Maximum role of Government?

[ascent]

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

[AyeYo]

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

I feel like I'm arguing with a preschooler that keeps retorting with, "I know you are, but what am I!?"

[myrkul]

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

Firstly, The idiot can't even keep my arguments straight. I never said anything about 'Citizens overcoming a private security company' Second, I've already explained all I intend to.

Government model: Pay power company. Pay government to keep power company in line. Pay lobbyist to keep government in line
AnCap model: Pay power company. Pay standards agency to keep power company in line. Other standards agencies keep yours in line via competition.


It's pretty clear which one would be cheaper.

[AyeYo]

If citizens can overcome a private security company, why can they not overcome a coal plant company?

I think the deafening silence of his answer is testimony to the rhetorical nature of the question. Clearly he tacitly admits the persuasiveness of your logic, and chooses to deflect said admission by insisting on the importance of other statements he has made, which incidentally, are typically devoid of any sound explanation of his ideology.

Firstly, The idiot can't even keep my arguments straight. I never said anything about 'Citizens overcoming a private security company' Second, I've already explained all I intend to.

I don't think you can keep your position straight.

You said in another argument with JA that citizens united (through funding of a defense company) would be more than capable of overcoming a crime organization (which is just a security company whose actions you don't agree with) because even a large, powerful organization with lots of guns cannot match a public body.

You then did a complete 180 degree turn in this thread and claimed that citizens united would never have the power to overcome the influence of a coal burning power company.


So which is it?  Do citizens have power over big business or does big business have power over citizens?

[ascent]

AnCap model: Pay power company. Pay standards agency to keep power company in line. Other standards agencies keep yours in line via competition.

It's not at all clear to me that there will be consistent enforcement or enough payment to the standards agency(s) for them to keep the power company in line. Nor is it clear to me that the standards agencies aren't subject to bribery by the power companies.

Furthermore, as evident by your general lack of interest in the details and complexities of global and local environmental issues, I can only assume that there are others like you, and that doesn't bode well for your model, from my point of view.

I've offered you quite a bit of reading material. And I took you up on your offer to investigate The Tragedy of the Commons. Why do you reject the material I have offered you?

[NghtRppr]

Do citizens have power over big business or does big business have power over citizens?

It depends, are we talking about a libertarian society or the current fascist one?

[myrkul]

You then did a complete 180 degree turn in this thread and claimed that citizens united would never have the power to overcome the influence of a coal burning power company.

I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying they shouldn't have to. The politicians are there ostensibly to represent their interests. That's what they're being paid for. If they're not doing it, why should the people have to hire someone to buy back the politicians?

In the place of that blatantly corrupt system, I am proposing a free market on environmental regulation, in which the people directly hire a standards organization to keep the companies in line, and because there isn't just one organization, they would compete for business, and the one that did the best job (kept the companies in line, didn't get bought out, etc) would survive, and be kept on its feet by the lesser agencies.

[AyeYo]

You then did a complete 180 degree turn in this thread and claimed that citizens united would never have the power to overcome the influence of a coal burning power company.

I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying they shouldn't have to.

Um, no, actually, this is exactly what you said:

Who, do you think, will be better able to pay for lobbyists, the coal-burning power company, or the citizens?

You said nothing about "shouldn't have to."  You simply came up with the retort that citizens don't have the financial power to influence big business, which is true, but that's not what you said previously.

Do or do not citizens have the financial power to influence big business, namely to keep big business from turning tyrannical?

[ascent]

Do or do not citizens have the financial power to influence big business, namely to keep big business from turning tyrannical?

In theory, they do, but they don't have the unity, or collective organization, or motivation to make it happen. A government does, however, if some fraction of the citizens convince the government to.

[myrkul]

Who, do you think, will be better able to pay for lobbyists, the coal-burning power company, or the citizens?

Do or do not citizens have the financial power to influence big business, namely to keep big business from turning tyrannical?

Better able does not mean that one group is unable, merely that the other group is able to afford it easier.

They do. Market competition is the more efficient method, but sure, by passing up just one meal a week, they can get together and get their own lobbyist.

[AyeYo]

Do or do not citizens have the financial power to influence big business, namely to keep big business from turning tyrannical?

In theory, they do, but they don't have the unity, or collective organization, or motivation to make it happen. A government does, however, if some fraction of the citizens convince the government to.

They're also missing another key factor: information.  Big business has a massive information advantage.

