GaTor on October 24, 2010, 05:02:12 pm
Unless i missed it in the strip or the forums, one aspect of EFT which I have not seen addressed are the poor, handicapped, old, stupid (hey not all of us are rocket scientists), the disadvantaged etc. etc.  Another thing that is missing which (if allowed) in our society that goes a long way in helping these unfortunates are all of the various service organizations.  These groups such as the Lions, Elks, Rotary, Grange, Soroptimists and many others would seem to fit perfectly in EFT and in an AnCap society.  These organizations operate at the grass roots level and not only help people nationally and worldwide but in their local communities.  Yah sure we've all seen the goofball Shriners in their fez's and running around in their go-carts, but they are a major player in helping disadvantaged kids with the hundreds of millions they have raised for their children’s hospitals. 

I'll say it here and put it to you all, that this is where socialism and charity belongs.  With the individual joining together with other, like minded individuals to serve the needs and lack of THEIR communities.  To voluntarily give their surplus of time and money to the charities and those in need as they see fit and not as the government demands.  It is these organizations that have the pulse of their local neighborhoods and knows the people who are working their butts off but still need a helping hand and those who are just lazy bums.  There is also the church(s), and yah I know there are a lot of atheists and agnostics here, but the churchie’s soup kitchens don’t care how lazy or indigent one is (Merry would seem to fit in this category).  When social causes are assumed by the government it ALWAYS leads to misuse, waste, oppression and abuse.  The sad part is, that in the USA the government has put so many regulations on these organizations that they are not nearly as effective as they could be. 

Anyway, it's impossible to detail all the aspects of the EFT universe, but this is one area that has been nagging me and which the authors have yet to address.  If you have, then I missed it and apologize.   If not, how about a short arc about the local chapter of the Ceres Lions club getting together to help a family out that suffered some misfortune such as a meteor/space debris strike on their habitat or some such?  This happens all the time especially in smaller towns.  Last year in the little town of Weiser Id., when a family’s house caught on fire the local service clubs were a focal point in coordinating a relief effort.   
Go forth and do good.

jamesd on October 24, 2010, 06:12:04 pm
Unless i missed it in the strip or the forums, one aspect of EFT which I have not seen addressed are the poor, handicapped, old, stupid (hey not all of us are rocket scientists), the disadvantaged etc. etc. 

Its a wealthy society - I expect that they can make an adequate living waiting on tables, cleaning up puke, greeting at Walmart and so on and forth.

To be a security guard requires no special abilities other than trustworthiness and diligence.   You can be stupid, and, for a stationary security guard, stupid and handicapped.  You just have to be honest and reliable.

You may well be asking what happens to those that are stupid and untrustworthy and lazy and irresponsible - which describes a great many of today's recipients of welfare - see the famous blog "Winston Smith: Working with the Underclass"

Answer:  I wish they would starve and/or run out of air, but unfortunately they will not.

For deserving poor, their is charity and family.  It is a wealthy society.  Indeed, in our society, for the undeserving, but cute, poor, there is far too much charity.  The various homeless children charities desperately fight each other for clients with alarming viciousness.  The kids would probably be better off with less competition for their favor.

In our society, I observe that homeless drunken bums, who are not at all cute and are obviously undeserving, are usually fat.  Begging is alarmingly lucrative.  Even the non cute do better than they should.

SandySandfort on October 24, 2010, 08:32:35 pm
Unless i missed it in the strip or the forums, one aspect of EFT which I have not seen addressed are the poor, handicapped, old, stupid (hey not all of us are rocket scientists), the disadvantaged etc. etc.

Yup, you missed the King's Court Unfortunates Fund. Also, charity does not require large service organizations. I direct your attention to the scene when Robyn tries to skip on the check at the Water Bros. Café. She ends up with a job, job offers and some no-strings loans. People naturally offer helping hands.

True story: When I was practice law in Flagstaff, a guy from a local search and rescue group came in. They were already saving lives of lost hikers and such, but they wanted to do more. They wanted our law office to create a charitable trust for visually impaired children. He said they had wanted to do something for blind kids, but the Lions club had beaten them to the punch. So they took what was left. BTW, no taxpayers were harmed in the making of this organization. The members tricked out their off-road vehicles and bought rescue gear at their own expense.

Barbara Brandon was once asked by a student: 'What will happen to the poor?" She replied, "If you want to help them, you will not be stopped." Compare that to what the government did to Food Not Bombs in San Francisco when the organization tried to feed the homeless:

  https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Food_Not_Bombs

terry_freeman on October 25, 2010, 10:53:34 am
The strip covers some means of helping the unfortunate. I've also made a few posts regarding fraternal or benevolent associations, which have historically played a very large role in providing food, health care, education, jobs, and other services to people in need.

