But what about the roads? Common argument against Libertarian/Anarchy Debunked.

[OGEvilgenius]

I am contending that inefficience, waste, loss of value etc. are human universals, whether it's from government, a homeowners' association, your neighborhood warlord or anyone in an oversight position. And "nobody in oversight" won't work. Humans are predators and opportunists. The social form that contains that while being efficient and dynamic has not been found yet in ten thousand years. One might argue that pacifist societies such as Shakers and Mennonites did this, but they came to be via a selection process. You can't turn an entire metro area into a cohesive pacifist community. It disregards human nature. My opinion.

They are universal, except that government is not subject as easily to failure. The beat can go on for much longer if a government who prints it's own money decides to distort things, and then the correction ends up being that much worse.

That being said, I think a reasonable argument can be made for publicly constructed roads. A reasonable one can be made for private roads as well. Roads were built in America before the government took responsibility. At quite a high rate.

 

[OGEvilgenius]

By the way, I believe the Inuit pretty much proved that anarchy can work just fine. Social rule over government rule. They had no government for a very long time. It was a social construct entirely. No official leader, although elders were respected and listened to - because they had the experience. Other groups have done the same.

They were a small group, the percentage of sociopaths & psychopaths in that society is much lower than it is in society today. Even now things are simply not handled in government for the most part. Murder someone? The watchful eye of the community is on you but you are allowed to continue to function. Do it again? Good chance your life is forfeit.

I think the sociopath factor requires some limited government, which is ironic really, but it must remain small and the general populace needs to understand why. Large challenges overall.

 

[Dr Kynes]

We tried the whole private road building excercise 160 years ago
it was a dismal failure

bullshit.

in any rural community most of the roads are built and maintained by the people the road services, not by the generosity of some far off government.

you have no idea whereof you speak. private roads still exist, are still built and operated today, and they do a brisk business especially in the northeast. they were built and continue to operate solely because the federal state and local governments neglected to build city a road through these communities in the first place.

if you dont like paying tolls, then demand that mommy fed nationalize them "for the common welfare" and "through the power of the commerce clause". just dont expect anything better for your efforts. fed state and local govts have been fucking up simple road projects for over 100 years, and charging tolls on rickety bridges even longer.

if you wanna talk dismal failures, the city of san francisco owns 30% of the "Golden Gate Bridge District", a private company that squeezes the juice out of one of the 3 ways into SF. they dont mind that the bridge was only supposed to have tolls till the bonds were paid off (in 1952) they just keep cranking the handle on their magic money machine. meanwhile the streets in SF that dont ring the cash register every time somebody drives past are neglected, and dangerous outside the tourist quarter. govt is even shadier than private companies, because government is controlled only by itself now. private companies can get sued if their road braks your axle or their bridge splatters your car with orange paint. any endeavor where government is involved becomes impossible to fight.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Fuck that
If you drive just a mile on the illinois tollway it is going to cost you a buck
doesnt matter if you drive 10 or 1
it is going to cost you a buck
until the next toll
then it is going to cost you another buck
they just privatized the skyway in chicago
7.8 miles
3.50
and that is only if you have 2 axles
the rate goes up to 20 bucks if you are a semi trailer

ORLY? i thought private roads were a failed experiment from 160 years ago? do you even read what you write?

damn son, tollways are a failure of government, not a failure of private companies. if government wanted to do away with tollways they would simply not repair the connecting roads, ramps and throughways.

dont be so daft.

