Poor education is caused by public schools
Poor health care is caused by regulations(FDA, AMA)
Poverty is caused by the welfare-regulatory state
Business Cycle is caused by central banking
Corruption and political instability is caused by democracy
and etc.
Kenneth: Poor education is caused by public schools
Many prefer poor education or no education at all. Thus the problem with public education is not that it is ‘poor’ but that it is uniform and involuntary.
Kenneth:Poor health care is caused by regulations(FDA, AMA)
Idem
Kenneth:Poverty is caused by the welfare-regulatory state
Even empiricaly that is very far from doubtful.
Kenneth:Business Cycle is caused by central banking
Albania has never experienced a business cycle. Let some statist explain that.
Kenneth:Corruption and political instability is caused by democracy
Corruption is, by definition, statist. Political instability is, by definition, a goal of democracy, although I would think twice before considering it a bad thing.
Kenneth:and etc.
People don’t agree on things. My poison is your meat. The state imposes the same solutions on everyone. End of story, from my point of view.
'if statism were the cause of all social evil, what on earth could be the cause of statism? '
Edwin Walker
'Men do not change, they unmask themselves' - Germaine de Stael
If I asked you how you would solve these problems, you would say abolish the state. This is what I mean. Your solution to virtually all social problems is less government so therefore you think that the state is the cause of the problem. If you don't find this applicable to you then propose an alternative solution.
Kenneth: If I asked you how you would solve these problems, you would say abolish the state. This is what I mean. Your solution to virtually all social problems is less government so therefore you think that the state is the cause of the problem. If you don't find this applicable to you then propose an alternative solution.
My misunderstanding than. Put like this, what I’d say is that past abolishing the State there is nothing more one could do to speed up solving any problems. In anarchy one has the best system envisonable.
Poverty IS caused by the welfare-regulatory state. The legal system(regulations) is against the poor, preventing them from creating cottage industries. Welfare programs treat poor people like livestock. It is a weaqpon of self-abasement and indignity wrought on the poor. At the bottom of it, welfare state entails heavy taxation which restrains capital accumulation and therefore economic growth. How can you say welfare and regulations do not cause poverty? Have you not read 'The Mystery of Capital', 'Lesson's from the Poor', 'Man vs the Welfare State', etc? What in your opinion, is the cause of poverty then?
Kenneth: Poverty IS caused by the welfare-regulatory state. The legal system(regulations) is against the poor, preventing them from creating cottage industries. Welfare programs treat poor people like livestock. It is a weaqpon of self-abasement and indignity wrought on the poor. At the bottom of it, welfare state entails heavy taxation which restrains capital accumulation and therefore economic growth. How can you say welfare and regulations do not cause poverty? Have you not read 'The Mystery of Capital', 'Lesson's from the Poor', 'Man vs the Welfare State', etc? What in your opinion, is the cause of poverty then?
You misread me. I said “far form being doubtful” as in ‘there can be no doubts about that’. I certainly agree with you.
My disagreement is about the "and etc." part. You've listed some social problems that happen to be caused by statism. There are other social problems that are not. Now, what are we going to do about those? Here's the thing - we can't fix them, or even address them properly, in the context of a society that things it is acceptable to have a massive institution of violence that you compete to use against each other when other people don't conform to your whims. Get rid of that, then we can get to work on the other problems.
Statism isn't the root cause. The root cause is a misapprehension of reality. There are many other effects besides statism that stem from a misapprehension of reality.
A lot of social problems are also caused by abuse of children and the incurrence of psychological trauma and other psychological problems.
When you're stuck in a hole, stop digging.
Social problems exist independent of the state. What the state tends to do is either exacerbate existing problems or create new ones; artifical problems.
But generally speaking, not having a gun held against your head or having threats of imprisonment tends solve a lot of problems.
Kenneth:What in your opinion, is the cause of poverty then?
