I’m not saying I oppose anarcho-capitalsim. I’m just trying to get some questions answered.
How do you know who owns the road? But I was talking about the road fixer.
What I’m trying to ask is if there is no rule against killing someone , somewhere (it doesn’t matter where), and someone kills a person there (and because I know you’re going to say this: let’s just say that person hasn’t set a rule up where he can’t be killed) can the killer be punished?
Yeah, thanks for the clarification guys. I know it seems I may be ignorant, but give me a break CMS schools in the south are frowned upon. But about rules: I’m now getting mixed signals here. Are not there rules placed on property by owners that they can enforce?
They have, so long as you’re wearing a military uniform.
Why would be there no rules against killing? Or any violation of property rights?
Understand that Market Anarchy simply replaces a coercive monopoly, the state, with the market. That doesn’t mean there isn’t security, arbitration, and justice. It just means that those services are re-designed to inherently to serve the consumer like all other market goods do.
As for the roads question, I encourage you to do a search on this website, we get that question weekly and it gets old answering the same question over and over, one of the reasons we need a FAQ!
Ok so is justice bought in an ancap society?
Amazing! Not a single mention of the NAP or polycentric law in this thread. I predict massive hangovers tomorrow.
For your intro to Anarcho-Capitalism, I recommend Chaos Theory.
The age old question of “but who will build the road?” has been answered, in book form, by Walter Block.
Thats for the entrepreneur to figure out. We can only speculate how future market goods would be distributed. It may be paid for directly or perhaps through insurance. Or perhaps its a clause in your renters agreement to pay a small fee for XYZ ect…
The market will provide the most effective, qualitative security services to the widest body of people at the cheapest cost. To deny this is to beleive that government can provide a good better than the market. If thats true we should do away with the market all together.
You cannot believe on the one hand that the market is most efficient at providing corn and milk to consumers, while the government is more efficient at providing security, without contradicting yourself.
Ahh yes. The NAP. Something you should be aware of Jaredsmith, as probably all Ancaps subscribe to it.
But the links Capital Pumper provided are excellent.
The only problem I would have with this is the question: is is truly ethical for having people to PAY for justice? I won’t question the efficiency of provided security, but just just that one question.
We do already through taxes. I don’t see how it is an ethical question. Plus, international companies settle disputes all the time with private arbitration.
Would you consider a single provider a milk who establishes itself via violence an ethical institute? If your concerned about ethics than you have to be against the state. The state by way of violent force compells individuals to subscribe to it’s services. From an ethical standpoint the state fails, its whole premise is built on theft and extortion from the public, then violent impositions of other programs.
From an economic standpoint the state does not have Economic Calculation. Therefore they fail to provide quality services to the consumer. Anyone whos had to deal with the justice department knows how pathetic it is. Like waiting years to get justice from a murderd lovedone. The state does not have the insentive to provide a quality service, there is no profit motive. All individuals are already subscribed by defaullt.
,
Ok, what precisely is the alternative to paying for justice? It would seem to be the idea that others have an obligation to provide this positive service for you - to chase down people who have hurt you, figure out who they are first in many cases, and so on? Actually, if paying for justice is a problem, there seem to be big issues with the state. Don’t we give police services as a major reason people have to pay taxes? If it is unethical to have to pay for justice, then you shouldn’t have to pay taxes, and the police and judges shouldn’t be paid.
Never thought of it that way. But what about kids? They can’t afford to buy their own protection and let’s just say their parents can’t afford to do so either.
You can ask this on any good, including many that are more essential than security, like food. Do you accept it as a reason to socialize food? Also, refer to my first point - does being a child entitle one to the servitude of others? Finally, let me ask you - what about kids? They have to live somewhere, and they can’t afford to pay rent or property taxes - and let’s just say their parents can’t afford to do so either. Does the government exempt them from property tax?
I’m not asking about other goods or trying to compare to other situations. All I am trying to know is if there is a way to guarantee the rights for people that are in no position to pay for them. Just because I am 8 years old and I have no way of getting a job that could pay for my security does this mean I have no protection?
I only ask this because I see it as a potential problem.
There are no guarantees anywhere just increased likelihoods.
Just because I am 8 years old and I have no way of getting a job that could pay for my food does this mean I have no sustenance?
what’s the problem?
The same way you know who owns a house or car. The owner could post ‘No Trespassing’ signs. S/He could also construct some manner of toll collection, unless s/he bills those who use his/her road in some other manner–via mail, EZ Pass, etc.
To answer your question in regards to “the road fixer”, s/he is paid by the owner of the road. Maintenance to the road is paid through tolls or usage fees that the road’s owner charges those who use it.
Your other questions have been answered pretty well by others. Check out those links, the readings will help answer the questions you have about an an-cap society.
Who owns the property? For example, in my linked example of roads in rural Spain, the owner of the road knows the land that he owns and so knows the land that he is responsible. He will maintain it to the point where the marginal returns are profitable.