• Squatters leave house once occupied by soverign citizen; Owner of house afraid of repair costs
    315 replies, posted
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42341136]That's usually entire states attacking entire states, massive military forces against weaker or less equipped ones to take control. Thousands of people fighting for a county or leader. Rarely for themselves. As there are no leaders or stage in anarchy, good be expecting for people to fight for themselves against organised groups fighting for power. Even if the individuals group up, would they all group together? Would ideology divide them? If they are divided by ideology, you end up with groups of people vying for power for they ideology now. Anarchy gone.[/QUOTE] people wouldn't be fighting for themselves, they would be fighting for their communities against authoritarianism. either way this is a non-issue because your hypothetical case isn't an anarchist "military" versus a state, it's a militia versus a militia.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341103]it's profitable for the bourgeoisie to sell for as high as possible and cut costs wherever possible.[/QUOTE] lol, bourgeoisie its profitable for every producer, even the little timmy lemonade stand kid, to sell as high as possible and cut costs thats literally how economics work its not because they are greedy, its because thats just what you do to make money i dont see the problem, if people can afford to purchase items and get off reasonably well from the purchase, the prices arent too high; if the price was too high, no one would buy it, what part dont you get? (this mostly applies to luxuries)
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341141] are you telling me there is an abundance of jobs free in the US and people dont take them because they dont pay enough? [/QUOTE] i'm saying there is a shortage of work in the united states and people take low wage jobs even though they don't pay enough.
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341141]how so? are you telling me there is an abundance of jobs free in the US and people dont take them because they dont pay enough? if so, you're plain wrong, thats not what unemployment does[/QUOTE] There are quite a lot of manual labor jobs that never get filled by United States citizens because most citizens feel themselves above that kind of work. If pay wages for those jobs were different then more people would probably be willing to do them.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341160]people wouldn't be fighting for themselves, they would be fighting for their communities against authoritarianism. either way this is a non-issue because your hypothetical case isn't an anarchist "military" versus a state, it's a militia versus a militia.[/QUOTE] it is clear you have no idea how humans work of how societies function
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42338934]no they aren't. people who own property and don't utilize that property are terrible.[/QUOTE] While to a certain extent I agree with the notion - there ought to be some drive at utilising unused or ignored properties over significant portions of time. But it should be done legally. Also a lot of larger squatting cases tends to happen on property which is used as an investment property or only temporarily unused. Which are really not excuseable squattings of any sorts. If a bunch of squatters take over a rundown building, that no one has used for a decade no one will care at all much. If instead they take over a house of someone who has just left for a year somewhere else, or a building that's temporarily locked in inheritance proceedings a lot of people do care.
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341165]i dont see the problem, if people can afford to purchase items and get off reasonably well from the purchase, the prices arent too high; if the price was too high, no one would buy it, what part dont you get? [/QUOTE] i get it, i think it's immoral. i don't agree with a system where those prices are decided upon by the bourgeoisie/government in the name of profit. i would prefer a system where people get what they need without having to sell their labor.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341168]i'm saying there is a shortage of work in the united states and people take low wage jobs even though they don't pay enough.[/QUOTE] so whats the problem? in an anarchist state, everyone would have to do these low wage jobs for free
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341174]it is clear you have no idea how humans work of how societies function[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341181]i get it, i think it's immoral. i don't agree with a system where those prices are decided upon by the bourgeoisie/government in the name of profit. i would prefer a system where people get what they need without having to sell their labor.[/QUOTE] would you be willing to work a field, cook meat, and prepare meals for free? clean streets, pave roads, everything a city and society needs to function, without getting anything in return? letting strangers live in your home and use your possessions (they wouldnt be yours technically) whenever they wanted?
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341183]so whats the problem?[/quote] idk lol [quote]in an anarchist state, everyone would have to do these low wage jobs for free[/QUOTE] not really for free. they would be getting the things they need and want.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341168]i'm saying there is a shortage of work in the united states and people take low wage jobs even though they don't pay enough.[/QUOTE] That's because the economic downturn caused their reservation wage to drop, meaning they'd be willing to work for lower wages. That doesn't mean they will work for anything, because modern labor economics says otherwise. Also, why don't laws prevent crimes, I really want to know your answer.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341194]idk lol not really for free. they would be getting the things they need and want.[/QUOTE] what would force the employer to give the people what they need?
how would you make sure the baker gives the people food in an anarchist society? how do you make sure there even is a baker? there is just trading for necessities, but no real ability to gain profit or luxuries no one would innovate or do high-tier jobs being a doctor would get you the same "reward" as being a janitor
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341160]people wouldn't be fighting for themselves, they would be fighting for their communities against authoritarianism. either way this is a non-issue because your hypothetical case isn't an anarchist "military" versus a state, it's a militia versus a militia.[/QUOTE] For the sake of a discussion I've had to use a hypothetical :v: it's hardly a non-issue, if one of those militias happened to become large enough to make an attempt, the hypothetical would be sound. If an state tried to take over the anarchist "state" (seriously, is there a proper term for this?), leading to them fighting militias who may not agree enough to work together, the hypothetical would be sound. So, what would happen? I've not really had an answer yet. What would happen if a large enough force wanted to install themselves as government in an anarchist system?
