The Freeman 1972 - The Ludwig von Mises Institute

404 THE FREEMAN Julyorders, want to socialize property,are socialist systems in the full sense.Private property exists only wherethe individual can deal with his privateownership in the. means of productionin the way he considers mostadvantageous. That in doing so heserves other menlbers of society, becausein the society based on divisionof labour everyone is the servant ofall and all the nlasters of each, in noway alters the fact that he hinlselflooks for the way in which he canbest perform this service. 10Mixed economies do not standstill. They do not allocate resourcesand tasks according topermanent, fixed definitions. Themixed economy is a battlegroundfor competing ideologies; withoutsolid, concrete definitions ofsphere sovereignty - rules thatspecifically limit, in principle, theoperations of bureaucratic managementand profit managen1ent ­the idea ofthe mixed economy willremain an intellectual monstrosityand, in practice, a very poor meansof getting things accomplished.It is not possible to compromise,either, by putting part of the meansof production at the disposal of societyand leaving the remainder to individuals.Such systems simply standunconnected, side by side, and operatefully only within the space theyoccupy. Such mixture of the socialprinciples of organization must beconsidered senseless by everyone. Noone can believe that the principlewhich he holds to be right should notbe carried through to the end. Norcan anyone assert that one or theother of the systenls proves the betteronly for certain groups of the nleansof production. Where people seem tobe asserting this, they are really assertingthat we must demand the onesystem at least for a group of the111eanS of production or that it shouldbe given at nlost for a group. Compronliseis always only a momentarylull in the fight between the two principles,not the result of a logicalthinking-out of the problem. Regardedfrom the stand-point of eachside, half-measures are a tenlporaryhalt on the way to complete success.llServing OthersIs it really true that the market,as an impersonal mechanism,pressures individual citizens, intheir role as economic actors, tosatisfy the needs of their fellows?A brief analysis should help toanswer this question in the affirmative.Consider the occupationof'the farmer. He owns land andtools. He possesses skills and specializedknowledge. The more productivehe is, the more specializedhis labor and, presumably, histools. These assets constitute hiscapital. The very fact of his legalownership brings the problem ofcost into the forefront: how muchdoes it cost him to own his assets?The doctrine of alternative costs