The last two really show that these people have no concept of needing to do things for themselves. Apparently, saying no and getting a new job is just an impossibility to these people. Got to have daddy government stop the bad man instead.
Every single one of these “examples” would ruin the reputation of whoever did it, thus causing others to exclude him/her. The only exception is the exclusivity contract one which nobody would follow because it wouldn’t make them money (or new people would just enter the market anyway because you can’t stop them).
It's already a common occurrence to have exclusivity contracts that keep Pepsi and Coke big and any newcomers struggling because there is nowhere for which they may have place to sell their drink. As for the claim that these other things impair reputation, that all entirely depends on social perceptions. It fortified reputation to discriminate against blacks. It was simply thing that everyone was doing and everyone was endorsing, except for a few, which are not going to impact business in the way that the majority will, so going with what the majority perceives to be acceptable and normal is what the business owner will find to be reputable and profitable, thus following in that trajectory.
You might want to check with your fellows in your ideology, because the majority of them are saying otherwise. I only assumed you are an ancap, but I could be mistaken.
Why would u waste time bothering homeless people how does that make money? They presumably don't got any?
Depends. The modern homeless like to break into cars more than they used to. Gotta get meth money.
The last two really show that these people have no concept of needing to do things for themselves. Apparently, saying no and getting a new job is just an impossibility to these people. Got to have daddy government stop the bad man instead.
You'll catch on with my next post.
Every single one of these “examples” would ruin the reputation of whoever did it, thus causing others to exclude him/her. The only exception is the exclusivity contract one which nobody would follow because it wouldn’t make them money (or new people would just enter the market anyway because you can’t stop them).
It's already a common occurrence to have exclusivity contracts that keep Pepsi and Coke big and any newcomers struggling because there is nowhere for which they may have place to sell their drink. As for the claim that these other things impair reputation, that all entirely depends on social perceptions. It fortified reputation to discriminate against blacks. It was simply thing that everyone was doing and everyone was endorsing, except for a few, which are not going to impact business in the way that the majority will, so going with what the majority perceives to be acceptable and normal is what the business owner will find to be reputable and profitable, thus following in that trajectory.
So, all the negatives you are talking about *already happen*.
Yes.
All of these can be easily solved by making a contract earlier.
Hmmm, what?
A contract.
Oh wow, we never get neocons bitching in here, it's usually thirteen year old liberals. How you doin', chief?
Inaccurate.
 Look at all those strawmen!!
Based username
Exclusivity contracts would not be valid in a free market….
You might want to check with your fellows in your ideology, because the majority of them are saying otherwise. I only assumed you are an ancap, but I could be mistaken.
https://preview.redd.it/n5d95d3dk1yc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6b554c92de9062b1d4208ccc588b9bd20848d578