In addition to what **Idaho **said, when government police/court/inspector institutions are found to be corrupt, what happens? Elected representatives with little incentives to correct the abuses (and may be the causes of the abuses) assemble a panel or something. Market police/court/inspector institutions must compete with other police/court/inspector institutions. Right now government has a monopoly on these functions backed up by guns and prisons.
Hunh? 
In the scenario, the bribe was huge and the restaurant is long-gone, vacationing in Tahiti. And, BTW, if insurance refuses to pay what does the injured (or dead :smack: ) person do? File for an injunction?
In your opinions it seems that it is the present U.S., with its government, that more closely resembles Somalian anarchy. When the government withers away in Extratopia, police are for sale, writs and counter-writs are served by the private polices, society will be more orderly? 
… You can’t make this stuff up.
“A libertarian is an anarchist who wants police protection from his slaves”.
Specifically, the power to stomp on any of the serfs who get out of line. In a libertarian society the common people have no legal protections or legal recourse for their grievances, and the only time the government will step in is if they turn to force out of desperation. Then the government will step in, to keep them from rising against their masters. The purpose of a libertarian government is to serve as an iron boot grinding on the face of the common people, so their overlords can exploit them without fear of retaliation.
No they won’t, because they’ll be dead if they try. Without a government, the only rule is that whoever is more brutal and ruthless gets what they want, and anyone who defies them dies.
It’s not irrelevant, except in sociopathic libertarian thinking. Especially in a libertarian society, where that means he’ll probably just die anyway.
And this post is what’s wrong with those espousing they know what Libertarians are about.
It isn’t the ‘act’, it’s the method of delivery.
For most Libertarians I know, they would no more want price gouging than the Democrats or the Republicans, they just don’t want it to be legislated.
Which means they do want it, but either won’t admit it or are deluding themselves about what will happen under their system.
Nailed me!
I just want to point out that every single sentence in that post is incorrect, including the made-up quote. You might have set a record!
No they aren’t. And the quote is a paraphrase from memory of Kim Stanley Robinson, not “made up”.
You’re seriously asking how a scenario can happen in which a restaurant is less than healthy? Are you aware that in real life, many restaurants are dangerous? Why do they do it? Maybe try acknowledging that real human beings are not perfect slaves to a system
Now that would be unacceptable to a libertarian.
Murder would be illegal in a libertarian society. The insurance company would hurt its reputation so there would be little incentive for them to be unscrupulous. When you sign a contract with an insurance company there would be a clause about third party arbitration agreements. Who would sign with a company that didn’t provide for this?
I will reiterate that police are for sale in the present day US. The only difference between a stateless society and the present one is that police would have competition.
They do it because of incompetence and/or they’re trying to cut costs. I’ve never heard of a restaurant intentionally poisoning it’s customers for profit. Right now the president of Applebee’s could send people out to various Ruby Tuesday franchises and bribe the cooks to poison their customers in order to discredit Ruby Tuesday and gain market share. It doesn’t happen. The poster was attempting to come up with a Dr. Evilesque scheme that has no precedent. It’s a lot different than a restaurant being “less than healthy”.
No, I’m seriously asking how an FDA makes this better. Which disproves your own point. You just state above that ‘in real life, many restaurants are dangerous’.
I agree!
But how can that be? Isn’t the FDA out there, making every restaurant safe? Isn’t the SEC making investments like Enron safe? The FAA approved the 787 Dreamliner…wasn’t it safe?
How about when you travel overseas? I spend about 20% of my time outside the United States. How about you?
When you travel, do you fast? Do you starve yourself? If not, how come? The FDA isn’t there to inspect the restaurants. It is a US-based entity. Apparently billions of people manage to dine safely in restaurants every year, including in 3rd world countries, without dying.
How can that be?
You guys are arguing against yourself and you don’t even realize it.
It doesn’t really matter whether you made up the quote or someone else did. It’s still just made up nonsense.
IOW, you’re not going to back up your assertion. Based on the rest of your response, you somehow confusing libertarianism with feudalism and anarchism.
This is a strawman. You’re describing feudalism here, not libertarianism.
This is a strawman. You’re describing anarchy here, not libertarianism. There is no way you could possibly be describing libertarianism, when you start a sentence with “without a government”. Libertarianism believes in a weaker centralized government, but not a lack of government.
Seriously, if you’re not even responding to the points I made, just spouting platitudes against typical anti-libertarian strawmen and not even keeping to the basic point of the thread. I specifically put forth how I think that, functionally, the scenario provided by the OP wouldn’t be meaningfully different in a libertarian society than in, say, the US. Unless I missed it, I haven’t seen anyone saying “I’m libertarian, he deserves to die”. In fact, I’m pretty sure every libertarian response I saw included saying that it would be an immoral act.
If I were you Mr Blaster, I wouldn’t waste your time and the calories required to tap the keys.
To paraphrase Mr Mace and Mr Farnaby above, it’s not worth it to try and argue against Jabberwock nonsense that goes something like this.
-
I’m a good person
-
I believe in X
-
I don’t believe in Y
-
Z is undeniably bad <substitute in for Z…being mean to people, wanting to kill people, clubbing little puppies over the head, etc.>
-
Therefore someone arguing for Y must mean that Y = Z
That’s about the level of debate you’re going to get.
