Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57
Like Tree49Likes

Thread: Endorsement from a Libertarian writer

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by YouTuber View Post
    > Problems occur when those who need something don't have access to whatever it is.

    Perfectly true, though probably not for the reasons you might think. :-)
    Be that as it may, equal shares won't fix any problem for any reason; it can only serve as an additional problem on top of any existing problems that does nothing but make things worse overall.

    Quote Originally Posted by YouTuber View Post
    Need is often a selfish want thing, portrayed as a need by those wanting resources.

    Now, if you was talking about need for the species, then it wouldn't be a selfish act, if you could figure out what is best for the species and dish out resources on that basis.
    I'm talking about needs at the level of human individuals for anything, whether it's food, water, medicine, shelter, clothes, shoes, means of transportation, or movie theaters, ice cream shops, alcohol, porn, weed, tickets to a concert or opera, tickets to a sports event, etc.

    Some people don't like ice cream, so they don't a share of ice cream. Equal shares takes ice cream resources away from those who do want ice cream. Not everyone likes to attend sports events; let those who do like sports events obtain tickets for the limited space available in stadium seats, rather than telling them that they can't attend the sports event because at all because there's no way to provide equal seating arrangements for everyone.

    Quote Originally Posted by YouTuber View Post
    > it's still trade & what this movement is advocating is to move away from the need for trade.

    That is one big error in my book, I reckon we don't need to move away from trade, we need to make it more efficient, and provide more data so people can trade and get more of a fair deal in the process.
    The idea is actually to try to move away from dependency on trade, not on banning it. When trade becomes efficient enough, I think it'll just cease to exist on its own (and government will essentially also go away, along with it).

    Quote Originally Posted by YouTuber View Post
    As at the moment, part of the reason profit can be obtained in a trade is because one side has more information than the other on the deal.
    All parties that freely engage in trade profit.

    Party X has a supply of M but no N, and party Y has a supply of N but no M.
    Party X wants a supply of N, and party Y wants a supply of M.
    Party X offers a supply of M to party Y, in exchange for a supply of N from party Y.
    They agree to trade; now party X has a supply of N, which is what they wanted, and party Y has a supply of M, which is what they wanted; that's profit.
    If the state prevents parties X & Y from making those exchanges, they don't profit.

    If a party is given a supply of something because of equal shares, that isn't the same as profit. It could be called a gift, but it doesn't address the dynamics of economics involved.

    For example, suppose I have a machine that produces enough widgets for everyone to have 1 widget and you have a machine that produces enough gidgets for everyone to have 1 gidget; my widget machine breaks down and needs 2 gidgets for replacement parts; equal shares means everyone else ought to get 2 gidgets of you provide me with 2 gidgets. Suppose that your existing supply of gidgets from your machine might mean that there are only enough to give everyone 1 gidget. Now that means my machine that produces widgets goes from producing 1 for each person to 0, because you're not permitted to provide me an extra gidget. Suppose the machine that produces gidgets also breaks down before I get the second gidget from you, and your machine needs widgets to replace it; given that there are 0 available to provide to anyone, now we're stuck with no widgets and no gidgets for anyone. Well then someone who doesn't need a widget or gidget could provide theirs, you might say; but then it's no longer an equal shares system anymore, because that person will have to provide everyone else with a widget or a gidget; but how are they going to do that? They need to be supplied with enough widgets and gidgets to give to everyone else, and if there are 100 people, then they need to provide both 100 widgets and 100 gidgets to everyone; where are they supposed to get them from if both our widget & gidget machines are broken down?

    As I hope you can see now, equal shares is an economically unsound concept; every aspect of the economy can quickly seize up once the tiniest problem appears in such an extremely delicate system, even in the best case scenario.

    That's far from the worst problem; equal shares means if you want to make anything, you have to make enough for everyone and in equal amounts. If you want to bake a cake for someone else, you can't just make one; you need to bake a cake for everyone. What if there are 1,000 people; that's a lot of baking. What is a person probably going to end up doing as a result? They're probably going to go from wanting to bake 1 cake for someone to baking 0 cakes for 1,00 people; at least that way they'll be in compliance with the equal shares policy, because 0 for everyone is still an equal share. Generalize that to everything else, and no one will have anything except 0 shares of everything; in other words, no one will have anything. Don't try to bake a cake only for yourself, though; because that's the most opposite extreme of equal shares; you have 1 cake and everyone else has 0!

