Chuck Stone wrote: » I would imagine it would go out to tender for a locale to be policed for a few years. A security company with a good reputation would get the contract.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » So what you want is to not pay taxes so that other people can just pay for your medical expenses for you?
The state builds roads all over the country that wouldnt get built by private business.
Whats wrong with tolling roads you say? Nothign much, but tolling every road wouldnt work.
Its called "services". How much would a passport cost if the passport office had to ake a profit?
Seriously, this is a ridiculous arguement.
Chuck Stone wrote: » What are you on about? What's wrong with health insurance?:)
Chuck Stone wrote: » Some people would call that a waste of money. Why should the tax payer be responsible for running a road up the side of a mountain for some gobshite who likes to live up there?:)
Chuck Stone wrote: » The technology is there to track cars and charge accordingly.
Chuck Stone wrote: » You see how you're very concerned about the roads yeah? Well most people would be concerned about the roads. Let's say the state ceased to exist tomorrow - do you think people would just lie down and cry and scream 'Oh no we can't use the roads anymore - let's just give up and use horses':)
Chuck Stone wrote: » Of course they wouldn't they'd make it work imo.
Chuck Stone wrote: » I'd say a private company would do it faster and cheaper tbh.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » How much does health insurance ost in the US?
Are you 8 or what?
Roads all over the country cost huge amounts of money to build and maintain.
Ah right so its all nice and convenient is it? The government puts everythign in place then we disband it and we have nice, useable roads for ever? How woudl the roads ahve been built in the first place? How are they maintained?
Really? What sort of fantasy world do you live in?
I picked passports off the top of my head. Theres a huge amount of things that couldnt be run for profit,
which is part of why governments exist.
How much would it cost to have a large, self sufficient office running 9-5 monday to friday churning out passports? Then divide that by the amount of passports issued each year then add 10-15% profit on to each passport.
Mickeroo wrote: » I have no idea what this thread is about
Chuck Stone wrote: » I have no idea but I'd imagine it's way too much. That wouldn't be just because health insurance is over charging people. The cost of medicines, paying health workers wages (low supply high deman inflates costs) would all contibute to inneficiency. I've been civil with you so perhaps you could be civil with me in return? Yes and it's paid for by us anyway. Why wouldn't a private company do it just as good if not better than who's doing it at the moment. There were council workers down at the bottom of our estate filling in pot-holes after the freeze. By Christ it was an appalling job and they were pot-holes again within a few days. Personally, I would have been embarrased if it was me who did it. Anyway, a sub-contracter came in a tore the road up and replaced the whole thing within a coupla days (abt 200m of road). You know that the govt gets it's money off us don't you? The govt doesn't actually have it's own money. It's not like 'the govt' says 'You know what - let's build some roads because we like pleasing people'. Yes - it's just conjecture. However - if we look at the utter mess our govt has gotten us in don't you think it's healthy to imagine alternatives? Not everything has to be run for profit. People could set up Co-ops and have community run services. Not really. I still think it'd be way cheaper and faster if people actually had to compete. How about two or three passport offices competing for our business? Best value and best service gets the job.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » I asked if you were 8 because you have such a simplistic way of lookng at the world:mad:. That opinion hasnt changed:mad:. Pretty much every bit of what you say is nonsense:mad:.
what about the bit about policing from further back up? Where does the money come from?
Chuck Stone wrote: » Okay let's go with your standard. Are you a gumpy, conservative, negative, old git who lacks imagination? .
Chuck Stone wrote: » I suppose that a district, housing estate, geographic area would come together and put security contract out to tender. A good security company would win the contract a bad one wouldn't..
Chuck Stone wrote: » I don't have all the answers. It's extremely unimaginative and immature of you to expect me to 'quarterback' an entire future of a stateless society. As I said before this is just conjecture. Open your mind a little and try to be more receptive to alternative ideas.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » seriously? I'm those things because I am realistic, with an idea of how things work in the real world, am able to give reasons why,
whereas your counter arguement to everythign seems to not go beyond "stuff will just work out and everyone will band together".
Hav you been out in the world at all?
So a group of peopel in a geographic location get together and form a group of some sort, collect money from all the people in the area and decide how to spend the money on stuff the people need, yeah? Think I've heard of that system before.......
