There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Sanctus ,
@Sanctus@lemmy.world avatar

Thats the neat part

TheFriar ,

Whatdoyoumean?! The govt obviously has so much money as to be able to put millions away for each and every person born! And that money isn’t even being used! Just $3M each, that’s just sitting there waiting for the right magic words to be uttered in a Bank of America in Lubbock, TX to finally be used! Of course money is infinite! They’re the ones printing it!

barsquid ,

the right magic words

“Nesara gesara”

betterdeadthanreddit ,

Secret treasury accounts linked to your berth certificate and by the way we’re boats something something maritime law.

4am ,

berth certificate

maritime law

LOL nice

dexa_scantron ,
@dexa_scantron@lemmy.world avatar

This is an actual Sovcit thing.

EldritchFeminity ,

It is, but berth is a nautical term. Thus making it as punny as it is sad.

Maalus ,

They use it because it is a nautical term. There is no pun.

experbia ,
@experbia@lemmy.world avatar

yes, they believe it’s one of the “in plain sight” pieces of evidence - that when you’re born, you have to have a berth (maritime) certificate that makes you like, property of the state or something because you’re recorded as “docking” with the country (which is actually a corporation that wants to own you and use your cache of money they hide from you that you receive at birth), and “they” get away with the ruse because us normal rubes just never think to ask if they said “berth” (maritime) or “birth” (reproduction). not even joking lmao

it is a funny pun, too, but they really think birth certificates are, in fact, secretly “berth” certificates for them in maritime trade law, which they believe is the only real law, in which we are all like… sovereign vessels that have been duped into signing away our independence.

Klear ,

That makes about twice as much sense as scientology.

betterdeadthanreddit ,

Not even making that bit up, it’s established SovCit lore that pops up now and again. I’m a boat, you’re a boat, your mom is a barge lovely lady (and also a boat).

Uli ,

I think I finally understand the term “anchor babies”.

frezik ,

My econ 101 professor once said “what are the things that even the most anti-government people say the government needs to do? Emergency services.” Then these dense motherfuckers came along to outdo even that.

sparkle ,

Internet libertarians & off-the-rails conservatives unironically say EMS and Fire Departments should be privatized. Ancaps go one step further and say police and sometimes even military should be private. It makes me lose hope in voters, until I remember that I was 15 before too and most people surely grow out of that phase. But there’s a few people who are fully adult-aged who still believe that which is kind of sad for them I guess

MonkeMischief , (edited )

They tried this with firefighters before way back when, and then realized that fire doesn’t seem to care who’s subscribed or not lol. Can you imagine? “The fire and EMS lobby” would be powerfully pushing for reduced safety and maybe even starting fires themselves LOL.

Edit while looking up the first thing: Oh my word… mercenary firefighters are a thing for the rich and we’re living in clown world.

EDIT: Link went to NYT because it was top result, but screw that lol. Fixed.

I can see it now though…

Privatized emergency services be like:

“Thank you for calling 9-1-1, this is Janeanniesomebody, can I have your 14-digit emergency insurance number, date of birth, and mother’s maiden name please. Okay thank you, one moment while I verify that…” (Click)

"Your call is very important to us. Want to skip the line when it matters most? Did you know, for only $49.97 a month, you can get Emergency-Services-Plus+! Whether you want help fast, or to regret being covered for the rest of your life, we have a plan right for YOU!

“Remember, emergency insurance means you can have peace of mind that, when you’re in mortal danger, we’re only a phone call and 45-minutes-to-1-business-day away! Not signed up yet? Press 1, and we can help!”

((Trendy upbeat hold music))

“Did you know? We’re always hiring!”

(Receiver pickup) “Thank you for calling this is Devaidengregjimmothy, dispatch specialist, how can I help you today? Hello?..Hello?..”

Mikelius ,

Cassius from the tail end of the roman republic famously was the richest man in Rome and owned the “fire brigade”. When a fire broke out he would only put it out after the owner agreed to sell the place for next to nothing.

Illuminostro ,

Crassus.

Mikelius ,

You are right, my bad.

Illuminostro ,

No problem.

rottingleaf ,

Also the guy whom Parthians had drink molten gold.

He wanted to try himself as a general too, but that didn’t quite work out.

Illuminostro ,

I don’t know why you’re being downvoted, that’s the account. It probably didn’t happen, but it made a great story. The greediest, richest man in Rome bought an army and was made to drink what he craved most when he failed. Poetic justice.

Side note, Crassus was an experienced military man who fought under Sulla, and put down Spartacus’ rebellion. But he was no general, treated legionnaires under his command with brutal discipline, even using the mostly outdated decimation (if a unit failed, or dishonored themselves, they were forced to beat every tenth man in the unit to death as punishment. )

The only reason he invaded Parthia was that he was envious of Pompey and Caesar’s respect amongst the plebes (common citizens, i.e. peasants.) Military conquests were a sure way to gain respect in Roman culture, and to amass fortunes in slaves and booty.

rottingleaf ,

I don’t know why you’re being downvoted, that’s the account. It probably didn’t happen, but it made a great story. The greediest, richest man in Rome bought an army and was made to drink what he craved most when he failed. Poetic justice.

Yes, I know ; there are a few stories of his death, some mutually exclusive. The most popular is the version that he was beheaded, “gold-fed” and his head used instead of cabbage in a theatrical play, the place is disputed too, most likely Ecbatana or Susa, but there’s also a version of that happening in Artaxata (matches the premise where it’s said that he didn’t listen to Artavazd’s warning out of his pride, and then Artavazd decided to “betray” Crassus by remaining loyal to Parthia).

I think I’ve heard a version of him being overfed with meat and fat and made drink cold water, thus dying ; well, I don’t know if it’s even a working way to execute someone.

Xenny ,

Firefighters were literally private companies before we collectively decided it was a bad idea. Firefighters would just sit and watch a place burn if nobody payed up. Sometimes rival firefighters would even get in brawls over who gets the contract while the house was burning down beside them.

vithigar ,

They’re municipally operated here and we actually had a case a few years back where a small town that couldn’t reasonably afford to operate their own fire department needed to make arrangements with a nearby larger town to have fire emergency response services cover them.

The larger town said sure, $50 per year per home. Small town had 63 people, but some refused to pay. Fire department said they weren’t going to keep track of which houses were and were not covered, so they had to all be on board or none of them would be.

Naturally a home later caught fire and burned to the ground. Thankfully no one was inside at the time.

Riven ,
@Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

Damn, that isn’t even all that much. Tiny town so I’m assuming some people just couldn’t afford it.

ASeriesOfPoorChoices ,

if memory serves, the first fire fighters were in Rome and owned by rich people. If you didn’t pay them to put out the fire, their boss would buy the ashes from you afterwards.

ancient-history-blog.mq.edu.au/…/Vigiles

okay, I was close. Buy your house while it was still on fire.

Contravariant ,

Somewhat predictably they also started the first public firefighting force after a large part of the city burned down, again. Apparently prevention is just not profitable if you’re only paying people to extinguish fire.

Didn’t prevent what is now known as the Great Fire of Rome though.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

There were cases of firefighters setting fires so that they could be paid to put them out. Why not?

rottingleaf ,

It makes me lose hope in voters, until I remember that I was 15 before too and most people surely grow out of that phase.

Wait till you turn 25 and leave your parents’ basement

sparkle ,

Damn I didn’t know ancaps existed on this site. Ooooo taxes ooOo basic public services ooo scawy

rottingleaf ,

You’re the one who wrote about being 15.

