|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: In position against one villain who check to you | |||
| ½×Pot |
   
|
12 | 20.34% |
| ¾×Pot |
  
|
33 | 55.93% |
| 1×Pot |
  
|
14 | 23.73% |
| Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#101
11-08-2005, 06:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Looking for fellow anarchocapitalists.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] without having to subject their work to the judgement of the market. [/ QUOTE ] I see this as a good thing, you see it as bad. Different strokes. A lot of scientific freedom is that I don't have to justify where my research will make a profit. [/ QUOTE ] In a free market you don't have to justify it, either - as long as you pay for it with your own money. If you're dependent on government money, you're not free to do whatever you want. |
|
#102
11-08-2005, 06:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Looking for fellow anarchocapitalists.
[ QUOTE ]
If you're dependent on government money, you're not free to do whatever you want. [/ QUOTE ] I said "scientific" freedom. Obviously we are at very different places. |
|
#103
11-08-2005, 06:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My last post to any anarcho-capitalists.
These arguments go on and on on here - every day a new sucker tries his hand at manuevering his way through the many strawmen and poorly crafted analogies, only to be twisted around.
Yet it is based on just a few principles. 1. Corporations are always more efficient than government. Sounds true, doesn't it? Fine, I can go along with that - so long as 'more efficient' isn't necessarily 'better'. 2. Private property rights are absolute. Really? Has anyone you know taken something that's not theirs? For private property rights to be absolute in an anarcho-capitalist state (oxymoron, I know), all members of that state (or region or whatever) must respect that fact. I see this as very unlikely. 3. All government is coercive, forced upon those that do not want it. Really? Then why isn't everyone an anarcho-capitalist? The central irony of anarcho capitalism is that it purports to force freedom on to the very people who do not want it! Do most people trust corporations, or have an understanding of economics that allows them to 'see the light'? I say no - and price gouging laws and things of this ilk are a representation of why they cannot succeed. When price gouging laws are democratically mandated, it's a sign that people do not trust corporations - certainly not enough to remove the overarching power structure. Anarcho-capitalists are the polar opposite of Marxists - Marxists who claimed that humanity would alter so fundamentally that the concept of private property would be laughed at like the old myths, now anarcho-capitalists claim that private property will be so sacred and inviolate that corporate justice could make a binding decision. Man both respects and disrespects the concept of private property - man is both savage and rational - man needs both the corporation and the government. |
|
#104
11-08-2005, 09:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My last post to any anarcho-capitalists.
I too have grown tired of the arguments and I think yours is a good summary.
A philosophical note on property rights... My dog thinks he owns my house and property. Can he be proven wrong? OK technically he can't sell it, but if he wouldn't want to anyway and he knows he will stay there for the rest of his life, then what's the difference? [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img] |
|
#105
11-08-2005, 09:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My last post to any anarcho-capitalists.
[ QUOTE ]
so long as 'more efficient' isn't necessarily 'better'. [/ QUOTE ] How is it not? You are getting more for less... [ QUOTE ] Really? Has anyone you know taken something that's not theirs? For private property rights to be absolute in an anarcho-capitalist state (oxymoron, I know), all members of that state (or region or whatever) must respect that fact. I see this as very unlikely. [/ QUOTE ] The government does a better job of protecting these rights? I don't see this as an argument anarcho-capitalism against at all. There will always be criminals... They are not more likely to bring down the system (or, more accurately, lack there of) in anarcho-capitalism any more than they are under state rule. [ QUOTE ] Really? Then why isn't everyone an anarcho-capitalist? The central irony of anarcho capitalism is that it purports to force freedom on to the very people who do not want it! Do most people trust corporations, or have an understanding of economics that allows them to 'see the light'? [/ QUOTE ] Ignorance is bliss. A sad truth in every society. [ QUOTE ] Anarcho-capitalists are the polar opposite of Marxists [/ QUOTE ] Agreed. They use logic, not rhetoric. [ QUOTE ] Marxists who claimed that humanity would alter so fundamentally that the concept of private property would be laughed at like the old myths, now anarcho-capitalists claim that private property will be so sacred and inviolate that corporate justice could make a binding decision. Man both respects and disrespects the concept of private property - man is both savage and rational - man needs both the corporation and the government. [/ QUOTE ] You certainly have a low opinion of your fellow man. |
|
#106
11-08-2005, 10:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My last post to any anarcho-capitalists.
[ QUOTE ]
1. Corporations are always more efficient than government. Sounds true, doesn't it? Fine, I can go along with that - so long as 'more efficient' isn't necessarily 'better'. [/ QUOTE ] Don't just restrict this to corporations. Private actors - individuals or corporations - are more efficient. "More efficient" is objective. "Better" is subjective. That's just one of many ways statism causes problems - imposing someone else's definition of "better" onto everyone. |
|
#107
11-08-2005, 11:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My last post to any anarcho-capitalists.
How do you define "more efficient"? If it's true that the gov't-run Medicare spends FAR less (by percentage) than what any other health insurance company in the world spends on administrative costs (source: Jimmy Smits [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] ), then how does that groove with your assertion that government is ALWAYS more inefficient?
Or do you need to make the assumption that a private company would do even better with the large-size economies of scale? Or do you define "more efficient" in some other way in this arena? |
|
#109
11-09-2005, 02:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Looking for fellow anarchocapitalists.
AC "utopia" as you put it isn't going to be perfect. It will just be a ton better than the status quo, from both a moral perspective and a utilitarian perspective.
And don't doubt the amount of money that humans will give to charity uncoerced. See the relief efforts for the Tsunami and Katrina for examples. Will |
|
#110
11-09-2005, 02:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: My last post to any anarcho-capitalists.
[ QUOTE ]
Find a better source than Jimmy Smits. [/ QUOTE ] "Medicare’s overhead is 2 to 3 percent while the overhead of private-sector insurance companies ranges from 15 to 30 percent. If you give Medicare a dollar in taxes, Medicare will keep 2 or 3 cents to pay the salaries of its staff, its utility bills etc., and will pay out 97 to 98 cents to doctors. But if you give a dollar in premiums to an insurance company, it will keep 15 to 30 cents for overhead and pay out 70 to 85 cents for medical services." zmag.org |
|
|
|
Linear Mode
