Report A Question On Job Creation. in House prices and the economy Posted August 1, 2013 But as Traktion has pointed out- nature itself generates coercion- it compels the individual to seek out food and shelter ect- and what the neo liberal model tries to pretend is that somehow the negotiations between men are not subject to these natural forces. Coercion has to be a phenomenon over and above nature, nature being the background and default state of everything. Common sense tells us that a starving man will find it hard to negotiate a good price for a loaf of bread- yet the neo liberal's will assure us that the negotiation was free from any coercion- no matter how exorbitant the final price might turn out to be. It is free from coercion. Coercion is force applied over and above natures demands. Unless you know a way to change nature, you have to take nature as a given before you do anything else. No sensible rational person says that gravity is oppressing people without a helicoptor. The fiction being advanced here is that the agreed price of the bread was arrived at through a negotiation between two individuals who were both entirely free of coercion- the fact the one of the two was literally starving is somehow presented as being external to the negotiation process- yet- in reality- it was central to that process. it's not a fiction. If the guy with the bread has no weaponry, it's coercion free. Might nor be fair, might not be even, but it is free from coercion. So the model of 'free choice' offered to us by the neo liberals is one in which the 'choice' is stripped of it's context and reduced to a simplistic formula in which the mere existence of alternatives- no matter how dire those alternatives might be- are enough to guarantee that a free choice has occurred. The neo liberals are not free marketeers. The neo liberals are statist assholes who add coercion to the mix so any trade winds up in their favour. Neo liberals are authoritarian marxist communists with an accountant, in fact.