Minyin Bison

[M.Bison]

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So an economic good would be recognized and promoted by corporations? So a quorum of super corps forms to agree on and fund a private police force, and you've just created de facto government in the form of fascist oligarchy, defeating your original point..

A government isnt a bad thing. A government that is localized and has consolidated all power on the other hand can be very dangerous. Under Friedman's model, no one PDA(private defense agency) would have any more power than the other. And if one agency did find themselves with more power, then people would stop patronizing it. Effectively putting them out of business. The free market would govern itself.

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by M.Bison [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

A government isnt a bad thing. A government that is localized and has consolidated all power on the other hand can be very dangerous. Under Friedman's model, no one PDA(private defense agency) would have any more power than the other. And if one agency did find themselves with more power, then people would stop patronizing it. Effectively putting them out of business. The free market would govern itself.

So if localized "PDAs" are constrained by some outside mechanism (people not patronizing them, w/e), what happens when my criminal organization outguns an individual force? Do they cooperate? Under what rules? Do innocent citizens get financially and perhaps literally burned as the trial and error sorts itself?

I can poke massive holes in your man's theory honestly, but I reject it outright. The only solution to organized crime is a scalable organized peacekeeping force. This is self-evident.

..but I thought you were against a state..?

[M.Bison]

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So if localized "PDAs" are constrained by some outside mechanism (people not patronizing them, w/e), what happens when my criminal organization outguns an individual force? Do they cooperate? Under what rules? Do innocent citizens get financially and perhaps literally burned as the trial and error sorts itself?

I can poke massive holes in your man's theory honestly, but I reject it outright. The only solution to organized crime is a scalable organized peacekeeping force. This is self-evident.

..but I thought you were against a state..?

If at any point in time a criminal agency 'outguns' a individual PDA, that would definitely become a threat to all other PDAs. At which time the 'outgunned' PDA would find itself backed by numerous other PDAs. If some criminal force is undermining PDAx, the public could view this as a direct threat to their protection.(IE. If that criminal organization can outgun and bully PDAx, what is stopping them from doing the same to PDAy and PDAz on down the line?) At which point PDAy, and PDAz, recognizing a threat to their customer base, come in and say ' well you outgun PDAx but do you outgun all 3 of us together?' The affect of all of this is ultimately a scalable organized peacekeeping force. On the surface this might look similar to what we have today, local police, state police, and federal law enforcement. The key difference being that today these state provided services have to provide for the entire public, and are all controlled by the same governing power. Under Friedman's model, individual PDAs would not have the burden of policing everyone, just the protection of its customers. Which is a much easier job in comparison, driving quality and response up, and through competition with numerous other PDA's, driving price down.


Anarcho-Capitalism(AC) is NOT anarchy. An anarchist detests the state, or any form of it. An AC recognizes the dangers of the consolidation of power(the state). While simultaneously recognizing the legitimacy of all the goods and services it provides. In a free market model, all the goods and services the state provides will instead by offered by private businesses. That way no one "state" controls all the healthcare/law enforcement/anything.

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by M.Bison [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If at any point in time a criminal agency 'outguns' a individual PDA, that would definitely become a threat to all other PDAs. At which time the 'outgunned' PDA would find itself backed by numerous other PDAs. If some criminal force is undermining PDAx, the public could view this as a direct threat to their protection.(IE. If that criminal organization can outgun and bully PDAx, what is stopping them from doing the same to PDAy and PDAz on down the line?) At which point PDAy, and PDAz, recognizing a threat to their customer base, come in and say ' well you outgun PDAx but do you outgun all 3 of us together?' The affect of all of this is ultimately a scalable organized peacekeeping force. On the surface this might look similar to what we have today, local police, state police, and federal law enforcement. The key difference being that today these state provided services have to provide for the entire public, and are all controlled by the same governing power. Under Friedman's model, individual PDAs would not have the burden of policing everyone, just the protection of its customers. Which is a much easier job in comparison, driving quality and response up, and through competition with numerous other PDA's, driving price down.

Ok, I figured you would say something like this, and can respect the idea, but we're not talking about a rash group of criminal gunslingers out of a 1960's western here. I mean organized crime. Playing the fringes. Taking what's yours in not only small snatch&dash jobs and protection threats, but in highly sophisticated technologically founded operations. Global crime man. We're in a different age now. A truly successful illegitimate organization needs to diversify their crime. You need the FBI against that shit man. The CIA and shit. Honestly I hate trusting them with that much power, but then I think of how bad the world would really be without Interpol. The russians are already paying the nigerians to phish your fucking account man, and dumpster diving hackers can get it if you're "too smart" to enter your information into that popup.. How bad would it be if there was no global effort to get rid of them? Doesn't that require a significant concentration of power in the form of resources, information, and secrecy? Coz lemme tell you dude.. I could, with a friend or four of like mind, set up a pretty decent operation to take what is yours if I didn't think the FBI would have my ass in a sling. ..and I'm really not very educated or even clever as far as being devious goes.

Seriously tho, without some form of "big police," crime would simply take over. ..and if you're going to have the CIA, don't you need checks and balances? Doesn't this lead us back to a large form of government?

Originally Posted by M.Bison [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Anarcho-Capitalism(AC) is NOT anarchy. An anarchist detests the state, or any form of it. An AC recognizes the dangers of the consolidation of power(the state). While simultaneously recognizing the legitimacy of all the goods and services it provides. In a free market model, all the goods and services the state provides will instead by offered by private businesses. That way no one "state" controls all the healthcare/law enforcement/anything.

#1 why do you bring up the state when you mention a consolidation of power? I know you like corporations, but let's be fucking honest here: the wealthy really have more power than any government in the world. The world is changed by corporations man, and wildly and without thought of the future at that. Just look at pharmacorps.. Even this huge government we have is BARELY enough to constrain them from killing thousands of people with untested drugs (even with what we have, drugs get released and kill people due to lack of government power to enforce longer term testing). If McDonalds wasn't constrained by government, don't you think they would advertise children in candy clouds eating 4 big macs at a sitting? Tobacco would be teaching kids how cool smoking looks and luring them with penis-faced ungulates. You name it, and I bet it would be elementary to show how corporations exert more influence than government.

#2 you skipped the question I asked about your neighbor. Let's say you are a customer of Hasbin Bad's Police Services. Local criminals have tried to rob you before, but 6 squad cars showed up bristling assault rifles and bullhorns before they knew what happened. Your neighbors however, residents of the area for 45 years, are known to be poor monetarily but also known to own many antiques. Are they not an obvious target? If they are not customers of a PDA due to monetary constraints, and they got robbed at gunpoint, they would have nobody to call? No recourse? That doesn't sound like any place I'd like to live.

[Lazortag]

Originally Posted by hasbinbad

Don't debate the proles Bison, them pickin's is easy. I'm here for you baby.

...

Also, you're talking post-America here dude, so don't bring "american exceptionalism" into this debate please. I know that other dude that posted set you up on your soapbox, but let's keep this debate grounded? Propaganda is for the Weak mind Bison, you're better than that.

u dumb.

[Hasbinbad]

Originally Posted by Lazortag [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

u dumb.

u mad.

[Lazortag]

Originally Posted by Hasbinbad [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

u mad.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]