And in a perfect libertarian world, there STILL will be people doing that, only with less fear of punishment.
No, LOL, it doesn’t not disprove my own point. Many restaurants are unsafe. But many more would be without the FDA and strict regulations. That restaurants are unsafe isn’t the issue, its the number and the degree to which the health violations would be without a regulatory body to ensure safety. Right now, restaurants who get low scores get time to improve, and additional inspections. If they do not, they get shut down. In your libertarian world, they wouldn’t be, and there would be no scores on their windows informing people of violations.
Ever heard of “Don’t drink the local water”? When traveling to places where health codes are less strict, its advisable to bring your own bottled water. Plus, humans who grew up in those areas develop natural immunities that tourists don’t have. And many other countries who have regulations are equal or more strict than the FDA. Europe has a huge thing against genetically modified food. You don’t need specifically the FDA to regulate things, you need SOME entity to regulate health codes in public eateries and punish violators
I spend about 100% of my time outside the U.S. since the Clinton Administration. But nobody’s comparing U.S. to countries with stronger governments, or ordinary models. We’re comparing to your Extrematopia. Would you please give us a clue what present-day country Extrematopia most resembles? Somalia has been mentioned; do you have a better example?
BTW, I have my own mental image – and real-world examples – of regions which did OK with no strong government, but based on contracts, integrity, and private police. But these did not involve insurance companies, etc., let alone the unregulated mishmash you seem to envision.
Please post a description of Extrematopia in IMHO, or us rational thinkers will continue to believe it’s some vague fantasy. If you can’t do that, please take further discussion to BBQ Pit.
I’ll try one more time.
You don’t need to imagine Extreme-atopia. It’s not even extreme. It’s not a fantasy. It’s right in front of your face. That was the point of the FDA and restaurant example, in which (I think) you are in violent agreement with me…I just don’t think you realize it.
Example 1: The FDA and restaurant example
You spend 100% of your time outside the USA. Excellent. Let’s work with that for a while.
I’ll make a further assumption that you go to “lesser developed countries” from time to time…say Africa, Southeast Asia or some places in Eastern Europe.
I’m also going to bet that you eat at restaurants in those places. The question I have for you is, why? The FDA is not there to inspect them. And in the above posts, you seem to be claiming that the FDA is absolutely necessary to prevent this bad thing - or that bad thing - from happening.
Yet you do not rely on the FDA at all. But you’re still here, alive and kicking it seems.
How can that be? From the above posts, it would seem like you would think we would descend into anarchy, or some “Extreme-atopia” without the FDA. But you live without them every day. And you’re not in Extreme-atopia.
I would argue that the FDA accomplishes nothing that contributes to your safety. All it does it prevent voluntary transactions from occurring between consenting parties. It adds cost and complexity to the existing supply chains for food and pharmaceuticals and prevents access to desirable things by consumers.
You, by your own actions overseas and outside the USA, are living proof that you don’t need the FDA. Great! Let’s abolish it. Or at the very minimum, make it a voluntary agency who’s advice can be taken - or not taken - by consumers.
Example 2: Ebay and Craigslist
10’s of billions of dollars worth of transactions take place on Ebay and Craigslist every day.
How can that be?
Scams abound, just like in any other marketplace. In most cases you can’t even see or touch the products. The buyers and sellers are faceless and nameless avatars. Yet any amount of expensive, complicated equipment…including automobiles and even airplanes, are bought and sold every day.
Is that Extreme-atopia? There is virtually no oversight or regulation, other than that which is self-generated by the marketplace, such as Ebay’s basic rules to play. Rating systems are organically generated by the users themselves. There are no “laws” or "regulations"governing these transactions. And those that could be created would be impossible to enforce.
Shouldn’t this whole thing collapse? Shouldn’t it descend into chaos? It sounds so “Extreme”, doesn’t it?
There is no benevolent hand of government providing oversight or licensing requirements. Yet it is a burgeoning and successful marketplace.
Those are two examples right in front of us, that are living proof that “oversight” or “regulation” are not necessary, and add nothing except restrictions and control over our lives. And they cost us our own money. And they are backed up with legal use of force.
I can think of many others. Please let me know if this makes sense to you.
- You are correct. So why would you eat there? If it is important to you to see scores on the windows informing people of violations, I presume you wouldn’t eat there.
So what’s the problem? You are 100% in control of your own fate. You don’t have to eat there if you don’t want to. I don’t understand what you are arguing about.
- Of course I’ve heard of that. THAT PROVES MY POINT, NOT YOURS.
Of course it’s advisable to bring your own bottled water. If you want to, of course.
If you think the risk of drinking the local water is too high for you to bear, then bring your own water. That’s a risk-assessment that you just made, by yourself, without the benefit of any government agency. Well done!
Just like in point 1, above.
Don’t you see? Don’t you realize that you are completely in control of your own fate here? You are making risk assessments for yourself, and acting accordingly. That’s great! Welcome to the Libertarian Party.
If you want the FDA, or the local government agency of Uzkatistan, to offer an opinion on the safety of the water or food, go ahead and take their advice. Or not. It’s up to you.
But why would you want to sign over your rights and have them force you to abide by their decision? Whether you agree with them or not? Why would you do that? Because that is what you are arguing for…