In an anarcho-capitalist society, who takes care of the vulnerable members of society(e.g the elderly...

In an anarcho-capitalist society, who takes care of the vulnerable members of society(e.g the elderly, orphaned children and people with disabilites)?

Other urls found in this thread:

mises.org/library/law-without-state
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Their family, friends and charities. You know things that became much less important with the growth of government.

Churches.

No one lol.
Sucks for them, but the weak should just die.
Part of the reason why ancap is the only truly redpilled ideology.

Fuck the vulnerables. The strong should always control the weak. Stop being a moralfag.

What if an orphaned child doesn't have a mother or a father, or any relatives for that matter? What happens if the father is missing and the mother dies during child birth? What happens with the child once goverment-funded foster homes are defunct?

Whomever is willing to pay a fair market price for them.

The sweet release of death takes care of them.

Most Ancaps always say that Ancapism is a system without a central government, not without morals?

Slavery or euthanasia

responsible whites who also need ancap to disassociate from niggers without the possibility of lawmakers stopping them

I dont get it, I thought an Ancap system would have laws, just without the central government.

Charities would take care of it. If the society is so heartless that they wouldn't exist or be funded how do you expect the government to fund those programs? They take cues from the public after all. They would exist and would handle the issue more efficiently and better. Government run orphanages are hellholes.

You open a private orphanage where people can "drop" their children anonymously and you gain a reputation of giving the children under strict scrutiny and investigation on the new parents, who would gladly pay for your middleman services.

Money that you use to pay the staff, yourself, and the children's needs during their time within the orphanage.

There's a lot of people who would love to have children and are going through bureaucratic nightmares to get them.

I guess its the only vaible answer. People tend to always assume that Ancap=no morals, which isnt the case.

What makes you think that, aside from isolated cases where a couple cant have children, people would want to practically buy a kid? What happens if the "buyer" is a pedophile of a psychopat?

>In an anarcho-capitalist society, who takes care of the vulnerable members of society(e.g the elderly, orphaned children and people with disabilites)?
>who takes care of
AAAHAHAHHA
>the vulnerable members of society
HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

It is basically a "the strongest survive" kind of society :)

There was a case here where a girl's parents died and instead of letting her grandparents take care of her (they were perfectly willing) the state put her in an orphanage. It's bullshit.

Social security companies
Ancap doesn't mean facilities go away, it means they're privatized

it absolutely would
but pol is retarded and made ancap a meme
the question of how do we solve problems without government isn't difficult
just start with how government gets in your way and work from there

Another viable answer.

So instead of having government, you have organizations that function exactly like governments, but they're called something else instead. Wow, such a better system!

>It is basically a "the strongest survive" kind of society :)

We have that now and the people at the top are all globalist kikes

"Strongest" doesn't necessarily mean "good"

>What makes you think that, aside from isolated cases where a couple cant have children, people would want to practically buy a kid?

The fact that they already do.

Registration fees, application fees, adoption fees, getting an adoption usually costs around 18k us$ in the US.

>What happens if the "buyer" is a pedophile of a psychopat?

Would you drop your kid in a private orphanage known for giving away kids to pedophiles or not offering any kind of guarantee that the parents will be investigated before delivering your kid?

Might as well be asking what is stopping them from dropping their kid in a garbage disposal instead of a reputable orphanage, if we're into "parents who don't give a fuck" hypothesis.

Anarchy is dumb

>Ancap=no morals
I'd say it's the exact opposite. When you have to rely on your family and community instead of the state, morals should be strengthened.

Companies are decentralized; you can go to another one if the one you use is shit
Democracies have a strict process in this regard. If you want to change how state facilities are run, you have to go through a democratic process

>less bureaucracy and actually focusing on fixing the problem instead of trying to squeeze more money out of taxpayers
>better system
Yes?

>fair market price
That's redundant. Any price the market offers is, by definition, fair.

the state has been starting to do this only recently

I could rename government now, but thats not ancap. Instead of me answering what the difference is why dont you try to answer? Or not, accept your ignorance, and leave me alone

Charity & community effort existed before government welfare

To socialists, nothing existed before socialism.

I guess those who want to? If you are really having a heartache over some poor orphans then nobody is going to stop you from paying for their upbringing.
The difference from the current system would be that people who have heartache over some issue won't use force to make some other random person to pay for it.

I understand where your coming from
most understand it as no rules
not by its definition: no rulers

and anarchists out there made most of us start calling it volunteerism cause they're awful or without morals

...

my rich aunt and uncle wanted to adopt a child
there are rules in america if you're over a certain age you can't adopt a baby
they were told they had to adopt a kid from he foster kid system which isn't bad but comes with baggage
so instead they paid like 20k and adopted a baby from Kazakhstan
the three of them live happily in a 5 bedroom house on acres of land

In theory: Charities
In reality: Nobody

What if the market price were negative, as in, I pay someone to give them something. In an instance where this wouldn't be acceptable it could be assumed an unfair market price.

So instead of giving money to the government, I give money to a corporation. It's essentially the same thing just with the name changed.

Ancap isn't a real system. The very name is a contradiction. Capitalism requires a government to function. You cannot mix anarchy and capitalism.

>Just switch the names USA and USSR
>It's essentially the same thing

charities actually still do this and have been doing this for centuries

The same people who do it now.

what ancap retards dont get is that the government is an extension of free self-organizing people and that it provides immense value.

It works with small government like the family and small clans or village that shared the same values and culture. That being said, it still encounters problems especially with non-contributing dependent members.

But I wouldn't call it socialism since it's human nature.

The child probably has other relatives, i.e. Aunts Uncles, Grandparents, etc. or family friends who would be willing to take care of them.

>Capitalism requires a government to function

Not by any definition of Capitalism.

Anarcho Capitalism is the only Capitalism that doesn't require democracy. Democracy, through popularity leadership, is pretty much a state.

You understand that anarchy in basically the state of nature in which the strongest survive. Eventually civallitation comes back together but in the beginning all human creativity will boil down to survival. But instead of sticks and stones we have guns.

The USA has been capitalistic (more or less) since the early 1800's but it has never been an anarchy.

are you suggesting you give money to the government instead of corporations now?

Or that a free market requires regulation?

Or even that keynesian economics is the only economic system?

>government
>free self-organizing

I like you user.

explain to me how government changes that in modern society

I will concede

>missing the point this hard

I would chip in for such charity. It is in my interest to provide this kid with good life conditions and education. Voluntary ofc. When government enforces this people feel disgust against such children.

It organizes a set of rules with punishment
Sure it's capitalized but it's the constant reminder that you are being watched and you're actions have consequences prevents most people from going ape shit

You think an Ancap society has no laws, you are wrong.

Okay. Name a country with capitalism but no government.

>are you suggesting you give money to the government instead of corporations now?

I give money to both, and that's exactly the way it should be.

>Or that a free market requires regulation?

Depends on how dogmatic you are about whether or not the market must be 100% "free" or not. For instance, the government requires food companies to include nutritional information on their packaging in many cases. This makes consumers more aware of what they are buying, which helps them make better decisions.

>Or even that keynesian economics is the only economic system?

It's probably the best overall system but not the only system.

And where do these laws come from? Who writes them? And who enforces them?

Capitalism is just a description of an economy where people use money, or some universally valued commodities to trade, and to provide a reference with which to measure value of other goods. Often, these commodities were relatively stable in some period of time, or who's value changes in a predictable way, and common enough to be acquired relatively easily, so that people don't get screwed. In Capitalism, people offer goods they have, whether land, labor, or capital, to get other goods, acting only on personal needs and desires.

Government has nothing to do with capitalism other than providing some services within it (in the ideal sense). All a government is in capitalism, is another organization that has a monopoly on specific aspects of that economy. It has monopolies on currency production, police and military, for example. It is an agent within capitalism and can be used to help resolves disputes within the economy, but it is not a source of capitalism or the economy.

If it has no ruler, it has no structure
The rules fall to those with money (or whatever has value) and can be bent to fit their will. At least a president can be impeached but if you have money in an ancap society, you can buy an army to stop any question to your rule

German humor out of nowhere!

>Capitalism requires a government to function.

No retard. you can protect your own private property.

>Name a country with capitalism but no government.

>country
>anarchy

they already do.

>No retard. you can protect your own private property.
Not effectively against organized opposition.

>Name a country blablablballa
Your own country came into existence as a result of Locke's ideas. Those ideas are very young. As is your country. And because it was the freest country ever it was also extremely prosperous and popular. The ideas of Ancap are even more recent and liberty-minded. Whether the ideology comes into popularity and subsequently into reality the same way classical liberalism did before the American revolution is up to the people.

>Okay. Name a country with capitalism but no government.

Name a country without capitalism that doesn't have government. Oh wait! There isn't one. Checkmate!

That's how stupid that statement is.

As if dictators havent been opressing countless societies all through history. The only difference with Ancapism is that the guy who can "buy an army" wouldn't be the only one capable of doing so, where as your president can hypotetically just go ham and order the army to start shooting up civilians, and there would be no force to stop them.

The goal of right-wing ideologies is not human equality or fairness. It's about human achievement and reaching greatness.

>Capitalism is just a description of an economy where people use money

And who creates money? The government. And who protects the monetary system by controlling the supply of money and punishing counterfeiters? The police.

>No retard. you can protect your own private property.

To a certain extent. But what if a large group of people, an invading army, decide that they are going to take my property? That's beyond my ability to deal with, which is why capitalist societies also have military forces to protect against such things. But an anarchist society wouldn't have that, which is why attempts to actually create anarchist societies usually don't last very long IRL.

mises.org/library/law-without-state
It's a long read, but I suggest you check it out.

Their bones pave the fu king roads

The other nations
That's what a world war is
Plus what would support the money, gold, water, POGs. How would you trade with other "countries" if your dollar is toilet taper to their coins.
Order is needed in every situation and has to be enforced in every scenario

sure you can. you just have to be organized yourself. Either way, win or loose the state isn't nessesary in capitalist interaction. you've made no real arguments to back your claim that capitalism requires a state. sure it helps to have a monoply to enforce property rights. but its not a fundamental mechanic of capitalism.

#rekt

ancap is psychopathic Judaism on steroids. ancaps belong in the fucking oven with the rest of the kikes

>But what if a large group of people, an invading army, decide that they are going to take my property?

>And who creates money?
The federal reserve... Which is not government

Their families, private charities and community places (churches, soup kitchens, etc.)

t.leftypol larping as NatSoc.
everyone knows Ancap and NatSocs are great trade partners.

The Chair of the United States Federal Reserve is appointed by POTUS and must also be confirmed by the Senate.

>right now the state is creating money therefore only the state can create money

I hate retards like you.

>>No retard. you can protect your own private property.
>Not effectively against organized opposition.

HUR DUR! 1 PURSUN CANT DEFEND THEMSELFS AGENSD 50! HUR DUR!

>And who creates money? The government. And who protects the monetary system by controlling the supply of money and punishing counterfeiters? The police.

People within a community start using a commonly available commodity that they all value and can some reasonable amount of within a short period of time. Some Native Americans, who didn't have any formal governments, accounting for their culture which people identified themselves with their tribes, used certain sea shells to trade among themselves as a currency.

The government only creates money if it nationalizes currency production. For much of human history, currency was created privately. I.e. people mined gold, silver, copper, or collected some resource, and traded it. When people were concerned with whether or not it was faked, they had something simple called a scale, and various other tools and simple knowledge how to tell real versus fakes that many can learn easily. If someone just pays attention, they will spot a fake and refuse to trade until a real commodity is given. That's how currencies have worked for thousands of years.

