AC and "emminent domain"

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
The land was secured for the fronteir by the United States military and granted to the settlers

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect, the closest thing you could say honestly about the situation was that the land was surveyed in parts by the US military. Settlers pushed out west first and the military was called upon by railroad magnates who wanted to transport goods from already settled lands without having to deal with the natives.

[ QUOTE ]
The laws that were enforced were those defined by the United State goverment

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually don't link papers whole like this, but I think its appropriate. The not so wild west Starting on Page 7 it describes how land clubs, cattlemen associations, wagon trains and mining camps all came up with their own laws and ways of enforcing them.

[ QUOTE ]
Quite a few interesting developments have occurred in Somalia; in no way are all of them horrible. I find it interesting that anarcho-capitalists have such a reaction to the mention of Somalia because it shows a less than perfect utopia side of AC.


[/ QUOTE ]

Somalia's history for the past 40-50 years has been quite uncertain, independence, military coup, war, secession, civil war. The general population grew up under what was essentially a constant state of war. Naturally these experiences shaped the ways that a lot of people interact and deal with problems, as well as destroying a lot of what capital was built up during colonial times (which going by other colonial territories as basic guides probably wasn't very much at all). Calling Somalia anarcho capitalistic is to imply that the conditions there are the result of anarcho capitalism, which is basically what ACers reject. In reality the conditions there are better attributed to the direct result of massive state intervention (be it foreign or domestic) for 120 years (I'm not at all familiar with pre colonial Somalia). All that can basically be said about it is that its going to take more than 10-15 years of ANY system to clean up a mess that large.

[GoodCallYouWin]

"Name One"

New Hampshire.

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
"Name One"

New Hampshire.

[/ QUOTE ]

"and support your answer"

[Sifmole]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The land was secured for the fronteir by the United States military and granted to the settlers

[/ QUOTE ]

This is incorrect, the closest thing you could say honestly about the situation was that the land was surveyed in parts by the US military. Settlers pushed out west first and the military was called upon by railroad magnates who wanted to transport goods from already settled lands without having to deal with the natives.

[ QUOTE ]
The laws that were enforced were those defined by the United State goverment

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually don't link papers whole like this, but I think its appropriate. The not so wild west Starting on Page 7 it describes how land clubs, cattlemen associations, wagon trains and mining camps all came up with their own laws and ways of enforcing them.

[ QUOTE ]
Quite a few interesting developments have occurred in Somalia; in no way are all of them horrible. I find it interesting that anarcho-capitalists have such a reaction to the mention of Somalia because it shows a less than perfect utopia side of AC.


[/ QUOTE ]

Somalia's history for the past 40-50 years has been quite uncertain, independence, military coup, war, secession, civil war. The general population grew up under what was essentially a constant state of war. Naturally these experiences shaped the ways that a lot of people interact and deal with problems, as well as destroying a lot of what capital was built up during colonial times (which going by other colonial territories as basic guides probably wasn't very much at all). Calling Somalia anarcho capitalistic is to imply that the conditions there are the result of anarcho capitalism, which is basically what ACers reject. In reality the conditions there are better attributed to the direct result of massive state intervention (be it foreign or domestic) for 120 years (I'm not at all familiar with pre colonial Somalia). All that can basically be said about it is that its going to take more than 10-15 years of ANY system to clean up a mess that large.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for the thought out, supported stance. I look forward to reading the paper you linked.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Name One"

New Hampshire.

[/ QUOTE ]

"and support your answer"

[/ QUOTE ]
lmao. Does the fact that New Hampshire has more respect for property then Somalia (a country currently in chaos and run by warlords) really have to be "supported"? Take a trip to NH, then to Somalia. It's pretty evident.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
The protection of the property rights in those nations stems from the laws defined by, ruled on, and enforced by the government of those countries. Isn't that completely non-anarcho-capitalist?

[/ QUOTE ]
It's a knock against the anarchic part, yes, which is why I said it's more AC and not AC. It's a sliding scale. And those property rights don't stem from government declaration, it was ultimately created by society's recognition of property rights. People just currently use government to defend property rights instead of market means (which is a hit against the capitalistic part).
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think asking someone to support their statements is "being a douche"

[/ QUOTE ]
True it isn't, but that's not all you did.
[ QUOTE ]
-- personally, I think you are a reactionary twit spouting the usual utopian AC party line who can't actually support anything. <-- that was being a douche.


