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

deprave

New Member

WHY, YES YOU CAN KITTY!what about the roads kitty?
How can we have Roads in a voluntary (anarchist/ libertarian society)

Well the argument for a minarchist or moderate libertarian society is relatively simple. Moderate Libertarians, Minarchist, or Teabaggers (as some like to call them) are not anarchist, they believe in minimal government so often this would include a government that would both build and repair roads. As for the real anarchist and anarchist libertarians the idea of how we would have roads is mere speculation but there is many possible ways it could work. I will describe some examples in this post.


So without further ado lets speculate how roads might work in a voluntary society:

Laying road is not the most complicated or expensive thing in the world especially when not done by the government in market that is tainted by government which sets artificially changes value it can never know the value so contractors can charge them whatever they want, inefficiency at its finest. The thing that catches people up is how to build roads within already existent neighborhood but the reality is, that is simply not how it works. Roads are in fact built before the communities are filled with people. A builder would have a much tougher time trying the sell his house if there is no road proving access to and from the home. A store would have a much tougher time trying to get any customers if they did not build any roads going to and from the surrounding neighborhoods.

In the circumstance that a road builder is wanting to build a road on already acquired land, he can use options and nondisclosure contracts in order to avoid any holdout problem. That is to say he can purchase the option to buy a spot of land from a series of landowners while also agreeing to a nondisclosure contract so that the owner of the last spot of land the road builder needs is not aware that they are the last person, and thus will not be tempted to charge a ridiculous sum of money for their land.And if there is someone who has some kind of sentimental value to their property and refuses to sell it for any price, then the road builder can buy options contracts for another route, or he can simply tunnel underneath them.

Neighborhood roads would likely be funded by Homeowner’s Associations and car insurance companies wanting to minimize their payouts for vehicle repair such as tires. Roads going to and from businesses would likely be funded by the businesses themselves wanting more customers. These residential and business roads could also be funded through voluntary donations. Highways could likely be funded by charging a monthly bill based on usage or perhaps this voluntary society would rely much more heavily on public transportation rather than private. It’s impossible to know these things in advance but the truth is that roads aren't just going to disappears, we won't just decide to no longer have roads, the demand will still be there. While eminent domain laws do seem tempting for the purpose of building roads, they are not a necessity, and the increased efficiency of these voluntary organizations would more than make up for the higher cost of buying the land voluntarily rather than corrosively, as well as avoid all of the other inherent problems that come along with using coercion. Finally I would like to add that we already have the roads and we also have the private companies with the means to repair them.


So How do you think Roads would work without Government?
 

mccumcumber

Well-Known Member
Neighborhood roads would likely be funded by Homeowner’s Associations and car insurance companies wanting to minimize their payouts for vehicle repair such as tires. Roads going to and from businesses would likely be funded by the businesses themselves wanting more customers. These residential and business roads could also be funded through voluntary donations. Highways could likely be funded by charging a monthly bill based on usage or perhaps this voluntary society would rely much more heavily on public transportation rather than private. It’s impossible to know these things in advance. While eminent domain laws do seem tempting for the purpose of building roads, they are not a necessity, and the increased efficiency of these voluntary organizations would more than make up for the higher cost of buying the land voluntarily rather than corrosively, as well as avoid all of the other inherent problems that come along with using coercion.

Homeowner's association would just be a bunch of people pitching on building a road. Sounds really similar to a tax to me.

Car insurance companies would love an excuse to raise rates on people. Every time you make them replace a tire, or even a wheel, they raise your rates. It would not be in their best interest to build the road.

Businesses may do it, but I doubt they'd want to pay for that. And if they did, who's to stop them from charging people to go on their road? It's their own private road, they can charge you if you want access. This could cause people having to pay money just get groceries and other necessities.

Voluntary donations and homeowner's association donations sound like the only two viable means of income generated for roads. Most real estate agents would know that low income subdivision would not be able to afford these roads, so I doubt they'd even bother giving them the option. Maybe just have the poor lay their own cement?

Highway based off of donations...

