| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Top 50 Atheism Quotes | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 30 2009, 09:46 PM (1,029 Views) | |
| ngc1514 | Jun 3 2009, 08:14 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think we need to back up a bit on this, Chris.
Let's start at the bottom and ask... why do we need this hired law enforcement agency? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 4 2009, 01:11 AM Post #22 |
|
Deleted User
|
Are you asking why we need law enforcement, or why we need it enforced by public or private means? I'll assume the latter since you said earlier capitalism needs regulation, and I agree. In the Mystery of Capitalism (another book I just purchased) DeSoto argues that the main reason capitalism has failed everywhere but in the West is because elsewhere their is not a system of laws not only regulating but establishing property ownership, title, and thus capital whereby investment loans are secured. So, indeed, laws are required, and required to be enforced. So the question becomes how better enforce law? The anarcho-capitalist argument is government will not serve the interests of those it is supposed to protect but those of (a) it's own presevation, (b) the politicians personal power, and (c) special lobbied interests. The incentives are all wrong. Private enforcement would be distributed among many companies answering directly to consumers. Private companies are also concerned with self-preservation, but that is done through profits ties to customer satisfaction. Distributing enforcement would keep any special interests at bay--see Madison's Federalist 10 on factions. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Jun 4 2009, 01:27 AM Post #23 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The first part, Chris. Why do we need law enforcement? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 4 2009, 01:39 AM Post #24 |
|
Deleted User
|
See "In the Mystery of Capitalism..." In short, law provideds the institutions and protections of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness--in a capitalist system, exchange. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Jun 4 2009, 04:27 AM Post #25 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
And where do the laws come from? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 4 2009, 06:45 AM Post #26 |
|
Deleted User
|
OK, I think now we change the topic slightly. Throughout history man has classified laws into divine, natural and positive. Divine we can't know and so I leave that question open. Natural laws are both physical and moral. Physical laws are descriptions, explanations, relationships, models of the natural world--like Newton's Laws, General Relativity, and so on. Natural moral laws are the laws we are concerned with. They are discovered through right reason. They describes, explain, etc, what man is and his potential as man, as a human being. Some argue they are derived of divine law or designed by God, but I leave that question open, as it can't be answered. We discover them by being human, and by being social or political, they are inherited from previous generations, and passed on to succeeding. Thus they evolve, emerge from our interacting with the world around us. Natural physical and natural moral law differs, since the former concerns what is and the latter what should be, but the process of discovery is similar. Positive law comes from man's design. These are Constitutions, Common Law, legislated law. The better aligned positive law is to natural law the better are those laws. A couple in heavily influential sources: Rothbard's The Ethics of Liberty (which you can read on line--read the first online page of the opening chapter, NATURAL LAW AND REASON), Stanlis' Edmund Burke and the Natural Law. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Jun 4 2009, 07:12 AM Post #27 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not asking for a general look at laws, Chris, but what laws will the hired police force be enforcing? A bit of specificity here would be useful to the discussion. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 4 2009, 08:50 AM Post #28 |
|
Deleted User
|
Ah, sorry. The laws would come from contracts between parties, between parties and insurance companies, and parties and law enforcement companies. Were some nation to adopt such a policy, contracts would be based on current practices, common law, and over time evolve to what was more effective. The laws would evolve and emerge from the interactions of individuals in an economic environment. They would not be designed. Common law has evolved this way. Markets have as well. |
|
|
| ngc1514 | Jun 4 2009, 07:10 PM Post #29 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You have me a bit confused about laws evolving, Chris. Let's say Joe Blow decides there "oughta be a law" to accomplish some goal. By what means does he get the law accepted in this society? How long a time frame do you envision for a law to "evolve and emerge"? What forms of protection from unjust laws would be offered? By unjust we might consider that "parties and law enforcement companies" decide to allow slavery in the agricultural arena. What would prevent this from happening or overturn it should it happen? Do I - as a party - have to enter into a contract not to kill everyone I meet? What constitutes a contract? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Jun 4 2009, 08:03 PM Post #30 |
|
Deleted User
|
"By what means does he get the law accepted in this society? " He'd have to get agreement with those he forms contracts with. Let's say Joe thought Walmart should guarantee jeans will last 2 years normal wear and tear. He'd have to get Walmart to agree. He'd have to persuade others to sign a petition to get Walmart to add that guarantee. Walmart on its part would have to consider its bottom line, would making the guarantee win customers without raising costs. Let's say Joe wanted to reduce the speed limit on the street in front of his house. He's have to get neighbors to agree, and then together they would have to hire a speed enforcer. Not much would change because we live in a relatively free country. --Earlier I said I'm not sure I'd want to change things so dramatically from what they are. "How long a time frame do you envision for a law to 'evolve and emerge'? " If the US adopted anarcho-capitalism most laws would remain as they are. The process of changing them, adding and removing laws, and enforcing them would change. As I pointed out, common law has evolved and emerged already. Since Roman times. "What forms of protection from unjust laws would be offered? By unjust we might consider that 'parties and law enforcement companies' decide to allow slavery in the agricultural arena. What would prevent this from happening or overturn it should it happen?" If some parties wanted to agree to be slaves, so be it. I doubt many would agree to it, and would hire protection of their natural rights. "Do I - as a party - have to enter into a contract not to kill everyone I meet?" Do you now? No. I'd pay for protection against you're doing that, whether that be in the form of a gun or some agency to protect me or come after you once you killed me so it would not serve your interests to kill me. "What constitutes a contract?" Same as now. Only enforcement changes. |
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · RV AND CAMPING DISCUSSION · Next Topic » |






![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)



12:41 AM Jul 14
