DF also gives the example of Saga period Iceland (going back 1000 years or more) as a model for government and law enforcement today. This is ludicrous. There are more recent (and close to home) examples of societies in the history of the American West that had no government expenditure on law enforcement, with high levels of rights and property rights protection. However, the vigilante justice of the period did not follow due process and was extremely harsh (immediate death upon apprehension for alleged theft). Few people would trade our expensive modern criminal justice system for the fiscally cheap vigilante justice systems of the pre-government American west<< From http://world.std.com/~mhuben/andreas.html Unless they have no choice? The pieces are falling into place.The price of
Ironically, DF says he would accept (as a compromise) a tax on unproduced resources like land. Until now he has been arguing that taxation equals theft and that the government does not have the right to tax. Now he is willing to accept billions of dollars of property tax. What happened to
APster as justice by consensus and libertarian Laura Norda.(DF stands for dangerous fiend and david Friedman) liberty is eternal vigilantism. the righteous indignation against government and taxation? If DF really believes taxation is the moral equivalent of violent theft via men with guns, then no amount would be OK. How is it possible for a libertarian to morally justify accepting this theft but not others? << Declan was on here recently bleating about this,maybe he,or davy's mate,Timmy can help us out here?They have exhibited the morality of a shithouse rat so far.
It is also ironic that DF chooses to live in a city and a state with relatively high property tax, sales tax, income tax and extensive local government services and regulations. If he were really convinced that taxation is the moral equivalent of violent theft via men with guns, then why doesn't he take some very simple precautionary steps to avoid it and move to a city and state with less taxes and regulation? << Movin' to Montana soon? Tammy lives in Cali too,shurley some mishtake! (Anarchy week in SF is huge.Real Anarchy.)
mhuben,fucking stateist.>>Communism under Stalin was inefficient for most of the USSR, but it worked fabulously for Stalin, so it was already pareto efficient. To recommend that they should have adopted Libertarianism, you need more than economics. You need a moral philosophy that justifies redistributing property and rights from Stalin to the people of the USSR. << Umm,thats easy,anarchism.If huben says a representative democratic state,Ill APster the SOB.ASAP.Tim and davy friedfish's silence is deafening.(unless you count timmies quoting Pravda:The tim may-bill white pact.)
. Libertarians have a hard time defining "initiation of force" which they consider unjust, and separating it from justified force. I personally think a superior moral philosophy would attempt to minimize total force over the long term rather than try to determine who initiated force and put the total blame on them. Does anyone really care who *initiated* WW1? This libertarian preoccupation with the initiation of force is similar to the moral philosophy of fighting children who always yell, "He started it" at the other kid. << I hope this helps one answer to my "hilary health" post.APster should minimize total force quite nicely.We should all be out there selling it like soupy sales.(psst kids,take some money from moms purse or dads wallet and send it to...)