Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan
I have a question for the "zomg AC will explode under the threat of organized crime and people running highly violent, purposely sub-optimal businesses" crowd.
Succeeding in business by exploiting the inherent nonsensicalness of an opt-in judiciary is not sub-optimal.
Quote:
There's no illegal drug market, there's probably a much smaller black market for stolen goods (because the people that had the stuff stolen are more motivated to get it back than cops),
As motivated as those whose goods are stolen may be, they are unlikely to take measures more costly than the items themselves to insure/recover them. This is the basis of one of the business models for organized crime in ACland. Just make your organization too expensive to pursue, and the for-profit police and court systems will not do so. If you happen to get caught anyway, have Acquittals R Us on retainer.
The society in a state of anarchy has no answer to this other than, in so many words: "You must choose from the oligopoly of approved courts," which of course makes it no longer an anarchy.
Quote:
Would a defense agency make enough money defending criminals, and only criminals, in corrupt courts to stay in business and compete with the honest companies?
Not just criminals, pretty much all defendants. And yes, I think there are enough of those to keep Acquittals R Us in the black.
Quote:
I think it's pretty demonstrable that dishonest businesses, while they can thrive temporarily, are not a long term viable business model.
Acquittals R Us is NOT a dishonest business. They always deliver.
Quote:
And? You say this as if they are mutually exclusive. Like if the mobster can just get a note saying "acquitted" no other arbitrator would consider the case. Again, the judgement itself is not a magical artifact.
So double jeopardy is not a problem in ACland?
Last edited by Strawn; 05-01-2009 at 10:52 AM.