The best argument against AnCap is "muh roads!"

>the best argument against AnCap is "muh roads!"

Stay stupid you statist cucks

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=d45x4OpMoow
youtu.be/r6QMmrM4BmI
youtu.be/RX5SkpGw1wM
fee.org/articles/how-policing-works-in-a-privatized-city/
na.unep.net/geas/archive/pdfs/geas_jun_12_carrying_capacity.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

...

>b-but muh free market
>b-but monopolies only appear due to government intervention

No but these trips are a good argument against those dubs.


Seriously though. Ancap is retarded.

and before them myspace and long forgotten video hosting sites were monopolies

If the market decides that Twitter/Kikebook suck so much they'll move to another social media site. Nobody is forcing them to use Twitter/Kikebook

pic related

And just to push it in: BEHOLD! Libertarians in a nutshell.
youtube.com/watch?v=d45x4OpMoow

It Is a basic arguments AnCaps haven't been able to refute.

No, it's just fucking stupid. Ancap is incompatible with actual freedom. You can't have a ruling class that rules over all just because they can afford to. Or have food industries without regulations, or banking /financial systems without regulations. This is fucking stupid.

>all these statist cuck shills

>It Is a basic arguments AnCaps haven't been able to refute.
This. You can't inb4 an actual objection. Or, rather, you can.

It just makes you look like a tard.

Anarcho-capitalism is an oxymoron. Anarchism is a left wing idea, not because of some arbitrary economic conception, but because the basis of that pseudo-ideology is that people are fundamentally good, so everything would just work fine without a state. Obviously, people are NOT good in reality, and if we add capitalism, and money to this wickeness, we get an even larger clusterfuck than vanilla anarchism.

what's stopping a large company with a monopoly over something using force to prevent an alternative from coming about once they get powerful enough?
If there is no government who's to stop them from hiring armoured goons to kill rivals?
I hate An-Caps because they make the libertarians look stupid by association, a government is necessary to maintain the free market, not to intervene in any way, but to make sure no one else does either.

>a government is necessary to maintain the free market, not to intervene in any way, but to make sure no one else does either.
Fucking this.

It's like playing laser tag and then someone suddenly brings in a live fire gun.

AnCaps consider this okay, because clearly the person's choice should be respected and anyone who doesn't like it can just get off the playground.

roads would be kept and maintained by communities and businesses that want to connect themselves with other communities and businesses. Nobody would get anywhere without roads, it's a pretty basic need that would need to be filled. It's incredibly beneficial for businesses to connect themsleves to communities and other businesses anyways.

AnCap just means that all private goods and services are owned with no government. Government would still fill a role of policing and justice.

and what is the current system? Monopolies set up by too many regulations and certifications? An extreme barrier of entry into the market?

AnCap doesn't mean 0 govt, it means 0 govt involved in private trade. Hired goons or force is against AnCap

> giving unlimited power to corporations

Surely cannot go wrong. :^)

>roads would be kept and maintained by communities and businesses that want to connect themselves with other communities and businesses. Nobody would get anywhere without roads, it's a pretty basic need that would need to be filled. It's incredibly beneficial for businesses to connect themsleves to communities and other businesses anyways.

Idiotic urbanite detected.

>I hate An-Caps because they make the libertarians look stupid by association
>implying lolbertarians aren't just as stupid

>AnCap doesn't mean 0 govt, it means 0 govt involved in private trade. Hired goons or force is against AnCap
So who would stop them?
>AnCap just means that all private goods and services are owned with no government. Government would still fill a role of policing and justice.
That's Minarchism.

You just toppled your entire house of card.

GG no RE

such a non argument it's unbelievable

I was meaning that in order for Ancap (ie. no govt intervention in free trade whatsoever) to work, people would have to be benevolent. Otherwise it would degrade to something like late 18thc century capitalism.

Who would stop armed goons? The government or police.

Wrong way round my friend.

The best argument is that white people create better societies/economies, so non-whites will always be drawn to them (even without welfare state).

Ancaps need to defend their borders.

>AnCap doesn't mean 0 govt
from the Wikipedia article on the subject: Anarcho-capitalism is a political philosophy that advocates the elimination of the state in favor of individual sovereignty, private property, and free markets. Anarcho-capitalists believe that in the absence of statute (law by decree or legislation), society would improve itself through the discipline of the free market (or what its proponents describe as a "voluntary society").
Have you considered that maybe you aren't actually an An Cap?