Such associations are a large part of the reason why many immigrants move up the ladder so quickly; they network with people who provide connections to jobs, cheap housing, business ideas and investment capital.

dough560 on November 07, 2010, 01:41:55 am
Those willing to work will find all the help they will need.  Those who won't work, will go back to Terra or die.  Some people have never learned to work.  Its not that they won't work, but they never learned how.  Look at how people raise or don't raise their kids.  That condition is curable.  Individual or organizational help will reach those who need it.  They'll just have to start the beginning and learn from their failures.  Like most of us have. 

macsnafu on November 09, 2010, 09:56:46 am

I'll say it here and put it to you all, that this is where socialism and charity belongs.  With the individual joining together with other, like minded individuals to serve the needs and lack of THEIR communities.  To voluntarily give their surplus of time and money to the charities and those in need as they see fit and not as the government demands. 

Charity, yes, but I fail to see how this is "socialism". 
I love mankind.  It's PEOPLE I can't stand!  - Linus Van Pelt.

Roget on December 09, 2010, 12:38:19 pm
I have been rolling this situation around in my head for a long time, trying to figure out where the care of the severely handicapped fits in an AnCap society. When I get to the questions at the end, I am not sure where my own understanding leaves off and wishful thinking begins, so please point me in the right direction.

A teenager (male or female, but for ease of reading I will use feminine pronouns instead of “he/she”) is injured in a hit and run and the responsible party is never found.

Her injuries result in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) such that she will forever function at about the level of a 7-year-old child.

Further, she has lost almost all short term memory. New information can be learned, but it is an extremely slow process involving constant repetition and reinforcement. For example, she must meet a person and be re-introduced several times a day for six months or more before the knowledge of who the person is makes it into her long term memory and she can reliably recall and talk about the person if they are not present. This effectively makes every new person she has met since the accident a stranger. The teenager also now has impaired judgment regarding the exercise of caution and trusts anyone who speaks to her, so she would walk off with a real stranger on the assumption that it is a person she knows but doesn’t remember yet.

Another factor of the short term memory loss is being unable to navigate a supposedly simple route. A directive to “please get the mail from the mail box on the sidewalk” can result in her becoming completely disoriented and unable to find her way back to the correct house. For her it is truly not as simple as “follow the same driveway back.”

A third factor in the memory loss is extremely short attention span and loss of focus. If she takes a break from a task to use the restroom, or even pauses to answer a question, she usually won’t remember what the task was – or even, often, that she had a task at all. She is happy and willing to work/help, but is not safe if left on her own. This means there must be a competent person accompanying and directing her at all times.

She has one parent, who has been the primary caregiver since she was released from the hospital after the accident. The other parent is not present in her life for any permanent reason of your choice – death, lives on another planet, doesn’t want to deal with the mess, whatever. For the sake of the scenario, there is only one parent and one child, and no extended family.

In a society like the one posited in EFT, I can understand that there will be professional caregivers and the parent can find safe and appropriate care for the teenager. The parent can also make enough income on Ceres to pay for that care.

Other than the TBI, the teenager survived the accident with amazingly little physical injury, so she will likely live a full and healthy lifespan, which means she will probably outlive her parent.

What happens to her when the parent dies? If the parent has saved enough to pay for her 24-7-365 care for 20 to 50 years and assigned a reputable trustee, everything is dandy. What if the parent couldn’t/didn’t save that much? What happens to the teenager, now a grown/middle aged/elderly woman, who is an eternally trusting child? Will she be allowed to wander out an airlock? Or go off with a person who exploits or harms her? Since she can’t remember what happened three minutes ago, she can’t bring a grievance to arbitration. Without family to look out for her, or either the funds or ability to support herself and ensure her own basic needs and safety, how will this person survive?

mellyrn on December 09, 2010, 03:04:05 pm
Quote
Without family to look out for her, or either the funds or ability to support herself and ensure her own basic needs and safety, how will this person survive?

Sounds to me as though what you want is a formula, a dependable "if X [in this case a helpless person] then Y [assured care]".  I think that desire, to know in advance how something will, or at least should, turn out, so that one need not feel anxious, is why humans want (or "want") government at all.

I think those who would be happy in an anarchy are those who have come to terms with the fact that we don't get any guarantees -- not even when there's an insitution (state-run or private) that is intended to, if not guarantee an outcome, then at least tip the balance towards it.

