> With what? You're an economist, not an MMA fighter. A) you don't know that, B) everyone else would be an MMA fighter? > Right, so the nerds get together and

> With what? You're an economist, not an MMA fighter. A) you don't know that, B) everyone else would be an MMA fighter? > Right, so the nerds get together and beat down the MMA fighters and create laws against "murder" and "theft"... Premise construction > ...and pretty soon you've got government. Magic > We're living in your nice little equilibrium. Conclusion I can't even accuse you basing your argument on a logical fallacy, because there isn't an argument present.