[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Learn to use a quote tag.

Your usual handwaving bunk. "Endemic to the system"? As usual, empty meaningless rhetoric backed up by no argument. Opportunity not always turned into reality? Yet somehow, magically, a bureacrat can turn it into reality? Strawman? Lol, ironyments. Where did I say that you said that every government program yada yada yada? Your claim is that *any* government programs *at all* can reduce transaction costs where, magically, the market cannot. I.e., that somehow (equally magically), a bureaucrat or a politician can think up what an entrepreneur cannot.

The freerider problem? It's been killed, there is no free rider problem on the free market. Freeriders are only a problem under socialism, where the contributor neither bears the brunt of the cost of not acting nor gains the primary benefit of acting. In a free market individuals act in their own interest because they are self-interested and receive the primary benefits of that action, regardless of who else might benefit. The whole idea of "positive externalities" preventing people from taking actions is farcical, since ANY action by anyone can have "positive externalities" because such things are subjective. This logic leads to government subsidy of anything and everything. The classic example of the "freerider problem", used in neoclassical economics textbooks for decades, the lighthouse, was shown to be utter and complete bunk, since private lighthouses were financed and operated around the world for hundreds of years without government intervention. All government monopolization does is act to kill off the profit incentive to find solutions to so-called "freerider problems." Why think of a way to privately finance lighthouses if the government is going to do it?

"Address the transaction costs of AC approaches to IP and defense"? Lol. You have been told numerous times that intellectual property protection under the market will be whatever the market demands; if people believe you can own ideas, then that is damn well what the judges will rule, because otherwise people will stop using them. And if people don't believe you can own ideas, then that is what they will rule as well. Why don't you address the transaction costs of IP under statism, where IP law is whatever the corporations with the biggest bribes say it is, because it is a small cabal of politicians and *monopoly* judges who decide it, rather than the consuming public?

Again you completely sidestep the transaction costs of government provided defense. You know, the transaction costs that are totalling a half a trillion dollars a year but can't stop a few guys from doing billions of dollars of damage with boxcutters? What about those transaction costs?

Why don't you at least once even attempt to show why an organized national defense must be a *monopoly* national defense? Are you under the delusion that people don't organize in the free market? If people need to coordinate for their common defense they are too stupid to figure out how, but politicians and bureaucrats are magically not? Why do you think it is that centralized states get conquered quickly, but decentralized resistances are so difficult for our monolithic armed forces to deal with? Viet Nam ring a bell? Iraq? It took England 700 years to conquer stateless Ireland, which was practically still in the Iron Age. Maginot line FTL?

How many times do you have to lose the same arguments before you abandon them and cease claiming that they "haven't been addressed"?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll highlight however I damn well please. Layers of quotes are incomprehensible. The arguments have never been lost. when specific questions are asked you respond with your usual crap like "Efficiency is not my problem".

[/ QUOTE ]

I just provided you an entire laundry list of arguments, none of them being "efficiency is not my problem", which I have NEVER stated. Why don't you just once explain how the market, whose entire function is to drive towards economic efficiency by reducing transaction costs, is more "inefficient" than bureaucracy and monopoly? I've asked you this sort of question countless times, but I never seem to get an answer that makes any sense. Only handwaving meaningless rhetoric like "It's endemic to the system."