<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="color:rgb(0,0,0)"><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">If we were starting from square one the above is what I would recommend,</font></div> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">but we are very very far from square one so we just have to do the best we can with what we've got.</div></font></div></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><br></div></font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> John K Clark</div></font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.8px;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><br></div></font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4">Fantasizing is fun but problems always arise that have been unseen in the planning. (Those unknown unknowns.) What you say might work and it might be a nightmare of payoffs and corruption; that is, not a lot different from what we have now, only worse. Again, I am no student of history, but what you suggest sounds like Italy around 1500: clans and their military enforced things; no overarching gov. How well did that work? I suspect that wars were fairly constant. Might makes right. </font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4">I am against punishment, mostly, for children - if it's the belt kind. Taking away privileges works much better for many reasons. But if you want to get rid of corruption you have to penalize and heavily. Quick and devastatingly hard punishment will stop the behavior more quickly than anything. Chopping off hands for a bit of shoplifting seems extremely harsh, but it's the right idea if the wrong method.</font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4">Not to re-enter that discussion, but the biggest problem with Wall Street and collapse of 2008 was that there were few if any penalties, much less harsh ones. So why not do it again? They will. Oh yes, they will. The incentives to do so are billions of dollars. Measure that against a jail term of a few years, and probably not for the top people. </font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4">On a related note, I read that many companies are getting into finance and out of providing services and products. Doesn't sound good, but what do I know?</font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4">Seems private debt is getting worse than national debt.</font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_quote" style="color:rgb(34,34,34)"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif" size="4">bill w</font></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:29 AM, John Clark <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:johnkclark@gmail.com" target="_blank">johnkclark@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><span class=""><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:57 PM, William Flynn Wallace <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:foozler83@gmail.com" target="_blank">foozler83@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:</div></span><div class="gmail_quote"><span class=""><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:'comic sans ms',sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(0,0,0)"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>One argument seems to settle this issue: if there is no government of any kind, then there is no police force of any kind.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>If no one can be told what to do or restrained from doing it, then you have chaos and rule of the mighty, who then will tell people what to do. QED</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div></span><div><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font></div>Not necessarily, there are other and probably better ways society could be organized<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">,</div> but <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">at this late date </div>getting from here to there would be astronomically difficult and perhaps impossible. The idea behind Anarcho-Capitalism<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>is<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>there would still be police and there would still be<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>law, but it would be private police and private law. PPL's (privately produced<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>law) in <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">an </div>anarchic world would<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>have private protection agencies (PPA's) to<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>back them up. Disputes among PPA's would be settled by an independent<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>arbitrator agreed to by both parties BEFORE the disagreement happened.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>Something like that can happen today. When companies sign complicated<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>contracts they sometimes also agree on who will arbitrate it if differences in interpretation<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>happen<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">s</div>. Nobody<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>wants<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> to</div> get caught up in the slow, expensive court<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> system</div> run by governments. The arbitrator would be paid by the case,<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>and because he is picked by both sides, it's in his interest to be as just as<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>possible. If he favored one side over another or made brutal or stupid<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>decisions he would not be picked again and would need to look for a new line<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>of work. Unlike present day judges and juries, justice would have a positive<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>survival value for the arbitrator.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">Today a</div> bad judge makes just as much money as a good judge, but a good arbitrator makes far more money than a bad arbitrator. </font></div><div> </div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4">All parties would have a reason to avoid violence if possible. The disputing parties would not want to turn their front yard into a war zone, and violence is expensive. The successful protection agencies would be more interested in making money than saving face. Most of the time this would work so I expect<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>the total level of violence to be less than what we have now, but I'm not such a utopian as to suggest it will drop to zero. Even when force is not used the implicit threat is always there, another good reason to be civilized.</font></div><div class="gmail_quote"> </div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4">I'm not talking about justice only for the rich. If a rich man's PPA makes unreasonable demands (beatings, sidewalk justice, I insist on my mother being the judge if I get into trouble) it's going to need one hell of a lot of firepower to back it up. That kind of an army is expensive because of the hardware needed and because of the very high wages it will need to pay its employees for an extremely dangerous job. To pay for all this they will need to charge their clients enormous fees severely </font><span style="font-size:large">limiting their customer base and that means even higher charges. They could</span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-size:large;font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div><span style="font-size:large">never get the upper hand, because the common man's PPA would be able to outspend a PPA that had outrageous demands and was just for the super rich. </span><span style="font-size:large">A yacht cost a lot more than a car, yet the Ford motor Company is far richer than all the yacht builders on the planet combined. </span></div><div class="gmail_quote"> </div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4">No system can guarantee justice to everybody all the time but you'd have the greatest chance of finding it in Anarcho<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">-</div>capitalism. In a dictatorship one man's whim can lead to hell on earth, I don't see how 40 million Germans could have<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>murdered 6 million Jews in a Anarcho-capitalistic world. Things<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>aren't much better in a Democracy, 51% can decide to kill the other 49% , nothing even close to that is possible in Anarchy ,even theoretically. </font></div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4"> </font></div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4">In general, the desire not to be killed is much stronger than the desire to kill a stranger, even a Jewish stranger. Jews would be willing to pay as much as necessary, up to and including their entire net worth not to be killed. I doubt if even the most rabid anti Semite would go much beyond 2%. As a result the PPA protecting Jews would be much stronger than the one that wants to kill them. In Anarchy, for things that are REALLY important to you (like not getting killed) you have much more influence than just one man one vote. </font></div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="display:inline"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif">If we were starting from square one the above is what I would recommend,</font></div> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">but we are very very far from square one so we just have to do the best we can with what we've got.</div></font></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><br></div></font></div><div class="gmail_quote"><font size="4"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> John K Clark</div></font></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div style="font-size:12.8px"><br></div></div></div></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>