"It is because we see the world reeking with injustices piled one on another to the very heavens that we are impelled to do all that we can to seek a world in which these and other injustices will be eradicated. Other traditional radical goals – such as the "abolition of poverty" – are, in contrast to this one, truly utopian, for man, simply by exerting his will, cannot abolish poverty. Poverty can only be abolished through the operation of certain economic factors – notably the investment of savings in capital – which can only operate by transforming nature over a long period of time. In short, man's will is here severely limited by the workings of – to use an old-fashioned but still valid term – natural law. But injustices are deeds that are inflicted by one set of men on another; they are precisely the actions of men, and, hence, they and their elimination are subject to man's instantaneous will.
Let us take an example: England's centuries-long occupation and brutal oppression of the Irish people. Now if, in 1900, we had looked at the state of Ireland, and we had considered the poverty of the Irish people, we would have had to say: poverty could be improved by the English getting out and removing their land monopolies, but the ultimate elimination of poverty in Ireland, under the best of conditions, would take time and be subject to the workings of economic law. But the goal of ending English oppression – that could have been done by the instantaneous action of men's will: by the English simply deciding to pull out of the country.
The fact that of course such decisions do not take place instantaneously is not the point; the point is that the very failure is an injustice that has been decided upon and imposed by the perpetrators of injustice – in this case, the English government. In the field of justice, man's will is all; men can move mountains, if only men so decide. A passion for instantaneous justice – in short, a radical passion – is therefore not utopian, as would be a desire for the instant elimination of poverty or the instant transformation of everyone into a concert pianist. For instant justice could be achieved if enough people so willed."
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard199.html
"It is also far easier to sentimentalize the issues and get the public's juices worked up by sobbing about the homeless, the foodless, etc. and calling for specific provision of these wants far easier than talking about the "moneyless" and calling upon the public merely to supply do-re-mi to the poor. Money does not have nearly the sentimental value of home and hearth and Christmas dinner.Not only that: but focusing on money is likely to lead the public to begin asking embarrassing questions. Such as: WHY are these people without money? And isn't there a danger that taxing A to supply B with money will greatly reduce the incentive for both A and B to continue working hard in order to acquire it? Doesn't parasitism gravely weaken the incentives to work among both the producer and the parasite class?Further, if the poor are without money because they don't feel like working, won't automatic taxpayer provision of a permanent supply of funds weaken their willingness to work all the more, and create an ever greater supply of the idle looking for handouts? Or, if the poor are without money because they are disabled, won't a permanent dole reduce their incentive to invest in their own vocational rehabilitation and training, so that they will once again be productive members of society? And, in general, isn't it far better for all concerned (except, of course, the social workers) to have limited private funds for charity instead of imposing an unlimited burden on the hapless taxpayer?"
http://mises.org/econsense/ch16.asp
Kenneth: Does the anarchist reduce all social problems to be the result of statism?
Does the anarchist reduce all social problems to be the result of statism?
No. Obviously enough a libertarian only has anything to say about problems that are caused by the state. There may be other problems, but a libertarian has nothing to say about them - as a libertarian. Albeit he might have something to say about them as a regular Joe. But that is not a part of libertarianism and is therefore very likely not going to be a topic of discussion here.
No. If the American government dissolved starting tomorrow and an anarcho-capitalist society emerged, we would still possibly see business cycles.
Marko: Kenneth: Does the anarchist reduce all social problems to be the result of statism? No. Obviously enough a libertarian only has anything to say about problems that are caused by the state. There may be other problems, but a libertarian has nothing to say about them - as a libertarian. Albeit he might have something to say about them as a regular Joe. But that is not a part of libertarianism and is therefore very likely not going to be a topic of discussion here.
Josh : Kenneth:Business Cycle is caused by central banking No. If the American government dissolved starting tomorrow and an anarcho-capitalist society emerged, we would still possibly see business cycles.
Nope. Even if people wanted a business cycle, without a central bank to create new money, they wouldn't be able to have one.
Business cycles are caused by economy-wide or industry-wide errors. You won't have that without an economy-wide or industry-wide monopolist.
