bjdotson on June 08, 2012, 08:30:03 am
Sometimes a "Union" is not really a union. Case in point is the Federal Employees Union. Federal Employees do not have collective bargaining rights, they can not strike, and their wages are set by Congress and the President. I think of them as the Federal Employee Lobbying group. You would be surprised how many Federal Employees (especially in the west) that are Libertarian or AnCaps, although a significant majority are Democrats.

ContraryGuy on June 13, 2012, 12:42:36 am
Sometimes a "Union" is not really a union. Case in point is the Federal Employees Union. Federal Employees do not have collective bargaining rights, they can not strike, and their wages are set by Congress and the President. I think of them as the Federal Employee Lobbying group. You would be surprised how many Federal Employees (especially in the west) that are Libertarian or AnCaps, although a significant majority are Democrats.

Well, if rich people can have unions of rich people/lobbying groups, why cant the poor working classes also have lobbying groups?

I thought you guys were all for fairness.

ContraryGuy on June 13, 2012, 12:46:54 am
Of course, in an AnCap system you'd be free to go to another, non-union, hospital. And if unions are necessarily as bad as you claim, they wouldn't survive in an AnCap system. So there's really no problem.

As is being demonstrated on Vesta by way of Masha and the Mascons, there is a tendency for entrepreneurs to establish a going concern and for coercive types to move in and take over.


What, you think we're actually playing golf on those Wednesday afternoons we're out of the office?

Why, yes, actually.  Many a time called physicians office and been told exactly that.

Gone through more darned doctors that way.

ContraryGuy on June 13, 2012, 12:59:10 am
Perhaps one should not start by assuming that all natural rights must be negative rights.

As long as we know what we're doing, and don't go overboard, it doesn't have to be all that bad. It's when we lose sight of the fact that those things are not rights, just convenient luxuries (for example, some socialized health care prevents cheapskates from inflicting infectious diseases on the rest of us) that we can slide into absurdity or tyranny.[\quote]

Thats another thing AnCap cant/wont do.  Prevent the spread of infectious disease.  Cant force you to get immunizations, some people wont for love or money.
No public health agency whose job it is to notice outbreaks and warn people.  Thats just butting into peoples lives; nossir, cant have that.
Do you really think that individual doctors would notice something like that?  Would they have time to look over records and seek out correlations, and then investigate, and then try to get word out that there is an abnormal amount of disease in their areas?

Of course not.  Every doctor I know is too tired at the end of the day to want to do more paperwork.
Maybe the rich doctors where you live can delegate that work to interns, but not around here.

Absolute freedom means absolute responsibility.  If youre sick, stay home from work so you dont infect your co-workers.  I'm sure youre boss will understand, and not fire you for bringing down his productivity numbers.  After all, theres no government to complain to about mean ol' employers.

Does sneezing on a co-worker constitute aggression?  Would coughing into common airspace violate the ZAP?

myrkul999 on June 13, 2012, 01:09:58 am
Perhaps one should not start by assuming that all natural rights must be negative rights.

As long as we know what we're doing, and don't go overboard, it doesn't have to be all that bad. It's when we lose sight of the fact that those things are not rights, just convenient luxuries (for example, some socialized health care prevents cheapskates from inflicting infectious diseases on the rest of us) that we can slide into absurdity or tyranny.

Thats another thing AnCap cant/wont do.  Prevent the spread of infectious disease.  Cant force you to get immunizations, some people wont for love or money.
No public health agency whose job it is to notice outbreaks and warn people.  Thats just butting into peoples lives; nossir, cant have that.
Do you really think that individual doctors would notice something like that?  Would they have time to look over records and seek out correlations, and then investigate, and then try to get word out that there is an abnormal amount of disease in their areas?

Of course not.  Every doctor I know is too tired at the end of the day to want to do more paperwork.
Maybe the rich doctors where you live can delegate that work to interns, but not around here.

Absolute freedom means absolute responsibility.  If youre sick, stay home from work so you dont infect your co-workers.  I'm sure youre boss will understand, and not fire you for bringing down his productivity numbers.  After all, theres no government to complain to about mean ol' employers.

Does sneezing on a co-worker constitute aggression?  Would coughing into common airspace violate the ZAP?

Seriously, CG, I'm beginning to think your screwups are intentional. I mean really... [\quote]?

As to the medical outbreak, what makes you think statistics would suddenly evaporate? The CDC doesn't do anything that a private agency couldn't do, excepting it's source of funding.

ex-Gooserider on June 13, 2012, 02:00:53 am
Presumably being a known disease vector (IOW sick...) would make one liable for infecting others - certainly I've heard of people w/ HIV being prosecuted for not telling sex partners. 

It would be tougher to prove just who gave you that cold, but the principle would be the same...