You are most likely not able to reason why ancap ideology is bad or why your own ideology is good. Which is why you should show more respect to people who are trying to reason in either direction. Their opinion, no matter which direction specifically that is, is worth something.

Specifically ancap ideology is attractive for me exactly because it requires one to imagine very specific architectures of how things would work, so - to reason their position. I’ve been following one ancom channel in TG, because they were posting many interesting articles about tackling the same problems ancaps want to tackle. And as you may know, ancaps and ancoms don’t like each other.

Both ancap and ancom ideologies are simply better than all the rest, because they don’t ignore the problem of compromised institutions.

Once again, your opinion is worth as much as you personally can support it with logic. Being part of a crowd doesn’t mean attaining the intelligence or the authority of somebody else in that crowd. These things don’t transfer. So your tone makes only you personally look immature and stupid.

Emmie , (edited )

I mean I am basically a feudal lady but even I know this whole capitalistic mess is toxic for mind, soul and environment. How you want that but dialled to 11 is beyond me.

It would end in actual feudalism as in few people amassing goods, land, resources and ruling over the masses as kings with their monopolies and monetising air you breathe or the like. Killing you for disobedience in some private execution using private justice system keeping u in check with private militia.

The only thing between that reality and current is government with its anti monopoly laws, taxes, protection of basic amenities and wealth redistribution. Of course countries vary here.

Ancapitalism is probably one of the most stupid systems you can invent as it basically deconstructs itself as one individual amasses so much wealth they become a de facto king ruling over everything with absolute power destroying the system that helped them amass such power.

It is sad to see someone crazy enough to advocate for such system that isn’t even possible to exist long term and leads to feudalism very fast.

Not many people are insane enough to want RUST game irl unironically

rottingleaf ,

Sorry, I see no value in this text because it wrongly assumes that ancap is about abolishing rules.

Ancap is about determining a specific functional set of rules and functional architecture to support it.

It’s about evaluating forces and feedbacks in human societies and economies and designing a system where people are impeded in using power to enforce their vision upon other people.

That is why central authority and state are a problem - there are never backup mechanisms that you can switch to once the main one stops working correctly, and many people want this, because they want to capture that mechanism and enforce their will upon others. So even attempts to create backup mechanisms are met with resistance by crowds of fools who think that their favorite faction is the closest to capturing the main one and making others do something, and by people with power, who, of course, exist just as well despite that being ideologically inconvenient for you.

The problem of someone eventually amassing too much power is not being solved by existing states any better than in ancap.

Thus ancaps are trying to design systems as decentralized as possible for human societies. So that there always would be backup mechanisms to run away to.

EDIT: If this is too abstract, that’s because ancap as an ideology is defined by these criteria and not by specific solutions. And that’s right, if an ideology puts its set of solutions above the goals, then it’s a religious cult.

Emmie ,

That’s a big load of pseudo-intellectual gibberish. But the end effect would be the same no matter how you try to gymnastic your way around it

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

People like this are always talking about how things should be without understanding that the world doesn’t run on ‘should’ and most people don’t want what they’re selling.

rottingleaf ,

OK, the other comment was bored, lazy and not very sincere.

Ancapitalism is probably one of the most stupid systems you can invent as it basically deconstructs itself as one individual amasses so much wealth they become a de facto king ruling over everything with absolute power destroying the system that helped them amass such power.

No. To learn about ancap, go to ancaps and not to non-ancaps writing about ancaps.

It would end in actual feudalism as in few people amassing goods, land, resources and ruling over the masses as kings with their monopolies and monetising air you breathe or the like. Killing you for disobedience in some private execution using private justice system keeping u in check with private militia.

No, because ancap is not the same as anarchy by Hobbes.

Valmond ,

What a weird appeal to authority (I guess?).

rottingleaf ,

No

sparkle , (edited )

Your reading comprehension must suck because you completely incorrectly read the sentence you’re obsessing over. There are so many of you ancaps (almost entirely clueless teenagers) online that it becomes tiring to debunk your stupid ideology over and over again. If you can’t see why a system based around capital – where you vote with your capital and people with more capital have more votes, where resources are distributed based on capital and capital itself is a resource – is inherently flawed, then that’s completely on you. If you want leftists to educate you, then you can support the education reforms they’re advocating for, not go on Lemmy and beg for them to personally tutor you. But I guess you’re still in high school so that’s not exactly something you’re old enough to do.

Ancaps are pathetic, there is no reason to seriously engage every single one you see. They live in a fantasy world where charity replaces taxes and systematic discrimination & deepseated cultural biases are solved by the “free market”, and pollution & climate change (if you even think it’s an issue) are solved by future techbros which will totally invent stuff to completely unfuck the planet asap (or something something they’ll totally be stopped when people realize it violates the NAP). They also live in a fantasy world where capital isn’t used to “compromise the institutions” as you say you’re worried about. You can try to slither your way into anarchist discourse all you like and try to gain their acceptance, but it is not happening.

rottingleaf , (edited )

No. You may imagine you’ve defeated someone or debunked something. Bye

EDIT: “If you want leftists to educate you” - definitely not. “Ancaps are …” - you are not qualified to talk about ancaps instead of ancaps themselves.

sparkle ,

The fact that your resolve immediately crumbles when you have to think about the logic of your ideology even a tiny bit says a lot about the number of years you have left until you graduate from high school

rottingleaf ,

My resolve crumbles because of people considering themselves intelligent gone chimps spamming my inbox.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Both ancap and ancom ideologies are simply better than all the rest, because they don’t ignore the problem of compromised institutions.

And yet almost no one wants to live in the world those people have presented to everyone. Should they be forced to?

rottingleaf ,

Should they be forced to?

If I can be forced to live in the world you like more, then yes, otherwise no.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

I see, so how would you force them to live this way, kill the ones who elect a leader and decide to trade in currency?

rottingleaf ,

Just kill those trying to prevent ancap between me and my friends.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

You just said everyone should be forced to live in an ancap world.

Which is it? Just you and your friends or everyone?

rottingleaf ,

What I said.

If I can be forced to live in the world you like more, then yes, otherwise no.

That’s why leftists fail at everything they do.

Which is it? Just you and your friends or everyone?

It’s not the first time you cheat to pretend you caught me at something.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Yes, I know that’s what you said.

I asked you:

And yet almost no one wants to live in the world those people have presented to everyone. Should they be forced to?

You responded:

If I can be forced to live in the world you like more

Clearly you can be forced to live in that world because you are forced to live in that world.

then yes

So I asked you how you would force everyone to live like that and you suddenly turned around and said this wasn’t about everyone, just you and your friends.

And I’m cheating somehow?

rottingleaf ,

I think learning functional programming would do you good, and also I have a headache so leaving.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

That’s an interesting cop-out.

force , (edited )

My entire job is using Scala, Rust, and Haskell, and I can guarantee that you have no fuckin idea what you’re on about. Like what even is that supposed to mean lmfao, you think monads will save your capitalism? Will you utilize lazy iterators to destroy the left wing? Did you just want to sound intellectual by using a random math term?

rottingleaf ,

My entire job is using Scala, Rust, and Haskell, and I can guarantee that you have no fuckin idea what you’re on about.

Thank God you’re not my colleague with such guarantees.

I meant laziness, yes.

Did you just want to sound intellectual by using a random math term?

