Freedom is ...

[hazek]

That's a problem that would quickly solve itself. Those not being responsible with their lives (such as not buying insurance, not taking care of their health, and not saving money for retirement and emergencies) will very quickly find themselves as horrible cautionary examples for others, since there won't be a nanny state to take care of them. And those who are dodging the rules at other's expense will be quickly forced to pay for those expenses, since there won't be a complex lengthy legal thing to fight through, and those who do take responsibility for whom they associate with will avoid you.

+1
If there's one thing that WILL bug people about being in an AnCap state is that it will be a rather brutal existence for irresponsible idiots. The sight of someone dying of starvation because they failed to secure their own lives and are unwilling to do anything about it may be somewhat common 

I doubt that very much since in an AnCap society there'd be many many people far better of then they are today and so they'd much more easily afford to contribute to charities which could address those who actually were less fortunate.

[myrkul]

If there's one thing that WILL bug people about being in an AnCap state is that it will be a rather brutal existence for irresponsible idiots.

Which is what FirstAscent and blablahblah are afraid of. They don't like their prospects.

No, it is that we actually have empathy and compassion to people that are more disadvantaged that we are.   If we are going to talk about a society different than are current one, we would not just let them fall to the way side. 

If you have empathy and compassion, why wouldn't you support those people voluntarily in an AnCap society? Just think, instead of just $500 of your annual $7,500 bill going to the needy, you could send them the entire $7,500?
Or is it that, by "compassion," you mean that you are compassionate enough to force others to take care of them, while giving the minimum effort yourself?

To say nothing of the fact that private charity is significantly more efficient than tax-funded welfare programs.

[Dalkore]

But if it's mutually beneficial, who would not purchase such a service voluntarily?  

- I will actually use your line, there are irresponsible idiots

Those are called, in economics, "public goods." Can you name some of those services? Can you think of some ways that they could be made profitable without resorting to forcing people to pay? Can you think of any ways that it might be paid for entirely voluntarily, with each person giving only as much as they desire?

- I have named these services many times so it feel redundant repeating this list.  I think you can figure those out yourself.   Hint: Domestic Army, Basic Preventative Health Care, Infrastructure, Education, Incarceration Facilities, Elections, Archival of Historic Records, etc....

These services should all be done not for profit and people should be required to pay.  No choice.  

No I don't think they can be paid for voluntarily because people are in whole pretty selfish and irresponsible.  This is why I think AnCap will never succeed unless you can change this aspect of human behavior.  I am not saying taking all selfishness away but we are WAY beyond a healthy amount.  Just look around and see the messages and the shit people say these days.  I know you agree with me there, you wouldn't be even thinking about this subject if the current culture didn't make you cringe.  

Try responding my comment about human behavior and lets see if we can make some progress.

[Rassah]

Having required & shared responsibilities does not equate slavery.  I find that a very lazy attitude to take, communities require us all to share different responsibilities so they operate in a beneficial manner to everyone.

They're not really responsibilities if they are basically forced on us. If I were to give money to a local school, I'd be taking on the responsibility for funding and growing our local education and workforce. Instead, I just see a bunch of money leaving my paycheck, and I have no idea where it's going. I can only assume a part of it is going to the school, but the "responsibility" is essentially forced upon m me.

Well there you go, you believe you live in a bubble and other live in bubbles and you do not recognize the community or the responsibility that go into maintaining a community.

You are wrong in that notion and I feel comfortable that your system will never catch on until you compromise on that issue among others.  My whole purpose of engaging in this debate was to get to this core issue.  You have a lack of take responsibilities for issues of your community that do not have a direct affect on you.  A selfish attitude and we already have plenty of this in the world today and is one of the reasons we are going down the tube.  

