Why is it that Anarcho-Capitalists...

Why is it that Anarcho-Capitalists, Anarchists and Libertarianists always promote the benefits (or at least the circumstances) of no taxation, and that taxation is theft:

But they never seem to answer or deal with the problem of state subsidies, low-interest loans, cash injections, legal status and protection, or disasters such as rapid inflation?

In industries such as public transport, state support has always played an essential role. These give the common man and woman access to reach their desired workplaces. This is just one example of how the state and the economy work together. But Anarchists deny even THAT exists!

How is it possible to take such fringe, extreme ideas seriously when all our institutions and societies all recognise how destructive anarchy would be, and how appalling the average life would become?

Really makes you... think...

Other urls found in this thread:

altarandthrone.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Anarcho-Monarchism-4.png
usa.gov/how-laws-are-made
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

From an ancap point of view, public transport is essentially a subsidy for big business; ordinary people's tax money pays for big business to move their goods and workers around, whereas with private roads/trains/etc people pay for what they use

...

>state subsidies
literally zero

>loans
did your family not accumulate wealth for you?
ask your fucking neighbours you filthy beggar.

>cash injections
of course not. but while we're talking cash, it's gotta be gold just gold NO SUBSTITUTES.

>law
unnecessary, the weak fear the strong.

>protection
guns and guns

>disasters
omg it's like patreon and social networks just fucking evaporated?

>public transport
omg the queen is dead! people will stop paying for the bus!!
serious it's so fucking simple I don't get why people think governance is even okay

if the private police unjustly arrests you, wouldn't he be violating the nap?

Literally never understood this meme; no ancap is arguing state police don't ever justly arrest people.

> no ancap is arguing state police don't ever justly arrest people
No true Scotsman?

ANCAPS regularly argue the state (and by extension, it's tools) is illegitimate. What the fuck is wrong with you?

>is it illegal to commit a crime?
>is an unjust arrest a nap violation?
this has to be the best strawman I've ever seen

The REAL question is, who will build the roads? Seems like no ancap or libertarian has thought about this, but without the state we'd have no way of getting around.

I never said that ancaps think the state is legitimate. If there was a gang in your neighborhood that regularly rob people but occasionally stops crime, it's perfectly reasonable to cheer when they stop a murder while still wishing they didn't rob people.

Just leftypol raiding under meme flags
No reason to keep avatar fagging degenerate avatar fag

City planning has effectively forced out efficient methods of transportation to work. The loss in economic efficiency is effectively carved out as additional profit for the government and it's big business beneficiaries.

Where people/businesses really need roads they can pay for them themselves and/or charge for use just like any toll road. There would probably be fewer roads because there are no big taxpayer subsidies for them, so people would have more money in their pocket to spend on their local economy instead.

>I never said that ancaps think the state is legitimate
If the state is illegitimate, state run and funded police are by extension illegitimate. Yes, we get it. Bad people can do good things, and good things can have bad consequences.

What legitimacy does a private police inherently have that state police don't have?

>If there was a gang in your neighborhood that regularly rob people but occasionally stops crime, it's perfectly reasonable to cheer when they stop a murder while still wishing they didn't rob people.
Sure, but that really doesn't have anything to do with what we're talking about.

I could take your point about public transport and say despite it being a subsidy for big business it's also helpful for people who happen to not be big business, effectively rendering the point meaningless from your perspective.

isn't the reason the economy is so shit right now is because of the government?
they devalued their own money,let every dickhead take loans, and expanded welfare instead of building up small economy.
in the end, it was the government fault.
free market cannot exist when you let other people fuck with your money.
obviously human error and stupidity by the masses have some part of this, but the government kept pandering instead of doing what's right. we don't need a government that play's on peoples emotions, we need to work

>What legitimacy does a private police inherently have that state police don't have?
Honestly, I don't think there's anything particularly magical about private police, it's more about making sure there's not monopoly on power. With private police if they unjustly arrest someone there are other police there to intevene, but with stat police who watches the watchman?

>it's also helpful for people who happen to not be big business
So let them decide for themselves if/how much they are willing to pay for it.

All of those distort the market.
"Rapid inflation" are you retarded ? You know rapid inflation and any inflation is caused by our money printing government ? Understand why ancaps want a gold standard: hint hint - this fixed the boom and bust cycles created by fed banker fuckers, any chance at "rapid inflation" gone and this "low interest loan" shit can never exist since only an organic interest rate would exist.
Subsidies are also bullshit. All of them.

>obviously human error and stupidity by the masses have some part of this, but the government kept pandering instead of doing what's right.
Agreed, people tend to be more stupid when it's other people's money on the line

fundraisers.
we donate millions to fucking retards getting gender surgeries, why not roads?

