Freee market useless on its own

[Hermit]

The scroll wheel on my mouse works well enough, but sometimes using the PGDN button is more efficient.

[rainbow]

OK, so the basic research is taxpayer supplied. Same thing.

Were the taxpayers asked if they wanted to be dunned to finance this basic research? No.

We also taxpayers and say yes, so you lose.

Learn to take defeat with grace.

[rainbow]

Indeed. All you have to do is ask if I want to pay for basic research. If I do, then I'll contribute. If I don't, then you'll have to go begging somewhere else...or do a better job of selling your proposition to me in order convince me that the benefits to be gained exceed the amount you are requesting from me.

No, we don't need to ask. The reason being that you don't have the wisdom to make the decision.
...so we don't need your opinion, just your money.
Hence taxes.

You know it's the right thing to do.

It's just common courtesy to ask someone for a contribution to your favorite cause, whatever it may be. Taking it by force, including using the inherent force of government, is simple robbery which must be resisted with all necessary force.

You jus' hole up there in them mountains with ya sister fella.
...and make some moonshine, and shoot them taxmen when they come aroun'.

[Seth]

OK, so the basic research is taxpayer supplied. Same thing.

Were the taxpayers asked if they wanted to be dunned to finance this basic research? No.

We also taxpayers and say yes, so you lose.

Learn to take defeat with grace.

And therein lies the lesson: Authoritarianism and collectivism don't give a damn about anything other than what the majority wants and they both are willing to take what the majority wants, using whatever force is required, including jackbooted thugs with machine guns, to get it.

And that's why socialism is such an evil blight on the world. It never asks, it just takes and then tries to excuse the theft by claiming that the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," which is the mantra of socialist mass murderers throughout history.

Your entire argument reduced down to "I want it and I'll do anything to get it, including using the force of government to take it from you even if you don't want to give it to me."

I call that "armed robbery" and I reserve the right to resist such efforts with any necessary degree of force.

[Seth]

Indeed. All you have to do is ask if I want to pay for basic research. If I do, then I'll contribute. If I don't, then you'll have to go begging somewhere else...or do a better job of selling your proposition to me in order convince me that the benefits to be gained exceed the amount you are requesting from me.

No, we don't need to ask. The reason being that you don't have the wisdom to make the decision.

So, you think you're smarter than I am and know better than I do what to do with MY money and labor? Therein lies the arrogance of Marxism.

...so we don't need your opinion, just your money.

And therein lies the mentality of the armed thug sticking a knife in your ribs from a dark alley.

Hence taxes.

Rationalization.

You know it's the right thing to do.

If it's the right thing to do, and you can convince me of that, I'll voluntarily contribute. If you can't convince me it's the right thing to do, that doesn't give you license to shove a shiv in my side and demand I pay anyway. When people try that with me they are very likely to get quickly dead, and justifiably so. Just because you want my money doesn't mean you may have it without resistance.

It's just common courtesy to ask someone for a contribution to your favorite cause, whatever it may be. Taking it by force, including using the inherent force of government, is simple robbery which must be resisted with all necessary force.

You jus' hole up there in them mountains with ya sister fella.
...and make some moonshine, and shoot them taxmen when they come aroun'.

Go right on thinking it's a joke. You might want to catch up on your Sun Tzu before trying to steal what's mine though.

[JimC]

Seth wrote:

Your entire argument reduced down to "I want it and I'll do anything to get it, including using the force of government to take it from you even if you don't want to give it to me."

I call that "armed robbery" and I reserve the right to resist such efforts with any necessary degree of force.

How many IRS agents have you killed to date?

[Seth]

Seth wrote:

Your entire argument reduced down to "I want it and I'll do anything to get it, including using the force of government to take it from you even if you don't want to give it to me."

I call that "armed robbery" and I reserve the right to resist such efforts with any necessary degree of force.

How many IRS agents have you killed to date?

If I had, what makes you think I'd tell you?

[Tero]

Patent office
FDA
Local offices for deeds etc
Army corps of engineers (dams)
Many more
Quite the catalog of offices that cannot be privatized, as they would go corrupt immediately. Now there is only the occasional official to fire or vote out, like Kim Davis.

[JimC]

As always, building infrastructure involves a mix of government planning and money, and private enterprise, in a wide range of possible partnerships. Governments typically plan a new infrastructure project, at least in broad detail, then contract out a (for example) private road-building company to get the job done. For some particular examples such as large new freeways, the finances may best be achieved via toll roads of various kinds. For maintenance of local streets , a council may have its own teams. It is pointless to argue for one system against another on ideological grounds; each country or state tends to evolve a mixed system which suits their needs, and if it fails badly, then the opposition can become the government...

[Seth]

Patent office

The patent office is merely a registry, it has no enforcement powers whatsoever, which is as it should be. If I file a patent and you infringe on it, I sue you directly. The patent office merely keeps the public records of who is issued patents. A private registry would operate exactly the same way, all that is needed is legal authorization, just like ICANN and other privately-funded organizations that coordinate national and international matters. The government's only required role is to make the laws which govern the particular activity.

FDA

The FDA is the same as the patent office, it is merely a regulatory agency that sets policy. It need not have any enforcement powers at all. All enforcement of food and drug issues can be done by the individual in civil court. Poison someone with bad food or drugs and you lose everything in civil court. The FDA needs no enforcement arm and can simply authorize and oversee local and regional food safety inspectors who can be paid by the food providers who use them. Just like Underwriter's Laboratory, public trust in the inspection and certification organization is created by strict standards and compliance within the inspection industry. The FDA's role is to set policy and police the inspection industry and punish incidence of force or fraud (coercion by health inspectors or bribery and corruption). If an individual inspector or inspection company is caught accepting bribes or coercing them, the individual and/or the entire company disappears, with all of the assets involved, including the individual's personal assets, being forfeited and distributed to the victims of the crime.

