693 sats \ 10 replies \ @kepford 24 Jan \ on: What Role Should Governments Play in Markets? history
Government is fine. The state is not. The state is a monopoly based in violence so the state should play no role in the market. The state should cease to exist. Governance is a part of pretty much every market. When the state gets out of the way private governance can flourish under competition.
This is a list of good things to look at. For almost all of them I have heard very convincing arguments or counter points. Some of these points you list are classic examples of the state taking credit for things that were already happening in the market. I would have to do some research to recall the sources. I went down this road for years and landed on my current stance.
Another thing to consider is the data showing that the more free a market the more prosperous. Of course many point to places like Somalia which doesn't have a state as examples to support the state but I think we can all see the flaws in that argument. If you start for nothing you can't compare that to the US or Switzerland.
Edit: I think there is a good debate to be had between minarchists. and anarchists. Minimal government or a night watchman state is far better than the direction the US and most of the west is headed.
The FDA because it holds a monopoly like the CDC is subject to corruption in ways that would be harder to accomplish if it were market governance.
I recall listening to Bob Murphy and Tom Woods talk about this drug journal that has a very long history of finding issues with drugs 6-12 months before the FDA even looks at them. Some of the issue is with the lack of competition and part is the susceptibility for corruption because of the centralization.
I have a question for you. Do you look at Yelp and Google reviews of a restaurant or do you look up their grade by the health department. Can we not imagine how much better it would be to have multiple decentralized health reviews on restaurants? We have many examples of voluntary private review of businesses.
Another example is lab door. A great resource for looking at the quality of vitamins and supplements. One of the other issue I think of in the area is how the state monopoly and their re-enforcement of the expertise leads people to trust institutions they should be skeptical of. Most people are more skeptical of private businesses but less skeptical of government institutions like the FDA or CDC. I believe we'd be better off with competing institutions that are voluntary. The masses need to be more skeptical. We are conditioned to trust our governments. Businesses have to win our business. The state does not. We should be skeptical of both but the pysop of the state and its education system conditions us against viewing the state as a ruler. The system is designed to make us believe that we are the state. That the government is us. It is not. That's the larger lie.
Keep asking questions. I think the state has helped in some situations. I just believe on the whole the damage has been greater than the benefit. I don't think anyone would argue that if you got rid of one company the world would end, but this is the mentality about the state by its defenders.
reply
Do you look at Yelp and Google reviews of a restaurant or do you look up their grade by the health department?
excellent point, do you know of any Yelp-like systems that were tried in the late 1800s back when people were putting cocaine and all sorts of crazy substances in food and drinks? i’m sure someone made an attempt at separating good from bad in the private market before the FDA was established…
reply
The free press raised the issues but I can't recall the details. Word of mouth.
As technology advances the arguments for states functioning as governments with monopolies gets weaker and weaker. I can see why paper money came to be used over gold. After reading more about the progress/evolution of money it made more sense to me. But to argue that fiat is superior to bitcoin today is crazy.
reply
reply
I am. I would love to see a move in this direction. The problem is that institutions like the SEC, FDA, and CDC will NEVER reduce their size and scope. The incentives are such that they will expand and suck more life out of the economy. They are leaches. They distort the market. The temp market actors to cheat by offering bribes and favors for favorable treatment of their operations. They are a corrupting force.
Now, of course people will try to game or cheat Yelp and Google reviews. But neither have a monopoly and to the extent they have market dominance I would suggest the state creates the environment where companies like Amazon and Google can gain dominance. Regulatory capture is a thing and often I see people blaming the market for things the state creates. The state tips the scales. It can't help itself.
reply
makes sense.
directly fighting the continued overreach of these agencies doesn’t seem to be much help, so perhaps we need another Bitcoin moment for some system to disrupt the status quo in a completely roundabout way.
i haven’t thought much about what such a system might look like though…
reply
Government is fine. The state is not.
When you look at the history of America, was there a point at which the federal government became “the state”?
Trying to get a better understanding of the distinction you’re making between the two, and the events that might have led to the creation of “the state”.
reply
That's a good question that I have never thought about. When I say government I mean the function of governing. Examples.
- I govern my home
- The bitcoin rules govern bitcoin
- Consortium govern industries (privately)
- There are private governments for certain cities.
When I refer to the State I am using the anarchist definition.
an institution that claims a monopoly on violence over a given territory.
I am sure libertarians and anarchists would have an answer.
If you'd like to dive into the topic of the history of the State I highly recommend The Monopoly on Violence on Prime
reply
Here's a shorter explanation.
Government is a function. The state is an institution that can provide the function.
Government is not dependent on a state. It occurs with and without state involvement. It occurs out of necessity. If there is a market need for governance it will arise.
reply