Scott on November 19, 2011, 06:42:34 pm
A fan alerted me via Twitter that a review of ESCAPE FROM TERRA written by Lauren Davis has appeared on io9, a fairly popular sci-fi-culture site. Lauren made a few errors but her review is generally fair.

There is a lot of lunk-headedness in the comments section, though. If anyone wants to join that fracas, be my guest, but I hope you will retain the rhetorical high ground and show everyone how sophisticated EFT fans are, eh?

Scott on November 21, 2011, 02:10:20 pm

NeitherRuleNorBeRuled on November 22, 2011, 05:31:24 pm
The URL for the interview is http://io9.com/5860981/in-escape-from-terra-a-libertarian-utopia-grows-on-ceres

"Lunkheads" is right.  As for the article in general, I really wish that folks would realize that AnCap supporters know and never claim that it would not be a "Utopia".  
« Last Edit: November 23, 2011, 12:13:56 pm by NeitherRuleNorBeRuled »

sam on November 22, 2011, 07:03:04 pm
I really wish that folks would realize that AnCap supporters know and never claim that it would not be a "Utopia". 

My position is similar to that of Gustav de Molinari - that privately supplied protective violence is bound to be a lot cheaper than monopoly protective violence.

And, what is cheaper, tends to be more abundantly supplied and utilized, with the result that from the point of view of vandals, bums, hoodlums, and assorted wrongdoers, anarcho capitalism would look a bit fascist.

UncleRice on November 22, 2011, 09:00:47 pm
To some extent, I do not disagree with the blog and it's comments. The current hioghly regulated government is guilty of the sub prime mortgage screw up, an abundance of other stuff, and the debt crisis, while the Laissez-faire group has the coal mines of 1900 to explain. Then their is religious beliefs. The Idea of ZAP, ABCT, and related theories being adhered to in a functionally universal manner is essentially akin to a virtual universal religion of itself. This I find highly improbable. I personally see no reason to believe humans will ever achieve a reasonable, let alone utopian, society for more than about 3.5 seconds. It will not be until either an inhuman AI or God himself comes along and takes over that we poor sops will see either a reasonable or utopian society.

That being said, I enjoy the mental exercise. Please continue.
Stupid criminals put on a mask and rob people with a gun.
Smart criminals put on a suit, call themselves politicians, and rob people with writ of law.


ContraryGuy on November 23, 2011, 01:25:06 am
The URL for the interview is http://io9.com/5860981/in-escape-from-terra-a-libertarian-utopia-grows-on-ceres

"Lunkheads" is right.  As for the article in general, I really wish that folks would realize that AnCap supporters know and never claim that it would not be a "Utopia". 

So your double negative means that you know that AnCap is really a utopia, right?   ;D


ContraryGuy on November 23, 2011, 01:28:56 am
To some extent, I do not disagree with the blog and it's comments. The current hioghly regulated government is guilty of the sub prime mortgage screw up, an abundance of other stuff, and the debt crisis, while the Laissez-faire group has the coal mines of 1900 to explain. Then their is religious beliefs. The Idea of ZAP, ABCT, and related theories being adhered to in a functionally universal manner is essentially akin to a virtual universal religion of itself. This I find highly improbable. I personally see no reason to believe humans will ever achieve a reasonable, let alone utopian, society for more than about 3.5 seconds. It will not be until either an inhuman AI or God himself comes along and takes over that we poor sops will see either a reasonable or utopian society.

That being said, I enjoy the mental exercise. Please continue.

Wow, more and more people agreeing with me!  Whatever is this little ol' world coming to?

ContraryGuy on November 23, 2011, 01:43:24 am
[T]he Laissez-faire group has the coal mines of 1900 to explain.

Check out:

 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:8ZRM2ZtummoJ:www.be.wvu.edu/divecon/econ/sobel/UnleashingCapitalism/FinalChapters/Chapter4_booklayout_final.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiXnJ-GTkCuu8z8eqVZ-1fb8H4DLpWTMb1EuXntFqPyWUxkb7LR3poOzDxmwk1OIuI46sBaPVMbtRdfDPoplKvpH4Ve2jcLXVx7pw4j6CBJsggC17oAaXWuR2NB057MZUfdKfg3&sig=AHIEtbQaE_7d--oKN6WZ-WWrtxmj3Z5ewA&pli=1

or the underlying text:

http://www.amazon.com/Soft-Coal-Hard-Choices-Bituminous/dp/book-citations/0195067258



First off, you need a Google account and Google Docs to read your first link,
Secondly, you need a $125 to order Mr. Fishbacks book on coal mining.

Amazons "Read Inside" feature is great, but it aint the whole book with appendices and charts.

Most people will agree with Mr. Fishbacks premise until they realize that he is a government employee.
Everyone here know that government employees are not to be trusted because of their inherent bias and unwillingness to challenge to views and aims of the people who sign their paycheck.

Worse still for AnCap is that he a teacher, a college level Professor at that.  This means, according to our local fauna, that he must not know a thing.

So, logically, if he cannot know anything, then anything he says cannot be believed.
If Mr. Fishback can be believed, than someone here has to be wrong.

Myself, I can see how his premise has merit, and appears to be a scholarly undertaking by an economics professor who is already predisposed to the side of the mine owners.

If it werent $125, it might be interesting to read.

macsnafu on November 23, 2011, 09:57:22 am
You know, it really burns me up that I'm supposed to be vastly more knowledgeable than the people I'm arguing against.  Perhaps it is a fault of my argumentation style, but I'll admit that there's much I don't know.  Of course, it's a bit of a argument trick, if an arguer can come up with some obscure historical event, and if I don't know anything about it, and don't want to read a book about it, then tney think they've won the argument.

