says: "laissez-faire has been commonly associated with capitalism".

Meanwhile, Google search:

Laissez-faire capitalism - 9,230,000 results
Laissez-faire socialism - 902,000 results
"Laissez-faire capitalism" - 313,000 results
"Laissez-faire socialism" - 1,710 results

As you can see, the difference in the number of results ranges from 10 to 300 (!!!) times, which is not reflected in the article. The article falsely promotes the idea that there is some kind of "laissez-faire socialism", when the sources on this term are completely marginal compared to "laissez-faire capitalism". 5.228.4.240 (talk) 12:36, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the obvious solution is to split the article. let's make this one about laissez-faire capitalism (could even change the name to laissez-faire capitalism) and then just link to laissez-faire socialism article Meistro1 (talk) 10:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, 313000/1710 is only 183, not 300. —Tamfang (talk) 00:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Meistro1 @Tamfang @5.228.4.240 "Socialist" should be changed to "non-capitalist" or "anti-capitalist" because for example Thomas Hodgskin was a Whig and he is described by some (for example, Diego Zuluaga) as a classical liberal.

Hodgskin proposes his own radicalization of what in law is called specificatio (or accession), laissez-faire and free trade. The author explicitly draws on John Locke's labor theory of property acquisition. See Labour Defended and the Natural Right and Artificial Right of Property Contrasted by Hodgskin.

Benj. R. Tucker expresses the same concept in Instead of A Book. 93.45.229.98 (talk) 18:00, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

tucker was also a socialist, at least when it came to economics. he opposed interest and profit, and was a hyperinflationist (like Proudhon). Meistro1 (talk) 01:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

etymology of liberism[edit]

In Italy, philosopher Benedetto Croce created the term "liberism" (derived from the Italian term liberismo),

This seems to say that before Croce there was an Italian word liberismo, from which Croce made the English word liberism; I suspect that is not accurate. —Tamfang (talk) 01:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it's unclear. Croce coined "liberismo" ("liberism" is the anglicized word). 93.38.68.62 (talk) 15:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]