4 ms·

Unless I have a gun too, which I would in hypothetical anarchyland, in which case we've got a gunfight. Hypothetical anarchyland isn't a very nice place to liv

by hugh3 16y ago

Unless I have a gun too, which I would in hypothetical anarchyland, in which case we've got a gunfight. Hypothetical anarchyland isn't a very nice place to live, though. Most libertarians are not anarcho-capitalists (let us ignore the subset who are because they're crazy), and are quite happy to pay the portion of taxes which go towards sensible things like the police force and the enforcement of contracts. The problem is that governments get to set whatever tax rates they like, inevitably wind up with a desire to go beyond this and to begin using tax dollars to feather the nests of whoever gets to make the government's decisions, whether it's a solid gold tomb for the King or free welfare checks for the bottom 51% of the population. And, y'know, we can deal with some of that happening, because it's inevitable, but we do need people to be standing up all the time and saying "Hey look Mr President, how about we get to keep a bit more of our money and you get to fly around in a private 777 instead of a private 747?" I'm not sure how you make the leap from "the government is necessary to protect your private property" to "it's not really your property, it's the government's". The bank is also necessary for me to get paid, and so is the electric company and the telephone company and the nice lady down in HR, but it's still my money. I don't mind paying for the services they provide either, but I'll still complain if they take more than they're entitled to.

Symmetry 16y ago
I don't really think that anarcho-capitalists are _that_ crazy. I'd be quite happy if some of them were to try getting together and building their utopia somewhere, because I'm honestly curious as to how it would end up playing out. I mean, I strongly suspect it would be worse than the government we have now - but would it be that much worse? People even managed to make communism work for a little while and this seems a bit less crazy a priori.
- kiba 16y ago
  I already have some experience in an quasi anarcho-capitalist economy. Here are what I learned: 1. Cheaters are most problematics to deal with, especially with drive-by fraudsters. They make everything worse for everybody else, not just the direct recipient of the fraud. 80% of drive-by cheaters can be prevented with simple measures. However, the rest are long term scammers who build up reputation and than cheat over us. This is extremely difficult to prevent. Thus everyone factor in the risk of being cheated out of their money. 2. Reputation is VERY IMPORTANT in an economy with no court and police. 3. Paypal dollars and anything that is chargebackable is BAD MONEY. It is the DOMAIN of scammers and fraudsters. They also cause bank runs as people transfer their worthless money into something more valuable. Is the economy a utopia? No. There are some scumbags who cheat and sometime got away with it. In one situation, their fraudulently brought merchandise got confiscated by an exchange mediator but not before it cause damage to the system. However, others were not so lucky. A guy got 2000 dollars in chargeback and had to shut down. What people will do, is learn how to handle cheaters, and find better methods to avoid cheaters. Since it is the internet, you can't just do "violence" or coerce individuals. It's impossible. Contracts are entirely based on reputation and trust. Nobody want to go to a state court and waste lot of money on lawyer.
  - dualogy 16y ago
    Which country is that supposed to be? "However, the rest are long term scammers who build up reputation and than cheat over us." Well you have that in the rest of the world too -- only they go by nobler-sounding titles of government agents, bureaucrats, commissioners... "Reputation is VERY IMPORTANT in an economy with no court and police." What's the problem here -- reputation can be earned, through quality, and should. The stronger it is, the less it can be shattered by drive-by morons who haven't built it for themselves yet (and if they had, they wouldn't need to). "They also cause bank runs as people transfer their worthless money into something more valuable." The corrective invisible hand at work, it sounds to me. Again, what's the issue? "Contracts are entirely based on reputation and trust. Nobody want to go to a state court and waste lot of money on lawyer." I think the western world will be moving to that direction as public services keep increasing prices and decreasing quality, as every coercive monopoly must, especially a high-deficit one. Contracts in the end are always primarily based on reputation and trust, aren't they? And shouldn't they?