Later when the governments, princes, local lords decided to monopolize currency, they also started to produce fakes. add some copper into a gold coin to try trick people, etc. Often these governments who "protects us from counterfeiters" were counterfeiters.

People actively try to protect themselves from counterfeiters. That's why they have those pens that change colors on fakes and many tools to spot fakes. All the police do is occasionally show up to arrest one counterfeiter who was caught, while there are still most of the other counterfeiters who get away with it. The police protect no-one. They only show up to provide revenge, or file a report after most incidents have occurred.

Let's say in ancapistan a romanian gypsy buys a house next to you and starts littering his garden with garbage. Can you do anything about it or you just have to deal with it?

Bitcoin. Also no government doesnt mean a currency instantly loses its value.

>only the state can create money

Well, technically anybody can create money, but it is called "counterfeiting" and is also illegal, and for good reason. Inflation would run wild if anybody could just print their own money.

Why do the vulnerable members of society 'need to be taken care'? Why is that anyone's responsibility?

Are you Europoors just that cucked?

Bitcion is fucking useless now
What makes you think that will change?
Currency will lose value because there is no system to manage the value.

>HUR DUR! 1 PURSUN CANT DEFEND THEMSELFS AGENSD 50! HUR DUR!

That's basically true, though.

And it's completely obvious. It has nothing to do with anything. The point is: stating the obvious doesn't really do anything.

read a book you dumb nigger and stop shitting your retardation all over the internet

>bitcoin is useless
>bitcoin is worth more than $1000 a piece, even more than gold
???

One of the best classes I ever had was on the communitarian tradition in Spain. The system was pretty awesome and the core unit is the family, and then the community. The family takes care of their own elderly, and if there is no family, the community steps up. The land belongs to whomever farms it, and the mountains belong to the community for timber and game. The system is self regulating but requires a homogeneous people and does not tolerate outsiders well.

If you can't use bitcoins in a regular store what's the point
Also
> if dollar has no value what is base value
> bitcoin measured in dollars
???
Also what if there is no internet companies anymore

>he doesn't know the historicity of USD

>gold's value is measured in dollars
>if dollar has no value gold also has no value.
Its basically what you just said

This is true, if you ignore history, where princes and kings, including our own government, generated inflation and devalued currencies on purpose. Princes and Kings were counterfeiters who put some copper in gold coins so they could make more coins, when the coins were supposed to be gold.

If there is nothing to limit the availability of the currency, i.e. natural limits one would find if they were using commodity currencies, then inflation would be easily and naturally checked. In our case where our currency is fiat currency. Governments purposely inflate the currency, and there are still plenty of conterfeiters, most of them get away with it. It's only a matter of time before governments start producing hyper-inflation, or run-away inflation.

Historically people used many different currencies, much of which were not issued or protected by governments, but were able to use very simple tools to help protect themselves.

AnCaps need to visit South Africa. Then you can see what its like having to have private security and police for your protection. Literally AnCap society is similar to living as a white in SA. Even the whole gated community aspect is represented.

Then you obviously need some kind of way to protect against such things. How does an anarchist society protect itself against raids from outsiders? If history is any indication, not very well. This is one of the many reasons why anarchism and capitalism can't mix. Because the point of capitalism is the generate wealth, but wealth also makes you a juicy target. Which is why capitalist societies have always invested heavily in defense.

If I can't take out my credit card and pay the shitty next door shop that doesn't have a credit card reader or whatever the fuck they're called in english, I can just go to the fucking bank and take some currency they accept. It doesn't negate the exchange and deposit value of bitcoin.

As far as I know, it's the only thing keeping whites alive in South Africa, so... mission fucking accomplished, if only the nigger infestation wasn't already complete.

>only the government can create currency
are you just pretending to be retarded?