|
Gentlemen, I propose an economy that will keep us, the heterosexual, Caucasian male on the top of the social order forever by exploiting the Negroids different Time Preference. I propose, in short, an attention-based economy.
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
In all seriousness though, that thread on whether a theocracy would be the best government put forward a better argument than jrod ever did.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
So how does Libertopia handle advances in technology that weren't even a thing back when the vehicle of oppression known as the State was abolished? Like in 100 years, I buy myself a comet, jrod buys himself a gas giant. Through no effort on my part, as a part of my comet's natural flight path, it goes through jrod's gas giant. Did I trespass on jrod's property? Who decides whether my comet naturally flying through jrod's gas giant counts as trespassing? Who decides how we calculate damages awarded to jrod in the event that my comet passing through his gas giant is trespassing? What if my Dispute Resolution Organization is a member of a different association of DROs than jrod's and has a different view on how comet/gas giant interactions work? What if in my DRO's view, jrod had an obligation to move his gas giant out of the flight path of my comet, and needs to pay me a fee for putting my comet in danger from having flown straight through a gas giant containing God knows what? I admit I'm jumping a few steps ahead by bringing up DROs when we haven't established if there's anything wrong with me ethnically cleansing my neighborhood through my Homeowner's Association banning all black people, but this seemed like a fairly glaring practical flaw.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
Lowtechs posted:Well your comet would be pulverized from the pressure of the gas giant's atmosphere so Well poo poo problem solved, I'm going to start protesting to strengthen State rights in order to bring us to a stateless society right now!  (I am clearly not an astrophysicist  . Pretend then that this is a dispute over my comet entering into orbit over jrod's asteroid, and whether I violated his asteroid's airspace, or if jrod's careless placement of his asteroid put my comet in danger and molested my comet's natural flight course)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2014 23:06
|
|
.
|
SA is a good example of a highly centralized and hierarchal authority that attempts to find balance between enforcement of law while still allowing for people to post whatever within those laws, I agree SA is a good example of a state.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:It is literally impossible for you all to be that dense. SA was not an example of a society, but of what individuals within a society are capable of doing without force. But there is plenty of force. If I post a thread in CD showing off my new horse rape porn I just filmed, I will be banned. If I post an LP that I started on YouTube and ask for donations in the OP, I will be probated at least and the thread closed. I cannot enter a free and open contract with other goons to create a thread on SA where we all post about under aged hentai.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Yo just a heads up that I want everyone to use the libertarian definition of the word "Negroid" in this thread, which as we all know means "to fart into a pie that is topped with whipped cream". This is in addition to the libertarian definition of "force", "aggression", "pug", etc
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:I'm asking a simple question. Would SA be better if it was directly run by government? Well if I compare the private run healthcare I got in the USA vs the government run one I got in Canada, I'd say hand those servers over to Uncle Sam, Lowtax!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
Socrates16 posted:Lol at US healthcare being private. Well the bad parts of it are the parts that private, if the government funded healthcare for senators applied to everyone it would be better, but still worse than single payer:)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
So what happens if I am a customer for a DRO that is part of one network/association/coalition of DROs, and I decide to murder a customer for a DRO that is in a totally different network/association/coalition of DROs. My DRO doesn't think I committed murder because the victim was a Sikh and the Templar Knights DRO (a member of the Crusader DRO Association) does not recognize the murder of infidels as a crime. Does the Sikh man's DRO take me to court somehow? But my DRO doesn't recognize any court that would make the sacred act of crusading illegal. And the Crusader DRO Association has a wide variety of businesses in agreements with it, so I can live a full healthy life under my DRO even if I am blacklisted by all DROs outside of the one that I am a member of.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
In what way is a DRO not an authoritarian, anti-free market, anti-voluntary statist manifestation? I have to be in their good graces to live, I cannot engage in free and open commerce with customers of the DRO without its approval, even if that customer wants to engage in commerce with me and feels selling me her house should in no way involve the DRO, all of society is built around the DRO to the point that I cannot marry a non-DRO member, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 16:25
|
|
|
I'm glad that Jrod could so quickly get his cards all on the table and let us know he is a statist that supports the use of force and violence against nonviolent people . Jrod, why is using violence against a civil rights activist at a sit in a better use of violence than using violence to redistribute wealth? Which should the state (whether you want to call it a government or DRO association or a pug, whatever) prefer over the other?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2014 18:14
