ancap

24 ms·

181.
by ancap 11y ago
I'm not aware of any countries where there exists a "pure" free market. While there is plenty written on the theory of enforcing laws and property rights sans government, I think it a stretch even with a government run court
182.
by ancap 11y ago
Except it was American courts in the early 19th century which deviated from the Anglo-Saxon common law tradition of property rights which viewed air pollution was a tort. Soviet rivers were some of the most polluted in the world. A free-mar
183.
by ancap 11y ago
>How do you figure? I don't follow. You dismissed the idea that forceful redistribution of capital is a problem at all because force already exists throughout society. By extension you must be perfectly fine with the other forms of
184.
by ancap 11y ago
> If you mean coercion, then many things in society are achieved through coercion... So when you say that distribution of property is done coercively, then there's nothing really special about it. It sounds like you're perfectl
185.
by ancap 11y ago
> Doesn't the qoute state that income inequality is supposed to enact accumulation and growth("give something to aspire to") but instead leads to concentration of political power among the wealthy, who then use that power
186.
by ancap 11y ago
You seem to be saying a lot but not really addressing any of the questions I raised. The following being a prime example: > Also, note that I didn't say that private property is "nothing more" than a social construct. I sa
187.
by ancap 11y ago
If private property is nothing more than a "social construct" surely the concept of "society" is nothing more. What is society other than a collection of individuals? And if the individuals cannot own property then what
188.
by ancap 11y ago
> every time you give money to someone else to do your bidding, you are exercising power over them I disagree. As long as you're referring to a non-coerced transaction, each side agrees to the transaction because they receive more b
189.
by ancap 11y ago
If this is reasonable justification to forcibly distribute people's capital, than why not to force everyone into a wheelchair to give the disabled more happiness? Or force everyone to shave their head to make the bald more happy? Or fo
190.
by ancap 11y ago
Then, it would seem, the focus should not be on lessening inequality but rather destroying this "extreme political power". Ironically those who beat the drum of inequality most often call upon the use and expansion of those politi
191.
by ancap 11y ago
Calling those prisons "private" in the sense that "private" equates to "private sector" is a huge misnomer.
192.
by ancap 11y ago
You must understand that government is the opposite of a typical business. For example, NASA's space shuttle unexpectedly blows up, so congress immediately gives them a bunch more money under the rationale that they failed because they
193.
by ancap 11y ago
That is a good point that I didn't address. Deferring spending in perpetuity is worthless unless someone gains some personal satisfaction merely from saving.
194.
by ancap 11y ago
>True. And yet, it still means there is some pushing of demand into the future due to the deflating prices. Which means that your argument in the GGP post is false. I never said deflation cannot defer people's demand. The comment I
195.
by ancap 11y ago
Why the prices dropped is irrelevant. Clearly spending on tech products has not ceased.
196.
by ancap 11y ago
Despite that, companies like Apple have hundreds of billions in revenues. Which is to say, the falling prices aren't a real problem. After all, the same person could say they could get the same thing for even cheaper in 2 years, 3 year
197.
by ancap 11y ago
>But the moment inflation dips below zero it really starts discouraging spending. While this view is common, it is incorrect. This is obviously evident when you consider the price of computers and other tech products over the decades.
198.
by ancap 11y ago
Nixon ended the Bretton Woods gold standard.
199.
by ancap 11y ago
If you want to learn why math does not belong in economics at all you should read Human Action by Mises.
200.
by ancap 11y ago
Your comment demonstrates beautifully how economics is not an empirical science. Much of what is taught in economics is founded on a flawed premise.
201.
by ancap 11y ago
In theory the government would have to reallocate money from something else in order to pay a higher interest rate. Thus they are not really spending any less. In practice the Federal Reserve takes up some of the burden by buying up Treasur
202.
by ancap 11y ago
You forgot about the most powerful economic actor, the consumer.
203.
by ancap 11y ago
Your comment shows an ignorance of how prices work. Companies cannot arbitrarily set whatever price they want.
204.
by ancap 11y ago
>Your original question must have been one of morality, not law. You are correct in your assumption. Perhaps I should be more explicit in that premise, as this seems to get lost on a lot of people. My fault. >My response is that I, pe
205.
by ancap 11y ago
>Welcome to toll roads Perhaps you have a very different idea of what mugging involves. Generally mugging means you are physically assaulted and then your property is forcibly taken from you. >Take route A and get your employer to rei
206.
by ancap 11y ago
>Property is a social construct. If humans decide these are the rules of property, then they are the rules of property. If your username is indicates your position, your beliefs are outside of the mainstream and your definition of proper
207.
by ancap 11y ago
>the entire point of living in a (democratic?) society is that it's a consensual affair Allow me to test this theory (that merely living in a society gives consent to what would otherwise be theft) with an analogy: You have two rout
208.
by ancap 11y ago
Please explain how forcibly taking someone's money is not theft.
209.
by ancap 11y ago
Is it okay to steal from person A to give to person B if person A has > person B?
210.
by ancap 11y ago
There's nothing wrong with greed. Greed is why you choose job A over job B, partner Y over partner Z, and many other choices in your life. Compulsion is the problem. That's why being a mugger is frowned upon and being a mechanic,

More ›