Looking for fellow anarchocapitalists.

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, if the average anarchocapitals behaves/ reacts like this, I don't have to worry. I get to keep my government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yet another brilliant rebuttal.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, if the average anarchocapitals behaves/ reacts like this, I don't have to worry. I get to keep my government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yet another brilliant rebuttal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reactions comes from actions. If everybody reacts this way towards you when you argue, you should consider looking into the cause, not only the effect.

[Borodog]

Oh, hey, I forget to tell you:

*** You are ignoring this user ***

Congratulations. You're number 3.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

Your list will probably be expanded by many more, I guess, so I don't feel that special.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, if the average anarchocapitals behaves/ reacts like this, I don't have to worry. I get to keep my government.

[/ QUOTE ]

Simple reply. Why would you want to keep something that forces you to do things against your will? Do you not believe in freedom? Do you believe that you could not help those less fortunate without being coerced by government?

I know what your response will be. Yes, we have fundumentally different views on human nature. It is the never-ending debate between AC advocates and dissenters.

[The Don]

[ QUOTE ]
How is the results of society today different than the results of an Anarchocapatalist society? There is no global government, and people have chosen to or been forced to create governments.

[/ QUOTE ]

A few people have chosen to create governments, none were forced to. Speaking of force though, those who chose to create governments decided to use force and impose their will on everyone else under their jurisdiction. Do you not see the unethical nature of this?

[Rduke55]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of course I have to think of science and I believe that it would suffer greatly if all science were privately run.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP.

Why? Because you have a feeling? Have you investigated it? Do you really believe that fundamental science has to be funded involuntarily or it won't get done? Personally, I think that is silly. Fundamental science is extremely valuable. I take it you will not disagree? Capital gravitates in a free market to that which is valuable. By what magical mechanism would science not be invested in?

[ QUOTE ]
And what about the interstates? (Sorry, I keep thinking of that quote) What pays for that?

[/ QUOTE ]

How about . . . the people who use them? Unlike now? Where the tax burden for almost all government "services" is either only tenuously connected or completely divorced from those who actually make use of the service?

[ QUOTE ]
Who does the upkeep on any roads?

[/ QUOTE ]

How about . . . the companies that own them?

[ QUOTE ]
Why do they do it?

[/ QUOTE ]

To make money?

[ QUOTE ]
Where does the profit come from?

[/ QUOTE ]

1. People want to drive on interstate highways (there is a demand).
2. They will pay you if you supply that demand.
3. Profit.

I could go into extensive detail describing a system of privately owned interstate highways, and why they would be far cheaper and better than our current system.

But I warn you, I have had these sorts of discussions on the internet many, many times. They always turn into the same thing: "Ok, but what about X? How does the private sector provide for X? I can't think of how the private sector could provide for X, therefore it can't, and therefore we need government to do it for us." I then patiently explain how the private sector could provide X. "Ok, but what about Y? How does the private sector provide for Y? I can't think of how the private sector could provide for Y . . ."

So, do you want to hear about private interstates or not?

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. You lost what little credibiltity you had with this post.
Private science is crap compared to govt. funded science. Being a neuro type I have direct experience with this. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about here. Privitazation wil kill pure science.

Roads? Are you kidding me? Privatization would make driving ridiculously expensive. How are tolls. etc. different from taxation? Profit in road building?????!!!!?!?!?

And I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. You're an ass for trying to call me out and FYPing my post to "I believe". I have a great deal of experience in both the academic sector and govt. funded research. Obviously you're misguided.

What are you, 16 years old? Anarchocapitalism? Grow up.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, private science is crap compared to govt. funded science. Being a neuro type I have direct experience with this. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about here. Privitazation wil kill pure science.

[/ QUOTE ]

You observe that government funds flow to a lot of useful research, which is true. Then you assume that because of that, government is the only possible way to solve the problem.

People clearly find value in research. If the government pulls out of funding research, something *will* fill that vaccuum.

I posted about this a couple of months ago. Here's what I wrote then:

****

Research is effectively an economic problem. There are finite resources, there are multiple competing uses for those resorces. In fact, many of these resources (people and material) have uses in other aspects of the economy - meaning you can't seperate research from other economic activity. It's all tied together.

Everyone already acknowleges that market action is superior to government dictation in the "regular" economy - why should research be any different?

Just the bureaucratic bungling is enough to make this decision clear. But there are other considerations. The political meddling (witness stem cell research) is, by itself, reason enough to not allow government to screw with research. Then the moral impropriety of using other people's money - again, by itself enough to make this decision easy.

Effectiveness: advantage market
Objectiveness: advantage market
Respectfulness: advantage market

Yes, people have made great discoveries with government funding. Just think of how much more could have been discovered already without government interference weighing the process down.

****

[ QUOTE ]
Roads? Are you kidding me? Privatization would make driving ridiculously expensive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Roads are already "ridiculously" expensive. You just don't see the bill directly. They would be considerably *less* expensive when built by private firms that can't run up unlimited budget overruns and pass them off on hapless taxpayers.

[ QUOTE ]
How are tolls. etc. different from taxation?

[/ QUOTE ]

You really can't tell the difference? Can you tell the difference between the price you pay for a gallon of milk and taxation?

[ QUOTE ]
Profit in road building?????!!!!?!?!?

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't think there's any demand for roads? Why are we building them, then?

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
OK. You lost what little credibiltity you had with this post.
Yes, private science is crap compared to govt. funded science. Being a neuro type I have direct experience with this. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about here. Privitazation wil kill pure science.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

[ QUOTE ]
Roads? Are you kidding me? Privatization would make driving ridiculously expensive.

[/ QUOTE ]

How so? Care to explain the assumptions you made and show your calculations? You do claim to be a scientist, don't you?

[ QUOTE ]
How are tolls. etc. different from taxation?

[/ QUOTE ]

How is voluntary different from involuntary?

[ QUOTE ]
Profit in road building?????!!!!?!?!?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, would you care to explain the assumptions you've made and the calculations you undertook to arrive at your position? I offered to outline a system of private interstates, since you brought them up, so that you could analyze the merits for yourself. But it appears you would rather dismiss the subject out of hand.

Also, you are dangerously close to invoking the gratuitous punctuation rule.

[ QUOTE ]
And I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. You're an ass for trying to call me out and FYPing my post to "I believe". I have a great deal of experience in both the academic sector and govt. funded research. Obviously you're misguided.

[/ QUOTE ]

I also have experience in both the academic sector and government funded research. I really wasn't trying to be a dick or "call you out" with the FYP. My apologies. That was a really stupid way to try to make my point, which was that I doubt that you've ever seriously considered what scientific funding would be like in the complete absence of coercive governmental sources. You're really just assuming that it would suffer. Much like you're assuming road construction would suffer, and probably the police, fire departments, health care, education, bakeries, and any number of other things that governments often monopolize.

[ QUOTE ]
What are you, 16 years old? Anarchocapitalism? Grow up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this how you normally conduct your brand of science? Dismiss theories out of hand without any investigation at all?

But thanks for letting me know I needn't waste my time trying to actually present any ideas.

Have a nice life.

[ptmusic]

Anyone watch the "live" presidential debate on the West Wing last night? It was pretty fun, but here's the point pertinent to this thread:

Apparently, private health insurance companies have an average administrative overhead of about 25%. Medicare has an administrative overhead of......






















2%.