Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've come to the conclusion that I hate the idea of "protection". The promise and desire to be protected has always been the means by which tyranny could spread. And it's not just SJW protection, it's all protection. In my opinion, and it's simply my opinion, protection seems to be a lost cause. I think we're better off abandoning the idea that the government should protect us, than trying to find ways to somehow justify the legitimacy of government.
I am not an anarchist, but I do think all protection services by the state and federal governments should definitely be left up to the market. I feel that if someone feels they need to be protected, they should pay for it. Just how it's not anyone's burden to feed you, clothe you, or pay for your college. It is also no someone else's burden to make sure you feel protected. If you feel you should be protected, then come out of your own pocket. But again, just my opinion.
Geez, why not get a ticket and high tail it out of American with all sense and movement of urgency.
I personally have no interest for such Anti-government types.
How can American Get Rid of These Types of People is the burning question?
This is a prime example of the self centered greed focus of individual that has been and continues to be the negative factor within the American system. They are always talking about paying for someone else. Heck, you pay for the streets you ride on, and the system that you live within... (unless one lives in the back hills of some wooded region).
It's evident that Civics's Class was ignored and absolutely nothing about Governance, and System structure was ignored.
If only America has a "wake up pill" to give some of these people would be a good thing, but what's even better is "for such types to move to another country... Lets' see how long they put up with such.mentality.
Eventually, this type will die out, just hope they don't get to infect any young minds before they do.
Yes, the function of the military, police and fire department will be left to the private market. This would give the average citizen more choice, or the option not to use these services at all. This would heavily cut down on police brutality as well and corruption as well. Since you can actually fire a corrupt police department or military. But you can't really "fire" a public police department and military.
So how does this work? Let's say my neighbor's house catches fire and I call the fire department. They have to look to see if he has paid for their fire fighting protection and only come out if he has? But meantime his burning house is threatening other houses nearby.
Same with police - they let burglars rip off property that is not "protected" but as long as I am paid-up they will arrest a burglar of my house? That sounds like old fashioned extortion.
That's crazy. Is that part of making America great again?
Well, you are an anarchist. But what you are really arguing, although you don't realize it, is inefficiency.
You see, it is far more inefficient for me, you and everyone else to hire their own security (as if we can each afford it) than if we collectively run a police force. If every truck on the road had to hire private security to protect from bandits, that cost would show in prices and competitiveness.
It is far more inefficient for me to allocate the time and effort to become an expert on medications, than to create an FDA to keep dangerous drugs off the market and to regulate the use of drugs.
It is far more inefficient for me to monitor food and pesticides, than to have an Agriculture Dept perform that task.
There are also areas as a private person that we have no control. I can't stop an industrial plant from polluting rivers if there is no laws preventing them from doing so.
Basically, what you are arguing makes little practical sense. We can't individually take on the services that government provides. That would leave us no time to do that which we are experts. It's akin to the days when everyone made their own clothing and grew their own food. Society learned to delegate shoe making to those that are experts at making shoes, clothes food, etc. and exchanging those services in the marketplace.
Great response. This is true.
The OP and people like him IMO also forget that people are not as sophisticated as they seem to think humanity is.
On the bold, that is also true, that tasks were delegated. I actually am a supporter of both government and free markets. The difference between the two IMO is that government's primary tasks is "protection." The government serves to protect a population from not only hostile nations, but from each other (individually or collectively) and from free market capitalist.
In the past a company/organization that became an "expert" did like a free market capitalist will do if they are allowed to do so - they put people in danger via horrible working conditions, pollution, etc. At least government is something that is (supposedly) controlled by the people via an electoral process. Businesses can do what they want to a society without the protection of government and the people have no recourse I guess for the OP except to get some guns/arms and kill the people at the company. That is not civilized behavior.
I don't believe the government should protect people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by branh0913
I've come to the conclusion that I hate the idea of "protection". The promise and desire to be protected has always been the means by which tyranny could spread. And it's not just SJW protection, it's all protection. In my opinion, and it's simply my opinion, protection seems to be a lost cause. I think we're better off abandoning the idea that the government should protect us, than trying to find ways to somehow justify the legitimacy of government.
