Two Plus Two Publishing LLC Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-02-2009, 04:42 PM   #301
zan nen
temp-banned
 
zan nen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: hardcore state apologist
Posts: 4,377
Re: Inclined to Liberty

These arguments are just silly. Like I said, anti-economy anarcho-communism will result in widespread death and a return to primitive life. The state is also not compatible with a post-industrial world. I know of these people are just neo-liberals supposing that they really believe that junk. Their actual beliefs like social cost/public goods has been proven wrong before. I really don't feel like rehashing it.

The worst case scenario is you have to deal with the evil property rights to buy up land for your commune. Then you can live in fantasyland all you want, just don't involve us. Capitalists are treated like criminals in your utopia, so you can't say the same respect for believing in unicorns is given in reverse.
zan nen is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 07:58 PM   #302
TorontoCFE
grinder
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 544
Re: Inclined to Liberty

[QUOTE=Zurvan;10384375]

In AC, you can only be coerced after taking a positive action -

QUOTE]

Except for apparently being coerced into hiring and maintaining an advocate to avoid social rejection.
TorontoCFE is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 09:46 PM   #303
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

[QUOTE=TorontoCFE;10388068]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post

In AC, you can only be coerced after taking a positive action -

QUOTE]

Except for apparently being coerced into hiring and maintaining an advocate to avoid social rejection.
If you don't choose which shelter to live in, you'll die.

If you don't choose which food to buy, you'll die.

If you don't choose which security firm you pay for, you'll die.

In all those situations you have the right to try without it. Maybe you'll make it without shelter or without a security firm, but it's a dangerous proposition.
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:06 PM   #304
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubeskies View Post
If you don't choose which shelter to live in, you'll die.

If you don't choose which food to buy, you'll die.

If you don't choose which security firm you pay for, you'll die.

In all those situations you have the right to try without it. Maybe you'll make it without shelter or without a security firm, but it's a dangerous proposition.
Let me add to this by simply saying that all I'm trying to get at here is that ACism is just another form of societal interaction. For humans to live together in a society, there have to be certain social contracts. In ACism, you're going to need certain social contracts, but at least you'll get to pick which one of those contracts to have without having to completely change your life around. You won't even have to move and you can switch whenever you want without moving and completely re-doing your life. AND, because the people supplying those services will have to compete with each other for customers, the terms should be pretty excellent for the consumer.

Is it perfect? No. Is it better than statism? IMO, yes.
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:10 PM   #305
vixticator
clutch
 
vixticator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Watch the throne
Posts: 117,345
Re: Inclined to Liberty

You don't need a security firm ahead of time. Hire someone when charges are brought against you. I suspect most people will do without one as they aren't likely to get in many disputes. This is like saying you must have life insurance. No, not really.
vixticator is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:18 PM   #306
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator View Post
You don't need a security firm ahead of time. Hire someone when charges are brought against you. I suspect most people will do without one as they aren't likely to get in many disputes. This is like saying you must have life insurance. No, not really.
True. But in both scenarios, it'll probably be cheaper if you do it ahead of time
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:25 PM   #307
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator View Post
You don't need a security firm ahead of time. Hire someone when charges are brought against you. I suspect most people will do without one as they aren't likely to get in many disputes. This is like saying you must have life insurance. No, not really.
Have you ever known an insurance company to cover something that happened before you started paying premiums?
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:26 PM   #308
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Except for apparently being coerced into hiring and maintaining an advocate to avoid social rejection.
You would very likely be able to survive without one. But seriously, what's your point? You're approaching "having to work to buy food is slavery" territory.
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:28 PM   #309
vixticator
clutch
 
vixticator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Watch the throne
Posts: 117,345
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post
Have you ever known an insurance company to cover something that happened before you started paying premiums?
It's a good idea to have protection against crime, sure. You don't need an insurance company to protect yourself from accusations--hire a lawyer. Even in cases against you, do the same... it's just more expensive when you need it.
vixticator is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:33 PM   #310
vixticator
clutch
 
vixticator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Watch the throne
Posts: 117,345
Re: Inclined to Liberty

I want some opinions on this scenario. If someone murders a homeless person who has no protection, what then? Who claims a wrong here?
vixticator is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:44 PM   #311
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator View Post
I want some opinions on this scenario. If someone murders a homeless person who has no protection, what then? Who claims a wrong here?
Well, if nobody witnesses it, nothing happens, just like in the state.

If people know who did it, I can see a few things happening.

If the homeless person was on private property, I'd imagine that the person who owns the property might be able to bring the person to court. For example, if you own a road, you can have rules that say "no going over 50MPH." And by driving on that road, you're agreeing to abide by the rules and penalties.

So if the bum was on somebody's private property that had a "no killing" rule, they should be able to prosecute. Also, bums would then know to only stay on property that had these rules if they wanted to be safe.

So if some road owner or park owner wants to help protect homeless people, he can post signs saying "no killing" or somehow let it be known violence isn't allowed on their property.

In fact, it would make sense for almost all private property owners to have a "no violence rule" so that they'd be allowed to prosecute criminals who harm people on their property ON TOP of the victims prosecution.