How will this person survive?  I don't know; it will depend entirely on her unique circumstances.  Someone may love her, damaged as she is, and will care for her; or maybe she'll just starve; or maybe various neighbors will do bits here & there until she does wander out an airlock or something.  Sux, doesn't it?  Not knowing?

And yet an institution provides only the illusion of knowing.  It lets her community go on about whatever it does, blithely assuming she's OK.  She might be; or she might be being neglected anyway, or even abused, but because there's an institution, we can all pretend she's OK.  And if she wanders out an airlock anyway, well, that's very sad but we none of us have to feel responsible.

I think in the absence of an institution to shield us from responsibility, a human community would tend to look out for her, to check in with each other, "Have you seen her today?"  And if she wandered out an airlock anyway, we'd all feel something real about it.  My money says she'd live to an older age in a real community than she would in one that had set up institutions in order to avoid uncertainty.

They found bones of a prehistoric man who'd had one of his legs pretty much destroyed.  There had been so much bone remodeling, they knew he'd lived decades past the time of the injury.  Ergo his tribe had taken care of him, despite his inability to help hunt or gather. 

Life's uncertain.  Even when you have institutions.  Maybe especially when you have institutions.

jamesd on December 09, 2010, 04:09:21 pm
Her injuries result in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) such that she will forever function at about the level of a 7-year-old child.

Further, she has lost almost all short term memory.

You have loaded the dice to the maximum extent possible, by making your innocent orphan victim young, sweet, and permanently and irreversibly innocent.

In real life, there are not only private organizations eager to look after the cute, there are considerably more such organizations than there are such clients, with the result that they fight each other for clients with ruthless and cynical desperation, using murder and bribery to get access to such clients.

Even the terminally uncute, for example elderly alcoholics, seem to get enough charity to get fat.  The cute are stalked and pursued by do gooders with alarming intensity.

SandySandfort on December 09, 2010, 04:33:42 pm
Holy moley, Roget, can you say "logorrhea"? 95% of what you have written is totally unnecessary to ask your questions. There are a number of simple and obvious answers to your scenario.

Come back when you have come up with your own answers on how people in an AnCap society take care of the halt and lame. If you still have questions, ask, but for Chaos sake, keep it short. Sorry to be snappish, but I hate overblown writing.

I have been rolling this situation around in my head for a long time, trying to figure out where the care of the severely handicapped fits in an AnCap society. When I get to the questions at the end, I am not sure where my own understanding leaves off and wishful thinking begins, so please point me in the right direction.

A teenager (male or female, but for ease of reading I will use feminine pronouns instead of “he/she”) is injured in a hit and run and the responsible party is never found.

Her injuries result in Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) such that she will forever function at about the level of a 7-year-old child.

Further, she has lost almost all short term memory. New information can be learned, but it is an extremely slow process involving constant repetition and reinforcement. For example, she must meet a person and be re-introduced several times a day for six months or more before the knowledge of who the person is makes it into her long term memory and she can reliably recall and talk about the person if they are not present. This effectively makes every new person she has met since the accident a stranger. The teenager also now has impaired judgment regarding the exercise of caution and trusts anyone who speaks to her, so she would walk off with a real stranger on the assumption that it is a person she knows but doesn’t remember yet.

Another factor of the short term memory loss is being unable to navigate a supposedly simple route. A directive to “please get the mail from the mail box on the sidewalk” can result in her becoming completely disoriented and unable to find her way back to the correct house. For her it is truly not as simple as “follow the same driveway back.”

A third factor in the memory loss is extremely short attention span and loss of focus. If she takes a break from a task to use the restroom, or even pauses to answer a question, she usually won’t remember what the task was – or even, often, that she had a task at all. She is happy and willing to work/help, but is not safe if left on her own. This means there must be a competent person accompanying and directing her at all times.

She has one parent, who has been the primary caregiver since she was released from the hospital after the accident. The other parent is not present in her life for any permanent reason of your choice – death, lives on another planet, doesn’t want to deal with the mess, whatever. For the sake of the scenario, there is only one parent and one child, and no extended family.

In a society like the one posited in EFT, I can understand that there will be professional caregivers and the parent can find safe and appropriate care for the teenager. The parent can also make enough income on Ceres to pay for that care.

Other than the TBI, the teenager survived the accident with amazingly little physical injury, so she will likely live a full and healthy lifespan, which means she will probably outlive her parent.

