Alan C.

Only market prices can solve the economic calculation problem, and that requires unimpeded trade.It's possible for societies to exist without economic calculation, but they'd remain in a state of primitive subsistence due to 1) a lack of information to coordinate production, and 2) diminished division of labor.Time is scarce, conditions change, and people's needs are transitory. Outdated prices send incorrect information to producers and consumers resulting in either surpluses or shortages. The more recent the price, the better the coordination.Suppose that you were required to wear a yoke for several hours daily. I could make the same claim that you're making; that you can still function despite the yoke. However, because your life would be curtailed during that time, you would be forced to rearrange your remaining hours to compensate for the lost productivity.

The Institute for Justice fights back against the federal government’s abusive civil forfeiture tactics

Because they're intellectually myopic, envious, immature, and lack life experience.

Improving the standard of living (ie. wealth creation, innovation, labor-saving devices, abundance) is a process of recursive transformation requiring higher order goods (aka capital goods). Higher order goods can only exist if a person produces and saves (defers consumption), because if a person consumes everything that he produces then his standard of living will either (at best) remain static or (at worst) decline. Consider higher and lower order goods in the context of wood; it can either be used to build a shelter or burned for heat. Higher order goods permit mass production of lower order goods (aka consumption goods). Politicians and their media flacks simply look at numbers on a spreadsheet and conclude that a higher GDP indicates human flourishing. They're wrong. It's possible for GDP to go up while people become increasingly impoverished and for GDP to go down while people become increasingly prosperous.

Why would you want to herd people into communities ("arrange" as you say) rather than allow people to live where they want and associate with whom they want?Arranging communities would introduce an artificial barrier, thus creating price distortions in addition to introducing transactions costs. It wouldn't produce real-world evaluation of prices. Prices emerge spontaneously on the market. The market would create reduncancy if it was necessary, and transactions are already recorded into computers. You say "best estimate," but best according to whom and according to what standard? You're making several assumptions. A free-market environment isn't set up; it emerges spontaneously on its own as soon as individuals engage in trade. If individuals are artificially isolated then the market isn't free. Prices in small, isolated communities (eg. rural towns, etc.) already convey economic information to the outside world. That's precisely what prices are supposed to do. Many of the questions you asked in this thread were already answered in the video. Prices convey information about the real world, but if they're distorted (by artificial barriers, regulatory impediments, etc.) then the information they convey is false and misleading.

Oculus Rift Corrects Man's Stereoblindness The Oculus Rift (OR) is a next-generation, virtual reality (VR) headset which mitigates the problem of latency which has plagued VR headsets for decades. Gamers have been especially interested in this technology because of the immersion that it provides. Also, the OR will be affordable to the average consumer and, like all computer hardware, will get better and more affordable (like tablets and smart phones). I posted this because it's another example of how the market has achieved something great without force, coercion, threats, expropriation, or the State squandering valuable resources on useless boondoggles. It even potentially spawned a related industry. Perhaps the technology of the OR might someday be integrated into visual devices like Geordi La Forge's occular implants to help millions of people with various visual impairments.

No, because prices must reflect individual value scales which can only be attained through exchange.

Free-market exchange doesn't impose a requirement on anyone. It's simply people consensually trading with each other without interference from others. One can look at the world (at various times in history) to see the effects of what you're talking about. The U.S. has largely had abundance while countries with central planning experience shortages, grinding poverty, and mass starvation. Local free-market exchange is good, but it's better if it takes places everywhere because it extends division of labor across all of society which benefits everyone.

It isn't possible to measure a quantity of utility (a "util" as he calls it). How does one measure a quantity of satisfaction, or comfort? An individual's ordinal value scale must be denominated as a numerical expression for cost accounting, or economic calculation. Trade and bidding provide exchange ratios which convey those numerical expressions as prices. Prices permit coordination of production between individuals; and especially so on a mass scale. Sure, people could coordinate verbally in person, but that doesn't scale well beyond a few hundred people without becoming unwieldly. There are only so many hours in the day and people need to eat. It isn't possible for everyone to spend all day running around, making assessments based upon direct observation and coordinating everything verbally in person.

