ancap

67 ms·

241.
by ancap 12y ago
>I have a feeling that anything other than "free market capitalism" is going to be shunned around these parts. As it should. If it weren't for capitalism we would not enjoy any of the abundance we have become accustomed to
242.
by ancap 12y ago
>From a moral standpoint... From a moral standpoint it is immoral to force person A to pay for person B's misfortune. You and I call that stealing. >they have regulators who are educated and understand the market It is impossible
243.
by ancap 12y ago
Big surprise. The government rules in favor of the government. Separation of powers is a myth.
244.
by ancap 12y ago
>And I find that regardless of how bad things were beforehand, or how light the resulting regulation, the response from AnCaps is always "You touched it, you bought it!" I'm not even sure what that means. >Nonetheless,
245.
by ancap 12y ago
>I doubt I will convince you, and I doubt anyone else here needs to be convinced that natural monopolies exist. You won't even try to provide an example? Perhaps it is not I who is "philosophically opposed to the concept".
246.
by ancap 12y ago
"unregulated" does not mean monopoly. In fact, in all cases, monopolies are only possible through government force (ie. regulation).
247.
by ancap 12y ago
>Do you think there is any such thing as a natural monopoly? I am not aware of any. >Do you think the cost inherent in laying cables makes the entity that owns the cables a natural monopoly? No, otherwise the "natural monopoly&qu
248.
by ancap 12y ago
>As a libertarian who knows tech, I'm on the government's side here That's an oxymoron. The core reason internet service sucks for the vast majority of Americans is because state and local governments grant monopoly status
249.
by ancap 12y ago
>Eliminating the government of Israel would require destroying the country of Israel, which would very obviously require killing vast numbers of Israeli citizens. >Feel free to now explain how Iran would wipe out Israel's governm
250.
by ancap 12y ago
Moved. (Previously HN was not letting me reply to your deeper comment)
251.
by ancap 12y ago
>Eliminating the "Zionist regime" would require destroying Israel No it doesn't. A "regime" is a synonym for a government. Ironically your previous link to Khomeini's plan for getting rid of the "Zionis
252.
by ancap 12y ago
None of your sources demonstrate a "goal to essentially kill everyone in Israel". In particular the "wiped off the map" Ahmadinejad quote has long been proven a mistranslation and yet is still pushed by the warmongers ye
253.
by ancap 12y ago
>Isn't Iran still backing numerous terrorist organizations, including Hezbolla source? >while proclaiming it their goal to essentially kill everyone in Israel? source?
254.
by ancap 12y ago
>This is ultimately terrible for everyone except maybe a few anarchists that think they deserve every websites information for free while sabotaging the publishers who work to develop the sites. I do not think that word means what you
255.
by ancap 12y ago
What is all this talk about exploiting? Were the workers forced to work? If so, why pay them at all?
256.
by ancap 12y ago
That's beside the point. You stated without government the "framework of trade [will] break down". On the contrary, even after scandals and shutdown markets, new markets pop up and, incredibly, people continue to use them. As
257.
by ancap 12y ago
Underground black markets such as the Silk Road prove otherwise.
258.
by ancap 12y ago
> the people come together to create that third party that has the guns Can you cite me one example of this happening?
259.
by ancap 12y ago
> the economy should strive to give people credit for what they choose to do The economy is an inanimate abstract. It does not strive for anything. It is not interested in anyone's perception of what is fair any more than my phone i
260.
by ancap 12y ago
You misunderstand. The cartel held a monopoly. The cartel comprised of multiple companies with multiple patents. However you want to phrase the end result, the cartel could only keep out competition under the legal threat the patents provid
261.
by ancap 12y ago
Who said anything about a single patent?
262.
by ancap 12y ago
There are two flaws in your argument: 1) As someone previously pointed out the cartel was only possible because of a government created monopoly through the patent system. 2) You imply that while producers do not have the interests of consu
263.
by ancap 12y ago
Where can I find this "unrestrained capitalist system" you speak of? I'd love to live there.
264.
by ancap 12y ago
If only the oceans were privatized, then Greanpeace could buy up as big of a chunk as they could afford.
265.
by ancap 12y ago
What evidence is there that during the vote there was "strict military occupation"?
266.
by ancap 12y ago
You could replace "Russia" for "U.S.", "Crimea" for a long list of countries, and your statement would still hold true. BTW as for the shooting down of the airliner I have not heard of any official source comin
267.
by ancap 12y ago
How does one calculate whether a government project is "underfunded?" It seems easy to fall into the trap that a government project is underfunded if it did not meet the expected results. Clearly the solution must be to add more m
268.
by ancap 12y ago
>This is due to Republicans in Congress blocking an increase on the gas tax, currently at ~18 cents/gallon of gas since 1993. Your demagoguery does not hold up to the fact that Democrats recently held a majority in both houses of co
269.
by ancap 12y ago
In what way are the enumerated programs well run? Well run compared to what?
270.
by ancap 12y ago
The definition of government is a monopoly on violence/force. Furthermore, no monopoly can be sustained without the force of government. Absent the government I'm not even certain there would be weapons of mass destruction. It is

More ›