Business Cycle Theory (by Jörg Guido Hülsmann) - Introduction to Austrian Economics, 7of11http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxq_mhdYeBM
However I believe that we should extend our thinking to how to reduce social problems in a free society. It is true there will be less but it'll still be there so we need ideas of how to combat it. I think the libertarian's neglect of this area stems from Hayek's spontaneous ordering ideas which essential leaves out private planning. It says its planning (statism) vs spontaneity (the market) whereas in fact it's between monopoly (statist planning) and competition (private planning). The spontaneity idea has value but has fundamental flaws. Now I'm not saying that a libertarian can speak on how to reduce social problems as a libertarian (although I'm open to forms of thicker libertarianism) but that he must speak as a person as we ultimately decide what a free society will look like. I've been mulling over recently how a free society would look in different communities ie. one's with predominantly eastern metaphysics, Christian theism, materialism etc. It's a potential future project and would help to say how a free society would look. The most interesting area would be if the worldviews would reinforce freedom or would tend to slide into statism.
The atoms tell the atoms so, for I never was or will but atoms forevermore be.
Yours sincerely,
Physiocrat
Nielsio:Business cycles are caused by economy-wide or industry-wide errors. You won't have that without an economy-wide or industry-wide monopolist.
Business cycles are caused by interest rates being below market equilibrium. If our region became anarcho-capitalist, the interest rate would still be influenced by foreign countries which have artificially low (or high) interest rates.
Josh : Nielsio:Business cycles are caused by economy-wide or industry-wide errors. You won't have that without an economy-wide or industry-wide monopolist. Business cycles are caused by interest rates being below market equilibrium. If our region became anarcho-capitalist, the interest rate would still be influenced by foreign countries which have artificially low (or high) interest rates.
You said "No" to the claim that business cycles were caused by central banking. Are you giving up that claim?
This would be the same as asking "Does the anarchist believe that no social problems would exist in a Stateless society?"
The anarchist would answer this with an emphatic NO. Social problems and disagreements are a part of the human condition. Ancap theory is not utopian, but instead a philosophical approach to how society would best organize in the absence of a State. Problems would still exist, but the ancap would argue that they could be addressed much better with freedom, as opposed to coercion. The ancap would further argue that the State and coercion can only exacerbate any social problem they attempt to eliminate by force.
Nielsio:You said "No" to the claim that business cycles were caused by central banking. Are you giving up that claim?
No, business cycles are caused by artificially low interest rates.
Josh : Nielsio:You said "No" to the claim that business cycles were caused by central banking. Are you giving up that claim? No, business cycles are caused by artificially low interest rates.
What's the cause of artificially low interest rates?
Josh :Business cycles are caused by interest rates being below market equilibrium. If our region became anarcho-capitalist, the interest rate would still be influenced by foreign countries which have artificially low (or high) interest rates.
I’m afraid that would be like saying that since A and B are now neighbors, and A’s time preference is Neanderthal-high, B’s time preference too will rise.
That ain’t the case, and time preferences are indipendent. As for foreign rates influencing a CB-less economy, note that in time such an economy would move back to commodity currency, the exchange value of which would be boosted each time the other fellows inflated. Fluctuating exchange rates would thus insulate the economy.
If not, no one would have bothered to establish Central Banks after the Bank of England had been established: other nations would have been influenced by the BoE-induces low interest rates.
Maybe some people on this board do. But the central premise of libertarianism is the NAP. The state inherently violates the NAP and so it must be eliminated. Now, libertarians have spent an enormous amount of time trying to show why undesirable social phenomena are inextricably linked to the state. But I think this is a consequence of the state's violation of the NAP. In other words, they simply want to eliminate the state because it violates the NAP. They don't really need any other reason but they realize a lot of people do.
I certainly don't. I think adultery is a social problem, so is out of wedlock births, as are a myriad of other issues. They're not the result of statism, but statism certainly isn't the best solution to solving them.
Josh : Business cycles are caused by interest rates being below market equilibrium. If our region became anarcho-capitalist, the interest rate would still be influenced by foreign countries which have artificially low (or high) interest rates.
Inter-bank clearance mechanisms between the US banks and foreign banks would force those foreign banks to severely limit their own credit expansion. If the US ever went to a hard money free banking system, then the world would probably have to follow suit.
No we don't. CLearly you can't blame the gov for some issues.
The gov will always make a problem worse or replace one problem with a worse problem.