Before whom, someone like you?

force , (edited )

You “meant laziness”? What are you trying to pull out of your ass right now man? Have you even touched a piece of modern technology in your life?

rottingleaf ,

Yes, quite a lot of them, but I forget things as quickly as I learn them. Go away, you are a fool.

force ,

deleted_by_moderator

    •
    rottingleaf , (edited )

    Well, I didn’t see which exact insult you wrote to be deleted by mods (I value their support emotionally, but frankly would prefer to replace all “deleted by mod” cases with “hidden by mod” to see what’s been posted if I want), but laziness in functional programming is not limited to lazy iterators. I meant lazy evaluations, as in Lisp. If that still doesn’t make sense to you, please postpone answering by 8-10 hours.

    EDIT: Ah, I see it now. A fool indeed.

    force , (edited )

    Actually whatever lemmy.world admins use to auto-ban malfunctioned and was banning a bunch of users for “URL Blacklist” coincidentally when I posted the comment. I’m glad that you thought it was a long ban though and that I wouldn’t be able to respond because now I can point and laugh at what you just said

    but laziness in functional programming is not limited to lazy iterators. I meant lazy evaluations, as in Lisp.

    Man you really just fucking Googled “laziness programming definition” and regurgitated words from the first Wikipedia article you saw? I’m curious how you’re going to try to weasel your way of of that and somehow connect lazy evaluation to however you were responding to that person. Because if you actually knew what the hell lazy evaluation was then you would know how stupid you sound right now. Let me guess, you won’t even attempt to because you realize trying to explain would make you look even more clueless.

    What is obvious is that you saw the words “functional programming” online one time and thought “you should learn functional programming” sounded like a fancy way of saying “you should learn logic” so you used it without having a clue as to what you were even talking about. The most stereotypical ancap pseudo-intellectualism I’ve seen!

    rottingleaf , (edited )

    Man you really just fucking Googled “laziness programming definition” and regurgitated words from the first Wikipedia article you saw?

    In my language what I said looked fine in this context and I’d be understood. In your language it’s still fine because a person arguing in good faith starts with assuming that the problem is with them, and the rest are not worth worries.

    Since I well know what lazy evaluations are, I am using them correctly, for the analogy that another person should have separated two arguments I’ve made (EDIT: as in “evaluating one is not necessary to evaluate another referring to it”).

    So it is clear for any spectator, competent or not, that you are a fool. Except some of them are the same.(EDIT2: removed for pettiness as well, found mentions of ADHD and, well, ADHD people usually seek arguments not to humiliate others, so I’m changing my interpretation)

    I didn’t “think it was a long ban”, I thought the specific comment got removed for some reason and I asked you to postpone continuation for 8-10 hours because I’d rather not test my willpower to not argue with fools in that timespan.

    I also think you are incompetent at your job, because people use informal language all the time to talk about concepts. (EDIT: this is petty, removed)

    force ,

    In my language what I said looked fine in this context and I’d be understood.

    Haha no fucking way you’re trying to use “in my language it’s different” in this context. What language? What language could you possibly even be referring to? Is this language in the room with us right now?

    Since I well know what lazy evaluations are, I am using them correctly, for the analogy that another person should have separated two arguments I’ve made. So it is clear for any spectator, competent or not, that you are a fool. Except some of them are the same.

    You saying “I’m right and your wrong because… because I know I’m right!” is certainly an argument. I guess I was correct about you not being able to come up with actual reasoning for the bullshit you tried pulling.

    I also think you are incompetent at your job, because people use informal language all the time to talk about concepts.

    What kind of pseudointellectual oral diarrhea is this? “Informal language”? You think anyone actually believes the bullshit you’re making up about “lazy evaluation” being “informal language” for something else in your language?

    Are you in 10th grade or something? You sound so unbelievably dumb right now trying to make justifications for your stupidity up on the fly and failing horribly.

    rottingleaf ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    force , (edited )

    “I realize me trying to use terms I don’t know the meaning of in an argument makes me look stupid now to people who actually have knowledge about the subject, so I’m going to make a short and quippy comment to avoid trying to address my incompetently made claims and hope the other person lets me have the last word, or else I’m going to continue arguing because it would hurt my ego if they got to have the last word.” That is how you look to everyone else. Ancaps are very predictable. How many times have you tried to mic drop people today so far?

    breadsmasher ,
    @breadsmasher@lemmy.world avatar

    You should have taken the L and stopped, many comments ago.

    rottingleaf ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    breadsmasher ,
    @breadsmasher@lemmy.world avatar

    This entire chain could be posted here - insane person on lemmy

    Valmond ,

    Are those friends in the room right now?

    rottingleaf ,

    I dunno, get a look around

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    Specifically ancap ideology is attractive for me exactly because it requires one to imagine very specific architectures of how things would work

    You’re saying you like it because it makes you use your imagination because it’s literally so far from reality it’ll never exist? Lol.

    rottingleaf ,

    Ancap ideology, not ancap world.

    Most ideologies require you only to bunch together and yell louder. Ancap is not suited for that, which is why it’s cool.

    I would formulate this as “hard to achieve, so requires clearly understood principles”. Same as space travel. Or GNU/Hurd. Sigh.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    Most ideologies require you only to bunch together and yell louder. Ancap is not suited for that, which is why it’s cool.

    Then why the fuck do I constantly see Ancaps doing this?

    I’ve literally never actually seen an ancap successfully practice their ideas. I’ve only ever seen them desperately fail trying, or loudly exclaiming that they’re the smartest and bestest and all their ideas are golden (ignore the fact they’ve never even tried to put them In place, just loudly yelled complaining about the world they exist in like cats).

    rottingleaf ,

    I’ve literally never actually seen an ancap successfully practice their ideas.

    There is a community in Montenegro I know of trying to do that. It hasn’t yet desperately failed. It’s Russian, so may not fit you.

    I also fuzzily remember a group of people planning of another such place like 10 years ago, but I stopped following them.

    or loudly exclaiming that they’re the smartest and bestest and all their ideas are golden (ignore the fact they’ve never even tried to put them In place, just loudly yelled complaining about the world they exist in like cats).

    How is this different from any kind of leftists except tankies?

    Also “never tried” is a simplification.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    I also fuzzily remember a group of people planning of another such place like 10 years ago, but I stopped following them.

    A group near me completely failed after their town was overrun by bears because the abolished the trash/recycling rules and the animal control department.

    How is this different from any kind of leftists except tankies?

    Literally every single leftie has a larger history of putting their ideology into practice, seen or heard of a welfare state? Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats probably built it. Every nation on earth has a Dem Soc or Soc Dem major party.

    Hell even the other anarchists have spent the past century building communes literally everywhere, and they’re the second most ineffective political group after Ancaps.

    rottingleaf ,

    A group near me completely failed after their town was overrun by bears because the abolished the trash/recycling rules and the animal control department.

    Well, incompetence sucks.

    Literally every single leftie has a larger history of putting their ideology into practice, seen or heard of a welfare state? Democratic Socialists and Social Democrats probably built it. Every nation on earth has a Dem Soc or Soc Dem major party.

    Of course it’s larger, ancap is from 1960s.

    So non-ancap nations influenced by ancap count?

    Hell even the other anarchists have spent the past century building communes literally everywhere, and they’re the second most ineffective political group after Ancaps.

    Because ancaps exist for less than a century.

    I guess you won’t call cryptocurrencies a success of ancap ideology.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    Of course it’s larger, ancap is from 1960s.

    If you only read Rothbard and his ilk, it did. But just like Marxism had thousands of years of proto-projects and inspiration, the thought behind Ancap has been around in practice for centuries.

    So non-ancap nations influenced by ancap count?

