[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
The more localized the gov’t power, the more the we can control it to our liking.
What is more localized than the sovereignty of private property?[/quote]
Who will protect that sovereighty?
[quote]dhickey wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
The more localized the gov’t power, the more the we can control it to our liking.
What is more localized than the sovereignty of private property?
Who will protect that sovereighty?[/quote]
Smith & Wesson.
Same thing that protects the sovereignty of the US of A. Free people.
[quote]orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Hey dhickey,
I understand where you’re going. Where would you draw the lines though? W/o a govt, how would you deal with information asymmetries and public goods?
Should we privatize
Defense? Security? Police forces?
Should public funds pay for:
education? trash collection?
We absolutly need gov’t. We need Federal, State, and Local Gov’t.
I assume that most people in this thread are talking about Federal Gov’t although it is easy to lump them all together or drift from one to the other. The Fereral Gov’t should exist as it was intended in the Constitution. Is that so radical?
If we can accomplish this, the abuses of state and local gov’ts will take care of themselves. As mentioned in the this thread or anohter, if Federal gov’t is limited we will have competition among the states to provide the best quality of life. The more localized the gov’t power, the more the we can control it to our liking.
Or states might decide slavery is OK again.
That would be one state then.
What if the Federal Government decides that?
[/quote]
It wouldn’t because it has a broad enough cross section of people to make the right decision on the issue. As it did in reality, where I live.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
The more localized the gov’t power, the more the we can control it to our liking.
What is more localized than the sovereignty of private property?
Who will protect that sovereighty?
Smith & Wesson.
Same thing that protects the sovereignty of the US of A. Free people.[/quote]
Bad people also band together to steal from free people.
Free people generally cannot afford to spend all their time protecting themselves so they pool their resources to form a government that provides protection from a myriad of threats.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
dhickey wrote:
It would only be altruistic if you gained no feeling of satisfaction or pride from doing it.
If that is the case then altruism doesn’t exist and HH should STFU about it.[/quote]
While it may not exist, many claim to strive for it and force it upon others to some degree. The truth is one can never attain true altruism but many strive to in vein. It’s like bashing your head into a concrete wall hoping to break through. It is impossible to accomplish and the attempt causes harm to oneself.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
orion wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Hey dhickey,
I understand where you’re going. Where would you draw the lines though? W/o a govt, how would you deal with information asymmetries and public goods?
Should we privatize
Defense? Security? Police forces?
Should public funds pay for:
education? trash collection?
We absolutly need gov’t. We need Federal, State, and Local Gov’t.
I assume that most people in this thread are talking about Federal Gov’t although it is easy to lump them all together or drift from one to the other. The Fereral Gov’t should exist as it was intended in the Constitution. Is that so radical?
If we can accomplish this, the abuses of state and local gov’ts will take care of themselves. As mentioned in the this thread or anohter, if Federal gov’t is limited we will have competition among the states to provide the best quality of life. The more localized the gov’t power, the more the we can control it to our liking.
Or states might decide slavery is OK again.
That would be one state then.
What if the Federal Government decides that?
It wouldn’t because it has a broad enough cross section of people to make the right decision on the issue. As it did in reality, where I live.[/quote]
So more people that are governed equals better judgment?
You are for world government then?
It may be splitting hairs, Zap, but of course you do realize that slavery is legal in every state of the union, as provided by the thirteenth amendment:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
So our state and federal penitentiaries are full of slaves. And more are being enslaved every day.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
The more localized the gov’t power, the more the we can control it to our liking.
What is more localized than the sovereignty of private property?
Who will protect that sovereighty?
Smith & Wesson.
Same thing that protects the sovereignty of the US of A. Free people.[/quote]
Free people create gov’t to protect themselves. There is nothing wrong with gov’t protecting individual rights. Not all of us can fend for ourselves. There is certainly a difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
It may be splitting hairs, Zap, but of course you do realize that slavery is legal in every state of the union, as provided by the thirteenth amendment:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
So our state and federal penitentiaries are full of slaves. And more are being enslaved every day.[/quote]
And a draft or “national service” could be reintroduced at any moment.
No, wait a minute, according to your courts, dyin… m, serving your country is an honor, however much it may have been achieved by coercion, so how could you call it slavery?