Maybe they could all choose a small group from within to take these decisions so as to streamline the process and speed it up so that every tedious little decision doesnt have to wait for every individuals approval?
You were the one that suggested it all, the least you can do is come up with reason why it would work.
If we're just throwing out things without the need to back them up
then I sujest we go back to the Punt, print enough for everyone to have £10m then all our problems will be solved cos we'll be rich.
Chuck Stone wrote: » No you're not. You're putting up reasons why not. It seems to me that merely entertaining an idea which doesn't conform to your worldview brings you out in a rash..
Chuck Stone wrote: » You have yet to give a satisfactory reason why it wouldn't and I don't think you have the ability to tbh...
Chuck Stone wrote: » Yes, it's not such an alien concept - much like a residents associations. Yes, maybe they could. It would be done by consent anyway...
Chuck Stone wrote: » These are not my concepts. There's plenty of information out there postualting how a stateless society might function if you care to look.
Chuck Stone wrote: » You can't back up something that is an idea with proof..
Chuck Stone wrote: » I'm pretty sure that printing money just leads to inflation and hurts people with low wages and others without the capacity to absorb it's effect.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Of course I'm giving reasons why not. I'm showing you why your ideas dont work.
Companies wont do things unless they are making money from it. Quite a chunk of the stuff funded from taxes are loss making.
They are that way because they are either not things your can make money from or things that people wouldnt pay the amounts they would need to charge to make them profitable.
The reality of it when your in the position is much different. Give Enda Kenny a ring and ask him.
BTW, why are you telling me to go find information to prove your point?
You can make an effort to show why your think it would work and hw it would work though.
Sarcasm isnt your friend, is it?
Chuck Stone wrote: » You have shown nothing of the sort. They are merely ideas. For them to be tesed there would have to be a stateless society as a social experiment. Now surely you can't claim to have set one up and watched it fail? Loss making until they are privatised or forced to compete with private industry. Take Aer Lingus for example. It was wallet raping people for decades until Ryanair came a long a booted it up the hole. Now we all have better air services with choice, efficency, and value. There's a real world example for you.
Chuck Stone wrote: » This is your opinion. Evidence to give it weight?
Chuck Stone wrote: » No thanks. I don't trust any of those shower of bastards who sold us out for their corrupt friends. Now there's govt. workin' for us; huh?
Chuck Stone wrote: » You said they were 'my ideas' they're not.
Chuck Stone wrote: » I've already said to you that if you take the Soviet Union, the state controlled and ran everything and seen how much of a failure it was and (work with me now, I know you have difficulty with ideas) carry out a little thought experiment and reverse the polarity.
Chuck Stone wrote: » You completely remove the state from daily life and let voluntarism and entrepreneurship take precedence over gunpoint taxation. Would we end up with a much better system? Perhaps. I think it quite likely myself.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Aer Lingus had faiely big cash reserves (€700m or so) that has been eaten away in the last few years.
Do you watch the news? They are on a fairly big cost cutting venture over the last 2 years or so.
policing and fire service. How do you turn them in to private , profitable businesses?
Chuck Stone wrote: » How much of that was effectively extorted from us when they had a monopoly? I remember it being the equivalent of 3 weeks wages to fly to England from this country...
Chuck Stone wrote: » They're already funded by the tax-payer so why not have fire fighting companies compete with each other to provide services? Likewise with security..
Chuck Stone wrote: » Well run, cost effective fire fighting companies would win contracts. Why is it so hard for you to get this?.
Chuck Stone wrote: » You're trying to make me quarterback this again. You should be able to think of possible alternatives and how they might work in a stateless society yourself. And for that reason: I'm out.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Compete to provide money to who? whos paying them? Do you pay them when you call them out? Do they save you from rape or stop your house burnign down before or after you pay them? How do they know you rcan definately pay?
Chuck Stone wrote: » You see what you're doing there? You're expecting me to describe in detail how something might work in the absence of the state. Stop being lazy minded. I would guess you pay for it like you would for car insurance. Or perhaps the fire companies would have their own accounts dept. so you could pay a monthly/ ½yr/ yearly fee to retain their service. Are you deliberately obsfuscating or are you genuinely having difficulty playing with ideas? Don't answer. This conversation is over.
