MichaelMcGillicuddy Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Hello good people of the world, I got into a discussion about a free society with a couple of guys my age whove never dealt with shitty childhoods, and their counter example to a free society went something like : No it wouldnt work because what if your neighbor doesnt buy fire protection, his house catches on fire, and then your house burns up as well. See, it CANT WORK!!! Im curious to hear how yall would have responded. Just to get inside their heads a bit, I replied with: well why doesnt the neighbor have it? Maybe you could help him out. Maybe you could go over and talk to him and tell him your concerns (them: No! Hes an asshole!). And then I got personal, "so would you pay for fire protection if you had a choice....uh yeah! It was the day before I moved to China, so I dont see these people on the reg, the reason Im asking is because Im writing a book about how violence is at the heart of our society and interactions, and then explaining how a free society would take care of all problems without the need for force, and a bunch of heads are better than one. Thanks guys Michael Ps, if anyone lives in Hong Kong or Near there I am moving to Shenzhen so please drop me a line!
Robofox42 Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 I don't understand. You have fire protection. He doesn't. So you will be compensated for the burning down of your home. He loses the value of his home. I don't understand the problem. He made a stupid decision and will suffer financially. Where is the problem exactly? Edit: Oh, I see you are talking about fire protection instead of fire insurance. So if he doesn't buy fire protection, his fire insurance rates would go way up and it would be very expensive. If he doesn't buy fire insurance, he is risking the value of his home by accident. Of course, the best course of action is preventative. A community would probably have in their contract that if homes in close proximity to other homes would need fire protection. If such a contract can't be arranged due to him already being there, then whoever builds their home next to his is taking the risk. If the society becomes free, and the homes are both already next to each other, and he continues to take big risks with fire, there is the possibility of filing a complaint with your DRO which will contact his DRO. If his DRO finds him to be negligent and endangering others, then it will significantly raise his rates unless he alters his behavior. If he refuses DRO protection, then he will have economic ostracization which probably won't take long before he will alter his behavior for his own self-interest. One common misconception about a free society is due to people inherently believing that the only way a community can organize or cooperate is with the state. This is due to parents having to force and control relationships children have with each other. So people grow up thinking that without the state (parents) they are left to fend completely for themselves without anyone else's help. This is teh root emotional argument people are making because of their childhoods.
Recommended Posts