Likewise, offering an inspector a bribe or attempting to coerce him results in your restaurant being seized, sold and the proceeds being distributed to the public in the area, who are the ones harmed by food safety violations.

Once again, the only government role is administrative in making sure the rules are reasonable and appropriate.

Local offices for deeds etc

Custodians of public records have no function other than as custodians, which is an appropriate government role, but one which can be physically served by private industry under the supervision of public records custodians.

Army corps of engineers (dams)

The Army Corps of Engineers has no business doing anything other than engaging in military engineering projects, which according to the Constitution includes a very limited role in building docks, magazines and other strictly military infrastructure. Dams are NOT military infrastructure and the COE has no business doing anything at all with respect to dams. The notion that the COE has supervision over all of the "navigable waters of the United States" is an artifice of the courts having nothing to do with constitutional authority to protect the "navigable capacity" of the navigable rivers of the US. Indeed, there is no constitutional authority for the federal government to exercise any control whatsoever over the waters of the states in the interests of protecting federal navigability. That too is an artifact of the specious notion that the federal government reigns supreme over the state governments, which it does not. The federal government was designed to do ONLY those things the states themselves CANNOT do, such as maintain a national army, coin money, establish post roads and those other things explicitly listed in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

The COE's authority over navigable waters, and non-navigable waters that "affect the navigable capacity" of such waters is an artifact of the Progressive agenda of destroying the power and authority of the individual states by centralizing all power and authority in the federal government by (mis)using the Commerce Clause.

]Many more
Quite the catalog of offices that cannot be privatized, as they would go corrupt immediately. Now there is only the occasional official to fire or vote out, like Kim Davis.

As if those government offices did not themselves "go corrupt immediately."

There is no faster road to corruption than to "governmentify" anything. That's because the whole of government is one giant festering cesspool of corruption that is simply a way of life for those swimming in it, whose only motive is preservation of their own power, privilege and income.

Geeze, get a clue, willya? The government is NOT here to help you, it's a necessary evil, like fire, that will destroy you utterly if allowed to slip it's leash. It's proper role is strictly regulatory, it's not supposed to enforce regulations, particularly not with fines, because that puts a "profit" motive into the heads of bureaucrats, who usually get to keep the proceeds of financial enforcement actions (or part of them) for their own bureaucracy, which means new furniture, parties with hookers and other corrupt uses of public money.

[rainbow]

OK, so the basic research is taxpayer supplied. Same thing.

Were the taxpayers asked if they wanted to be dunned to finance this basic research? No.

We also taxpayers and say yes, so you lose.

Learn to take defeat with grace.

And therein lies the lesson: Authoritarianism and collectivism don't give a damn about anything other than what the majority wants and they both are willing to take what the majority wants, using whatever force is required, including jackbooted thugs with machine guns, to get it.

Adapt or die.

And that's why socialism is such an evil blight on the world. It never asks, it just takes and then tries to excuse the theft by claiming that the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," which is the mantra of socialist mass murderers throughout history.

Diddums.

Your entire argument reduced down to "I want it and I'll do anything to get it, including using the force of government to take it from you even if you don't want to give it to me."

I call that "armed robbery" and I reserve the right to resist such efforts with any necessary degree of force.

And the majority, who have more weapons and more means to enforce your compliance reserve the right to make you do what they want.

[JimC]

rainbow wrote:

And the majority, who have more weapons and more means to enforce your compliance reserve the right to make you do what they want.

Over his dead body!

[Tero]

The patent office is merely a registry, it has no enforcement powers whatsoever, which is as it should be. If I file a patent and you infringe on it, I sue you directly. The patent office merely keeps the public records of who is issued patents. A private registry would operate exactly the same way, all that is needed is legal authorization, just like ICANN and other privately-funded organizations that coordinate national and international matters. The government's only required role is to make the laws which govern the particular activity.

The office you describe is like the old Japanese office. You merely posted your claims there and then fought in court. The US Patent office involves science and engineering. The patent examiner, who you can try to bribe (but is well paid, same as their industrial counterpart) determines whether your claim is new and patentable. He will not band your cold fusion claim as he has no lab of that sort. The examiner will base his decision on reading the science.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_examiner

[Tero]

Ban, not band.

[Seth]

Learn to take defeat with grace.

And therein lies the lesson: Authoritarianism and collectivism don't give a damn about anything other than what the majority wants and they both are willing to take what the majority wants, using whatever force is required, including jackbooted thugs with machine guns, to get it.

Adapt or die.

My job is not to die for my country, it's to make as many of the other sons-of-bitchs die for theirs as I possibly can. I'm very adaptable, you see. Which of course says nothing about your non-answer. Authoritarians always resort to "obey or die" in the end because they are incapable of rationally supporting their ideology, as we see here.

And that's why socialism is such an evil blight on the world. It never asks, it just takes and then tries to excuse the theft by claiming that the "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few," which is the mantra of socialist mass murderers throughout history.

Diddums.

Ibid.

Your entire argument reduced down to "I want it and I'll do anything to get it, including using the force of government to take it from you even if you don't want to give it to me."

I call that "armed robbery" and I reserve the right to resist such efforts with any necessary degree of force.

And the majority, who have more weapons and more means to enforce your compliance reserve the right to make you do what they want.

Most of the majority doesn't even know which end the bullet comes out of, much less do they have any capacity to make me do what they want if I refuse. Those who are qualified are a much, much smaller contingent and therefore are much easier to deal with effectively.