Did the Free-market fail during industrialization?

[trey4sports]

Ive been learning alot more about the industrial revolution and how so many folks worked so hard for such little money and horrendous conditions in factories and I'm curious why the free-market didnt solve this problem and gov't had to step in?

so did the free-market fail to provide a comfortable wage and working conditions or is there more than meets the eye?

[mediahasyou]

It's all relative.

The industrial revolution led farmers off their farms and into the factories. These conditions and wages were far better than what would be had working on a farm.

Compared to today, yes the conditions did suck. But not back then. And 100 years from now people will look back at how our living conditions suck.

There's only one way to improve living conditions without crippling others. And that is to increase productivity. Which is a product of the free market.

So yes. The free market does improve the standard of living.

[trey4sports]

It's all relative.

The industrial revolution led farmers off their farms and into the factories. These conditions and wages were far better than what would be had working on a farm.

Compared to today, yes the conditions did suck. But not back then. And 100 years from now people will look back at how our living conditions suck.

There's only one way to improve living conditions without crippling others. And that is to increase productivity. Which is a product of the free market.

So yes. The free market does improve the standard of living.

by no means am i trying to condemn unfettered capitalism I'm just trying to figure out the depth of the situation.

is it safe to say that the problems would have been self-regulated with the growth of industry?

[ronpaul4pres]

The free market does improve the standard of living.

The standard of living may improve under the free market, but that does not imply causality. Human genius improves the standard of living.

[Zippyjuan]

In a free market an employer pays as little as he can get away with and charges as much for his goods as he can in order to maximize his profits. Free markets are about the owners of capital- not the workers which are disposable inputs. They only have to pay more if they are having troubles attracting enough qualified workers for their jobs.

[Conza88]

Ive been learning alot more about the industrial revolution and how so many folks worked so hard for such little money and horrendous conditions in factories and I'm curious why the free-market didnt solve this problem and gov't had to step in?

so did the free-market fail to provide a comfortable wage and working conditions or is there more than meets the eye?

Because you've been learning lies, that's why. ;)


Robert LeFevre Commentaries

These commentaries have made their mark in the history of libertarian ideas for their clarity, eloquence, and pedagogical value. Drawing on great thoughts from all ages, and specifically influenced by Rothbardian political economy, Robert LeFevre asks and answers fundamental questions about the relationship between man, property, society, and the state. See this biography from the original liner notes. Special thanks to Mr. Ross Anderson for his donation of the famed "LeFevre Commentaries" audio cassette tapes to the Ludwig von Mises Institute.

http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=27

127 - The Industrial Revolution - Part One (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/127.mp3)
128 - The Industrial Revolution - Part Two (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/128.mp3)
129 - The Industrial Revolution - Part Three (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/129.mp3)
130- The Industrial Revolution - Part Four (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/130.mp3)

:)

[Mini-Me]

In a free market an employer pays as little as he can get away with and charges as much for his goods as he can in order to maximize his profits. Free markets are about the owners of capital- not the workers which are disposable inputs. They only have to pay more if they are having troubles attracting enough qualified workers for their jobs.

This is incorrect: Unless owners of capital put their instruments of productivity to no practical use and let them lie idle, free markets are not actually about the owners of capital but about their customers. Of course, some rich landowner could let his land sit and do nothing...but if he's so unproductive, it makes you wonder how he accumulated his wealth in the first place, unless it was through government force and protectionism. ;) I'd go into a longer diatribe, but...I won't this time.

To just offer an opinion without going into details to actually back it up, I agree 100% with mediahasyou's post about how everything is relative. I remember elaborating at length about this on Youtube of all places (where we were indeed discussing the industrial revolution), and I tried looking for my comments when I saw this thread, but I can't find them now...but in short, there was just so much less to go around back in the days of the industrial revolution that living conditions were a lot lower than they are today. However, their quality of life was significantly better than that of previous generations, precisely because the nation's productivity was growing so rapidly.

[Mini-Me]

Because you've been learning lies, that's why. ;)



http://mises.org/media.aspx?action=category&ID=27

127 - The Industrial Revolution - Part One (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/127.mp3)
128 - The Industrial Revolution - Part Two (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/128.mp3)
129 - The Industrial Revolution - Part Three (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/129.mp3)
130- The Industrial Revolution - Part Four (http://mises.org/mp3/lefevre/130.mp3)

:)

Sometimes I love you.

[Conza88]

Sometimes I love you.

Why not all the time? :(

Hahah :p

[nickcoons]

Ive been learning alot more about the industrial revolution and how so many folks worked so hard for such little money and horrendous conditions in factories and I'm curious why the free-market didnt solve this problem and gov't had to step in?

so did the free-market fail to provide a comfortable wage and working conditions or is there more than meets the eye?

Poor working conditions were improved with technological advances, not through government.


Nineteenth-century workers and their families had to choose between a dangerous, uncertain, and backbreaking existence on their small farms or long hours and low pay in crowded, poorly maintained factories. The creation of wealth was so inefficient in those times that almost every waking moment was spent in creating enough wealth to barely survive. The majority of the choices available to our ancestors would look barbaric by today's standards. Our modern, efficient production of life's necessities has enabled us to work 40-hour weeks, dispense with child labor, and support those who create no wealth at all. These choices were not realistic options for most people until the latter half of this century. If we continue to decrease wealth production with increases in minimum wages and other forms of aggression, we will find ourselves faced with these harsh choices once again.

Without minimum wage laws, what will prevent employers from colluding to pay only slave wages to workers, even when they learn to create more wealth? The natural balance of the marketplace ecosystem keeps employers' greed in check automatically by simply allowing them to reap as they sow. If it didn't, employers would be able to pay low wages to workers even when they had experience! Because employers voluntarily pay more than 90% of the workers who are 24-65 years of age more than the minimum wage, (4) the marketplace ecosystem is obviously regulating the marketplace well without aggression.

http://www.ruwart.com/Healing/ruwart_all.html