 

[londonfog]

bullshit.

in any rural community most of the roads are built and maintained by the people the road services, not by the generosity of some far off government.

you have no idea whereof you speak. private roads still exist, are still built and operated today, and they do a brisk business especially in the northeast. they were built and continue to operate solely because the federal state and local governments neglected to build city a road through these communities in the first place.

if you dont like paying tolls, then demand that mommy fed nationalize them "for the common welfare" and "through the power of the commerce clause". just dont expect anything better for your efforts. fed state and local govts have been fucking up simple road projects for over 100 years, and charging tolls on rickety bridges even longer.

if you wanna talk dismal failures, the city of san francisco owns 30% of the "Golden Gate Bridge District", a private company that squeezes the juice out of one of the 3 ways into SF. they dont mind that the bridge was only supposed to have tolls till the bonds were paid off (in 1952) they just keep cranking the handle on their magic money machine. meanwhile the streets in SF that dont ring the cash register every time somebody drives past are neglected, and dangerous outside the tourist quarter. govt is even shadier than private companies, because government is controlled only by itself now. private companies can get sued if their road braks your axle or their bridge splatters your car with orange paint. any endeavor where government is involved becomes impossible to fight.

can I google some of these streets ???? google earth is awesome

 

[Dr Kynes]

Again we can only speculate and I am only using popular speculation, see page 5 or 6 with the dawn defense example.

Answers to your questions: Representatives of society( Independent arbitrators), yep, maybe, yes except with accountability and no centralization(everything is privatized that is the idea), society.

popular speculations? you mean like science fiction?

when my wee lil nephew first started watching star trek he asked "if everything comes out of the "repukator", why do they work so hard?, counldnt you just "repukate" money?"

popular speculations rely on the willing suspension of disbelief. Stone Cold Steve Austin didnt really get run over by a car driven by Rakishi at survivor series. the thousands in attendance, and the millions watching at home knew this was fiction, but they accepted it as part of the spectacle.

only through your own willing suspension of disbelief can you imagine that anarchy (no matter what adjectives surround it) could result in anything other than what it advertises. anarchy. or, in another popular speculation, Fallout 3.

 

[ChesusRice]

By the way, I believe the Inuit pretty much proved that anarchy can work just fine. Social rule over government rule. They had no government for a very long time. It was a social construct entirely. No official leader, although elders were respected and listened to - because they had the experience. Other groups have done the same.

They were a small group, the percentage of sociopaths & psychopaths in that society is much lower than it is in society today. Even now things are simply not handled in government for the most part. Murder someone? The watchful eye of the community is on you but you are allowed to continue to function. Do it again? Good chance your life is forfeit.

I think the sociopath factor requires some limited government, which is ironic really, but it must remain small and the general populace needs to understand why. Large challenges overall.

That is Awesome

You get to murder one person and not have to go to prison
Sign me up now

 

[deprave]

popular speculations? you mean like science fiction?

when my wee lil nephew first started watching star trek he asked "if everything comes out of the "repukator", why do they work so hard?, counldnt you just "repukate" money?"

popular speculations rely on the willing suspension of disbelief. Stone Cold Steve Austin didnt really get run over by a car driven by Rakishi at survivor series. the thousands in attendance, and the millions watching at home knew this was fiction, but they accepted it as part of the spectacle.

only through your own willing suspension of disbelief can you imagine that anarchy (no matter what adjectives surround it) could result in anything other than what it advertises. anarchy. or, in another popular speculation, Fallout 3.

yep basically like science fiction or any book about market anarchism or voluntarism...they don't rely on "willing suspicion or disbelief" however, its just ideas on how society might work if everything was privatized and no government.

 

[deprave]

That is Awesome

You get to murder one person and not have to go to prison
Sign me up now

that is social anarchy which is a different topic entirely really, in anarcho-capitilism systems there is law and order only through private means. see page 6

 

[Dr Kynes]

can I google some of these streets ???? google earth is awesome

you mean the neglected tore up pothole filled streets in SF? sure, all of them that arent in SOMA or the financial district, nob hill or right by the new baseball stadium.

dont pretend you are unaware of this problem. once the governemnt starts cutting back they cut back on the parts of their services that affect people the most, to extort more taxes from them next year. only those areas deemed "essential" get to keep their funding.

thats why state parks, hospitals, schools police and fire are the first programs on the liberal chopping block, instead of the boondoggles and wasteful projects that nobody wants.

case in point, sacramento is "laying off" cops and sheriff's deputies, closing firehouses, and suspending road repairs (except downtown and the capital) while throwing TENS OF MILLIONS on the fire to try and keep the Kings (perennial loser basketball team, you may not have heard of them, even if you love the NBA) from moving to annaheim. the city has no money for cops or firemen, but theres plenty to give away to a pair of morons from Vegas who cant even turn a profit with a casino.

