cab21

the op could have asked about the empathy of people who have not been spanked, rather than make such a prediction about the empathy of people who have not been spanked.

the question is about which government is in charge of law in criminal cases in one neighborhood, if 5 people, with 5 different governments, break into a house, and steal from 5 different people, who each have 5 different governments, and sell the stolen goods to 5 people with 5 different governments, how is it sorted out who gets prosecuted where? we have 15 people and 15 different governments, all in one neighborhood. is each person judge, jury, and executioner for his own government? i

That lack of hierarchy is better for human's happiness, what is the research behind that? people can sell labor, so if someone sells labor, the person who bought the labor gets the result of the labor. if the person wants the result of the labor, the person could do that instead of sell the labor. does the left have a theory that a person should sell the labor , and get the result of the labor as well, instead of the person who paid for the labor? or is the theory that people should not sell labor in the first place? would freedomain radio be better with some worker takeover instead of stefan molyneux doing shows and content?

what kind of catagories are you using there are many humans, there is only one you, noone else has your genetic code. there was once a first cup, before other cups were created. no two cups use the same material i think the idea of monotheism is only one does does exist, rather than using the word "could" both poly and mono seem just as not reality.

how many dsayers exist? i thought the idea that only one of something exists is a statistical certainty, or where i'm i wrong?

if one wants to give protection, one can do so without the usa. it's not the usa's place to offer protection by taking tax dollars by force or borrowing in the names of people by force

http://drwolffe.blogspot.com/2009/06/child-behavior-spanking.html if the argument is that spanking makes people more empathetic, the research shows the opposite.

if you want to speak to your father and see how things go, that seems good. go with your own terms and set the standard for the relationship you would accept, if the father chooses to be a part of it then that only seems good, and if not that seems like closure.

what is objectivist about your example? the book is talking about people working for government paid schools. objectivism would not have government paid schools the book is not advocating for government paid schools or objectivism the book could name names as to which free market academics work at public schools instead of private schools or think tanks

cool

whats the difference between panarchy capitalism and anarchy capitalism? it seems one calls it a government while the other calls it a DRO? http://www.panarchy.org/debellis/onpanarchy.html this was a interesting article

in this case, the cat. if you want to pay the costs for the cat, you can do so. if people that want to adopt the cat want to pay, they can do so if there are owners that want the cat, the owners can do so if the hosbital wants to pay , the hosbital can do so.

why are you accepting money from him?

What data and research have you done on empathy that would suggest a child needs to experience spanking to feel empathy, rather than be able to put herself in the person's shoes?

in the free market, and connections would be voluntary and by contract. you would not need to be connected to the electricity network it the first place, so you could choose not to if the company does not want to pay you for the resources you generate. one would only pay or be paid for what one actualy uses. looks like now you are forced to be connected to the electrictricity network in the first place, so them being forced to pay you just creates a ishue that would be a non ishue in the free market, where you would choose to be connected if offered a reason to be connected.

the mind uploading seems interesting

interesting looking at how much trouble government has given the inventor of earthships, and that would not happen in free market economy. you did buy the earthship, and it sounds like your happy with it. looks like earthships are a great way to go.

what did your father say before letting you use the car? did he say he was giving you the car and registered it's ownership papers in your name, or who was the registered car owner? why were you not writing thank you notes? why were you drinking? i would say forced thank you notes are wrong, and giving a car with the expectation of a forced thank you note as well your father could have had you earn your car, write a letter in trade for the car, or other system of trade where there was a negotiation. are you expecting things be paid for without you trading for them? forced gratitude may have something there, although its not gratitude if forced

people could do that

in ancap, land not used it land not owned. today, if private land is not being used, it's because a government is protecting that ownership without a proper sense of property rights. it's government regulation , rather than private ownership via homesteading that would cause private land to not be in use. so explore space if you think there is not enough land on earth. by the time this may be a problem, space exploration will be advanced enough that people that don't like conditions on earth can leave earth. several generations into the future technological advancement will be several generations advanced. the increase in wealth would make it less hard as years go by. new technology and inventions will make getting resources easier. people people free to advance and create technology and invention would open up to a lot of wealth generation. future generations would only benefit from increased productivity and reduced energy expense.

how well is the earthship working?

yes no not all sex is making love, not all making love is sex yes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_theory_of_love

cool video

ownership of land is not a requirement to meet essential needs in life. plenty of people choose to rent in a city rather than own farmland for instance, and these are really life choices. one farmer, who knows how to farm, and produce profits from farming, and owns a lot of farmland, is better than lots of people owning farmland, but not knowing how to grow food on it and not being able to make a profit. these people are freed up to do activities where they do know more of how to make a profit.

there is plenty of unowned land ( let alone unused) out there. go out and use it. or do you want to use land other people have already developed rather than developed your own land? the majority of unused land that is owned, is owned by governments (and not the minarchist kind)