If you have an argument to make I'm happy to hear it

...

>
roads would be kept and maintained by communities and businesses that want to connect themselves with other communities and businesses. Nobody would get anywhere without roads, it's a pretty basic need that would need to be filled. It's incredibly beneficial for businesses to connect themsleves to communities and other businesses anyways.
Roads which will be held at what standard and at what cost? How would you held accountable the road owner if its conditions are inadequate yet it's the only road there is? If small towns leave too small profit does that mean they don't get roads? How would the competition between corporations and trading communities ensure that they all cooperate in such a big an altruistic way as to ensure there's a proper infrastructure that is well maintained?

If you want your an-cap so badly, just look at what happened in the late 1800s to early 1900s in the US.

>Corporations with little to no regulation whatsoever
>Creation of corporate "towns" for workers to keep them on or near-site at all times
>Paid with false currency that can only be redeemed at corporate trading posts or outlets so as to not lose a profit
>Min-maxed wages to the point where the bare minimum of food, drink would be the result of 12+ hours of virtual slave labor

Fuck out of here with that weak an-cap bullshit.

>>the best argument against AnCap is "muh roads!"

No, here are some better ones:

-natural monopolies are inefficient and constitute the theft of natural resources from the nation. Accept dat lockean proviso and you'll be fine senpai, but then you'll be a geoanarchist instead. Enjoy your LVT.
-just as communism fails because it distributes the incentives for all productive activities over a lot of people, anarcho-capitalism will be inefficient because it allows the incentive for some activities to stay distributed- for example, if global warming is real there is a positive externality to using renewable energy, or in another example a company that invents some intellectual property won't get the full benefit of the production of knowledge. This results in a malinvestment of resources. Can be fixed by a mutualistic or nationalistic culture (requires incredible social capital) or by a central government that evaluates the benefits/harm to parties external a contract and supplies a Pigou tax or subsidy accordingly. This is not just an argument for government, it is an argument for a centralized government, preferably a global government.
-Although eventually we need free markets, we need the nationstates of today to defend their workers from unfair and inefficient competition. Trade between nations is meant to create wealth through specialization, but if instead the interaction reflects artificially low labor prices we may need to halt trade to pressure them into allowing a free market on their soil.

>such a non argument it's unbelievable
Do I really have to explain suburban decay to you?

ancapism might have been viable when we were colonizing the west with 100000000% productive growth rates,

unfortunately it falls apart in the current scenario of forever unhinged growth required in a world with vanishing resources.

t. former ancultist

Tl;dr: shut the fuck up and support the NWO already.

And i'm not saying this in a way meant to discredit and/or attack your argument, i firmly believe that a central world government with absolute power would be the best thing for humanity as a whole

what? the quote you replied to was markedly anti-globalist

Shit, just realized how bad my formatting was. Redo.

1. natural monopolies are inefficient and constitute the theft of natural resources from the nation. Accept dat lockean proviso and you'll be fine senpai, but then you'll be a geoanarchist instead. Enjoy your LVT.


2. just as communism fails because it distributes the incentives for all productive activities over a lot of people, anarcho-capitalism will be inefficient because it allows the incentive for some activities to stay distributed- for example, if global warming is real there is a positive externality to using renewable energy, or in another example a company that invents some intellectual property won't get the full benefit of the production of knowledge. This results in a malinvestment of resources. Can be fixed by a mutualistic or nationalistic culture (requires incredible social capital) or by a central government that evaluates the benefits/harm to parties external a contract and supplies a Pigou tax or subsidy accordingly. This is not just an argument for government, it is an argument for a centralized government, preferably a global government.
3. Although eventually we need free markets, we need the nationstates of today to defend their workers from unfair and inefficient competition. Trade between nations is meant to create wealth through specialization, but if instead the interaction reflects artificially low labor prices we may need to halt trade to pressure them into allowing a free market on their soil. This basically implies a sort of cautious nationalism.

If you accept all three arguments as valid, you will go from ancap to a nationalistic georgian minarchist, just like I did.

Physical contact between the family is important. It leads to closeness and proper bonding.

It can go too far, however.
For example, imagine your daughter suffers from depression and anxiety. She hasn't told anyone except for you. And it's you, her father, who she turns to when she's feeling down. And one Friday night she has had a breakdown, and she just needs someone to hold. So she comes and cuddles with you, her father, on the couch. She cries a little bit, but eventually she falls asleep, straddling you. But you start to feel slow rhythmic movements against your pelvis. She is slowly pushing her pussy against your dick, back and forth. Her legs wrap around you a little tighter as she positions herself so that her clit is rubbing against your now erect cock.

