Re:Accidentally Stopping a Global Cyber Attack
by mowenz on Wednesday May 17, 2017 @09:05PM
(#14364136)
Financial traders are still buying and selling goods and services with a counterparty.
Even here, we still can observe that in most cases (except those where government interferes, or perhaps with organized crime) the counterparty is also enjoying a choice in whether or not they want to do the deal. I would argue that in cases where a counterparty has no choice, such a scheme should not be viewed as a legitimate busines, as it historically would not be.
Re:Accidentally Stopping a Global Cyber Attack
by beaconstudios on Thursday May 18, 2017 @06:58AM
(#14366217)
that's basically the root argument of libertarianism - that forced transactions are unethical and thus taxation is theft.
I'd still argue that a business does not have to provide a good or service to be considered a business though. The Medallion Fund that I mentioned solely exists to make money for its owners - it does not provide any goods or services.
That's not true. A business is a vehicle for making money, that's it. Most businesses do this by providing goods or services, but certainly not all - for example, financial traders that only manage their own funds, like the Renaissance Medallion fund.