The Anarcho-Capitalist Movement

[FlyingDuck 134]

Trying to bribe the government is fairly easy if that is how you will convince them to join your organization. I do like the concept of anarchism but it is in my view point impossible to collide into this system considering the jobs that are implied in the game are jobs that can not be removed however that does not simply stop you which is wonderful due that is purposely a good trait for a good "game" I guess you can say it that way.

I do not know much about Identities government body figure whether it will have it copied more like the US with presidents, with different branches and Anarchism as far as I know it does not have fixed bodies, but now you have stated you will win over different branches with bribes, protests or simply a fair discussion or a philosophical debate considering Anarchism is a philosophy in my sight.

However I do know one thing and that is that whether you are in real life or not people will be greedy especially in games, games are for enjoyment and that brings over "unseriousness" sometimes / often which will ruin other people experience but then again Anarchism is based on "freedom" which I have a differnet opinion on, so whether people want to follow your ideals of Anarchism or the ideals of low taxes-

Now taxes it is a thing most people don't like but you see the government runs on taxes. You say you will decrease taxes ( lower them or abolish them either way ) to make the people happy but the government is also the people. Therefor when you lower taxes you lower income.

The tax money are used by the government to give budgets to police branches, hospitals / paramedics, Agency Branches, road maintenance, education, religion ( differs ) but if we are strictly speaking the game won't have too much to do with education and road maintenance and such but you do have a police force and you can NOT abolish that either due that is a game feature and it is being loved by many. So if you legalize drugs and guns you won't have a high crime rate which is fairly "Ok" in reality but it creates less trouble for the police which might not like the "non excitement" which is given to them. 

Abolishing the government is impossible in my sight especially for an ever lasting time due to taxes. Because how will hospitals survive on a non funded budget? I want to exclude investors. 

I do believe more in social anarchism than capital anarchism at this very moment but that is my very own opinion.

I am not saying I am for anarchism nor am I saying I am against it. In reality I like the philosophy behind Anarchism.

 

EDIT: I forgot to mention and now I have done fairly little research on this so my apologizes for that, but if you are to abolish the government does not that include yourself considering if you enter a party and win over this "government" your party is yet to exist considering by that time your party is a legal government holder and that laws, petitions and other cases goes through your branches and so on.

 

Edited December 6, 2016 by FlyingDuck

[Capitalist 35]

32 minutes ago, FlyingDuck said:

Trying to bribe the government is fairly easy if that is how you will convince them to join your organization. I do like the concept of anarchism but it is in my view point impossible to collide into this system considering the jobs that are implied in the game are jobs that can not be removed however that does not simply stop you which is wonderful due that is purposely a good trait for a good "game" I guess you can say it that way.

I do not know much about Identities government body figure whether it will have it copied more like the US with presidents, with different branches and Anarchism as far as I know it does not have fixed bodies, but now you have stated you will win over different branches with bribes, protests or simply a fair discussion or a philosophical debate considering Anarchism is a philosophy in my sight.

However I do know one thing and that is that whether you are in real life or not people will be greedy especially in games, games are for enjoyment and that brings over "unseriousness" sometimes / often which will ruin other people experience but then again Anarchism is based on "freedom" which I have a differnet opinion on, so whether people want to follow your ideals of Anarchism or the ideals of low taxes-

Now taxes it is a thing most people don't like but you see the government runs on taxes. You say you will decrease taxes ( lower them or abolish them either way ) to make the people happy but the government is also the people. Therefor when you lower taxes you lower income.

The tax money are used by the government to give budgets to police branches, hospitals / paramedics, Agency Branches, road maintenance, education, religion ( differs ) but if we are strictly speaking the game won't have too much to do with education and road maintenance and such but you do have a police force and you can NOT abolish that either due that is a game feature and it is being loved by many. So if you legalize drugs and guns you won't have a high crime rate which is fairly "Ok" in reality but it creates less trouble for the police which might not like the "non excitement" which is given to them. 

Abolishing the government is impossible in my sight especially for an ever lasting time due to taxes. Because how will hospitals survive on a non funded budget? I want to exclude investors. 

I do believe more in social anarchism than capital anarchism at this very moment but that is my very own opinion.

I am not saying I am for anarchism nor am I saying I am against it. In reality I like the philosophy behind Anarchism.