>Honestly, I don't think there's anything particularly magical about private police, it's more about making sure there's not monopoly on power.
I don't know how a police force being private would stop that unless the person owning that police force that those goals in their mission statement.

>With private police if they unjustly arrest someone there are other police there to intervene
You should go read up on private for-profit firefighting services that were commonplace in the 1800s and tell me that's a good idea. Two fucking police forces with two completely different goals and ideas of what "laws" should be the rule of that particular land? That's insane.

>but with stat police who watches the watchman
I don't know what you're trying to say here.

>So let them decide for themselves if/how much they are willing to pay for it.
So should the amount of money you put into the road project dictate how many kilometers you're allowed to drive on it? People who don't pay don't get the road pass?

This is some hyper-Kike kind of future I would rather die than live in.

THE question indeed. Pls answer, ancaps.

>You should go read up on private for-profit firefighting services that were commonplace in the 1800s and tell me that's a good idea.
To add to that I'm saying the purpose of the state is to get things done in as orderly as a fashion as possible.

A firefighting service paid by the public through has one job and only one job, sit around in their designated area and wait for a fire in their designated area. ANCAP firefighting services would rather fight other firefighting services in the way of the fire they want to put out, because instead of being a for-people and society service it's a for-profit service.

I'd say it's a perfectly reasonable and fine thing to want firefighters, police and medics who would rather help you then fight their competition in front of you as your dying or on fire.

you guys really are retarded. private police. how about private fire departments? they work out really well, and private prisons are great.

lets say private police, who decides who gets to be private police, and who decides at what capacity they operate at?

crime wont be an issue since there are no barriers to success. you can start a business with loans ans scoop 100% profits

What's to prevent a corporation from absorbing its constituents, renting property of acres by the billions, and charging fees without calling it authority or taxation?

>fundraisers
So effectively "pay if you want" tax system. Do people get road passes for certain private roads for however much they put into the fund?

Who stops people driving on a road they don't have a permit on? Who arrests them? Who sentences them and for what crime?

Seems like you just described apartment buildings or home builders in general.
W o w

Larry the landlord doesn't own nation-sized properties.

this is a hard concept to get your head around but there is no such thing as a utopia, crime won't be an issue, you think this based on what exactly? what happens when you start a business and take out a loan , your business fails, do you pay back the loan? do the private police arrest you if you don't pay back the loan?

>public transport, state support has always played an essential role
That's because it's a state run enterprise. Makes you thinko

>Two fucking police forces with two completely different goals and ideas of what "laws" should be the rule of that particular land? That's insane.
No, the OWNER of that piece of land decides the laws, the police just do the dirty work.

>I don't know what you're trying to say here.
I typo'd state police. The point I was trying to make is that with one government police force there's no way to fight back if they get out of control, it's the same reason why the USA has the second amendment, just take to it's logical extreme.

>So should the amount of money you put into the road project dictate how many kilometers you're allowed to drive on it?
If you are one of the investors in the road then of course you would have to agree on it's rules of usage before you pay up, it's just like any contract.

A homeowner renting a house and an apartment managing company that owns and entire complex are not comparable in the slightest.

>I'd say it's a perfectly reasonable and fine thing to want firefighters, police and medics who would rather help you then fight their competition in front of you as your dying or on fire.
What are you, a communist?

>investors in the road

you mean toll roads?

the police you describe are known as private paramilitary groups

> The point I was trying to make is that with one government police force there's no way to fight back if they get out of control,
That's just incorrect and a presupposition you use in order to support your theory that unlimited amounts of private organization not bound by any law other than the laws they make up.

>it's the same reason why the USA has the second amendment, just take to it's logical extreme.
kek what, the 2nd amendment is a state sanctioned right to rebel against the state if things get to harry, what incentive does a for-profit company have to give you the right to destroy them?

You're not making a single lick of sense my dude.

>your theory that unlimited amounts of private organization not bound by any law other than the laws they make up ***are better than a singular organization

> local economy
So, economies of scale BTFO. Also fuck international trade and internet.

>Anarcho-Capitalists, Anarchists and Libertarianists always promote the benefits (or at least the circumstances) of no taxation, and that taxation is theft:
I consider myself close to a libertarian. I don't believe taxation is theft. I'm more liberal than right-wing thinking though tbf.

First let's all get together and kill all leftists and commies.
We can always infight over our small ideological differences later.

>don't violate the NAP guys
>but we're allowed to xD

>the police you describe are known as private paramilitary groups
Call them what you like
They don't have to give you permission if they violated the NAP, that's what the other police are for.

Communists are not human.

>> TLDR
>> "Why don't libertarians believe that socialism and statism are good things?"

