Question for AC experts

[soon2bepro]

This is not meant as a critique, rather I want to learn about your ideas.

You do suggest a free market with no government in any way, shape or form, right? Well, I heard some of you agree to a government that is there only to prevent violence.

For those who don't, I ask, how do you suppose the free market will fight violence? Not just as good as our current system does it, but also how does it expect to get better in the future?

And to all of you, how do you suppose the free market will adress subjects that affect everyone on varying degrees, and that can be exploited by some even if most take a stance, such as pollution, garbage recollection, fireproof buildings, common street lights, etc?

[Nielsio]

In a free market system people can start selling their products and services to whomever thinks they are valuable. Is security your value? Then someone may just supply it. Is garbage disposal your value? Then someone may just supply it.

[BCPVP]

There's got to be at least a half dozen threads on the topic of free market defense here as well as who knows how many threads on the other things and there are many articles (some quite lengthy) at Mises.org on these subjects.

[soon2bepro]

[ QUOTE ]
In a free market system people can start selling their products and services to whomever thinks they are valuable. Is security your value? Then someone may just supply it. Is garbage disposal your value? Then someone may just supply it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but if most people purchase those services, any one individual can take a free ride on the others' need.

How do you theoretically solve this problem?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a free market system people can start selling their products and services to whomever thinks they are valuable. Is security your value? Then someone may just supply it. Is garbage disposal your value? Then someone may just supply it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but if most people purchase those services, any one individual can take a free ride on the others' need.

How do you theoretically solve this problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it need to be solved?

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a free market system people can start selling their products and services to whomever thinks they are valuable. Is security your value? Then someone may just supply it. Is garbage disposal your value? Then someone may just supply it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but if most people purchase those services, any one individual can take a free ride on the others' need.

How do you theoretically solve this problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

What about the millions of people who get housing and food and medical care, etc, etc that are paid for with money taken from others (taxes). They are free riders. How do you solve this problem?

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
I heard some of you agree to a government that is there only to prevent violence.

[/ QUOTE ]
ACists have said this? I've never noticed this.
[ QUOTE ]
For those who don't, I ask, how do you suppose the free market will fight violence?

[/ QUOTE ]
For starters, a state creates tons of violence. In the 20th century 10s of millions of people were killed either by their own state, or in state on state wars. It's not even a matter of which prevents more violence, the state has always been a leading factor in violence in it's history. The Iraq War simply wouldn't have been possible for a free market to do. From an investing standpoint the Iraq War has been a very -$EV decision. The people making money off the war (contractors and mercenary forces) differ from those that pay for it (taxpayers who really had no say in the matter at the time).

Simply put, on a free market the rewards of cooperation outweigh the "rewards" (quotations because it's rarely profitable) of conflict. Now, unfortunately some will make the -EV decision to turn to aggression rather then cooperation, and people should defend against that. We don't think planning ahead of time is particularly useful. No one could really predict ahead of time how the free market would solve various problems. When the internet was created, do you think anyone could accurately predict then how the internet would unfold? Of course I doubt you see anything wrong with the internet, but just wait, congress will begin soon enough to regulate the internet, making up reasons and fear mongering the whole way (just like the justifications for the internet gambling bill, the government wasn't getting their piece so they decided Americans need to spend their money in ways that they could). Government really is a mafia. They want a piece of everything. And of course one of a mafia's first objectives is forcing people to pay their protection money "for their own good".

In a free market people have various problems, and someone acts to meet those demands (usually for profit but often through charity too). I see no reason why hiring a police agency would cause any free riding problems at all. Delagating security to another company may not even be as effecient as simply using your own means of protection. Although it's 21 pages The not so wild, wild west may have some answers on how a decentralized area would work. There was very little government to be had at all and violence was much lower then it's eastern and southern couterparts at the time (not to mention a lot lower then violence seen today). In the years following state intervention, crime rates immediately began rising.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
There's got to be at least a half dozen threads on the topic of free market defense here as well as who knows how many threads on the other things and there are many articles (some quite lengthy) at Mises.org on these subjects.

[/ QUOTE ]
Who know there may just be a long Op on the front page about this very subject [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Right, but if most people purchase those services, any one individual can take a free ride on the others' need

[/ QUOTE ]
Besides Nat'l defense, what services do you see as possible free riders (I think the market can prevent Nat'l defense free riders too, but just to nail down what we're talking about here)?

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a free market system people can start selling their products and services to whomever thinks they are valuable. Is security your value? Then someone may just supply it. Is garbage disposal your value? Then someone may just supply it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, but if most people purchase those services, any one individual can take a free ride on the others' need.

How do you theoretically solve this problem?

[/ QUOTE ]


I think you are misunderstanding. The people who are involved in this equation of trade choose to do so. They want to do it.