    The only countries to be ideologically pure in anything have been hellscapes, so I’d say being inspired is probably the best example you can get.

    I guess you won’t call cryptocurrencies a success of ancap ideology.

    You literally had to recreate centralized exchanges for crypto to succeed, and through that, you rebuilt everything that’s wrong with traditional currency but transferred the control from democracies to private citizens.

    rottingleaf ,

    If you only read Rothbard and his ilk, it did. But just like Marxism had thousands of years of proto-projects and inspiration, the thought behind Ancap has been around in practice for centuries.

    Not that much. Maybe Catholic distributivism and, eh, early USA.

    The only countries to be ideologically pure in anything have been hellscapes, so I’d say being inspired is probably the best example you can get.

    OK, then it’s hard for me to draw a border between something being ancap-inspired and generally right-liberal. Ancap is extreme voluntarism. The name is wrong, it’s not about capitalism, but capitalism results from it.

    You literally had to recreate centralized exchanges for crypto to succeed, and through that, you rebuilt everything that’s wrong with traditional currency but transferred the control from democracies to private citizens.

    I didn’t mean that as an achievement of ancap, it’s an utter (mostly technical, but still) failure. Just that it’s clearly influenced by that ideology.

    Maybe cypherpunks (partially).

    ameancow ,

    They sure do want us all to live in a world where you have to swipe your credit card to drive anywhere, to go into a store, to walk anywhere, to use a public bathroom, to call 911, to use any services at all.

    But I guess it will be worth it, because I’m sure the ancaps and libertarians and sovcits have a really good plan to keep each of us wealthy enough that privatizing the entirety of civilization won’t harm anyone.

    YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH ,

    Has to be a troll. Otherwise, wow.

    Sammy ,
    @Sammy@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    What I like to say (in this post-true era): Big if tru

    some_guy ,

    Wow. I’m absolutely stunned.

    RampantParanoia2365 ,

    Thiz is probably a normal person trolling sovcits.

    Leate_Wonceslace ,
    @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    Fun fact: The government doesn’t actually need to use taxes to pay for things. The amount of currency in the market isn’t fixed, and so the government actually is fully capable of “printing more money” however, this has the potential to cause rapid inflation. So, taxes are a way of reducing inflation, rather than paying for government services.

    Trantarius ,

    That’s assuming printing money is the default solution. Taxes have existed for longer than that. The earliest taxes were literally a portion of a farmers harvest. You can’t just print more food, or gold, or whatever else. Printing money to fund government was never really an option, so positioning taxes as a solution to inflation just doesn’t make sense. It’s like saying that instead of eating at a restaurant, you could eat roadkill, which you aren’t going to do because of disease, and therefore restaurants are a way of reducing disease rather than providing food.

    Leate_Wonceslace ,
    @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    That’s assuming printing money is the default solution.

    I’m not operating with a model of solutions being “default” or not, so no it absolutely does not. What I’m doing is intentionally ignoring the historical context of how these systems developed to observe how they work in the present moment. Doing so allows me to understand the flaws of the model where money is viewed as a resource, rather than a pure social construct that exists in the minds of those who use it. Resources are limited by physical reality, whereas money flows like a clockwork river who’s source is infinite and who’s sink has infinite capacity. Changing the ammount of money available too much, too quickly, or in particular ways has negative consequences but it is possible. Resources don’t do that.

    Resteraunts are a way of reducing disease instead of providing food

    I’d say they have more to do with entertainment, but they do all of those, yes. It’s just a matter of perspective.

    Jikiya ,

    There is a Planet Money (podcast) episode about this. It’s a fairly new economic theory, but actual PhD level economists have said this. Government prints money, and to bring down inflation they need to get taxes to reduce the amount of money in circulation, to control inflation. The epidsode was in the 2019 timeframe, I think.

    Something that absolutely works in the abstract, but kinda hard to fit into my current model of reality.

    Natanael , (edited )

    You have to look at it from the perspective of mathematics, like systems control theory and balance / equilibriums. Money flow is comparable to energy flow. Mathematical equivalence principles allows for multiple descriptions of the same phenomenon because every externally visible system behavior can be implemented in many different ways.

    So even if that’s not how the underlying implementation looks like, you can switch the system to work like that without changing anything about how you interact with it. And that allows you to analyze the system in different ways that might not work in the current system

    Leate_Wonceslace ,
    @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    I’m a mathematician, so yes; I can confirm. 😂 I was trying to avoid that comparison, but I did use the same techniques I use to compare algebras when my sister and I stumbled on this way of thinking about the economy. I’ve never heard of systems control theory, though.

    Semi_Hemi_Demigod ,
    @Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world avatar

    Except that money is put back into circulation through government spending, especially when they’re running the kind of deficits we see in the US.

    Socsa ,

    It’s not really abstract, it’s pretty close to how advanced economies already work in practice. Fiat currency is the proxy by which goods and services are valued and exchanged. It is the underlying goods and services themselves which actually have intrinsic value, and printing money doesn’t actually change that. Deficits are inflationary and surpluses are deflationary. Growth is deflationary and recessions are inflationary. Governments in these economies will always run deficits because you can’t have both growth and a surplus at the same time. At the end of the day macroeconomics isn’t balancing a spreadsheet as much as it is about balancing the money supply and economic activity.

    This is also why something resembling capitalism is pretty much inevitable in an advanced economy where scarcity is a factor governing economic behavior. If you are using a fiat proxy to mediate economic inputs and outputs, you will end up with market forces. Pretending you can centrally plan around that is naive, which is why harm reduction is the right strategy.

    masquenox ,

    “printing more money” however, this has the potential to cause rapid inflation.

    That only happens if you put all that money into circulation - if you were to, say, just give it away as a handout to the military or Israel… no inflation. Which is… exactly how they give handouts to the military and Israel.

    To think… they could just as easily spend that thumb-suck money on healthcare - but that won’t murder brown people, so they don’t do it.

    Leate_Wonceslace ,
    @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    Since the USD is considered the world reserve currency, the government is capable of doing wacky shenanigans like that. Inflation, so long as the American people are insulated from it, could theoretically be used as a way to extract wealth from other nations. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that they’re actually already doing exactly that.

    exanime ,

    That only happens if you put all that money into circulation - if you were to, say, just give it away as a handout to the military

    How do you give a handout to the “military” without putting that money into circulation?

    masquenox ,

    How do you give a handout to the “military” without putting that money into circulation?

    That’s the beauty of “trickle-down” economics - it doesn’t. Give it to the military and the parts of it that doesn’t get hoarded by MIC billionaires gets spent on things such as R&D and asset/infrastructure development and maintenance - there’s not a lot of that money “trickling” down and circulating amongst the general population.

    If you were to spend it on health infrastructure and development, the money will still not be “trickling” down - but the benefits will. A bunch of F-35s means next-to-zero benefits for people - but a functional hospital does.

    exanime ,

    Even so bud, every cent used in R&D is already in circulation

    Even the hoarded money, it’s not in an evil lair, it’s in some bank, in circulation, making money for the hoarder.

    It may have a slightly less inflationary effect but this money is as much in circulation as the single going into a strippers thong

    AeonFelis ,

    Taxation is a big part of the reason why fiat money has any value at all. By demanding to be payed with its own currency, a government can ensure that the bills it issues will always have demand (because people will need it to pay taxes) and therefore will always have value.

    Leate_Wonceslace ,
    @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

    Yes, exactly!

    palebluethought ,

    Or is he taking it down from the inside?

    gedaliyah ,
    @gedaliyah@lemmy.world avatar

    The forefathers were famed for their bake sales.