...

>still sees nothing wrong with fire brigades fighting other fire brigades in front of burning buildings
I'm confined most of you people just want absolute chaos because you're downtrodden nihilists.

You're making a good argument for "Hate speech isn't free speech." Dehumanization is a common staple of Communism, might want to search inside yourself and figure out where you picked that up from.

>lets say private police, who decides who gets to be private police
The market.
Economies of scale are not sound if they only exist through state subsidies.

Easy, the owner of the land makes all "legal" decisions. And if the owner hás enough land and tenants he is King. Support Anarcho-Monarchism!
altarandthrone.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Anarcho-Monarchism-4.png

>The market.
Articulate what this means. Popular opinion and consensus? Is there a voting process?

This is the problem, you talk of absolute utopia but can't walk us through the process of how that happens.

The fire brigades don't fight, they don't put your house out if you don't have a contract with them

What speech? Communists have no speech. No arguments. No soul. All they have is a thousand twisted lies.
If humanity is to survive, then they must be wiped out.

> No, the OWNER of that piece of land decides the laws, the police just do the dirty work.

> Be power hungry and lazy private policeman.
> Good friends with other private policemen.
> Have guns.
> Kill le land owner in his sleep.
> Forge documents of selling land to me and my friends private policemen.
> Be new owners of land.
> Keep guns.
> Repeat with other owners.
> Be First King.

Why don't you just come out and say it, you're a kike. Muh profits in the expense of human suffering, that's a tenant straight out of kike fueled communism.

>still effectively making the argument that hate speech isn't free speech

This.

Anyone can be the police, there's no need for consensus, if you own the land you make the rules and you hire whoever you want to police them

Ancaps/libertarians are dumb.

why would you need a permit if theres no government?

lending will be harder to get because it will be based on merit, since there is no law enforcement, defaulting or bankruptcy will be more rare
we will have the same thing as we did back when no police existed, a community mediator

I come and kill you with my police force it's now my land and there isn't anyone I violated the NAP with anymore since they're dead. There is no incentive for me not to do this because I may or may not have a larger force than you. What happens to me?

Someone maybe or maybe doesn't come and do the same thing to me based on whatever principles he or the private police force operates on.

>why would you need a permit if theres no government?
Okay, so you build the road with your quasi-taxes and I use it without paying. Thanks sucker.

There's nothing stopping this happening now, just replace private with public
There's nothing stopping people setting up charities for people who can't afford private services
YOU UNDERSTAND

so what happens when you leave your private property? lets say i go to a business to buy something, what prevents that business from arresting me taking everything i own or killing me outright, or do we all just stay on our property and not have any contact with anyone else out of fear of false imprisonment or murder.

The Commies can speak all they want while I push them into the oven. But I doubt I will hear anything important. They haven't had a new idea in 150 years.

user, it's simple. Nobody will want to interact with you because you're bawd fer buzinesss :^)

wow violate the NAP much?

woooooow, your stupidity is really aggressive in my opinion, might standing over here on my private property?

wooooow

Cucks and Lefties will hate this! They are authoritarian trash!

if i can't conduct business how will i pay for my private police? i guess i will just take out a loan from the not-a-bank and use that to pay my private police.

no. we got back to community laws instead of federal law, you want to be in a community? fine. you have to pay into the system the community have. don't like the system? start a new community with a new system.
free market.

You violated the NAP of whoever was due to inherit, they'll hire other police to get their inheritance back.

A business that robs and murders people wouldn't get many visitors

and I'll just kill them or take my conquest if there was nobody next to inherit.

My community is hyper aggressive and bigger than your and better equipped, good thing there's nothing in the way of me and you besides your police force that will protect you as long as you have the funds.

making a superhero larper will help you out or something, sure as fuck nobody else is going to be incentivised to.

Use food you idiot!

so i am in a community, we are doing really well, we all chip in a little bit every month to keep out community up and running, make sure our roads are in great shape, make sure our police and fire services are well staffed and funded. why does that sound oddly familiar to the way things are now?

robbing and murdering is their business, whos going to stop them?

Murderers and robbers would absolutely love my business though. Fill me in on how exactly evil and bad people suddenly stop existing in ANCAP utopias.

here is how it works:

a community have elect leader
elected police.
don't like the laws? good, you vote on EVERY law.
in federal law, you vote every year for some fucker don't even like.
business between communities will be made based on agreements sent to larger communities so everyone stay committed

Wait, is it possible blacks aren't savages but Anarchists?

no, because the government does not allow citizens to vote on laws, so it basically does what it wants. which is dangerous to liberty

hahahah you guys are fucking retarded.

official ANCAP manifesto

shit is the same as it is now, only we say it's different.