Obviously in this situation, the wrong thing for the father to do would be to strip her off and fuck her. But nor should you throw her off. The best approach, of course, is to pretend not to notice, and lay there with your daughter as she slowly brings herself to orgasm, rubbing her clit against your cock. She can't entirely control the quivers which run down her body as she reaches her peak, nor her sweaty panting, but in the morning, when you both wake up and give each other a morning kiss, still lying in the straddle position, you pretend you never noticed a thing.

Read closer
>Can be fixed by [...] or by a central government that evaluates the benefits/harm to parties external a contract and supplies a Pigou tax or subsidy accordingly. This is not just an argument for government, it is an argument for a centralized government, preferably a global government.

...

It's an odd sort of shitpost

No bruh I am kind of middle ground in an odd way.

We need nationalism for ensuring a free market in nations that compete with us so that resources won't be mispriced worldwide (like in the case of China lowering the price of labor worldwide because its workers can't unionize, harming American workers in the process) and we need a government with global authority to ensure that external effects are internalized via taxation and subsidy.
Ideally the military power backing up this system should be broken up between a world government, national governments and the people. The national governments should be just large enough to subdue a portion of their people, but not large enough to win a civil war against their people. The global government should have enough military power to facilitate Pigou taxation and subsidy with some minimal support from the nation states- after all, they all benefit from Pigou policy being enforced consistently.

wtf australia

What's wrong a police state? Most people are morons who need to be coerced into behaving.

You can't argue that.

The best argument against ancap is that you believe in anything youtu.be/r6QMmrM4BmI

We could have had this instead of VaginaBuster 3.

Someone else could offer poretctinon. Open a cop business

Thank you Italy you are greatest ally youtu.be/RX5SkpGw1wM

...

Still can't understand the whole ideology behind the guy but the drawings are kewl

First : Facebook and Youtube dont have monopoly
Theres thousands video hosting sites with smaller market share
And loads of other social networks
And its fucking hilarious that OP said Twitter/ Facebook/Youtube
Because they are in competition with eachother.

>Russia is a statist shithole
>doen't have roadt anyway

Not an argument

guessing the future is not a refutation
nor an argument
gilipollas

>being poor
>shitty negotiation power, no opportunities, shitty economy, shitty everything
>hate reality
>blame bussiness of the situation of the poor

Daily reminder wronkthinking is not a mistake, they're not humans, they're drones programed to parasite, they lack reason and shame

Give them what they deserve and welcome them with guns.

Also

>Somalia
>health care
>defence
>monopolies
>policing
>social unity
>education
>waste disposal
>infrastructure

Also

>really, muh fucking roads tho.

Has anyone ever met an an cap that was over the age of 24/not a blithering idiot?

where are your functional ancap societies then?

stay mad, poorfag

>Be 400 years ago
>Where are your non-monarchy societies?
>Everyone knows societies can only exist with an absolute ruler managing them as their property!

Even though your post is basically appeal to status quo I am going to give you a serious reply.
For a good example of an entirely private city (private roads, streets, sewage, electricity lines, etc) I can refer you to Atlantic Station: fee.org/articles/how-policing-works-in-a-privatized-city/

what are network effects?

Roman republics you fucktard, or the italian republics that existed during that time.
Also there were very few "absolute" monarchy in History. And even for one of it's most representative subject ,Louis XIV of France, was heavily balanced by the Church.

Your shit is just an over theorized thought experiment that will never leave books.

what if you are poor and need the police?

Scarcity driven consumption is destroying the natural systems that we depend on.
When money is the bottom line cultural and natural resources are seen as little more than cash factories.
Capitalism is intrinsically unsustainable.
So is socialism/communism.
The only answer is a natural law(science)/ resource based economy where consumption is driven by abundance and not scarcity.

>Roman republics
Yeah dude, some stuff from +1000 years before only intellectuals knew about. Pretty sure the common folk knew about republics and shieeet. Retard.

Democratic republics were as much of a fringe "thought experiment that will never leave the books" as libertarian anarchism is today. There have been private law societies back in the past, namely Ireland, Iceland and many others. It is up to you guys to educate yourselves and leave your prejudice.

