Why coercion is an essential and beneficial element of maximal-capitalist society.

[filc]

@Rettoper

logically, I can guarantee that the profit driven actor will accumulate more wealth and capital then the pacifist driven actor assuming both are rational.

This is a false dichotomy. Profit driven actors can be, and often times are, pacifists.

@Rettoper

if the greatest return on your investment was an enterprise that used coercion to obtain its profits – would you invest in this firm ?

This has been your assertion since day one. I already explained above why these fascists organizations are likely to be the least profitable organizations out there. Your assumption is that man will fund organizations that threaten to harm them. When a thief breaks into my home, I don’t invest in him by giving him a gun.

I also explained that the more organized the crime syndicate becomes, the more honest a business it becomes. Untill eventually they’re just selling a service, and trying thier very best not to step on any customers.

Consumer sovereignty.

[filc]

@Rettoper

how is the cost of both a donut and security determined ?

I’m not going to explain the pricing mechanism to you.

@Rettoper

i think your demonstrable inability as a pacifist to engage in economic calculation

As I stated, if it were possible for individuals to correctly identify an equilibrium price, then there would be a strong argument for central planning. The whole point of the market is that these prices are unknown. Entrepreneur’s being best in the prediction of things are as close as your going to get. Since I am not an entrepreneur in the sales of donuts, or of private defense, I won’t pretend to even guess the answer.

Your underminign the whole point of a market with your argument.

@Rettoper

your engaging in another strawman argument. the fact that equilibruim is fluid does not mean that the primary factors that influence the determination of the level of security is fluid and undetrimenable.

Ahh yes, any answer that explodes your entire thesis must be a strawman. Your asking me to explain to how you how the costs and prices of private defense would come about. For me to be able to do that I would need a level of information that I as a human being am incapable of procesing.

So as you can see, this assertion that I am strawmaning you, along with all the historical like assertions, is as always incorrect. And I have ofcoarse provided yet another example, that you no doubt will deny, of your falability.

@Filc

*Or the actor’s profit loss analysis takes additional factors into consideration that you simply overlook. Like long-term reputational consequences, long-term deterioration of exchange, market ostracization, legal expense. The list I am sure goes on. – flic

@Rettoper

it is obvious from your statement that you are not a profit-seeking actor – you are a pacifist first, a capitalist second

How one arth can you deduce this from my statement? Why are you constructing a false dichotomy of Capitalist, or Pacifist, where both are mutually exclusive. It sounds like your having to construct some pretty radical arguments just to defend yourself. As was stated above, pacifism and capitalism are mutual traits. In fact many capitalists, if not most, are pacifists. I feel like your re-defining things here.

@Rettoper

id you ever consider why the most extreme statist regimes are among the most peaceful ?

Depends on how short sighted your opinion here is. Did you ever consider why the most extreme slave owners are the most peaceful? Is it because they aren’t violent? Or because they’ve tricked thier slaves into not understanding what violence is, thereby being more tolerant of it.

Most statist regimes are among the most violent. The United STates being one of the biggest examples. Examples of global imperialization supported by widescale theft. The organization is built on violence, supported by violence, and its purpose is to perpetuate more violence.

@Filc

*A profit maximizing crime syndicate will become an honest business in short time frame, if the goal is long-term revenue generation. – filc

@Rettoper

where do you include ‘honesty’ on your balance sheet ? what is the cost per unit of honesty ? on what market does honesty trade ? or for that matter pacifism ?

Either you are being dishonest here, or your not capable of comprehending what I told you. The only thing that matters here is profit, any firm that wants to expand thier posibility of future revenue must do so at the mercy of the consumers. At the scrutiny and judgement of consumers who hold opinions that may not align with the opinions of the violent regime.

The example being crime syndicats in the united states growing, and in the process becoming more businesslike, and more peaceful along the way. As thier primary concern was expanding their market. The only way to expand your market is to not alienate those who you want to market to.

Honestly this is extremely elementary. In highschool business your taught not to insult your customers.

[Rettoper]

This is a false dichotomy. Profit driven actors can be, and often times are, pacifists.–filc

your making a highly dubious faith-based value judgment that has no basis in reality.

I have throughly refuted this fallacy.

profit driven actors are PROFIT DRIVEN, irrespective of the means used to obtain profit.

your statement is illogical and unsupported by any fact, logic, and empiricism.

since you are a pacifist, you desperately want to believe that the most effectatious system for accumulating wealth is pacifists — however you are wrong.

This has been your assertion since day one. I already explained above why these fascists organizations are likely to be the least profitable organizations out there. Your assumption is that man will fund organizations that threaten to harm them. When a thief breaks into my home, I don’t invest in him by giving him a gun.–filc

amusingly, you are incapable of answering my original challenge:

if the greatest return on your investment was an enterprise that used coercion to obtain its profits – would you invest in this firm ?–Rettoper

you cannot answer this question because you are not a rational actor. You are a faith-based actor.

this supports my thesis that pacifists like your self are not really ancaps. Moreover, your strawman diversions and inability to answer a simple question with a straightforward answer puts you in the same faith-based, reality deficient box that the Marxist occupys when he tries to calculate prices.

I also explained that the more organized the crime syndicate becomes, the more honest a business it becomes. Untill eventually they’re just selling a service, and trying thier very best not to step on any customers.

Consumer sovereignty. --filc

you have been driven into an intellectual corner. The market makes no distinction on the means to deliver quality, price point, and value. If coercion can release heretofore underutilized, and hence under defended valued resources to the marketplace, thereby improving consumer sovereignty and choices ---- then coercion it is.

In sum, when pacifists restrict a means to more effectively allocate resources they are parrotting the actions of statists who seek to protect the established order by restricting competition. Your pacifism simply preserves the status quo and protects negligent managers of scarce resources from suffering the consequences of bad management at the hands of more efficient profit driven (read NOT pacifists) actors.

of course, like islamists, egalitarian marxists, and nationalists — no amount of logic and empiricism can sway pacifist who hate and abhor violence for emotional reasons. hence, I cant use fact, logic, and empiricism to sway you.

it is like arguing with a marxist that the minimum wage is beneficial since neither you or the marxist are thinking in rational economic terms.

[Lilburne]

Rettoper, I have warned you multiple times about posts like this, and I’ve given you an ample number of chances (even standing up for you). But, I simply do not have the time to forever police your constant derisiveness and hostility. You’re finished here.