My brain has this ethical æsthetic. Taking government money feels disgusting, filthy and impure, the same way I’d expect stealing things from an independent food cart vendor might, even though I’d only be taking what the system should give me anyway (I want the state to basically tax people for a reasonable UBI and not much else; if I use corporate welfare to get less money than the UBI I’d want to implement there logically should be no problem, but it’s still yucky).
Then there’s the fact that I’m poor (YGM) and thus don’t really have that much of a choice; I’d love to survive without getting in bed with the state but it’s not really a realistic option because the state also makes surviving artificially expensive by eg. limiting the housing supply and banning contracts with which I could borrow money from future-me with less risk of getting in inescapable debt if future-me doesn’t end up as wealthy as I’m expecting. And it’s also caused me a lot of psychological harm from being terminally dependent on a thoroughly abusive system for years, and in any just world it would owe me big reparations for that.
But I’m totally planning to make a big deal of calculating all the services I’ve received from the state and spitefully paying them back to the penny once I can afford it, just for the sake of a grand gesture, and then I’m going to whine massively about how they are still going to try to impose bullshit and mob rule on me.
Does the state limit the housing supply though? At least in Australia, zoning rules are typically set by local councils which represent existing land owners, who typically oppose development and get very upset when higher levels of government overrule them to allow high-rise buildings etc.
If anything a libertarian paradise might have less development if owners manage to impose binding contracts on each other that no higher power can overrule.
In Finland there are a lot of regulations that limit construction and rig the system to favor the rich (mandatory parking spaces, regulations requiring the mean apartment size to be artificially large etc.), and while I don’t want to do full libertarianism immediately (the people are just totally unable to handle it), except maybe somewhere for testing purposes, injecting a hefty dose of laissez-faire would help as the builders could build more of the highly desirable aka. profitable city apartments.
Also, in full libertarian paradise people dissatisfied with the existing cities could just build their own city, with blackjack and sex workers who are treated with dignity and respect, and impose contracts that building is not to be artificially restricted. The working class would probably follow pretty soon because it would be a cheap place to live in, and the end result would be basically what the SF YIMBYs are trying to get. But this is pretty “would the workers’ paradise give everyone one pony or two ponies” because nobody is expecting full libertarian paradise to ever exist on this planet. All I’m saying is that we should seriously try the opposite of the cronyist festering regulatory abominations sometimes.
2 months ago · 89 notes · source: argumate · .permalink
peopleneedaplacetogo liked this
ronyyaya reblogged this from argumate- ronyyaya liked this
arundelo liked this
academicianzex liked this
drethelin reblogged this from xhxhxhx- drethelin liked this
argumate liked this
neoliberalism-nightly reblogged this from xhxhxhx
ilzolende liked this
davidsevera liked this
imu-li liked this
shuffling-blogs liked this
atumitum liked this
xhxhxhx reblogged this from argumate and added:It might be hard to lobby the council governments of Australia. It’s a responsible country, after all. It’s a democratic...
- atumitum reblogged this from argumate and added:
In the libertarian paradise the idea is not to vote for what can and what may not be done, but to decide individually...
sexyy-emo-phanther liked this- argumate reblogged this from xhxhxhx and added:
@xhxhxhx bringing down the citation hammer :)Yes, councils are state bodies. But they often work at cross-purposes to...
almostcoralchaos liked this
socialjusticemunchkin reblogged this from voximperatoris and added:Left-libertarianism may appear naive from an absolutist propertarian perspective, but it’s more coherent as...
voximperatoris reblogged this from tentativelyassembled and added:I don’t think corporations have a tendency to grow or merge beyond the point where they reach an efficient size. But...
tentativelyassembled reblogged this from voximperatoris and added:Corporations seem to tend towards growing / merging, but I guess those have slightly different pressures than homeowners...
crazyeddieme reblogged this from wirehead-wannabe and added:In my experience they exist, but in “less desirable” neighborhoods.A lot of this bullshit is a desperate effort to...
bpd-anon liked this
wirehead-wannabe reblogged this from voximperatoris and added:I mean, I might agree with this more if there was better competition among HOAs. I am not a homeowner, but I would...
- wirehead-wannabe liked this
dagny-hashtaggart liked this
jbeshir reblogged this from voximperatoris
satisfizzier liked this
eka-mark liked this- xhxhxhx liked this
urpriest liked this
shlevy reblogged this from voximperatoris and added:So not getting into the core of this, but I want to point out that most people I know with (voluntary!) HSA/condo...
pratfins liked this
skulkingscavenger said: I think at this point it would be helpful to try and define a general principle for distinguishing tasks that in practice should be performed at a collective level. zoning, roads, and military seem to be popular examples. I’m not as grounded in game theory as I probably should be, but on the face of it all of these are symptomatically susceptible to the free-rider problem. I don’t think the free-rider problem by itself should be considered a hard limit though.
collapsedsquid reblogged this from argumate and added:I personally go with this. Homeowners really want control over their neighborhood, and in the absence of government,...
anotherpersonhasclaimedthisus reblogged this from argumate and added:When did ya’all agree land could be “owned”?
- shuffling-blogs reblogged this from argumate and added:
I’m not so sure zoning itself doesn’t fall prey to as many flaws. In my city there are strict limits on minimum home...
- Show more notes