Damn that driving flash got really realistic

In a libertarian society whats stopping me from firing a howitzer in a suburban neighbourhood onto land I own?

What happens if I surround everyone's house with a road with an then police it with my own private army.
The fee for using my road is 50 bucks, if you don't comply I shoot you.

Can you monetize breathing rights in a libertarian society?

>he doesn't understand the way innovation and development increase carrying capacity
>he posts unscourced graphs regarding his viewpoint that don't even have scale to them for reference

>laughingeconomists.png

Enjoy living in bondage to your local warlord, corporate cuck.

>srss about being a meme cap ever

>he thinks we can transcend our ecology with technology
MY SIDES!
All technology is ultimately dependent on natural processes.
The unsustainable consumption of natural resources will diminish our ability to produce new technology.

First you would need to build the road so you would have to buy the terrain from them, because they would have probably homesteaded or already owned it. It is very likely that even if they sold you it to you they would have made you sign an agreement of free movement through your road. There's also the fact that very few DRO courts would consider shooting people an adequate response to trespassing property and you would be liable to private law enforcement.

>Can you monetize breathing rights in a libertarian society?
Air is not a scarce resource in Earth's surface. The only places where air is monetized today is underwater for Scuba diving, in very deep mine shafts and in space.

Economics 101.

>t. a New-Yorker living in mountains of horse shit

I want borders to keep foreigners out.

I'm from nw Arkansas bub.
These mountains are more like foothills

Then why do you support the state keeping all the streets forcefully open?
Under the current context once they have trespassed the border they are free to roam the entire country regardless of the natives opinion.

In a private law society every street is a border and every neighborhood is free to kick out niggers/minorities as they please.

Freedom of association discriminates more than any border ever will.

You should take a look back through history, m8. For the past few hundred years, we've been "in danger" of running out of a lot of shit. Coal, oil, viable food options, etc. Every time, innovation has spread that gap. Solar power. Nuclear power. Alternative plastic sources. Improved farming methods.

We're on the cusp of a lot of really cool things that will further increase that gap. Thorium reactors, the infant stage of fusion power, the birth of vertical farming and asteroid mining. We have a lot of really neat shit to look forward to.

Fantasy 101. Some fucker would buy Manhattan bridge and extort people to cross.

na.unep.net/geas/archive/pdfs/geas_jun_12_carrying_capacity.pdf
Not the source for the graph but a good reveiw of human carrying capacity

So entering any town/village/street/random bit of private property would be a border crossing. Kek.

The best argument against ancap is that there are specific challenges that a more advanced civilization faces that requires a government.
I'll give you an example. Every year, the FBI gathers up a few million in resources to go hunting for missing children who were likely taken by human traffickers. They hire private investigators for the task, and have to either get warrants to actually go onto the properties and take the children back from people who will ultimately kill them, or get similar clearance with foreign governments in the event in which they have to cross national boundaries.

You ancaps have.....what answer to this problem exactly? Can an ancap society raise this kind of money? Who's going onto private property to retrieve these children, and what authority do they have to do so?

>This triggers the ancap

Yeah, nah. Look at page three. The caption on the graph states that the carrying capacity given by the majority of the studies suggests that capacity is less than or equal to 8 billion. Twenty studies said that. Fourty five said it was greater, with the next highest, fourteen, saying sixteen billion. The majority of their studies do NOT say that carrying capacity is less than or equal to 8 billion, in fact, less than a third do.

Not loaded at all.

We are but it's simple not enough.
We aren't making the transition to clean energy fast enough(because there is still money to be made in fossil fuels)
I actually own a 10 acre farm and a 120x25 ft Aquaponics greenhouse. It's a fast growing industry but we are along way from sustianible farming practices.
Nearly all of our food comes from industrial practices.
Oceans are warming, acidifying and overfished running out of fish
And let's not forget the real problem, it's people in the devolping world that are forced to destroy the environment they depend on to survive.

Maybe you should read past the third page

Why don't libertarians celebrate infrastructure?

Please don't conflate libertarians with ancaps. They're not equivalent positions.
Libertarians
>No taxation without representation.
Ancaps
>No taxation...tldr;

First, show that force or coercion is a moral harm.
Secondly, show that the free market would bring about THE BEST situation, long term, without intervention. Not the most efficient, but the most good for all of the nation and/or humanity.
Thirdly, explain why most nations with decentralized force and governance are shit tier hell holes, while those with a proper state with a monopoly on force are all successful (t. weber)

im no ancap. but i guess the answer wouyld be that the family with the missing child would pay some private investigator to search for their child right? if they dont have the moeny they would lend it from the bank, family or lose the child.