    - kiba 16y ago
      Which country is that supposed to be? There is no country in the world that is at the very least quasi-anarcho-capitalist. This economy deal entirely on the internet and with bitcoins as its currency. I think the western world will be moving to that direction as public services keep increasing prices and decreasing quality, as every coercive monopoly must, especially a high-deficit one. Contracts in the end are always primarily based on reputation and trust, aren't they? And shouldn't they? Keep in mind, these are lessons, not a critique. I am not criticizing the reputation based nature of a cryptoeconomy. Rather it is lessons in how the cryptoeconomy really works.
      - dualogy 16y ago
        This is pretty interesting. Do they ever convert BitCoins back to fiat money or precious metals at some point? Well I guess I can research this myself, I did come across BitCoins before. Fancy idea of backing currency by CPU power rather than a tangible, durable, universally accepted store-of-value but it's a step forward from fiat currency that is backed by the decree of Heli Ben and the gunned power of a state to tax future production... I did not mean to imply you were criticizing. Your lessons are valid examples of a quasi-anarchic situation. People policing themselves, organizing networks of trust and reputation and self-protection. Sounds like there is a market in there for mutually-trusted middlemen acting as, well, "trustees" or escrow services? Or is that built into BitCoin already. Of course if the scam only materializes after the transaction was already completed to mutual consent, that's a different matter. But what kinds of fraud are happening there?
- cousin_it 16y ago
  Apriori (that is, without knowledge of the results) communism was way less crazy-sounding that some here tend to think, because look how many smart people it attracted! Look at 60's US or at Russia circa 1900, where communism was the belief system for smart young people to "graduate" to. It had the same hipster vibe as the belief in a benevolent singularity today, only more so.
  - hugh3 16y ago
    I wouldn't say that this means that it's a priori crazy, merely that humans have an outstanding ability to believe crazy things. The flaws should have been apparent to anyone who understood human nature and was willing to sit down and ask the obvious questions like "What happens when X" and "But won't people Y?" They were less apparent to people who didn't want to sit down and ask these sorts of questions. This is pretty much exactly the same level of crazy you get from anarcho-capitalists.
    - larrywright 16y ago
      The flaws should have been apparent to anyone who understood human nature and was willing to sit down and ask the obvious questions like "What happens when X" and "But won't people Y?" They were less apparent to people who didn't want to sit down and ask these sorts of questions. This brings to mind my favorite communism story. 15 or so years ago my local newspaper ran a story about a young lady who was moving away to go work for the American Communist Party, because she had taken a trip to Cuba and seen Communism in action; it was clear to her that this was the ideal form of government for the people. That same day, the news was full of stories of people risking their lives to leave Cuba in homemade boats. It always amazed me how this girl could completely miss this.
kiba 16y ago
Yes, but being an anarcho-capitalists is a very interesting rabbit hole. For once, a subset of ancap are able to engage in dealing with a Neal Stephenson plot device. I often feel like I am in a cyberpunk novel. ;)
khafra 16y ago
> The bank is also necessary for me to get paid, and so is the electric company and the telephone company and the nice lady down in HR, but it's still my money. I don't mind paying for the services they provide either, but I'll still complain if they take more than they're entitled to. When everyone gets to decide how much they want to pay for private goods, ceteris paribus we get better, cheaper private goods. When everyone gets to decide how much they want to pay for public goods, ceteris paribus we get worse and fewer public goods.

