I'd like to see mandatory voting in Congress.

Voting is a duty, at least ethically.

this

we represent one half of the social contract, and as such, we are obligated to keep the other half of the contract in check, so as to protect the interests of both parties.


however, mandatory voting is a fundamental breach of our freedom of expression, by my estimation. i do think that people who dont vote are worthless, but i can understand where they're coming from. we were never given the option to opt-in to this social contract, and if we try to leave, we're just going to enter into a contract with another government anyway. however, you cant live free of government, so you might as well do your best to influence it in a positive manner.

What kind of retard can't live free of government?

Say what you like, but government is necessary to have a functioning society and economy. Private enterprises simply cannot, in an efficient manner, operate services like security--be it domestic or foreign. A monopoly on the enforcement of rules is a must for any civilisation, whether or not you agree with the rules in question.

You can privatize pretty much anything

Not the law, or its enforcement.

Quote from: Azumarill on March 28, 2015, 03:10:36 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on March 28, 2015, 01:18:13 PM

Voting is a duty, at least ethically.

this

we represent one half of the social contract, and as such, we are obligated to keep the other half of the contract in check, so as to protect the interests of both parties.


however, mandatory voting is a fundamental breach of our freedom of expression, by my estimation. i do think that people who dont vote are worthless, but i can understand where they're coming from. we were never given the option to opt-in to this social contract, and if we try to leave, we're just going to enter into a contract with another government anyway. however, you cant live free of government, so you might as well do your best to influence it in a positive manner.

I'm sorry, is government a necessary component of oxygen?

What kind of retard can't live free of government?

read the Leviathan. we cannot exist without government. without a social contract we will tear each other to pieces.

Laws are opinions with guns behind them, nothing more.

Who gives a fuck?

I'd rather have a Buddhist behind me with a gun than a Muslim.

Are governments coercive? Yes. Are governments dangerous? Of course. Are they corrupt? Invariably. But it's nothing that would happen without some sort of centralised authority in question. Maniacal and fanatical groups like ISIS aren't going to give a fuck if our merchants are amiable.

Quote from: Azumarill on March 28, 2015, 05:30:22 PM

Quote from: Arm The Mob on March 28, 2015, 04:25:46 PM

Quote from: Azumarill on March 28, 2015, 03:10:36 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on March 28, 2015, 01:18:13 PM

Voting is a duty, at least ethically.

this

we represent one half of the social contract, and as such, we are obligated to keep the other half of the contract in check, so as to protect the interests of both parties.


however, mandatory voting is a fundamental breach of our freedom of expression, by my estimation. i do think that people who dont vote are worthless, but i can understand where they're coming from. we were never given the option to opt-in to this social contract, and if we try to leave, we're just going to enter into a contract with another government anyway. however, you cant live free of government, so you might as well do your best to influence it in a positive manner.

I'm sorry, is government a necessary component of oxygen?

What kind of retard can't live free of government?

read the Leviathan. we cannot exist without government. without a social contract we will tear each other to pieces.

you're doing a very poor job of convincing me that you have the ability to think.

You're assuming that the market cannot produce secular armed groups who can be paid to protect people.

No, I'm assuming the market can't efficiently produce such groups. The private sector is great at operating within a solid system of free enterprise on a legal foundation. The problems that come with governmental regulation of any kind are merely exacerbated when you throw the responsibility totally on the market. It isn't just one potentially problematic imposition, it's several.

Try as it might, the market will not ever remove corruption without a monopolised arbiter. Capitalism is not a principle, it's an expediency which is only incredibly valuable because of the prosperity it has managed to create. I don't care that governments are coercive, I only care when governments are too coercive, and the whole point of contemporary politics is drawing that line.

You might call the government a mafia, but they make for a more agreeable mafia than the CEOs of Silicon Valley would if they had that sort of authority.

Finally, you seem to have forgotten that the world's nation-states, which are more powerful than they have been at ANY point in history, have so far been unable to stop groups like IS anyway.

Because a legitimate concerted effort has been made, right?

It doesn't matter than government's are inefficient when it comes to security. It just matters that they're significantly less inefficient than the market would be. Fuck, I mean you can even have PMCs if you want, but you can't have PMCs writing the rules to game they're supposed to be playing.

It's really not. You can privatize pretty much anything, and not only will it it run, it will run better than any centrally-run system.

Shit like this is why libertarians aren't taken seriously.

Quote from: Arm The Mob on March 28, 2015, 04:56:51 PM

It's really not. You can privatize pretty much anything, and not only will it it run, it will run better than any centrally-run system.

Shit like this is why libertarians aren't taken seriously.

It's true.

But the one thing you really cannot privatise are the rules. It'd be like the pieces writing the rules for chess. Self-interest cannot function macroeconomically.