How free is a person if it can be revoked at a moments notice?
edited and stuff
[quote]orion wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Couldn’t a homeowners association be considered a free market “government”?
The free market can solve anything.
Everything within the market-
What about things that aren´t?[/quote]
You mean like an nth-order multi-variable differential equation?
Couldn’t I hire someone to write me a program to “solve” it?
I am not sure what things wouldn’t be considered part of the market if it is part of man’s capability to desire it.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
It may be splitting hairs, Zap, but of course you do realize that slavery is legal in every state of the union, as provided by the thirteenth amendment:
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime where of the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.”
So our state and federal penitentiaries are full of slaves. And more are being enslaved every day.[/quote]
In this case they are lucky to be slaves. If our local authorities did not remove criminals from society, society would remove them, and not by providing room and board. If one is not put in jail for a crime then retribution by criminal activity would also not be jailable.
Penetanturies also protect those on the inside. How many times have you heard about a supposed child molester, or other such criminal, and immediatly wished you could have 10min alone with them and a baseball bat? Would you bother to rehabilitate them? Would you bother with a jury trial? What about drug dealers? What about armed robbers?
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Bad people also band together to steal from free people.[/quote]
Yes, historically it is called government.
Given the right circumstances most people would make time. In the mean time we are prosperous enough to hire someone for it.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Bad people also band together to steal from free people.
Yes, historically it is called government.
Free people generally cannot afford to spend all their time protecting themselves so they pool their resources to form a government that provides protection from a myriad of threats.
Given the right circumstances most people would make time. In the mean time we are prosperous enough to hire someone for it.[/quote]
You are a dreamer.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
There is certainly a difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.[/quote]
Yes, I agree. One word refers to the ethical code of liberty and another word refers to how people might choose to organize themselves under such an ethical code. They are both compatible with each other.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
orion wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Couldn’t a homeowners association be considered a free market “government”?
The free market can solve anything.
Everything within the market-
What about things that aren´t?
You mean like an nth-order multi-variable differential equation?
Couldn’t I hire someone to write me a program to “solve” it?
I am not sure what things wouldn’t be considered part of the market if it is part of man’s capability to desire it. [/quote]
Externalities.
Two men make a deal and let another one pay for it.
Like when I undercut my competitors by lowering my costs by polluting the air.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Given the right circumstances most people would make time. In the mean time we are prosperous enough to hire someone for it.
You are a dreamer. [/quote]
Its the same way it is now except under the system I propose none would have the right to hold a gun to your head and force you to swear fealty to its cause.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Bad people also band together to steal from free people.
Yes, historically it is called government.
Free people generally cannot afford to spend all their time protecting themselves so they pool their resources to form a government that provides protection from a myriad of threats.
Given the right circumstances most people would make time. In the mean time we are prosperous enough to hire someone for it.
You are a dreamer. [/quote]
And you are not even that.
I think your soul is dead, though your body sometimes rises to put down others arguments by mindless one-liners.
[quote]orion wrote:
Externalities.
Two men make a deal and let another one pay for it.
Like when I undercut my competitors by lowering my costs by polluting the air.
[/quote]
Maybe the technology doesn’t exist yet but imagine if someone figures out a way to clean and or capture said pollution and then charges the rightful owners for it. Call it a pollution catcher – kind of like a dog catcher.
Are murder and theft also externalities?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dhickey wrote:
There is certainly a difference between Libertarianism and Anarchism.
Yes, I agree. One word refers to the ethical code of liberty and another word refers to how people might choose to organize themselves under such an ethical code. They are both compatible with each other.[/quote]
Interesting but I disagree. Gov’t also protects the minorities from mob rule. With anarchy, so comes mob rule. A Libertarian cannot be an anarchist as anarchy will not always protect the rights of individuals. Only those with the biggest stick.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
orion wrote:
Externalities.
Two men make a deal and let another one pay for it.
Like when I undercut my competitors by lowering my costs by polluting the air.
Maybe the technology doesn’t exist yet but imagine if someone figures out a way to clean and or capture said pollution and then charges the rightful owners for it. Call it a pollution catcher – kind of like a dog catcher.
Is murder and theft also externalities?[/quote]
As long as no such technology exists aren´t mandatory maximums the way? And how to enforce (sic!) that?
And maybe, in a way. It is more of a way of a public good though to be save that.