Ultimately, though, I'm trying to argue from a certain principle, like the ZAP.  Anybody arguing against that is essentially saying that they are for initiating force under at least some conditions.  Although to be fair, some are simply arguing that force will be initiated, whether it is fair or not.

So how much do I really need to know about the coal mines of 1900?  Really??
I love mankind.  It's PEOPLE I can't stand!  - Linus Van Pelt.

NeitherRuleNorBeRuled on November 23, 2011, 12:29:00 pm
[T]he Laissez-faire group has the coal mines of 1900 to explain.

Check out:

 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:8ZRM2ZtummoJ:www.be.wvu.edu/divecon/econ/sobel/UnleashingCapitalism/FinalChapters/Chapter4_booklayout_final.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiXnJ-GTkCuu8z8eqVZ-1fb8H4DLpWTMb1EuXntFqPyWUxkb7LR3poOzDxmwk1OIuI46sBaPVMbtRdfDPoplKvpH4Ve2jcLXVx7pw4j6CBJsggC17oAaXWuR2NB057MZUfdKfg3&sig=AHIEtbQaE_7d--oKN6WZ-WWrtxmj3Z5ewA&pli=1

or the underlying text:

http://www.amazon.com/Soft-Coal-Hard-Choices-Bituminous/dp/book-citations/0195067258



First off, you need a Google account and Google Docs to read your first link,
Secondly, you need a $125 to order Mr. Fishbacks book on coal mining.

Google accounts are trivial to obtain; I note that it also requires -- gasp -- internet access and the ability to select a URL.

The book can be ordered from Amazon for as little as $7.18, including shipping, at least within the US.

Quote
Most people will agree with Mr. Fishbacks premise until they realize that he is a government employee.
Everyone here know that government employees are not to be trusted because of their inherent bias and unwillingness to challenge to views and aims of the people who sign their paycheck.

Worse still for AnCap is that he a teacher, a college level Professor at that.  This means, according to our local fauna, that he must not know a thing.

So, logically, if he cannot know anything, then anything he says cannot be believed.
If Mr. Fishback can be believed, than someone here has to be wrong.

This is an ad hominem attack, and logically without merit.  Such a reference may raise questions in cases where the arguments may reflect a bias in favor of the employer; however those questions must then be answered by finding that actual bias, and arguing based on the direct evidence.

Quote
Myself, I can see how his premise has merit, and appears to be a scholarly undertaking by an economics professor who is already predisposed to the side of the mine owners.

Evidence of predisposition hasn't been given.




macsnafu on November 26, 2011, 08:55:59 am
I went to that GoogleDocs link, and this Claudia Williamson person includes statistics and references and everything for anyone who is willing to reconsider their position, and not simply hold on to their beliefs fanatically.

It does seem to be focused on West Virginia, but the arguments are not necessarily specific to West Virginia, so there you go.
I love mankind.  It's PEOPLE I can't stand!  - Linus Van Pelt.

ContraryGuy on November 26, 2011, 11:57:40 am
[T]he Laissez-faire group has the coal mines of 1900 to explain.

Check out:

 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:8ZRM2ZtummoJ:www.be.wvu.edu/divecon/econ/sobel/UnleashingCapitalism/FinalChapters/Chapter4_booklayout_final.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiXnJ-GTkCuu8z8eqVZ-1fb8H4DLpWTMb1EuXntFqPyWUxkb7LR3poOzDxmwk1OIuI46sBaPVMbtRdfDPoplKvpH4Ve2jcLXVx7pw4j6CBJsggC17oAaXWuR2NB057MZUfdKfg3&sig=AHIEtbQaE_7d--oKN6WZ-WWrtxmj3Z5ewA&pli=1

or the underlying text:

http://www.amazon.com/Soft-Coal-Hard-Choices-Bituminous/dp/book-citations/0195067258



First off, you need a Google account and Google Docs to read your first link,
Secondly, you need a $125 to order Mr. Fishbacks book on coal mining.

Google accounts are trivial to obtain; I note that it also requires -- gasp -- internet access and the ability to select a URL.

The book can be ordered from Amazon for as little as $7.18, including shipping, at least within the US.

Quote
Most people will agree with Mr. Fishbacks premise until they realize that he is a government employee.
Everyone here know that government employees are not to be trusted because of their inherent bias and unwillingness to challenge to views and aims of the people who sign their paycheck.

Worse still for AnCap is that he a teacher, a college level Professor at that.  This means, according to our local fauna, that he must not know a thing.

So, logically, if he cannot know anything, then anything he says cannot be believed.
If Mr. Fishback can be believed, than someone here has to be wrong.

This is an ad hominem attack, and logically without merit.  Such a reference may raise questions in cases where the arguments may reflect a bias in favor of the employer; however those questions must then be answered by finding that actual bias, and arguing based on the direct evidence.

Quote
Myself, I can see how his premise has merit, and appears to be a scholarly undertaking by an economics professor who is already predisposed to the side of the mine owners.

Evidence of predisposition hasn't been given.

Ah, but if you are trying to convince someone of something and you give them a link which requires them to do extra action, then the data you want your audience to read must not be very important; if it were, you would not make your audience go through extra steps to read data that supports your argument.

sam on November 26, 2011, 06:09:40 pm
Ah, but if you are trying to convince someone of something and you give them a link which requires them to do extra action, then the data you want your audience to read must not be very important; if it were, you would not make your audience go through extra steps to read data that supports your argument.

The first link I clicked on quoted someone who claimed to have read company employment records, and claimed that the average turnover was about a year, that miners came and went.  Therefore, no "company towns" - there were company towns in that the companies built and owned them to accommodate miners, but the miners came and went - demonstrating a free market in employment and symmetric negotiating power between miners and employers - many potential employees for each employer, and many potential employers for each employee.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2011, 06:13:55 pm by sam »

 

anything