pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 18 replies \ @CliffBadger 18 Nov \ parent \ on: Why people are cheering up for El Salvador BTC reserve ? bitcoin
Government is the entity that specializes in violation of property rights. But you want to give it credit for protection of property rights. Your brain is a square circle.
Without government how are property rights enforced?
How do I defend my land and assets from those who would seek to take it from me?
Without government it is the law of the jungle- the strongest can seize property from the weakest with impunity.
Government recognises this and puts itself in place as the strongest entity but where it is well operated it can and dose protect property rights in such way that wealth security and prosperity can develop.
Government is a natural role that has evolved from the nature of humans as humans are weak and greedy as individuals but can achieve much greater strength as a group.
Of course there are trade offs with government but overall it has proven an essential part of any human community.
You ascribe only bad attributes to government but in fact it is a human construct and is made up of humans and so is variable in quality just like humans.
Not all government is bad.
There has only ever been sustained wealth and prosperity where there is good government. We need to fight for it and not completely give up on the entire thing because without good government we are more or less fucked.
reply
Without government how are property rights enforced? How do I defend my land and assets from those who would seek to take it from me?
Join your local Bitcoin meetup, obviously.
Government is a natural role that has evolved from the nature of humans as humans are weak and greedy as individuals but can achieve much greater strength as a group.
The group collecting the protection fees at gunpoint is not representative of the people paying the fees. You're imagining some kind of symbiotic relationship that doesn't exist. There are humans that form businesses to produce goods and services, and there are humans that form gangs to steal what they can't acquire through trade. There's no moral justification for the latter to exist, ever. The most successful one is the worst.
reply
lol yeah right.
You need to read some basic economic theory to start getting an idea of reality.
Adam Smith is a good place to start.
‘People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publick, or in some contrivance to raise prices’.
reply
Let's read on.
It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. A regulation which obliges all those of the same trade in a particular town to enter their names and places of abode in a public register, facilitates such assemblies. . . . A regulation which enables those of the same trade to tax themselves in order to provide for their poor, their sick, their widows, and orphans, by giving them a common interest to manage, renders such assemblies necessary. An incorporation not only renders them necessary, but makes the act of the majority binding upon the whole.
In other words, it's the government's laws and regulations that facilitate such a conspiracy and allow it to succeed. In a free market it would fail.
reply
No, without government there would be no way to reduce cartels duopolies and monopolies- we would be ruled by corporations. Which is what is happening in the USA today with the government largely owned by its corporate sponsors. Crony capitalism is not ideal- it makes your USA inefficient and very likely to lose against the mercantile determination of China. Enjoy your coming 100 years of humiliation as a consequence of abandoning the mixed economy features such as robust anti trust laws and your stupid Libertarian free market fixes all nonsense which left you with no rare earths and militarily hostage to China.
reply
No, without government there would be no way to reduce cartels duopolies and monopolies
You're entitled to your incorrect opinion but don't try to claim Adam Smith agrees with you that government prevents (rather than enables) monopolies, because he clearly doesn't.
Enjoy your coming 100 years of humiliation as a consequence of abandoning the mixed economy features such as robust anti trust laws and your stupid Libertarian free market
The West overall is still vehemently statist. Trump is one libertarian-leaning guy in a massive ocean of socialist bureaucrats and academics occupying every other major institution besides the executive branch. The New Deal programs were never overturned, and every other Western country despises the very idea of a free market. Your discussions here are with people that have all been ostracized from mainstream politics.
The only reason the US maintains some semblance of a free market at all is because of historical legacy and an inflexible legal system. Everyone writing the newest laws, which are causing the decline, agrees with you that the government should replace God.
reply
Wrong - Smith clearly indicates cartels are a problem and that governments should and can act against them.
God is long dead . . . He was used by the state for millennia and you still appeal to him for authority - oh dear.
reply
No he doesn't. He says they're no problem at all except when the government enables them. Read it again.
政府没办法禁止这些会谈,就算不理什么自由原则也无法执行一个有效的法律。几个有共同行业的人一起讨论东西,法律无法禁止这种事。可是谈话不够,提高价格这个阴谋只有通过政府的法律系统,求政府的支持(也就是说所谓的“投资”),他们才能够垄断市场。
生意和政府合作就是 monopoly 的来源。所谓的 crony capitalism 就是 mixed economy 的结果。没有政府,市场才有自由竞争,提高价格的阴谋就无法成功。不自然的价格总是政府的错。
Not all government is bad.
It's all bad. Stealing for the "common good" is always bad and nonsensical.
reply
Then why don't you go live somewhere there is little or no government?
You don't because you are a Hypocrit.
reply
My economic well-being is tied to Bitcoin, not the government. I can't/won't live in a jurisdiction that doesn't tolerate Bitcoin.
reply
You depend on the government to allow bitcoin.
Statist lapdog!
reply
Yeah they could always kill me for any reason. Mao made that point pretty obvious. That's a big part of the reason I don't like statism.
reply
There have always been murderous sociopaths- getting rid of governments will not change that.
It will just give them more scope.
We have learned that much surely.
Mao was responsible for much that may be viewed through western eyes as wrong, but so can Napoleon, or Stalin, or many of the US Opium Traders who profited from the Opium Trade and even Queen Victoria who refused to act against it.
There have always been sociopaths but removing government will not fix that.
reply
Yes it will. Removing the government forces the sociopaths to get real jobs. Your system is what gives the murderous psychopaths infinite power. They have no power in a free market because no one would voluntarily give them money to kill random innocents. That's an industry that relies 95% on taxation.