4 ms·

<eyeroll> Standard libertarian/ancap nonsense that confuses interference with regulation, and actively maintains a blindspot to the role of government in fundam

<eyeroll> Standard libertarian/ancap nonsense that confuses interference with regulation, and actively maintains a blindspot to the role of government in fundamentally supporting every single business within the economy by providing a monetary system, markets, legal systems, law enforcement systems, transportation systems, as well as a myriad of subsidies and direct loans. Please don't go on about 'privately produced law' or how private roads will replace public roads. I used to be an ancap and looked into PPL quite deeply back in the 90s - the field has made little progress since then that I can see, and appears to serve mainly to assuage the conscious of ethical libertarians, providing flimsy-yet-vaguely-plausible reason that something will fill the void when their desired collapse of government occurs. >"Government is largely immune from the consequences of their mistakes, even disastrous ones - if a private business does a mistake that harms people, they can be fined, or even put out of business, but if a government agency does it, it usually ends up with somebody getting early retirement with full benefits, and that's it." Are you freaking kidding me? Private business doesn't make myriad of mistakes and keep on going, even being rewarded? Did you miss the 2008 financial scandal? BP managed to poison an entire vast ecosystem and shoreline populated by millions, they're still going strong. Have you ever heard of the term 'golden parachute'?

quadrangle 9y ago
As someone who has always seen ancap stuff as a mix of bullshit and good intentions (and it's easy to correctly identify a flaw in the status quo while having only non- or counter-productive ideas about what to do instead), I'd like to know more from a former ancap… Do you have any ELI5 about stuff like (A) whether there's anything interesting in ancap stuff or if it's just repeating the same simplistic dogma all the way down and (B) how to get ancap folks to recognize the validity of agnosticism (i.e. somehow get them to take the first step from blindly dogmatic to being able to express their ideology as interesting ideas they like but acknowledge that they can't actually know omnisciently that it aligns with reality…)
smsm42 9y ago
> <eyeroll> Standard libertarian/ancap nonsense that confuses interference with regulation <eyeroll> standard statist nonsense which thinks by changing labels the essence of things changes. See how easy it is to argue a position when you think argument means finding a name to call your opponent? > Please don't go on about 'privately produced law' or how private roads will replace public roads Please don't attach your comment on discussion with voices in your head to mine. I never said anything about private law or roads. > Private business doesn't make myriad of mistakes and keep on going, even being rewarded Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. Government always do, that's the point. Excepting violent revolution, of course, but you don't want to go there, do you? That's the difference - business very well may escape the consequences of mistakes, just as murderer can escape justice. That happens and nobody would pretend otherwise. But for the government consequences are not even on the menu - like for an executor in state prison, there's not even a question whether he can be accused of murder - of course not. That's the whole difference. > Have you ever heard of the term 'golden parachute'? Yes, I did. And a private company can afford only finite number of those. Unless, of course, it is too big to fail - in which case, government comes in, which can force me, the taxpayer, provide the gold for those. I don't like private sharehodlers being fleeced, but what is even worse is when I'm being fleeced even without being a shareholder. And that's what the government does.

quadrangle 9y ago

As someone who has always seen ancap stuff as a mix of bullshit and good intentions (and it's easy to correctly identify a flaw in the status quo while having only non- or counter-productive ideas about what to do instead), I'd like to know more from a former ancap… Do you have any ELI5 about stuff like (A) whether there's anything interesting in ancap stuff or if it's just repeating the same simplistic dogma all the way down and (B) how to get ancap folks to recognize the validity of agnosticism (i.e. somehow get them to take the first step from blindly dogmatic to being able to express their ideology as interesting ideas they like but acknowledge that they can't actually know omnisciently that it aligns with reality…)

smsm42 9y ago

> <eyeroll> Standard libertarian/ancap nonsense that confuses interference with regulation <eyeroll> standard statist nonsense which thinks by changing labels the essence of things changes. See how easy it is to argue a position when you think argument means finding a name to call your opponent? > Please don't go on about 'privately produced law' or how private roads will replace public roads Please don't attach your comment on discussion with voices in your head to mine. I never said anything about private law or roads. > Private business doesn't make myriad of mistakes and keep on going, even being rewarded Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. Government always do, that's the point. Excepting violent revolution, of course, but you don't want to go there, do you? That's the difference - business very well may escape the consequences of mistakes, just as murderer can escape justice. That happens and nobody would pretend otherwise. But for the government consequences are not even on the menu - like for an executor in state prison, there's not even a question whether he can be accused of murder - of course not. That's the whole difference. > Have you ever heard of the term 'golden parachute'? Yes, I did. And a private company can afford only finite number of those. Unless, of course, it is too big to fail - in which case, government comes in, which can force me, the taxpayer, provide the gold for those. I don't like private sharehodlers being fleeced, but what is even worse is when I'm being fleeced even without being a shareholder. And that's what the government does.