Message from @GalaxyBrainer
Discord ID: 675124478526619702
It's not freedom to have people violate your private property
of course you have the freedom to walk into someone else's store if it is public
I disagree
it's not freedom to be blocked out of somewhere for no reason
which is it lizard
Yes, But you don't have the right to enter that place if it is owned by someone else
It's not freedom to be able to walk into anyone's property
That is anarchy
i agree
but if you run a public business then surely your customers should be free to enter
They are
But you have the right to evict any of them from that business for any reason
so, scenario
As the owner of the business that is your right
it's your first time going to this store, that's just opened, you've heard of. you've had no previous interactions with anyone involved. the moment you set foot in, the shop forces you back out.
assume this logic can apply to monopolistic agencies (for example if youtube or twitter were somehow representable and implementable in this manner) or essentials (life-threatening: inhalers, essential medicine to prevent a death, etc.).
this is justified behaviour by your logic?
Only if they are private businesses
then i rest my case
We can easily have a few nationalised businesses for basic services that can be paid for using taxes
assume that in said example that it could be the only one of it's kind, the only supplier of that thing or it's urgent and this was the most local one
Then i would still have to maintain my belief that it is ultimately up to the business owner to decide if they were going to supply said product
the scenario i described depicts being instantly removed on entry
is this justified in these circumstances, yes or no
Yes
congratulations on being the first community-appointed anarcho-capitalist. i am going to bed.
The business owner should still maintain their right to evict someone for any reason
The problem is that you are creating a scenario so specific that it is pretty much in the realms of fantasy
The chances of their being a very rare product that is needed for life that only one local store has and you are evicted from that store for no reason are next to none
You could use an equally specific scenario to find flaws in any system
Muh freedom to bum kids
Okay nonce
Stop being gay
I have never advocated that
Thought you were for freedom
Or are you a authoritarian
You don't have the freedom to act against someone else's wishes
Especially if said person is too young to consent
Should people pay tax
And what should the state do to people that don't pay tax
I.e they don't "consent" to the 'societal contract'
People should pay tax on what they earn and if they refuse to then the State should take it forcibly