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341204]what would force the employer to give the people what they need?[/QUOTE] there would be no employer, there would be no private property. -_-
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;42341217]More over, whats to stop someone from gathering up people and forming a government? Or someone from forming a gang and using threat of force to get you to do what they want?[/QUOTE] like i said, people will always move to make a society and government, anarchy is just not possible, because people will always need organization in order to further the society [editline]28th September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;42341222]there would be no employer, there would be no private property. -_-[/QUOTE] so how would you get food [editline]28th September 2013[/editline] also please ask the multiple above questions about your own "possessions" and the other scenarios
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341224]l so how would you get food also please ask the multiple above questions about your own "possessions" and the other scenarios[/QUOTE] from the peope who grow, process, and cook food. you would get bread from the baker. you would get taken care of by the doctor. just because there isn't a fucking dictator doesn't mean that there won't be doctors or bakers.
also, whats to stop one big mean guy from gathering some buddies, stealing all the food, and making a government? [editline]28th September 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=yawmwen;42341247]from the peope who grow, process, and cook food. you would get bread from the baker. you would get taken care of by the doctor. just because there isn't a fucking dictator doesn't mean that there won't be doctors or bakers.[/QUOTE] what would be the incentive to be a doctor or baker if there is no profit based economy good will? [editline]28th September 2013[/editline] you didnt answer the questions pertaining to what you'd do
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341204]what would force the employer to give the people what they need?[/QUOTE] Not everybody in the world is a selfish prick. I assume if someone falls, you help them up. Also the fear of being ostracized from society can be a pretty big driving force.
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341249] what would be the incentive to be a doctor or baker if there is no profit based economy good will? [editline]28th September 2013[/editline] you didnt answer the questions pertaining to what you'd do[/QUOTE] so the only reason there are bakers and doctors is because these guys are part of the 1% and make shitloads of money right?
[QUOTE=matt000024;42341260]Not everybody in the world is a selfish prick. I assume if someone falls, you help them up. Also the fear of being ostracized from society can be a pretty big driving force.[/QUOTE] Many times, being helpful is pushed toward someone you know or relate to, not complete strangers whom you have nothing in common with.
[QUOTE=matt000024;42341260]Not everybody in the world is a selfish prick. I assume if someone falls, you help them up. Also the fear of being ostracized from society can be a pretty big driving force.[/QUOTE] not everyone is a selfish prick? perhaps, but not everyone needs to be a selfish prick for a society to get majorly fucked up by crime and greed
(btw doctors and bakers are paid shit wages so profit isn't a particularly strong incentive for either of these jobs. the real question is: why are there bakers and doctors in a capitalist society?)
Who ensures the baker is cooking bread safely and not pissing in the dough? Fuck everything else, where will safety standards be enforced?
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341269]so the only reason there are bakers and doctors is because these guys are part of the 1% and make shitloads of money right?[/QUOTE] no its because they are employed by the "1% that make shitloads of money" if a doctor or baker was paid the same wage as a mcdonalds worker, there would be no incentive to be a doctor or baker
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341282](btw doctors and bakers are paid shit wages so profit isn't a particularly strong incentive for either of these jobs. the real question is: why are there bakers and doctors in a capitalist society?)[/QUOTE] Do personal goals and preferences for career choices count for anything? I know people that want to be doctors, I know people who want to be iron-workers, it comes down to preference in addition to the ability to pay for normal expenses and lead a comfortable life. Why don't laws prevent crimes?
[QUOTE=Loriborn;42341287]no its because they are employed by the "1% that make shitloads of money" if a doctor or baker was paid the same wage as a mcdonalds worker, there would be no incentive to be a doctor or baker[/QUOTE] Unless the person wanted to be a doctor or baker, which is a big motivation.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;42341282](btw doctors and bakers are paid shit wages so profit isn't a particularly strong incentive for either of these jobs. the real question is: why are there bakers and doctors in a capitalist society?)[/QUOTE] lol doctors are paid well you are insane as the son of a anesthesiologist i should know bakers and doctors exist because there is a [b]demand[/b] for them, hence, capitalism
[QUOTE=Bentham;42341299]Unless the person wanted to be a doctor or baker, which is a big motivation.[/QUOTE] but there is no organized government, which means instead of doing education to be a doctor (btw no teachers because no state funded education) you are busy paving roads for free
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.