Also it seems likely to me that the controlled environment of a belt settlement could be kept free of most nasty infectious diseases without a lot of effort - (possibly competing) private agencies could do the same sorts of duties as CHI agencies and those running space ports might refuse landing privileges to "uncertified" craft, and have arbitrators that back them up...

Doctors would quite likely have more time to do tracking of illnesses and other such issues given that they would have a lot less required gov't based paperwork to fill out...

Don't know all the answers, but it seems like a solvable problem - people don't like getting sick, and I'm sure they would work out systems to help keep the populace as a whole healthy...  (Note that the person refusing a vaccination puts himself at risk, but not those that HAVE gotten the shot....)

ex-Gooserider

macsnafu on June 13, 2012, 09:21:51 am
Absolute freedom means absolute responsibility.  If youre sick, stay home from work so you dont infect your co-workers.  I'm sure youre boss will understand, and not fire you for bringing down his productivity numbers.  After all, theres no government to complain to about mean ol' employers.

Does sneezing on a co-worker constitute aggression?  Would coughing into common airspace violate the ZAP?
Again, with this "absolute freedom" nonsense.  An enlightened employer *will* understand if you're seriously ill and contagious--he/she won't want half the workforce or more to be out for several days because of the flu or something worse.   And firing sick employees and training their replacements could be very expensive, time-consuming, and nonprofitable.  Even evil employers will want to minimize their expenses.  Of course, it depends upon what kind of work we're talking about, and how the workplace is organized.  Circumstances vary as to what's a big problem and what's a minor situation.

And I'm not sure sneezing and coughing would violate the NAP, but even if they do, you're still overlooking an important point:  the "punishment" must fit the crime.  Just as it would be inappropriate to execute someone for stealing a loaf of bread or a candy bar, so too, would it be inappropriate for spreading a cold or flu. 
I love mankind.  It's PEOPLE I can't stand!  - Linus Van Pelt.

SandySandfort on June 13, 2012, 09:38:55 am
Again, with this "absolute freedom" nonsense...

When you don't have an argument to stand on, you make shit up. In logic, it's called a straw man argument. While no market anarchist, libertarian or fellow traveler would ever create such a cockamamie, semantically null, oxymoron such as "absolute freedom," it is the only way CG can create the illusion of rational argument.

BTW, falsely attributing this intellectually vapid term to ACs, would constitute fraud if anyone actually bought into it. So CG is a fraudster, just not an effective one. Which just supports the conclusion that CG isn't good at anything. He never discusses his work, for example. He's probably on the dole and freedom threatens his "lifestyle."

ContraryGuy on June 14, 2012, 03:41:46 pm
Again, with this "absolute freedom" nonsense...

When you don't have an argument to stand on, you make shit up. In logic, it's called a straw man argument. While no market anarchist, libertarian or fellow traveler would ever create such a cockamamie, semantically null, oxymoron such as "absolute freedom," it is the only way CG can create the illusion of rational argument.

BTW, falsely attributing this intellectually vapid term to ACs, would constitute fraud if anyone actually bought into it. So CG is a fraudster, just not an effective one. Which just supports the conclusion that CG isn't good at anything. He never discusses his work, for example. He's probably on the dole and freedom threatens his "lifestyle."

Actually, i am a fully functioning self-employed entrepreneurial capitalist, whose job it is to make house calls (like doctors of old) and provide repairs to computers and related technologies and stress relief to to the user.

I am no more on the dole than anyone here, and less than some.

As for the /quote, am i not even allowed a single typo?  And i thought i was pedantic!

myrkul999 on June 14, 2012, 03:58:41 pm
You don't typo once, but at nearly every opportunity. My browser almost has a fit drawing red squiggly lines whenever I quote your posts.

And as for the [\quote]... there's a link which quotes the posts for you. To say nothing of the "preview" button. If you don't know how to use that, I feel sorry for the people you inflict your "services" on. I would expect a computer tech to be computer literate, at least.

To try, at least, to pull it back on-topic, I noticed you haven't responded to any criticisms of your arguments. A quick sampling:

Quote
As to the medical outbreak, what makes you think statistics would suddenly evaporate? The CDC doesn't do anything that a private agency couldn't do, excepting it's source of funding.
Quote
Presumably being a known disease vector (IOW sick...) would make one liable for infecting others - certainly I've heard of people w/ HIV being prosecuted for not telling sex partners.

It would be tougher to prove just who gave you that cold, but the principle would be the same...

Quote
An enlightened employer *will* understand if you're seriously ill and contagious--he/she won't want half the workforce or more to be out for several days because of the flu or something worse.   And firing sick employees and training their replacements could be very expensive, time-consuming, and nonprofitable.  Even evil employers will want to minimize their expenses.
« Last Edit: June 14, 2012, 04:48:57 pm by myrkul999 »