    Ben Franklin used to make a bundt cake that was to die for

    Zachariah ,
    @Zachariah@lemmy.world avatar

    It’s the government. It can just print more money.

    AmidFuror ,

    And that has no influence on the price of goods, which is strictly decided by the buyer and seller. Or so I read today.

    dejected_warp_core ,

    Not even that. All your state’s comptroller^1^ has to do is discharge debts made to the state, by writing “discharged with prejudice” with red pen on the DOT contractor bills. But this only works on pink collection notices, not normal paperwork. State stays out of debt and the roads stay paved.

    ^1^ Yep, that’s a real word.

    Honytawk ,

    And end up like Germany after WW1 where bills were cheaper than firewood?

    http://www.strangehistory.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Burning-Money-in-Germany-in-Inflation-Crisis.jpg

    dejected_warp_core ,

    This is self-awarewolf material, right here.

    YungOnions ,

    Would love to see the responses to this.

    BonesOfTheMoon OP ,

    OP is here for you.

    https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/f14b1753-8094-4cbb-9ee9-befc81a86883.png

    sparkle ,

    I wonder why specifically 19

    Valmond ,

    Rounded up.

    cultsuperstar ,

    Lol sin taxes and the Vatican

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    With these people it’s always Catholics or Jews or both.

    AeonFelis ,

    Are SovCits against the concept of taxation in general? I thought they just convinced themselves they have loopholes that allow them to avoid it personally…

    BonesOfTheMoon OP ,

    Yes they are. They believe it’s illegal.

    Buddahriffic ,

    The ones I’ve seen posted here seem to want all of the benefits of living in a society without any of the restrictions or responsibilities that go along with it. Taxation is just one part of that.

    Some think they shouldn’t even have to pay other things, basically believing that there’s a part of loans that is voluntary and their esoteric knowledge means they can just get loans and not pay them back, which itself comes from a misunderstanding of how the rich use loans to get to spend their assets and keep them.

    That misunderstanding itself is that there’s an overall fair system in place, if you have the esoteric knowledge to use it, and you just have to know what magic words to use to make judges agree with you and police back off. They don’t realize that the rich following a different set of rules isn’t based on fairness under a secret system, it’s based on the soft power that comes with being rich and having the resources to make someone’s life better or worse with a phone call.

    rottingleaf ,

    All the posers here thinking they are very smart, while never asking similar “stupid” questions about their own political ideologies.

    In general, smart people ask stupid questions about everything.

    As of this specific question, there are various possible answers:

    1. Crowdfunding;
    2. Custom fees as a source of income;
    3. Close to taxes, but paying some fixed fee, like a membership fee.

    Variants which are taxes, but relevant for the question in spirit:

    1. Georgism;
    2. Only one simple income tax, only one simple property tax, no other taxes;
    3. Deciding every citizen’s payment into budget on a popular vote every N years (may even make it not a sum, but a percentage of property or something), as the average of submitted numbers or something.

    Not a sovcit, but they do have a point in saying “fuck you” to the authority.

    HollandJim ,

    Not a sovcit, but they do have a point in saying “fuck you” to the authority.

    No they don’t. Fighting “authority” for the sake of it stupid and meaningless because it’s so vague it’s dangerous. You fight the injustice or the lack of transparency, but what you prescribe as “authority” could be anything from schools that educate to laws that protect to support of groups you don’t belong to.

    If you said “Authoritarianism”, you’d have a point.

    rottingleaf ,

    No and I don’t owe you anything

    Jiggle_Physics ,

    And we don’t owe you respect

    rottingleaf ,

    “We” is a symptom of some disorder? Or you think that numbers matter here?

    Jiggle_Physics ,

    You are definitely displaying a number of disorders, that is for sure.

    rottingleaf ,

    ASD and ADHD. 2 is a number.

    But I’m grateful for them, as in this conversation they show me to be generally more adequate than your side.

    Also forgot to say that I don’t need your respect.

    Jiggle_Physics ,

    I would also add symptoms of ODD, HPD, and NPD

    rottingleaf ,

    I don’t think scolding morons is indicative of any of these

    Jiggle_Physics ,

    people with NPD rarely see the problems with their behavior, so this checks.

    rottingleaf ,

    Oh, half the time of therapy I’m being told that things I perceive as problems with my behavior are not.

    But then fighting windmills or ignorami is definitely that. Thx for a good thought

    Jiggle_Physics ,

    Every comment you make is just evidence of what I suspect. I mean, you are like a cliche.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    They also seem to think you and I are the same person, which is pretty amusing.

    Jiggle_Physics ,

    I think this person just assumes, whether consciously or not, that everyone questioning them is just a big, monolithic, mass that they are superior to, and therefore it doesn’t matter that they are addressing a number of different people, and critiques, the same way.

    FlorianSimon , (edited )

    To be fair to this idiot, social media can feel like that sometimes when everybody disagrees with you. Different people have different techniques to handle that. Some just shut up, others like them just double down and get absolutely rekt.

    Jiggle_Physics ,

    This is true. I often find myself not reading names and occasionally it leads to me addressing one person thinking they are another.

    breadsmasher ,
    @breadsmasher@lemmy.world avatar

    its like incels talking about girls -

    https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/728af19f-2f9f-4812-81dd-7904f74e727f.jpeg

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Nope, they’re right. You are not owed respect by anyone.

    rottingleaf ,

    Answered elsewhere - I’m fine with that, and in your case I’d never want it.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    In my case in specific? Why single me out out of billions of strangers? What’s so special about me?

    rottingleaf ,

    What’s so special about me?

    You being the author of the comment I was answering, maybe.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/02a8dc46-984f-46e7-9f53-c5d0bb42e45d.png

    You’d never want my respect because you agreed with what I wrote?

    rottingleaf ,

    “And” doesn’t mean causality.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    What part of “Nope, they’re right. You are not owed any respect by anyone” makes me singled out for you not wanted to be respected by? Because that is the comment I authored and you said that is why you didn’t want respect from me.

    rottingleaf ,

    “And” doesn’t mean causality.

    Archimedes designed siege devices and died at Siracuse. Him designing siege devices is not the reason for him dying.

    I agree that nobody owes me respect (I actually like it, because it removes the balancing part) and I’d not want respect from you. The latter is not a consequence of the former.

    Also “I’d not want respect from you” in natural languages can mean “I want no respect from you” or literal meaning, I meant the latter.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/29c230be-22d4-42dc-906d-9bc6512f126f.png

    Comment you were answering:

    https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/455fefe8-63a7-4c29-ae95-b256c0537ff9.png

    Edit: wait, you think I’m that Jiggle_Physics guy, don’t you?

    https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/929254e4-3503-4f59-b1d9-323069a22f5a.png

    rottingleaf ,

    No, you’ve literally screenshotted the comment I meant. What I said about FP. End

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Either you don’t want my respect because I agree with you or you don’t want my respect because you think Jiggle_Physics and I are the same person. There is no third option here, sorry. A follows B.

    Hamartia ,

    That sounds a bit like his ancap attitude to collective services.

    Honytawk ,

    We as in every person who downvoted your delusional rants.

    rottingleaf ,

    “We” means you (and every person yadda yadda) don’t have basic dignity

    FlorianSimon ,

    Seek help.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    What if my neighborhood can’t crowdfund enough money to keep a fire department in operation because we can’t afford to?

    Just let our houses burn down?