That is exactly how most seem to see libertarians and AnCaps, and it couldn't be further from the truth. I believe that I live in a community, and that I have responsibilities for it. I just think that my responsibilities should be voluntary, and that by "forcing" this responsibility on everyone, the government is essentially teaching everyone to completely abdicate their own responsibilities. Why should people care and be responsible if the government will just take their money and take care of things itself? The low voter turnouts pretty much show that people mostly don't care what their money goes to, and don't want to be responsible for how it's spent. Also, note that the point of doing taxes for everyone is to end up paying as little as possible. So, not only is the government teaching people to abdicate responsibilities, it's teaching them to avoid paying for as much of it as possible, too.
I could similarly argue that your side is the selfish one, where you are projecting your own selfishness on all people in general, believing that everyone is as selfish as you, and only contribute to society because they are forced to, not because they feel responsible for it.

[hazek]

It all boils down to this: You think I must do something and instead of trying to persuade me to do it voluntarily and accept a potential rejection you think you should be able to use violence in order to force me to do it no matter what I want.

Bottom line, that's what you advocate and have shit for brains of calling it good.



You know what you are? You are an evil stupid bully/thug and you can go fuck yourself.

[CountSparkle]

Domestic Army

Switzerland doesn't have one. Every citizen owns a rifle and is trained to fight. That's a big reason Hitler didn't want to attack it.

Basic Preventative Health Care

Free clinics for those who need them, and hard lessons learned from not taking care of one's health, not knowing some basic health information, and not owning health insurance. Even if you are poor, if it's something as important as your life, I would hope people would be compelled to spend money on health rather than a new TV or video game (they don't, now, because they know if they get sick, they'll just go to the emergency room, and get treated using someone else's money). I'm actually very glad ObamaCare passed for this reason, even if a legal mandate isn't as "educational" as a hard life example.

Infrastructure

Private power (already exists), private water (already exists), private rail (already exists), private roads and bridges (already exist), etc. Infrastructure actually hurts us in some way, by forcing us to stick with old technologies that new things can't compete against. Part of the reason the rail system in US sucks is because it can't compete with subsidized highways.

Education

Private schools (especially if funded with "war" money)

Incarceration Facilities

Many prisons in US are already privately owned

Elections

won't exist or be needed

Archival of Historic Records

private collections by hobbyists (you should see mine), or museums funded by visitors

No I don't think they can be paid for voluntarily because people are in whole pretty selfish and irresponsible.  This is why I think AnCap will never succeed unless you can change this aspect of human behavior.

You are projecting your own selfishness on others. Also, people who are selfish and irresponsible will quite literally die off in AnCap society, where you NEED to build relationships and communities to survive. You can't just work 9-5 for a crappy wage, have your money taken to pay for things you yourself should be responsible for, and spend all your time sitting at home playing videogames without giving a crap about anyone else. Well, you could, but at the first bit of trouble you'd be royally screwed.

[Dalkore]

Having required & shared responsibilities does not equate slavery.  I find that a very lazy attitude to take, communities require us all to share different responsibilities so they operate in a beneficial manner to everyone.

They're not really responsibilities if they are basically forced on us. If I were to give money to a local school, I'd be taking on the responsibility for funding and growing our local education and workforce. Instead, I just see a bunch of money leaving my paycheck, and I have no idea where it's going. I can only assume a part of it is going to the school, but the "responsibility" is essentially forced upon m me.

Well there you go, you believe you live in a bubble and other live in bubbles and you do not recognize the community or the responsibility that go into maintaining a community.

You are wrong in that notion and I feel comfortable that your system will never catch on until you compromise on that issue among others.  My whole purpose of engaging in this debate was to get to this core issue.  You have a lack of take responsibilities for issues of your community that do not have a direct affect on you.  A selfish attitude and we already have plenty of this in the world today and is one of the reasons we are going down the tube.  

