The article is for those minarchists who argue that the market good, security, is better provided by the apparatus of coercion, the state. That economically it can out perform a market. You advocate socialism in the security industry. As with all coercively distributed services you cannot calculate. Enjoy
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/012010-dns-security-deadline-missed.html
So are you saying that when I was robbed and the police spent all of 5 minutes working on the issue, and I received nothing for their efforts, that isn’t argument enough? [:D]
Nice find on the websites, I will be sending this to my government loving co-workers.
Anyone who wants to understand why most advocate the state in the current environment, need to read Hayek’s The Constitution of Liberty because the debate about what system is more effective will do nothing to convice so-called statists.
Haha seriously. I have a friend who’s father was killed by an irresponsible driver. The police know of the company who the vehicle belonged to and have a strong idea of who it was. The case has been open for 8 months and all the information is on hush hush. My friend knows nothing, has no justice, and is not allowed to get a lawyer to sue the company who owned the vehicle untill the cops close their case.
If they were a private firm they would have been fired a long time ago.
Not necessarily, justice involves more than a “strong idea”, and not only must the innocent party be considered in the pursuit of justice, the accused must also be considered thus the need for proof before individuals are arrested for crimes that they might not have ever committed.
We have the proof. Have had for months. The whole thing was video recorded.
It’s time to LOL, folks!
Government security = THE FAIL!
Now, all it need is an appropriate lolcat picture.
I wonder if the reason the calculation argument hasn’t been applied to the security aspect of the State is that since around the 1950s libertarians have been stuck on the objective ethics idea. If one subscribes to objective ethics, economics arguments like the calculation problem cannot apply to ethical issues, because economic valuation is subjective but ethical valuation is considered objective.
It would have been inconsistent for an objective ethicist to argue that the State cannot determine, for example, the right level of punishment for a crime - because objective ethicists ought to be able to supply heads of state with such information. Instead they attack the State by saying it cannot possibly administer justice when it must be unjust in order to exist, which is a fine argument on its own, but surely not convincing to as many people as the two arguments in combination.
Point taken AJ. From an ethical standpoint however what about folks who feel that they don’t get adequate service from state provided security and would prefer to bring their money elsewhere? What about the ethics in that situation?
Not sure what you mean. I was just talking about the calculation argument or similar arguments.
Fil, let’s imagine that you can convince me that market provided security would be better than state provided security. Then what? What do you think will happen after that?