    The fire department sends us a bill?

    rottingleaf ,

    You buy insurance like many other people, most of which won’t have a fire. You call them, they come.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Ah yes, insurance against fire. I can’t see a problem ever happening there.

    Wait, that’s already a problem?

    latimes.com/…/state-farm-wont-renew-72-000-insura…

    So if I get this right, your solution is to do something insurance companies aren’t willing to do.

    Should they be forced to?

    rottingleaf ,

    No, it’s not, the article is obviously not in ancap context, it’s in USA, California, 2024 context.

    Humanity is doomed.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    What would make insuring such homes profitable in your world?

    rottingleaf ,

    An irrelevant question after your argument has been shot down

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    You didn’t shoot down my argument. You just said “nuh-uh.”

    rottingleaf ,

    Your argument is in the wrong context -> it’s invalid -> shot down.

    You’re simply denying things you don’t like and pretend to be winning something somewhere. Go away

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    You said insurance would cover firefighting.

    I’m saying insurance can’t afford to do that now.

    Your response to that is “the ancap world isn’t like the world now.”

    Yes, I know. So what’s the difference?

    rottingleaf ,

    A company may not be able to afford prolonging contracts without raising prices, but otherwise be able to fulfill this role.

    Maybe people shouldn’t settle in places too prone to fires.

    Maybe there’s some regulation involved in the first sentence which won’t be in ancap.

    Whatever. Ancap being worse than alternative in some criterion doesn’t mean defeat of ancap, ancap being better in some other criterion doesn’t mean victory of ancap.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    Dude, you can’t solve the problem of fighting fires for everyone regardless of where they live or how much money they have, something we’ve already solved.

    FlorianSimon ,

    And they’re already tripping on very basic shit… Wait until problems get trickier and subtler…

    These guys are the flat-Earthers of politics. They cling onto some idiocy that’s defeated with arguments a 10 yo could make.

    explodicle ,

    Evidently we can’t solve it either, at least not in CA.

    Edit: [smacks forehead] you said fighting fires, not fire insurance, sorry

    prettybunnys ,

    Everyone this is sophism in action

    Socsa ,

    I’m starting to think this person isn’t just trolling…

    explodicle ,

    Adding to the pile of stupid questions:

    Why don’t the insurance companies just offer it at a higher rate, until it’s profitable for them?

    HollandJim ,

    From where? You didn’t fund enough to have a fire department. And since you’re so clever as to not pay for support services, wait to you see the cost of your exceptional insurance…

    Folks, we either have a sovcit who discovered this group or an anarchist-type just stirring up shit.

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    This person said below that people should be forced to live in an ancap world even though almost no one wants to, so I think this is some weird form of fascism.

    FlorianSimon , (edited )

    You mean he wants the rest of us to live under neo-feodalism?

    There’s no such thing as anarcho-capitalism 🤭

    FlyingSquid ,
    @FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

    I have no idea. They told me I should learn to code when I tried to get them to explain it.

    rottingleaf ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    FlorianSimon ,

    You are ignorant of basic facts about markets. You guys need to go out more, you’d understand why the world is the way it is, and what can be done about it, instead of fantasizing about dystopic worlds. You really are the flat-Earthers of politics.

    BonesOfTheMoon OP ,

    That’s enough thank you.

    UrPartnerInCrime ,

    Also, what road are the trucks gunna drive on? Cause the trucks are gunna have to carry their own water since there’s no public water lines running for them to use. And all that weight is gunna be hell to drive on dirt roads

    AnUnusualRelic ,
    @AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world avatar

    Just have trucks with tracks, then they don’t need roads.

    See? There’s always an easy solution!

    UrPartnerInCrime , (edited )

    Do you genuinely know the cost of maintaining those tracks? Cause there’s a reason we just use roads

    Edit: I made this comment before coffee and see I’m being a bit dumb here haha

    Schmuppes ,

    If you exchange “buy insurance” for “pay taxes”, you’re awfully close to reality!

    rottingleaf ,

    The difference is that you choose the insurance company.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    Did you really choose which firestation was gonna send a truck?? That’s the problem with using a “free market” argument for emergencies, yeah sure it’s great to choose between different emergency providers when there’s nothing happening.

    But when a fire starts or you have a heart attack? The nearest Ambulance or Fire Truck that can get you is coming to get you, and you don’t (and can’t) have a choice in which Hospital they’re gonna rush you to, or which fire station that truck came from, all that matters is that it came

    rottingleaf ,

    Imagine being the first person to answer without insults or smug stupidity since I first commented under this post, and I wasn’t insulting others then.

    Did you really choose which firestation was gonna send a truck?? That’s the problem with using a “free market” argument for emergencies, yeah sure it’s great to choose between different emergency providers when there’s nothing happening.

    Yes. You need to have at least twice as many firestations to have a choice, if you want to choose between fire services, though.

    Or if we are talking only about choosing between insurance companies, then there’s no problem, but with only one fire service and some imagined jungle capitalism you’ll have a problem, because it’ll be very expensive as a monopolist.

    I don’t see a problem with having twice as many firestations, as in two parallel services. They don’t have only one landline at the firestation after all. They have HA in any mass service system.

    This all is unimportant, though, since it ignores the fact that something like a state fire service, only one separate from police, military and others and with administration formed separately from them is still allowable for ancap. Where membership would be like citizenship in our world, and a member gets the service on usual conditions (but pays something like taxes), while a non-member will pay a lot that one time. It’s similar to state healthcare being free for citizens, but not for foreign nationals in some countries.

    Notice how it requires no coercion or monopoly, so perfectly acceptable for ancap.

    But when a fire starts or you have a heart attack?

    See my solution.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    Yes. You need to have at least twice as many firestations to have a choice, if you want to choose between fire services, though.

    You’re gonna sit there on your phone trying to decide which fire service to use while your house is literally burning down?

    What about people who rent? It’s not their own private property, are they supposed to pay for the whole building being saved? Does it get put on the landlord? He never consented to having his building saved, his tenants just called the fire station when a fire started. Are the tenants supposed to contact their landlord first so that he can properly consent to having a fire station save his property?

    I don’t see a problem with having twice as many firestations, as in two parallel services. They don’t have only one landline at the firestation after all. They have HA in any mass service system.

    Well other than now having to pay for double the amount of infrastructure, you now also probably have people who own and profit off the stations, which introduces every normal market pressure, positive and corrupting.

    Notice how it requires no coercion

    “Pay our massive fee or your house burns down” certainly sounds coercive. You’ve also not established anything to guarantee that a fire station doesn’t develop a monopoly.

    See my solution.

    If your solution to serious and urgent emergencies like “Oh my god, my house is on fire” or “Oh my god, I’m having a heart attack” is several paragraphs long, you’ve not actually developed a solution, just a hypothetical which shows painfully obviously why we stopped running society like this millenia ago.

    rottingleaf ,

    You’re gonna sit there on your phone trying to decide which fire service to use while your house is literally burning down?

    Why “trying to decide”? One may have some kind of subscription etc. Also finding one quickly, like with taxi and food delivery services, is a demand to be filled. Markets and such.

    What about people who rent? It’s not their own private property, are they supposed to pay for the whole building being saved? Does it get put on the landlord? He never consented to having his building saved, his tenants just called the fire station when a fire started. Are the tenants supposed to contact their landlord first so that he can properly consent to having a fire station save his property?

    It seems you haven’t read the paragraph about separation.

    Well other than now having to pay for double the amount of infrastructure, you now also probably have people who own and profit off the stations, which introduces every normal market pressure, positive and corrupting.