by hugh3 16y ago

Symmetry 16y ago

I don't really think that anarcho-capitalists are _that_ crazy. I'd be quite happy if some of them were to try getting together and building their utopia somewhere, because I'm honestly curious as to how it would end up playing out. I mean, I strongly suspect it would be worse than the government we have now - but would it be that much worse? People even managed to make communism work for a little while and this seems a bit less crazy a priori.

kiba 16y ago
I already have some experience in an quasi anarcho-capitalist economy. Here are what I learned: 1. Cheaters are most problematics to deal with, especially with drive-by fraudsters. They make everything worse for everybody else, not just the direct recipient of the fraud. 80% of drive-by cheaters can be prevented with simple measures. However, the rest are long term scammers who build up reputation and than cheat over us. This is extremely difficult to prevent. Thus everyone factor in the risk of being cheated out of their money. 2. Reputation is VERY IMPORTANT in an economy with no court and police. 3. Paypal dollars and anything that is chargebackable is BAD MONEY. It is the DOMAIN of scammers and fraudsters. They also cause bank runs as people transfer their worthless money into something more valuable. Is the economy a utopia? No. There are some scumbags who cheat and sometime got away with it. In one situation, their fraudulently brought merchandise got confiscated by an exchange mediator but not before it cause damage to the system. However, others were not so lucky. A guy got 2000 dollars in chargeback and had to shut down. What people will do, is learn how to handle cheaters, and find better methods to avoid cheaters. Since it is the internet, you can't just do "violence" or coerce individuals. It's impossible. Contracts are entirely based on reputation and trust. Nobody want to go to a state court and waste lot of money on lawyer.
- dualogy 16y ago
  Which country is that supposed to be? "However, the rest are long term scammers who build up reputation and than cheat over us." Well you have that in the rest of the world too -- only they go by nobler-sounding titles of government agents, bureaucrats, commissioners... "Reputation is VERY IMPORTANT in an economy with no court and police." What's the problem here -- reputation can be earned, through quality, and should. The stronger it is, the less it can be shattered by drive-by morons who haven't built it for themselves yet (and if they had, they wouldn't need to). "They also cause bank runs as people transfer their worthless money into something more valuable." The corrective invisible hand at work, it sounds to me. Again, what's the issue? "Contracts are entirely based on reputation and trust. Nobody want to go to a state court and waste lot of money on lawyer." I think the western world will be moving to that direction as public services keep increasing prices and decreasing quality, as every coercive monopoly must, especially a high-deficit one. Contracts in the end are always primarily based on reputation and trust, aren't they? And shouldn't they?
  - kiba 16y ago
    Which country is that supposed to be? There is no country in the world that is at the very least quasi-anarcho-capitalist. This economy deal entirely on the internet and with bitcoins as its currency. I think the western world will be moving to that direction as public services keep increasing prices and decreasing quality, as every coercive monopoly must, especially a high-deficit one. Contracts in the end are always primarily based on reputation and trust, aren't they? And shouldn't they? Keep in mind, these are lessons, not a critique. I am not criticizing the reputation based nature of a cryptoeconomy. Rather it is lessons in how the cryptoeconomy really works.
    - dualogy 16y ago
      This is pretty interesting. Do they ever convert BitCoins back to fiat money or precious metals at some point? Well I guess I can research this myself, I did come across BitCoins before. Fancy idea of backing currency by CPU power rather than a tangible, durable, universally accepted store-of-value but it's a step forward from fiat currency that is backed by the decree of Heli Ben and the gunned power of a state to tax future production... I did not mean to imply you were criticizing. Your lessons are valid examples of a quasi-anarchic situation. People policing themselves, organizing networks of trust and reputation and self-protection. Sounds like there is a market in there for mutually-trusted middlemen acting as, well, "trustees" or escrow services? Or is that built into BitCoin already. Of course if the scam only materializes after the transaction was already completed to mutual consent, that's a different matter. But what kinds of fraud are happening there?
cousin_it 16y ago
Apriori (that is, without knowledge of the results) communism was way less crazy-sounding that some here tend to think, because look how many smart people it attracted! Look at 60's US or at Russia circa 1900, where communism was the belief system for smart young people to "graduate" to. It had the same hipster vibe as the belief in a benevolent singularity today, only more so.
- hugh3 16y ago
  I wouldn't say that this means that it's a priori crazy, merely that humans have an outstanding ability to believe crazy things. The flaws should have been apparent to anyone who understood human nature and was willing to sit down and ask the obvious questions like "What happens when X" and "But won't people Y?" They were less apparent to people who didn't want to sit down and ask these sorts of questions. This is pretty much exactly the same level of crazy you get from anarcho-capitalists.
  - larrywright 16y ago
    The flaws should have been apparent to anyone who understood human nature and was willing to sit down and ask the obvious questions like "What happens when X" and "But won't people Y?" They were less apparent to people who didn't want to sit down and ask these sorts of questions. This brings to mind my favorite communism story. 15 or so years ago my local newspaper ran a story about a young lady who was moving away to go work for the American Communist Party, because she had taken a trip to Cuba and seen Communism in action; it was clear to her that this was the ideal form of government for the people. That same day, the news was full of stories of people risking their lives to leave Cuba in homemade boats. It always amazed me how this girl could completely miss this.

kiba 16y ago

Yes, but being an anarcho-capitalists is a very interesting rabbit hole. For once, a subset of ancap are able to engage in dealing with a Neal Stephenson plot device. I often feel like I am in a cyberpunk novel. ;)

khafra 16y ago

> The bank is also necessary for me to get paid, and so is the electric company and the telephone company and the nice lady down in HR, but it's still my money. I don't mind paying for the services they provide either, but I'll still complain if they take more than they're entitled to. When everyone gets to decide how much they want to pay for private goods, ceteris paribus we get better, cheaper private goods. When everyone gets to decide how much they want to pay for public goods, ceteris paribus we get worse and fewer public goods.