Advocate wrote: ↑Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:35 pm
Separate entities doing those things efficiently can still be less efficient than a centralized agency doing them less efficiency, it's called economics of scale, but you're ignoring incentives. The profit motive poisons everything it touches. It is literally incompatible with a) sustainability b) civilization.
The Soviet Union had vast economies of scale, but they lacked the information that comes from choices and prices and sales pipelines. Any government enterprise, but particularly a market dominating one such as you are suggesting, lacks that sort of market information which is why planned economies never operate efficiently.
You have no basis for such a sweeping statement as "The profit motive poisons everything it touches. It is literally incompatible with a) sustainability b) civilization", it's no better than what you were just criticising Henry for because it is nothing but a dogmatic mantra.
To explore and develop your personality and circumstances.
and why do I need a state to do that?
you said "states suck"
no, I said there's one helluva a big difference: I can choose, without major repercussions, to not do business with a company...I don't know of a single state for which you can say the same
and -- yeah -- states suck
But if it's really good for everyone it will provide a meaningful way to opt out as much as possible
no state, no matter how benign, will ever allow an opt out...if it did, it wouldn't be a state
because some people wouldn't care how good the state is, they would just want to do things their own way
I'm one of those people...I recall askin' you, in one of your libertarian fascism threads, about what your fascism would do with a man like me...do you recall your answer?
and that's fine as long as it can be assured not to interfere with anyone else pursuing their own development.
hey, I got no interest in interferin' with other folks...leave me be, let me transact freely with folks who wanna transact, and you all can go develop yourselves as you like
Because otherwise someone like me will get tired of you and take all your shit.
>no state, no matter how benign, will ever allow an opt out...if it did, it wouldn't be a state
If it did, it wouldn't be a slave state. All states are not slave states.
[b]because some people wouldn't care how good the state is, they would just want to do things their own way[/b]
>I'm one of those people...I recall askin' you, in one of your libertarian fascism threads, about what your fascism would do with a man like me...do you recall your answer?
Not precisely but it must be something along the lines of "as long as you're not fucking with nuclear or chemical weapons or something that could fuck up everyone, there should be a free zone for you to do whatever in. Probably Kansas.
>hey, I got no interest in interferin' with other folks...leave me be, let me transact freely with folks who wanna transact, and you all can go develop yourselves as you like
Everyone doesn't think that way, hence the need for a government to govern such things.
Because otherwise someone like me will get tired of you and take all your shit.
we have multiple states all over the world: name one where there's no theft
and: you'll try to take my shit...you wouldn't be the first...I still had my shit after them; I reckon I'd still have my shit after you
All states are not slave states.
no, not all states are successful slave states
Not precisely but it must be something along the lines of "as long as you're not fucking with nuclear or chemical weapons or something that could fuck up everyone, there should be a free zone for you to do whatever in.
that's close
Probably Kansas.
nope...I'll go where I choose: I'm the free zone
and: if I truly want atomics, I'll have 'em
Everyone doesn't think that way, hence the need for a government to govern such things.