>>health care
I don't want "health care". I want medical services from whomever I judge as competent to provide them with no protectionist government insinuating themselves in the contractual relationship between equals under the law.

Because any example of the government doing anything good (regardless of how inefficient it is) triggers them.

The one thing I never got is the argument that government is bad because it doesn't care about making a profit.
Isn't that one of the best things about government projects? That they can pursue extensive or long term projects that don't have a clear RoI for several decades, if not more?
The RoI is improving the nation in some manner, allowing the economy to grow in some manner, allowing them to get those taxes back later on down the road.

Truly, public funding utilizing private corporations (as much as possible) is the best.

>inb4 why can't the people spend their own money collectively on hiring those firms, instead of the government taking their money and spending it for them
Because the people are stupid, often don't know what they want or need, and government quite nicely does away with coordination issues over large scales.

think the possiblities with a ancap society.

ahh nice the sun in shining, time to go outside to the park!

Wops I dont own the park, gotta pay the goyim.

So they can either get a loan for whatever the investigator charges (possibly paying into the 6 figure range), while hoping that the person in question actually lets him onto his fucking property (this is an ancap society, remember? MUH COERCION), or stand by and wait as their child is raped until puberty and murdered in cold blood.
Sounds like a lovely place to live. Hopefully you'll forgive the overwhelming majority of sane fucking people for preferring things as they are now.

>Be a hard working ancap that manages to retire at 40
>puts his savings into building perfect house
>meme cap moves in
>a year passes and a pig farmer buys a lot next to them, now his house stinks of shit.
>sewage company buys a river close to the property for a pipe. Pipe is poorly built due to 0 regulations resulting in sewage leaking out.
>meme cap kills himself after his world view is ruined.

Wew lad

>400 years later the free market has finally worked out the kinks and the world is back to the level of infrastructure and safety that it once was
>world is pretty much dominated by an implicit state regardless, such is the tangled web of corporate alliances and vassalization of varying courts and law systems

you already pay for your parks idiot unless you're a welfare leech

And? That's kind of the point of taxes, to fund public utilities with no chance of short-sighted but self-interested individuals pulling out and fucking everyone else over.

Everyone (supposedly) pays taxes, and the tax dollars of everyone are spent the same way. It's perfectly fair.

to assume a certain figure range is pretty stupid. it obviously depends on several different factors - like education, resources, skills, experience etc.. When it comes to property though, there would most likely be some law that prohibits murder and excessive violence even in ancap societies, that would allow people with certain jurisdiction(/education) to search properties if the ones being searched are heavily suspected for breaking the law. The effectiveness of this system would most likely develop in the same degree that any other private sector would.

there is more

gotta pay the guy who owns the roads to be able to walk over there.

gotta pay a bike-fee to be able to cycle over there

gotta pay the guy who owns the sunshine there

gotta pay the guy who owns the air to be allowed to breathe there

do you realize how retarded this utopia is?

>law
There's no state, remember?
Whether or not a "law" is enforced depends on whether or not that individual subscribes to it.

Without coercion, the law of a territory is worth only as much as the paper its printed on.

You're too stupid to understand the underlying argument. AnCap societies would be unable to provide an optimal amount of public goods, if any at all. Such societies would also be unequipped to handle market failures.

There's a reason why virtually no economist supports AnCap.

Facebook and gogel dominance is maintained by govt., because it`s a perfect instrument of propaganda. With cancelling govt. elites wont disappear tho. So it will end up like , but not for the home - for the whole system.

What ancap is about - is abolishing the democracy (or just stable regime) and creating vacuum of power. That`s the only functioning part of it. Like for any other anarchy.

Then comes bolshevism.

I wasn't assuming, I was giving a hypothetical (as in, it could possibly go that high). It would depend on how long it actually takes to find the fucking kid.
If you're talking a months-long operation involving a credible investigator, it would absolutely break 6 figures.
Also, what this guy said.

WTF I hate roads now.

true, i dont subscribe to the ancap doctrine. but even if the case were that there would be no law, then moral codes would also follow that same road, which means there would be people willing to brake into houses and do morally wrong things if the incentives were high enough. Isn't this what the police/fbi is currently doing, standing above the law?