 

[deprave]

can I google some of these streets ???? google earth is awesome

Have you been to SF? They have some roads that are like 90 degree vertical and with all kinds of flaws in them..lol..might be hard to see the 90 degree roads and all the flaws on google earth

 

[Toorop]

Again we can only speculate and I am only using popular speculation, see page 5 or 6 with the dawn defense example.

Answers to your questions: Representatives of society( Independent arbitrators), yep, maybe, yes except with accountability and no centralization(everything is privatized that is the idea), society.

So these private people won't have their own interests at heart but those of the community? What is to stop the person who owns the road from being the same person who decides? Or someone with an interest in controlling and creating these regulations? What if we let companies run OSHA or the EPA? If they say arsenic and toluene are safe to put into the water supply, then it will be A-OK, right? Who says that the bridges on these roads have to have "structural integrity" in order to be used?

 

[ChesusRice]

Although the states of Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio subsidized privately-operated turnpike companies, most turnpikes were financed solely by private stock subscription and structured to pay dividends. This was a significant achievement, considering the large construction costs (averaging around $1,500 to $2,000 per mile) and the typical length (15 to 40 miles). But the achievement was most striking because, as New England historian Edward Kirkland (1948, 45) put it, "the turnpikes did not make money. As a whole this was true; as a rule it was clear from the beginning." Organizers and "investors" generally regarded the initial proceeds from sale of stock as a fund from which to build the facility, which would then earn enough in toll receipts to cover operating expenses. One might hope for dividend payments as well, but "it seems to have been generally known long before the rush of construction subsided that turnpike stock was worthless" (Wood 1919, 63).[SUP][SUP]3[/SUP][/SUP]

 

[deprave]

So these private people won't have their own interests at heart but those of the community?

What is to stop the person who owns the road from being the same person who decides? Or someone with an interest in controlling and creating these regulations?

that if we let companies run OSHA or the EPA? If they say arsenic and toluene are safe to put into the water supply, then it will be A-OK, right? Who says that the bridges on these roads have to have "structural integrity" in order to be used?

Well the idea is that they would want to make money as any private company, and to do so they need to satisfy their customers by providing a good service at competitive rates. The argument being that a is superior to having one entity having a monopoly of centralized power (a government) in an unbalanced environment, that this would be a more efficient use of resources. If society had a demand for "structural integrity" and "clean water", they would hire a company(or another company would) to do things they are demanding and the quality and efficiency would be superior because in this example the "EPA" would need to compete with other "EPA"'s...I know thats quite jumbled but make sense? The idea is that everything could be privatized and there wouldn't be a need for a government.

 

[Dr Kynes]

yep basically like science fiction or any book about market anarchism or voluntarism...they don't rely on relying "willing suspicion or disbelief" however, its just ideas on how society might work if everything was privatized and no government.

it's "Willing Suspension of Disbelief", the voluntary and conscious act of accepting the fiction oif a play, movie, tv show or other theatrical production as reality for the duration of the performance. this allows the audience to become engaged in the story being told, and experience the emothjional reaction desired by the producers, performers and audience alike.

everyone in the seats knows that the actors are portraying characters, and sparkly gay vampires arent actually lurking in the streets preying on stupid mormon emo bitches.

