|
|
#51
03-22-2006, 01:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
Because anything beyond that would be forcive coersion, which is antithetical to the tenets of AC.
"There won't be any forcive coercion in ACland cause I don't want it there!" 
|
|
#52
03-22-2006, 01:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] What has Joe Blo done wrong other than make a poor business decision? As a result of it, he had to leave his job and will no longer be employed as a claims agent. Isn't that the free market in action? [/ QUOTE ] Gotcha. There's no law in the free market. Makes sense. [/ QUOTE ] Well, Joe Blo could certainly be forcively coerced into living in a prison, or moving to the Arctic Circle, or whatever, but isn't that the exact practice that ACers so ardently oppose in the government? [/ QUOTE ] That's a code 318. Legal actions under anarchocapitalism do not initiate force, they close force transactions opened by the initiating party.
|
|
#53
03-22-2006, 01:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
Uninitiated should be the stuck in front of government. Responding to another's aggression is not uninitiated coercion.
Of course, but if company A feels that they are responding to company B's aggression, when all company B did was buy a franchise down the street from them, who arbitrates that?
|
|
#54
03-22-2006, 01:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
[ QUOTE ]
Jo Blo defrauded the company, violated his employment contract, and caused damages. He is liable. [/ QUOTE ] He is liable insofar as he agreed to be liable in the terms of his contract, and I doubt that a company whose employment contract included a clause which required an employee to serve prison time or be subject to corporal or capital punishment for breaking company policy would find itself overburdened with employment applications.
|
|
#55
03-22-2006, 01:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
[ QUOTE ]
The existence of insurance companies that don't want to go out of business. Strangely enough, people would not voluntarily patronize companies that tried to coerce them into behaving ways they don't want to. Shocking, isn't it? Yeah, that's why the people who start pyramid schemes are always bankrupt. Oh, wait, that's because the state can seize their assets. [/ QUOTE ] Purple monkey dishwasher. Get back to me when you can explain the connection between pyramid schemes (like social security) and insurance companies coercing their customers into not BASE jumping.
|
|
#56
03-22-2006, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
[ QUOTE ]
Uninitiated should be the stuck in front of government. Responding to another's aggression is not uninitiated coercion. Of course, but if company A feels that they are responding to company B's aggression, when all company B did was buy a franchise down the street from them, who arbitrates that? [/ QUOTE ] Arbitraters...?
|
|
#57
03-22-2006, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Jo Blo defrauded the company, violated his employment contract, and caused damages. He is liable. [/ QUOTE ] He is liable insofar as he agreed to be liable in the terms of his contract, and I doubt that a company whose employment contract included a clause which required an employee to serve prison time or be subject to corporal or capital punishment for breaking company policy would find itself overburdened with employment applications. [/ QUOTE ] What? "Liable insofar as he agreed to be liable in the terms of his contract"? He's liable for the damages he caused the company. Or are you claiming that if I rob you I'm not liable because we didn't have a contract? Why do you people flail so violently to avoid conceding any point, no matter how obviously incorrect you are?
|
|
#59
03-22-2006, 01:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
[ QUOTE ]
Of course, but if company A feels that they are responding to company B's aggression, when all company B did was buy a franchise down the street from them, who arbitrates that? [/ QUOTE ] It isn't profitable to initiate violence against a competitor, especially one who is insured by a private security firm. Even jr. high educated, inner city gangs know this truth, and avoid "gang war" at all costs.
|
|
#60
03-22-2006, 01:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: AC: The Economics of Revolutions
[ QUOTE ]
bison, You can't win an argument against someone's imagination using facts. Give up. NT [/ QUOTE ] You've confused facts with assertions, flawed logic, handwaving, and non sequitors. It's ok though, statists are often confused about such things.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