This just sounds like a tax on those wealthy enough to pay it, those who can't get boned. I guess the benefit would be keeping the poor out of the rich neighborhoods, but that could cause civil disturbances and riots. There's a reason why we don't completely fuck over our poor.

Who's going to pay for the public transit? More voluntary subsidies? How can you even claim you are against taxation?

Just think out the consequences of this, if you make roads private people will take advantage of it. Probably in an even worse way than I thought of in five minutes.
 

tomahawk2406

Well-Known Member
So You'd rather people have forceful violence used against you and others from the mafia and live in a violent oppressive impoverished society, to each his own I guess.
deprave i know you love the matrix, but please come out of it. the united states would suffer greatly. total 180. thats the truth. end of story. thread closed.
 

deprave

New Member
Homeowner's association would just be a bunch of people pitching on building a road. Sounds really similar to a tax to me.
Not the same lol


Car insurance companies would love an excuse to raise rates on people. Every time you make them replace a tire, or even a wheel, they raise your rates. It would not be in their best interest to build the road.
If it was getting out of hand it would be, they would have to remain competitive and make profit, if there was no state then car insurance would not be a requirement

Businesses may do it, but I doubt they'd want to pay for that.
They would have to if they want to make any money

And if they did, who's to stop them from charging people to go on their road? It's their own private road, they can charge you if you want access.
You wouldn't pay it if it wasn't worth it

This could cause people having to pay money just get groceries and other necessities.
From the cheapest place that offered the best service

Voluntary donations and homeowner's association donations sound like the only two viable means of income generated for roads. Most real estate agents would know that low income subdivision would not be able to afford these roads, so I doubt they'd even bother giving them the option. Maybe just have the poor lay their own cement?
Who would buy a house without a road to it or even rent one? Good luck on them selling that...

Highway based off of donations...
Hmm doesn't sound unreleastic to me[/quote]

This just sounds like a tax on those wealthy enough to pay it, those who can't get boned. I guess the benefit would be keeping the poor out of the rich neighborhoods, but that could cause civil disturbances and riots. There's a reason why we don't completely fuck over our poor.
The highway would need to only pay for itself and not turn a profit, the fee would not be expensive with the high demand to use the highway, it would be like a nickle toll road, if you can't afford a nickle then you probably can't afford gas...

Who's going to pay for the public transit? More voluntary subsidies?
Probably, or people trying to make money transporting people, what do you think

How can you even claim you are against taxation?
How can you claim to be for taxes? You think a giant monopoly of power can exist in our interest?

Just think out the consequences of this, if you make roads private people will take advantage of it. Probably in an even worse way than I thought of in five minutes.
And whats is a giant monopoly on power government doing? Forcefully taking advatage of people...If people had to provide a good service to make good money then they would have to provide good wages to compete and they would have to have competitive prices. You think the government takes care of the poor you have fucking lost your mind.
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
deprave i know you love the matrix, but please come out of it. the united states would suffer greatly. total 180. thats the truth. end of story. thread closed.
deprave, you have ben found guilty of spreading lies and sedition, in the court of tomahawk2406, judge, jury and executioner. He has closed your thread and if you continue to post material that tom deems objectionable, you will be taxed until you are dead.
 

deprave

New Member
deprave i know you love the matrix, but please come out of it. the united states would suffer greatly. total 180. thats the truth. end of story. thread closed.
Please tell me how? Taxes would end and we would all suffer a devastating plague and flail about helpless while the apoclyspe reigned in on all of mankind? Is that what you think?
 

tomahawk2406

Well-Known Member
Please tell me how? Taxes would end and we would all suffer a devastating plague and flail about helpless while the apoclyspe reigned in on all of mankind? Is that what you think?
yes thats exactly what i think deprave.........exactly.
 

deprave

New Member
yes thats exactly what i think deprave.........exactly.
the united states would suffer greatly. total 180.
Seems that way. You seem to think we are helpless without this corrupt entity known as government "protecting" us and "taking care of us"....just give them half our money and unlimited power with no accountability for their actions right?

