The Inernet is an anarchy at the pleasure of governments is because
governments know that scientists and engineers make the most progress
when they have unbridled communication amongst themselves. The reason
why the Internet is still an anarchy now that it has grown beyond that,
is more a matter of the slugishness of govenrments, and the entrenched
influence of people who have made fortunes off the internet. Notice how
much effort is going on to reign it in these days?
> >
> You are committing the naturalistic fallacy here. Just because a price
> would naturally be X in a free market doesn't mean the price SHOULD be
> X. Likewise, government frequently attempts to do good things (space
> travel, quick economic recovery, for example) that would not happen in a
> free market. That doesn't mean they OUGHT NOT to happen.
Market prices are ALWAYS the proper prices, provided it is an
uninfluenced free market. Also, the "good things" that government
attempts to do are needed to fix the results of distortions in the
marketplace by shortsighted laws and regulations. For instance:
R&D: Due to the influence of government manipulation and regulation of
interest rates, long term investment is unprofitable, the majority of
which is, lo and behold, involved in research and development....
Space exploration: The original colony in Virginia was a PRIVATE
venture, as was the Massachusetts Bay Colony. In fact, most of the
original colonies here in the US were private ventures, as were many of
the ventures colonizing central and south america. My own ancestors, who
colonized Nova Scotia on a seasonal basis at first, were private
fishermen fishing their secret spots (the Grand Bankes), long before
Columbus (he got much of his navigational info from Scottish fishermen,
who sent him further south hoping he'd get lost in the Sargasso Sea.
The fact that the US space program has generated $14 in the economy for
every $1 invested ( as opposed to $0.57 on the dollar for normal
government) means that it is a profitable venture that should have been
privatized a long time ago.
Quick economic recovery: The things that government does best to
stimulate economic recovery is to stop collecting taxes, stop spending
money on obsolete resources, technologies, or jobs.
ANything else we need government for? Deliver the mail cheaply maybe,
HAH.
> >
> >Modern communication, cryptography and untraceable
> >digital cash will make it increasingly difficult to collect taxes.
>
> Not likely. We may see a shift in the kinds of taxes paid, though. But
> even sales taxes and income taxes are difficult to hide if one of the
> parties is a licensed business that must keep records and books.
So a company pays your company for services rendered. you deduct all
your expenses, and lo and behold, you LOST money. Gee, no income tazes
this year....
> >
> >There is just
> >no getting around it, recent developments in mathematics and
> >communication
> >have tipped the balance away from the tax collector and in favor of the
> >
> >tax evader.
>
> I must not get your point. How does cryptography keep me from paying
> property tax on my home, license tax on my car, income tax on my salary,
> or sales tax collected by CompUSA?
Salary from whome? If its your own company, there are already hundreds
of thousands of people in the US who use that dodge every day. In NH you
do not need a business license....Really Richard, this sort of thing
goes on every day. Keeping two sets of books is easy, its hiding the
second set that can be difficult once suspicions are raised. If you
crypto your real books, they can't make you divulge the key, due to 5th
Amendment protection against self incrimination. And, since the Income
Tax is a voluntary system (really!) you are doubly protected. They have
to prove it without your cooperation.
Granted, under our present system, strong crypto will probably help
organized criminals more than the average joe, but there wouldn't be
organized criminals if there weren't laws against their activities.
> >
> >The tribute that could still be extracted, like
> >property taxes and building permits, would have to be increased to
> >astronomic levels and collected with a heavy hand, a tax revolt will
> >follow. Without money government will grind to a
> >halt.
>
> I'm not clear on which taxes you think would be unenforceable. The U.S.
> government doesn't have a sales tax. Why would income tax become less
> collectable? I don't see much effect at all on business taxes, which I
> believe are the bulk of income for the U.S. government.
Any economic transaction that involved information. There is no cost for
the duplication of information. Of course, this then brings up matters
of property. You will need copyright protection from somebody. This
could probably be performed by your insurance carrier and its associated
contractors.
> >
> > >Who would enforce it? The government?
> >
> >It's not clear to me what "it" refers to, I think you mean law and
> >order and
> >justice.
>
> Sorry for the lack of clarity. I meant the state of anarchy. That is,
> what is to prevent someone from setting up a government once your
> anarchy is established?
Broad based guerrilla warfare, mutual assistance agreements among
insurance carriers, and a tribe of Mikin like "Umpires" whose job is to
go aaround looking for and stamping out signs of "bigness".
>
> >Consider what would happen if law and law enforcement were driven by
> >market
> >forces. 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 (private protection agency) 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.
The big IF in stable anarchy is that a large majority of a population
practicing such a system must 1) beleive in it, in the patriotic sense
2) have a developed sense of informed, rational self interest. if you
allow too many con artists of any type in, you'll destabilize things.
Personal integrity is a must.