 

EDIT: I forgot to mention and now I have done fairly little research on this so my apologizes for that, but if you are to abolish the government does not that include yourself considering if you enter a party and win over this "government" your party is yet to exist considering by that time your party is a legal government holder and that laws, petitions and other cases goes through your branches and so on.

 

This movement is not a party, I guess you could call it a philosophy as you say with the ultimate goal of abolishing the government. I have argued your points many times before. Everything that the the government does will be moved to the markets, that´s how simple it is. All the people working for the government will be moved to the markets. Any other arguments or questions?

[FlyingDuck 134]

 

10 minutes ago, Capitalist said:

This movement is not a party, I guess you could call it a philosophy as you say with the ultimate goal of abolishing the government. I have argued your points many times before. Everything that the the government does will be moved to the markets, that´s how simple it is. All the people working for the government will be moved to the markets. Any other arguments or questions?

Explain the markets a bit more if you could.

[Capitalist 35]

6 minutes ago, FlyingDuck said:

 

Explain the markets a bit more if you could.

Everything the government does, the freemarket can do it better. So moving everything that is state owned to private owners will lead to better quality of goods and services since they compete for profits. Read on Lassez Faire economics.

[FlyingDuck 134]

5 minutes ago, Capitalist said:

Everything the government does, the freemarket can do it better. So moving everything that is state owned to private owners will lead to better quality of goods and services since they compete for profits. Read on Lassez Faire economics.

Now I noticed something, I am sorry if some of my arguments does not fit the best but I have a very busy schedule trying to fit this philsophy bit in considering this is very enjoyable.

Now if a company let us call it company A. Company A manufactures clothes  and gives its employees a very small amount of profit / income let us say around 12$. 

The person needs food, and a transportation vehicle if they live in a greater distance, they could walk but let us say that takes a lot of your energy.

Most of your energy is now used to get to work, you work and get done with it and get paid your 12$. The clothing is being sold for 30$ and the profit is divided into different investors and so on. But if that employee is supposed to eat for let us say 3$ he gets "half" of his energy and mood back creating a fair work again but if he were to eat this meal two times at minimum chance a day he would end up with using 6$ a day of his payroll. Giving him an profit of 6$. This employee has no family or relatives so the person does not pay anything towards that cause. The person can socialize without using expenses in cafe's, cinemas and games etc. However he would have to avoid such situations for the upcoming future as he has a budget. 

If the person is smart he puts 3-4 $ away every payroll for accidents such as health affairs such as dehydration, starvation, emergency use but if this person got robbed or got in an accident it would create problems for his health considering it will cost a bit to get in an operation and such, or get "healed". 

The person would need to sell his small apartment and get something cheaper or live on the street in case of this.

Company B which can increase profits for its employees can use this as an strategy for winning more man-power or even use it to create health insurance but then the private health market might increase their demand for "healing" due such a large increase. 

 

Another scenario is fuel, fuel for transportation.  of middle wage worker getting fuel. Considering this is a game, fuel cost of gas stations will be different each hour or so by my guess due I bet we will not have oil rigs. By all means this is guessing. 

But you do see my point right? Best regards, love these small discussions. 

[Capitalist 35]

2 hours ago, FlyingDuck said:

Now I noticed something, I am sorry if some of my arguments does not fit the best but I have a very busy schedule trying to fit this philsophy bit in considering this is very enjoyable.

Now if a company let us call it company A. Company A manufactures clothes  and gives its employees a very small amount of profit / income let us say around 12$. 

The person needs food, and a transportation vehicle if they live in a greater distance, they could walk but let us say that takes a lot of your energy.

Most of your energy is now used to get to work, you work and get done with it and get paid your 12$. The clothing is being sold for 30$ and the profit is divided into different investors and so on. But if that employee is supposed to eat for let us say 3$ he gets "half" of his energy and mood back creating a fair work again but if he were to eat this meal two times at minimum chance a day he would end up with using 6$ a day of his payroll. Giving him an profit of 6$. This employee has no family or relatives so the person does not pay anything towards that cause. The person can socialize without using expenses in cafe's, cinemas and games etc. However he would have to avoid such situations for the upcoming future as he has a budget. 

If the person is smart he puts 3-4 $ away every payroll for accidents such as health affairs such as dehydration, starvation, emergency use but if this person got robbed or got in an accident it would create problems for his health considering it will cost a bit to get in an operation and such, or get "healed". 