Fucking just give whats his face donations on the 700 club hotline and jesus will save you and forgive you for your sins eh?
 

deprave

New Member
lol whatever floats your boat deprave. your opinion on taxation in this country will always continue to baffle me.
it completely baffles me how you think a corrupt power of one over 350 billion can have our interest in mind and how you think that giving them our money is not theft, but whatever floats your boat I guess.
 

tomahawk2406

Well-Known Member
it completely baffles me how you think a corrupt power of one over 350 billion can have our interest in mind and how you think that giving them our money is not theft, but whatever floats your boat I guess.
like i said id rather pay taxes.
 

deprave

New Member
when the slaves gained freedom, did they know how they would pick all that cotton?

No They didn't, but the cotton still got picked, we got our cotton and our freedom.

Don't be afraid of freedom
 

canndo

Well-Known Member
Order. It seems that liberrtarians don't place muchj value on order. The chief function of any government is to provide order to a society. Name any private entity that is truely capable of doing that. We don't pay taxes for roads, we pay taxes in return for basic order, sucession of political leadership, dependability of infrastructure, judicial applications, persistance of laws, predictability of social structure. Devoid of that we have nothing but unworkable anarchy/
 

tomahawk2406

Well-Known Member
Order. It seems that liberrtarians don't place muchj value on order. The chief function of any government is to provide order to a society. Name any private entity that is truely capable of doing that. We don't pay taxes for roads, we pay taxes in return for basic order, sucession of political leadership, dependability of infrastructure, judicial applications, persistance of laws, predictability of social structure. Devoid of that we have nothing but unworkable anarchy/
yeah see.......i don't mind paying for that. bongsmilie
 

deprave

New Member
Order. It seems that liberrtarians don't place muchj value on order. The chief function of any government is to provide order to a society. Name any private entity that is truely capable of doing that. We don't pay taxes for roads, we pay taxes in return for basic order, sucession of political leadership, dependability of infrastructure, judicial applications, persistance of laws, predictability of social structure. Devoid of that we have nothing but unworkable anarchy/
so your defining order as: succession of political leadership, dependability of infrastructure, judicial applications, persistance of laws, predictability of social structure.

I want to ask how you define it as this but lets roll with it....

sucession of political leadership: Huh? What does that do for us? Why do we need that and especially without a state or a minimalist state? This in itself is a falesy because it decays rapidly in any society regardless. I don't think you have a point here really with this vague term so moving on.

dependability of infrastructure: Why can't a private company provide dependability of infastructure, more importantly, why wouldn't they do it better and cheaper in a free market? Government does a horrible job at this.

judicial applications: Yes they do.

persistence of laws: Continuing on with the vagueness of this, Persistance of laws what? Why would this be in a stateless society or valuable? What do you even mean?

predictability of social structure: Again what? More vague shit.. for example?

"Devoid of that we have nothing but unworkable anarchy/"

what? why? how?


This is the most vague response to anything I have seen that contains over 2 sentences in a very long time. You should win an award for vague response of the year. Finally I have to say based on this response that you have obviously not researched even a single libertarian or anarchist philosophy and have absolutely no idea what your talking about. I think its also fair to say that your probably didn't read the OP of this thread.
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
Order. It seems that liberrtarians don't place muchj value on order. The chief function of any government is to provide order to a society. Name any private entity that is truely capable of doing that. We don't pay taxes for roads, we pay taxes in return for basic order, sucession of political leadership, dependability of infrastructure, judicial applications, persistance of laws, predictability of social structure. Devoid of that we have nothing but unworkable anarchy/
Yeah, shut the fuck up and get with the program. I'm from the government and I'm here to maintain order. Go to work, pay your taxes and keep buying shit. If you don't like it, we can help adjust your acceptance. Perhaps a two week vacation at our exclusive resort in beautiful, tropical Guantanamo Bay.
Order. That's kind of subjective, don't you think? Continuing along that train of thought, the logical goal of such a government would be a police state.
Given the choice between a police state and anarchy, I'll take anarchy, thank you.
 
Top