What happens to her when the parent dies? If the parent has saved enough to pay for her 24-7-365 care for 20 to 50 years and assigned a reputable trustee, everything is dandy. What if the parent couldn’t/didn’t save that much? What happens to the teenager, now a grown/middle aged/elderly woman, who is an eternally trusting child? Will she be allowed to wander out an airlock? Or go off with a person who exploits or harms her? Since she can’t remember what happened three minutes ago, she can’t bring a grievance to arbitration. Without family to look out for her, or either the funds or ability to support herself and ensure her own basic needs and safety, how will this person survive?


Roget on December 10, 2010, 10:00:06 am
Holy moley, Roget, can you say "logorrhea"?
My apologies for the over-explanation, Sandy. I get beaten up too often for not giving sufficient detail; I'll try to keep it shorter.

I am sure there are a number of simple answers, but if they were obvious to me, I would not have asked to be pointed in the right direction. I don't expect to be led by the hand, but I would like to be pointed toward reliable source material. I do know better than to trust everything I find on the internet or in print.

You have loaded the dice to the maximum extent possible, by making your innocent orphan victim young, sweet, and permanently and irreversibly innocent.

jamesd, permanently stuck as a child does not equal permanently sweet or cute - in an adult, and especially as the adult ages, it tends to equal creepy and off-putting. If the parent/caregiver lives to, say, 75, you have a 50-ish child left behind. Not exactly heart-string-pulling poster fodder.

Sounds to me as though what you want is a formula, a dependable "if X [in this case a helpless person] then Y [assured care]".

mellyrn, if wishes were horses, the formula would read: young person on bicycle + impaired driver = driver in ditch + young person safe. Life doesn't happen that way. Yes, it bites.

I think in the absence of an institution to shield us from responsibility, a human community would tend to look out for her, to check in with each other, "Have you seen her today?"  And if she wandered out an airlock anyway, we'd all feel something real about it.  My money says she'd live to an older age in a real community than she would in one that had set up institutions in order to avoid uncertainty.

They found bones of a prehistoric man who'd had one of his legs pretty much destroyed.  There had been so much bone remodeling, they knew he'd lived decades past the time of the injury.  Ergo his tribe had taken care of him, despite his inability to help hunt or gather. 

Thank you; I thought that might be the tendency, but didn't know if it was wishful thinking on my part. Guy, Robin, Kinko, and other escapees have all had something substantive to contribute in exchange for their keep, and the ability to look out for themselves - I wonder about those who truly don't.

SandySandfort on December 10, 2010, 12:02:31 pm
I am sure there are a number of simple answers, but if they were obvious to me, I would not have asked to be pointed in the right direction.

Yes, but apparently, you did not think about it at all, before you went to the back of the teacher's book. Look, this is something that I have suggested repeatedly, but nobody seems to want to put forth the effort. Figure out want you would do. If you woke up tomorrow morning on EFT's Ceres and saw the problem of the halt and lame, what would your solution be? You have outlined a problem that seems to be a big deal to you. Well, if it is such a damned important problem, what would you do to solve it?

Let's assume you have employable skills on Ceres, but let's give you the equivalent wealth to what you have now.  You are on Ceres so,   WHAT   WOULD  YOU  DO?

If you really, really cannot see obvious solutions, after you have put your mind to it, come on back. I will tell you the story of Topsy other relevant examples.

(NOTE TO OTHER FORUM PARTICIPANTS: Have I already told the Topsy story? I hate to chew my cabbage twice.)

quadibloc on December 10, 2010, 12:04:25 pm
Come back when you have come up with your own answers on how people in an AnCap society take care of the halt and lame.
Obviously, societies did care for the halt and lame before the modern socialist welfare state came along.

And we know how they did it, too.

People who couldn't work were taken care of by their families.

People without family support were often supported by charities, particularly church-run charities. Some immigrant ethnic groups also had their own charities, particularly when they faced economic difficulties.

And in our present-day society, people injured on the job can be privately insured as an employment benefit.

If, however, it is unacceptable to have a patchwork of solutions - if one insists, as a condition of an adequate solution to the problem, that 100% of the halt and lame will be taken care of, with no one falling through the cracks - then a tax-supported welfare scheme is the solution.

It's a question of values; if you're not particularly bothered by initiation of force, provided it's done under the control of a democratic majority within Constitutional limits, but you're terrified by the thought that some deserving but unconnected or unlikeable person might get forgotten, then you will find AnCap inadequate.

I can come close to a scheme which is "moral" with respect to part of the ZAP, but it rests on an initiation of force as well, just a different one than the collection of taxes. Private health insurance is too expensive for people with birth defects? The scheme of forcing insurance companies to redistribute wealth, recently tried in the U.S. as a response to HIV infection only kills private insurance?