[/ QUOTE ]
heh, Ok you had me going on that one [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ]
If you can find and post a wiki link (like I did for you regarding the internet, see I saw what you did there) that supports your position that any of these nations are AC then I would be happy to read it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Supports what exactly? If you want to be shown that there's more respect for property rights in New Hampshire then in warlord-ridden Somalia, well I think that's pretty evident.

[NewTeaBag]

OK, standard "Somalia debate detour aside," I still haven't seen much in the way of addressing my specific questions.

No one is an expert on "free market road systems" doesn't help when it comes time to sorting the roads for the AC society.

Additionlly, the argument that "If I knew how this work then I'd be a central planning advocate" doesn't seem to helpful either because it ignores the simple fact that roads are a requirement and have to be dealt with and is also circular in logic. It is akin to saying "If I can explain this how this works, then my theories breakdown therefore I won't try to explain."

As almostbusto pointed out. It isn't a trick question trying to draw you into some long, delicious trap. I am just wondering how ACists think this important facet canbe/should be/would be handled.

Simple, "government monopolies are so bad free markets would do it better" statements read more like copouts/dodges of the important question over precedence in rights between the individuals (and there buisneses) and the road planners/owners which are vital to all of capatilistic society.

Saying "we don't need to rebuff every little detail question" is akin to saying we don't really have the tools to make an AC society work. I'm not asking about how two neighbors arguing over a tree that spans both properties is divided (or some such trivial issue). Roads are a core/essential thing in any modern society. If ACers have taken so much time to come up with strong aruments over dealing with military, judicial, and other core aspects of society, why are roads a throwaway that can be dealt with after the fact?

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
I am just wondering how ACists think this important facet canbe/should be/would be handled.


[/ QUOTE ]
There is a question in the faq that links two threads over this topic.

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am just wondering how ACists think this important facet canbe/should be/would be handled.


[/ QUOTE ]
There is a question in the faq that links two threads over this topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, now I've looked at them. I have to admit, borodg's arguments were vastly superior (even if I disagree with much of it) to your your's.

That aside. We don't exist in an embryonic state wherein AC will suddenly appear from the vacumn.

How does AC handle emminent domain issues WRT the 2 specific examples I discuss?

In EX1: Buisnesses along rd 1 can't just up and move stakes to another road if the road owner decides to hike his rates (which is effectively what conducting a protratced commerce harming road repair is).

In EX2: There are serious safety concerns regarding the problem. AND very few effective routes around the restriction. So, whish way do we swing? On the "greater good: the road is more important to all than just this one building owner" or "the building owner's property rights are sacrosanct, dredge/plowover/pave a sswamp (at incredible cost) to create a competitive alternative"?

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am just wondering how ACists think this important facet canbe/should be/would be handled.


[/ QUOTE ]
There is a question in the faq that links two threads over this topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, now I've looked at them. I have to admit, borodg's arguments were vastly superior (even if I disagree with much of it) to your your's.

That aside. We don't exist in an embryonic state wherein AC will suddenly appear from the vacumn.

How does AC handle emminent domain issues WRT the 2 specific examples I discuss?

In EX1: Buisnesses along rd 1 can't just up and move stakes to another road if the road owner decides to hike his rates (which is effectively what conducting a protratced commerce harming road repair is).

In EX2: There are serious safety concerns regarding the problem. AND very few effective routes around the restriction. So, whish way do we swing? On the "greater good: the road is more important to all than just this one building owner" or "the building owner's property rights are sacrosanct, dredge/plowover/pave a sswamp (at incredible cost) to create a competitive alternative"?

[/ QUOTE ]

These road questions get pretty repetitive. If you're asking what happens when roads get bad, well ideally, someone comes along, sees that people don't like the current roads, and invests his money into giving them another option.

As for what happens when people gain a monopoly or oligopoly on the land around an area, well I'll quote my favorite ACer on here: "Let the chips fall where they may" and "The Market will sort it out".

Cody