|
|
|
Reverend Catharsis posted:It does appear at this point we're pretty much just bantering with ourselves without the slightest care as to jrod's opinion, doesn't it? We just kinda keep posting whatever until it's been 24 hours since the last Libertarian posted. Then we all just kinda go away until it all starts again. Honestly, we haven't really gotten that much out of jrod this time outside of the racism stuff, and we exhausted that pretty well. Like I'm not trying to do some smug "Aw man, Jrod's been so pwned that he doesn't even have anything let to say" thing, but law enforcement in any society is pretty huge, especially one that is based entirely around property rights, but I'm not clear how it's supposed to not basically be a state in all but name only. You have to be a member, pay their fees and follow all their laws or you will be eternally punished, they are the only recognized law enforcement in town, and if I don't like the local DRO my only choice is basically to move somewhere with a better DRO. Why not just cut out the middle man and have a state at that point?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
I propose a new Prosek government/economy; Everything more or less stays the same as it is now for your average nation with universal healthcare; the government may have some involvement in the market up to and including having state run businesses controlling things like exporting natural resources, but overall you do have a market economy. However, when it comes time to vote, the poorer you are, the more votes you get. Being on the board of a company, owning stock, having more than $1,000,000 combined in the bank, owning more than 2 homes, etc will all basically reduce the number of votes you have to only a handfull. Having massive debt, owning no homes, having a fulltime job but still living below the poverty line, having little formal education, etc all give you more votes, up to 10,000 for one person. This way, the market is controlled by the wealthiest of the population, while the government is controlled by the poorest of the population. I admit it's a work in progress; the numbers need tweaking, we would have to know exactly how much money every person in the country has in every bank in the world, something would need to be done so a dude who owns a single house and just keeps 10,000,000 in cash in his safe can't appear to be poorer than he is to get more votes, but the overall idea is clear I think.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
Dyz posted:So If I was living in an ancap society and an outbreak of say, ebola, occurred, would I be quarantined? Presumably, when you sign up for health insurance/membership with a Healthcare Resolution Organization (which you have to do to be able to go to the only hospital in town), it would include an article where in the event of a highly contagious outbreak, you will submit to quarantine as directed by that local hospital or else you will be dropped from the organization. What happens when you drop your membership? Well, in order to keep their members safe, the insurance company/HRO won't allow their members (which includes everyone else in town other than you) to allow you onto any member's property since they don't know what kind of diseases you could have now that you dropped your membership. And even if you see the error of your ways and want to sign up for membership later, you can't! All previous medical conditions are per-exsiting conditions that the insurance/HRO company won't pay for. And what happens if your spouse or loved one quits the insurance/HRO company, you may ask? You must divorce them and move out of your home immediately  . Bask in the glory of the voluntarist, freedom of association friendly future!Tezzor posted:Instead of this clumsy attempt at balance, how about the workers control the means of production? Much simpler and more intuitive. Well, my idea was basically a way to reform current society without the need for any massive upheaval, but I suppose even if you made my plan less convoluted, it would still involve massive upheaval in order to radically change voting laws to tie number of votes to how poor you are. Can't really imagine any country voluntarily passing sweeping amendments like that today .
burnishedfume fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Aug 13, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Kinda strange request, but does anyone have a link to JRod's old thread that had a title that was something like "When is it okay to use force against innocent people?" or something like that? I vaguely remember the first reply to the thread being something like "When nobody is looking ^__^". I'm trying to find it but I'm having no luck, and I remember there was a lot of gold in that thread.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
 much obliged!StandardVC10 posted:Also note the giant ASCII Ron Paul art halfway down the page. Truly, a work of art 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Little Blackfly posted:What exactly is the threshold for evidence required? We need to see if it's possible for a man to be part of a PMC and shoot someone in a world without governments. Is such a thing even possible? In this hypothetical world, the victim's family would be able to "sue" the company, and convince others around them to "not do business with them", neither of which can be done today due to states.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 07:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
Socrates16 had better come back and explain what his libertarian society would look like, because right now if he agrees 100% with Jrod, then he should probably stop using words like statist negatively because he totally is one. If anything a DRO-state is actually way more authoritarian and prone to abuse than what we have today.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 16:41
|
|