The person would need to sell his small apartment and get something cheaper or live on the street in case of this.

Company B which can increase profits for its employees can use this as an strategy for winning more man-power or even use it to create health insurance but then the private health market might increase their demand for "healing" due such a large increase. 

 

Another scenario is fuel, fuel for transportation.  of middle wage worker getting fuel. Considering this is a game, fuel cost of gas stations will be different each hour or so by my guess due I bet we will not have oil rigs. By all means this is guessing. 

But you do see my point right? Best regards, love these small discussions. 

Non-sense. In a anarcho-capitalist society everything will be privatized so a person will find plenty of jobs that will pay more than 12 dollars, you´d probaby earn more by getting money from the church or charity for the poorer classes than working for a Company A. look I understand what you mean but this is not possible in a scenario without taxes, without taxes you´ll earn so much money that even shitty jobs will pay decent and with plenty of competing companies striving for profits without regulations there will be cheaper alternatives of food, houses and tools for less income people. This is very simple.

Edited December 6, 2016 by Capitalist

[Dream 6]

Or you just get a loan.

[Capitalist 35]

4 minutes ago, Dream said:

Or you just get a loan.

Sure, I would not recommend it but if you gonna start a business that will make nice profits and you low on money then sure.

[Shadow765 149]

Is it possible for the government to loan people to start their businesses?

[Capitalist 35]

7 hours ago, Shadow765 said:

Is it possible for the government to loan people to start their businesses?

Yeah mandatory loan that they never pay back called taxes. We are the only ones who tell statists to piss off from from our wallets and our personal lives. But they keep coming back don't they? Another reason we need to abolish the government.

[Shadow765 149]

Just now, Capitalist said:

Yeah mandatory loan that they never pay back called taxes. We are the only ones who tell statists to piss off from from our wallets and our personal lives. But they keep coming back don't they? Another reason we need to abolish the government.

I see your point

[Capitalist 35]

8 hours ago, dragon_12dk said:

False again, IT CAN be based on mutual consent, even if there are taxes! Simply because at this state of chaos that you want to have, people are WILLING to pay for protection, and services! Secondly, In your scenario, you are being irrational with the human condition! Who said it had to be 10? It could be 30, 60, 100 followers who want a country, and just by wanting a country, we would easily be able to start one! Thirdly I find it ironic that you call yourself a capitalist, because corporations would FAIL without any form of government! There would be no real currency, so you would completely rely on the coincidence of wants like the cavemen did, there would be NO reason for innovation, because no one is going to protect my patents, or copyrights, so research and development is a waste of time and money, Infrastructure would collapse, say goodbye to your roads, radios, televisions, water, and phones.

At such a point where you have completely ruined a country, yes, people would be absolutely willing to pay me or someone else to help fund a new government that can actually keep them safe, and have an infrastructure!

Also, If this were to happen in the USA, and I am the Prime Minister of Canada, or the president of Mexico, what do I see right next to me? FREE LAND, all I have to do it take it, and now you belong to a country that is probably a lot worse than the one you just destroyed. Again, Anarchy is impossible, it can not last more than a few minutes before groups of people start banding up for common necessities.

 

1.Oh here we go again here comes the, WHO WILL BUILD THE ROADS!!!11!?!!1 argument again. Like I haven't answered that a hundred times before. The same people that build the roads today through peoples tax money, the private sector, it's just that in our society it will be built on voluntary money. Look if you wanna build a country based on volutarism where people will pay taxes in a voluntary manner, fine go ahead, but if you use force to build a country in a armed society you're on your own, you will have the whole armed people against you and your 100 statist friends. It will end pretty badly.

Yes corporations who suck the welfare tit of the government will be subjected to the freemarket once there is no government, fuck corporations who use state power to gain profits, they are the reason so many dumb leftists hate Capitalism when this has nothing to do with capitalism at all, this is corporatism and corporatism is anti-freedom, so you´re really really wrong here my friend. I´m way more capitalistic than you're.

There will be competing currencies in the Anarcho-Capitalist society, if you keep printing the same currency it will lose value, so competing currencies will balance that out. I would personally create currency based on gold, now that´s something that will never run out of value.