That is exactly how most seem to see libertarians and AnCaps, and it couldn't be further from the truth. I believe that I live in a community, and that I have responsibilities for it. I just think that my responsibilities should be voluntary, and that by "forcing" this responsibility on everyone, the government is essentially teaching everyone to completely abdicate their own responsibilities. Why should people care and be responsible if the government will just take their money and take care of things itself? The low voter turnouts pretty much show that people mostly don't care what their money goes to, and don't want to be responsible for how it's spent. Also, note that the point of doing taxes for everyone is to end up paying as little as possible. So, not only is the government teaching people to abdicate responsibilities, it's teaching them to avoid paying for as much of it as possible, too.
I could similarly argue that your side is the selfish one, where you are projecting your own selfishness on all people in general, believing that everyone is as selfish as you, and only contribute to society because they are forced to, not because they feel responsible for it.

Ok, now I think I have a question to bridge this divide.  I can see at least this present company, our hearts are in the right place. 

Question:How do we get the general populous to start caring about their community and the people around them.  If I had faith in them to be the proper custodian then I would be much more open to a different decentralized form of government. 

The modern media culture shows basically messages that are narcissistic and self-centered.  About getting to the top no matter how ruthless.   The less morals you have and the more you will exploit yourself the better.   How do we combat this message?   How do we bring back honor in people actions?  Not all people because there are always exceptions but in most people.   

[Dalkore]

It all boils down to this: You think I must do something and instead of trying to persuade me to do it voluntarily and accept a potential rejection you think you should be able to use violence in order to force me to do it no matter what I want.

Bottom line, that's what you advocate and have shit for brains of calling it good.



You know what you are? You are an evil stupid bully/thug and you can go fuck yourself.

That is your opinion and your entitled to it.  You should refrain from personal insults.  Quite unbecoming of a "Staff" member.

[myrkul]

But if it's mutually beneficial, who would not purchase such a service voluntarily?  

- I will actually use your line, there are irresponsible idiots

Indeed there are. And, except in the case of actual public goods, they would not receive the benefits of the programs they did not pay for. Thus, the brutal existence for them. If they remained irresponsible idiots, short as well.

Those are called, in economics, "public goods." Can you name some of those services? Can you think of some ways that they could be made profitable without resorting to forcing people to pay? Can you think of any ways that it might be paid for entirely voluntarily, with each person giving only as much as they desire?

- I have named these services many times so it feel redundant repeating this list.  I think you can figure those out yourself.   Hint: Domestic Army, Basic Preventative Health Care, Infrastructure, Education, Incarceration Facilities, Elections, Archival of Historic Records, etc....

These services should all be done not for profit and people should be required to pay.  No choice.  

If they can be done without force, and for profit, can you explain why they should not be?

No I don't think they can be paid for voluntarily because people are in whole pretty selfish and irresponsible.  This is why I think AnCap will never succeed unless you can change this aspect of human behavior.

They're irresponsible because they can be. Why get a job, when you can live off welfare and food stamps? Why save for retirement, when you can collect social security? Why save for a rainy day, when if you get fired, unemployment will pay you? I know you just want to help. I just wish that you would see that the help is what's causing the problems.

The only public goods you presented up there were Domestic Army ("national" defense), and infrastructure. The rest are either private goods, such as education, or not goods at all, such as elections. Infrastructure is easy to make profitable, or for that matter, turn into a private good. Toll roads, for instance.

The defense is a bit of a problem, since there is the positive externality of all the people who don't pay getting defended along with those who do. Of course, those who don't pay probably are taking care of their own defense, with a small arsenal of weapons. Therefore, they provide that same positive externality back to the community. Seems an equitable tradeoff to me. And as long as the defense company is able to run profitably, without charging so much that people stop paying, then they find it a fair trade as well.

[Rassah]

As I'm sure you'd agree, specialisation leads to efficiency. Just like the neurons tell the muscle cells what to do, and muscle cells must obey. Doing everything by consensus or in the style of a Polish parliament would be like getting a bucket of amoebae and expecting them to doing something smart. I mean -- come on! Each amoeba is a fully functional independent organism! Surely they can work something out?

Except the government is not specialized. It's a hodgepodge of bureaucracy, where everyone tries to take on as little responsibility as possible, which attracts typically the least skilled in their fields thanks to it paying the lowest salary for those skills due to tax payers and politicians wanting to "save money" instead of "get the job done."

