3 ms·

"> Want to fish the waters around Tuvalu? Radio them and offer more money. Or I'll just go fishing because what ever Tuvalu can do to me? " If you can thug you

"> Want to fish the waters around Tuvalu? Radio them and offer more money. Or I'll just go fishing because what ever Tuvalu can do to me? " If you can thug your way into Tuvaluan waters, so can anyone. At that point you get into a conventional arms race with everyone else who wants to get into a race for empire in the Pacific. Much cheaper to agree to buy the fishing rights at auction.

salawat 2y ago
...You're assuming the seller doesn't simply take your money then sell them to the next person. Or that anyone else will care to recognize any claim of exclusivity as a result of your purchase. Or that they're for sale at all. In point of fact, any guarantees against any of the above are typically based on a threat of violence at some level.
TeMPOraL 2y ago
> If you can thug your way into Tuvaluan waters, so can anyone. At that point you get into a conventional arms race with everyone else who wants to get into a race for empire in the Pacific. Yes, that's history of mankind in a nutshell. That's what nukes put a stop to, at least between the nuclear powers themselves[0]. Ironically, auctions are a non-market solution to the same problem you mention: tragedy of the commons and arms race are fundamentally the same thing; they're solved by having an external entity that's more powerful than the players involved set the rules and enforce them. If you follow the recursion, the buck always stops at threats of violence. Also worth remembering that for any set of rules you want everyone to follow, the rules tend to benefit the winners, and the losers have a lot of incentive to tear the whole game down. Ultima ratio regum, and all. -- [0] - In my books, only nuclear powers are truly sovereign nations; everyone else is at their mercy. For politicians and diplomats, it's not something you bring up in a polite company, but the implied threat and order of things is always there in the background.

salawat 2y ago

...You're assuming the seller doesn't simply take your money then sell them to the next person. Or that anyone else will care to recognize any claim of exclusivity as a result of your purchase. Or that they're for sale at all. In point of fact, any guarantees against any of the above are typically based on a threat of violence at some level.

TeMPOraL 2y ago

> If you can thug your way into Tuvaluan waters, so can anyone. At that point you get into a conventional arms race with everyone else who wants to get into a race for empire in the Pacific. Yes, that's history of mankind in a nutshell. That's what nukes put a stop to, at least between the nuclear powers themselves[0]. Ironically, auctions are a non-market solution to the same problem you mention: tragedy of the commons and arms race are fundamentally the same thing; they're solved by having an external entity that's more powerful than the players involved set the rules and enforce them. If you follow the recursion, the buck always stops at threats of violence. Also worth remembering that for any set of rules you want everyone to follow, the rules tend to benefit the winners, and the losers have a lot of incentive to tear the whole game down. Ultima ratio regum, and all. -- [0] - In my books, only nuclear powers are truly sovereign nations; everyone else is at their mercy. For politicians and diplomats, it's not something you bring up in a polite company, but the implied threat and order of things is always there in the background.