Twilight was still a better work of fiction than "anarcho-(fill in the blank)ism", and thats a pretty fucked up thing to say.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Although the states of Pennsylvania, Virginia and Ohio subsidized privately-operated turnpike companies, most turnpikes were financed solely by private stock subscription and structured to pay dividends. This was a significant achievement, considering the large construction costs (averaging around $1,500 to $2,000 per mile) and the typical length (15 to 40 miles). But the achievement was most striking because, as New England historian Edward Kirkland (1948, 45) put it, "the turnpikes did not make money. As a whole this was true; as a rule it was clear from the beginning." Organizers and "investors" generally regarded the initial proceeds from sale of stock as a fund from which to build the facility, which would then earn enough in toll receipts to cover operating expenses. One might hope for dividend payments as well, but "it seems to have been generally known long before the rush of construction subsided that turnpike stock was worthless" (Wood 1919, 63).[SUP][SUP]3[/SUP][/SUP]

the point is...?

youre being daft again (still) the fact that some tollways were unsuccessful is obvious. every financial speculation does not turn a profit. any fool could tell you that. some have done very well for themselves, and some tollways have been expanding and extending their service for many years (slowed down a bit due to the obamaconomy), or do you declare that all private roads are a failure, and none make a profit?

 

[tomahawk2406]

We would have roads and thats my argument and the reason for making this thread. The argument that we need taxes or a big government in order to have roads is invalid, the argument that we even need a government to have roads is also an invalid argument as I have shown here we can have roads without taxes and even without a government at all. As I said over and over, we can only speculate how a voluntary society without government might work, I gave examples on how it might work which are completely rational. You choose to shut this down and not even expand your thinking into the realm of philosophy, you providing no suggestions whatsoever, and I feel very sad for you. I pointed out the flaws with anarchy being most importantly that there is no viable path to elimination of the state and secondly the argument that power will centralize and eventually form a state. I am simply saying that we would have roads, most importantly from the libertarian argument I made, libertarians are no anarchist most libertarian philosophy would include a minimal government that builds/repairs roads, but even more important from the libertarian argument on the tax front is that taxes aren't even used for roads now. I am sad to see that you completely shut yourself off from this these ideas so much that it seems as if you didn't even read it. You are a very closed mind individual and this is partly from state indoctrination actually, I do not not believe in anarchy because of the flaws which I stated, I recognize the main flaws but I sit here and argued for it, I think it could possibly work well if all the stars aligned and somehow the state was eliminated but I honestly don't see that happening nor do I see it sustaining itself unless everything went absolutely perfect. As canibear wrote it is kind of a utopian dream. It is obviously not likely the world today would be able to tolerate such a transition.

jesus christ, thats my whole point deprave. it cant work in todays society and it never will. fuck i agree with you, u dont need a government to build roads. everyone fucking knows that. but you based your thread as if a transition in america to this method would be a successful one. im closed minded to stupid ideas. maybe i took your thread the wrong way. in todays america, id rather pay taxes. in your little utopia its probably a better idea to build them yourself.

 

[ChesusRice]

The only argument I ever need to go against 'anarchy' is

Somalia

Now there is a pristine example of what small goverment can do for you

 

[londonfog]

you mean the neglected tore up pothole filled streets in SF? sure, all of them that arent in SOMA or the financial district, nob hill or right by the new baseball stadium.

dont pretend you are unaware of this problem. once the governemnt starts cutting back they cut back on the parts of their services that affect people the most, to extort more taxes from them next year. only those areas deemed "essential" get to keep their funding.

thats why state parks, hospitals, schools police and fire are the first programs on the liberal chopping block, instead of the boondoggles and wasteful projects that nobody wants.

case in point, sacramento is "laying off" cops and sheriff's deputies, closing firehouses, and suspending road repairs (except downtown and the capital) while throwing TENS OF MILLIONS on the fire to try and keep the Kings (perennial loser basketball team, you may not have heard of them, even if you love the NBA) from moving to annaheim. the city has no money for cops or firemen, but theres plenty to give away to a pair of morons from Vegas who cant even turn a profit with a casino.

Did you jsut say "state parks, hospitals, schools police and fire are the first programs on the liberal chopping block"...I think you have that backwards

 

[deprave]

fuck i agree with you, u dont need a government to build roads. everyone fucking knows that.

No they don't know that, thus the whole reason I made this thread, you can see examples of this throughout the thread, people think that we need government and taxes for roads and this argument is commonly used, in fact its usually the first argument made against a libertarian or anarchist.