Question re AC and the current setup of society

[bunny]

Assume, for now, that AC is the best solution to organising the world. Also accept that we are currently living in a mixed society. Does it follow that any policy which enhances freedoms and reduces control by the state is better than one which restricts freedoms in some way or which increases state control?

[New001]

I know some people will say that all policies that restrict freedom (even if it restricts less than it does now) are bad, but I disagree. I'd rather take small steps than no steps.

[psy]

I don't know what you mean by "mixed society" but leaving that bit out I would answer your question with a resounding not at all. Some freedoms must be curtailed to prevent anarchy and to protect those less fortunate.

[hmkpoker]

Well, some of the statist monopolies are more hard-wired into our social system than others, and removing them before the resources exist to reduce the time preference that requires their existence would create a damaging shock to the economy. Privatizing the police force, for example, without first removing government restrictions (for example, the war on drugs) that create crime would not be a step in the right direction.

[madnak]

No. I think removing certain government policies would be like pulling the rug out from under society. Easy does it.

[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
Assume, for now, that AC is the best solution to organising the world. Also accept that we are currently living in a mixed society. Does it follow that any policy which enhances freedoms and reduces control by the state is better than one which restricts freedoms in some way or which increases state control?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's pretty close to tautological and the answer is clearly yes. The more freedom/less state policy will be better but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is best to implement it immediately without considering effects on other policies still in force.

Surely in the transition from current mixed system (capitalism and socialism) to AC there will be a long list of things to do, all of which increase freedom and reduce state control, and all of which are better than not doing them, but to realize the benefits, the schedule of implementation has to be followed with delicate precision IMO. Choose the wrong schedule and the effects of those better policies might be negative, but that would be because of bad scheduling and not because of the inferiority of the policies themselves.

I know I just sounded like an ACer but I am first and foremost a logically minded person. You asked me to assume something and I did. Whether I agree with the assumption or not is another matter altogether.

[psy]

Oh yeah.

Reading your reply and looking at the question again I retract what I said earlier.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
No. I think removing certain government policies would be like pulling the rug out from under society. Easy does it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's more like a tablecloth, easy does it will get you fought and beaten by special interests at every turn.

Table Cloth Method :

Stop all tax collecting and finance interim spending through debt accumulation. Announce a plan to sell every "public" asset at a public auction linked real time with on online auction to increase inclusion. Begin with the easy stuff roads rivers etc but people can only bid in gold. Over the course of your term limit collect gold for all the harder and harder stuff to privatise till you're left with the police, courts and a small army and a huge pile of gold. Announce that you intend to honour the gold value of a dollar for a limited period but that first you will pay down all debts in gold. (Pray that you got enough for the public assets to do this, you can sell the coins and paper for their recycle asset value too). Set fire to all the dollars you have collected and noone wants as a symbolic gesture then ride off into the sunset.