I am not an anarchist, but I do think all protection services by the state and federal governments should definitely be left up to the market. I feel that if someone feels they need to be protected, they should pay for it. Just how it's not anyone's burden to feed you, clothe you, or pay for your college. It is also no someone else's burden to make sure you feel protected. If you feel you should be protected, then come out of your own pocket. But again, just my opinion.
There are places that are perfect you. It's just that the USA isn't one of them and if you choose to stay here among us Americans, you're going to continue to be disappointed and bitter.
Somalia, S Sudan, places like that are exactly what you describe. Take charge of your life. Don't just sit there and pretend that you and a handful of other "sovereign citizens" are going to carve out a chunk of America to make your own private free-for-all. Get up and go to where things are already set up the way you want them.
Private security for the entire country? Is this real life???
hmmmm. Yea, that's what it reads like to me as well. But, since the SCOTUS has ruled that the police are under no assigned duty to protect the citizens, I do believe that we should be able to protect ourselves. By means of arms needs be, without interference from the state and without repurcussions from same. Now national defense, as "protection", is a different animal, and I certainly don't favor disbanding police forces. But all of us paying out of pocket for private security? Please. Let's get serious.
You're assuming that somehow someway the market can meet demands of the need for protection better than the government can. But there is no indication that somehow magically government is the best at the job. I mean we have spent several billions of dollars on military, on police services etc. Yet crime still exist and still remains bad. What the police are fighting for (war on drugs) really isn't immediate threat to anyone, but since the government has decided (without your input by the way) that it's a threat, now you're apart of this war (via your tax dollars).
The government decides who is the enemy. Doesn't have to be based on a threat. It could be based on the interest of those who lobby government. you're in it no matter what. We don't just go overseas and kill terrorist. no we kill innocent women and children. And you've bought into this, because you're forced to.
If there is a threat, a privatized military would do this far better. And if someone has some special interest in another country, they are on the hook to hire their own miltary, instead of forcing our government to do their bidding. We all know we fight war to steal resources, not protect people.
I agree that we end up killing lots of innocent people in wars, and I think that is horrible. But do you really think that a privatized military, which BTW, would still have to be organized in some way, would be any less likely to engage in such atrocities? What about the fact that special interests could then have their own privately funded troops that they could then set upon the American people themselves?
Okay, I think this will be the most hilarious thing I will read today lol!
FYI - there actually are places where people are "armed" and they get decimated by a more heavily armed renegade militia that is hell bent on taking everything from everyone and raping/pillaging.
Most Americans are fat and out of shape or old or children. The few who aren't cannot defend the entire country by themselves. What you are speaking of is a stateless society. Yet you say you are not an anarchist....
Even with most Americans being fat and out of shape. How many radical terrorist do you actually think will come into our borders? Not a lot I can guarantee you that. The are restraints in that they have to first fly here and come through the borders in the first place. Meaning that there is really only enough money for a limited amount of terrorist. Plus terrorism is largely funded by oil, let's not delude ourselves. If you kill all Americans, they'll destroy their own economy, and furthermore destroy their own source of funding. Remember, we inadveretantly fund our own terrorist. We have created an economy for them. If our own trading partner tries to kill us, will we ever trade with them again? Or would we make domestic drilling far more cheaper and cost efficient. I see the latter happening. There are a billion ways to take the wheels off of terrorist, but we think someone spend billions on military is effective with no actual real strategy.
There are places that are perfect you. It's just that the USA isn't one of them and if you choose to stay here among us Americans, you're going to continue to be disappointed and bitter.
Somalia, S Sudan, places like that are exactly what you describe. Take charge of your life. Don't just sit there and pretend that you and a handful of other "sovereign citizens" are going to carve out a chunk of America to make your own private free-for-all. Get up and go to where things are already set up the way you want them.
Be happy.
Hasta la vista, baby.
There is a libtert@rdian compound in Honduras that he might be able to buy his way into lol
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't believe the government should protect people.