A second possibility is that human rights groups can launch a smear campaign against the person who did it which might drive up his security premiums since he's a known killer and he might get fired from his job or lose friends.
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:46 PM   #312
foal
Pooh-Bah
 
foal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: half villain, half good player
Posts: 3,593
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post
The government is coercive by nature. Everything it does is coercive, even to people that follow all of its rules.

My owning a piece of property is not coercive to anybody. You are free to choose whether to enter my property or not.
But if you respond with violence when someone makes that choice, then it is no different than choosing not to pay taxes.
foal is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:52 PM   #313
vixticator
clutch
 
vixticator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Watch the throne
Posts: 117,345
Re: Inclined to Liberty

You can't kill people on any property. That's crazy. A property owner has no right to kill people on their land unless in self defense. Call some people to haul them away, sure. "No killing" sign, really? That's a given.
vixticator is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:53 PM   #314
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by foal View Post
But if you respond with violence when someone makes that choice, then it is no different than choosing not to pay taxes.
My property and the requirement to pay taxes are not analogous.

Again, there's a negative requirement that you pay taxes, but trespassing is a positive choice.

If you never take action in the case of taxes, you will be punished. If you never take action in the trespassing case, then you will never be punished.

Do you see how the situations are different?
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 10:54 PM   #315
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator View Post
You can't kill people on any property. That's crazy. A property owner has no right to kill people on their land unless in self defense. Call some people to haul them away, sure. "No killing" sign, really? That's a given.
He was talking about a third party committing murder on his property, not the property owner doing it.
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:01 PM   #316
vixticator
clutch
 
vixticator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Watch the throne
Posts: 117,345
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zurvan View Post
He was talking about a third party committing murder on his property, not the property owner doing it.
I know. Say your neighbor gets drunk and passes out in your lawn. You cannot have the right to murder him for trespassing claiming a violation of your property. He did initiate aggression by passing out on your lawn though, right? But surely this doesn't mean you can react in any way.
vixticator is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:04 PM   #317
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Why are you changing the subject? THAT'S NOT WHAT HIS POST SAID

He was saying property owners could have a no killing rule in the case that the homeless guy was murdered on their property they could prosecute the killer.
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:04 PM   #318
Zurvan
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Zurvan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: On the front porch, yelling at kids
Posts: 35,623
Re: Inclined to Liberty

As for killing somebody for trespassing:

I have a strong suspicion (although I don't know for sure, ldo) that anybody who murdered another person for coming on to their property would likely not be able to offer the "but those damn kids were on my lawn" defense.
Zurvan is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:07 PM   #319
Strawn
adept
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 709
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubeskies View Post

If you don't choose which shelter to live in, you'll die.

If you don't choose which food to buy, you'll die.

If you don't choose which security firm you pay for, you'll die.

In all those situations you have the right to try without it. Maybe you'll make it without shelter or without a security firm, but it's a dangerous proposition.
Only in the last one does another actor cause your death.
Strawn is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:11 PM   #320
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strawn View Post
Only in the last one does another actor cause your death.
Read the post I made after that. And as Vix pointed out, my first post might have been a bit of an exaggeration in that you actually might not need to have a security firm.
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:13 PM   #321
Strawn
adept
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 709
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator View Post
I know. Say your neighbor gets drunk and passes out in your lawn. You cannot have the right to murder him for trespassing claiming a violation of your property. He did initiate aggression by passing out on your lawn though, right? But surely this doesn't mean you can react in any way.
Why not? By what authority could any third party to tell you what rules you can and cannot enforce on your own property?
Strawn is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:18 PM   #322
vixticator
clutch
 
vixticator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Watch the throne
Posts: 117,345
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strawn View Post
Why not? By what authority could any third party to tell you what rules you can and cannot enforce on your own property?
You still have to comply with community standards. In principle, to the extreme ACists, you are right that they have no way around this that I can think of.
vixticator is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:21 PM   #323
Rubeskies
Pooh-Bah
 
Rubeskies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Smooth Conversion
Posts: 5,704
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator View Post
You can't kill people on any property. That's crazy.
Um, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't we worried about a homeless person being able to be killed without retribution? Isn't that what you were worried about? If you "can't kill people on any property" than why did you have to ask the scenario in the first place?

Quote:
A property owner has no right to kill people on their land unless in self defense. Call some people to haul them away, sure. "No killing" sign, really? That's a given.
When did I say a property owner could kill somebody on their property?
Rubeskies is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:23 PM   #324
Strawn
adept
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 709
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubeskies View Post
When did I say a property owner could kill somebody on their property?
If they can't, why can't they?
Strawn is offline  
Old 05-02-2009, 11:27 PM   #325
vixticator
clutch
 
vixticator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Watch the throne
Posts: 117,345
Re: Inclined to Liberty

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubeskies View Post
Um, correct me if I'm wrong but aren't we worried about a homeless person being able to be killed without retribution? Isn't that what you were worried about? If you "can't kill people on any property" than why did you have to ask the scenario in the first place?
Do you agree with me? It is my opinion that you can't kill people on any property without some good justification. I asked because I don't know if you agree--presumably you do right? Anyways, the question as to who can claim the offense of a homeless person getting murdered stands. I think you are with me here in that anyone can claim a wrong. The question remains on what basis?
vixticator is offline  

 
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive