pull down to refresh
28 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford OP 5h \ parent \ on: HOAs. Why do people dislike them? Politics_And_Law
I agree that the root issue is people. But I disagree that it doesn't have much to do with the state. The state is a monopoly and the stakes are much higher. The reason I'm opposed to the monopoly government is BECAUSE of the flaws of people.
The argument you are making against insurance as an alternative governance model ending up like an HOA I don't get. You can't fire your HOA. You have to move. One of the biggest issues with HOAs is how they are modeled after state governments.
I also think one of the biggest issues with HOAs is education. Because most people have a poor understanding of government and its incentives they don't realize how they work. And therefore don't see how HOAs are flawed. They are in a sense copying a bad design. This is why we can't have a ancap or limited government today. People want the chains. We aren't ready for it. The HOA in my opinion is a great example of people being the problem. But just as slavery was once an accepted evil but no longer is, the monopoly of the state could shift in the modes of the people.
But that's what has to happen. The people have to evolve. Market forces are not in play with the state. They are in some ways in the HOA but there needs to be more innovation.
The argument you are making against insurance as an alternative governance model ending up like an HOA I don't get. You can't fire your HOA. You have to move. One of the biggest issues with HOAs is how they are modeled after state governments.
Lets imagine a world without government. We all live more or less in private territories. Those territories need a way to harmonize rules and procedures. (ie. if you drive your car from Territory A to B, your insurance company wants to make sure things like road conditions and traffic rules are harmonized to an equal standard between territories to provide coverage).
It becomes in every territories best interest to more / less agree with these standards as it makes commerce so much easier (ie. Our territory agrees to "milk pasteurization definition ABC", so a buyer in a foreign territory can be assured that its of sufficient quality, etc).
In order to create these standards bodies, various insurance companies will each vie to get their representatives appointed. Pretty soon, as these things progress, these 'standards bodies' will become the lynchpin where all political infighting happens. It will become the place where backroom deals are done, where corruption happens, etc. In a sense it just becomes the new 'gov' - the deal making clearing-house between territory owners and insurance companies.
Will this be better than what we have now? Perhaps, at least in theory. How much in practice? Unknown....
People want the chains. We aren't ready for it.
That is one view, which I don't fully disagree with, but there is another view: The "Deep Ancap" view, which is: We already live in ancapistan. What you see around you (the state) is itself the product of market forces. The state doesn't exist in spite of free-market forces, but because of it. That is, people and corporations desire to have universal authorities so, market forces put those entities in place.
reply
Yeah, I see your point. We don't know and I always try to remember this.
reply