Jeff Bezos is Now Worth 200 Billion

[doodle]

Bringing it back to Jeff Bezos, I'm sure with 200 billion he could hire one hell of a private army..maybe build a few private gulags to lock up economic competitors. Lol you guys have lost your minds.

[Mark Leavy]

The fact that you are running with this is mind boggling to me. Private security forces...beholden to who? Without a monopoly on power...aka, the state...suddenly you have warring security forces. This exists in Mexico with the drug cartels...seriously, I can't believe you are entertaining this idea.

You're a funny guy doodle. You should get out more. You have a weird sense of how the world actually works. And not just in Mexico...

[Mark Leavy]

Sigh.

Okay... step by step.

1) Do you believe that private security forces are legitimately used to protect bank deposits? (i.e. Brink's trucks)
2) Do you believe that private security forces could legitimately be used to protect other real property? (i.e Title Insurance)

[glennds]

In a non-government society, obviously there's no legislature and no judicial court system. So how do laws get made and enforced?
Or are there any laws at all?

[doodle]

Sigh.

Okay... step by step.

1) Do you believe that private security forces are legitimately used to protect bank deposits? (i.e. Brink's trucks)
2) Do you believe that private security forces could legitimately be used to protect other real property? (i.e Title Insurance)

Yes, but those private security forces are also subject to state legislation beholden to public. In your world that doesn't exist. It's essentially taking the anarchy present on the world stage and introducing it into the fabric of our communities. Look at European warring kindoms and feudal States for an idea of what that would look like. Better start building your castle and maybe a moat. I feel like I'm having a debate in an insane asylum right now.

In a non-government society, obviously there's no legislature and no judicial court system. So how do laws get made and enforced?
Or are there any laws at all?

It's anarchy.....anarchocapitalism to be specific. They use examples of things like Ebay to argue why people can get along harmoniously without the presence of government. Obviously they have never sat on a condo board of directors where every meeting was fireworks. Lol...Techno might be a bright computer code guy but his understanding of humans is pretty naive for such a hard nosed conservative realist.

[Libertarian666]

In a non-government society, obviously there's no legislature and no judicial court system. So how do laws get made and enforced?
Or are there any laws at all?

There would be common law, made and interpreted by judges (obviously private ones).
But the most common solution to dispute resolution would be something very like the "General Submission to Arbitration": https://www.facebook.com/GeneralArbitrationSubmission

[glennds]

In a non-government society, obviously there's no legislature and no judicial court system. So how do laws get made and enforced?
Or are there any laws at all?

There would be common law, made and interpreted by judges (obviously private ones).
But the most common solution to dispute resolution would be something very like the "General Submission to Arbitration": https://www.facebook.com/GeneralArbitrationSubmission

I can see where private dispute resolution agreements like this could work for civil disputes when both parties have agreed in advance to the process, but I am having difficulty seeing the application in situations involving criminal activity.

For example, if someone tried to unexpectedly take or occupy my private real property, I don't see where I would have a claim on my title insurance policy. My right of title is intact and the policy has not been violated in terms of chain. In other words, I have no claim against my title company. However my right to possession has been infringed (in violation of the hypothetical common law?). So how do I resolve that situation, especially since it requires some level of urgency.

Title insurance policies insure against title claims, but not the full scope of property rights and property liability claims.

And what if the infringing party has refused to sign a ADR agreement?

Who creates and/or amends the common law?
Who pays for the private judges?
How would this be applied in the event of a violent crime?

[Libertarian666]

In a non-government society, obviously there's no legislature and no judicial court system. So how do laws get made and enforced?
Or are there any laws at all?

There would be common law, made and interpreted by judges (obviously private ones).
But the most common solution to dispute resolution would be something very like the "General Submission to Arbitration": https://www.facebook.com/GeneralArbitrationSubmission

I can see where private dispute resolution agreements like this could work for civil disputes when both parties have agreed in advance to the process, but I am having difficulty seeing the application in situations involving criminal activity.

For example, if someone tried to unexpectedly take or occupy my private real property, I don't see where I would have a claim on my title insurance policy. My right of title is intact and the policy has not been violated in terms of chain. In other words, I have no claim against my title company. However my right to possession has been infringed (in violation of the hypothetical common law?). So how do I resolve that situation, especially since it requires some level of urgency.

Title insurance policies insure against title claims, but not the full scope of property rights and property liability claims.

And what if the infringing party has refused to sign a ADR agreement?

Who creates and/or amends the common law?
Who pays for the private judges?
How would this be applied in the event of a violent crime?

You're asking me to tell you how a different social order would work, which isn't something that can be done in this medium.
What I can do is to tell you where to read a fairly well worked-out description of how it might work.
Here is a free version: https://cdn.mises.org/For%20a%20New%20L ... esto_3.pdf.

Of course I'll be happy to answer questions after you have read it.

[doodle]

Ok, so I'm a bit confused...in this anarchocapitalist world there would no longer exist nation's / countries....so in essence we would live in a borderless world...free to move and travel and live wherever we wished without government interference. So why the support for nationalistic patriotic populism of Trump? Aren't these immigrants flowing across our borders simply anarchocapitalists filling the needs of the free market? After all, they are coming here for work.