And, in fact, this is exactly what a proper government is.  It is citizens united to give themselves collective bargaining power against those entities more powerful than themselves.

[myrkul]

And, in fact, this is exactly what a proper government is.  It is citizens united to give themselves collective bargaining power against those entities more powerful than themselves.

This may be the one time I actually agree with something you say. The only stipulation I would add is that it should be voluntary.

[patvarilly]

in the US, even the income tax refund checks are taxed

Uh, what??  I know that you *want* this statement to be true to fuel your rabid taxman-the-oppressor fantasies, but it's just nonsense.

A federal income tax refund is simply money that you overpaid the government during the year that it's giving back, it's not taxable income.  The only situation I can think of where your statement even remotely has a kernel of truth is if you claim a deduction on your federal income taxes due to paying state taxes, and then the state sees you overpaid them and sends you a refund check.  *That* refund is taxable, essentially because you claimed too much of a deduction for it to begin with, and now you're adjusting that deduction down (and if you claimed the standard deduction instead of itemizing, then it's not taxable):

http://taxes.about.com/od/income/qt/taxable_refunds.htm

[AyeYo]

And, in fact, this is exactly what a proper government is.  It is citizens united to give themselves collective bargaining power against those entities more powerful than themselves.

This may be the one time I actually agree with something you say. The only stipulation I would add is that it should be voluntary.

If it's voluntary then it's not a government.  That's like having optional no smoking signs. 

[MoonShadow]

Do or do not citizens have the financial power to influence big business, namely to keep big business from turning tyrannical?

In theory, they do, but they don't have the unity, or collective organization, or motivation to make it happen. A government does, however, if some fraction of the citizens convince the government to.

They're also missing another key factor: information.  Big business has a massive information advantage.

And, in fact, this is exactly what a proper government is.  It is citizens united to give themselves collective bargaining power against those entities more powerful than themselves.

This is actually one of the better arguments for your 'benevolent statism' position.  And, speaking historicly, it's true.  The Internet has been systematicly undermining the 'leverage' of superior data gathering long held by large organizations for centuries.  We are all already in uncharted territory, and continue down this same path with each passing day.  Bitcoin is just one piece in that great puzzle, but it's already true that a person transplanted from 1980 couldn't have predicted the reality of 2011.  Twelve year old girls regularly get a new cell phone for their birthday, although not necessarily their first cell phone.  Furthermore, cell phones are only called such for historic reasons, as talking upon them is just one application of the tiny & portable computers with multiple built-in digital radios, all of which have bitrates that would have cost a fortune for a wired connection in 1980.  If that person from 1980 was even aware of the Internet, what the average middle class fourth grader has access to would have still floored him.  If he was an academic, Wikipedia would have made him fear for his tenure; and if he was a member of the military officer's core, Google Earth would have scared the crap out of him even after learning about the complete collapse of the Soviet Union.

[myrkul]

in the US, even the income tax refund checks are taxed

Uh, what??  I know that you *want* this statement to be true to fuel your rabid taxman-the-oppressor fantasies, but it's just nonsense.

We'll table this until I can put eyes on a refund check. If I am indeed incorrect, I'll freely admit it.

[myrkul]

And, in fact, this is exactly what a proper government is.  It is citizens united to give themselves collective bargaining power against those entities more powerful than themselves.

This may be the one time I actually agree with something you say. The only stipulation I would add is that it should be voluntary.

If it's voluntary then it's not a government.  That's like having optional no smoking signs. 

But voluntary unification would still meet your requirements.

[MoonShadow]

in the US, even the income tax refund checks are taxed

Uh, what??  I know that you *want* this statement to be true to fuel your rabid taxman-the-oppressor fantasies, but it's just nonsense.

A federal income tax refund is simply money that you overpaid the government during the year that it's giving back, it's not taxable income.  

I've got some really bad news for you.  I'm taxed each year on the amount of my tax return check from the previous year by the state of Kentucky.  By some legaleze magic, they don't consider it double taxation.  The only way to avoid it is to owe the state each year, which is very difficult to do.

[ascent]

This is actually one of the better arguments for your 'benevolent statism' position. 

We have had plenty of excellent arguments. And in fact, the more excellent they are, the more they're ignored.

[MoonShadow]

This is actually one of the better arguments for your 'benevolent statism' position. 

We have had plenty of excellent arguments. And in fact, the more excellent they are, the more they're ignored.

Just because you consider your arguments in high regard, doesn't mean that I consider them worth responding to.