?

the only way i could see it making sense is if anarchism was just being used as a synonym for a high level of decentralization

I'd even say, "Ought Communism able to function? Yes. Will it? See history."

capital is easier to steal than slave labor

also easy to trade

thus the point

(History replies: Not just no, but hell no.)

@Death in June the people would have to be more responsoiible as they were more like in the 1800s in america, there would have to be decentralised means of record keeping and contracts and perhaps most importantly of all many services provided by government today would have to have private companies pick up the slack, example, private company for road mantence, private securty companies, private fire departments

Whereas AnCap the historical answer is... .... ... maybe?

read my profile

Rational Man Animal

in the REVERSE order

thus commie = animal

@Laucivol that's cool, atleast you're open minded to it

rational is at the top of the pyramid

So again I just have to take your word and hope companies are benevolent enough not to form monopolies.

hard to stay there when survival is at stake

And my experience of corporations is not so much.

I cannot trust a company to have my best interest at hand.

well, the problem is that a corporation MUST by law place the profit of share holders ABOVE all other concerns

Nor can I trust a sovereignty to have my best interest at hand.

thus if the company can break the law but profit more than the fine....

they are required to break the law

you see the paradox

Also yes I want to have options to skim through as my house is burning to the ground.

(Even GodManAnimalEmperor wants AnCap to make sense, by the by... but we still don't see the result as net positive versus what's before us.)

that is the one flaw with the market

cancer is a GREAT market creature

but what WILL be or what is sustainable tommorrow has no value to the market

it will consume it self if it profitable and will never realize the inevitable cliff until the fall begins

@SageTheory they will have a much harder time when there is so much competition, the free market is not kind to monopolies

that is an oxymoron

if you have COMPETITION

you have no MONOPOLY

Except we've seen that going completely hands free *is* kind to monopolies.

Rockefeller bought out all his competition. Nothing stops that in Ancap world.

The industrial revolution EG Rockefeller, Carnegie and so on shows us that.

well, not really because.... now that interest rates are artifical and money is fiat

not real capitalism

(i know, i know)

The only reason people don't do that now is anti monopoly laws otherwise they'd be more common.

(Still not arguing against it.. . once we moved to fiat currency... capitalism breaks.)

but in truth, we have changed the very basis of the mechanism that makes capitalism function

Derivatives destroy markets. Period

Besides the few that the govt doesn't crack down on

Only GOD should be able to create something from nothing

not banks

And this is true in An__CAP__, too.

@SageTheory a bigger richer company could do that but then more competition would arise

lol

and once derivatives were allowed, it became possible to PROFIT from the COLLAPSE/FAILURE of a company

And be absorbed by said monopoly.

that is the opposite of capitalism

it's exploitation, plain and simple

Which, again, we've seen repeatedly and is why anti-trust laws are needed.

They exist they need to be enforced

but anti-trusst laws won't help competitiion

they will only penalize monopolies

@SageTheory and despite the anti monopoly laws monopolies still formed and continue to form today

not always the same

They try to make the playing field more even, though.

yeah so did affirmative action

lol

we see how that works

Once again a select few and I'm not saying it's not a problem

Affirmative Action is equal outcome.

@Laucivol exactly, it's not real capitalism once fiat is introduced

well the problem is now, with the FED, it is more profitable to simply move money around than to actually PRODUCE, or SAVE/INVEST

First step is some how ween off of fiat.

How? Fuck. Wish I knew.

that only concentrates the wealth with those that HAVE money to move

not after 2008

quantative easing is through the roof

hence the trade war

I think that's where we agree as a whole.. fiat currency is diabolical .

but there IS a legitamate argument for it; liquidity

Can't work towards either ideal in this weather.

there has to be enough of it for everyone to be able to participate in the system

I'm saying ancaps would make it worse but all you want to tell me is that people are benevolent and would never do that because.... I dunno.... Competition for monopolies to destroy?

and the more the population grows, the more deflation a non-fiat would see

ancaps wouldn't be able to seperate security from trade

To be clear I leverage towards mixed. Monopolies are bad. AnCap has no system to prevent that.

and thus those with the guns would just TAKE rather than trade

Of course I'm also a fan of more decentralized control.

current govs seperate those who apply force from the incentive to imply force

Stronger local govt's is good because reactions are a local matter.

And federal should be external focused.

cops don't get paid based on how many people they arrest or how badass the criminals they take down ar

So things like the trade war, border security and so on is the intended focus for the feds.

And to hold the states to the Constitution.

Oh, and making sure interstate interactions are conducted fairly.

govt is ALWAYS best when the decsion powwe is focused on the level of the avg person

constitution? we haven't followed it in decades

Unfortunately... I think it's been quite a few decades.

If not more than a century.

"Power shalll rest with the States and only that authority which IT chooses shall be delegated to the Federal gov"

Ayup.

more than a century at least

The only problem was that chattel slavery would be permissible.