    If you couldn't see earlier that equal shares is an economically absurd concept, I hope you can see it by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by YouTuber View Post
    Moving away from trade is one of those things you suggest to your enemy to do to make them weaker. :-)


    > What TVP & TZM advocate is a society with no state,

    This is also one of the things you suggest to your enemy too..

    Sure advocate the smallest state size possible, with the least laws and rules to follow, but to completely abandon it, rather foolish.
    I agree, actually; until we have the infrastructure of technology in the form of robotics, automation, and implementation of other forms of advancements in technology, banning trade is a bad idea.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil View Post
    There's a glaring omission to this; what this doesn't do is speak to who wants to improve things for everyone. At this point I think history has provided us with enough information to know what does and doesn't work to improve things. In a nutshell, to me it's libertarianism that wants to improve things for society, and it's the other end of the spectrum (socialism) that makes things worse; it's that to me because that's what history has shown me. To me, either people are ignoring history, or they're not interested in improving things for everyone, if they want socialism rather than libertarianism; I'm not really trying to push that position per se, just trying to provide a response to you that hopefully will give you some perspective or insight that might satisfy your inquiry.
    I have a few questions.

    So in a Libertarian World, what would Cronyism, Monopoly, Corruption look like?

    Are they Greatly reduced by epic proportions? And wouldn't they have to be to support the Libertarian idea or then it just becomes another Failed Capitalist experiment?

    Kind of like retuning an engine to make it last longer but what's really Needed is a Completely New Engine in the long run.

    And just thinking about it. Was the System of Capitalism ever designed to enrich the Lives of Everyone participating in it or was it always just some promising Theory with no actual way of achieving its promises in the Real World? Something to think about ...
    droneBEE likes this.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    I have a few questions.

    So in a Libertarian World, what would Cronyism, Monopoly, Corruption look like?

    Are they Greatly reduced by epic proportions? And wouldn't they have to be to support the Libertarian idea or then it just becomes another Failed Capitalist experiment?

    Kind of like retuning an engine to make it last longer but what's really Needed is a Completely New Engine in the long run.

    And just thinking about it. Was the System of Capitalism ever designed to enrich the Lives of Everyone participating in it or was it always just some promising Theory with no actual way of achieving its promises in the Real World? Something to think about ...
    Would/could Libertarianism exist without capitalism?

    Libertarians claim that a SHARING Economy wouldn't work.......despite the fact that its not been tried

    Libertarians advocate a version of Libertarianism which is only accessible to those in society who are minimally doing well and then denies its exclusionary precepts ......

    This is what's wrong with simply 'following' ideologies or ideas....or any Leader.... without staying open and aware of the fluidity and complexities of both.

    After a certain point, 'following' always becomes a form of Blind Tribalism......a form of enslavement....
    Ernest and HAL9000 like this.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    749
    Right, I think that's why it would be awesome if we could Test ideas first and compare them to others so we can actually experience how they would work and affect people's Lives. Instead we just have to accept the ideas of so called "professional leaders" that mostly do more harm and Don't improve most people's Lives.

    So I think our problem lies in not following and using Scientific methods to show us what ideas genuinely work. And this comes back to the Human Condition of too much Ego. People don't want to be wrong. There goes that Fear again ..
    YouTuber, droneBEE and HAL9000 like this.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    I have a few questions.

    So in a Libertarian World, what would Cronyism, Monopoly, Corruption look like?
    Great question; thank you for asking!

    Let's compare what they look like in a non-"Libertarian World" now: they're all much bigger problems. Cronyism is a bigger problem in our bigger government world today because politicians can hook up their friends & family with the many government jobs that come with bigger government; either they're jobs that serve little or no purpose, or they're important jobs that aren't necessarily being given to the most skilled, experienced, or qualified person (either way, a waste of human resources). Monopolies are a bigger problem when they jack up prices and bigger government gets in the way & makes it more difficult for competitors to enter the market. Corruption is a problem with bigger government because more power that can be corrupted is centralized & concentrated in a few politicians.