>
> I have trouble even getting into your head on this one, John. What the
> Nazis did WAS essentially anarchic.
I would hardly call the SS a bunch of anarchists. What they did was
legal by the laws of their nation. Trouble was, they made the laws....
They illegally whipped up a bunch of
> support for executing the Holocaust. How would it be any different under
> an anarchy? And before modern enlightened government, slavery was common
> and "natural."
Slavery began as an effect of organized warfare, and maintained its cost
effectiveness as a result of inefficient technology. First at the tribal
level, then the clan level, and finally at City State and Nation level.
"Natural" slavery was always more of an indenturement rather than a
dehumanization. It took european christian self righteousness to
transform that cultural tradition into a total abrogation of human
rights, and the enforcement and approval of European Powers, as well as
the Pope, were major factors in maintaining the legitimacy of it.
>
> You keep assuming that in your ideal anarchic state, you could simply
> allocate funds to your priorities and have them magically materialize.
> Baloney! Wealthy people, large groups, people with connections have
> exponentially more power than ordinary folks. With no laws regulating
> behavior, there is nothing to mitigate this power. You will have a
> country such as Thailand where laws are essentially unenforced and you
> need connections to get anything done.
Because the powerful use the government to enforce their will, and the
people pay taxes in order to be repressed ( typical mercantilist
operation). Privatize the bully gangs and you soak up capital of the
rich and overbearing.
The fact is Richard, is that without the drag on the economy of
government, market prices would drop by an average of 60%, thus nearly
tripling the disposable income of the average person. How much insurance
could you buy from a competitive company for half that? How much of your
own protection could you self fund with half that?
> > They could 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. 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.
>
> People's wills and motivations are not driven by the amount of money you
> pay them.
Ever heard the term "Money talks and bullshit walks"? Granted many
people demand a level of fulfillment with their jobs, but it is nowhere
near the prime motivator.
Napoleon remarked how amazing it was that a man would risk his
> life for a shred of ribbon and a scrap of metal. Look at you: no one is
> paying you to write these words. Likewise, you don't have to pay
> soldiers much to beat people up.
you are taking historical quotes completely out of context. In
Napoleon's France, there was conscription, so if you weren't happy with
ribbons and scraps of metal, they would just as soon shoot you. Most
soldiers were the types that get nailed for jury duty today: they were
too stupid and poor to figure out who to pay off and how much. In
today's professional military, morale is currently in the sewer over pay
and benfits cuts (while congress votes pay raises for themselves). These
are people who make the militiary their careers, not just something they
are forced to do. The feeling of patriotism does make for some
compensation, which is why equally talented military people make between
1/3 to 1/2 their civilian counterparts, but ribbons dont put food in
soldiers' kids mouths.
>
> And once you give the soldiers weapons, to whom are they accountable?
Theri superiors, who are accountable to their organizations, who are
accountable to either their governments, or if such is lacking, to the
insurance companies that hire them.
All a government is is an insurance monopoly. being a monopoly explains
why they are so inefficient, expensive, and callous.
> >
> >It won't be perfect, there will still be brutality, but you have to ask
> >
> >yourself, brutal compared to what? States? Governments, those paragons
> >of
> >charity and morality, those defenders of the weak and powerless, the
> >source
> >of all virtue, have butchered hundreds of millions of people this
> >century
> >alone, often their own citizens. We'd have to work very hard to break
> >that
> >record.
>
> I don't recall the United States butchering hundreds of millions of its
> own citizens this century. It seems to me that the butchering is on the
> decline as governments become more enlightened, no?
> >
>
Only because the vast decentralization of communications and information
has made it much harder to hide such overt acts, for governments who are
concerned about their public images domestically as well as
internationally. More power to the people enforces and amplifies the
popularity competition among governments, just like any free market.
Governments are like school yard bullies: they only do what they think
the can get away with, and are motivated chiefly out of fear.
-- TANSTAAFL!!!Michael Lorrey ------------------------------------------------------------ President retroman@tpk.net Northstar Technologies Agent Lorrey@ThePentagon.com Inventor of the Lorrey Drive Silo_1013@ThePentagon.com
Website: http://www.tpk.net/~retroman/ Now Featuring: My Own Nuclear Espionage Agency (MONEA) http://www.tpk.net/~retroman/MONEA1.htm MIKEYMAS(tm): The New Internet Holiday http://www.tpk.net/~retroman/mikymas1.htm Transhumans of New Hampshire (>HNH) http://www.tpk.net/~retroman/TRANSHNH.htm ------------------------------------------------------------ Transhumanist, Inventor, Webmaster, Ski Guide, Entrepreneur, Artist, Outdoorsman, Libertarian, Certified Genius. ------------------------------------------------------------ If I saw further than others, it is because I had an unjoggled view from standing on my own two feet. - Mike Lorrey