[Rassah]

Question:How do we get the general populous to start caring about their community and the people around them.  If I had faith in them to be the proper custodian then I would be much more open to a different decentralized form of government. 

We don't. They will either see the benefit of it, or they won't, but they won't be allowed to enjoy the benefits of a community otherwise. They will also get a chance to see what contributing to a community actually gets them, which is something they currently can't with the government doing everything.

The modern media culture shows basically messages that are narcissistic and self-centered.  About getting to the top no matter how ruthless.   The less morals you have and the more you will exploit yourself the better.   How do we combat this message?   How do we bring back honor in people actions?  Not all people because there are always exceptions but in most people.   

Subjective morals aside, contrary to popular belief, you can't actually get very far in business while being an asshole about it. The only way to get far in the private sector is to give others something they want. You can be a total asshole and still get elected or make money in politics though (e.g. Gingrich, lobbyists, etc). As for being self centered, again, the only way you can make your own self centered life better is by trading something with someone else, be it your money, your skills, or your good/services. So even if you are narcissistic and self centered, at least you gave a lot of other people things to get that way.

[Dalkore]

They're irresponsible because they can be. Why get a job, when you can live off welfare and food stamps? Why save for retirement, when you can collect social security? Why save for a rainy day, when if you get fired, unemployment will pay you? I know you just want to help. I just wish that you would see that the help is what's causing the problems.

The only public goods you presented up there were Domestic Army ("national" defense), and infrastructure. The rest are either private goods, such as education, or not goods at all, such as elections. Infrastructure is easy to make profitable, or for that matter, turn into a private good. Toll roads, for instance.

The defense is a bit of a problem, since there is the positive externality of all the people who don't pay getting defended along with those who do. Of course, those who don't pay probably are taking care of their own defense, with a small arsenal of weapons. Therefore, they provide that same positive externality back to the community. Seems an equitable tradeoff to me. And as long as the defense company is able to run profitably, without charging so much that people stop paying, then they find it a fair trade as well.

Well now you bring a good line of discussion to go into:

How would you feel about the State if we cut those benefits you spoke of?  Is that a major part of you angst?

Before I address your comment about my wanting to help (I'll give my reasoning), I would like to state I believe everyone universally is entitled to education in a Capitalistic society.   Also road should be maintained for everyone, it should not become a class issue to travel in your country, at least to the doorstep of someones property.  Elections should be funded by the public with no private money at all, issues are what get you elected and that is all.  Even in AnCap you would have some form of elections to posts everyone agreed you needed.

Now here is my issue with your hardline approach to whine people off of welfare services.  I agree we would be stronger without them, the problem I have is the intentional perversion of the education and culture that has really brainwashed the populous into this servile state.  I have to have some compassion for their situation and realize it is not all their cause and fault (some yes, not all).   Also I don't believe "wealth" ie "money" should be the determinate factor on a person worth in society as well.  Look where is has gotten us, no where except we have a few extra goodies.

[Dalkore]

Subjective morals aside, contrary to popular belief, you can't actually get very far in business while being an asshole about it. The only way to get far in the private sector is to give others something they want. You can be a total asshole and still get elected or make money in politics though (e.g. Gingrich, lobbyists, etc). As for being self centered, again, the only way you can make your own self centered life better is by trading something with someone else, be it your money, your skills, or your good/services. So even if you are narcissistic and self centered, at least you gave a lot of other people things to get that way.

You need to spend more time in business.  It is called lying to your customers.  There is much less competition in most industry and most are basically monopolies so either you pay ball or not.  Also, you don't need to "get far", you just need to "get enough" and cash out and say "f**k em".   

I am not going to waste my time with this line of discussion.  I would rather continue elsewhere, no offense I hope but I just think you are not being objective enough on this subject.

[CountSparkle]

I believe everyone universally is entitled to education in a Capitalistic society.

Agreed. Kids can't make choices about their lives. Though how that education is actually provided for is what's debatable.

