- Capitalism and Alternatives -

welcome back

Posted by: Gee ( si ) on June 01, 1999 at 17:15:02:

In Reply to: Whose facade is it anyway? posted by Samuel Day Fassbinder on June 01, 1999 at 16:22:35:

:SDF: Gee responded, even though I didn't say anything! That's of course expected -- it's easier to bicker than it is to discuss substantively.

As you have shown thus far in this thread.

: As you said here. Uh, if government can't be trusted to provide any other benefits equally, why this one?

It cant, but its the easiest to make transparent and to draw firm borders upon a justice system based upon so called 'negative rights' than it is if the state is entrusted with allsorts of other unconnected roles. Look at how long the politicians of America has had to chip away at that annoying bill of rights, however imperfectly drawn up and however misrepresented in state schools and the media - it still keeps getting in the way of 'progress' toward the kind of state we are gradually headed toward.

: How about this notion that tenants would gleefully hand over large portions of their wages to landlords (as they do now) if there were no government to back up eviction laws? For or against?

It is far more tenable idea than some mass rebellion, especially considering how much more disposable wage and how much less rent would be involved.

: Do chronic malnutrition, racism, and slums magically disappear once we declare the world to be anarcho-capitalist?

No, unlike socialism it does not insult by pretending that 'equality' in outcomes is a goal. Will slums become the past or the norm under a system where there is no incentive to create property except at the behest of others, and where - given the track record of attempts to collectivize (both in the US and elsewhere), corruption and despotism is a most distinct probability?

: The individuals affected by such things don't have the individual power tochange these situations all by their lonesomes -

Whether they do or not, they will not gain the right to another persons 'power to change'.

: The economy shouldnt be 'fixed' by elites or quasi 'egalitarian' interest groups.

as you do here, then it's not going to happen? Well? Is it or isn't it?

Than whats not going to happen? You think that if the state was minimised or done away with then things would remain largely as they are? You actually predict no change in the distribution (and creation rate) of wealth? the 'best' thing that could happen to slum dwellers in the extreme short term is for you and a horde of armed 'egalitarians' to simply rob everyone who is creating wealth and hand it over. The best thing in any term longer is for them to create their own wealth, without the pretense of an 'equal start' and with any freely given that a largely generous and benevolent human race may freely decide to offer.

: Is everyone going to suddenly give up on the notion that economic prosperity is predicated upon the stabilizing influence of government control of the money supply? Should we go back to the 19th century boom-bust cycles on a whim?

Rest assured, it wont actually happen (and dont over play the 19th century cycles as being entirely free of govt influence, or as being anything remotely like the reserve assisted bust of 1929) - if its any more likely than stateless socialism then that difference is very small. The greater likelihood is an increased slide toward fascism with greater police state controls on what an individual can and cannot do - which may well seem attractive to you.

: Still promoting this idea that monopolies give us lower prices, when monopolies give us lower prices only temporarily, so they can drive competitors out of business?

And you still laboring under the misapprehension that once a monoploy exists it somehow has a bottomless pit of competetive ability to for ever see off the barrage of competitors intent on taking a shre of what would be a hugely profitable market?

: Still don't think that businesses need government, even when today the businesses are buying more security "cops" than the real cops the government itself is buying?

Stats please, and a run down of exactly how strong these 'forces' are, how much they are controlled and regulated by your precious government - or I may aswell conclude that you are referring to instore security.

Well you made some points this time. welcome back

Follow Ups:


The Debating Room Post a Followup