Hi

[Vagos]

From other thread, you told me to reply here,

[ QUOTE ]
All,

deleted a few posts in this thread. one thing I would like to see is for arguments on the AC/non AC type when the OP is about a specific area is for replies to stick to that subject instead of going to a general state vs. no state line which I see happen. there will be plenty of broad philosophy type discussions for that so I want specific area threads to be more focused and unique.


this will of course be a judgment call on the part of myself and the mods and there will be times you disagree but please keep that out of the thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems kind of unreasonable to me. Let's look at the OP of the charity thread.

[ QUOTE ]
In trying to deal with the whether there would be sufficient charitable efforts made in an AC society, I haven't seen ACists address the following consideration:

It would seem to me that there is a sizeable portion of the population who, with respect to a large range of the chartable/welfare programs x, would agree with both of the following statements:

1.) I would prefer not to give $z to support x.
2.) I would vote for a law forcing all people to give $z to support x.

That is, they believe that the the charitable effort is worthwhile is given the sufficient funding that forcing everyone to contribute would provide. They are happy to be forced to provide this funding if everyone else is forced to. But given the opportunity to be a free-rider, they would do so.
In short, I think there are lot of programs than many people believe are worthy of support, but only if the burden of support it borne by all, even those who don't want to support it. These programs may be funded by the state, but will disappear in an AC world.

BTW, I'm really uninterested in any sort of "taxation is theft" discussion. I'm just interested in knowing how these programs would exist in AC society , or what would replace them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, he is telling us force is alright for the purpose of the welfare of the poor. He doesn't want to hear that force is wrong. Hell, he even tells us the answer before he even asks question(see bolded parts). How can an AC honestly debate this topic without getting into a state vs no-state morality debate? We don't have any charts or graphs about AC so OF COURSE we can't show you how much charity will exist in AC. Our position(well most of us anyways, excluding utilitarian ACists) is one of morality. Restricting us from debating on the "general state vs no state" line is unreasonable I think. I realize a lot of threads get bogged down by the same old argument, but I say if that's where the momentum of the argument is going, so be it. I don't want to see content over-modded in politics. I respect your desire for keeping the debate civilized and keeping offensive material out of the matter but don't mod debating tactics too. Consider this my plea to be lenient on modding the direction of where threads go. It's politics, discussions should be allowed to go wherever they are going.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
Restricting us from debating on the "general state vs no state" line is unreasonable I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would appear that in taking this approach you are running from a legitimate criticism of AC. There are some services that the government is quite good at providing. I am also certain the market can provide these services and deal with the free rider issues. When you retreat to the default position of the state being bad because it provides services by force you are repeating yourself rather than contributing to the discussion in a meaningful way.

[NeBlis]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't want to see content over-modded in politics.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is quite likely to be. I am going to hope for the best but I'm not too optimistic considering what I've heard so far. I hope that I am wrong in my pessimism.

*crosses fingers and thinks happy thoughts*

[Dan.]

[img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] *sigh* 3 more mods....nothing personal, I just didn't want to see any.

[Vagos]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Restricting us from debating on the "general state vs no state" line is unreasonable I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would appear that in taking this approach you are running from a legitimate criticism of AC. There are some services that the government is quite good at providing. I am also certain the market can provide these services and deal with the free rider issues. When you retreat to the default position of the state being bad because it provides services by force you are repeating yourself rather than contributing to the discussion in a meaningful way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not retreating from the criticism at all. But everytime someone asks something about AC the debate would just be...

"How will this work in AC-land?"
"Free market, next topic."

We can't say exactly HOW the free market will solve certain things and we never claim utopia where everything has a happy solution.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not retreating from the criticism at all. But everytime someone asks something about AC the debate would just be...

"How will this work in AC-land?"
"Free market, next topic."

We can't say exactly HOW the free market will solve certain things and we never claim utopia where everything has a happy solution.


[/ QUOTE ]

When they ask this sort of question one of two things is true. Either they are trolling for a state vs. AC debate or they want to know how the free market will deal with this. It is ok to not know the answer when someone asks a question. If you don't know the how they are asking about it might be time to examine your own position rather than counting on the market to work through it. I believe markets are very powerful, but I reached that conclusion through study not blind faith.

[Case Closed]

[censored],

Good luck.

[Felix_Nietzsche]

RR and Jman, could you briefly state your political beliefs.
This way I will know whether I can express my conservative poltical beliefs freely or not in the forum...If liberal, I can go into hibernation until the forum is safe for me to post again. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

PS
I should add that I like Ann Coulter and think she is funny and smart as hell.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
RR and Jman, could you briefly state your political beliefs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have many political beliefs, but I have an MA in economics and this guy was one of my favorite profs as an undergrad. http://preview.tinyurl.com/2vkjxg

[Vagos]

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't know the how they are asking about it might be time to examine your own position rather than counting on the market to work through it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because I don't know HOW the free market will deal with every single situation doesn't mean I don't know IF the free market can deal with every single situation. Also I don't have to re-examine my position, because my position is based on morality. That's the point. It's not blind faith, it's just the nature of a free market.

[ QUOTE ]
Either they are trolling for a state vs. AC debate

[/ QUOTE ]

This is my main point from the "Charity in AC" thread. He said [ QUOTE ]
These programs may be funded by the state, but will disappear in an AC world.

[/ QUOTE ] and then [ QUOTE ]
I'm just interested in knowing how these programs would exist in AC society

[/ QUOTE ]

Clearly this is a case of someone trying to push some buttons and thus an AC vs State debate should be fair game here.