[glennds]

You're asking me to tell you how a different social order would work, which isn't something that can be done in this medium.
What I can do is to tell you where to read a fairly well worked-out description of how it might work.
Here is a free version: https://cdn.mises.org/For%20a%20New%20L ... esto_3.pdf.

Of course I'll be happy to answer questions after you have read it.

Thanks
And sorry to the OP for taking the discussion off topic,

[boglerdude]

(and drop orphans, the demented, and those who cant manage their legal heroin, into the volcano)

[Mark Leavy]

(and drop orphans, the demented, and those who cant manage their legal heroin, into the volcano)

I knew there was something we could agree on boglerdude!

[Maddy]

There is a very odd movement afoot, most prominently in the Yale and Columbia circles (which have always embraced a leftist revolutionary slant on the law), to dismantle the law and legal system as we know it and to usher in a system known as "reflexive law." When I first heard this term, I was skeptical, since after many decades in litigation and legal analysis there aren't many legal concepts with which I'm unfamiliar.

It took reading a number of very lengthy law review articles coming out of these institutions, and to get past all the double-talk and euphemisms, to understand what they were really talking about.

Once I understood where they were coming from (and it isn't easy), I immediately saw that they were not talking about "law" at all. What they are advocating is in essence a system of behavior modification whereby instantaneous rewards and punishments are used as a tool of coercion to manage, right down to the minutest detail, both individuals and societies. It assumes a complex, highly integrated, system of monitoring and control over both the production and use of resources which would be achieved through a coordinated, highly networked system of feedback such as those envisioned for "smart cities" using 5G technology. I believe that China was, and is, the prototype for this kind of system.

Watch this development, as I guarantee it's only getting started. If you ever read Waldon Two, it's time to read it again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walden_Two

[Libertarian666]

(and drop orphans, the demented, and those who cant manage their legal heroin, into the volcano)

I knew there was something we could agree on boglerdude!

I guess that's equivalent to calling me a Nazi?
(Not you, of course, Mark).

[doodle]

Ok, so I'm a bit confused...in this anarchocapitalist world there would no longer exist nation's / countries....so in essence we would live in a borderless world...free to move and travel and live wherever we wished without government interference. So why the support for nationalistic patriotic populism of Trump? Aren't these immigrants flowing across our borders simply anarchocapitalists filling the needs of the free market? After all, they are coming here for work.

If you are arguing for abolishing the US government, I agree with you.

However, as long as we have a government, the taxpayers are paying all the costs of illegal immigration, as well as all the other costs of government. You can't have open borders and a welfare state, or you will be overrun by grifters wanting a handout.

So before we open the borders, we need to get rid of all forms of welfare, including any kind of government-paid services, e.g., Medicare or Medicain. We also need to eliminate all business regulation, all gun control and all drug laws. In addition, property owners must have the absolute right to exclude anyone from their property for any reason or no reason.

I may have overlooked something, but I think that's close enough to allow opening the borders.

Ending the issue of illegal immigration would be a lot easier if Trump would set his sites on hitting employers with stiff fines and or jail sentences. Any idea why he hasn't done this and continues to focus his efforts on the poor employees?

[doodle]

There is a very odd movement afoot, most prominently in the Yale and Columbia circles (which have always embraced a leftist revolutionary slant on the law), to dismantle the law and legal system as we know it and to usher in a system known as "reflexive law." When I first heard this term, I was skeptical, since after many decades in litigation and legal analysis there aren't many legal concepts with which I'm unfamiliar.

It took reading a number of very lengthy law review articles coming out of these institutions, and to get past all the double-talk and euphemisms, to understand what they were really talking about.

Once I understood where they were coming from (and it isn't easy), I immediately saw that they were not talking about "law" at all. What they are advocating is in essence a system of behavior modification whereby instantaneous rewards and punishments are used as a tool of coercion to manage, right down to the minutest detail, both individuals and societies. It assumes a complex, highly integrated, system of monitoring and control over both the production and use of resources which would be achieved through a coordinated, highly networked system of feedback such as those envisioned for "smart cities" using 5G technology. I believe that China was, and is, the prototype for this kind of system.

Watch this development, as I guarantee it's only getting started. If you ever read Waldon Two, it's time to read it again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walden_Two

Walden Two was very interesting read. I second recommendation.

[WiseOne]

Ending the issue of illegal immigration would be a lot easier if Trump would set his sites on hitting employers with stiff fines and or jail sentences. Any idea why he hasn't done this and continues to focus his efforts on the poor employees?

Really good question and I've wondered the same thing. Specifically, why isn't E-verify mandatory for all employers of any size. It was a key 2016 campaign promise.

This is how enforcement of immigration laws is done in other countries, e.g. the UK and European Union. You'll still get illegal immigrants hanging around on street corners looking for odd jobs to do for cash under the table, but that won't be enough for them to live here on a long-term basis, let alone raise a family here.

Ending welfare might help, but it won't be enough by itself. Illegals will still show up in ERs, and blue cities will continue to give them benefits like food stamps and housing. And the major draw for them will still be the ability to get high paying jobs (compared to what they could get in their home countries).

[vnatale]

Jeff Bezos thought there was a ’30% chance’ Amazon would succeed: I told my parents ‘it’s very likely they’ll lose their entire investment’


https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/03/jeff-be ... ter%7Cmain