AC scenario!!!

[foal]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I saw that coming, but I already pointed out that the mafia does not merely operate in black markets.

[/ QUOTE ]
Those other operations wouldn't sustain them at a level any higher than a gang of pickpockets..

[/ QUOTE ]
Their black markets are drugs (to a limited extent I think), gambling and prostitution. Their non-black markets are stolen goods, owning resteraunts or clubs, pornography, and so on. I think their non-black market activities are significant enough that they would stay successful even without the black market stuff. But I do agree that illegalization of gambling and prostitution is beneficial to them.

[tame_deuces]

ACism holds principles which could potentially be very beneficial to breach. As such it faces the same problems as a state, but granted to a much, much lower extent (since it has much less principles).

Imprisonment is a big problem though, I can't see how it can be justified in an AC setting without being the target of the same criticisms ACists usually pose towards government.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I saw that coming, but I already pointed out that the mafia does not merely operate in black markets.

[/ QUOTE ]
Those other operations wouldn't sustain them at a level any higher than a gang of pickpockets..

[/ QUOTE ]
Their black markets are drugs (to a limited extent I think), gambling and prostitution. Their non-black markets are stolen goods, owning resteraunts or clubs, pornography, and so on. I think their non-black market activities are significant enough that they would stay successful even without the black market stuff. But I do agree that illegalization of gambling and prostitution is beneficial to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Front operations for the mafia are often quite unprofitable. But if people are making money without initiating force on others what is your problem? They should be punished for when they initiate force not when they don't.

What problem do you have with the mafia that you don't have with the state? The protection racket is the same from both.

[boracay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I saw that coming, but I already pointed out that the mafia does not merely operate in black markets.

[/ QUOTE ]
Those other operations wouldn't sustain them at a level any higher than a gang of pickpockets..

[/ QUOTE ]
Their black markets are drugs (to a limited extent I think), gambling and prostitution. Their non-black markets are stolen goods, owning resteraunts or clubs, pornography, and so on. I think their non-black market activities are significant enough that they would stay successful even without the black market stuff. But I do agree that illegalization of gambling and prostitution is beneficial to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Front operations for the mafia are often quite unprofitable. But if people are making money without initiating force on others what is your problem? They should be punished for when they initiate force not when they don't.

What problem do you have with the mafia that you don't have with the state? The protection racket is the same from both.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's take an existing example - mafia in Southern Italy and i kindly ask you to explain how would it work in ACism.

Ok, they make money out of prostitution, drugs, illegal gambling, illegal money lending, etc. Ok, let say most of people can get away from that.

What about protection rackets, briberies for all businesses there and impact of terrorizing when confronted against their members at courts, fear of policemen, etc.

Mafia is the biggest business enterprise in Italy with revenue of 126B$/year, not comparable to any company there and it's known that basicly all businesses in the South have to pay 'protection' no matter how big or important the company is.

So, the question is, how would it be possible to reduce these threats of a private army called Mafia in ACism, when even now even independent, highly trained government forces with almost unlimited budget and personal cannot?

[tomdemaine]

Firstly through bribery and intimidation the mafia uses the power of the state to mean that most of it's victims have no good means of defending their property. The state is "supposed" to do it but somehow doesn't manage it. Secondly if you are worried about people being forced to pay money against their will or suffer horrible personal consequences for doing nothing more than starting a business or living in a vertain place. Would you be concerned more with a 126B$/ year business or a multiple Trillion $/year business?

[tomdemaine]

YOU CAN'T GET RID OF SLAVERY! PEOPLE MIGHT BECOME SLAVES!!!! OMGOMGOMGOGMOGMGGOMGZZZZ!

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am guessing that a private security firm would offer provide people the opportunity to buy a service to keep them imprisioned, and if it was worth it to pay them rather than be put in danger, people would do it. If enough people have an interest in something and want it done, a possible solution be developed.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if 60% of people really want black people sent out of the country? Will a solution be developed?

What if 80% of people want all Muslims imprisoned? Will a solution be developed?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think happens in a state, especially a democracy, in these cases?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Everybody else doesn't need to know it. The fact that people can find out is enough incentive for a security firm to not risk disaster for the sake of one client's business. If it did get out that the firm knowingly imprisoned an innocent man (!!!) then that would be all she wrote for that firm.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes, this reasoning was in full swing at Absolute Poker and Enron.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you have to have a terrible understanding of both economics and human nature to assume that almost all people adequately assess risk and will be sufficiently bounded by purely financial concerns. There are many reasons for a security firm to do all kinds of horrible activities and there are many reasons why they could and would get away with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know if you noticed but Enron didn't "get away with it." They (along with Authur Anderson) went belly up due to market forces before any meaningful government sanctions kicked in. Once everyone knew AA was involved in cooking books, ALL OF THEIR CUSTOMERS LEFT.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Let's try this, glue brain:

Q: What's the point of Mike's Security Firm?
A: To provide safety and/or justice in a manner people think is fair.

[/ QUOTE ]
Probably to make money.

[/ QUOTE ]

And how pray tell do they go about making money?

Magic? Voodoo?

Ancient Aztec prayer rituals?

[/ QUOTE ]

You haven't heard of this business plan? It's right up there with the "hire a huge army to kill hobos and steal rice bowls from starving africans" business model.

1) spend lots of money killing poor people
2) ???
3) PROFIT!!

[tame_deuces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am guessing that a private security firm would offer provide people the opportunity to buy a service to keep them imprisioned, and if it was worth it to pay them rather than be put in danger, people would do it. If enough people have an interest in something and want it done, a possible solution be developed.

[/ QUOTE ]
What if 60% of people really want black people sent out of the country? Will a solution be developed?

What if 80% of people want all Muslims imprisoned? Will a solution be developed?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think happens in a state, especially a democracy, in these cases?

[/ QUOTE ]

Technically nothing should happen as in any true modern democracy there are limit to what policies can be enforced upon the minority by the majority, enforced by the checks/balance system.

A modern democracy is in principle a lot more than majority rule.