if we want a stateless society, why dont a team of private investors and political refugees colonize Somalia
do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?
Stranger:But the point is that I love my country. Don't you?
I've traveled a wee bit. I like my country, but in many ways, it is inferior to others I have been to. I don't feel I particularly owe it anything in the way of allegiance or loyalty.
I could learn to love a free country, regardless of the climate or geography. Being free is more important to me than acknowledging my history and the history of my ancestors with a particular state.
@all, I second the Liberty Colony idea. It's possible that an exodus may at one point be the only option left to us. The world is certainly not getting less statist. Things are moving in the wrong direction, and while choosing to stand and fight might be honourable, it's wise to pick the battles you can win. If you can't beat the state, then change the game. Plus the entrepreneurial opportunities for a Liberty Colony could be tremendous.
Danno:I've listed examples of where it's failed to put a company out of business - can you give examples of where it has worked (outside of government intervention) as you claim it can?
The Taco Bell in Eureka, Ca around 12 years ago.
The kids working the drivethrough put some bacon bits in the food (which the cop didn't mind too much) but made the mistake of also spitting in the food in view of said cop.
This hits the local newspapers and within a month the only Taco Bell within ~100 miles of the university is boarded up. People simply quit going there, that's all it took.
I'd be interested in any further info you have on the S&W boycott because, as I'm sure you're aware, California passed a 10 round maximum magazine capacity law a while back and if the two are related your whole argument just went out the window.
Danno:This does not mean, however, that I've been convinced that anarchy is a workable alternative to statism. It's been noted before that government, like fire, is a dangerous servant and an awful master. This does not prevent me from cautiously using fire for the purposes of heating my home, or believing that I can do without fire at all.
Or we can realise it for what it is, a parasite, one that we can and should eliminate.
"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"
Bob Dylan
Jon Irenicus: Is he aware that HOAs are most likely to own neighborhood roads BTW? -Jon
Is he aware that HOAs are most likely to own neighborhood roads BTW?
-Jon
A truly frightening assertion to anyone who has seen the tyranny done by many such associations in condominiums, time-share associations, and the like.
Danno, amused by the "talking past instead of to" bit. OooooOOOooooh!
The avatar graphic text:
"Are you coming to bed?"
"No, this is important"
"What?"
"Someone is wrong on the internet."
This is pure assertion - spoken like a True Believer.
Oh yawn, that dull, worn out epithet. It is demonstrable by Austrian economics. You're not even original for a socialist/fascist. You are the True Believer, in the magic of force and government. So don't even try these puerile mental games with me.
Oh - that explains it. Thanks for clearing that up.
You're familiar with the subjective theory of value, I assume?
Oh, yes, massah.
Spare me this drivel.
Danno, admittedly having been guilty of hubris on occasion himself.
Danno, admittedly guilty of being a socialist/advocate of aggression.
Freedom of markets is positively correlated with the degree of evolution in any society...
Maxliberty: Danno: Then, according to you, minimalist-government proponents are indistinguishable from anarchists. Okay - cool. Shall we get together and cooperate on this? Not exactly what I said. Minimalist believe we still need a little government and anarchists/freedom movement thinks we can do without the little bit too. We are in agreement that less is better. I would welcome cooperation. There are lots of opportunities in the LC for investment and involvement.
Danno: Then, according to you, minimalist-government proponents are indistinguishable from anarchists. Okay - cool. Shall we get together and cooperate on this?
Then, according to you, minimalist-government proponents are indistinguishable from anarchists. Okay - cool. Shall we get together and cooperate on this?
Not exactly what I said. Minimalist believe we still need a little government and anarchists/freedom movement thinks we can do without the little bit too. We are in agreement that less is better.
I would welcome cooperation. There are lots of opportunities in the LC for investment and involvement.
Cooperation works for me, if you don't object to cooperation from one who has been called a communist, socialist, and other fun things by the True Believers in these parts. (With luck, I can be a Nazi before nightfall!) To which LC do you refer? Google came up with such a wide variety of hits it was not apparent - though I doubt you mean the Library of Congress.
Danno, the communist advocate for violence and theft, who enjoys reasoned discussion.
Ipse dixit, socialist.
Danno: Maxliberty: Danno: Then, according to you, minimalist-government proponents are indistinguishable from anarchists. Okay - cool. Shall we get together and cooperate on this? Not exactly what I said. Minimalist believe we still need a little government and anarchists/freedom movement thinks we can do without the little bit too. We are in agreement that less is better. I would welcome cooperation. There are lots of opportunities in the LC for investment and involvement. Cooperation works for me, if you don't object to cooperation from one who has been called a communist, socialist, and other fun things by the True Believers in these parts. (With luck, I can be a Nazi before nightfall!) To which LC do you refer? Google came up with such a wide variety of hits it was not apparent - though I doubt you mean the Library of Congress. Danno, the communist advocate for violence and theft, who enjoys reasoned discussion.