    You’ll pay less, that’s for sure, ask anyone who’ve worked with state services and big organizations. At their job, I mean. I have.

    “Pay our massive fee or your house burns down” certainly sounds coercive. You’ve also not established anything to guarantee that a fire station doesn’t develop a monopoly.

    It seems you haven’t read the paragraph about separation.

    If your solution to serious and urgent emergencies like “Oh my god, my house is on fire” or “Oh my god, I’m having a heart attack” is several paragraphs long, you’ve not actually developed a solution, just a hypothetical which shows painfully obviously why we stopped running society like this millenia ago.

    It seems you haven’t read the paragraph about separation. Which is one (1) paragraph, not several. Also no, it doesn’t show anything, because you haven’t read it and can’t make such claims.

    The paragraph about separation:

    This all is unimportant, though, since it ignores the fact that something like a state fire service, only one separate from police, military and others and with administration formed separately from them is still allowable for ancap. Where membership would be like citizenship in our world, and a member gets the service on usual conditions (but pays something like taxes), while a non-member will pay a lot that one time. It’s similar to state healthcare being free for citizens, but not for foreign nationals in some countries.

    Now what I don’t understand is why you all refuse to read before commenting.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    Why “trying to decide”? One may have some kind of subscription etc. Also finding one quickly, like with taxi and food delivery services, is a demand to be filled. Markets and such.

    So you want every person to have to pay for a fire subscription? And if they don’t have one their house burns down or they get extorted?

    You’ll pay less, that’s for sure, ask anyone who’ve worked with state services and big organizations. At their job, I mean. I have.

    You certainly may have interacted with government during your career, but hearing this is all I needed to hear. There’s nothing objectively different between Government and Private products, sure the private product may be cheaper sometimes, but there’s also plenty of ways the private service could be more expensive, that’s why every business, including the one I used to run, has conversations about cost vs. benefit of private vs. public for certain services.

    It seems you haven’t read the paragraph about separation. Which is one (1) paragraph, not several. Also no, it doesn’t show anything, because you haven’t read it and can’t make such claims.

    I have read it, I just didn’t mention it because not only was it irrelevant, it was also wildly incorrect, government services can compete with eachother, and private companies can have a monopoly even without government intervention.

    rottingleaf ,

    So you want every person to have to pay for a fire subscription? And if they don’t have one their house burns down or they get extorted?

    That’s what you have now, only it’s provided by the state. Well, if you don’t have one, you are either an illegal alien or have it free or prosecuted for not paying taxes.

    There’s nothing objectively different between Government and Private products, sure the private product may be cheaper sometimes, but there’s also plenty of ways the private service could be more expensive, that’s why every business, including the one I used to run, has conversations about cost vs. benefit of private vs. public for certain services.

    I agree, it’s mostly about size and organization, not about ownership.

    because not only was it irrelevant, it was also wildly incorrect, government services can compete with eachother, and private companies can have a monopoly even without government intervention.

    Well, I’m looking at it and I see it as relevant. Yes, they can, but it’s not necessary for them to be part of the same structure. Yes, they can, but they may be organizations like Mozilla with the supposed goal of delivering the service, not profit. So just like with state services, but separated where no monolithic organization is really required. Also I haven’t said what you are arguing with, so it can’t be wildly incorrect if I haven’t said it, obviously.

    FlorianSimon ,

    There’s a fundamental difference between most private entities and public entities: the profit motive, which is the reason why private companies’ interests are misaligned with the interests of the people they’re meant to serve in a lot of cases.

    The search for profit is the source of a lot of waste of resources that would be better used providing actual services (eg. Marketing for a fire station makes zero sense).

    Of course, this applies to entities that provide services and not those that build your phones.

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    There’s a fundamental difference between most private entities and public entities

    But not the products they make, a government made screwdriver and a private made screwdriver are gonna be basically the exact same, the only difference being price and the market forces that the producer is impacted by.

    Which is what my comment was about.

    FlorianSimon ,

    The thread was about services (like fire stations, police stations and the likes), so I think it’s relevant to mention that markets are very often ill-suited to provide the best services you can get (and they’re often more expensive than public options, too).

    Bernie_Sandals ,
    @Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world avatar

    Yeah I kind of touched on that in this part,

    Well other than now having to pay for double the amount of infrastructure, you now also probably have people who own and profit off the stations, which introduces every normal market pressure, positive and corrupting.

    But you’re right, maybe I should’ve hammered harder specifically on market forces, but Ancaps treat the market as their god so I was trying to avoid it.

    FlorianSimon ,

    You can’t be sure of that. Some companies have monopolies on certain goods/services.

    One thing you can be assured of is that it would be way more expensive, and probably shittier, as is the case with that kind of privatized services.

    echodot ,

    Wait you’re calling us stupid and you think the government can fund themselves through crowdfunding.

    The government tells people they no longer have to pay taxes but they can if they want. That’s your pitch is it?

    rottingleaf ,

    I don’t.

    Why can’t leftists argue without distorting their opponents’ words?

    Honytawk ,

    We aren’t distorting your words. Just rearranging them so your logic becomes clear.

    Please, tell us what you exactly mean then.

    How would crowdfunding work if it isn’t based on non-mandatory donations?

    rottingleaf ,

    deleted_by_moderator

    •
    prettybunnys ,

    Oh fuck this extremely salient point has changed my mind entirely.

    echodot ,

    It’s actually profound is what it was.

    Hamartia ,

    You are sounding a bit SovCit adjacent in the old glaring-holes-in-your-theory kinda way

    FlorianSimon ,

    You’re such a clown, mr. Superior. The fact that you can proudly claim you’re smarter than everybody else while arguing for the stupidest shit speaks volumes. Thank you, I needed a good laugh this morning

    yokonzo ,

    Why can’t leftists argue without distorting their opponents’ words?

    This is what’s called a strawman fallacy kids

    rottingleaf ,

    I know what my words mean, so arguing to me about that is … (without insults) … never right.

    yokonzo ,

    Honestly at this point you either seem like you’re trolling or you’re very passionate but haven’t done your research beyond reading a few articles years ago without following up or verifying their sources.

    Then when people point out the flaws you go into personal attack mode

    rottingleaf ,

    but haven’t done your research beyond reading a few articles years ago without following up or verifying their sources.

    Have you rehearsed this phrase before a mirror? I mean, where specifically in these insult exchanges was research required?

    Also people don’t reason with “ahahaha, this has been disproved many times, everybody knows this”. Not all social changes since Lucian’s time I like.

    Then when people point out the flaws you go into personal attack mode

    There’s been one (1) person who came really pointing out something, which I gave answers for.

    yokonzo ,

    Okay

    echodot ,

    No one’s distorting your words, that’s literally what you said, you literally said the government could fund themselves through crowdfunding, it’s right there, you said it.

    How the hell would that work. People already dodge taxes that they have required to pay, I WAS if you’re not required to pay taxes then they definitely won’t do it at all.

    I don’t need to rearrange your words to make them sound stupid.

    rottingleaf ,

    I said it can be one of the sources of income and it already is in the form of war bonds and donations.

    How the hell would that work. People already dodge taxes that they have required to pay, I WAS if you’re not required to pay taxes then they definitely won’t do it at all.

    Some dodge taxes, some donate. I’ve donated to some things. Many others did.

    You need something, you want something done, you have a motivation.

    It’s a part of a list.

    echodot ,

    But how is any of that better than the current system of taxes which will ensure they get money?