>because the government does not allow citizens to vote on laws
Is the government not made up of citizens?

>Why is it that Anarcho-Capitalists, Anarchists and Libertarianists always promote the benefits (or at least the circumstances) of no taxation, and that taxation is theft:
>But they never seem to answer or deal with the problem of state subsidies, low-interest loans, cash injections, legal status and protection, or disasters such as rapid inflation?

They do, but you don't have the attention span to stay in the thread long enough and read their answers to "lol who will build the roads"

Also a lot of confirmation bias.

usa.gov/how-laws-are-made

seriously you guys are fucking retarded.

bro, the government is EVIL
when you enter a government position they make you take the EVIL PLEDGE so you can only do EVIL THINGS to your constituents

If they are only killing or robbing people on their property it's not a crime if people know in advance what's going to happen, otherwise private police.
They don't, but they can only be an asshole on property they own.

no, absolutely not.
the government does not allow citizens to backtrack on shitty laws, when a law is made, its set in stone. even if it was a grave mistake.
referendums take too fucking long and it does not even represents the population, there is too much bureaucracy in between

>They don't, but they can only be an asshole on property they own.
And are you assuming these properties are going to less powerful than everyone else because....?

>no, absolutely not.
Well that's funny since a celebrity just became the most powerful person on the entire planet a few months ago.

God damned you're stupid.

Y'know, in some cities in Mexico you have a pull out where any privateer can drive a minibus (combista). In US cities we have giant state-run bus systems which are never on time and aren't reactive to changing demands. Guess which one actually functions?

But yea, I'm sure we should design cities around decrepit UK-style state-run transportation instead of the other way 'round.

the vast majority of united states and europe is against immigration. how do you explain what is happening right now?

ill tell you why, its because you elected a body which is so fucking huge (the UN and its subsidiary) to make up rules for everyone based on some arbitrary bullshit

Fuck the French revolution and the Puritan fascists!

Because they're bad for business, you can't make money if someone else has already murdered your customers

so there would be no common law, or law of the land. no person would be safe unless they were in their own home? what about guns, i'm sitting on my property and i shoot my nextdoor neighbour? it's not a crime because my land doesn't recognise that as a crime

there will be a law, but the government will be so small and localized that you have a decision in every law that's being made

you bring up an interesting point, immigration. how do you prevent people from invading the pseudo country?

The bullet entered their property, thus violating the NAP

how is that small government paid for?

what NAP they are dead, how about i claim all the land around their land and set a huge fire and they burn to death, i don't allow their private fire brigade on my property or my roads, if they try to flee the fire onto my property i kill them.

you don't let them in, is that even a question?
ok and lets just say they do come in
they don't pay taxes, they can't be part of the community, the government can't fund their stay because they are illegal, so they just escape from one jungle to another

>Because they're bad for business, you can't make money if someone else has already murdered your customers
>they're bad for business

Not if their business if killing people and stealing their shit, making themselves as strong as they can possibly allow. To be an ANCAP you have to be a Dwarnaist. So when you ANCAPanon get taken as slave to a slave owning society located not too far from your property and you lose everything, do you chalk that up to "Well, should have protected myself better I guess."

You're either going to breakdown and realize why you got yourself into that position or you're going to still continue being the ardent ANCAP in captivity in the exact same way Solzhenitsyn described the ardent Communists in the Gulags still spouting Soviet propaganda while feasting on the rats in your cell.

Traditions ARE NOT laws, therefore traditions and common law (as in medieval common law) would remain. But the modern bullshit must GO, ALL OF IT. ALL THAT IS SOLID WILL EVAPORATE. TYRANNY WILL BE REPLACED BY ANARCHY AND LAWS BY TRADITIONS AND COMPASSION.

Loans could easily be sourced through crowdfunding or financiers the same way they are done now... the only difference is a few government bureaucrats will not have their hand in the pot.

lets say a country like china decides to invade, what do you do?

why would anyone pay taxes? taxes for what?

taxes, you want to be part of a community with police and shit no?
you don't want to be part of a community? good. then you will have no roads.
the difference is, people have control over laws and that's what matters
that's if you decide to sign up for a community

>benefits (or at least the circumstances) of no taxation, and that taxation is theft

Because benefits are beneficial
And taxation is theft.

>But they never seem to answer or deal with the problem of state subsidies, low-interest loans, cash injections, legal status and protection, or disasters such as rapid inflation?

Well actually we do all the time, but u actually need to listen or actively inform yourself.
Being an ignorant or lazy faggit is no excuse for theft.

Can you answer the question? How do 350 million americans broken up into a million different enclaves of various laws combat an external threat like an invasion from a foreign power?