Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #141  
Old 05-02-2006, 11:24 PM
theweatherman theweatherman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: مدينة واشنطون دي سي
Posts: 1,725
Default Re: Some objections to AC

[ QUOTE ]
blissful utopia.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not what AC is at all. Even they say so.

AC is a world where the rich can get richer and the poor can [censored] off.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 05-03-2006, 12:35 AM
nietzreznor nietzreznor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: i will find your lost ship...
Posts: 1,395
Default Re: Some objections to AC

[ QUOTE ]
AC is a world where the rich can get richer and the poor can [censored] off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seeing as centralized Statism hasn't exactly been a resounding success in terms of stopping the rich from [censored] the poor, what have we got to lose? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 05-03-2006, 09:18 AM
.......... .......... is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 273
Default Re: Some objections to AC

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Magical Rainforest of Anarcho-Capital Fairytail Land :Well we don't want to give you "x". We like "x"


[/ QUOTE ]

Who is "we"?

[/ QUOTE ]

"We" is obviously referring to anyone benefiting from the surrounding congregation of sovereign individuals not being a steaming pit of burning flesh and rubble - presumably those among the highest rungs of society, who in all probability value an abundance of customers and employees enough to render them the perfect candidates for said extortion. That's umm...who we is.

Now, if "we" understands what is best for "we", then "we" will consult with the other "we's", and decide amongst themselves whom will incur which percentage of the new cost of running a blissful utopia where everyone is happy and only the poor and unfortunate suffer.

In exchange, of course, the oppressive occupiers will now offer their military might as protection from other possible threats, as they now have a vested interest in the smooth operation of Magical Rainforest Of Anarcho-Capital Fairytail Land.

Now of course this is all purely hypothetical because the "we's" of M.R.A.C.F.L. were intelligent enough to have envisioned this nightmare scenario, and decided instead to unite together and divide the cost of their very own nuclear-capable military to ensure they would never find themselves in the untenable position of having to give anyone else a percentage of their money.

Unfortunately the "we's" soon began to realize that the cost of owning and maintaining their very own modern-day war machine was beginning to grow exponentially - far exceeding what they had initially anticipated. So they quickly decided that since everyone in M.R.A.C.F.L. was benefiting from having a powerful military presence in the region, then everyone should contribute to the rising cost of maintaining it. I mean why should a few have to pay while everyone else gets a free ride? But they couldn't just go around collecting money from people if they didn't want to pay. That would be coercion.

After much deliberation the "we"s finally decided that they simply had no real choice in the matter, as the operating costs of Magical Rainforest Of Anarcho-Capital Fairytail Land were simply too high to turn a decent profit. It was either impose a war-machine tax, or surrender control to the oppressive state. It was unanimous. It was much better to exploit than to be exploited. And so they did. The following week they declared it "mandatory" that everyone pay a war-machine tax. But the people refused, citing "coercion", and went about their daily business ignoring the new and oppressive rule.

Well this was just no good. Didn't the people realize that if they didn't help fund the war-machine, that they would have to turn over their congregation of sovereign individuals to an oppressive state? Obviously the people didn't know what was good for them so the "we's” assembled a private security team to enforce the payment of the war-machine tax.

Very quickly they realized just how much "enforcing" they would need to do, and once again it was much more than they had initially bargained for. So they hired more personnel, which much to their dismay meant more money. A whole lot more. This was very disheartening because again profits were rapidly declining.

They soon decided that they had no viable alternatives other than to impose a war-machine-payment-enforcement tax. Again, it was either that or give up their sovereignty.

Well, in virtually no time at all they had bitten off more than they could chew. The amount of people who refused or could not afford to pay the new price of freedom was overwhelming. The "we's" didn't know what to do. Even now that they had adequate enforcement personnel, they still had nowhere to put all of the offenders once they were apprehended. How in the hell did this happen??? What started out as a beautiful dream was now a horrible nightmare. And this was just the beginning.........

Commence incoherent ramblings.....
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 05-03-2006, 10:15 AM
pvn pvn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: back despite popular demand
Posts: 10,955
Default Re: Some objections to AC

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Magical Rainforest of Anarcho-Capital Fairytail Land :Well we don't want to give you "x". We like "x"


[/ QUOTE ]

Who is "we"?

[/ QUOTE ]

"We" is obviously referring to anyone benefiting from the surrounding congregation of sovereign individuals not being a steaming pit of burning flesh and rubble - presumably those among the highest rungs of society, who in all probability value an abundance of customers and employees enough to render them the perfect candidates for said extortion. That's umm...who we is.

[/ QUOTE ]

So "STATE" just picks up the phone and calls "we"?

And there is this congregation of sovereign individuals with enough wealth to attract a bully, but somehow they can't figure out how to defend themselves?

How does forming a state improve this situation?

[ QUOTE ]
Commence incoherent ramblings.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Commence? You're supposed to say that at the [b]beginning[/i].
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 05-03-2006, 12:52 PM
Sharkey Sharkey is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,140
Default Re: Some objections to AC

[ QUOTE ]
And there is this congregation of sovereign individuals with enough wealth to attract a bully, but somehow they can't figure out how to defend themselves?

[/ QUOTE ]

They did figure it out, and their solution was to create a state.

What the anarchists have not explained is how their “free market” will figure out how to structure and finance the R&D and implementation of a military-industrial complex that meets all the requirements of national defense.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 05-03-2006, 01:16 PM
nietzreznor nietzreznor is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: i will find your lost ship...
Posts: 1,395
Default Re: Some objections to AC

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commence incoherent ramblings.....


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Commence? You're supposed to say that at the beginning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh snap!!!
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 05-03-2006, 07:07 PM
.......... .......... is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 273
Default Re: Some objections to AC

[ QUOTE ]


So "STATE" just picks up the phone and calls "we"?

[/ QUOTE ]

When it comes to making money, people have been known to do all kinds of wild and crazy things like make phone calls, yes.

Although, this story does take place in the not-too-distant future, so I imagine the acquisition would look a little more like this:



[ QUOTE ]
And there is this congregation of sovereign individuals with enough wealth to attract a bully, but somehow they can't figure out how to defend themselves?

How does forming a state improve this situation?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. I know my exegesis was cryptic and rife with philosophical interpretation, but I thought I at least left the basic analogies decipherable to the average ACer. I guess I sometimes overestimate who I'm dealing with.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Commence incoherent ramblings.....

[/ QUOTE ]

Commence? You're supposed to say that at the [b]beginning[/i].

[/ QUOTE ]

Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 05-03-2006, 09:44 PM
Borodog Borodog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Performing miracles.
Posts: 11,182
Default Re: Some objections to AC

pvn,

No offense, but why are you arguing with an obvious gimmick account troll?

And you others, too.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.