It's a false dichotomy to say that we must either have IP or people get to copy and sell whatever they want. I think that people recognize dishonorable behavior and that the market would devise mechanisms to discourage it. While copying isn't technically "theft," it may be construed as being in poor taste. Obviously, if everyone simply downloaded copies of everything from the Internet without compensating developers then new content would eventually disappear because people have to earn a living. Methods for curtailing freeloading include digital distribution platform integration (eg. Steam) and social stigma.

I was wondering how much time you dedicate to this work on a daily or weekly basis? What is a 'need' a who decides? I'd prefer to live in a manmade world with abundance and comfort. If you've ever watched Survivorman or Man vs. Wild you'll see that the natural world presents a constant struggle against starvation, exposure, dehydration, vitamin deficiency, diarrhea, hypothermia, injury, and envenomation. A century ago, the flu could mean a death sentence. Today, it's possible to run down the street to the local drug store and you're good as new in a week or two. The increase in poverty is the result of the State interferring in the market and the massive parasite class which enables the State. Prosperity, abundance, and wealth aren't illusions. My standard of living far exceeds that of my grandparents and I earn only a modest income.

France calls for EU to regulate Web giants to counter dominance Translation: politically connected interests in France can't compete, so they need to use the force of the State to hobble their competition.

57% believe in the devil, 72% for blacks, 61% for women

I neglected to address the point about education. The market has made education available to virtually everyone at little to no cost. Tens of thousands of free books are available for download on the Internet, thousands of hours of instructional videos are viewable for free, and educational software can be purchased for the price of a large pizza. Meanwhile, the State spends tens of thousands of dollars per year to "educate" a child in a dull, tedious, repetitious, plodding, uninspiring environment replete with useless lessons of no practical application, memorization and regurgitation of factoids and propaganda, and rampant bullying.

What does it mean to be poor?One of my grandmothers grew up on a farm in rural Oklahoma with no indoor plumbing, natural gas, electricity, appliances, or central air/heat.The helpdesk at the company I work for is staffed mostly by young adults, most of whom are college students who think that they're poor. They all have cars, smart phones, computers, cable TV, Netflix, iTunes, and access to appliances (microwave, washer/dryer, A/C, hot water, etc.).If Marxists and left-anarchists oppose private property because it leads to privilege and hierarchy then it would be a performative contradiction for them to have any property of their own.Libertarianism is a social philosphy based upon non-aggression; it's purpose isn't equality.Divesting a person of legitimately acquired property without consent is an implicit claim over that person by proxy. That's why it's aggression. While the person isn't physically aggressed against directly, it's tantamount to robbing that person of a portion of his life.Why is it a problem that some have greater material wealth than others?The free-market is simply people freely exchanging with each other. Its purpose isn't to reduce society down to the lowest common denominator; that's the purpose of Marxism (to make everyone equally destitute).Libertarianism doesn't defend inequality of material wealth and opportunity as moral. Libertarianism doesn't have anything to say about material wealth and opportunity.Private property is essential to the survival of humanity, without which most would die of starvation and exposure.

The other thing that Marxists (and left-liberals) like to do is to hold everyone in society accountable for the plight of poor children, except the parents who brought them into the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFl7X9AWXW8

Some socialists may view Star Trek as the end product of socialism given the apparent absence of a 'capitalist vs. worker' arrangement, a lack of material needs, free health care and education, and no visible medium of exchange. However, Star Trek is complete fiction, just like the socialist paradise. Consider Rothbard's 'parable of the ham sandwich' and then contemplate a 'parable of the starship.' Star Trek isn't going to happen while we lack market prices and free exchange.

A frequent mistake made in the liberty movement is thinking that the State is the source of the problem. It isn't. It's simply a symptom of an underlying problem. Even if it were possible to magically remove the State in an instant, the decadence responsible for creating the State would remain.

The Law by Frederic Bastiat transformed me from Republican to libertarian almost overnight.

Hampstead headteacher tells police of pupil 'enchanted by anarchism' and tips off his chosen university I didn't realize that this was already posted.

Rival campers who opened fire turn out to be sheriff's deputies

Indiana firm acquires MV-1 wheelchair accessible vehicle

90,473,000: Record Number Not in Labor Force--Up Almost 10M Under Obama