    It doesn’t seem like relying on the good will of people could possibly work. And I don’t see how the richer incentivized to pay literally anybody anything at all.

    This all seems like the sort of thing a hippie comes out with, but they’re allowed to come out with that kind of rubbish because their brains are permanently suzzled, so what’s your excuse?

    rottingleaf ,

    But how is any of that better than the current system of taxes which will ensure they get money?

    Ideological problem, where you can’t opt out.

    It doesn’t seem like relying on the good will of people could possibly work. And I don’t see how the richer incentivized to pay literally anybody anything at all.

    This has some similarities with wind as a source of renewable energy. It’s one of the inputs, not all of the budget.

    In this particular line of the list there’s no incentive other than goodwill.

    This all seems like the sort of thing a hippie comes out with, but they’re allowed to come out with that kind of rubbish because their brains are permanently suzzled, so what’s your excuse?

    I don’t need any excuse for thinking about possible solutions. I’d argue people with such reactions to those do.

    And since you said “this all”, other points are not reliant on goodwill. If by excuse you jokingly meant the reason we can’t do with usual taxes - because of corruption in the wide sense. Unfair advantages gotten by some companies paying full taxes and other getting exemptions in various ways, bribe money finding more targets in a complex bendable system, imbalance of interests affecting lawmakers though the way the budget is comprised.

    Sethayy ,

    Hell yeah baby privatise the military😎💵💵 /s

    rottingleaf ,

    Wrong post. All things mentioned are about one centralized state.

    The reason for them instead of usual taxes is to make it harder to embezzle taxes and reduce motivation to corrupt the state apparatus. You’ve heard that before, it was the usual republican shit.

    TankovayaDiviziya ,
    1. Crowdfunding;

    Sounds like someone has never gone on a charity drive and hasn’t experienced how limited one could get funding from it.

    rottingleaf ,

    One line in a list

    AeonFelis ,

    they do have a point in saying “fuck you” to the authority.

    The don’t say “fuck you” though - they say “gotcha!”. The way I understand it, the Sovereign Citizens Movement is a cargo cult. They hear about all the billionaires who barely pay taxes thanks to clever accounting and all the criminals who escape punishment on technicalities, and figure that “if the law can be manipulated - why can’t we manipulate it?”

    Do they “have a point”? Maybe, in the same way alchemy had a point that lead and gold are made of the same fundamental matter and therefore one can be converted to the other. In the same way humoralist medicine had a point that the human body has various substances that must be balanced to maintain health. They’ve all had a point in that they’ve managed to glimpse at the nature of the problem - and they all fail by grossly underestimating the actual complexity of the model and the amount of effort, resources and expertise required to achieve their goals.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if an expert legal team could achieve some of the things SovCits are trying to achieve. But that would require lots of hard work from them, and SovCits have managed to convince themselves that all it takes is a few magic phrases. I leave it to anthropologists to figure out how they came to think they could so easily figure out what these magic phrases are.

    rottingleaf ,

    The way I understand it, the Sovereign Citizens Movement is a cargo cult. They hear about all the billionaires who barely pay taxes thanks to clever accounting and all the criminals who escape punishment on technicalities, and figure that “if the law can be manipulated - why can’t we manipulate it?”

    Ah, there is that, yes. There are people who believe that law is some magic where they can prove anything if they know it well enough and know some secrets.

    It’s not a bad belief, frankly. They want to prove something they consider right, so they believe the law would be on their side if they worked hard enough. Just naive, but not worth ridicule.

    In the sense that its connection to justice is not 1-to-1 they are right, but there are no secrets that bend it, just raw real power which a sovereign citizen doesn’t possess.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if an expert legal team could achieve some of the things SovCits are trying to achieve. But that would require lots of hard work from them, and SovCits have managed to convince themselves that all it takes is a few magic phrases. I leave it to anthropologists to figure out how they came to think they could so easily figure out what these magic phrases are.

    Oh, you already said that.

    I don’t know what you mean by “figure out” (as in what else there is to figure out), but this is indeed a common enough plot point in fairy tales.

    I was talking about the emotional part where right and common sense matter more than the law. The law is supported by force, so it’s morally acceptable to use force to protect right and common sense against it. Oh, well, speaking of USA, that’s in their Constitution anyway, and what’s more important, those founding fathers they like to mention have many times said that this is a natural principle and the Constitution doesn’t create or support it, just mentions it.

    pyre ,
    1. Crowdfunding;
    2. Custom fees as a source of income;
    3. Close to taxes, but paying some fixed fee, like a membership fee.

    these are just taxation with extra steps

    rottingleaf ,

    Sovcits believe most of the laws are corrupted or something like this, so these things are better as they are simpler and can even be put into constitutional law or something.

    I’ve never met one, we have “citizens of USSR” where I live.

    TheFriar ,

    You’re definitely misunderstanding this post. Yeah, there’s value in bucking authority. But you’re also just describing taxes. It sounds like you’ve read up on the modern form of libertarianism. Which is another crock.

    The problem isn’t that they’re questioning authority. Generally most people (especially on lemmy) are down with that. We’re talking about the leaps of illogic that sovcits rest their entire belief system on. This post is to highlight the absurd hypocrisy in what they preach. Not to call their disobedience of authority foolish, but their methods and entirely unfounded beliefs.

    rottingleaf ,

    You mean that they are imagining a phantom republic so resilient that they can live by its “true” laws while most people violate them day and night, and that these “true” laws make functioning of said republic impossible?

    Many people believe in rule of law, yet revolutions and forceful changes are a necessity, states recognize facts made against existing law all the time, every state and system in existence has been erected by illegal violence, and with all that many say that another revolution (in hypothetical scenario, not right now) would somehow be less legal than existing systems. There’s a clear contradiction here, the only answer to which is usually that the current situation is in common interest and you can’t do that, because “fuck around and find out”.

    There are such contradictions in free speech, of which everyone here certainly knows - one can use free speech to kill free speech. There are such contradictions in property rights, as everyone ridiculing ancaps certainly knows. There are such contradictions in personal freedom. There was another example but I think I’m writing too much. Got this habit while learning English at school.

    But you’re also just describing taxes. It sounds like you’ve read up on the modern form of libertarianism. Which is another crock.

    I’ve read up on many forms of it. Yes, I’m literally listing ways to make taxes acceptable for a libertarian.

    TL;DR: Nobody employs pure ideology. If sovcits were to make their own state, they’d have taxes with the reasoning that these are necessary in practice. Same as NEP in Soviet Russia.

    Ballistic_86 ,

    How very libertarian of you. Who’s going to make me pay those “not tax” taxes? Your private military? Well, my private military is bigger so I say NO to your desire for my money.

    rottingleaf ,

    This post is not about libertarianism, idiot. Bunch of lefties overloaded me with their bullshit yesterday and now the slow ones come to have a shot, thinking those of yesterday didn’t buttfuck themselves publicly with triumphant look.

    In general when you are doing such things like they did instead of normal discussion, you are robbing yourself of an ability to make a case for your wrong opinion.

    FlorianSimon ,

    You merely stating things doesn’t make them right. But keep believin’ I suppose. You got plenty of rational arguments yesterday, too bad you weren’t able to respond to them 🤷‍♀️

    Default_Defect ,
    @Default_Defect@midwest.social avatar

    I’m not sure they’ll overstand the question.

    PythagreousTitties ,

    The roads they travel on pay for themselves… somehow

    explodicle ,

    Just sign up for corpo-pass! As you drive through the toll, your Zelle account will be charged automatically. You hereby agree to all fine print as you drive past it.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •