The Homeless Problem

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by DanielVogelbach » Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:16 pm

ddraig wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:10 pm
Does government do anything better than private enterprise?
No. The government version always sucks. We just need our tax money back and a truly free market. It's ridiculous to think that the government knows how to spend our money better than we do. Nothing beats the free market.

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by DanielVogelbach » Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:21 pm

GL_Storm wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:23 am
I am a statist. I believe absolutely in the concept of the state, defined as the agency in society with a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence within a territorial boundary. It isn't a perfect system, but it is the system that has allowed for the greatest degree of human flourishing.
Bullshit, the free market is responsible for the flourishing. Statism only gets in the way.

Where does the authority come from? Why should the rules be different on opposite sides of an imaginary line? There's nothing moral about it. Only indoctrinated statists see morality in the use of force.
Photo Nov 15, 11 51 07 AM.jpg
Photo Nov 15, 11 51 07 AM.jpg (126.02 KiB) Viewed 494 times

User avatar
Walla Walla Dawg II
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2021 12:29 am
Location: Southeastern Washington

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by Walla Walla Dawg II » Fri Feb 17, 2023 2:50 pm

ddraig wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:10 pm
I heard this AM that California (Gavin Newsom) had a brilliant idea to resolve the homeless situation in the state. He created a Billion Dollar budget to build $120,000 homes for low income housing. Those homes averaged $600,000 to build. Why? Land costs for one. But Mr. Newsom neglected to factor in State, County, and Local fees, Environmental fees, lengthy wait times for permits which cost developers money, and the price of materials going up these past two years. So instead of over 8,000 houses being built, they ended up with 1600. Not exactly a recipe for solving the homeless situation in California. If they really wanted to build low income housing, they should have cut regulations. Not much you can do about the cost of land. My guess is that Newsom will ask the taxpayers for even more money, but the results will be the same. Does government do anything better than private enterprise? Even the military has $600 toilets!
And this doesn't even take into account that the housing will need to be rebuilt every 10 years. How do I know this? Because the HUD housing here in Walla Walla needs to be rebuilt every 10 years because the occupants of these government funded homes treat the building like shit. They damage the buildings, they smoke in the buildings, they punch walls, they steal the fixtures, locks and windows (any anything else they can get a buck for).

So once again, Newsome is proposing a TEMPERORY fix.

User avatar
Walla Walla Dawg II
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2021 12:29 am
Location: Southeastern Washington

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by Walla Walla Dawg II » Fri Feb 17, 2023 2:51 pm

DanielVogelbach wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:16 pm
ddraig wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:10 pm
Does government do anything better than private enterprise?
No. The government version always sucks. We just need our tax money back and a truly free market. It's ridiculous to think that the government knows how to spend our money better than we do. Nothing beats the free market.
That's certainly common ground.

User avatar
douche
Posts: 2065
Joined: Wed Oct 23, 2019 6:41 pm

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by douche » Fri Feb 17, 2023 5:07 pm

DanielVogelbach wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:16 pm
It's ridiculous to think that the government knows how to spend our money better than we do.
I was discussing this with a friend the other day. We both came to the conclusion that it's probably a 3:1 ratio. Consider any service that a private company could provide. Then consider that it would cost approximately 3 times that much for the government to offer the same service.

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by DanielVogelbach » Fri Feb 17, 2023 6:16 pm

douche wrote:
Fri Feb 17, 2023 5:07 pm
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:16 pm
It's ridiculous to think that the government knows how to spend our money better than we do.
I was discussing this with a friend the other day. We both came to the conclusion that it's probably a 3:1 ratio. Consider any service that a private company could provide. Then consider that it would cost approximately 3 times that much for the government to offer the same service.
Competition is key. If a private security firm has a corrupt employee, then they will fire them to protect the reputation of the firm. In government law enforcement, everyone will cover for the corrupt cop.

With private education, you can learn what you want. With government school it's all indoctrination and obedience training.

I think it's more like 100x the cost for government services versus the free market. You have to really add up all the taxation and don't forget inflation which is just another tax. Then look at the administrative costs of the government itself. Look at the money that goes into political campaigns. Government is a never ending sucking of your wealth. It provides no value. It only steals. All of the services can be provided better, faster, and less expensive by the free market. The government is just an unnecessary layer of control and extortion.

