Newbies

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

MikeL — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 04:59:06 GMT

This interview with Walter Block when he was at the Fraser Institute is excellent. He doesn't tackle the problem posted here specifically, but he does speak at length on free market solutions to environmental problems. There are five parts. Start here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrTsaSUFfpo

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

Marko — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:46:34 GMT

Hehehe.

Mind you I am not necessarily against this sort of thing. I am just trying to think.

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

MatthewF — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:30:26 GMT

How well do you pay your riders? Where can I interview for the position?

Even though this was a thread about wildlife reserves, this is an opportunity to point out that while someone may find a way to preserve wildlife, others may choose to preserve "recreational areas."

I live in Oregon and enjoy dirt bike riding at a place called Sand Lake. Because it is government owned, the camping fee's are always rising, that bathrooms are always filthy, and there are curfew's and rules about alcohol consumption.

If you would let me ride after midnight and not bother me because I'm enjoying a beer, I would gladly pay to use a part of your land. Maybe that is how you got rich...

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

Marko — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:06:39 GMT

MatthewF:

There is no scarcity of paths to patrol, but there is a scarcity of the amount of time you have to patrol these paths. You would be limited in your patrol area by the need to stop patroling and produce food instead. Of course you could pay someone else to patrol, but again you would only be able to pay for the amout of partol service that you have left over after providing for your own survival. It wouldn't be economical to just horde an unused area to yourself.

True. But what if we are talking about a flat grassland and I use a dirt bike to cover huge distances? What if I am wealthy and on a whim hire 10 riders? In order to give myself a huge private unspoiled preserve resort area, albeit under the guise of philantropic conservation? Is that down with everyone?

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

Jon Irenicus — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:23:06 GMT

Yeah, that's a great one. I mentioned it in the thread on homesteading the sea.

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

MatthewF — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:21:40 GMT

http://mises.org/story/2120#9

I found this to be very helpful

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

MatthewF — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:12:04 GMT

Marko:

And how exactly do I get the right to barr people from a stretch of land I have no other connection to than that I patrol it daily? If I grow corn then I can not have another grow beets on the same land. In this case the farmland is scarce. But if I am patroling some forrest to keep the wildlife safe, surely another can do the same at the same time? There is no scarcity of paths to patrol in a forrest.

There is no scarcity of paths to patrol, but there is a scarcity of the amount of time you have to patrol these paths. You would be limited in your patrol area by the need to stop patroling and produce food instead. Of course you could pay someone else to patrol, but again you would only be able to pay for the amout of partol service that you have left over after providing for your own survival. It wouldn't be economical to just horde an unused area to yourself.

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

MikeL — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:11:28 GMT

Bob Murphy has a chapter in his "PIG guide to captialism" called "How capitalism will save the environment." It's a good intro but that's about it. Too brief to be really powerful.

http://www.amazon.com/Politically-Incorrect-Guide-Capitalism-Guides/dp/1596985046

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

sirmonty — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:56:36 GMT

Does anyone know of any detailed articles or excerpts dealing with an-cap/austrian economics and the environment?

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

Conza88 — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 11:20:12 GMT

Ah, 1) is closely linked to an issue I just raised... about homesteading the sea (i.e you don't want people to homestead it... how can you protect it so it doesn't get changed, altered, or homesteaded?) - talking about surfers wanting to preserve their break.

Would be interested if this could provide some kind of solution.

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

Morty — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:51:13 GMT

Ultima:
I've been thinking about some environmental issues and I'm confused as to how a anarcho-capitalist society could deal with them more efficiently than the present system of nation-states could.

I hate to respond to your questions with questions of my own, but I'm confused. What does it mean to "deal with [environmental problems] more efficiently"? Do you mean achieve a certain environmental goal, and if so, what goal and who wants it achieved?

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

ecoli — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:51:29 GMT

How about the implementation of a tax credit to industries producing any kind of alternative energy, rather than subsidizing specific technologies.

This as an alternative to the current problem, not necessarily as the ideal solution.

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

Marko — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:52:18 GMT

ThorsMitersaw:

Marko:

This is an interesting question. There are cases where it could be relevant in theory . The giant sequoias for example. They should be protected against vandals and would be, but what would be the legal rationale?

And why shoudl they be again? Why ought inanimate objects be preserved in the manner that they are? I find it sort of strange that someone on an Austrian board woudl be suggesting that a thing has an objective value if that is what you are proposing. So far as I am concerned, these giant seqouias are indeed interesting but no more deserving of exception from acquisition through labor than gold in the earth or corn in a field.

I am not certain I understand what you are saying. And I am not certain you understand what I am saying.

I am all for homesteading sequoias, but I don`t see how you can homestead it without cutting it down, which would be sort of self-defeating. I am not saying it can not be homesteaded in another way, in fact I am trying hard to think of a way, but so far with little success. Maybe you have the anwser?

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

ThorsMitersaw — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:16:57 GMT

Marko:

This is an interesting question. There are cases where it could be relevant in theory . The giant sequoias for example. They should be protected against vandals and would be, but what would be the legal rationale?

And why shoudl they be again? Why ought inanimate objects be preserved in the manner that they are? I find it sort of strange that someone on an Austrian board woudl be suggesting that a thing has an objective value if that is what you are proposing. So far as I am concerned, these giant seqouias are indeed interesting but no more deserving of exception from acquisition through labor than gold in the earth or corn in a field.

Re: Anarcho-capitalism and environmentalism

ThorsMitersaw — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:13:09 GMT

GilesStratton:

Sphairon:

Putting a fence around a piece of property can be considered homesteading.

Yes, homesteading of exactly the land you put your fence onto. Everything within the fence is still up for grabs.

I'd agree to an extent with your comment. Keep in mind that the point of homesteading is to establish intersubjectively ascertainable borders regarding property, which acts as an extension of your body in order to acheive your goals. So essentially a fence doesn't do it by itself no,but that doesn't mean you need to homestead of every inch of a plot of land to have said to have homesteaded it.

Agreed. In this fashion I believe that if one set up trails, signs, plaques, ranger towers and stations, throughout a piece of land to some degree that land could be considered homesteaded and labored upon to warrant ownership of the land without it destroying so much its natural state. Through a combination of many more unobtrusive means to the end of homesteading.