    In a "Libertarian World", cronyism would be relatively insignificant because there wouldn't be so many government positions available for politicians to hand out to their friends & family; monopolies wouldn't be a problem where they jack up the prices because government wouldn't be doing things to prevent new businesses that can compete with them from entering the market; corruption would be far more difficult to achieve because politicians only have a tiny fraction of power to corrupt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    Are they Greatly reduced by epic proportions?
    Yes; it would also be easier to spot these problems, mentioned above, in a "Libertarian World" when they happen, because they'd be much more noticeable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    And wouldn't they have to be to support the Libertarian idea or then it just becomes another Failed Capitalist experiment?
    Of course! Proponents of libertarianism want this; they don't support it because they're adherents to an ideology for the sake of being adherents to an ideology (unlike those on the opposite end of the spectrum). It's the other way around; it has been shown to work, and it has to continue to be able to show that it works; otherwise, it wouldn't be practical/useful/beneficial.

    Libertarianism isn't a capitalist experiment, but it is opposed to some things that could be deemed capitalist experimentation, such as central planning (espcecially when it's shown to not work as well as free-market capitalism). If capitalism is an experiment, and it fails, then at the moment the only option is to go back to living like warring nomads & tribes. There's nothing about the libertarian "platform" that is opposed to allowing for a return to being nomadic & tribal, that I'm aware of.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    Kind of like retuning an engine to make it last longer but what's really Needed is a Completely New Engine in the long run.
    I think we both agree that when it comes to dealing with old engines, you want the most cost effective or practical solution - whether it's to retune it or replace it. The way libertarianism becomes relevant is that the one with a dependency on, or stake in the engine, is the one who it matters most that the right decision is made about that. Libertarianism simply wants to let you decide whether to retune or replace your engine, rather than having the state decide "for" you. What if you know it needs to be replaced and it's very difficulte, expensive, and time consuming to retune it, but the state orders you to retune it, which is what socialism does; which would you rather have, socialism or libertarianism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    And just thinking about it. Was the System of Capitalism ever designed to enrich the Lives of Everyone participating in it or was it always just some promising Theory with no actual way of achieving its promises in the Real World? Something to think about ...
    Why don't you call it & tell me how you arrived at your conclusion? While you're at it, don't forget to specify what version of capitalism you're talking about: free market or central planning.
    Last edited by Neil; 02-18-2017 at 12:15 AM.

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    223
    > I agree, actually; until we have the infrastructure of technology in the form of robotics,
    > automation, and implementation of other forms of advancements in technology,
    > banning trade is a bad idea.

    I agree too !

    Did I just witness a discussion / debate resulting in an agreed solution !

    I can see we currently have a few evolved steps that distance themselves from direct trade, such as with software, the donation model approach to producing an application / game, which in turn also solves the problem of piracy.

    I suppose crowd funding is also an evolved kind of trade that helps to cut out the middle man profiteer. (I guess before that, we had direct mail order sales, which did not involve having commercial shop premises to sell from.)

    We also have the likes of online retailers, auction sites like Ebay.

    And the more evolved ones, like Freecycle.
    Neil likes this.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    223
    > it would be awesome if we could Test ideas first and compare them to others
    > so we can actually experience how they would work and affect people's Lives.

    For that I would suggest simulated environments filled with real people.

    MMORPG's offer that kind of opportunity to study human behaviour in different environmental settings:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massiv...e-playing_game

    Anthropology of the MMORPG | Judy Williams - Academia.edu

    http://etheses.lse.ac.uk/193/1/Ross_..._Economics.pdf

    https://library.gwu.edu/sites/defaul...%20MMORPGs.pdf

    As such, I would suggest if we created such a game ourselves, we could have full access to the data and test out different economic models to see how they work and gain some insights into what might work well in the real world, before testing out pilots there too.
    Ernest likes this.

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    223
    > other forms of advancements in technology

    What does anyone think are going to be the new hot areas of advancement which will help bring forth our improved social paradigm ?

