If you can't afford the private police service fee or you don't have enough men or ammunition to kill the invading...

>if you can't afford the private police service fee or you don't have enough men or ammunition to kill the invading force of bandits coming onto your property I guess you're shit out of luck, aren't you? :^)

Other urls found in this thread:

mises.org/system/tdf/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy_3.pdf?file=1&type=document
mises.org/system/tdf/A Short History of Man — Progress and Decline.pdf?file=1&type=document
riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf
mises.org/system/tdf/Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, A_4.pdf?file=1&type=document
mises.org/system/tdf/From Aristocracy to Monarchy to Democracy_Hoppe_Text 2014.pdf?file=1&type=document
mises.org/system/tdf/Myth of National Defense, The Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production_3.pdf?file=1&type=document
mises.org/system/tdf/The Private Production of Defense_3.pdf?file=1&type=document
mises.org/system/tdf/Economic Science and the Austrian Method_3.pdf?file=1&type=document
mises.org/system/tdf/What Must Be Done_7.pdf?file=1&type=document
youtube.com/watch?v=EO68Kvb9fD4
archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/105621530/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

i'm sure there would be some security companies good enough at their job to offer you a "free trail" for long enough for you to have an income

not to mention your boss can "pay" them as part of some sort of "insurance" plan

>needing employer sanctioned insurance plans to keep you from being murdered

So I says to the guy I say to him, I say...

That's fucking retarded.

This just sounds like government with extra steps involved.

>needing employer sanctioned insurance plans to keep you from being murdered
that's only if you "can't afford it"

meanwhile you need the government to pay the security force

where's the difference

only difference i see is in my case everyone pays fairly, even the "murderer" gambles his life. in your case you a leech, a thief if you will, with the government enabling you services

the government is free market with extra steps involved

you and your employer already pay the government, and they then pay for security

But user, working for a company is a voluntary contract. You can opt out and live a life of unprotection against the murderous bands of reavers if you wish, that's your prerogative if you want freedom!

>that's only if you "can't afford it"

And I suppost an ANCAP society would do away with "crony capitalism" and wealth would rain from the skies and trickle down the mountains?

>meanwhile you need the government to pay the security force

Except the government isn't not going to protect me if I happen to miss a payment on my taxes.

>only difference i see is in my case everyone pays fairly, even the "murderer" gambles his life.

And the murderer(s) can "gamble" and win. It really isn't much of a gamble in a situation where the invading force greatly outnumbers a group with no means of protection, huh?

>paying to government
You mean taxation, in other words, thief.

>meanwhile you need the government to pay the security force

I'd also add that I'm free to hire my own private security right now, but living in a society that doesn't actively encourage the ability to commit crime compared to an ANCAP world doesn't really make it necessary.

>You can opt out and live a life of unprotection
working for a company isn't the only way to have an income

>wealth would rain from the skies and trickle down the mountains
if protection is such a lucrative business you can work for them, eventually it would be clear to "murderous bands" that it's not worth it

>Except the government isn't not going to protect me if I happen to miss a payment on my taxes.
no, eventually they'll just jail you
and you can live happily in you cage
protected from all the boogymen

>no means of protection
government is the one regulating guns and how you use them

crime is defined by government
the only institution except from crime is government

in a free society security is still prioritized, just not by a monolithic mafia

I am hijacking this shit thread.

...

...

...

the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights. The parent therefore may not murder or mutilate his child, and the law properly outlaws a parent from doing so. But the parent should have the legal right not to feed the child, i.e., to allow it to die.2 The law, therefore, may not properly compel the parent to feed a child or to keep it alive.3 (Again, whether or not a parent has a moral rather than a legally enforceable obligation to keep his child alive is a completely separate question.) This rule allows us to solve such vexing questions as: should a parent have the right to allow a deformed baby to die (e.g., by not feeding it)?4 The answer is of course yes, following a fortiori from the larger right to allow any baby, whether deformed or not, to die. (Though, as we shall see below, in a libertarian society the existence of a free baby market will bring such "neglect" down to a minimum.)