2. Guns keep people safe, not people with the monopoly on guns. cops will be probably come late anyways if shit is about to hit the fan, i'll probably be dead by their arrival. A armed society is a polite one. Stay armed friends.

3. So you´re saying we can't have anarchism because governments will use force to conquer any "FREE LAND" Aka Armed Anarchist Land .. You know this is not an argument right?

 

Edited December 7, 2016 by Capitalist

[Capitalist 35]

16 minutes ago, dragon_12dk said:

There you go again, blabbing on and on about how the population will take up arms if a government is created in your imaginary world. In reality it would only be a select few insane rednecks including you. Voids get filled, and by creating a void, with the elimination of government, you shouldn't be surprised that it too will fill.

Have you even stepped a foot into the world of economics? sounds like you haven't. Patents, copyrights, and trademarks have nothing to do with welfare. Patents have fueled innovation.

Sure I'm not against the right to bear arms, but you must understand that not everyone can use a gun. Not everyone can defend themselves.

It is indeed an arguments, either a foreign government will take the land, or a new government will form in that land. That is it. Just because you have guns doesn't mean you are going to defend yourself against something like that. It would be like the U.S military vs Somalian pirates. good luck with that.

 

Not an argument

[Capitalist 35]

38 minutes ago, dragon_12dk said:

Millions would disagree

Oh I see so if I make a bunch of subjective slander non-arguments and defensive assumptions that "millions of people" would agree upon then it'll automatically become objective arguments. No it´s not an argument.

I appreciate the discussion while it lasted but when you start throwing snarky tantrums like " insane redneck", or assumptions that I have never stepped a foot  into the economics world, then you're not making an argument anymore.

I don't think you're quite aware how defensive and stupid you look when you make these non-arguments to intelligent people that genuinely want to understand what we're all about., and I don't mean only you but also all the other people who post emotionally reactive non-sense here.

If you have an argument I'm open to discuss but if you're gonna spew non-arguments then stop wasting our time, we don't need your empty emotional reactiveness here because they're not arguments.

 

Edited December 7, 2016 by Capitalist

[Capitalist 35]

58 minutes ago, dragon_12dk said:

emotionally reactive? me? judging from what you just went off about, I would say the opposite.

also, according to the Webster dictionary, an argument is "a reason or set of reasons given with the aim of persuading others that an action or idea is right or wrong."

Since my statements fit that definition, they are indeed arguments.

Also, no need to post everything in bright yellow, it doesn't do much for those who read your posts.

Oh so now you try to Clinton me. Okay let's pretend you were not emotionally reactive at all then, in what ways does throwing a tantrum at me and my movement calling us a bunch of insane rednecks has anything to do with objective thought and reason? If you can't answer without making an argument I'm moving on.

I mean you might aswell call us racist or white trash or whatever, calling us insane rednecks and thinking you have dissaproved anarchism makes you look dumb, tantrums are not an argument. 

Edited December 7, 2016 by Capitalist

[xPadrinho-AC3 29]

In order for your movement to work how you Invision it to you need to establish some sort of law and tax. It'll fund whatever you wanna do for your community and ensure your community will be satisfied.

[Capitalist 35]

1 hour ago, dragon_12dk said:

You are the one throwing a tantrum right now, not me. I have made plenty of arguments, but you cant seem to take things into context.

Okay I´m moving on because you don't care about answering my question, you first claim that arguing is using reason but then you avoid answering how calling me an insane redneck has anything to do with reason which you claim to possess in your non-arguments, instead you go back to defensive state, so bye.

[Capitalist 35]

2 hours ago, xPadrinho-AC3 said:

In order for your movement to work how you Invision it to you need to establish some sort of law and tax. It'll fund whatever you wanna do for your community and ensure your community will be satisfied.

Go on, why do we need laws and taxes for my community to be satisfied? What does that even mean?

[Capitalist 35]

1 hour ago, ShenjiNagasaki said:

I simply just don't see how this could work. You've tried explaing everything but it just didn't make any sense. "Give guns to people." Okay, have you seen that peopleare already stealing guns? Gun shop theft has risen to 22% in recent years. And people will fight for their property and what they think is right. And if you say "We will control them." That would be a government, the thing you are trying to avoid. How would you maintain order when everybody has guns and drugs? Ultimately opinions would be shared and fights would break out leading to death. Death would lead to panic and panic would lead to order. And order is exactly what you fought to get rid of.