All right, just require prospective parents to get insurance before they conceive a child for that child. So everyone is taken care of if for some reason they can't support themselves, whether an accident or a birth defect - with no dependence on charity which might not be forthcoming or state support.

This supposedly would make the bleeding-heart liberal happy on the one hand, because it achieves his stated goal, no one not taken care of if he is unfit to work - and the conservative happy on the other hand, because people are taking care of themselves (or their own children) with no government grabbing taxes to do it.

Actually, they're both hopping mad. The liberal is mad because it's clearly genocide: poor minority group people can't afford to have kids. The conservative finds government intrusion into family matters and reproduction even worse than taxes.

The reason I point out such a solution, though, is that I think that the liberals and conservatives are both right in terms of their most emotionally persuasive arguments. So trying to reconcile both goals makes sense to me as something to try to achieve; and if a proposed solution is ridiculous, perhaps it helps to point out where the liberals and conservatives are wrong - so that we eventually do figure out what we want to keep, and what we want to throw away, from each viewpoint.

mellyrn on December 11, 2010, 07:46:46 am
Quote
If, however, it is unacceptable to have a patchwork of solutions - if one insists, as a condition of an adequate solution to the problem, that 100% of the halt and lame will be taken care of, with no one falling through the cracks - then

Then one is asking for the moon.  Such a one is asking for a program, a formula, to cover all cases, but some cases will be only slightly halt, and a program cannot decide if that one is halt enough to be covered.  Some who are severely disabled have amazing strength of mind -- I met a guy who is quadriplegic, who can do little more than bounce his forearms on the arms of his wheelchair, who is a wealthy, successful businessman, by his own efforts and not through inheritance.  He'll certainly qualify for programmatic aid, but he doesn't need it.

Otoh, someone crippled by "nothing more than" depression might not make it into the program.  How depressed is "depressed enough to be covered"?

And then there are people like me, damned bright enough but with no business sense whatsoever.  My "care" program consists of finding someone who needs what I can do, and letting them take care of me by having me do it.  Sounds like honest labor, but I am just bright enough to realize my handicap.

How much coverage?  Plenty of food -- albeit raw -- and shelter, plus freedom of movement, was once the height of luxury for H. sapiens, medical care beyond licking open wounds being unlikely; will that do?  Why not?

As a member of society, with some powers of my own (even sheltered as I am), I am willing to care for, or help care for, these [specified] people.  It's just what I do.  A program demands that I help care for more than that.  Who or what has the moral right (as opposed to the physical power, aka force) to make that demand of me?

terry_freeman on December 13, 2010, 03:53:36 am
You know, in Real Life, people solve these supposedly Impossible Problems. They're not as hard as you make them out to be, and they don't require Magical Government Expertise to solve.

You'd think that the people who dream up these Problems, with their ten-page dissertations, never heard of voluntary charities; never heard of hospitals being founded by religious orders and other voluntary societies; never, in fact, cracked a single historical novel to determine how things were done before the Omnipresent State.

You don't even have to go that far - just inquire into the history of the prominent hospitals in your city - if you don't find several institutions which were originally founded by Catholics, Jews, Presbyterian, or similar societies, I'd be shocked. I live in Pittsburgh, and I know of Mercy Hospital ( Catholic ), at least two Presbyterian Hospitals, one of which bought up many others and became the University Presbyterian Medical Center conglomerate, and the Montefiore Hospital, a Jewish hospital which is now part of UPMC.  All have their roots in voluntary associations and contributions. Our hypothetical sweet beautiful innocent would find a home somewhere, like as not.

People today vote for government provision of health care, welfare, yadda yadda because they want those things to be taken care of. Thanks to government-sponsored mis-education, people have a mistaken notion that only government can do these things effectively. Ask one of your parents or uncles: were people dying in the streets for want of medical care, prior to the creation of Medicare in 1960-something? They'll tell you to stop smoking that funny weed. Of course we had medical care way back, before the government takeover.

The same people who want problems solved would still want them solved in the absence of government. The same resources - and more - would be available in an AnCap society; less would be frittered away by government bureaucrats. Same wants, more resources; what's the problem?

Would someone, somewhere, fall through the cracks? Yes; and this is true of absolutely any system in the Real World, including countries where the Great God Government ruleth over everything; you can read about failures of the NHS in Great Britain, in Canada, in Cuba, in every country in the world. So enough with the "I dreamt up this impossibly convoluted hypothetical scenario where this beautiful innocent lass is dying for want of care!" scenarios. You are engaging in adolescent intellectual masturbation, not critical reasoning.


Yet anyone who has looked closely at government budgets knows better; private institutions get better results more cheaply.


 

anything