(07-09-2014, 11:29 AM)Drashner1 Wrote:

(07-09-2014, 10:05 AM)Ares Johnson Wrote: SNip

Of course the reason those countries have any sort of less polluted option to aspire to is because some countries passed laws forcing businesses there to reduce/regulate/eliminate their pollution. If no such regulations existed, what would be the incentive to do this? Wouldn't it be more likely that, since the degradation of the environment is generally gradual, that companies would meme the population into either thinking that conditions were 'the norm' or 'the price of progress' while pointing to all the great stuff folks have? And why do they need trees anyway? We see some of this already around climate change and the loss of honeybee populations (the cause of colony collapse disorder has apparently now been traced back to a particular chemical. Yet the companies that produce it aren't rushing to stop on their own).

I think part of the problem with letting private industry police itself is that it has a strong incentive not to. While 'market forces' might force a change eventually, what evidence is there that this change wouldn't happen a lot faster if government forces it?

As far as child labor - this would seem to run into the issue of informed consent. Presumably there is an age below which a child is not considered competent to make decisions about getting a job or being able to do it safely - they might be pressured into it by family or think they know what's best - but do they? Virtually every society seems to have some concept of children and adults and an age at which one converts to the other. So not sure how you get around that.

For that matter, if a 14yr old says they want to make porn, is that OK? Presumably in a Libertarian system child pornography is legal since its a business and as long as the actors say they are doing it of their own free will.

Todd

(07-10-2014, 06:18 AM)Ares Johnson Wrote: I think I need to say explicitly something I've only said implicitly so far. I am only in favor of Anarcho-Capitalism in a society that is at least capable of being post-scarcity/labor. I strongly suspect a place like the NoCoZo could function, as the incredible cheapness of goods, food and education available in such a technological setting mean that even the poorest person would, one way or another, have all needed things. You'd likely just be short on luxuries, if that.

For now, the real modern world, I tend to mostly agree with Jon Stossel and advocate Minarchism. I want government small and out of people's way in most cases. The only crimes should be those that clearly fall under the Non-Aggression Principle as I previously defined, no victimless crimes. Drugs should be legal and sold openly just as alcohol is by stores, not gangs and cartels. Marriage should at worst be open to all, no discriminating, and at best not in its purview at all. Taxes should be limited solely to a consumption tax; not based on income, no heavily taxing vices or discounting kids, marriage or other things we "should" be doing (social engineering, I call it), none of all that crap. H&R Block will hate it, but the rest of us will never have to file taxes again or worry about entire bookshelves of tax law and I'm sure we'll be happy for it.

I support the idea of a self-defensive military, not the giant bloated thing America has spread everywhere that functions as the world's police. Education, I'd like to at least least the Federal government out and let states handle it (pretty sure the constitution doesn't give them this authority, anyway). I really think Social Security needs to be phased out or at least be completely restructured, as it cannot last in its current form. I fervently think government needs to get out of health insurance and healthcare, or at least massively scale back its involvement. And for the love of all that is good, absolutely no carrying a national debt, always keep a balanced budget. No government program should ever be passed without some way to pay for it.

Now, for some specific stuff.

Eminent Domain- The Lone Holdout: First off, trying to protect someone from one form of Aggression by committing another is not a solution. Second, Aggression is exactly why police and private security exist. Third, I expect someone in the path of something this big will consider possible consequences and choose to either risk it or take the offer, as is their right.

Monopolies: While I don't think these are intractable as some think, I expect these will cease to be a major problem as tech improves. When flying cars and trucks become economical, roads will be at least in poorer demand and at most obsolete. Power Companies will be less powerful or obsolete once solar power, wind power, fuel cell and battery technology improve to the point where everyone can just produce and store their own energy. I expect cable companies will out on their asses soon, as the business models of companies like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant Video and the like become the norm for television. Add in more ubiquitous internet access through self-replicating aerostats or satellites to take away their niche for providing the access and they really will have no chance.

kch49er Wrote:Not neccasarily there is also soverign wealth funds which can be funded from exports- income and investments rather than taxation. I don't think any country relys 100% on this, but with a valuable enough export and small enoguh goverment they might.

Alright, now you're talking. I would tolerate a low consumption tax, but if a government could actually support itself, that would be fantastic.

kch49er Wrote:Could be, though this mass exodus would have a big impact on South Korea.

Might not be so bad. I hear they're pretty good about taking in North Koreans when they do show up. And who says they all would need to stay? South Korea could just be a stepping stone to elsewhere if needed or desired.

(08-29-2014, 07:52 PM)kch49er Wrote: A goverment supporting itself probably works best in an export orientated economy, in real life the oil-rich states arre much closer to this than anyone else,essentially the customers pay for all the niceties, the state could be considered one big company that provides for its employee/citizens. I don't know what the y11k equivelant is to Oil though. Maybe nexus tarrif in a hub or stable monopole exports?

(08-29-2014, 07:52 PM)kch49er Wrote: One way I can think of a state providing without to0 much burden on private bvusiness is to be a supplier of last resort. By offering only the basic of services at the lowest (if not zero cost) but not preventing anyone else to enter the market. Any other business has to offer better in order to get the business, if nobody does the free market will simply choose the alternative. Branding would probably be quite important.

(08-29-2014, 07:52 PM)kch49er Wrote: Regaridng the megacorps and smaller buisness I wonder if they might be closer to a banding of small business or franchises, ala McDonalds and the federation of small business.

(08-29-2014, 07:52 PM)kch49er Wrote: I'm getting an idea of how a OA NoCoZo might work be libertarian and a little socialist, though by all means not all would be of course. Short on time at the moment, will post up later.