Also road should be maintained for everyone, it should not become a class issue to travel in your country, at least to the doorstep of someones property.

I'd rather travel by train, flying car, or work over the internet. Why is it that I have to pay for a car, car insurance, maintenance, gasoline, and taxes to support it all in US, when I can pay a much cheaper fare and travel conveniently by train on a profitable railroad in Europe or Japan?
Though the sprawl in US, with everything and everyone being so far apart, is a symptom of the road systems that would be an issue if AnCap was to take over here.

Elections should be funded by the public with no private money at all, issues are what get you elected and that is all.  Even in AnCap you would have some form of elections to posts everyone agreed you needed.

There would be no "posts" in AnCap. People will be hired based on their skills, and services will be "voted" on by purchases. Don't like the person at some "post?" Pay someone else.

[Dalkore]

There would be no "posts" in AnCap. People will be hired based on their skills, and services will be "voted" on by purchases. Don't like the person at some "post?" Pay someone else.

I bet that is "exactly" what they will be hired on.   No posts in Ancap, wow I feel safe.

[hazek]

It all boils down to this: You think I must do something and instead of trying to persuade me to do it voluntarily and accept a potential rejection you think you should be able to use violence in order to force me to do it no matter what I want.

Bottom line, that's what you advocate and have shit for brains of calling it good.



You know what you are? You are an evil stupid bully/thug and you can go fuck yourself.

That is your opinion and your entitled to it.  You should refrain from personal insults.  Quite unbecoming of a "Staff" member.

This whole discussion where certain people advocate violence against peaceful people merely because they refuse to do something became unbecoming so I fail to see your point.

[myrkul]

They're irresponsible because they can be. Why get a job, when you can live off welfare and food stamps? Why save for retirement, when you can collect social security? Why save for a rainy day, when if you get fired, unemployment will pay you? I know you just want to help. I just wish that you would see that the help is what's causing the problems.

The only public goods you presented up there were Domestic Army ("national" defense), and infrastructure. The rest are either private goods, such as education, or not goods at all, such as elections. Infrastructure is easy to make profitable, or for that matter, turn into a private good. Toll roads, for instance.

The defense is a bit of a problem, since there is the positive externality of all the people who don't pay getting defended along with those who do. Of course, those who don't pay probably are taking care of their own defense, with a small arsenal of weapons. Therefore, they provide that same positive externality back to the community. Seems an equitable tradeoff to me. And as long as the defense company is able to run profitably, without charging so much that people stop paying, then they find it a fair trade as well.

Well now you bring a good line of discussion to go into:

How would you feel about the State if we cut those benefits you spoke of?  Is that a major part of you angst?

The maximum legitimate role of government is to provide external security, an internal police force, and courts. Ie, the industries of security and justice. And those can certainly be provided privately, so the minimum role is none.

Before I address your comment about my wanting to help (I'll give my reasoning), I would like to state I believe everyone universally is entitled to education in a Capitalistic society.   Also road should be maintained for everyone, it should not become a class issue to travel in your country, at least to the doorstep of someones property.  Elections should be funded by the public with no private money at all, issues are what get you elected and that is all.  Even in AnCap you would have some form of elections to posts everyone agreed you needed.

I'll address the points in order: First, nobody is entitled to anything. Period. That's life, get used to it. TANSTAAFL.
Roads don't have to be toll maintained, that's just one way to do it. Another perfectly viable method is advertisement. A while back, KFC was filling in potholes in exchange for the ability to put their logo on the patch. Billboards are an accepted site along the highway, the funds from them could go towards the road maintenance. Or to apply the "freemium" model, perhaps you could pay to travel in special lanes.
As to elections, I don't think you actually understand AnCap. There would be no elections in an AnCap society, because there would be no posts to elect anyone to. AnCap is entirely privately run.

Now here is my issue with your hardline approach to whine people off of welfare services.  I agree we would be stronger without them, the problem I have is the intentional perversion of the education and culture that has really brainwashed the populous into this servile state.  I have to have some compassion for their situation and realize it is not all their cause and fault (some yes, not all).   Also I don't believe "wealth" ie "money" should be the determinate factor on a person worth in society as well.  Look where is has gotten us, no where except we have a few extra goodies.

Again, the solutions you propose are the cause of the problems you point out. The government controls education, so of course they produce good little drones. Private education would solve that.

[Rassah]

Subjective morals aside, contrary to popular belief, you can't actually get very far in business while being an asshole about it. The only way to get far in the private sector is to give others something they want. You can be a total asshole and still get elected or make money in politics though (e.g. Gingrich, lobbyists, etc). As for being self centered, again, the only way you can make your own self centered life better is by trading something with someone else, be it your money, your skills, or your good/services. So even if you are narcissistic and self centered, at least you gave a lot of other people things to get that way.

You need to spend more time in business.  It is called lying to your customers.  There is much less competition in most industry and most are basically monopolies so either you pay ball or not.  Also, you don't need to "get far", you just need to "get enough" and cash out and say "f**k em".   

I am not going to waste my time with this line of discussion.  I would rather continue elsewhere, no offense I hope but I just think you are not being objective enough on this subject.

I AM in business, and am talking from experience. Yes, you can lie, and be an exploitative monopoly, but you won't have customers or be a monopoly for long, since you'all be inviting competition or innovation. You can just say "fuck'em" and get out, but in that case you hopefully have made your money legitimately.

[CountSparkle]

Now here is my issue with your hardline approach to whine people off of welfare services.  I agree we would be stronger without them, the problem I have is the intentional perversion of the education and culture that has really brainwashed the populous into this servile state.  I have to have some compassion for their situation and realize it is not all their cause and fault (some yes, not all).   Also I don't believe "wealth" ie "money" should be the determinate factor on a person worth in society as well.  Look where is has gotten us, no where except we have a few extra goodies.

Those proposing AnCap are of two camps:
1) Establish an AnCap society somewhere else, such as by SeaSteading. In that case, the people you feel compassionate about will be left with their safety nets, and you don't have to worry about them. The only people who do end up in the AnCap society will be the ones who voluntarily move there, knowing all the risks.
2) Society and government as a whole are slowly devolving into AnCap, thanks to globalization and technologies like the Internet, Bitcoin, Tor, 3D Printing, file sharing, etc, which will make the government lose more and more power due to not being able to regulate the things it used to. In this scenario, AnCap is pretty much the inevitable end, so arguing about why it's good or bad for us is irrelevant, and we should instead focus on what it could entail and how to be ready for it.

As for those outwardly "wealthy" and "moneyd" types, a lot of their wealth is actually owned by their bank in the form of loans and credit cards. All they own is a bunch of junk that they're only losing money on. Your real wealth, or net worth, is determined by how productive you are in a society, which I believe should be encouraged. If you simply won the lottery, or inherited a large sum, you likely won't keep that money for long, either.

[Dalkore]

It all boils down to this: You think I must do something and instead of trying to persuade me to do it voluntarily and accept a potential rejection you think you should be able to use violence in order to force me to do it no matter what I want.

Bottom line, that's what you advocate and have shit for brains of calling it good.



You know what you are? You are an evil stupid bully/thug and you can go fuck yourself.

That is your opinion and your entitled to it.  You should refrain from personal insults.  Quite unbecoming of a "Staff" member.

This whole discussion where certain people advocate violence against peaceful people merely because they refuse to do something became unbecoming so I fail to see your point.

That is a poor response and justification for your use of language which I took directed at me.    

Also your assumption that these were peaceful people is a large assumption as well.  The act of Capitalism which is part of AnCap is not economically peaceful and being that the money/profit derived from this activity is my sole manner of acquiring the goods I need for my survival, you could in fact through collusion, enact violence on my pocket-book and deny me the means of my survival.  You think just because I am not clubbing you over the head I can not be violent or aggressive against you.  Interesting...

Capitalism: Capitalism is an economic system that is based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. -