I never said "give guns" to people, my argument is that the state should not regulate gun laws, I recommend everyone to arm themselves because only you can save your life in the moments of danger and rise of tyranny. Look I'm not saying there won't be crime in a anarchist society, but there will be far less crime when everybody can protect themselves from criminals and hire private security etc. The question here is how much are you willing to pay for security, in our society you get to choose the price and the type of security you're willing to pay for or none at all, while in a statist society you have to pay money through taxes against your will for a government police to do that job, and they do a much worse job on stopping criminals and killers than private police.

[xPadrinho-AC3 29]

1 hour ago, Capitalist said:

Go on, why do we need laws and taxes for my community to be satisfied? What does that even mean?

Well Anarchy means that there are no laws in place. So pretty much man runs man. With no laws you'll have no way of having control over the people you are trying to lead. Some might listen to you but most will be like "fuck it I don't gotta listen to anyone cuz I live in a Anarchy community". And you need funds to do all this stuff you're saying you wanna do. With no funds to build your community all you'll have is a huge poverty percentage. You say you'll pay out of pocket. That's not gonna work unless you start off a multi millionaire. No wait a multi billionaire. That's not possible so to get funds you gotta ask for funds right?? That's taxation so you'll pretty much go against your own agenda.

[Capitalist 35]

13 hours ago, xPadrinho-AC3 said:

Well Anarchy means that there are no laws in place. So pretty much man runs man. With no laws you'll have no way of having control over the people you are trying to lead. Some might listen to you but most will be like "fuck it I don't gotta listen to anyone cuz I live in a Anarchy community". And you need funds to do all this stuff you're saying you wanna do. With no funds to build your community all you'll have is a huge poverty percentage. You say you'll pay out of pocket. That's not gonna work unless you start off a multi millionaire. No wait a multi billionaire. That's not possible so to get funds you gotta ask for funds right?? That's taxation so you'll pretty much go against your own agenda.

That's the point, Anarchy means no rulers or governments. Asking for funds is not taxation since there is voluntarism between the actors, it's called charity to voluntary fund something which I support as substence to taxation, if you want to build factories, houses or roads in anarcho-capitalist society and you don't have the resources for it, you can always get a loan from banks or get inverstors to support you, I don't see why government is needed here to make this possible.

Edited December 7, 2016 by Capitalist

[Capitalist 35]

6 hours ago, dragon_12dk said:

See ya, didnt mean to intrude on your safe space.

You mean intellectual space? Correct, emotional reactiveness and tantrums are not welcome here. Only arguments, you can be passive-aggressive all you want but you're not going to be taken seriously, we don't give fuck about your feelings here. Don't like it, then leave or make an argument.

 

[xPadrinho-AC3 29]

2 hours ago, Capitalist said:

That's the point, Anarchy means no rulers or governments. Asking for funds is not taxation since there is voluntarism between the actors, it's called charity to voluntary fund something which I support as substence to taxation, if you want to build factories, houses or roads in anarcho-capitalist society and you don't have the resources for it, you can always get a loan from banks or get inverstors to support you, I don't see why government is needed here to make this possible.

Government will be needed to keep order in the community. There's a reason there are laws. Without order you won't be able to do a quarter of what you want to. And charity and loans? You really think people will willingly just give you money and hope you'll do what you say you're gonna ? Banking is run by federal and state governments. Without government how will these banks be run? How will they get their money?

[Capitalist 35]

2 hours ago, xPadrinho-AC3 said:

Government will be needed to keep order in the community. There's a reason there are laws. Without order you won't be able to do a quarter of what you want to. And charity and loans? You really think people will willingly just give you money and hope you'll do what you say you're gonna ? Banking is run by federal and state governments. Without government how will these banks be run? How will they get their money?

There will be diffrent currencies that banks will print and the most stable currency will be the most valuable one, gold for example is a currency not printed or run by the government and yes obviously you can't print gold, bitcoins is another example. What the government can do the freemarket can do better, the freemarket can bring order to a society.

Edited December 8, 2016 by Capitalist

[Capitalist 35]

Brothers and sisters! I want to announce that I have started a new company called Blackwood Corporation, check it out!

 

Edited December 8, 2016 by Capitalist