ACland -- live it now

[ianlippert]

And the point I was trying to make is that the HOA is going to have a police force, and the banks are going to have their police force. A HOA isnt going to be able to confiscate your money without engaging with the banks forces.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
But once a government starts trying to kidnap their customers and demanding their money, they can say good bye to all future taxes They will also have a hard time once everyone in the country get antsy and demands change. A government isnt going to sacrifice millions of dollars in revenue just to get some tax money from one guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh wait....it does...

[AlexM]

Where are the other ACists hiding? I want to see some AC responses to this!

[bkholdem]

Anything is possible.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But once a government starts trying to kidnap their customers and demanding their money, they can say good bye to all future taxes They will also have a hard time once everyone in the country get antsy and demands change. A government isnt going to sacrifice millions of dollars in revenue just to get some tax money from one guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh wait....it does...

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you expect an ACist to disagree with you?

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But once a government starts trying to kidnap their customers and demanding their money, they can say good bye to all future taxes They will also have a hard time once everyone in the country get antsy and demands change. A government isnt going to sacrifice millions of dollars in revenue just to get some tax money from one guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh wait....it does...

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you expect an ACist to disagree with you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. I expect those questioning the abilities/actions of a giant HOA to recognize that it likely will go after one person.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Why isn't our current system considered AC?

[/ QUOTE ]
Enforced territorial monopolies who hold legitmate right to squelch competition in it's "services" and holds a monopoly on legimate theft. It's going to be tough to find a business that acts in that manner.
[ QUOTE ]
Consider the following: ACland opens for business. People acquire their initial properties from homesteading.

[/ QUOTE ]
Property is already aquired now. What property is left for homesteading?
[ QUOTE ]
Soon people find that they want to maintain some semblance of order amongst their neighbors, so they create what are essentially homeowners associations.

[/ QUOTE ]
HOAs, while they would likely exist, would not likely be very highly used as it's not to effecient in all matters. First and foremost in retaining order would be private property, followed by contracts and arbitration, all of which not only can be supplied without HOAs, but would be provided better without use of a HOA.
[ QUOTE ]
Once a member of the HOA, your property is encumbered by the rules (i.e. all HOA rules run with the land.)

[/ QUOTE ]
This seems incredibly unlikely in an individualistic society, especially one that preferred the fruits of the free market. If people came into an AC society, it's unlikely they're going to care for rules, especially ones they can't back out of unless they move outside the HOA.
[ QUOTE ]
HOAs might soon band together and create towns (to minimize costs of, for example, police, fire protection, schools.)

[/ QUOTE ]
There would be towns without HOAs in AC. Minimizing costs for services by monopolizing them doesn't make sense. If society were to become AC it would because people recognized such services were better provided by a free market.
[ QUOTE ]
If all available real estate were eventually a part of an HOA (or a larger town, county, state, country) has AC evolved to statehood?

[/ QUOTE ]
It would depend on the nature of the HOA's rules. Either way, this is a very unlikely senario for the reasons I gave earlier.
[ QUOTE ]
Would that state be considered AC even if in 5 generations none of the existing property owners actively consented to the original creation of the HOA?

[/ QUOTE ]
Possibly, it's definitely coercize and against the meaning of anarchocapitalism.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But once a government starts trying to kidnap their customers and demanding their money, they can say good bye to all future taxes They will also have a hard time once everyone in the country get antsy and demands change. A government isnt going to sacrifice millions of dollars in revenue just to get some tax money from one guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh wait....it does...

[/ QUOTE ]
Did you expect an ACist to disagree with you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not at all. I expect those questioning the abilities/actions of a giant HOA to recognize that it likely will go after one person.

[/ QUOTE ]
By saying that government is anologous to a entity that operates in a free market?

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
Possibly, it's definitely coercize and against the meaning of anarchocapitalism.

[/ QUOTE ]

How is it coercive if you give your consent through contract?

The reason I think HOAs or similar things would exist is I imagine it would not be too uncommon for residential neighbors in ACland to agree, for example, to not place a business on their property as a business could drive down the value of their own property. All agree and then someone sells their property to someone who intends to conduct a business on their property. It won't take too long for people to realize that in order to ensure that their property isn't next to a gas station, they have to create an agreement with their neighbor that lasts beyond their neighbor's tenure at the property. In fact, if the agreement attached to the land, that could actually be a selling point driving up the value of your personal property --- "2 acre estate in residential neighborhood --- all neighboring property MUST be residential in future"

There are many situations in which people would view it as mutually beneficial to bind the property (something that runs with the land) rather than your person (through traditional contracts.)

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
How is it coercive if you give your consent through contract?

[/ QUOTE ]
I misread what you wrote in the part I replied to.
[ QUOTE ]
The reason I think HOAs or similar things would exist is I imagine it would not be too uncommon for residential neighbors in ACland to agree, for example, to not place a business on their property as a business could drive down the value of their own property. All agree and then someone sells their property to someone who intends to conduct a business on their property.

[/ QUOTE ]
This may happen. I don't see why you think this would become incredibly widespread or why you think that other "laws" would become fairly common.
[ QUOTE ]
It won't take too long for people to realize that in order to ensure that their property isn't next to a gas station, they have to create an agreement with their neighbor that lasts beyond their neighbor's tenure at the property.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's very unlikely that some contract could put restrictions on any property ad infinitum.
[ QUOTE ]
In fact, if the agreement attached to the land, that could actually be a selling point driving up the value of your personal property --- "2 acre estate in residential neighborhood --- all neighboring property MUST be residential in future"

[/ QUOTE ]
It can be a bad thing also for the seller as it artificially lessens demand for that property by limiting the amount of potential buyers (such as business).