    I can think of a few at the moment myself which are in the process of doing that, such as 3D printers, which whilst mainly dealing with plastics on the low end price point, at some stage will develop to low cost metal fabrication.


    It is a shame that a decade passed without TZM getting involved very much in helping to develop 3D printer technology when it had the chance to kick start the process into the mass arena.

    My hope is that any further advancements we spot, that we might this time run with the ball, collectively, rather than pass it to a couple of other people in the hope that the entire team might see it as a good idea and join in.

    I also hope we stop shooting ourselves in the foot and virtually destroying our own chances of helping ourselves, as we repeatedly hammer down practically any effort any group, or individuals start to bring forth practical projects.

    I imagine to help in that direction, improved communication systems which help to spread the load and are themselves resilient to deformations, so they can recover from any mishaps that occur, will be one of the next steps in our evolution to solutions.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by YouTuber View Post
    > other forms of advancements in technology

    What does anyone think are going to be the new hot areas of advancement which will help bring forth our improved social paradigm ?

    I can think of a few at the moment myself which are in the process of doing that, such as 3D printers, which whilst mainly dealing with plastics on the low end price point, at some stage will develop to low cost metal fabrication.


    It is a shame that a decade passed without TZM getting involved very much in helping to develop 3D printer technology when it had the chance to kick start the process into the mass arena.

    My hope is that any further advancements we spot, that we might this time run with the ball, collectively, rather than pass it to a couple of other people in the hope that the entire team might see it as a good idea and join in.

    I also hope we stop shooting ourselves in the foot and virtually destroying our own chances of helping ourselves, as we repeatedly hammer down practically any effort any group, or individuals start to bring forth practical projects.

    I imagine to help in that direction, improved communication systems which help to spread the load and are themselves resilient to deformations, so they can recover from any mishaps that occur, will be one of the next steps in our evolution to solutions.
    Well for one thing there still is plenty of opportunity to greatly improve 3D printing. Right now it has so many limitations. For example, it's main feature has been to make prototypes rapidly. It's good for limited uses, such as for one-time or discontinued items; but economies of scale is involved - mass producing items in large quantities is much cheaper and quicker per item. Right now 3D printing cannot compete with that, if you want something that's already available on the market.

    3D printing is not something that's new; it was actually invented a few decades ago:


    It's only recently been making it's way partially because some key patents expired & will continue to emerge as more of them expire: https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/15/ho...f-3d-printing/

    Think of what science fictional technology such as the replicators in Star Trek can do, and what it will take to bring us closer to them; over time, one invention or improvement after another has incrementally brought us closer to it & if we keep it up we'll probably be able to reach it. Sometimes things from science fiction has been surpassed; self-driving cars has actually done this. At one time, the autopilot feature in airplanes was probably thought to be a crazy idea; at one time, man being able to fly was probably thought a crazy idea (and who knows whether they were even thinking of it as a very efficient way of traveling quickly over long distances).

    There's one catch, though; we're going to have to learn how to create these things, which means getting degrees in mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, computer science, chemical engineering, etc. Like Jacque Fresco once said when speaking about what to study (and he was referring to those in non-STEM fields): "Switch to robotics!"

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northwest Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,983
    Quote Originally Posted by Ernest View Post
    Right, I think that's why it would be awesome if we could Test ideas first and compare them to others so we can actually experience how they would work and affect people's Lives. Instead we just have to accept the ideas of so called "professional leaders" that mostly do more harm and Don't improve most people's Lives.

    So I think our problem lies in not following and using Scientific methods to show us what ideas genuinely work. And this comes back to the Human Condition of too much Ego. People don't want to be wrong. There goes that Fear again ..


    I think the best 'test' has been conducted already.....IMO

    Its not like Human Beings have suddenly arrived. We've got considerable historical evidence showing us what does and doesn't work in a successful and thriving society. The problem comes after the 'rotting from the inside' has taken hold and the masses are lulled into a slumber that they are unable, unwilling or unprepared to fight against....


    ....this isn't our first time down this road....
    Ernest likes this.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
web statistics
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1