To be honest, I see every reason for the LC to steer well clear of minarchists.
Danno:Cooperation works for me, if you don't object to cooperation from one who has been called a communist, socialist, and other fun things by the True Believers in these parts.
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
I don't think anyone is advocating private tyranny. Only pointing out that it is possible that roads could come under joint ownership without there being a government. HOAs are just one such form of arrangement. Market anarchism can involve any number of voluntary solutions to problems, of which firms are a subset, hence my inquiry.
Maxliberty: Danno:It's economies of scale - they've got it, largely because nobody else is allowed to compete with them in simple letter delivery. So your arguement is that the government gives beneficial treatment to its own activity and subsidizes it with tax-payer money but it provides a service you like so you think its better. The government is providing a subsidy for this activity which means that if you had to pay the complete cost yourself the service wouldn't exist. So what you are really saying is your glad other people are paying for you to be able to send a letter cheaply. So your glad the government is taking money by force from other people so you can have this particular service. How about we take all of your money so someone else can live in a nicer house? Same idea.
Danno:It's economies of scale - they've got it, largely because nobody else is allowed to compete with them in simple letter delivery.
So your arguement is that the government gives beneficial treatment to its own activity and subsidizes it with tax-payer money but it provides a service you like so you think its better. The government is providing a subsidy for this activity which means that if you had to pay the complete cost yourself the service wouldn't exist. So what you are really saying is your glad other people are paying for you to be able to send a letter cheaply.
So your glad the government is taking money by force from other people so you can have this particular service. How about we take all of your money so someone else can live in a nicer house? Same idea.
I did, indeed, try to make plain that I objected to the way it's been set up and run, and I've never claimed that taxes other than user fees were anything but extortion. This does not change the fact that, in letter delivery, a force-induced monopoly has been known to provide a service that has not been matched in the free market. Perhaps a free-market competitor could do as well - I'd love for them to be able to try. A postal service without the idiotic bureaucracy, subsidies, and unions that the USPS has had to deal with would likely be more efficient and productive, but I suspect that it being a monopoly would add to its potential to be efficient.
I never claimed, or even inferred, that I preferred the idea of a state-run monopoly. Frankly, I'd love to see convincing argument that privately-owned roads would be a viable solution in an urban environment. I'm just reporting that I haven't seen one yet.
I understand that I'm committing blasphemy by not agreeing with the 'proven fact' that governments fulfill no useful purpose - but I'm not going to agree with that until I've seen that 'fact' proven, and being slandered here isn't going to convince me, either.
Danno, remembering civil discussions here in the past.
Do come off your high horse. Your argument reduces to "either private individuals can arrange for the provision of a service or they cannot. If they cannot government must force them to "cooperate" to do so." That second bit is a non sequitur, an unwarranted inference. You've done nothing to convince us government is necessary.
Anonymous Coward: Danno:I've listed examples of where it's failed to put a company out of business - can you give examples of where it has worked (outside of government intervention) as you claim it can? The Taco Bell in Eureka, Ca around 12 years ago.
Fair enough - I'll posit that such boycotts can work - though I'd love to know whether it'd have worked as well had it not been government agents witnessing the abuse of the customers.
I have, however, seen ostracism fail to put badly-managed businesses out of business, so I'm probably not going to have as much faith in their power as some others seem to show. I recall the public outrage when Arby's was caught buying beef that was not legal for human consumption, back in the 1970s - but there's an Arbys (and a Taco Bell) within 2 miles of where I am right now.
Let's take that to email, then - I fear it's too far afield of this topic for even me, but I'll be glad to tell you what I remember of it. It was back in the 1990s, and the furor has largely died down now - but a gun shop owner at the time admitted that the only S&W guns he was selling were to first-time buyers. If you really want further information, I'll look for you in my mailbox.
Danno, who still won't buy a new S&W, as ineffective as that turned out to be.
Jon:I don't think anyone is advocating private tyranny. Only pointing out that it is possible that roads could come under joint ownership without there being a government.
Danno:I understand that I'm committing blasphemy by not agreeing with the 'proven fact' that governments fulfill no useful purpose
GilesStratton: Danno:This does not mean, however, that I've been convinced that anarchy is a workable alternative to statism. It's been noted before that government, like fire, is a dangerous servant and an awful master. This does not prevent me from cautiously using fire for the purposes of heating my home, or believing that I can do without fire at all. Or we can realise it for what it is, a parasite, one that we can and should eliminate.
I'll cheerfully agree that it has become onerous and parasitical, doing staggering amounts of damage, and that we'd all be much better off if it were drastically cut back.
The house fire across the street was extinguished (to continue the analogy), but the damage had been done. This very possibly raised local sales of smoke alarms and fire extinguishers, but it did not convince anyone to shut off their furnace or water heater.
I remain, as ever, convinced that an excess of government, like fire, is disastrous. I stll fear that a small, controlled amount is needful.
Danno, the friendly neighborhood heretic.