F
R
E
E

B
A
B
Y

M
A
R
K
E
T

...

>except
exempt*

for the record, i don't associate myself with any ideology

...

...

...

...

Lurking, post moar

>not to mention your boss can "pay" them as part of some sort of "insurance" plan

are you implying you or your boss cucking their wife to the police?

...

HOPPE READING LIST

>The Economics and Ethics of Private Property (1993; 2006 2nd edition)
mises.org/system/tdf/Economics and Ethics of Private Property Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy_3.pdf?file=1&type=document

>A Short History of Man: Progress and Decline (2015)
mises.org/system/tdf/A Short History of Man — Progress and Decline.pdf?file=1&type=document

>Democracy—The God That Failed (2001)
riosmauricio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Hoppe_Democracy_The_God_That_Failed.pdf

>A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism (1988; 2010 edition)
mises.org/system/tdf/Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, A_4.pdf?file=1&type=document

>From Aristocracy, to Monarchy, to Democracy (2014)
mises.org/system/tdf/From Aristocracy to Monarchy to Democracy_Hoppe_Text 2014.pdf?file=1&type=document

>The Myth of National Defense: Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production (2003)
mises.org/system/tdf/Myth of National Defense, The Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production_3.pdf?file=1&type=document

>The Private Production of Defense (1998; 2006 edition)
mises.org/system/tdf/The Private Production of Defense_3.pdf?file=1&type=document

>Economic Science and the Austrian Method (1995)
mises.org/system/tdf/Economic Science and the Austrian Method_3.pdf?file=1&type=document

>What Must Be Done (2009)
mises.org/system/tdf/What Must Be Done_7.pdf?file=1&type=document

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

I'll be in the invading bandit side.

...

Based Portuguese Hoppe poster, keep up the good work, and whenever someone gives you shit for your country, just remind them that canada exists.

Yes. This all the way.

This from a guy who needs gooberment to build his roads.

youtube.com/watch?v=EO68Kvb9fD4

I will poison every single one of these shit threads until the National Capitalist Libertarian Alliance comes to fruition. Some of these people really ought to be thrown out of fucking helicopters!

ANCAP is just a rebranding of fuedalism for today's hip youth

...

...

...

...

...

...

why don't they just physically remove themselves from normal society

do you use mumble or discord?

""""normal"""""

what?

So let me get this straight:

A poor person who can't afford protection in ANCAP and gets murdered is shit out of luck, but a person who can't afford protection in society at the moment is a victim of authoritarianism?

Except private road construction companies and private roads exist right now.

If you can't afford to live, I guess you're shit out of luck, aren't you?

>""""normal"""""
not an argument :^)

>spamming
>completely dodges the question
>ANCAP

checks out

...

>ancap
>state
:^)

How would an ANCAP society protect itself from a invading foreign army?

>The Myth of National Defense: Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production (2003)
mises.org/system/tdf/Myth of National Defense, The Essays on the Theory and History of Security Production_3.pdf?file=1&type=document

No, I'm looking from an answer from you.

pretty good desu

Go look on the Hoppe thread from yesterday then. We had already answered those questions.

archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/105621530/

(((Murray Rothbard)))

If you can't actually discuss and argue why ANCAP would work, you've already failed in your "argument"

Anyone can copy and paste links. Use your words. ANCAP rejects all notions of morality and essentially turns justice into a form of revenue for the highest bidder.

statism is absolute ownership of the state above everything, always having the last word, the limit is it's own vanity, desire and imagination, it's ok to start coercion

ancap society is the absolute ownership of the legitimated property, where the owner have the last words, it's own limit is the non initiation of agression principle

>JehW

>legitimated property
By who?

>JehW
it's just a coincidence

legitimation does not need to be granted by someone nor yourself, what is legitimated in a wolf pack?? what is fair and what is not? has justice anything to do with preferences or opinions?

what makes sense, and you can come to it from an evolutionary point of view, from a rationalist perspective and from a pragmatic perspective