How would a libertarian society have prevented this?

How would a libertarian society have prevented this?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_firefighting#Rome
wildfirex.com/private-firefighting/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Toast Marshmellows

>1 post by this id
shill detected

Why prevent that, mostly pakis, niggers and Muslims died in this fire. This was in a poor part of London. The building was full of shitskins. Let them die.

Pay for a private fire fighting force to save your office and your office alone.

Yes, in a libertarian society that building would've never came into being

Their homeless so they wouldn't libe there.

The fire is violating the NAP

Without roads no one could even get to the apartments in the first place

There wouldn't be a government housing tower.

By firing a tomahawk missile at the apartment the moment it started smoking because the smoke violated the NAP by inconveniencing the guests a cookout being held by the warlord next door.

Prevent it? In a Libertardian society this would be a weekly occurrence, with the added bonus of this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_firefighting#Rome

...

In a libertarian society the best contractors would've worked for the best price to construct the best building out of the highest quality materials.

Instead we got a half-ass building built by some government employed contractors who only did as well as they had to to avoid getting fired.

/thread

Libertarians don't believe in prevention.

Librarians are not known to be good firefighters.

Demographically.

Any society that had become this nonwhite would not be libertarian.

Actually a pretty good argument

By keeping out muslims.

fire would be privatized

>He doesn't know about private firefighters

wildfirex.com/private-firefighting/

Libertarian >> No building and fire regulations >> 2 of such a fires per day in any big city

>but if you can't live without the government, how can you live without the government?

Being the fence-sitting cuckolds they are, libertarians would only let more brownskins in and do nothing about it.

The contractors of build it for the best price for the highest quality possible

If it went on fire anyway Private firefighters and the company that built it would be sued by all the families

There wouldn't have been government subsidized housing in the first place.

Yeah no. Overheads are a thing regardless of what fantasy you live in.

Interesting.

You'd have to change the laws of physics to prevent fire faggot.

There would be no roads for the refugees to come into the country on.

the laws of physics are a misogynist patriarchal social construct.

Yeah, in a libertarian society we'd all live in space and have evolved to survive without oxygen so house fires would be a thing of the past.

B-but, the best things and the best stuff because the best reasons!

There would be only mudhuts in a libertarian society.

fireproof buildings resultant of hyper effective markets not wanting to lose one red cent to some blunder of safety

The third world is way ahead of you Gary Johnsons. You have a house fire here and they turn up and won't do anything until payment is agreed.

A price well worth paying for freedom from taxation. (you do have to wonder who starts all the fires though)

praying and changing there facebook profile picture.

>fireproof buildings
Most consumers wouldn't be able to afford such a luxury so more likely you'll just have an oversupply of dirt cheap accommodation that isn't fireproof being the assumption is that such events are too rare to be worth the premium on offer.

The people that burned to death would stop spending money with the landlords that have dangerous buildings and their profit would have been lowered.

That my friend, is the invisible hand of the free market at work.

A libertarian society wouldn't have a government-built and -maintained public housing project in the first place, genius.

Marcus Crassus invented that in first century BC Rome. He had his slaves sit on top of the hills looking for smoke, and when they saw some he would have them all run to the fire. Then he'd find the owner of the building and negotiate to buy it from them. If they didn't sell he let it burn a bit, and then offered them a lower rate. When they finally sold, he had his people put the fire out, and then rebuild tenaments on the spot. In this way, he wound up being the landlord for half of Rome.

This.
If i were a private fire fighter i think it would be easy to have already formed a cartrl with all other firefighters. we wont raise a finger to save you and your family unless you hand over all your wealth.
"Bu-bu-but it would ruin your reputation!"
Dead men tell no tales.

They wouldn't of deducted the fire departments pay for social programs.

How do you know which landlord has a dangerous Building? Or will you only avoid the ones that already had burned buildings? I can tell you how to prevent it. Landlords need to pay from their own pocket damages that subpar construction caused. This guy for example would owe 2 million dollars per lost life for every dead person to every family.

>it actually came true

Cool bot-generated slide thread.

Prevent it? We would cause it in every Muslim majority block and poor gov regulations would mean that poor people wouldn't be able to afford private security. We could fight the shitskins out of our land.

Increased competition = increased competitive output = superior products at lower prices.

Free-market wins again.

>>I can tell you how to prevent it. Landlords need to pay from their own pocket damages that subpar construction

What will compel the landlord to make these costly repairs? More regulation, or a more free market?

The answer is both, but only one costs money and hinders the market.

No regulations they just will have to take the Responsibility. Its logical.