You basically get nothing from your Federal tax except socialist insecurity and the military. Spending on defense should be voluntary. If you are fearing an enemy, then you can spend on your security. Fear is a key element of convincing people they need rulers. It's all sold as safety, convenience, and social equality. Then they label it "freedom". It's a scam.

https://government-scam.com/

User avatar
gil
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:50 pm

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by gil » Sat Feb 18, 2023 3:12 pm

DanielVogelbach wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:21 pm
GL_Storm wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:23 am
I am a statist. I believe absolutely in the concept of the state, defined as the agency in society with a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence within a territorial boundary. It isn't a perfect system, but it is the system that has allowed for the greatest degree of human flourishing.
Bullshit, the free market is responsible for the flourishing. Statism only gets in the way.

Disagree.

My understanding of the concept of "statism" is that it covers quite a spectrum of possibilities, from a free market economy with minimal controls all the way through totalitarianism (no economic or personal freedom). I'm a staunch believer in capitalism and the free market *to an extent* ... I believe that well designed rules harness the free market's potential. I'm thinking of things like enforcing contracts and protecting consumers from deceptive practices.

Does the free market provide defense against foreign militaries? No. Does the free market provide roads? Not really (unless you cherry pick examples like the "private" toll roads in Southern California, which would not exist except for intense government coordination). Does the free market assure that food is safe to eat? One could argue that food producers would want to have safe food for the sake of their reputations (i.e., would lose business if their food wan't safe), but I think history tells us that government regulation has assured that food is safer than if this were left to the fee market.

User avatar
Walla Walla Dawg II
Posts: 2355
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2021 12:29 am
Location: Southeastern Washington

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by Walla Walla Dawg II » Sat Feb 18, 2023 3:50 pm

gil wrote:
Sat Feb 18, 2023 3:12 pm
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:21 pm
GL_Storm wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:23 am
I am a statist. I believe absolutely in the concept of the state, defined as the agency in society with a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence within a territorial boundary. It isn't a perfect system, but it is the system that has allowed for the greatest degree of human flourishing.
Bullshit, the free market is responsible for the flourishing. Statism only gets in the way.

Disagree.

My understanding of the concept of "statism" is that it covers quite a spectrum of possibilities, from a free market economy with minimal controls all the way through totalitarianism (no economic or personal freedom). I'm a staunch believer in capitalism and the free market *to an extent* ... I believe that well designed rules harness the free market's potential. I'm thinking of things like enforcing contracts and protecting consumers from deceptive practices.

Does the free market provide defense against foreign militaries? No. Does the free market provide roads? Not really (unless you cherry pick examples like the "private" toll roads in Southern California, which would not exist except for intense government coordination). Does the free market assure that food is safe to eat? One could argue that food producers would want to have safe food for the sake of their reputations (i.e., would lose business if their food wan't safe), but I think history tells us that government regulation has assured that food is safer than if this were left to the fee market.
Holy Shit Gil, We are in total agreement on this.
This may be the first time this has happened.

It isn't that I like government regulation, but we need government regulation to a certain extent. Without rules, we would be in anarchy.

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by DanielVogelbach » Sat Feb 18, 2023 8:09 pm

gil wrote:
Sat Feb 18, 2023 3:12 pm
DanielVogelbach wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 9:21 pm
GL_Storm wrote:
Thu Feb 16, 2023 5:23 am
I am a statist. I believe absolutely in the concept of the state, defined as the agency in society with a monopoly on the legitimate use of violence within a territorial boundary. It isn't a perfect system, but it is the system that has allowed for the greatest degree of human flourishing.
Bullshit, the free market is responsible for the flourishing. Statism only gets in the way.

Disagree.

My understanding of the concept of "statism" is that it covers quite a spectrum of possibilities, from a free market economy with minimal controls all the way through totalitarianism (no economic or personal freedom). I'm a staunch believer in capitalism and the free market *to an extent* ... I believe that well designed rules harness the free market's potential. I'm thinking of things like enforcing contracts and protecting consumers from deceptive practices.