Dimithy wrote: » So basically your idea
Dimithy wrote: » So basically your idea boils down to: 1 get rid of big Government 2 Set up small local Government, but its not really a government.....or something like that, maybe. 3 Collect money from people, but not taxes, and not everyone has to pay.....or something like that, maybe. 4 ? 5 ? 6 Well functioning society. And the only reason why anyone would have a problem with this is lack of imagination? Really?
Chuck Stone wrote: » It's not my idea FFS. It's merely speculating on how a non-coercive, non-violent, society that works on voluntarism and the free market (not a corporatocracy) might work. If you're really interested watch this video.
Amhran Nua wrote: » Its hard to blame anyone for looking out for themselves these days in fairness. It would be a different story if we were getting world class services and weren't bailing out private banks at the behest of a weak and incompetent government, but we aren't.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Non-violent society? So what happens to all the violent peopel around? Do they all just up and leave to allow you your utopia? How come countries aroudn the world are not abandoning government in favour of these perfect societies?
Chuck Stone wrote: » Non-violent way of organising society. .
Chuck Stone wrote: » . Give it a shot - it might open your mind a little.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » My mind doesnt need to be "opened". I'm perfectly happy, your the one lookign to change stuff.
Chuck Stone wrote: » Yeah you're right. Have a nice day.
dermo88 wrote: » SonnenblumenWhat a load of hypocritical rubbish. The Black economy pre-dates most of what you suggest are some of the causes. The black economy is caused by bottom of the barrel dishonesty and cheating. Its just that these days, the cheats are blaming others for their own bad deeds. Hypocrites. Of course the black economy is caused by bottom of the barrel dishonesty and cheating. There is no denying that. There is also the old chestnut stated by a Government official who has never worked in the private sector in their lives; "Taxes would be lower if everybody paid them" Which frankly, is complete bollocks. Governments on the Left wing of the equation view the taxpayer as a bottomless pit to be milked and bled dry. Governments on the Right wing view the taxpayer as a privatised entity to be sold to their cronies at will for milking and bleeding. Its about perception. Its about responsibilities over rights. Its about avoiding moral hazard. Not only must justice be done, it must be seen to be done. The Black economy was always there, no doubt about that, and if your back is against the wall financially, your first duty is not to the state. Its to your family and friends. I do not specifically refer to Ireland, I refer in general, from failed states like Somalia at one end of the spectrum through to success stories such as Singapore, Sweden, Switzerland. I have grown increasingly convinced that the connections of an elite in Ireland are unsustainable for the size of the country. Its simply a case of too many chiefs and not enough Indians. Bottom of the barrel cheating and dishonesty happen when those at the top are seen to have escaped justice. In terms of business, integrity with customers and colleagues and other parties is crucial. If I don't have that credibility, I do not do business. The same goes for the state. The 1980's were an era of rampant tax evasion and fraud because at the top.....abuses of power were observed. The result is a feedthrough loop. When it comes to the state.....I have never taken a penny, apart from my education. Beyond that, nothing. Paid medical care myself.....worked since I was 16....and meanwhile.......these Bankers get bailed out. It is repulsive, and the people are expected to pay for someone elses incompetence and mistakes. This is a Weimar Republic style nightmare. Did you elect Holohan, Fitzpatrick, or Timothy Geithner? No.....you did'nt, I did'nt, yet they are making momentous, morally questionable decisions that will affect Billions of people in terms of the chain reaction and contagion they cause. On the other hand, do I expect German taxpayers to continue forking out money to fund irresponsible and immature regimes hundreds of kilometers away from their borders. I don't. I used the black economy when I was badly paid and when I was a student because there simply was no choice in the matter. It was a matter of survival, where an extra twenty quid a week was the difference between savings and debt. It does'nt sound like much, but twenty quid saved is as good as twenty earned. If you seriously believe for one minute that what I said is hypocrisy, then I have Twenty Five Million Dollars frozen in a Bank account in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, West Africa. If you transfer $2,500 to my account, I can give you 10% commission once those funds are released. Self interest will win out against a faceless and unaccountable state. Neither you nor I can unravel the crisis hitting Ireland, Europe and the World. But.....honesty and transparency on the part of those in charge would solve many many problems. Until then, do not expect all society to be honest. I can pay a subscription to the Ku Klux Klan using a credit card, why not Wikileaks? What I said is not hypocrisy, its the truth, and you cannot handle the truth.