Does the free market provide defense against foreign militaries? No. Does the free market provide roads? Not really (unless you cherry pick examples like the "private" toll roads in Southern California, which would not exist except for intense government coordination). Does the free market assure that food is safe to eat? One could argue that food producers would want to have safe food for the sake of their reputations (i.e., would lose business if their food wan't safe), but I think history tells us that government regulation has assured that food is safer than if this were left to the fee market.
Statism means you support humans ruling over other humans. Anarchy means "no rulers" and is the only moral way. This is a very simple concept, but it generally takes years to sink in. This is partially due to the fact that we get 12 years of government indoctrination when we are kids. Statism is a pseudo religious cult. If you're interested in leaving the cult of statism, I highly recommend Larken Rose's book THe Most Dangerous Superstition I think it would be pretty much impossible to read that book and still hold onto the belief that statism is moral or good.

Note that I was myself a statist until I learned about these concepts in my 40s. It was not an obvious thing. It took me a couple of years before I started realizing it's true. You can't delegate rights you don't have. If you can't take money from your neighbor, then you can't delegate that right to a "representative" or "government". All taxation is theft. Governments are not created by consent, they are implemented by force and only work to serve the ruling class. If you value peace, love, and prosperity, then you should be anti "government".

Liberals are the most brainwashed. They think the answer to all the problems created by government is to add more government.

The free market provides every service provided by rulers. Only far better. Yes, this includes defense against foreign militaries. One must consider, though, that foreign enemies are mostly fabricated BS, just like the "his story" taught in 12 year government indoctrination camps. The enemies are fabricated to justify the "governments". It's really a one-world system of control and sovereign countries are a fake show. You don't actually have to worry about Kim Jong Un striking with military missiles - that's a fake presentation.

I used to be right there with you as a liberal thinking we need to "regulate" the rich capitalists. News Flash ***That's Impossible***. There is no mythological benevolent "government" authority. Government will always serve the rich. Money will always be power. But, the key is to avoid creating "governments" that allow that money to become far more dangerous and tyrannical.

You hit the nail on the head when referring to reputation. We buy products based on reputation, not based on what some bullshit bought and paid for government agency says. My favorite example is the Zagat rated restaurants. You don't need a government agency for this stuff. Governments create problems, they don't solve them. The road to cleaner, healthier food has nothing to do with politicians. Government provides zero value. It's just a leech and a controlling mechanism for the ruling class.

The free market absolutely provides roads, and "Muh Roads" is a common joke in the anarchist community when referring to statists. "Who will build the roads?" means you haven't spent any time considering your indoctrination to statism. One obvious answer is Amazon. They need the roads to run their business, don't they? Or what about FedEx and UPS? They could build some roads. Or, people in a community could pool their money to build a bridge. Pooling money is fine when it's voluntary. When it's forced, it's a crime called extortion.

I will leave you with a few "Muh Roads" memes.

Screenshot 2023-02-18 140405.png

Screenshot 2023-02-18 140438.png
Screenshot 2023-02-18 140323.png

DanielVogelbach
Posts: 748
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 7:43 pm

Re: The Homeless Problem

Post by DanielVogelbach » Sat Feb 18, 2023 8:31 pm

Anarchy literally means "no rulers". By latin roots, that's all there is.

The "chaos" element of the definition was intentionally introduced to seed the idea that without rulers there will not be order. This is false. People naturally avoid and resolve conflict. Giving one group of people authority to rule over others is not a requirement for order, but it is a requirement for tyranny and enslavement.

The fact that people generally aim to avoid conflict and seek justice is one of the key tenants of anarchy. Power and authority are not necessary to propagate love, compassion, and fairness. Power and authority are only necessary for evil, greed, and envy. So, who do you think is going to seek power?

Government is the group of armed thugs that people are afraid will take over in the absence of government . "Government" doesn't create order. It creates problems e.g. death, sickness, poverty, war, and brainwashed statists.

To avoid the "chaos" definition of anarchy, you can always substitute other pro-freedom labels such as libertarian, voluntaryist, agorist, or anarcho-capitalist. The key is to realize that if you are really in favor of love, peace, and morality, then you can't support an evil construct like statism.

Government should not be synonymous with order and law. That's where people go wrong. Government should be synonymous with extortion, enslavement, crime, illegitimacy, no consent, force, statism, brainwashing, war, violence... all the bad stuff in life. The good stuff comes from the free market! Is the free market perfect? No. Can you make it work better by giving people seats of power to rule over you? No.

Post Reply